To ask the Secretary of State for India, seeing that the property belonging to Ramchandra Rao, one of the six sons of Bapu Raghunath, Dewan of Dhar, was confiscated in November, 1857, on account of Ramchandra's alleged complicity in the Mutiny, will ho ascertain what has become of the property belonging to the other sons of Bapu Raghunath, and why the claims of his other descendants, viz., Krishna Rao Raghunath, son of a younger brother of Ramchandra, and Shanka Rao Bhagwant, grandson of another brother of Ramchandra, are not recognised by the Dhar State.

To ask the Secretary of State for India, in view of the statement contained in his Budget speech last year to the effect that the yield of food crops per acre in India had increased from 730 lbs. in 1880 to 840 lbs. in 1900, will ho give the statistics on this point for each province of India. (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) The statement made in my Budget speech last year repeated certain estimates of produce prepared in India from data collected by the Famine Commission of 1898. The detailed figures, as I have received them from India, are as follow:——

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether a Commission has yet been appointed to inquire into the Police Administration in India; and, if so, will the treatment of third class native passengers on Indian Railways by the police be inquired into. (Answered by Secretary Lord George Hamilton.) A Commission has been appointed to inquire into Police Administration in India. One of the subjects to be inquired into is whether the existing organisation of the Railway Police is in a satisfactory condition; and, if not, what improvements can be effected. If there are any complaints regarding the treatment of native passengers by the police, they will doubtless be brought to the notice of the Commission.

To ask the Postmaster General whether the temporary and auxiliary postmen employed at the E.C. district office received the same pecuniary consideration for duties performed on 9th August (Coronation Day) as that received by the other members of the staff; and, if not, what are the reasons for the different treatment. (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) Temporary postmen employed in the Eastern Central District on full duties received the same extra payment for their attendance on the Bank Holiday of 9th August as the established staff. On inquiry I fear that there has been some misapprehension as regards the payment of auxiliary postmen in the Eastern Central District for Bank Holidays, but I have received no representations on the subject from the men concerned. I am having the matter investigated.

To ask the Postmaster General if he has received any communication from the Ballina Urban Council relating to the proposed change of the post office in that town to a new site. (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) I have received a communication from the urban district council of Ballina maintaining their objection to the removal of the post office from Knox Street to King Street, and suggesting the purchase of a site in Knox Street and the erection of a new building. This, however, is an arrangement which would be more expensive than the circumstances justify; the King Street scheme has therefore been sanctioned.

To ask the Postmaster General if he will state the position of the negotiations by the Department towards acquiring a site for a post office in Ballymoney. (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) No negotiations are going on at present for the acquisition of a site for a new post office at Ballymoney. The office there has recently been enlarged, and no difficulty is experienced in carrying on the business in the present building.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether the local education authority to be established under the Education Bill will have control over the selection and arrangement of furniture, the granting of holidays, the imposition and remission of fees, the provision of certificates and prizes, and the provision of school libraries. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) It is not convenient to answer questions as to the interpretation of a Bill which is under discussion in Committee. But, so far as secular instruction is concerned, the control of the local authority over the expenditure required for maintaining public elementary schools is complete.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any gratuity is to be given to the men who were engaged in operations in China in 1900; and, if so, what conditions are to be observed. (Answered by Mr. Arnold-Forster.) A gratuity will be granted to the Naval and Marine forces engaged in the operations in North China and in the Yangtse Valley from June, 1900, to 31st December, 1900, similar to that awarded to His Majesty's land forces. The Army unit of 24 rupees a share will be adopted and the gratuity paid, as in the case of the troops, to all employed, irrespective of the nature of the services rendered by them, subject only to the proviso that no person shall receive the gratuity in addition to the Pekin prize money unless his share of the prize money be less than his share of the gratuity, in which case the difference between the two amounts will be paid to him. It is expected that the distribution of the gratuity will commence about the beginning of November.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he intends to make and issue, for the guidance of police authorities, any model regulations for the purpose of securing the giving of information and the identification of convicted persons under Section 6 (3) of the Licensing Act, 1902. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.)—I have now under consideration the regulations to be made by me under Section 6 (3) of the Licensing Act, 1902, as police authority for the Metropolitan Police District; and I hope to be able, in a few days time, to forward copies of these regulations to the various police authorities, to whom they may be of assistance.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade, why no inquiry has been held into the loss of the steamship "Islay" off Port Ellen on 15th September; and whether he will have an investigation made into the circumstances attending the loss and the causes of the delay in lowering the boats after the vessel struck. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) A preliminary inquiry, which was held in the case to which my hon. friend refers disclosed the fact that the cause of the stranding was the density of the fog, and, possibly, a slight error of judgment on the part of the master. The crew and passengers were safely landed by the ship's boats without any mishap, and the weather being still and the sea smooth there was no necessity for undue haste in lowering the boats, which were reported by the Board of Trade Surveyor as being in good order and easily handled when last surveyed.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will say when the accounts of the General Lighthouse Fund for the year ending 31st March, 1902, will be presented to this House; when each of the three lighthouse authorities rendered its accounts for the year ending 31st March, 1902, to the Board of Trade; when these accounts were sent by the Board of Trade to the Auditor General; when the Board of Trade received his certificate; and, if it has not yet been received, when the Board of Trade expects to receive it. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The lighthouse authorities render their accounts quarterly. Those for the quarter ending 31st March, 1902, were received at the Board of Trade at different dates during the months of May and June. The accounts are forwarded by the Board of Trade to the Auditor General in instalments so soon as they have been examined, the first instalment having been sent on the 26th May and the last on the 4th September. The full annual account is sent when the Board hear that the Comptroller and Auditor General has completed his examination of the last instalment.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state when the Return of Hours Worked by Railway Servants, now in course of preparation, will be presented to the House. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) This Return was presented on the 14th instant. I understand that it will be circulated very shortly.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he proposes to take any, and, if so, what course of action in reference to the Report of the Royal Commission on the Port of London; and whether he will use his influence to obtain facilities for a discussion of the subject upon the Motion of which notice appears upon the Vote Paper. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) This subject is at present engaging the attention of the Government, and I am not yet in a position to make any statement with regard to it.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the statement of the necessity for improving the entrance to the harbour at Lehud, County Kerry, lately submitted by the local fishermen to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who resides in the district, and

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of head constables, sergeants, and men of the Royal Irish Constabulary stationed in Newry, and to what particular denomination do they separately belong.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of officers, head constables, sergeants, and men of the Royal Irish Constabulary stationed in the City of Belfast, and to what particular denomination do they separately belong. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The religious distribution of the force in Belfast on the 31st December was as follows:——

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any decision has yet been come to in connection with the claims of North Mayo to grants from the new piers and harbours fund; and, if not, if he is in a position to say when a decision may be come to. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) No decision has yet been arrived at. The Government hopes to be in a position to give effect to the provisions of the recent Act at an early date.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Return granted on the 6th August, dealing with Railway and Harbour Guarantees (Ireland) is yet ready; and, if not, what is the cause of the delay. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) There has been no avoidable delay in the preparation of the Return, which, it is hoped, will be completed in the course of a fortnight.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain the cause of delay in the sale of the White Estate (near Bantry); and whether he can state approximately when it will be sold. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Report made to the Land Judge in the matter of this estate deals with a very large number of holdings. In the case of many of these, the Land Commission have required amendments to be made in the rental, and this cannot be done without the consent of, or on notice to, the tenants whose interests would be affected It is not possible, at present, to say when the property will be offered to the tenants.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if the Report of the Agricultural Board (Ireland) for the year ending 31st March, 1902, may be expected before the end of the Session, and if there is any reason for the delay in its publication; if he can state the aggregate amount of the grants made by the Board, in respect of agricultural purposes during the year ending 31st March, to the counties of Armagh, Down, Antrim, and Derry; and also, for like purposes, the aggregate to the province of Connaught, and also theaggragate amounts raised or guaranteed locally in those counties for such purposes, and also in the province of Connaught. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) It is hoped that the Department's Report for the year ended 31st March, 1902, will be ready for issue in the course of next month. The Report for the previous year was issued in the same month. The other information asked for is being prepared, and will be communicated to my hon. friend when received.

To ask the Secretary of State for War can he state the average cost of clothing of a private of Imperial Yeomanry in January, 1900, compared with that of a private of cavalry at the same date. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The value of the South African outfit of a cavalry private in January, 1900, was £7 19s. 2½d., and of an Imperial Yeoman was £9 4s. 5½d.

To ask the Secretary of State for War, with reference to the Court of Inquiry into the Remount Department, if he will state what allowance has been made to General Truman for counsel, and what has been that for the assessor appointed by the War Office to assist the Court. (Answered, by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The sum of £660 has been paid to General Truman for counsel, and a further claim is under consideration. The sum of £2,163 has been paid to the assessor.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case of N. Perry, late of the 12th Lancers; whether he is aware that this man was discharged from the Army on the 2nd July, 1896, and underwent an operation on his leg rendered necessary from an accident whilst he was in the 12th Lancers; that, although not allowed to rejoin that regiment, he joined the 34th Middlesex Company of Yeomanry, and went to the war with the 8th Division, but had enteric, and was sent home in October, 1900; that when well again he joined the 21st Sharpshooters, and went again to the front, where he was again injured by an accident in the field; and whether he is not eligible for an allowance as his leg is still bad, in accordance with the recommendations of the recent Committee of both Houses. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) No application for pension has been received from this man; if he will furnish full particulars of the illness and the recent injury mentioned the case will be considered. It appears from his documents that he was discharged from the Middlesex Yeomanry at his own request, and from the Sharpshooters on termination of his engagement.

To ask the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the case, stated by the Secretary of the Army Reservists Fund, of a time-expired man, two of whose children have died of starvation and who is himself in the workhouse, although £40 is due to him for arrears of pay; and to the case of another man, with £30 due to him, who had to pawn his medal to obtain money to support his children; and whether he will, if details of the above cases are brought before him, cause an inquiry into the whole circumstances.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the statement, made on behalf of the Committee of the Army Reservists Fund, that numbers of time-expired men are still without arrears of pay due to them; that the Secretary of the Committee was not paid for eight months, though he called at the War Office to urge his claims; that the Chairman did not receive any of his pay until eight weeks after his return home with his papers in order, and until he had twice written to the Commander-in-Chief and had a personal interview with Sir Edward Ward; that in this last case £10 only has been paid, and the balance retained until the middle of November; and what explanation he can give of these circumstances. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The statements referred to by the hon. Baronet only reached me this morning. I will have them inquired into. Without wishing to cast any doubt on these particular statements, it is right I should mention that I inquire carefully into every grievance which reaches me and hitherto the great majority have not been borne out by the facts.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will inform the House what is the date of commencement of work on the latest ship of the 1901 programme, and when the two battleships and two armoured cruisers of the 1902 programme are to be begun.

The orders for the armoured cruisers for the 1901 programme were despatched on the 29th March last, and letters confirming the telegraphic orders were sent to the contracting firms on the 12th April, when the work was proceeded with immediately. As already explained in the House, the date of commencement of these ships was delayed owing to the necessity for improving their protective armour and modifying their boiler installation. One of the battleships of the 1902 programme has been ordered, and work has been commenced upon her on the Clyde. The second ship will be laid down at Portsmouth dockyard as soon as the "Suffolk" is launched, and it is anticipated that the whole of the money voted for the ship for the current year will be expended on her.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will say why, in the Return of Fleets, the order of the ships, and especially in the case of cruisers and destroyers, has been changed from the chronological order previously in most cases adopted, so that easy comparison with former Returns is rendered difficult; and whether the Admiralty will adopt in future an order of ships such as to make reference and comparison more simple.

The Return has been re-arranged in the manner explained in the Prefatory Memorandum. Ships of the same class have been grouped together, and it is believed that this arrangement will prove more convenient, and will give more information to hon. Members than that previously adopted. It is proposed to issue any future Return in the same form as that now presented. I ought to add, however, that the Return being furnished for the information of the House of Commons, it is desirable that it should be compiled in such a manner as to meet the views of hon. Members. If, therefore, the right hon. Baronet will submit to me any suggestions with respect to Amendment in the form of the Return I will undertake to submit them to the Department responsible for the compilation and to ascertain how far they can be incorporated in similar Returns in the future.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, if, before the final approval of any new musketry regulations for the Volunteer force, he will consult with the Council of the Commanding Officers Association as to their details.

I shall be glad to take the opinion of some representative Volunteer Officers before issuing the new regulations which are however very elastic. But I should prefer proceeding through the General Officers Commanding Districts and the Advisory Board.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, with reference to the Court of Inquiry on the Remount Department, and in view of its being the usual practice that the opinion of the convening officer accompanies the report of such a court, will he state whether such an opinion has been recorded in the present case by the Commander-in-Chief; and, if so, when it will be published; and, if not, will he explain why.

The opinion of the Commander-in-Chief has been recorded on the report of the Court of Inquiry. He considered the report inconsistent, and therefore unsatisfactory. The remarks of the Commander-in-Chief bear upon the future as well as upon the past, and therefore I do not propose to publish his minute, the future of the Remount Department being still under discussion.

Will the Report eventually be published?

I cannot make any promise on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, in view of the expansion of the duties of the Remount; Department, and of the intention in July, 1900, to move the office of that Department to Pall Mall, will he say why the Department is still lodged in Victoria Street, where it is sometimes obliged to wait for four days before being able to obtain War Office papers it may require; and can he explain, in view of these facts, why the Yeomanry Committee was lodged during the war in spacious rooms close to the War Office, and is now occupying more central offices than the Remount Department; and will he state why no administrative increase was made to the headquarters staff of that Department till May, 1900, more than six months after the outbreak of the war.

The War Office suffers great inconvenience from its work being carred on in a number of different buildings, and various branches, including the Intelligence Department, have with great difficulty and at considerable expense been housed in buildings adjacent to Pall Mall. Repeated efforts were made to obtain more central accommodation for the Remount Department in buildings adjacent to the War Office, but the difficulties of procuring such accommodation on reasonable terms proved insuperable. The Yeomanry Committee had already secured rooms in Cleveland House before the War Office was in treaty for it. As regards the Remount Staff, no increases were asked for until March, 1900, when the Department was required to take over the provision of horses for the Imperial Yeomanry, and the demands by the Inspector General of Remounts for additional staff in London or in the districts, were in all cases acceded to.

HOW was it the Yeomanry Committee were able to procure rooms, while the Remount Department could not?

Because they were already in possession of that particular building.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state the amount incurred on war expenditure in South Africa to the termination of the war; the amount incurred since that date for transport, terminal charges, and gratuities to the troops; the amount incurred since the termination of the war for military charges other than above; and the amount estimated as required to meet all charges on account of South Africa, other than civil charges, till 31st March next.

In the absence of final accounts, no better estimate can be framed of the total expenditure incurred in connection with the war than the figures contained in Table I. of the Return moved for by the hon. Member for Poplar in April last (No. 155 of 1902), if the supplementary provision of £17,000,000 in 1902–3, made on the assumption that the war would continue, be omitted.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will say what amount has been disbursed by the Treasury if he cannot give the actual figures incurred?

No, Sir. If I gave these figures it would be misleading. I must wait for the final accounts before I can state what the cost of the war has been.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if, having regard to the expenditure due to the South African War, the fiscal regulations of the new colonies will provide for the preferential treatment of British goods compared to foreign goods.

I anticipate that the South African Colonies will shortly hold a Customs Conference, and it would be premature to make any statement on the subject at the present time.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will say how much of the three million pounds granted for the rebuilding and restocking of the Boer farms at the signing of the terms of peace has been spent up to the present time on the purposes for which it was granted.

I am not in a position to say the exact amount, but I have asked Lord Milner to supply a rough estimate, as far as he can do so.

Is the fund being used to pay the expenses of sending the Boer prisoners back to South Africa?

I must ask for notice.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the policy of maintaining the status quo in the Mediterranean, announced by His Majesty's Government to Parliament last session, applies equally to the status quo in the Adriatic; and whether His Majesty's Government has received any information of an agreement between France and Italy looking to a contingent disturbance of the status quo, and referred to publicly by M. Delcassé and, if so, whether he will inform Parliament of the nature and effect of the agreement between France and Italy, especially with regard to Trieste and Dalmatia.

The answer to the first Question is in the affirmative. His Majesty's Government are not aware of any agreement between France and Italy involving a disturbance of the status quo in the Mediterranean.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, before a Vote is taken for any further money for the Uganda Railway, he will lay upon the Table a Balance Sheet, showing the capital and the trading profit and loss of this railway, in accordance with the course adopted by directors of railway companies to their shareholders.

The Annual Parliamentary Report by the Uganda Railway Committee, which is to be laid in a few days will, I think, be found to contain all the information desired by the hon. Member so far as the circumstances of the line correspond with those of an English railway.

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

A further telegram from General Manning, relating to the operations in Somaliland, has been communicated to this day's evening papers as follows:—

"Arrived Berbera 10 this morning.

"Swayne has reached Bohotle in safety. Force was not attacked during retirement; situation consequently more satisfactory, but do not cancel orders warning Punjab Regiment from India for service, in case they have been given, as further developments must be awaited.

"Wounded all doing very well; no anxiety concerning wounded officers need be felt. Howard's wound slight, Everett's wound severe (shoulder), but able to ride.

"Aden attachment will arrive today and go forward to posts tomorrow morning."

I may perhaps say in explanation that the Aden attachment, to which reference is made, is about 300 strong, but of course these are not the only reinforcements which the Government have ordered, though we may hope they will not be so much required now. There is a battalion and a half under orders from India—not the Punjab but the Bombay regiment—and besides that we have ordered 600 more African troops from the other protectorates, who are specially useful in Somaliland owing to the local conditions. I need not say that if the news does not continue to be equally satisfactory, if bad news should come, the Government would be prepared to supply even further troops.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the fact that, under the International Scheme for North Sea Fisheries Investigation, this country's share of the joint international expenditure will amount to £42,000, will he state the amount to be expended by the other countries interested.

My noble friend has asked me to reply to this Question. The only joint international expenditure will be the annual sum of £4,800 for the maintenance of the central organisation at Copenhagen, towards which it is proposed that Great Britain, Germany and Russia should each contribute £1,250 and the other countries £262 10s. The sum of £42,000 represents the amount which will be required by Great Britain to meet our own expenditure during the next three years, inclusive of our contribution to the joint expenditure.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state what progress has been made with the scheme for a light railway between Dingwall and Cromarty.

An Order under the Light Railways Act, authorising the construction of the line in question, was confirmed by the Board of Trade on the 1st August last. I have no information as to the steps that may have been taken under the powers so conferred.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state what sentence has been passed upon the London policeman who was recently convicted of perjury, and what witnesses were examined for the prosecution.

The sentence passed on ex-Police Constable Rolls is five years penal servitude. The prosecutor was Joseph Wheelerbread, and his evidence was supported by twelve private persons and six police officers.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake that copies of the depositions and a transcript of the shorthand notes of the remarks made by the judge in passing sentence will be forwarded to the Chief Secretary for Ireland?

May I ask if the Crown counsel in this case was instructed to state that the aggrieved party——

Order, order! Notice should be given of this.

But it arises directly out of the Question.

The Question on the Paper is what sentence was passed and what witnesses were examined. That has been answered.

Did the Treasury bear the cost of this policeman's defence?

Order, order! The hon. Member must give notice.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the levy made in the different police barracks of London for the defence of the London policeman recently convicted for perjury was approved by the authorities; whether it is a fact that his bailsmen were London police officers; whether the constable was afforded an opportunity of resigning from the force before dismissal; and whether it is intended to award the constable any compassionate allowance from public funds.

I have no knowledge of any such levy. The bailsmen for ex-Police Constable Rolls were not police officers. He was not allowed to resign, nor did he ask to do so. His dismissal followed as a matter of course on the result of the trial. A police constable on dismissal forfeits all claim to compassionate or other allowance.

Was the aggrieved person in this case told that it was his duty to bring the police perjurer to justice, and was he obliged to pay his own expenses in doing so?

I cannot answer that Question without notice.

Then I give notice of it.

The Question itself asks whether a collection was taken.

And that has been answered.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give this valuable constable as a present to the Irish Secretary?

Make him a removable magistrate in return for his valuable services.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney General whether his attention has been directed to the charge of the Recorder at the Central Criminal Court on the 20th inst., and to his remarks respecting the calendar, and the number of prisoners, and the offences; and will he state how many prisoners out of the 116 names on the calendar are charged with murder or attempts to murder; what interval has elapsed since the last sessions; and, in view of the learned Recorder's statement, do the Government intend to propose legislation of an exceptional character for the metropolitan area.

I have made inquiries on this subject. Seven persons out of a calendar of 116 were charged with murder or attempted murder.

Do I understand that 116 cases occurred since 9th September?

I cannot say when they occurred.

Does not the hon. Gentleman consider that in the circumstances some exceptional legislation such as a Crimes Act is necessary.

Not in England: not in the slightest degree. The sittings of the Central Criminal Court are sufficiently frequent to cope with the business.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the creation of new holdings in Barra that took place in the early part of the year, he will take steps to encourage the creation of similar holdings in the Island of Lewis and other congested areas of the Western Highlands; and will he state whether he will arrange to open negotiations with the proprietor of the Island of Lewis and other landlords with a view to the acquisition of the necessary land.

The circumstances now existing in the Island of Lewis are not in all respects parallel to those in the Island of Barra. It does not follow that the experiment tried in the latter island by the Congested Districts Board for ameliorating the condition of the people, and which they hope in course of time will be successful in attaining that object, would be equally suitable to the Island of Lewis. They do not at present think they can usefully open negotiations of the kind suggested by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the question of closing areas such as the Moray Firth was brought before the International Fishery Conference which recently met at Copenhagen; and, if so, with what result; and will he say when the Report of the proceedings will be published.

I understand that the question referred to was not formally under discussion at the recent meeting of the International Fishery Council. The question of the publication of the Report is now under consideration.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer will he grant a Return of the hereditaments in England, Ireland, and Scotland respectively held by the Crown in respect of which Treasury Bounty in lieu of rates is paid, and the amount in each case; can he say whether the amount of contribution is determined on the principle of what a hypothetical tenant would pay in each case; and, if so, what Treasury Official decides how much the hypothetical tenant would pay in the case of arsenals and dockyards.

The preparation of a Return giving each hereditament would be a very laborious matter; but if the hon. Member will move for a Return in continuation of Parliamentary Paper No. 221 of 1900, I shall be happy to grant it. Treasury contributions in lieu of rates are made as a matter of grace and favour. The valuations are based as far as practicable on the same principles as the valuations of private property. They are fixed in Ireland by the Commissioner of Valuation; in England, Wales, and Scotland by the Treasury, after personal negotiation between the Treasury Valuer and Inspector of Rates and the local rating authorities.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will state what amounts respectively have been stopped by the Treasury in England, Ireland, and Scotland, and from what bodies, in respect of contributions in lieu of rates for Royal Parks, and in what year did the deductions begin; is he aware that in the case of the Phoenix Park there is an annual income from grazing, averaging nearly £600 a year, and as the legal test of rateability has been defined to be what a hypothetical tenant would give, can he suggest any reason why the grazing rents of Phoenix Park are not rateable.

I shall be happy to give the hon. Member privately, or as an answer to an unstarred Question, the details asked for in the first paragraph. The receipts from the Phoenix Park for grazings, etc. (which average £700, not £600, per annum) are more than counterbalanced by the cost of maintaining the Park, which amounts to over £7,000 per annum. In view of the judgments in the case of the Churchwardens of Lambeth v. the London County Council, reported in The Times of 20th July, 1897, the Treasury would not be justified in making any contributions in respect of them.

But surely the hon. Gentleman can give me the amount stopped for England, Scotland and Ireland respectively.

Yes, I have said I will give the information privately or in answer to an unstarred Question. It would be too long an answer to be read in the House.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the new statue of Mr. Bright has been placed in the position which it is proposed it shall permanently occupy; and, if so, whether he will consider the desirability of removing it to a better position in the outer lobby, such as was occupied by the first statue erected to the memory of the deceased statesman.

The answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The position was selected with the assent of the donor and the sculptor. With regard to the second part of the Question, the position occupied by the first statue erected to the memory of Mr. Bright has, since its removal, been assigned to the statue of the late Mr. Gladstone, and it is not proposed to alter that arrangement.

May I ask my hon. friend whether he will consider the propriety of removing the statue of Earl Granville to a suitable position in another place, and, in that way, of leaving that space available for the statue of Mr. Bright?

I will make inquiries on behalf of my right hon. friend, but I think the whole matter is under the consideration of the First Commissioner of Works. I will certainly call his attention to the suggestion of my right hon. friend.

Will the consideration extend to the statue of Cromwell?

I beg to ask the Postmaster General, whether he will state how long the high rate levied for a telephone message between London and Paris,—viz. eight shillings for three minutes time, and sixteen shillings for six minutes consecutive time—has been in existence, and the estimated cost of construction of the telephone between London and Paris, the annual revenue, and the estimated expenditure for the Paris—London telephone.

The present rate of charge for telephonic communication between London and Paris has been in force since the 1st April 1891. I have no information as to the cost of construction or maintenance of the French section of the line, nor is it possible to separate accurately the cost of working this line from other telegraph expenditure.

Does the telephone pay?

Yes, I think it does.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether there is telephonic communication between London and Brussels, and London and Berlin; and, if not, whether any steps are being taken to establish direct communication between the cities named.

A new cable has been laid to Belgium, and telephonic communication between London and Brussels will be opened as soon as the necessary arrangements can be completed. The establishment of communication between London and Berlin is not at present feasible.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General if he is aware that on Wednesday, 3rd September last, telegraphic communication between England and Scotland was almost entirely suspended, causing inconvenience and loss; and whether, looking to the frequency of such breakdowns in the telegraph wires, will he give some assurance that the underground system will be extended to the principal commercial centres of Scotland.

I am aware that telegraphic communication with Scotland was seriously interrupted on the 3rd ultimo, with the result, I regret to say, that the traffic was considerably delayed. I fully recognise the importance of an extension of the underground system, and shall make as much progress with it this year as the funds voted by Parliament for that purpose admit of.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he intends to introduce legislation for the better housing of the labouring classes in Ireland during the present session, or will he give facilities for the Bill introduced by the hon. Member for South Louth.

The extent to which the Government is prepared to go in this matter is disclosed by an Amendment which I have put down on the Paper to the Bill of the hon. Member for South Louth. A NATIONALIST MEMBER: But the right hon. Gentleman promised to introduce a Bill. Will he not keep his promise?

I did not promise to bring in a Bill. [VOICES: You did.]

Hon. Members are not entitled to enter into an argument as to whether the right hon. Gentleman is fulfilling his pledges.

He never does.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Tipperary No. 1 Rural District Council included in their recent improvement scheme under the Labourers Acts the extension of existing half-acre plots to one acre; and, seeing that the power is vested in the District Councils to grant what is termed the additional half-acre, will he say on what legal grounds the Local Government Board rejected several applications of this nature in connection with this improvement scheme.

The scheme proposed the acquisition of the additional allotments to 130 existing cottages. Fifty-one cases were withdrawn by the District Council at the Inquiry. The inspector recommended forty-five and disapproved of thirty-six. These latter were rejected because in some cases the applicants were not agricultural labourers; or were unable to cultivate the land if granted; or because the land was unsuitable; or the applications were not supported by the District Councillors.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state why the Improvement Scheme which is being promoted by the Cork Rural District Council has not yet been sanctioned by the Local Government Board, seeing that the District Council has completed all the necessary forms enjoined on them under the Labourers Acts.

The scheme is at present the subject of correspondence between the Board and the District Council. It will be sanctioned upon the satisfactory settlement of certain matters at issue.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state what are the matters which require adjustment?

I have not the information here.

Is it not the eviction of a certain number of labourers from their cottages?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of county and district councillors convicted in Ireland during the past twelve months, under the provisions of the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, 1887, and of these how many have been sentenced to terms of imprisonment with hard labour.

Thirty-two, of whom sixteen were sentenced by the Court of First Instance to imprisonment with hard labour. In five cases the haul labour was remitted on appeal; and appeals are pending in six other cases.

May I ask whether the sentence of hard labour does not disqualify these gentlemen from acting on their respective councils for five years?

Arising out of the answer is it not the fact that these councillors are disqualified for five years, and was not that the object of the sentences?

Order, order! That is not a proper Question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay on the table the instructions he has given to the removable magistrates on the subject?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether an application has been made by the Dingle Harbour Board for a grant, under the provisions of the Marine Works Bill; seeing that the Local Harbour Board is prepared to give £500 contribution, and that the work will benefit a congested district, whether he will take steps to secure that the necessary help will be given.

The application has been received and will be considered with others. I am not at present in a position to make any further statement in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has come to any decision as to the distribution of the balance accumulated from the Local Taxation Account.

I have been giving this matter full consideration, but I am not yet in a position to announce a decision.

When may we expect a decision?

When I have had an opportunity of conferring with other Departments concerned.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has taken into consideration the burden of taxation which the Dingle Railway and the Fenit Pier are to a congested county; whether he proposes to make a grant for the purpose of carrying out those structural alterations in this railway recommended by the Local Government Board inspector, with a view of making the line financially successful; and whether he will take steps to reduce the charge paid annually on the loan for the construction of Fenit Pier to the rate at which the Treasury can borrow the money.

I have considered these questions, in so far as they affect the Irish Government. They are closely related to other questions of a similar character, and can only be decided after a careful consideration of the whole matter in conference with other Departments.

When will the right hon. Gentleman confer with the other Departments?

I am in communication with them already.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland what was the amount paid out of public funds with reference to the defence of Sergeant Sullivan at the criminal trial in Sligo; what was the amount paid in his defence in the civil action in Dublin; and will the Government pay Sergeant Sullivan's expenses in any further proceedings that may be taken against him.

My right hon. and learned friend has undertaken to reply to this question. [NATIONALIST cries of "Why don't you?" "Where is he?"]

This is not a legal question.

The hon. Member can put the Question again.

I beg to submit to you, Sir, that I am entitled to an answer from the responsible Chief Secretary of the country. This is not in any respect a legal question, but a question of the highest and deepest national policy.

It is not an uncommon course for a Minister to ask another Minister to reply, and if he says that he has done so, it is the usual courtesy of the House to a wait that Minister's answer. Subsequently, the Attorney General for Ireland being present,

said: I beg again to ask this Question of the Chief Secretary, but I must decline to ask such a question of a Castle lawyer.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether any communications, verbal or written, have passed between Dublin Castle and any resident magistrate or magistrates in Ireland on the subject of reporting to Mr. Speaker any prosecution, arrest, detention, or conviction of any Member of this House; and if so, what was the tenour of such communications.

In 1888 and 1889 written instructions were issued requesting resident magistrates to notify to Mr. Speaker the fact of the committal to prison of a Member of this House, or his arrest and remand whether on bail or otherwise. Telegraphic instructions were sent in particular cases during the last Session. I have directed that general instructions of similar purport to those of 1888 and 1889 be reissued to resident magistrates.

Were any communications made to the resident magistrates after the last discussion in this House? Was Mr. Brown's recent communication to Mr. Speaker a result of communications from Dublin Castle?

I have given the hon. Member the facts. I have directed the general instructions to be sent out again.

Have they been sent out?

I directed them to be sent out three days ago.

After I raised a debate.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he can state if any political meetings are allowed to be held in Court houses in County Down; and whether any instructions have been issued to the Sheriff of that county to disperse such gatherings by force.

A general instruction was issued on 1st August to High Sheriffs advising them that—

"The custody of the County Court Houses is given High Sheriffs for the purpose, mainly and primarily, of providing for the administration of justice, and that, so far as is consistent with that provision, the High Sheriff should allow the County Council to use the Court House for the execution of their duties, but for no other purpose whatever."

It was also pointed out that the High Sheriff, in the discharge of his duty in this connection, is entitled to call for and receive the assistance of the police.

Is it not the fact that meetings are being held in Court houses to promote an agitation on the licensing question?

I am not aware of that.

The right hon. Gentleman has not said whether political meetings have been held in Down Court houses.

I have no knowledge of that. The High Sheriff is responsible for the custody of the Court house.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire whether meetings of the local Orange Lodge are held regularly in the Court house at Newcastle, County Down?

Order, order! If the hon. Member wishes to call attention to a particular case he must give notice.

Who is the authority to decide whether a meeting is political?

The re-movables.

Do the High Sheriffs pay for the maintenance of the Court houses?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will grant the Return on the Paper relative to Congested Districts (Ireland) (Population, etc.)

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the case of Mr. Martin O'Dwyer, county councillor since the passing of the Local Government Act, who was sentenced, at a Court constituted under the Criminal Law and Procedure (Ireland) Act, to two months imprisonment with hard labour for a speech delivered at Templemore on the 11th September; and seeing that hard labour entails on Mr. O'Dwyer disqualification as a county councillor, and the resident magistrate refused to remit the extra penalty, will he say what steps he proposes to take in the matter.

The hon. Member has overlooked the fact that Mr. O'Dwyer has appealed against the sentence imposed upon him by the magistrates. The appeal will be heard at Thurles Quarter Session in January.

Is it not a fact that hard labour has been imposed?

And has not a full meeting of the County Council unanimously condemned the sentence?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the meetings held every Sunday on the Custom House steps at Belfast lead to riot and disorder, and the statements of Protestant clergymen that they are the direct cause of drunkenness amongst the Protestant working class, instructions will be given to have the Custom House railed in, as in the case of the Dublin Custom House.

The question has been previously considered by me. The expediency of enclosing the steps of the Custom House in Belfast, with the object of prohibiting, or otherwise regulating meetings, is, as I have already stated, very doubtful. The circumstances which led to the enclosure of the steps of the Custom House in Dublin were of a different character.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on Sunday last scandalous scenes took place on the Custom House steps of Belfast, and that an old man was knocked down and nearly murdered? I will further ask him whether he is going to allow these riotous scenes, held under the auspices of a so-called religious organization, to continue from Sunday to Sunday.

I cannot discuss the use made of my discretion by way of Question and answer, but if the hon. Gentleman objects to it he can call attention to it in Committee of Supply. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman thinks it would conduce to good order in Belfast to put up a railing, which, in all probability, would be pulled down, thus increasing the disorder.

Arising out of the Question, I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will consider the advisability of railing in the Nationalist Benches, for the same reason.

Order, order! The Question on the Paper was whether the Chief Secretary would consider the advisability of railing in certain steps. He says he has considered it and does not think it advisable. There really is nothing more to be asked on this Question. Several Nationalist Members rose to ask further Questions.

I must ask hon. Members to remember that there is a limited time for Questions, and there are others which have to be answered. If hon. Members have other Questions to ask which cannot arise directly out of this Question, they must give notice of them in the ordinary way, and let other Members take their turn. Several Nationalist Members again rose.

I must ask hon. Members to pay attention to my ruling. I assure hon. Members that I have every desire, in proper turn and time, that every Question should be answered. But there are some Questions that ought not to be asked as supplementary, and ought to be put down as fresh Questions, and I think really that this Question has been completely answered. I trust hon. Members will accept that statement. I have stated what I consider to be the rule.

On a point of order, Sir, I propose to submit a Question arising out of the Question.

That is not a point of order.

again rose.

I know that hon. Members, in one sense, might ask many questions arising out of the Question on the Paper, but that is not the sense in which the word is used here. A supplementary Question must mean one that is necessary for the complete explanation of the answer actually given, or to supplement an omission in the answer. This Question has been fully answered, and I must ask hon. Members to accept that.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker——

Is the hon. Gentleman going to submit another Question?

No, Sir, I am not. I propose to ask you whether, when you are satisfied in your own mind that a Question on the Paper has been fully answered, we are to understand that it is not competent for any Member of this House to put a Question arising out of that answer?

It is not a Question arising out of the answer in the sense in which those words are used here. If the Question has been fully answered, and the proposed supplementary Question does not arise out of the answer, it must be treated as a new Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will state the name of the constable of the Royal Irish Constabulary, at present discharging the duties of his office in the depôt of the Royal Irish Constabulary, Phoenix Park, Dublin, who has given perjured testimony resulting in the conviction of innocent men; and whether he will direct his dismissal from the Royal Irish Constabulary.

The hon. Member will find the information for which he asks in the reply given to a question put by the hon. Member for the Ossory Division of Queen's County on 15th July. The reasons for retaining this constable were stated by me in Committee of Supply on July 23rd.†

The only answer I will take is "Yes" or "No." Will the right hon. Gentleman instantly dismiss this constable or not?

I must make him say "Yes" or "No."

I must ask the hon. Member to sit down."