To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that in a catalogue recently issued by a London bookseller a number of papers issued by the Indian Government and marked confidential, among them being Routes in Central Asia, compiled under the orders of Lord Roberts, in six volumes, and other volumes compiled in the Intelligence Branch of the Quartermaster General's Department, wore offered for sale; and whether steps will be, or have been, taken to prevent the recurrence of a public sale of Indian Government confidential reports; and if the offence is not punishable under existing Acts, whether the necessary powers will be sought for by fresh legislation. (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton..) My attention was drawn to the catalogue in question, and steps were taken to prevent such of the books as were still of a confidential nature from passing into improper hands. The books in question appear to have passed out of official custody many years ago. During more recent years stricter regulations have been in force to prevent Indian Government reports of a confidential character getting into the market. I am advised that, under certain circumstances, if an officer of Government offered such books for sale, it might be possible to charge him with breach of trust under The Official Secrets Act, 1889, and that the advertisement and sale of such books might, in certain circumstances, be restrained by injunction. I am not aware that any fresh legislation on this subject is proposed in this country.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether a consignment of arms purchased in Germany by the Ameer's agent, consisting of a battery of twelve quick-firing mountain guns, two howitzers, eighteen field pieces, and over 850 cases of ammunition and other war material, has been landed at Kurrachee ex: the Hansa liner "Wartburg" and forwarded to Peshawur en route for Cabul; and whether it is consistent with the relations of the Afghan and British Governments that a portion of the British subsidy should be employed in purchasing arms in Germany and conveying them to their destination across British territory. (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) It is the case that the late Amir of Afghanistan purchased in Germany certain guns and munitions of. war. This transaction is not inconsistent with the Agreement entered into by the late Amir and His Majesty's Government.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the amount which has been received for import duties on corn and sugar, and for export duties on coal during the three quarters of the present financial year which expired on the 30th September last. (Answered by Mr. Ritchie.) One-half only of the financial year had expired on the 30th September, and the amounts collected during that period were as follows:—

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will state the number of soldiers now undergoing punishment in the local and convict prisons of the United Kingdom. (Answered by Mr. Akers-Douglas.) The number is 450 (431 in local and 19 in convict prisons.)

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, whether, having regard to the fact that the prison now used as a naval prison at Lewes was condemned as unfit for a local or convict prison, he will state the grounds upon which this prison is used for men in His Majesty's Navy who have been sentenced for disciplinary offences. (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) I am not aware of the circumstances to which the hon. Member alludes in the first part of his Question, but they must have occurred many years ago, as Lewes has been used as a naval prison for forty years. It was selected for the purpose after consultation with the Home Office, and, with the additions and alterations made from time to time in the accommodation, it has always been found suitable. The reports of the visitors, and the results of the periodical inspections by the Commander in Chief, Portsmouth, and the Medical Director General of the Navy, are quite satisfactory, and the health of the prisoners has always been very good.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he is aware that sometime since the mail steamer "Leinster" ran down the Kish Lightship; and, seeing that it is alleged that the system of warning vessels from the lightship is defective, he can state if any steps are being taken to render it effective; and if the Government have any intention of introducing a Bill to amend the system under which the Irish Lights Board are nominated. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) Shortly after the occurrence of the casualty at Kish Bank, the Board of Trade asked the Commissioners of Irish Lights to consider the possibility of improving the system of warning vessels from the lightship, and have been assured that the matter will receive every attention. The reply to the concluding part of the hon. Member's Question is in the negative.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether he is aware that the owner of Rostock Castle, county Mayo, is prosecuting migratory labourers for gathering seaweed on the foreshore of the Stoney Estate, near Mallaranny, county Mayo, and that this estate has been sold by the owner to the Congested Districts Board, and that, during the negotiations for purchase, the Congested Districts Board refused to entertain his title to the foreshore, he being unable to produce any title: And, seeing that these rights belong to the Crown, will he, in order to protect these people who are harvesting in England and Scotland at present, see that the Crown will be represented at the trial at the next Quarter Sessions in Castlebar, and that its rights are finally asserted. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I understand that the statements in the first paragraph of the hon. Member's Question are generally correct. The Board of Trade will be represented at the trial at Castlebar on the 27th instant.

To ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the Government has any information, either through its diplomatic agents in Russia, or through the agents of the Government of India, or otherwise, of any intention or endeavours on the part of the Russian Government to establish diplomatic or commercial relations with Afghanistan, or to obtain Russian influence in that country; whether he can give the Mouse an assurance that no demands to this effect, either in this country, in India, or in Afghanistan, have been brought to the knowledge of the British or Indian Governments, whether confidentially or otherwise; and whether it continues to be an understanding between the Russian and British Governments that Afghanistan is to remain outside the sphere of Russian influence. (Answered by Viscount Cranhorne.) His Majesty's Government have received a communication from the Russian Government proposing that direct relations should be established between Russia and Afghanistan with regard to frontier matters. It was stated that these relations would have no political character, as the Russian Government maintained their former engagements, and continued to consider Afghanistan as being outside the sphere of Russian influence. His Majesty's Government, having regard to the understanding by which Afghanistan is outside the sphere of Russian influence, have replied that it would be impossible for them to take into consideration any change in existing arrangements, or to frame proposals to be brought before the Ameer without some more precise explanation in regard to the method which the Russian Government would desire to see adopted for the exchange of such communications between the frontier officials, the limitations to be placed on them, and the means of insuring that those limitations would be observed. To this communication no answer has yet been received.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that notices, calling a meeting of the citizens of Limerick on the 8th of September last, to welcome Mr. P. J. Linnane, J.P., and Mr. O'Sulivan on their release from Limerick Jail, after serving a term of three months imprisonment under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, were torn down and defaced by the police; and will he state by whose authority did the police act. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The notices were removed by the police in the belief that they were of an illegal character. The police acted in error, and were so informed. Full instructions on the point have since been issued to the force.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if he will state when the provisions of the Marine Works (Ireland) Bill, in respect to Liscannor Harbour, county Clare, are likely to be carried out. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) At an early date. It is necessary, as the hon. Member is aware, to come to an understanding with the County Council, and also with persons pecuniarily interested, who may reasonably be asked to contribute in money or otherwise. In the case of Liscannor it is also necessary to confer with the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether, seeing that the last Quarterly Return of Agrarian Outrages in Ireland shows that no offence was committed in Queen's County during the three months preceding the 30th June last, that the Return for the quarter ending 31st March, 1902, shows a similar blank, and that the Chairman of the County Council and other local magistrates have protested against the proclamation of the county under The Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, he proposes to recommend the withdrawal of the proclamation of the county. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) There have been five agrarian outrages in the Queen's County since the 30th June, namely, two cases of injury to cattle and one of injury to property in July, one injury to property in August, and a threatening notice in October. It is not at present proposed to withdraw the proclamation.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether the attention of the Board of Works or other public Department has been called to the condition of Staigue Fort, one of the stone forts in Ireland, which is situate near Castle Cove, county Kerry; and whether the necessary steps will be taken, by the erection of a door, or otherwise, to prevent the stones being dislodged by cattle. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) This fort was recently placed in the custody of the Board of Public Works by the owner. The Board is aware of its condition, and has given directions for the erection of a gate to prevent damage to the structure by cattle.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he can state the number of prisons in Ireland, originally classed as county prisons, which were closed last December on the order of the General Prisons Board; and whether he can say in what, districts or localities these prisons were situated. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) There were five such prisons, situated at Carrick-on-Shannon, Enniskillen, Mullingar, Omagh, and Wicklow.

TO ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he can say what position is occupied by Thomas Patrick Nolan in the employment of the Local Government Board, and what are his duties; whether he is required under the conditions of service to give his entire time to the duties of the office; and, is it in accordance with the regulations of the Board that Mr. Nolan should occupy a position on a local paper, and also act as handwriting expert at trials in different parts of Ireland. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham) Mr. Nolan is employed as a clerk in the department of the Local Government Board, and performs such clerical duties as may be assigned to him by the Board. The only regulation bearing on the subject of his employment is that contained in Orders in Council, dated 21st March 1890, and 15th August 1890, and is as follows:—

No officer shall be allowed to accept any part in the management of any society, or any trading, commercial, or financial company, of whatever description, which would require the attendance of such officer at any time between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that a quantity of basic slag has recently been imported into Ireland for use as a fertilizer, which, though represented as being of the standard quality, is so inferior as to be little better than ground brick-dust; whether he is aware that the wholesale merchant who sold this slag to buyers in Ireland has instituted a prosecution against the foreign exporter; will he state what steps are being taken by the Department of Agriculture in Ireland to put in force the provisions of the Fertilizer and Feeding Stuffs Act, and to ensure that this article Is not being supplied to the farmers of Ireland as genuine 38–45 per cent, quality, which the brand upon the bags purports it to be. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) It has been represented to the Department that a quantity of inferior basic slag has recently been imported into Ireland, and the attention of the Department has been drawn to a newspaper report of the prosecution referred to in the Question. The Department is inquiring into the matter with a view to such further action being taken as may be practicable in the circumstances.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, whether his attention has been directed to the case of a private in the Foot Guards having been refused admission to a London theatre on account of his uniform, and whether he proposes to take any steps in the matter with reference to opposing the licence or otherwise. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I have had private information of this occurrence, but have not received a report from any of the regiments in London, as the case has not been identified. I understand the managers of the theatre in question maintain that the exclusion was only from a part of the theatre reserved for those in evening dress. Uniform is an equivalent of every dress, and if this principle is not recognised by theatrical managers I shall take such legal steps as I may be advised to secure soldiers against a recurrence of such exclusion.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, if his attention has been called to the public meeting in London of discharged Reservists, and to the grievances of which they complain; and will he say what steps he proposes to take in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick). My attention has been drawn to the public meeting referred to by the hon. Member. The regulations for the prompt payment of all claims are most explicit, and some weeks ago orders were issued that a return should be made from each district of any claim a month overdue. Inquiries have been promptly made into all individual cases of grievances which have reached me. A large number have been found to be unfounded, but in cases where delay has unavoidably occurred prompt action has been taken. As regards employment, the War Office have taken the only action in their power by laying it open to all men who cannot find employment to return to the colours for short periods. I need hardly add how earnestly I hope that all employers will second our endeavours by giving the preference to Reservists in regard to any places they have open.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, whether his attention has been called to the fact that a lieutenant of the Royal Field Artillery took part in the military ride from Brussels to Ostend, a distance of upwards of eighty miles, on27th August, on which occasion it is stated that his horse was so exhausted that it was necessary to destroy it; whether this officer was authorised by his superiors to become a competitor on this occasion; whether any notice has been taken of this officer's action; and whether steps have been, or will be, taken to prevent British officers from taking part in such competitions in future.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, if he will say whether officers are required to ask permission before engaging in an international sporting contest; whether a lieutenant of the Royal Field Artillery asked permission to take part in the ride from Brussels to Ostend; whether the participation of a British officer in such a performance has the sanction of the Commander-in-Chief; and whether any communication has been addressed to this officer on the subject. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) A lieutenant of the Royal Field Artillery did take part in this ride, after duly obtaining leave to travel abroad for this purpose. Instructions have since been issued by the Commander-in-Chief to General Officers Commanding that he was of opinion that British officers should not take part in these competitions, as he failed to see that any good result could ensue from them.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, whether he is aware that after the first purchase of Hungarian horses, General Truman was visited by a Hungarian gentleman well qualified to give advice upon the subject, and advised to purchase from a different source, and that the same gentleman subsequently tendered similar advice at personal interviews to Lord Roberts and the Quartermaster General, by which latter official it was reported to the Secretary of State for War; and will he say why this advice was ignored. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) Will the honourable Member kindly give me the name of the Hungarian gentleman, and the dates of his interviews with the officers mentioned? I have received such a large number of suggestions that it is necessary to obtain the information I now ask from the hon. Member to trace the specific case to which he refers.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, if he will state what steps are being taken to reconsider the sentences of soldiers undergoing imprisonment in military prisons for military offences, having regard to the fact that a recent visit of the Commander in Chief to Dover Military Prison brought about the liberation of soldiers undergoing sentences in that prison. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The sentences of all military prisoners sent home from South Africa have been carefully reviewed from time to time, and considerable remissions granted in eases where they could be made with a due regard to the interests of discipline. In particular all sentences of penal servitude have been investigated, and in every case where possible have been commuted to a term of imprisonment so as to avoid the committal of the prisoners to civil prisons. Instructions were recently issued to General Officers Commanding, directing them to review the cases of all military prisoners from South Africa in the military prisons in their command, and to grant such remissions as they might consider desirable. As regards other military prisoners the remission of sentences is left to the discretion of confirming officers. If any sentence seems to the Judge Advocate General to be unnecessarily severe he brings the case to the notice of the Commander-in-Chief.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, whether he is aware that at the court-martial on Captain Gordon Turner, assembled at Queenstown, South Africa, 7th April 1902, it was shown in evidence that remount farms at Clark's Siding, Cape Colony, had been leased to Government as containing 14,000 acres at a monthly rent of £10 per 1,000 acres, whereas the lessor only possessed 9,030 acres, thereby incurring a loss to the public of £50 per month; and whether he is aware that during those leases the lessor sold to Government for some time 600,000 lbs. of green forage daily, at £40 a day, grown on the leased farms; whether he will communicate to Parliament full particulars of these transactions, and the action taken by the military authorities to end this loss to the public and punish those responsible.

To ask the Secresary of State for War, if he can say by whom the remount farms at Clark's Siding were inspected previous to April, 1902; and whether the inspecting officer reported the loss Government was incurring to the Officer Commanding Eastern District, Cape Colony.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, whether the General Officer Commanding Eastern District, Capo Colony, by sanctioning the leases of the remount farms at Clark's Siding, made himself responsible that the public interest was duly considered and I safe-guarded in them. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The points raised in the three Questions on this subject require very careful consideration, and it has been necessary to refer the matters to the authorities in South Africa, the information at my disposal being incomplete. I am afraid, therefore, I shall not be able to give any reply for some time.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether his attention has been called to the reports, of the Chief Constables of Surrey and other counties as to the danger caused by the excessive speed at which motor cars are driven. And, whether he will obtain facilities for the early consideration of the Bill promoted by the Automobile Club and introduced by the hon. Member for the New Forest Division of Hants, providing for the identification of motor cars by a conspicuous number, and for the licensing of motor drivers, or adopt other measures for the safety of the public. (Answered by Mr. Waller Long.) I have seen a recent report of the Chief Constable of Surrey, and I am aware that complaints frequently have been made as to the danger caused by the excessive speed of motor cars. The latter part of the Question is really one for my right hon. friend the head of the Government, but I am afraid there is no probability that the Bill referred to could be proceeded with during the present Session.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in view of the fact that a short time ago a petition was presented to His Majesty the King, signed by several thousand Fijians, asking that their islands may be federated with New Zealand, if he will say what reply has been given to the petition; and will he lay the petition and reply on the Table of the House. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) No such petition has reached me.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether he is aware that the importation of opium into Ceylon last year was 21,005 lbs., in 1895 12,827 lbs., in 1880 10,116 lbs., while in 1870 it was only 2,499 lbs., thus increasing over eight-fold in thirty years; and whether he will order an inquiry into the causes of this increase, with a view to its abatement. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) The figures quoted appear to be correct, except for the year 1870, when the imports amounted to 12,449 lbs., and not 2.499 lbs. I will ask the Governor of Ceylon to make inquiry into the causes of any increase.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether His Majesty's Government have settled upon any specific sum as the amount of the indebtedness of the Transvaal and Orange River Colonies. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) I presume that the hon. Member refers to the contribution in aid of the cost of the war. If so, the answer is that no specific amount has yet been fixed by His Majesty's Government.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether it is intended that Transvaal mines, already existing and still to be opened up, shall be taxed on the same basis and be equally subject to the 10 per cent, tax on profits; whether it is intended to increase the tax on profits beyond the 10 per cent, rate now in force; whether the profits of this tax will be devoted to the ordinary expenditure of the colony, or partially or entirely devoted to meet the service of any loan issued in respect of the cost of the war; and whether he is in a position to in dicate the course to be followed in regard to making the colony responsible for the cost of the war. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) I regret that I am not at present prepared to add anything to the statement made in this House on the 29th July, in which I laid down the general principles on which His Majesty's Government would proceed. †

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether he is yet in a position to give any indication as to the date

†see preceding volume, page 42,

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether he is aware that vessels trading in the interest of private owners have been unloaded at Government wharves in Gibraltar during the recent labour dispute there; that soldiers and police have, by the orders of the Governor, been employed in the unloading of such ships; and will he say if the employment of soldiers in such a manner is consistent with the regulations of the service, and has the approval of His Majesty's Government; and whether he is aware that Government vessels have been used to convey Moorish and other labourers to Gibraltar to replace the men locked out by the dock companies. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) No vessels were unloaded at the Government Wharves at Gibraltar during the recent labour disputes, nor were soldiers or police employed in connection with the unloading of vessels, except in eases where Government stores, or stores intended for important public works, had to be landed. His Majesty's Government are satisfied that the action of the Governor in this matter did not go beyond what was required for the protection of Government interests. The answer to the last part of the Question is in the negative.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether a yacht or steam launch was purchased by or for the Sierra Leone Government; and, if so, at what price, and for what object, and at what date. (Answered by Mr Secretary Chamberlain.) A steam launch was constructed for the Sierra Leone Government by Messrs. J. S. White and Company, of Cowes, at a cost of £4,805. The launch is required for the general services of the colony in the place of the old colonial steamer, which has been condemned as unfit for further use, and it arrived in the colony on the 21st of March. The cost mentioned above is exclusive of the cost of the armament (one Hotchkiss 37 m.m. Q.F. gun and one rifle calibre Maxim gun), which amounted to £594 5s. 11d.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether a lifeboat worth £3,000 was recently sent out to the Lagos Government, and, being condemned immediately on her arrival by the harbour master, now lies useless in the harbour. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) A lifeboat, of which the total cost, including freight to the Colony, was £2,256 9s. 6d., was sent out to Lagos early in 1900. No lifeboat has been sent out since then, and no complaints have been received with regard to the one sent out in 1900, but inquiry will be made.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, what has been the I expense of constructing the pier at Sekondi; when it was finished; and whether there are any statistics showing the extent to which it has been used. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) The expense of constructing the pier at Sekondi was £26,887. The pier was finished in April, 1902. There are no statistics in the Colonial Office showing the extent to which it has been used.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether the correspondence upon the note of the American Government regarding the treatment of the Jews in Roumania will be published, and whether the House will be given an opportunity of discussing the question. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) The correspondence upon the note of the United States Government to which my honourable friend refers is not completre, and I am not therefore in a position to answer the concluding part of the question.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the stipulation in the Sugar Convention that it shall be ratified on the 1st February, 1903, he proposes, during the present session, to ask the sanction of Parliament to that Convention. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) Effect cannot be given to the provisions of the Sugar Convention without an Act of Parliament. The Convention, however, does not come into force until 1st September, 1903, although it has to be ratified by the 1st February next. The Government propose to ask for the sanction of Parliament by way of Resolution, which will enable them to ratify it before the latter date, 1st February.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether he proposes to take any action to vindicate the right of the House to receive immediate reports of the withdrawal by a sentence of a Court of Law of any Member from the service of the House. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) The practice is for a communication to be made to the Speaker when the Member is committed to prison, bail not being allowed. I understand that there has in fact been no infraction of this custom.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether he can say how it is proposed to provide for the salary, during the current financial year, of the President of the Board of Education, who was appointed to that office on the 11th of August last. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) The salary will be charged against the Education Vote. If this be insufficient a Supplementary Estimate will be presented towards the close of the financial year.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether the Royal Prerogative of conferring orders and honorific distinctions is exercised by His Majesty upon the advice of His Majesty's Ministers, or otherwise. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I trust that my hon. friend will not think it necessary to deal by way of Question with the subject of Prerogative.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, can he state, or will he agree to a Return stating, the number of foreign Sovereigns on whom the Order of the Garter has been conferred since the year 1837, and the number of those Sovereigns who were not of Christian faith. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) There is, I believe, no objection to such a Return, though perhaps my hon. friend will be content with the statement that only three names would appear in such a Return of Sovereigns not of the Christian faith, namely, the Sultans of Turkey, Abdul Medjid and Abdul Aziz, and the late Shah of Persia.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is able to announce any decision which may have been reached with regard to relieving the Greenwich Hospital Funds in respect of pensions to widows of seamen killed on duty; and, whether he is prepared to consider the possibility of devoting a portion at least of the Patriotic Fund to this purpose. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I am, afraid I am not yet in a position to announce any decision in this matter, but I hope before long to be able to do so.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the condition in which the new Rule of Procedure relating to Order in Debate is left by the Government at present, and having regard to the occurrences of Thursday last and their possible recurrence, he proposes to take steps, and, if so, when, to give effect to the intention expressed by himself to complete that Rule before the close of the session. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I have not absolutely given up the hope that the House may be able to deal with the Order referred to by my right hon. friend in the course of the present Session, but the arrangements for proceeding with it must necessarily depend upon the progress made with public business.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, whether it is proposed to declare 25th October a Bank Holiday, at least so far as London is concerned. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) Yes, so far as London is concerned, there will be a Bank Holiday on Saturday next. It is correctly stated in a public announcement today that the proclamation is solely intended for the necessities of bankers' business arising out of the probable congestion in the streets along the route of the Royal progress, and will not affect the shop-keeping community at large nor enjoin a general suspension of employment.

Have the Government any further information as to events in Somaliland?

I have very little to communicate to the House beyond what appeared in the newspapers this morning, sent by the Foreign Office. I think I ought to begin by saying on behalf of the Secretary of State how deeply he regrets the lamentable loss of life that has taken place, and the possible results of the retirement which has followed. We have every confidence in Colonel Swayne, who is a very experienced officer in those regions, but, of course, Colonel Swayne is at the front, and he cannot be responsible for sending forward reinforcements. Fortunately, in the ordinary course of his duties, General Manning, who is the principal military adviser in the Foreign Office Protectorates, arrived at Aden yesterday morning, and we have placed at his disposal, after communicating with the India Office, an Indian battalion, and also have ordered from Central Africa the reserve battalion of the Protectorate's own forces. We have informed him that if he does not consider this force sufficient we shall be quite ready to supply other troops. The House ought to remember, in considering these events, that the country over which these operations had to take place is exceedingly difficult. Not only is the actual battlefield apparently covered with very thick bush, but, in order to get there, a large extent of perfectly barren and waterless country had to be crossed, throwing great difficulties in the way of forces advancing in such a country. In these circumstances it is not surprising that after so severe an action Colonel Swayne thought it better to retire. But we do not conceal from ourselves the fact that that may necessitate very much more prolonged operations than we had hoped, and a larger force than we had at first thought would be sufficient. That is all I have to tell the House at present.

Has the noble Lord any further information with regard to casualties?

Not beyond what has been published.

Is the War Office or the Foreign Office responsible for the conduct of the campaign?

The Foreign Office.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, what was the date of H.M.S. "Terrible's" leaving Hong Kong, and the number of days occupied by her voyage to Portsmouth; what was the amount of coal she consumed on the voyage; and if she can now steam her designed speed of 22 knots; and if he will state who designed the gun-carriage for the guns used at Ladysmith.

The "Terrible" left Hong Kong on. 29th July, and arrived at Portsmouth on 18th September, occupying fifty-one days on the voyage, of which thirty-four were steaming days, the remaining seventeen being spent in harbour. The amount of coal consumed on the voyage was 8,670 tons, of which 7,466 tons were consumed when under way. On her last full-speed trial, in July, 1901, she developed 24·693 horse-power for four hours. No full-speed trial has been made since that date. It is doubtful whether the ship can now maintain her designed speed for any length of time, as her boilers, engines, and auxiliary machinery require extensive repairs, such as may be expected at the close of a long commission. The gun-carriages for the guns used at Ladysmith were designed by Captain Percy Scott, and were constructed under his immediate supervision.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman if he is aware that the gun-carriage was designed by Assistant Engineer Roscoe, and not by Captain Percy Scott?

I am not aware of that fact, and I am clear that the facts are as I have stated them.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether the correspondence which commenced with the telegram of the 26th February to the Government of India as to the conditions of service of British troops in India is complete, and when the Papers showing the views of the Government of India will be laid before Parliament.

There has been some delay in completing this correspondence, but I expect in a short time to got the final views of the Government of India; until I receive their despatch I cannot reply as to what Papers will be laid before Parliament. As the War Office and India Office were unable to agree as to what the relative apportionment of increased charge arising out of the change of the conditions of service should be, the matter will be referred to arbitration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether he will give the names of the present members of the Indian Imperial Council established at the New Year of 1877 by Lord Lytton, under the Command of the late Queen-Empress; and whether, looking to the desire then proclaimed of obtaining in matters of importance the counsel and advice of the Princes and Chiefs of India, and of associating them with the Paramount Power in a manner honourable to themselves and advantageous to the Empire, he will state whether at the Delhi Coronation Durbar occasion will be taken to hold a session of the Council, and thus further the objects of the institution.

The Council of the Empire at present consists solely of ex officio members, and there is no intention of holding a session at Delhi on the occasion of the Coronation Durbar.

Is it worth while continuing this Council in existence? It has not met for many years.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, if his attention has been called to the memorandum submitted to the Chief Commissioner of Assam by the Hon. James Buckingham, C.I.E., lately a member of the Vice-Regal Council of India, on the crime and disorder produced among coolies in the Assam tea gardens by the excessive number of liquor shops established by the Government throughout the tea area of that State; and if he has observed the statement of the Chief Commissioner in Clause 3 of his resolution on the Excise Report of 1901–2, to the effect that, although the policy of the administration in regard to the sale of liquor has been repeatedly inquired into during the past twenty years, a fresh investigation will now be opened; will he state what is the nature of this promised investigation, is it now in progress, and will he lay upon the Table of the House a copy of Mr. Buckingham's memorandum, the correspondence which has taken place between the Chief Commissioner of Assam and the Deputy Commissioner of Labour Districts in Assam, particulars of the inquiries into the administration in regard to the sale of liquor referred to in the Chief Commissioner's resolution, and a statement of the nature of the promised fresh investigation?

I understand that the memorandum in question has engaged the attention of the local administration which has undertaken to make a fresh inquiry into the excise arrangement of the Province. I am in communication with the Viceroy on the subject, and when I receive the information I have asked for, I will consider what papers can be presented.

Will the Question be considered whether the Government ought to be interested in the drink traffic in India?

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, and, if so, when, it is proposed to take steps to carry out the report and recommendations of the Select Committee on Savings Banks Funds, including certain administrative reforms; audit it is intended to reduce the interest payable to the banks by one-eighth per cent., from what date such reduction is likely to take place, and whether notice will be given to the banks and to the public.

I have a Bill prepared to carry out the recommendations of the Select Committee, reducing the interest from 20th May next in the case of the Trustee Banks, and from 1st July next in the case of the Post Office Banks, and I think it will perhaps be advisable to introduce it in the hope that it may pass unopposed. Otherwise it must be re-introduced early next session with a view to passing it by the dates named, in which case the notice to depositors will be much shorter. Further postponement of the reduction in the rate of interest would involve a heavy charge on the taxpayers.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of making the date uniform in the case of each class of banks? It is important there should be notice to depositors.

; And, if there is opposition, will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to give reasonable facilities for the consideration of this important matter?

I do not think that, with the business at present before the House, we can possibly hope to get through a Bill of tins kind if it has really contentious matter in it.

There will be.

But it must be introduced early next session. As to the Question of my hon. friend, the financial year is different in the case of each class of banks, and, in order to make the date uniform, they would have to change their financial year. That would be attended with some difficulty, and I do not want to add anything more to the work we have to do in connection with the matter.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether His Majesty's Government propose to lay upon the Table of this House the terms of the agreements come to respectively with the Cunard Company as to their ships, and with Mr. Pierpont Morgan as to the ships acquired by the American Corporation known as the Atlantic Shipping Trust; and, if so, when; whether, during the present session, any opportunity will be afforded to this House of discussing those agreements; and on what date the first payments to be made by His Majesty's Government under either of these agreements will become due.

The Government propose to lay upon the Table of the House the formal agreements with the Cunard Steamship Company and the Atlantic Shipping Trust when these have been duly executed. My right hon friend the Prime Minister informs me that he will be prepared to find some evening for a discussion of the subject, if desired, after the agreements have been laid. It is unlikely that any payment under the agreement with the Cunard Steamship Company will fall due during the present financial year. The agreement with the Atlantic Shipping Trust does not involve any additional burden on the Exchequer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to give an indication as to when the Papers are likely to be laid on the Table of the House?

I cannot name a date, but I hope it will not be very long.

We are told it is to involve no financial burden on the Exchequer. But at what rate of interest is the money to be advanced?

No money is to be advanced to the Atlantic Shipping Trust.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether, in view of the late rise in the prices of meat, negotiations have yet been conducted and carried to a favourable issue with the Government of the Argentine Republic for the admission of live cattle for slaughter at certain ports in this country, due precautions having been taken before embarkation to inquire into the healthy condition of the cattle; and will he say when such admission will be allowed.

Before my right, hon. friend answers that Question may I ask him whether his attention has been drawn to the following paragraph in the Report of the Committee of Inquiry upon the question of remounts:—

"They (the horses) were all subject to final approval in Buenos Ayres, where they were collected in large cattle pens which had been erected for the storing of cattle, but which were then vacant owing to the existence of the foot-and-mouth disease."

The negotiations referred to in the Question are not yet concluded. Admission will be allowed when the Argentine regulations are such as to afford adequate security against the admission of diseased animals into this country. The hon. Member is, I presume, aware that both this year and last we have received more meat from the Argentine than ever previously—and that the first nine months of this year especially show a very large excess above the record of any previous nine months. At the present rate the imports of meat from the Argentine this year should be about 20 per cent, more than in 1899, the year before the ports were closed to live cattle.

But is it not the fact that the total imports of meat into the United Kingdom during last year show a considerable reduction?

That may be true, but the fact that there has been a drought in Australia and a shortage of maize in the United States is no argument for doing that which would involve the risk of importing disease into this country from the Argentine.

Will my right hon. Friend give the House an opportunity of discussing this question of the restrictions on the importation of cattle from Argentina before they are removed?

That is a Question which must be put to my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Treasury.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether he is aware that there is a vacancy for post-master at Limerick; and whether, seeing that five-sixths of the population of the city are Roman Catholics, and that all local superior appointments, with one exception, are held by Protestants, and that no Roman Catholic has filled the position for the past thirty-five years, he will now consider the advisability of selecting an Irishman and a Roman Catholic for the post.

The vacancy has been notified in the usual manner in the Post Office Circular, and in due course I shall appoint the candidate who, in my opinion, is best qualified for the post without inquiring as to his nationality or religious belief.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether his attention has been called to an accident which occurred at Monasterevan, Great Southern and Western Railway, Ireland, on the 11th of November last year, when the line gave way under the 10.5 p.m. train from Kingsbridge to Cork, causing a milk truck and the guard's van to roll down the embankment, injuring the, guard; and, if so, will he state the cause of the line giving way and the date the Company reported such accident to the Board of Trade.

Yes, Sir. My attention has been called to the accident referred to. It would appear from the Railway Company's explanations that relaying operations had been in progress at the place in question, and from some cause which has not been ascertained the rear portion of a goods train was derailed. The Company's officers were unable to agree as to the cause of the accident, and as the occurrence was not reported to the Board of Trade until the 21st August last, the Department had not an opportunity of ordering an inquiry at a time when a formal investigation would have been of service. The Company have explained that the delay in reporting the accident was due to an oversight, which they regret, and they state that steps have been taken to ensure that any future accidents shall be promptly reported to the Board.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been called to the fact that a subsidy of,£500 has again been granted by the Congested Districts Board to the Clyde Shipping Company for running a steamer from Cork to the south-western seaboard of Ireland; and whether, seeing that the Limerick Harbour Board and Chamber of Commerce have protested strongly against this grant in view of a similar subsidy having been refused to Limerick, which is a competing port, he will say what steps he proposes to take in the matter.

Representations in favour of a continuance of the subsidy were received from the Kerry County Council, the Cork Chamber of Commerce, and from a number of other local bodies and leading traders. The Board has approved of payment of the subsidy, as a tentative measure, for a further period of one year.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state how many Members of the House of Commons have been arrested under the provisions of the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, on the warrants of resident magistrates, and sentenced to imprisonment by resident magistrates in the interval between the adjournment of the House of Commons on 8th August and the present time; and whether he can state the names of the Gentlemen so arrested and sentenced and the terms of their imprisonment; and whether he has any, and, if so, what explanation to give of the neglect in any case of the resident magistrates to communicate to the Speaker of the House of Commons the fact of the arrest and commitment by them of Members of this House.

Three hon. Members—for the Birr Division of King's County, for South Mayo, and for East Galway—having failed to appear in answer to summonses, were arrested on the warrants of resident magistrates and sentenced to two months with hard labour, three months with hard labour, and four months with hard labour respectively. On appeal, the sentence on the first hon. Member was confirmed, but the hard labour was remitted. In the other two cases appeals are pending. No other hon. Members have been arrested, but the hon. Member for the Tullamore Division of King's County was sentenced to two months with hard labour. This sentence has been reduced on appeal to one month without hard labour. Two hon. Members, therefore—for the Birr Division and the Tullamore Division—are debarred from attending this House. Two others— for South Mayo and EastGalway—having been arrested on warrants, are at liberty pending appeal. In reply to the second part of the Question, communications, whether from resident magistrates or County Court judges, are addressed directly to Mr. Speaker, and not through the Irish Government. I understand that Mr. Speaker received a communication in respect of the two hon. Members who are debarred from attending the House, but that no communication reached him in respect to the hon. Members for South Mayo and East Galway, who are not so debarred. [Laughter.]

This is no laughing matter.

And you will soon learn that.

I want to ask whether the resident magistrates have, in any case whatever, sent letters to Mr. Speaker which have been suppressed in Dublin Castle by the right hon. Gentleman's orders.

No, Sir, I do not think the hon. Member listened to my answer. I said that all these communications go direct to Mr. Speaker, and not to the Irish Office.

Now, I will ask another Question. I want to know this—whether it was not at the instance of the Executive Government that the resident magistrates failed to comply with the ordinary courtesies to this House, and whether it is not in accordance with precedent that, immediately a warrant is issued against a Member of this House and he is arrested, a communication should be addressed to Mr. Speaker, and why that was not done in this case.

I will not go into the question of precedent, but I will say that no action was taken, and no action was left undone, at the instance of the Executive Government.

Has the right hon. Gentleman read the whole sentence in each case? Is it not the fact that each hon. Member was, in addition, required to go to prison for three months in lieu of giving bail, on the expiration of each sentence, for his future good behaviour?

I have endeavoured to answer the Question on the Paper. [Nationalist cries of "You have not."] It is impossible to give all the details. I have answered the Question on the Paper. [Nationalist cries of "You have not."] I have endeavoured to give all the information that is material. The hon. Member is quite right in stating that certainly in one case, in the case of the hon. Member for South Mayo, it is present to my mind that he was called upon to give bail, and I dare say in some of the other cases.

These are what the right hon. Gentleman calls matters of detail‡ Is it not the fact that the sentences actually imposed on these men are just double what the right hon. Gentleman has stated to the House?

Are we to understand that there has been any failure on the part of any judicial officer in Ireland to perform the immemorial practice of acquainting you, Sir, officially with the sentence passed?

Upon the facts stated by the right hon. Gentleman, I do not understand that there has been any failure. Four cases have been referred to; in two of them the hon. Members in question were committed to prison, and in those cases notices have been given. The other two were cases in which there was an arrest of two hon. Members in order that they might answer to a charge which they were summoned to answer; when those cases came before the magistrates, I think I am right in saying they were convicted, but were let out on bail during an appeal. In such a case the duty of the magistrate does not arise. It is laid down in "May s Parliamentary Practice"—and I think correctly laid down—that the duty of the magistrate arises when he has committed a criminal to prison and when he is detained there without bail. In all the cases in which the duty arose it seems to me to have been complied with. As far as I am competent to judge, it has also been complied with in the case of the hon. Member for North Leitrim, who was convicted on Thursday. I have read this afternoon to the House a letter from the resident magistrate stating his conviction and sentence.

In Mr. M'Hugh's case he has appealed, and he is at liberty. I wish to bring under your notice the fact that one of the resident magistrates, whose name I heard you, Sir, read out, a Mr. Brown, presided in two Courts in which Members of this House have been convicted; they appealed, but he did not communicate with you. If he has communicated with you now, what is the meaning of this variance?

The facts are as I stated them, as far as I am aware, and they seem to me to be in accordance with the ordinary rule.

Is it not a fact that King's County is at present deprived of all representation in this House?

Order, order‡ That does not arise out of the Question. The Question on the Paper has been fully answered. If hon. Members desire to ask other Questions on this matter, they must put them down on the Paper.

I wish to ask—

Order, order‡ I have said that the Question has been fully answered.

Permit me—

Order, order ‡ If any hon. Member wishes to ask a further Question he must put it down in the ordinary way.

On a point of order, I wish to ask whether you, Sir, are aware that the hon. Member for the Birr Division was in prison under arrest, pending his trial on a warrant for non-appearance, for nine days in Tullamore Jail.

I do not know how the fact was; I will assume that the hon. Member is quite correct, but that does not affect what I have stated.

But if that is so, ought not you to have been informed?

I have already stated what I conceive to be the duty laid down for magistrates under the practice of this House. I cannot allow it to be argued.

It will be argued, anyhow. I wish to ask whether Mr. Speaker is aware that the hon. Member for East Gal way will be committed to prison tomorrow, and that Questions put down on the Paper now cannot be asked before the hon. Member is committed.

That certainly does not arise out of this Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will: state how many persons were sentenced to terms of imprisonment with hard labour under The Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, since its enactment in July, 1887, and the suspension of its operation in Ireland under the provisions of the Statute in 1892; and how many persons have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment with hard labour since the Proclamation of April, 1902, placing certain counties of Ireland under the operation of this Act, and the present time.

The number in the first-mentioned period was 1,601. The number since April last is forty-eight; this latter number includes cases in which sentences have been varied on appeal, and also cases in which appeals are now pending.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain why a constable of the Royal Irish Constabulary, who was one of the accomplices of ex-Sergeant Sheridan of that force in the perpetration of crime and the conviction by perjured evidence of innocent persons for the crime so perpetrated, is still a member of the Royal Irish Constabulary.

One constable admitted at the Inquiry that the chief part of his evidence was not true of his own knowledge, but urged that he believed it to be true, because Sergeant Sheridan told him so. Sheridan's other accomplices resigned, but this constable refused to do so, and has been stationed at the depôt since August, 1901.

And is this man to remain in the pay of the Crown while Irish Members are put on a plank bed?

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the name of the case in which this constable gave admittedly false evidence?

The course pursued by the Government in this matter was explained by me so recently as on the 23rd July last.† I must refer the hon. and learned Member to the statement made by me on that occasion.

But this is a question which can be immediately answered. There were three or four cases in which Sheridan committed perjury, and I want to know the particular case in which this constable who is retained in the force did so.

I can only refer the hon. Member to my previous statement. To that I adhere.

And is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this constable is at the depôt giving instruction to new entrants into the force.?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, how many Members of this House representing Irish constituencies have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment in Ireland during the past twelve months on charges based upon political speeches made by them; how many of them have been sentenced to hard labour; and will he say if such sentence involves sleeping on a plank bed and a dietary for several days of bread and water.

Exclusive of the case of the hon. Member for East Clare, who has been ordered by the King's Bench Division to give sureties for good behaviour or to go to prison in default, seven Members wore convicted and sentenced to imprisonment during the past twelve months. One was convicted on three different occasions, and one on two occasions. Appeals were lodged against seven convictions; in four cases the convictions were confirmed, and in three the appeals are pending. Another

†See (4) Debates, cxi., 1072, et seq

What about the raiders?

What about Jameson? [Nationalist cheers and disorder.]

The Irish Prison Rules, like those in operation in England, prescribe that every prisoner shall be supplied with "a sufficient quantity of wholesome food, according to a scale or scales of diet." If the hon. Member will refer to these Rules, which have been laid on the Table of the House, he will find that a sentence of hard labour does not entail a dietary of bread and water.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether there has been any case before of proceedings under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act of 1887 where sentences of hard labour were imposed?

In reply to a previous Question, I stated that there were 1,601. [A NATIONALIST MEMBER: That was the total convictions.]

Cases with hard labour?

Yes, Sir; 1,601 cases where the sentence imposed by the Court of First Instance entailed hard labour.

Utterly wrong.

Do you mean that under the administration of the Prime Minister in Ireland there were 1,601 cases of hard labour?

Under me, and subsequently.

1,601 cases of hard labour?

That is so.

I mean, of course, for offences under the Criminal Law Procedure Amendment Act (Ireland), 1887?

Yes, Sir.

I desire to ask whether I am right in supposing that a sentence which carries with it hard labour also carries disqualification to sit as a county or district councillor.

Order, order‡ That does not arise out of the Question. The Question has been fully answered.

I would ask, Sir——

Order, order

Closure him; he has only spoken once, like O'Donnell.

again rose.

Order, order ‡ There must be some end to these supplementary Questions.

once more rose.

Does the hon. Member rise on a point of order?

Yes, Sir. I want to know whether hard labour was inflicted on Mr. O'Brien when he was convicted.

Order, order‡ I must ask the hon. Member to conform to the rules of the House. Rightly or wrongly, the Speaker has to be the judge in these matters, and I have given my decision.

rose to put a further Question.

The hon. Member has been long in the House, and he must know that business cannot be properly conducted if Members persist in putting these supplementary Questions.

I have no desire whatever to unduly prolong Questions, but am I not entitled to ask a Question arising out of a reply of the right hon. Gentleman as to the accuracy of one of the statements he made?

The hon. Member should put down his Question. The Question on the Paper has been fully answered.

Then I beg to give notice that I will put down a Question.

Are you aware that the Clerks at the Table have repeatedly ruled that they cannot allow a Question bearing upon a Question which has already been answered?

The rulings are given by me, and not by the Clerks at the Table. A Question may be put to elicit a particular fact without referring to an answer previously given.

Mine has been rejected for that reason.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, has he observed that at the Mullingar Quarter Sessions, in the proclaimed county of Westmeath, there was no criminal case for trial except a charge of burglary against a soldier, and that the Grand Jury unanimously passed a resolution respectfully requesting the Government to remove the proclamation of the county on account of its peaceful and crimeless condition; whether he is aware that County Court Judge Curran, who presided, tore up the resolution and threw the pieces of paper towards the Grand Jury, and, when one of the Grand Jury asked to be informed of any case of boycotting in the county, the judge threatened him with imprisonment; and seeing that Grand Juries in Ireland have habitually passed resolutions dealing with the state of the country which have been received by the judges, will the Government take any steps to secure the freedom of speech of Grand Juries, when respectfully representing to the Government the crimelessness of proclaimed districts.

I have seen a newspaper account of the proceedings in question. The learned judge is reported to have congratulated the Grand Jury on the freedom of the district from ordinary crime. He expressed regret, however, at the introduction of the, "thin edge of boycotting,'' and referred, from his lengthened experience, to the serious result of the system. To what extent the newspaper report is an accurate record of what took place I cannot say. The Government has no responsibility in the matter mentioned in the concluding part of the Question.

May I ask whether the Chief Secretary has given us an official communication from the countycourt judge; and whether it is not a fact that all the newspapers reported that after tearing up the resolution and throwing it at the Grand Jury the judge said, "There's your precious resolution"? Will the right hon. Gentleman inform Judge Curran that if on a question of local knowledge twenty-three Grand Jurymen living in the neighbourhood——

Order, order ‡ This is really making a speech on the Question.

I think you might allow me to finish my Question. When I have put it I will bow at once to your ruling. What I desire to ask is whether, if a difference of opinion arises on a local matter between the judge and the jury, the Chief Secretary will inform the judge that the difference of opinion ought not to be treated as a crime for which Grand Jurors are to be committed to prison?

No, Sir; I never make communications to judges.

It is very hard to put a Question amid the bursts of laughter of the hon. Members opposite who do not know what imprisonment is.

Some of them do.

Yes. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Judge Curran is to try Mr. O'Donnell's appeal?

Order, order‡ That does not arise out of the Question.

In reference to the last reply of the Chief Secretary, might I ask the Prime Minister whether, now that the County Courts in Ireland form a portion of the exceptional tribunals——

Order, order.‡ The hon. Member cannot ask a Question of the Prime Minister now.

Why not? I have asked them hundreds of times.

Because the Question on the Paper is disposed of, and the proper order is to take the next Question.

Well, but Mr. Speaker, this is a Question entirely and directly arising out of the answer of the Chief Secretary.

The hon. Member's Question was addressed to a different Minister altogether, and he cannot interpolate Questions to any Minister.

Then I shall put the Question to the Chief Secretary himself. I beg to ask him whether, having regard to his answer that it is not possible for him at present to address any communications to county court judges in reference to any controversial questions, he will not recommend that the salaries of those judges should be taken off the Consolidated Fund, so that it may be possible for us to criticise their action?

Order, order ‡ That does not arise out of the Question.

May I ask the Chief Secretary why Judge Curran was removed——

Order, order. That does not arise out of the Question.

Will you allow me to complete it?

No, I will not.

Because he is an Irishman.

Then I will put it down.

Do not the criminal statistics for the last three months show—

Order, order ‡ That does not arise out of the Question.

Show there is no crime——

Order, order ‡

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the evidence of Thomas Patrick Nolan, expert in handwriting, an official of the Local Government Board, on the hearing of the prosecution against the editor, manager, and printer of the Irish People newspaper, that he agreed with Mr. Gurrin, the Treasury expert, that the forged letter, purporting to come from Mr. John MacHale, president of the West Mayo United Irish League, arranging for a murderous outrage, was in the handwriting of Sergeant Sullivan, Royal Irish Constabulary, of Mulranny; whether he is aware that Nolan further avowed that, notwithstanding his own conclusion, he was employed by Sergeant Sullivan at the Sligo and Dublin trials to discredit the evidence of Mr. Gurrin and so shield Sergeant Sullivan from justice; and will he say whether Sergeant Sullivan has been called upon for any explanation; has he been dismissed from the force; and whether any steps will be taken to prosecute him for perjury.

The Chief Crown Solicitor reports that on the occasion mentioned Mr. Nolan, in answer to questions put to him on cross-examination, stated that in the Sullivan case three or four experts had not come to an opposite conclusion to his, and further that, as far as he was aware, Mr. Gurrin had not come to an opposite conclusion to his. These are the only avowals made by Mr. Nolan. There is no foundation, so far as I know, for the other statements concerning him contained in the Question. Sergeant Sullivan was tried and acquitted on the charge of writing a certain letter. He cannot, of course, be prosecuted on the same charge, nor would it be right to speculate on the possible effect which another expert witness might have produced on the minds of a jury who acquitted a man in opposition to evidence of the experts who were examined as witnesses against him.

Will any special steps be taken to prevent this man committing further acts of perjury—I respectfully press for an answer.

The hon. Member must know—

resumed his seat.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, if Mr. O'Flanagan. J.P., Chairman of the District Council of Cordfin, was recently sentenced to four months imprisonment with hard labour under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, and if he will state what was the character of his punishment; whether he had to sleep on a plank bed: whether he had for any time, and, if so, for how long a time, to subsist on bread and water; and if he has become insane, and has had to be transferred to a lunatic asylum.

The following report has been made by the Governor of Limerick Prison through the General Prisons Board—

"Mr. Flanagan was committed to this prison from Corofin Petty Sessions on 17th June last for four calendar months' hard labour under the Act referred to. He slept on a plank for the two nights succeeding his commitment to prison, after which he was given a full bed on the recommendation of the medical officer. He was not subjected to any punishment, and at no time did he get or subsist on bread and water. His employment for the first month of his sentence was chopping wood for manufacture into firewood, and during the remainder of his time he was engaged at carpentry work. On the 12th September, having complained of being unwell, he was placed under medical treatment, and on the 13th was removed to the prison hospital. On the 14th September, typhoid having developed, the medical officer recommended his discharge from prison, and he was accordingly released on the 15th September, by order of the Lords Justices, and removed to the County Limerick Infirmary under the supervision of the medical officer, who is physician to the Infirmary. He remained there under treatment, in the meantime, but having lately become insane he was on the 11th instant committed from the Infirmary to the Limerick District Lunatic Asylum. During the thirteen weeks he had been in custody at this prison he made no complaint as to his treatment. When he had been only three weeks in prison he got a pint of new milk extra, daily, which was continued up to the time of his removal to hospital and since the 8th August he had been getting C. Diet instead of 15. diet."

I hold the hon. Gentleman responsible for this man's condition.

Will a sworn inquiry be held into this case?

I must ask for notice of that.

Order, order‡ It is now five minutes to three, and Questions must stop, except those relating to business and matters of urgent public importance.