To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will say what steps have been taken to initiate the inquiry which he has promised into the Board of Manufactures in Scotland and the various institutions under its charge; and whether he will state what form that inquiry will take and when it will be held. (Answer.) I am in communication with the Secretary for Scotland on this subject. I think a Departmental Committee will probably be appointed to undertake the inquiry as soon as possible after the summer recess.—(Treasury.)

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state the number of engineer officers short in the Fleet both at home and abroad, specifying the number in the following ranks, viz.: chief engineer, engineer, and assistant engineers, also the number of engine-room ratings short in the following ranks, viz.: engine-room artificers (stating trades), boiler-makers, engine-fitters, also the number of stoker ratings short throughout the Fleet; also the number of engineers now doing duty in lieu of chief engineer, and the number of assistant-engineers now doing duty in lieu of engineer; also the regulation number of engine-room ratings required at home ports for care and maintenance parties of battle-ships, first-class cruisers, second-class cruisers, third-class cruisers, gun-vessels, and torpedo-boat destroyers respectively; and also the average number of engine-room ratings employed at home ports, at the present date, for care and maintenance parties of the class of ships named in the preceding paragraph. (Answer.) The numbers of engineer officers short, as compared with the numbers voted for the year ending 31st March, 1903, are as follows: Fleet, staff and chief engineers, 10; engineers and assistant engineers, 41. Engineers and the authorised numbers, as promotions assistant-engineers are classed together in depend upon length of service. In the case of engine-room ratings, the shortage as compared with the numbers voted is as follows: engine-room artificers, consisting of 55 fitters, 7 engine smiths, 57 boiler-makers, 12 coppersmiths, total 131; stokers 529. Although an addition of 529 stokers would make up the numbers authorised to be raised during the present year, there will still be a shortage in the stoker class, as to which I have given the noble Lord the particulars in reply to another Question. The increase of stokers asked for this year was limited to the increased numbers of the proper class which it was believed could be raised in one year. One engineer is at present doing duty in lieu of a chief engineer, but there are no assistant-engineers employed in lieu of engineers. In reply to the last paragraph of the Question, the regulation number of engine-room ratings required for care and maintenance parties for vessels in the Fleet Reserve compares with the numbers actually borne, as follows—

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can slate why the Vale of Rheidol Light Railway Amendment Order, which was applied for in May, 1901, and, after a local inquiry in October, 1901, by the Light Railway Commissioners duly made, has not yet been confirmed by the Board of Trade, and when the Confirmation Order will be signed; and will he take steps to prevent similar delay in future. (Answer.) There has been no unnecessary delay in this case. The Order in question was submitted to the Board by the Light Railway Commissioners on the 21st March last, and, after the usual interval for the lodging of objections, a hearing took place on behalf of the Department. The Board found it necessary to ask for further information with the view of satisfying themselves as to the financial aspects of the undertaking, and the promoters have since been informed that the Order will be held in abeyance until the line already authorised has been reported on by one of the Board's inspecting officers. —(Board of Trade.)

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state how many life-saving rocket stations are provided on the coast of Ireland between Derry and Sligo, and how many lives have been lost on that coast in the last ten years. (Answer.) There is at present one rocket life-saving station on the coast of Ireland between Derry and Sligo, viz., at Green-castle, on Lough Foyle. The Board of Trade have decided to establish a second rocket station, viz., at Mulroy, county Donegal, and are now endeavouring to secure a suitable site. Thirty-six lives have been lost in consequence of casualties to vessels between Derry and Sligo during the last ten years, but only four of the casualties were strandings, and, so tar as the Board of Trade are informed, in none of these cases would a rocket apparatus have enabled life to be saved.—(Board of Trade.)

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the fact that a man. named Joyce, is to be prosecuted on the 16th instant at the Castlebar Quarter Sessions for trespass on the foreshore at Mallaranny, county Mayo; and whether, in view of the fact that the Board of Trade has not parted with its Crown rights over the foreshore in question, he will see that the Board is professionally represented at the trial. (Answer.) The whole matter is under the consideration of the Boar of Trade, who will be represented at the hearing of the case on the 16th instant.—(Board of Trade.)

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received any intimation that the quarrymen at the Bethesda Quarries have resolved to discontinue the strike, which has continued for upwards of two years; and whether he can say whether any arrangements have been made as to the resumption of work by them. (Answer.) No intimation on the subject has reached me.—(Board of Trade.)

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state the reason for the delay in holding the usual half-yearly examination for second division clerkships by the Civil Service Commissioners; find why vacancies in the various offices are being filled up by the appointment of candidates unsuccessful at the examination held in October, 1901, to the exclusion from competition of those who have been working up for some time and are near the age limit (17–20). (Answer) There are no regular half-yearly examinations for second division clerkships, but competitions are held from time to time, according to the needs of the public service. When there is a sudden demand for clerks, or there are difficulties in the way of holding a fresh competition, the Civil Service Commissioners, with the consent of the Treasury, offer appointments to candidates unsuccessful in the last competition who have done well in the examination—(Treasury.)

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the proposals of the Board of Customs for the removal of the grievance of the second class examining officers, in regard to their pay and prospects, have been yet submitted to the Treasury; and, if so, whether he can state what the proposals are. (Answer.) The proposals have not yet been submitted to the Treasury, but are under consideration, and it is hoped that they may be submitted during the present session.—(Treasury.)

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the overseer's vacancy in the south-eastern district, created by the death of Mr. Feldwick, and recently filled by a suburban officer, will now be restored to the town establishment, seeing that the appointment properly belongs to this establishment. (Answer.) The vacancy in question has been filled by the transfer of an overseer from a suburban office in the same district, but the vacancy thus created in the suburbs has been filled by the promotion of an officer in the town district office.—(Post Office.)

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he has under consideration recommendations of the Ambulance Committee of the Metropolitan Asylums Board, made in reports to the managers dated 24th February and 8th March, urging the establishment of additional stations and shelters and of land transport service for smallpox patients, the latter to be used as an alternative to river transport; whether any estimate of the cost has been submitted by the Ambulance Committee or the Asylums Board; and whether, having regard to all the circumstances, the Local Government Board will abstain from sanctioning these proposals until the Councils of the Metropolitan Boroughs have been consulted. (Answer.) I have seen reports of the Ambulance Committee of the Metropolitan Asylum District bearing on these matters, but no proposals on the subject have been submitted to me by the Managers. As I understand, no definite decision has been arrived at by them. In the event of any application being made to me for sanction to proposals of this kind, I should not fail to give careful consideration to the various interests involved; but until the proposals are before me I could not say what course I should adopt with regard to them.—(Local Government Board.)

To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state the relative position of the lowest British tender and the lowest American tender in the coin-petition for thirty-two locomotives recently placed with a German firm. (Answer.) I am informed that there was no American tender for the locomotives which the East Indian Railway Company has recently ordered from a German firm.—(India Office.)

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the firm who has obtained the order for thirty-two locomotives for the East India Railway Company has before been entrusted with an Indian order; and will he state the relation to the lowest British price of prices of any German firms who have previously executed work for the Indian Railway Companies. (Answer.) The German firm which obtained the order from the East Indian Railway Company has never been entrusted with any order by mo or my predecessors in office. Whether it had executed work for any of the Indian railway companies, or what may have been the prices at which tenders were received from firms which bad executed such work, is a matter as to which I have no information.—(India office.)

To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state whether any steps have yet been taken to dual with the overcrowding of native passengers in the third-class carriages of Indian railways; and, if so, will lie state what has been, or is being, done in the matter. (Answer.) This matter is one as to which any complaints should be addressed to the local authorities. The inquiry which was instituted some time back into the working of the railway systems of India will doubtless take cognizance of any inconvenient overcrowding which may be reported to them.—(India Office.)

To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the post of British Vice-Consul at Montreux has been given to a Swiss; whether an application for this post was received from any duly qualified British subject; and, if so, on what grounds the post was given to a Swiss; and whether he will state the number of British Consulates and Vice-Consulates in Switzerland held by Swiss and British respectively. (Answer.) It is the ease that the post of British Vice-Consul at Montreux has been given to a Swiss citizen; applications were considered from more than one British subject, hut none were found to be duly qualified for the post; there are ten British Consulates and Vice-Consulates in Switzerland, of which four are held by British subjects, and six by Swiss citizens. The Secretary of State has every reason to lie satisfied with the manner in which the latter perform their duties. But inquiry is always made in these cases, and preference invariably given to British subjects, when duly qualified.—(Foreign Office.)

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the inquest held on James Allinson, who lost his life in a quarry accident at Holwick, Yorkshire, on 2nd December, 1901. whose body was, by order of the coroner, forbidden to be taken to its home, a short distance away, on account of the county boundary intervening, and was kept in a weigh-house at the quarry; and whether he will inquire into the action of the coroner in preventing such removal. (Answer.) I have considered carefully the papers relating to this matter with which the hon. Member has been good enough to furnish me. I am advised that, it being undoubtedly an offence to remove a body for the purpose of preventing an inquest, the coroner has a discretion to prevent any dealing with a body which might have that result. And it is also the duty of constables and all other persons to prevent, so fat-as possible, the commission of any such offence and to assist the coroner. At the same time it is clear that the discretion ought to be exercised with great care, and I feel bound to say that I deprecate the laying down of any hard and fast rule such as must inevitably, in circumstances such sis those of the case in question, cause pain and distress to the relatives, which might perhaps be avoided by some arrangement. I have no jurisdiction to inquire into the action of the coroner in this case.—(Home Office.)

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Local Government Board has received resolutions from the different Boards of Guardians in Ireland and from the Poor Law Association of Ireland with reference to the appointment of persons to the positions of inspectors and auditors under the Local; Government Board, in which they put forward the claims of poor law officers on the ground of efficiency and experience to a share of such appointments; and whether, in view of a recent appointment of an assistant inspector, he will see his way to recommend the Local Government Board to recognise the claims of poor law officers to such appointments. (Answer.) I cannot give an undertaking such as suggested in this Question. In selecting persons to fill vacancies on the staff of inspectors or auditors, the Board proceeds on the principle of choosing the persons whom it considers best qualified for these positions. The claims of all candidates are carefully considered.—(Irish Office.)

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Return relating to maintenance of roads in Ireland, ordered on the 24th April last, has not yet been presented; and whether he can state the cause of this delay, and when the Return will be presented. (Answer.) There has been no avoidable delay in the preparation of this Return, which is now in a forward condition, and will, it is hoped, be ready for presentation before the end of the month.—(Irish Office.)

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the War Office have declined to grant a pension to the mother of a lieutenant on probation, killed in action near Wolmaranstad, on 26th February, 1902, on the ground that he was not actually commissioned as an officer at the time he was killed. And whether he will direct that this decision be reconsidered in order that the relatives of those killed in action, whilst bearing officers' rank and performing officers' duties, shall receive the ordinary pensions due to relatives of officers killed in action. (Answer.) it is not possible to make the concession referred to, as service on probation does not necessarily carry with it a guarantee that a commission will be granted. If, however, promotion is given after death, with an antedate determined upon before death, a pension is given, subject to the qualifications of the beneficiary being otherwise in order.—(War Office.)

To ask the Secretary of State for War if the members of the Militia, Yeomanry, and the Volunteer forces who have served in South Africa under Lord Kitchener, and have received the medal, and to whose unofficial attendance at the reception on Saturday of that General there is no objection, will have any special place reserved for them on the line of route if in uniform, or any privilege over the other persons. (Answer.) The military authorities are considering whether any arrangement can he made, and whatever it may be possible to do will be notified. (War Office.)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state when the Government expects to be in a position to announce the terms of reference in the case of the small Royal Commission to inquire into the war, and the names of the Royal Commissioners.

We are not in a position at present' to make a statement on this subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, what explanation, if any, can be given for the fact that on his return from South Africa General Buller was praised in an Army Order, notwithstanding the knowledge of the Government of the heliogram to Ladysmith and of Lord Roberts' opinion of the Spion Kop operations; and can he explain why Sir Redvers Buller was given command of the First Army Corps, having regard to the statement of the Secretary of State for War that the commanders should be ready and able to take the field.

I understand that the right hon. gentleman the Member for Berwick-on-Tweed intends to raise the question of Sir Redvers Buller's position on the Vote for my salary, when I shall be prepared to fully justify the conduct of the Government in regard to him.

The right hon. Gentleman will have a hard job.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, having regard to the allowance by the Government of the publication of the heliogram sent by Sir Redvers Buller to Sir George White during the siege of Ladysmith, the Government will allow Sir Charles Warren to publish documents relating to Spion Kop, more especially the statement laid by him before the Commander-in-Chief when he was withdrawn from his command in Natal, whose immediate publication Sir Charles Warren solicited in a letter of the 21st April last. And, on what grounds has the permission accorded to Sir Redvers Buller to publish documents relating to the operations in South Africa been withheld from Sir Charles Warren.

No, Sir. There is no similarity between the two cases. Sir Charles Warren made his report on the Spion Kop operations in the usual manner and it was commented upon according to custom by his superior officers. To allow a rejoinder by Sir Charles Warren would be contrary to all precedent and would be utterly subversive of discipline, as a similar course would have to be allowed in the case of any officer aggrieved. Sir Redvers Buller was permitted to publish telegrams which had passed between himself and Sir George White and the home authorities, and which had not previously appeared, because he considered his character was impugned by incorrect versions of these telegrams which had been put before the public. The war being over it was held that these documents could be published without detriment to the public service.

As a matter of fact was not Sir Redvers Buller Sir Charles Warren's superior officer, and if so why should not Sir Charles be allowed to publish his version?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will now publish Lord Kitchener's letter to President Schalk Burger, forwarding to him the correspondence with the Netherlands Government and making the overtures to the Beers on which they based their proposals for peace; and will he say why has that letter been withheld from publication.

The terms in which the letter of Lord Kitchener referred to were couched were purely formal.

Is not that the letter Lord Kitchener referred to in his letter to the right hon. Gentleman?

The communication was merely passed on in a formal manner.

If there is nothing to conceal, why keep it back!

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will state how many of the twenty-nine cadets who have been rusticated from Sandhurst in consequence of the recent incendiary fires had been previously punished for disorder on the occasion of the Camberley Fair.

Of the cadets under punishment at the College for the serious breach of discipline on the 11th June which followed the Commander-in-Chief's action on the 10th June seven out of twenty cadets were among the twenty-nine in "C" Company now rusticated. The numbers punished were only a small proportion of those who took part in the disturbance.

Is there any reason to suppose that the whole twenty-nine were guilty?

I cannot say the exact number.

Has the smallest inquiry been made as to their guilt?

A large number of cadets, more than 100, were engaged in the disturbance, so that a very small proportion has been penalised. It is impossible to state the exact numbers or the names of those who were engaged in the disturbance.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say that those who were penalised were present at the time of the disturbance?

They were not penalised at that time in consequence of the disturbance, but the general state of indiscipline at Sandhurst has been such during the last few weeks that it was necessary for the Commander in-Chief to take serious action.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman state the other day that there was no charge—

Order, order! The hon. Member has no right to refer to an answer given to a previous Question.

I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government proposes to give facilities for the discussion of the Motion concerning the recent proceedings at the Royal Military College, Sandhurst, standing in the name of the hon. Baronet the Member for the Henley Division of Oxford.

As my hon. friend is aware, the Vote for the salary of the Secretary for War undoubtedly has precedence over other War Office Votes. I think, if my hon. friend were looking for an opportunity on the Estimates for discussing the question, in which I know he is interested, I could not, as at present advised, with the small remaining time at our disposal before the adjournment for the holidays, give special facilities for discussing it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the presence of this Motion on the Paper has the effect of preventing a Motion for the adjournment of the House?

Order, order! The hon. Member is arguing an obvious matter.

Has not the right hon. Gentleman given a promise that blocking Motions shall not be used, as the Motion on the Paper has been used, with the consent of the Government?

reply was inaudible.

again rose.

Order, order!

I ask the First Lord of the Treasury, is it not a fact that when the new Rule was passed, making two days notice of starred Questions necessary instead of one, the right hon. Gentleman gave a pledge—

Order, order! The hon. Member must surely know that that does not arise out of the Question.

again rose.

Order, order! I must remind the noble Lord and the hon. Member that they have not the privilege of disregarding the ruling of the Chair.

Let us have some order.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman give two days for the debate on the Secretary for War's Vote?

That does not arise out of the Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the extent of the Crown foreshore adjoining Cork Harbour which in November, 1899, was let to the War Department at a renta of 2s. 6d. per annum; and, seeing the this foreshore was subsequently sold by the Department in June, 1900, will he state the amount paid.

Sixteen perches of foreshore were so rented. The hon. Member has been misinformed as to the sale of the foreshore by the War Department.

Have not the Commissioners of Woods and Forests made the sale to the War Office?

I cannot say.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state the number of men that has been fixed as requisite for the Reserves of the Fleet, giving in detail seamen, seamen gunners, artificers, and stokers in the engine room department, and marines; and whether the numbers considered necessary are all available; and, if not, what arc tie deficiencies.

The number of Reserves requisite for manning the war fleet at the present time is 10,420, including 3,000 firemen. There is at present a deficiency of 2,700 stokers on the Active Service List, in consequence of which, after reckoning in the 3,700 stokers and firemen available from the Reserves, there is a deficiency of about 2,000 stokers. With this exception, all the other ratings are available. The question of the deficiency of stokers is engaging the attention of the Admiralty, and the best method of remedying it is being considered by the Committee under the presidency of the right hon. Baronet the Member for Berwick. I should like to add that, with the exception of the stoker ratings, there is a large number of men available in the Reserve to supply the waste of war, but the number, though large, is not considered adequate, and steps are being taken to increase it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he will state the cost of the evening party at the India Office on Friday last, and will the cost be charged to Indian or Imperial revenues.

The gathering alluded to was not an evening party, but a State ceremony of importance, commemorating the fact that for the first time in the history of this country the Sovereign, at his Coronation, occupied the position of Lord Paramount of India. The cost of this ceremony will be about £7,000, and, as I informed the House on June 20th, this will be charged to the revenues of India.

Has the Government of India consented to have this amount charged to the Indian revenues?

It is not a question of consulting the Indian Government. The India Council is supreme.

In view of the fact that these Indian gentlemen were guests of the King for the Coronation, I hope that the expense will not be allowed to fall on India. It is too mean.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state in what securities the Gold Reserve Fund of India, £3,455,282, is mainly invested.

The whole amount of "the Gold Reserve Fund has been invested in the purchase of 2¾ per cent. Consolidated Stock of the nominal value of £3,711,047.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state what progress has been made with the re-coinage of the two issues of rupees of 1840, which the Government of India decided to re-coin on account of the coins having reached the limit of light weight.

Arrangements have been made by the Government of India for the re-coinage in 1902–3 of such rupees of the issues of 1840 as have been withdrawn from circulation under orders issued in July, 1901, and January, 1902. But I am not able to state how many of these rupees have been re-coined up to the present time.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state the estimated annual output of each of the new military factories in India, viz., the Cordite Factory in the Nilgherries, the Gun Carriage Factory at Jubbulpore, and the Small Arms Factory at Ishapore. Can he say how many labourers and artisans it is proposed to employ at these factories, and have any arrangements yet been made to train natives of India in the work of each factory.

I regret that I cannot make any public statement of the figures asked for by the hon. Member. As regards the training of natives for the work of these factories, I have received no report from India, and have no reason to believe that there is any lack of skilled labour for the purposes required.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the Government of India have yet considered the expediency of instituting a local inquiry into the economic condition of typical villages in famine areas, with a view to consider the best remedial measures to be adopted.

The inquiry suggested is not a practical method of investigation, and as such does not find favour with those who are conversant with drought and its consequences.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that, under the Hindu law of inheritance, the property of Bapu Raghunath, who held office as Dewan of Dhar, became by his death in 1837 the property of his six sons in six equal shares; that the share falling to Ramchandra Rao, one of the sons, was forfeited in 1857 for his alleged complicity in the mutiny, and that this forfeiture did not include the property of the other sons of Bapu Raghunath; will he explain why a grandson of Bapu, viz., Krishna Rao Raghunath, is not entitled to claim a sixth part of his grandfather's estate, seeing that his father, to whom it fell on the death of Bapu, took no part whatever in the mutiny.

I cannot discuss the legal hypothesis raised by the hon. Gentleman in the first part of his Question. As to the latter part of it, I must refer the hon. Member to the reply given by me to him on the 12th of May last.†

I shall take the earliest possible opportunity of calling attention to this matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Report on the Post Office of India shows that during the

† See (4) Debates, cvii, 1342.

I am aware of the figures quoted from the I Post Office Report. The paragraph of the Report from which the figures are taken shows that the entire mail was recovered in fourteen cases and a part of the mail in twenty-eight cases, and that the Government suffered loss in nineteen cases, the total amount of the loss being about £171. I am not aware that any special measures have been taken for the better protection of the mails. The Post Office Report for 1901–2 has not; yet reached me.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether, having regard to the condition of Hayti as reported to His Majesty's Government, and looking to the proximity of the Island to British and American possessions, it is proposed to approach the Government of the United States to take joint or any other action which, under the circumstances, may be deemed advisable.

The latest information received from Port-au-Prince shows that although the political situation is unsettled, there is no immediate danger to foreign interests. In these circumstances His Majesty's Government do not propose to take any action of the nature suggested. His Majesty's Consul General at Port-au-Prince may be relied upon in case of necessity to act promptly, either in conjunction with I his colleagues or independently, for the protection of-British life and property.

I beg to ask the. Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the increasing importance of Vladivostock, and looking to the representation of other Powers by Consuls, he will consider the advisability of appointing a British Consul, or in the meantime of placing the district under the supervision of the British Consul at Yokohama for commercial purposes.

The advisability of appointing an agent for commercial purposes at Vladivostoek is under consideration. An arrangement by which the district was placed under the supervision of His Majesty's Consul at Yokohama would most probably prove unsatisfactory.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the proceedings at Beaconsfield Petty Sessions on the 7th instant, at which two men were sentenced to six weeks' imprisonment in connection with riotous proceedings at High Wycombe on 26th ultimo; whether he is aware that Police Constable Wright was maltreated on this occasion; and whether, in view of the number of cases in England of police constables injured in the discharge of their duty, the Home Office will introduce legislation with a view to obtain some compensation for wounded policemen charged on the locality.

The cost of police is in England a local charge, and pensions and gratuities given to policemen injured in the discharge of duty come from local funds. No change in the law appears to me necessary.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of adopting the Irish system in these matters?

Order, order!

Why not?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, before the Admiralty makes any agreement with Air. Pierpont Morgan, the House of Commons will have an opportunity of considering the question.

The Government have undertaken to make a statement on the various questions raised by the Atlantic Shipping Combination as soon as they are in a position to do so. We do not think it would be expedient at the present stage to tie our hands by giving the pledge suggested in the Question.

Is the Government in a position to give an undertaking that no arrangement for subsidizing these ships will be made until the Report of the Committee now sitting on subsidies has been issued?

Order, order! The right hon. Gentleman has stated that the Government are not ready to give any further pledge.

Then I will put a Question which I assure you is relevant. Will the Government undertake to make 110 arrangements until the Report of the Steamship Subsidies Committee is in the possession of Members?

No, Sir, I cannot give any such undertaking.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Homo Department whether he will consider the propriety of supplying the Metropolitan police with a special head dress during very hot weather.

The question of supplying the Metropolitan police with a special head dress during very hot weather has been the subject of consideration on many occasions, but it has not been found possible to provide a substitute for the helmet at present in use which would afford better protection from heat and from blows.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his attention has been drawn to the continued prevalence of glanders in the Metropolis; and whether he has received any evidence showing the source of the disease to be the public drinking trough; and, if so, will he consider the advisability of closing these troughs.

No, Sir. The evidence we have does not bear out the suggestion contained in the Question. The Metropolitan Drinking Fountain Association have, however, fixed taps to a great number of the troughs, so that fresh water can be drawn by drivers in their own buckets.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he is aware that the acreage of the Deer Forest of Achanault, Ross-shire, is not mentioned in the amended Deer Forest Return, 1899; and will he ascertain why this has been omitted.

The Lord Advocate has already informed the hon. Member on more than one occasion that the Return in question was derived from information supplied by the assessors; that it is impossible to have a complete and exact return of acreage without survey; that the Secretary for Scot land does not consider that any public purpose would be served by embarking on such an undertaking, and that he does not propose to make any further inquiry in the matter.

Is it not a fact that the information obtained by the assessor is supplied by the landlord or his factor?

I am unable to say.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Secretary for Scotland has received a petition from the tenants of Invershiel and Morvich-Kintail, parish of Glenshiel, Ross-shire, pointing out that they arc in need of an extension of their holdings; and whether he will use his influence with the owner of the estate in support of the petitioners' application for land.

The Secretary for Scotland has made inquiries, which have elicited the fact that the Trustees who are the owners of the estate have no land which they are empowered to grant to the tenants mentioned. The said tenants are not, and never were, crofters. They were, at the date of the passing of the Crofters Act, cottars, paying no rent, and the land which they now hold was subsequently granted to them by the estate ex gratia.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, having regard to the great damage done to farmers and breeders by the forestalling of the great horse fairs of Ireland, such as Banagher Great Fair, the Cahirmee Fair, and many others, he will take steps to enforce the Act which forbids sales on the streets so as to prevent the legal day of the fair being anticipated, and foreign and other buyers forestalled.

In the case of the Banagher Horse Fair held on the 16th September, 1901, the police were instructed to caution persons causing obstructions in the streets of Birr, Frankford, and Ferbane on the days preceding the fair, and, in the event of their persisting, to take their names, etc., with a view to prosecution. Any powers possessed by the police are derived from 14 and 15 Viet. cap. 92, Section 10, Sub-section 10, and Section 13, Sub-section 3. The provisions of the first mentioned section are rendered inoperative by the fact that the custom of exposing animals for sale on the streets is an ancient one—in most towns without date, but almost invariably existent for from fifty to one hundred years. To enforce Section 13, an actual obstruction must occur before a constable can give a direction to "move on," as, if there be no obstruction, and if his direction be disobeyed, he has no remedy, either by arrest or asking name for summons. I am making further inquiry, through the Home Office, as to the practice in England in similar circumstances.

I beg to ask I the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieu-tenant of Ireland whether he can say why the results of the examinations in Irish, French, Latin, and instrumental music, which were held by the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland in July, I 1901, have not been communicated to I the candidates examined or to the authorities of the training colleges.

I am informed that the results are now about to be communicated to all the Training Colleges.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed at a meeting of the Guardians of the North Dublin Union relative to the condition of the deaf and dumb and blind in Ireland; and whether it is the intention of the Government to give effect to the Report of the Royal Commission of 1888 by legislation whereby the State should be made responsible for their maintenance and education, and thus relieve the guardians of the annual sums now expended for this purpose.

I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, out of the thousands of blind persons in Ireland, only about five hundred are provided for in institutions largely supported by the rates; and, seeing that the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the condition of the blind, which sat in 1889, declared that their condition called for immediate legislation, will he say what steps the Government propose to take to give effect to the recommendations of the Commission.

I am unable to give any more definite undertaking than that made by my right hon. friend the Attorney General for Ireland, on the 5th May.† I will see that the question is not lost sight of.

How many years are to elapse before the Report of the Commission receives the serious attention of the Irish Government? The Report was made in the year 1889.

And the Attorney General told me the matter was receiving sympathetic attention.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the fair rent fixed on the holding of Mr. William O'Connell by the County Court Judge of Kerry on the 1st instant, at the old rent of £40, while the poor law valuation was £32; and whether he can take any steps to obtain a revision of this decision.

The reply to this Question is obviously in the negative.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the evidence showed that this tenant had spent £500 on improvements and the landlord nothing at all?

Order, order!

This is a very serious matter, and I will take the first opportunity to call attention to it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the secretary of the Millstreet Branch of the United Irish League is subjected to a system of police supervision whenever he appears at the Millstreet fairs or markets for business as a farmer; that he is followed into houses, and his private

† See (4) Debates, cvii., 627.

An organised attempt to boycott the tenant of an evicted farm was made at Millstreet fair on the 1st instant. The persons named in the Question were kept under police supervision on the occasion, because the police had good reason to believe from their movements at the fair that they were engaged in the illegal practice of boycotting.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these men are shadowed by the police on every occasion they make their appearance?

Yes, because it is believed they are carrying on a con-spiracy.

Does the right hon. Gentleman get his information from the police?

Yes.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on the 30th June a tramp named Stephen Kirby, an ex-member of the Royal Irish Constabulary, was arrested for having abused a servant in the employment of Dr. R. R. Leader, J. P., Millstreet, on being refused alms; and that he was immediately taken before Mr. H. W. Leader, J. P., a cousin of Dr. Leader's, and sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labour, and to a further term of four months imprisonment in default of finding bail; will he state how long Mr. H. W. Leader has been a Justice of the Peace, and how often has he adjudicated at petty sessions; and why this man Kirby was not charged before the ordinary Court instead of being dealt with summarily.

The facts are generally as stated in the Question, except that it is not known whether Kirby had served in the constabulary. I am making further inquiry into the matter, and perhaps the hon. Member will repeat the Question on Tuesday or Wednesday next.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on Sunday 29th June the drum band went on a practice march through Fishmoyne, Killiskeghan, Goolden's Cross, and Cannell's Cross, and that they were on the following Monday warned by Sergeant Geoghegan, Royal Irish Constabulary, that District Inspector Duff gave orders that such parades should not take place in future; and, seeing that there was no demonstration or disturbance of the peace, will he explain why the constabulary authorities have interfered to prevent the public appearance of this band.

The hon. Member has not been correctly informed on the facts. The police did not warn the band that such demonstrations would be prevented in future, but merely stated that no demonstration of an ostensibly intimidatory character would be permitted in the vicinity of the residence of a gentleman residing at Barnane, who has been the object of considerable intimidation and who, in consequence, has been placed under special police protection.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on 1st July, whilst Philip Dunn, of Shanakill, was cutting hay on a farm from which he had been evicted two years previously, he was arrested by Sergeant Smith and two constables acting on the instructions of the steward of the property; can he state whether these policemen had any warrant for Dunn's arrest; is he aware that Dunn was kept in custody for over seven hours, and subsequently taken before a magistrate who immediately discharged him; and if it is shown that Dunn was wrongfully arrested, will steps be taken to offer him any compensation or apology for his detention by the constabulary.

The steward cautioned Dunn against cutting the hay. He refused and became very violent. The sergeant, fearing a breach of the peace, arrested Dunn, who was armed with a scythe. He was taken before a magistrate as soon as possible and discharged, to enable the landlord to take proceedings. There are no grounds for awarding compensation to Dunn, as suggested, and no grounds for an apology by reason of his detention.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that at the Summer Assizes, held in Ennis for County Clare, the Lord Chief Justice addressing the Grand Jury said there was no Bill to go before them; and whether, in view of this statement as to; the condition of Clare, the proclamation of the county under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act will be revoked.

No, Sir. There has not been an improvement in the condition of Clare such as would justify the Government in revoking the proclamation.

Is it not a fact that the Lord Chief Justice congratulated the Grand Jury on the marked improvement in the condition of the county, and in view of that statement will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of at once releasing the men who are imprisoned not under the ordinary law?

There has been an improvement, but not such as to justify my taking the course suggested.

Is there any crime in this county?

Order, order! The Question on the Paper has been fully answered, and I must ask the hon. Member not to persist in putting further Questions.

Yes, but a paragraph was taken out of my Question. There is more crime in your constituency than in County Clare.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any decision has yet been come to by the Government as to whether the venue of the trial will be changed in the case of the Orangemen prosecuted in connection with the Annaghmore riots, County Armagh; and whether the Crown intends to challenge any jurors at the trial.

At my right hon. friend's request I will reply to this Question. The accused will be tried at Armagh Assizes. The Crown will there follow the rule observed in all other cases, namely, take such steps as may be considered necessary to secure an impartial trial.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether any improvement in the mail service between Kenmare and Sneem, County Kerry, will be effected; whether arrangements have been made so as to ensure the arrival of the mail at Sneem at 9.45 a.m., as was formerly the case, and the delays obviated whereby the mail arrives at 11.30 a.m. or in some cases at twelve o'clock.

Since November last it has been found necessary to postpone the arrival of the mail at Sneem by twenty minutes owing to the increased bulk of the mails conveyed by the car from Kenmare. The mails are sometimes late owing to the late running of the train to Headfort Junction, but every effort is made to maintain punctuality as far as possible. The Postmaster General regrets that it is not practicable to accelerate the service to Sneem.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the postal authorities are aware of the dissatisfaction expressed by the commercial communities of Cork city and county with the state of the trunk telephonic communication between Cork and the neighbouring towns, and whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Post Office has refused the demand of merchants of Mallow and neighbourhood to be connected with the trunk telephone which passes through Mallow, on the ground that it would interfere with the through communication between Cork and England; and, seeing that the calls between Cork and England are few in number, will the Department order an inquiry as to the possibility of establishing on a paying basis telephonic communication between Cork city and Bandon, Kanturk, Mallow, Fermoy, and other surrounding towns.

I beg also to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether the postal authorities have received any representations from Cork city and county merchants as to the want of telephonic communication between Cork and Youghal; and, seeing that a short time before the trunk telephones were taken over by the Government the National Telephone Company were about to put up a line to Youghal, which only requires extension from Midleton (which is half of the distance), and in view of the importance of Youghal as a seaport and a centre of the brick-making industry, will the Post Office authorities take steps to meet the requirements of the commercial communities concerned.

The question of extending the trunk system to Youghal has been carefully considered on several occasions, but there seems no probability that the revenue would cover the cost of working the line. The Postmaster General would, however, provide the line, if a guarantee were given. The Postmaster General is considering whether a trunk telephone service can be afforded at Tipperary and Mallow, by means of the trunk circuit which passes near those towns. As regards the other places mentioned, the Postmaster General fears that the amount of traffic to be expected would not justify him in incurring the heavy expenditure which would he involved in providing trunk communication unless a guarantee is given on the same terms as for extension of the trunk wire system in other parts of the United Kingdom.

May I ask, cannot the Postal Authorities communicate with the leading merchants interested, with a view to securing the service at once, without waiting for a guarantee?

No, I do not think that can be done. If the local people are in a position to guarantee a sufficient amount of business, of course the line would be proceeded with, but at present the Post Office does not feel justified in starting it.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the wire through Mallow is little used? Could not that be made available?

Order, order! The question cannot be argued.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the National Telephone Company have practically decided to extend the line to Youghal?

I do not know that that affects my answer.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, as representing the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that some months ago a letter box was erected in the village of Kilmurray, that the morning delivery of letters takes place about 8.30 a.m., and the box is cleared about three hours afterwards; and, seeing that the residents in the locality complain of the insufficient time for replying to the morning post, and of being compelled to send their letters by special messenger to the Lissavarda Post Office, will he recommend that the time for collection in Kilmurray be extended.

The Postmaster General recently caused inquiry to be made as to the possibility of affording a later collection of letters at Kilmurray, but he regrets that in view of the high cost of the existing service, the additional expense involved would not be warranted.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that no inspection or report on the condition of the Irish lighthouses, buoys, and beacons, excepting Tralee and Fenit, has been made by the Commissioners of Irish Lights and forwarded to the Board of Trade, in accordance with the provisions of Section 652 of the Merchant Shipping Act of 1894, during the years 1898, 1899, 1900, and 1901; and, seeing the Commissioners of Irish Lights state in their Report that it is not incumbent on the general lighthouse authorities to make inspections or reports at any specified period, but as they think fit, whether he will say whose duty it is to inspect and report on the condition of the Irish lights, and issue instructions for this to be regularly carried out in future.

The answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative, but I must point out to my hon. friend that the duty of inspecting under the section relates only to the light houses, buoys and beacons belonging to, or under the management of local lighthouse authorities. It is the duty of the Commissioners of Irish Lights to inspect all such lighthouses, buoys, and beacons, and to make general reports of the results of their inspections to the Board of Trade, but as the Commissioners point out, there is no obligation upon them to inspect or report at any specified period. The Board of Trade have no power to issue any instructions, but I have called the attention of the Commissioners to the fact that no systematic inspection has been made during the last four years, and I have been informed by them that they are taking steps to make further inspections during the present year.

Are we to understand that the Commissioners of Irish Lights are entirely independent of Parliamentary control or responsibility?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say where their Reports can be seen? I can never find them.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that at the last petty sessions at Carna, Connemara, a man named Hugh King had several parties summoned for loss and damage for cutting and removing sea weed, and that the agent of the estate claimed on behalf of the landlord not only the foreshore adjoining the tenants farms, but the sea weed on the rocks situated in deep water away from the shore; and whether, seeing that Mr. King has had several summonses of a similar nature tried before the Carna Petty Sessions Court within the last four months, and has had the defendants fined and imprisoned, will the Board of Trade take steps to assert the rights of the Crown against this landlord.

The reply to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The Board of Trade are taking steps to assert the rights of the Crown.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, having regard to the uniformly orderly conduct of the Orangemen of Armagh, he could state on what grounds the Orange Demonstration, for July 12th, had been prohibited from taking place at Rostrevor, and would the Government acquiesce in the proposal to hold it at Warrenpoint, and take steps to prevent Nationalist interference with the meeting.

said he had also given the Chief Secretary private notice of a Question on the same subject. He wanted to know why it was not practicable to prevent Nationalist disturbers of the peace from entering the town in the same way that Orangemen, on another occasion, were prohibited entering Donegal.

Is it not the case, that last July it was necessary for the Rostrevor Catholics, by ringing the chapel bell, to summon Catholics to their aid to defend the convent from the attacks of Orangemen?

said the notices of questions only reached him as he entered the House, and. he had not had time to make a study of them. The Government had taken the action they had done because the Lord Lieutenant and himself held that Rostrevor was not a suitable place for an excursion of the kind proposed, and they had arrived at that conclusion after a study of what took place at Rostrevor last year. After all what had been done was only an extension of the power, frequently exercised, of preventing processions going down particular streets. It was only a reasonable extension of that practice to say that an excursion should not go to a particular place where there was likely to be a breach of the peace. That was the principle on which they had acted. He had only just received a copy of the proclamation. It was doubtful whether it would cover a meeting on the further side at Warren point. But it was almost a physical impossibility to stop an excursion train at any other point before Warren point was reached. A meeting could be held at Warren point, but only on the condition that the procession did not advance in the direction of Rostrevor. People going there must proceed individually, and not with bands and banners in procession.

asked whether he was to understand that if, on an Orange meeting being advertised for a certain place, the Nationalists chose to call an opposition meeting, the Orange meeting would be proclaimed.

replied that no such general deduction could be made. The Government action had been dictated by considerations as to the peculiar fitness of the place for a meeting.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the two decisions arrived at by the Joint Committee of both Houses upon the London Water Bill, he will consider the advisability of not taking the Committee stage of the recommitted Bill until the evidence is in the hands of Members.

I may also ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will arrange that the London Water Bill shall not be considered in Committee until the evidence given before the Joint Committee has been for some time in the hands of Members; and whether he can say when the evidence will be circulated.

May I also ask the President of the Local Government Board when the evidence given before the Joint Committee on the London Water Bill will be circulated; and whether he will arrange not to take the Bill in Committee until the evidence is in the possession of Members, in order to enable them to deal satisfactorily with the Bill.

I explained to the House yesterday that it is wholly unprecedented that evidence given before a Hybrid Committee should be in the hands of hon. Members before further Parliamentary proceedings are taken with reference to the Bill to which it relates. As a matter of fact I think it will be in the hands of Members today I cannot consent to postpone the consideration of the Bill which is put down for tomorrow, because the evidence was not published earlier. In my judgment, the evidence is not material for the consideration of the Bill in the House.

But was not this Committee quite exceptional?

Surely if the evidence is to be in our hands in a few minutes, it is hardly treating hon. Members fairly to ask them to consider it at such short notice. Why not postpone the Bill till next week?

I do not admit that the evidence is material to the further consideration of this Bill, and under the circumstances I think it is unreasonable to ask the Government at this period of I he session to defer the Bill another week.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable dispute as to the rulings of the Chairman of that Committee?

Order, order! The Question on the Paper is as to when the evidence will be circulated. That has been answered.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the rule against members of the Civil Service taking part in public controversies applies to the High Corn-1 missioner in South Africa, and other representatives of the Crown serving abroad.

The Treasury minute referred to applies only to civil servants in this country under the Treasury.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to cause the Minute to be reprinted. It is impossible to find it in the Library.

If the hon. Gentleman will put down a question I will consider it.