To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether, in view of the delay in the publication of the revaluation lists of Belfast, he can arrange that the appeals lodged on the 8th February last shall be delayed until Parliament has determined the proper Court of Appeal which would be applicable to the whole county. (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) There was no delay in the publication of the revaluation lists which were issued in 1901, but cannot come into force before March, 1905. The appeals to quarter sessions were lodged before 29th February, 1904. I cannot give an undertaking such as suggested, but I am looking into the matter.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will ascertain whether the cost of the steps which are being taken by the German Colonial Committee, in order to establish and extend the cultivation of cotton in German Colonies, and which are described in detail in the Board of Trade Journal of 25th February, 1904, is being borne by the State or by private individuals. (Answered by Earl Percy.) The experiments are paid for by the Colonial Scientific Committee, which obtains all its funds partly from subscriptions and

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Government have any information as to the result of the inquiry, stated by His Majesty's Consul at Frankfort in his last report to be then about to be held, in consequence of complaints received by the German Government of the effects on German trade of the action of trusts and cartels in selling surplus stocks of raw materials and partly manufactured goods in foreign markets at lower prices than those required of German consumers of such goods. (Answered by Earl Percy.) A summary of the proceedings of the Commission of Inquiry down to June last is given in the Blue-book on British and foreign trade and industry issued by the Board of Trade, pages 333 to 342 [Cd. 1761].

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the amount of salted herrings imported by Germany during the years 1901, 1902, and, if possible, 1903, showing how much of these imports came respectively from Britain, Holland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and other countries. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) The following is the information desired by the hon. Member:—

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has any official information showing the percentage of breakage of rails on railways in the United Kingdom made from steel manufactured by the basic and the Bessemer acid processes, respectively; and, if not, will he institute inquiries as to the comparative safety of rails made by the two methods. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I have no information as to the percentage of breakage of rails manufactured by the basic and the Bessemer acid processes respectively, and I do not think such an inquiry as is suggested would lead to any useful result. I may add that accidents from broken rails are of rare occurrence. The hon. Member is no doubt aware of the Report of a Committee on Steel Rails (1900, C. 174).

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has completed his inquiry as to sources of iron ore supplies; and, if so, will he lay upon the Table the results of his inquiry. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) A large amount of information has been received, but there are still a certain number of reports outstanding. I propose to lay upon the Table, as soon as practicable, a Report based upon the information already obtained.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade when it will be possible to give the total for 1903 of values of exports of manufactured and partly manufactured goods from the United Kingdom to principal protected foreign countries, in continuation of, and on the same basis as, the figures given at pages 21–2 of the Blue-book, Cd. 1761. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) It will not be possible to give the figures referred to by my right hon. friend before the completion of the "Annual Statement of Trade" for 1903, that is, for some months yet. The value of the total exports of British produce and manufactures to the "principal protected foreign countries," included in the Memorandum referred to, was £106,000,000 in 1903, compared with £104,700,000 in 1902.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he can state the sum expended on telephone instruments in connection with the new system up to date; how much of this amount has been spent on instruments manufactured in England and how much on instruments manufactured in Sweden, Antwerp, and America; and whether he can give the patent number of the instruments which he is compelled to purchase from foreign firms. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The sum expended on telephone instruments for the new system in London could not be given without a careful analysis extending over four years, and this would involve much labour and expense. The amount expended on stores of all kinds for the telephone system of the whole country during the four years is £1,328,966. Of this amount about £176,500 was spent on articles manufactured abroad; but most of this was on account of central battery switchboards and their equipment, which are patented, the patent numbers being as follows: No. 20,099(1890); 4,427(1892); 4,428(1892); 17,160(1892); 3,831(1893); 9,638(1893); 8,222(1895); 11,548(1895); 11,549 (1895); 18,613 (1898); 6,712 (1899); 24,718 (1899); 10,124 (1900). Telephones for the use of subscribers have had to be obtained from abroad from time to time because they could not be obtained in this country; but I am glad to say that British companies are now prepared to manufacture them, and I hope I shall be able to reduce more and more the amount spent with foreign manufacturers.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the recent report of the National Telephone Company in which the chairman states that they are working in partnership with the Post Office; if so, whether he will state when the present partnership with the National Telephone Company expires, and what are the arrangements made for taking over their business; and whether, in view of the increasing business of the National Telephone Company, he will endeavour to expedite the completion of the new Post Office system. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The statement made by the chairman of the National Telephone Company had reference, probably, to the arrangement made in 1901 for free intercommunication between the exchange systems of the Post Office and the company in London. This arrangement has proved to be a great convenience to the large body of telephone users in the London area. It will continue until the termination of the company's licence. The company are bound at the expiration of the licence to sell to the Post Office their plant in the London area at a valuation on what are known as "tramway" terms. As soon as funds have been provided under the Bill which I hope shortly to obtain leave to introduce, the development of the London telephone service by the Post Office will be expedited as much as possible.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury when the Civil Service Estimates will be in the hands of Members. (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) Some of the classes will be circulated this week and the remainder in the course of next week.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, if he can state the number of men belonging to the Royal Irish Constabulary who have been dismissed from 1st April, 1897, to 1st September, 1900, and the number from 1st September, 1900, to 1st February, 1904. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) In the first-mentioned period the number of men dismissed was 101 and the number discharged for misconduct 108; total 209. In the second period the number dismissed was 129 and the number discharged seventy-five; total 204. The statistics of other punishments for indiscipline in the force show a very considerable reduction in the period that has elapsed since the present Inspector-General assumed command on the 1st September, 1900, as compared with the corresponding period prior to that date.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, if he can state the number of Constabulary Courts of Inquiry held within the past ten years from which the Press have been excluded; and what were the reasons for excluding representatives of the Press. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) This information will be procured and communicated to my hon. friend.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, if he can state whether a time and place has as yet been fixed for the hearing of the appeals to the head Land Commission from the county of Tipperary which had been fixed, some time since, for hearing in Waterford on the 22nd instant but were struck off the list. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) No arrangements have yet been made for the hearing of the appeals referred to.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that the deputation of the Belfast licensed vintners that waited on the Commissioner of Valuation for Ireland in September, 1901, had relation only to that year's annual revision, where some twenty-six publicans' valuations were dealt with in a particular district; that the Commissioner then arranged to hear the several cases in the council chamber of the town hall on 7th October, 1901, and with one exception set them back to the original valuation; and that an interview of one member of the licensed vintners, without authority from the general body, has been taken by the Commissioner to comply with the undertaking to arrange interviews with public bodies in Belfast; and, if so, can he take steps to secure that the Commissioner will now interview the Belfast publicans before their cases are decided at quarter sessions, and try to come to some amicable understanding without involving appellants in legal expenses. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Commissioner of Valuation is prepared to arrange for an interview with a deputation of the Belfast publicans at an early date, and will communicate with the secretary of that body for the purpose.

To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in view of the fact that in respect to the South African War a regimental captain appointed as staff lieutenant would get £60, the captain's gratuity, a regimental lieutenant appointed a local captain would get £60, being the benefit under the Army Order No. 5 of 1901, but that a regimental lieutenant appointed both a local captain and a staff lieutenant would get only £27 10s., although as a staff officer he would have more responsibility than as a regimental local captain, instructions will be given to rectify this apparent inequality. (Answered by Mr. Bromley-Davenport.) If the hon. Member will be good enough to furnish the details of any such eases as those mentioned in the latter part of the Question, they shall be inquired into.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether his

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the total normal military expenditure of this country in each of; the financial years 1895–6, 1898–9, 1901–2, 1902–3, 1903–4, 1904–5, including Supplementary Votes and expenditure under Military Works Acts. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The normal military expenditure for these years is as follows:—

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the total number of recruits, excluding colonial forces, and the total military expenditure for each year since 1896. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Faster.) The number of recruits for each year since 1896 are as follow:—1897,

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the Report of Lord Esher's Committee, he will withhold his consent from confirming the appointment of the Acting Director of Army Contracts in succession to Mr. Major, whose appointment expires next month on completing forty years service. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The future appointments of the Civil Staff of the War Office will be dealt with by the Army Council after the Report of the Committee has been approved.

§ Enlistments during South African War excluding Colonial Corps recruits and including recruits enlisted for one year's service or the duration of the war, ex soldiers re enlisted, and garrison regiments.

¶As in Army Estimates.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will state how the proposals under the new Army Scheme will affect I the number and disposition of the troops in the neighbourhood of Salisbury throughout the year; and whether it is intended to retain the present headquarters at Salisbury. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) I am not yet in a position to reply to this Question.

To ask the Secretary of State

†The expenditure during 1904–5 on the Military Works Loan cannot at present be estimated.

‡The figures in the first column from 1901–02 onwards include expenditure under the "Mowatt" programme for Reserves of Stores, &c.

for the Colonies whether he has had any information as to a meeting of natives in the Transvaal, said to have been held early in February last, at which strong opposition was displayed to the Ordinance for the importation of Chinese labour. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) I have received no information as to this meeting, but if the right hon. Gentleman will furnish me with particulars I will telegraph inquiries.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, when a foreign potentate visits Gibraltar or Malta, he and his staff, or any of them, are allowed to inspect any parts of the fortifications which we do not usually show to ordinary visitors; and whether the Governors of Gibraltar and Malta have instructions on the matter.

The Sovereign of any friendly country will be gladly welcomed at Gibraltar or Malta, but it is obvious that such a visitor could not be asked to inspect any portion of the fortifications which it is considered necessary to withhold from the inspection of foreigners, nor is there any reason to anticipate that any such request is likely to be made.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how the arrangements are made for the foreign service of regiments; whether the Royal West Kent Regiment, now under orders to leave for Malta this month, returned to England in the winter of 1902–3, after twenty-one years continuous service abroad, including the Egyptian campaign of 1881, the Nile campaign of 1884, and the North-west India campaign of 1897–8; and why some other regiment with a shorter record of foreign service has not been selected.

As I have already explained to the House in reply to a similar Question concerning another regiment†, owing to the present exigencies of the service more than half of the battalions of the line are required abroad, and it has accordingly been found necessary to curtail the period of home service. The claims of the various battalions who have been selected to proceed abroad have been most carefully weighed, and I am afraid that it is impossible to amend the selection without unfairness to others. I may add that the period of foreign service for individual men is in many cases very short, as a portion of their Colour service is with the battalion at home.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state what is the amount already spent and estimated to be spent in building permanent accommodation for troops in South Africa.

The figures are as follows:—Actual expenditure out of Army Votes (up to 31st March, 1903), £1,028,000; estimated expenditure out of Military Works Loan, from 1st April, 1903, to 31st March, 1904, £1,230,000; from 1st April, 1904, to 31st March, 1905, £1,075,000. Total, £3,333,000. The above total will, it is anticipated, complete the permanent accommodation for the force to be maintained in South Africa. As a set off against the above total, there will be the amount to be realised by the sale of the main barracks at Capetown.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state what is the size of the force intended by the new Army scheme to be kept ready for expeditionary purposes abroad without calling out Reserves.

No new scheme for the Army has been put forward; consequently no change has been

† See (4) Debates, cxxix., 335.

made in the existing arrangements for the despatch of an expeditionary force.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will say what the estimate is for expenditure under the Military Works Acts for the year 1904–5.

I am not in a position to give the information asked for at the present time.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if ho can state the number of men under a three years engagement now serving in India, as well as those with the same engagement under orders for India during the present trooping season.

The number of non-extended three years' men serving in India is 447. The number under orders for and on passage to India is 3,660.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the 91st Battalion Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders has not been quartered in Scotland for some years, and that since their return from South Africa they have been quartered at Longmoor, Aldershot; and whether he will arrange that this battalion may be quartered in that portion of the United Kingdom to which it belongs.

The hon. Member has been misinformed. This battalion was quartered in Edinburgh from March, 1892, to June, 1894, and at Glasgow from September, 1896, to August, 1898. Considering that there are only three stations in Scotland for ten Scottish regiments, this battalion would appear to have had a very fair share of home service in Scotland.

I shall drawl attention to this matter on the Estimates.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state the strength of our naval forces in the Far East.

The strength of the Fleet in the Far East at present is:—five battleships; four first-class cruisers; four second-class cruisers; one third-class cruiser; eight sloops and gunboats; nine destroyers; twelve river gunboats and special service ships; four torpedo boats.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is prepared to employ a sufficient number of gunboats or other suitable vessels to patrol the fishing grounds of the United Kingdom and to prevent the infringement of the three-mile limit.

It is not possible to detail any vessels for the sole duty of patrolling the coasts of the United Kingdom in order to prevent the infringement of the three-mile limit, but there are a considerable number of gunboats and Coastguard cruisers which combine this work with their other necessary duties.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what information he is in possession of as to the progress and position of the Transvaal Land Settlement Scheme, up to 30th June, 1903; and when he expects to be able to furnish the Return as to sum of money spent, number of settlers in actual agricultural occupation, and the number of holdings and total acreage allocated up to the present time.

A Return of 23rd July last laid upon the table of the Transvaal Legislative Council gave the amount of expenditure in connection with land settlement as £831,896, of which capital expenditure represented £718,955, and the number of settlers on the land 313. The report for which the Governor has been asked will be expedited as much as possible, but I am unable at present to give a definite date for its receipt.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now say when the Ordinance and regulations for the introduction of indentured Chinese labour into the Transvaal Colony will be laid in their first complete and operative form.

I am unable to add anything to my reply to the same Question in answer to the hon. Member on the 25th February.†

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, at the conference between the Colonial and Foreign Offices, convened to determine certain matters in connection with the introduction of indentured Chinese labour into the Transvaal, the Chinese Minister took objection to the recruiting of coolies by agents from the Transvaal before the terms of the Ordinance and the form of the accompanying regulations had been settled as between the Chinese and British Governments; and, if so, whether any assurance was given that the recruiting of coolies for the purposes of the Ordinance would be discontinued until the first complete and operative form of the Ordinance and its regulations had been determined upon.

I must decline to make any statement with regard to the conference while the negotiations are proceeding.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Ordinance for the introduction of indentured Chinese labour into the Transvaal introduced into the legislative Council, and which passed its Second Beading, contained a proviso

†See (4) Debate, cxxx. 977.

(to Section 10) that no transfer of the contract of employment should be valid until the superintendent had satisfied himself that the labourer had given his consent thereto; whether this proviso was deleted during the passage of the Ordinance through Committee; on whose Motion these words were deleted, and I whether the Attorney-General and the official members supported the Motion for their deletion; whether Lord Milner gave, or whether the Secretary of State asked for, any explanation of the omission of these words.

I think it best to refer the hon. Member to the further Papers which are to be published this afternoon, which will furnish a reply to all his Questions.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what provision has he made, and on what date did he make it, to secure that the transfer of the indentured Chinese labourer to another employer must be with the consent of the labourer himself; whether he will lay upon the Table any correspondence that he has had with Lord Milner with reference to this point; whether this security for the labourer will be inserted in the Ordinance itself or merely carried out by administrative regulations which are liable to be revoked at any time at the pleasure of the Lieutenant-Governor.

I have to refer the hon. Member to the Papers published to-day. The security will be provided by regulations. Obviously no alteration; on such a point would take place without communication with the Secretary of State.

I beg to ask the Secretary of state for the Colonies whether the regulations relating to the Transvaal Labour Ordinance will contain special provisions with reference to the sale of ntoxicating liquors and prohibiting the sale of opium to the Chinese imported labourers, also whether, in view of the importance of the question of including in the regulations relating to the Ordinance such provisions, he will state when he will be in possession of Lord Milner's views on the subject; and whether Papers will be laid before the House containing the suggested new regulations before the final decision of the Government is arrived at.

I have to refer the hon. Member to my reply given yesterday to the similar Question of the Member for the Cleveland Division of Yorkshire† Papers will be laid. I am unable to make any statement about the date.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Transvaal Government will be able to meet its obligations I in respect of the £35,000,000 borrowed last year without having resort to the Imperial guarantee.

Lord Milner has written (p. 8 of Cd. 1899) that he can certainly avoid contribution from Imperial Exchequer during the present financial year, but that if he is compelled to rely for a much long period on about one-third of the available resources of the Transvaal he is unable to say what may happen afterwards.

When does the financial year end?

In June.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether ne is aware that negotiations are taking place with certain associated firms at Old Calabar in respect of the conferring of trade privileges in the Cross River district; whether his attention has been called to representations from the Liverpool and Manchester Chambers of Commerce upon the subject; and, if so, will he say what steps he will take to secure that such privileges, if granted will not

†See (4) Debates, cxxx., 1

constitute a monopoly of trade to the recipients.

The Answers to the first and second Questions are in the affirmative. With regard to the third Question, I do not admit that the arrangement proposed would constitute a monopoly, but the matter is receiving further consideration, and I propose to communicate with the Chambers of Commerce again before coming to a final decision.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what is the exact objective of the expedition to the Ibibio country in the Southern Nigeria Protectorate consisting of 450 troops, with five Maxims and two pom-poms; whether the expedition was sanctioned by His Majesty's Government; and whether any official explanation has been received as to the causes of the alleged rising near Asaba, and of the measures taken to suppress it.

The object of the patrol through the Ibibio district was to bring the country under Government control, to take away the war-guns and arms of precision in the possession of the natives, to open the country to trade, and to stop slave raiding. Many of the towns which were disarmed in the Aro expedition, and were consequently unable to defend themselves, have been raided by the Ibibios. The patrol was sanctioned by my predecessor. The force employed consisted of four small columns acting in concert, amounting to 430 rank and file in all, with four Maxims and two 75 millimetre guns. No detailed report has yet been received as to the disturbances in the neighbourhood of Asaba, but the district has a bad reputation for lawlessness, the inhabitants being terrorised by a society called the Ekumekus, who have given trouble on previous occasions by attacking the missionary stations situated in the country.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can state what are the instructions which have been given to Colonel Younghusband in regard to the Mission to Tibet; whether he can state what the expense of this Mission has been so far; and, whether it is intended to proceed by force in case the Government and people of Tibet should oppose the progress of the Mission.

The instructions given to Colonel Younghusband will be found at page 198 of the Blue-book. (2) I have received no accounts of the actual expenditure incurred, but the latest estimate of cost of the Mission to the end of the current financial year is £300,000. (3) The instructions to Colonel Younghusband are that he is not to take hostile action unless attacked, and I can make no statement on a question which has not yet arisen.

asked whether all the instructions given to Colonel Younghusband were contained in the Blue-book, or whether any had been given to him since.

The instructions given to Colonel Younghusband are fully included in the Blue-book.

Has Colonel Younghusband been provided with an Army Corps?

Has the right hon. Gentleman read page 210 of the said Blue-book?

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact that during the last wet season in British Central Africa, extending from November, 1903, to the present time, cotton estates have been left to go to weed, and work on the railway almost stopped, because sufficient labour was not available: and will he say whether the reports which the Foreign Office has received from officials in that country indicating that there is a surplus of labour, refer to the wet or the dry season; I and whether there is any objection to laying the reports upon the Table of the House.

The attention of His Majesty's Government has been called to I the facts alluded to by the hon. Member, and in reply to our inquiries His Majesty's Commissioner reports as follows: That labour in the Protectorate is always I scarce during the rainy season—from beginning of December to end of February—because during that period the natives cultivate their food crops. But it is not more scarce this season than it has been previously, and the emigration of a few I thousand labourers from the highland districts will not affect this periodical scarcity in the local supply. From March to November the supply has; hitherto exceeded the demand, and local employers of labour would secure more men by the offer of higher wages and better treatment. The hon. Member will find further information on the subject in; the Papers which have already been promised.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether I he will state how long the Government proposes to delay requiring from the Transvaal Government the fulfilment of its undertaking to pay £30,000,000 towards the expense of the war; if he will state the loss of interest arising to the Imperial Exchequer; through each year's delay: and whether the Imperial Exchequer will receive from the Transvaal Government any compensation for this loss of interest.

Payment of the first instalment has been postponed for more favourable conditions both in the: money market and in the financial position of the Transvaal. The Transvaal Government did not undertake to effect repayment at any particular date, and so no question of compensation for loss owing to postponement can arise.

Is the agreement for underwriting this loan binding?

Yes, Sir, it is binding.

Is it only binding to the extent of £10,000,000?

It is binding for as much as is underwritten. That agreement is not affected at all.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the quantity of coal exported from Germany to France in the years 1901, 1902, and 1903.

The quantity of coal of domestic production exported from Germany to France in 1901 was 784,000 tons; in 1902, 965,000 tons; and in 1903, 1,056,000. This last figure is provisional and may be subject to revision.

Do these statistics include coke and patent fuel?

I will inquire.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, why was the official Memorandum showing by statements and facts the absence of any ground for alarm at the system of trade known as dumping, which was attached to the Board of Trade fiscal Blue-book, not included in the copies of that Blue-book, laid upon the Table of this House; and will he now lay a copy of that Memorandum upon the Table.

The Memorandum to which I suppose the hon. Member refers is quite incorrectly described in the Question, and was not attached to or intended to form part of any published Blue-book. It was a confidential Paper prepared in my Department, and circulated by me for the information of my colleagues in the Cabinet. I am not prepared to lay it on the Table. Perhaps my answer to this Question may be taken to include Question 62 put to the First Lord of the Treasury by the hon. Member for Halifax.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Lord Balfour in another place stated that this Memorandum was attached to the Fiscal Blue-book?

If that is the case he is in error.

Will the right hon. Gentleman present the Memorandum to the quasi-Royal Tariff Commission?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can furnish a Return for the last five years of the number of infants accidentally suffocated in bed, and for the proportion of such deaths in London, Liverpool, and Manchester, compared with the rest of England and Wales; and further, for the number of cases that occur in December and January compared with any other two months.

I scarcely think that this is a matter for a Return. Perhaps it will serve the hon. and gallant Member's purpose equally well if I give him such figures as are available. I will send him the details for the towns which he mentions, and merely state now the totals for England and Wales, viz., in 1898, 1458 children were accidentally suffocated in bed; in 1899, 1621; in 1900, 1619; in 1901, 1434; and in 1902, 1490. There are no statistics available as to the number of cases occurring in each month. I understand that the matter will be dealt with in the forthcoming volume of Criminal Statistics for 1902.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the discontent caused by the reduction of subsistence allowances granted to postal and telegraph clerks when absent from headquarters for the purpose of instructing or taking temporary charge of sub-offices; if so, will he say what steps he proposes to take in the matter, and will he state whether in these cases the time occupied in travelling counts towards the day's attendance; and whether, in the case of duty at town sub-offices, any monetary allowance is made for either subsistence or travelling.

I am not aware of any general discontent in regard to subsistence allowances paid to officers when absent from headquarters for the purpose of instructing or taking temporary charge of sub-offices. If the hon. Member will give me particulars of the cases to which he refers I will inquire into the matter. In such cases as those mentioned the time occupied in travelling, if properly certified, is taken into consideration in fixing the subsistence allowance. In the case of duty at town sub-offices an officer is allowed any extra expense incurred for travelling. At town sub-offices in a town other than that where his headquarters are situate, an officer would receive allowance for subsistence, but he would not receive such an allowances if detached for duty at a town sub-office in his own town.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether his attention has been drawn to the letter written to a candidate selected for appointment to the office of headmaster of the Hopton Wafers Non-Provided School, Shropshire, by the corresponding manager on 9th February; whether that letter, which asks the candidate if after appointment he will play the organ and trim the lamps, is a violation of Article 71^* of the Education Code, which makes it illegal to impose any duties outside the ordinary school hours as a condition of appointment; whether he will ascertain whether the local education authority has sanctioned the appointment in question; and, if so, whether he will call the attention of the authority to the fact that, if Article 71^* be violated, the Board of Education will not recognise any teacher in schools where the conditions of that of Article have be n evaded.

I have seen the contents of the letter to which the hon. Member refers. It is a letter of inquiry addressed by one of six managers to a candidate for a teacher's place as to whether he can play the organ, and contains some information as to work done by the retiring teacher outside the duties of his post. There is nothing in the letter to suggest that the undertaking of this work was a condition of appointment—indeed, the exact contrary is stated—or that the manager who wrote the letter addressed this inquiry on behalf of his five colleagues. I am informed that the local education authority will shortly consider the matter. In the absence of further information, and until the local education authority have considered the matter, it would not be desirable for me to give a definite opinion as to whether Article 71^* has been violated.

Does the hon. Gentleman think that for a corresponding manager to write such a letter is a proper proceeding?

Order, Order! That is a matter of opinion.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, if he can state how many houses and other buildings there are in Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens; whether all of them are required at the present time, and whether he will take steps to secure the removal of all or some of them; what is the area occupied by the new police barracks in Hyde Park, and for how many men is accommodation there provided.

The buildings are Kensington Palace, the Ranger's house, sixteen lodges, the block of administrative offices, the powder magazine, guard-room, and lodge, one police station, one pumping engine-station, one refreshment pavilion, the Royal Humane Society's receiving-house, and sundry plant-houses, boat-houses, kiosks, stands, shelters, and public conveniences. All of these are required. The police-barracks occupy an area of 22,000 square feet, and accommodation is provided in them for thirty-seven police officers and prisoners.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether, before any further laying-out takes place of the new enclosure in Hyde Park on the north side of the Serpentine, an opportunity will be given to the House to express its opinion on the proposed change.

The outlay hiving been sanctioned by Parliament last year, there is no proposal before the First Commissioner to make further additions to the ground enclosing the frame houses.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether assent has been given to the scheme for devoting the southern front of the new Victoria and Albert Museum to the purpose of exhibition as originally proposed.

The reply is in the affirmative.

beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware that in consequence of the nature of the harvest last year in Caithness the crofters in the congested districts are without seed corn and cannot lay down crops this year unless seed be provided; and whether, in these circumstances, he will cause inquiry to be made and seed corn provided by the Congested Districts Board.

I am aware that the harvest last year was far from good. The Congested Districts Board have offered to supply seed corn, carriage paid, in the congested districts of Caithness at a charge greatly below cost prices. To supply seed on other terms would be to infringe the general policy of the Congested Districts Board, which has been adopted after most careful consideration.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether, in view of the fact that magistrates appointed to the Commission of the Peace in Ireland since 1892 are confined, by the terms of their commissions, to certain Petty Sessions Courts, outside of which they cannot adjudicate, he will say whether such magistrates, by direct application to the Lord Chancellor, can have their areas of adjudication extended.

The statement contained in the Question is not quite accurate. The Lord Chancellor, in order to make arrangements for the proper manning of the Petty Sessions Bench, and the due discharge of business, requires a justice, when appointed, to confine his attendance to certain districts then arranged between them. Of course the Lord Chancellor will be ready to consider any application of a justice to have the arrangement altered.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in several parts of Ireland Petty Session Courts have to be adjourned for want of sufficient magistrates, they only being allowed to sit in a limited area?

I know adjournments do take place, but not for that reason.

I say so from personal experience.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that resident magistrates have a roving commission all over Ireland?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he is aware that the Cloonkeen Parish Committee of the Congested Districts Board hold their meetings on a Sunday, and at a time when Protestant clergymen who are members of the Committee are unable to attend; and will he give instructions for these meetings to be held at a time when persons are not engaged in religious worship?

The time of holding these meetings is left to the discretion of the Committee, I am not aware that inconvenience, as alleged, is caused to members of the Committee, but I will cause my hon. friend's suggestion to be brought under the notice of the Committee.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether an application has been received by the Estates Commissioners on behalf of the evicted tenants upon the Adair (Mountmellick) Estate, Queen's County; and, if so, whether, in view of the fact that this estate has been sold to tbe tenants under the Ashbourne Act, he will state what steps it is proposed to take with reference-to the evicted tenants upon the property who have not been restored to their holdings or otherwise provided for.

Three such applications have been received. Should the Commissioners have an opportunity of acquiring untenanted land in the neighbourhood, the claims of the applicants will be considered. In reply to a further Question, Mr. WYNDHAM said he did not pretend to have personal knowledge of all these estates, but he had every confidence in the Estates Commissioners.

Well, the statement I have made is true.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to state why it is that the tenant purchasers on the Granard Estate living at Soran, county Longford, have been deprived of their turbary, although a large quantity of bog is available in their vicinity; and whether he will direct the Land Commission to take steps under Section 21 of the Irish Land Act, 1903, with a view to providing these tenants with turbary as before.

The sales to tenants in this district were closed seven years ago. They were not deprived of any rights of turbary enjoyed by them before purchase.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the judgment of the Land Commissioner in which he expressly declined to give these tenants their turbary rights.

I have not seen the judgment but I am informed that after the sale they had every right they enjoyed before.

I will forward the judgment to the right hon. Gentleman, and perhaps he will bring it to the notice of the Estates Commissioners.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, in negotiations for the sale of the estate of J. H. Jessop, in county Longford, the applications of two evicted tenants, Peter Farrell, of Cloghan, and James Brett, of Castlerea Mountain, were refused by the landlord's representative; and, if so, whether he will direct the attention of the Estates Commissioners to the case of these men with a view to arranging a sale to them.

No application has been received by the Commissioners from either of these evicted tenants. If made, it will be considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will grant a Return showing the names of the purchasers under the Land Act, 1903, of 860 acres of the Cusack Estate, and how many of these purchasers are themselves evicted tenants or the sons of evicted tenants on this property; and whether, seeing the difficulty of procuring untenanted lands in county Longford for the settlement of evicted tenants in that county, he will represent to the Estates Commissioners the inadvisability of accepting the offers of graziers or large farmers for any portion of this estate.

This estate, I have already informed the hon. Member, is administered in the Land Judge's Court. The solicitors having carriage of the proceedings propose to apply to the Land Judge for an Order authorising the Estates Commissioners to issue a request under Section 7 of the Act of last year with a view to their making an offer for the purchase of the property. The matter has not, therefore, yet been brought before the Commissioners.

This request will shut out the evicted tenants. Will the right hon. Gentleman take action accordingly?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can hold out to the debenture holders in the Edgeworthstown Loan Fund Society any hope of having the available assets of the society, which were collected by Mr. James Stephens, J.P., the receiver, distributed amongst them by way of compensation for their losses.

The Loan Fund Board hopes to be able to authorise payment of a dividend to the debenture holders of this society in the course of the present month.

On behalf of the hon. Member for the St. Patrick Division of Dublin, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that in Government works in Dublin, particularly the Board of Works, bank holidays such has St. Patrick's Day are observed only by the civil servants, and that tradesmen and others in the Government employment work as usual on these days; and whether this arrangement will be discontinued on next St. Patrick's Day, so that the national holiday may be observed by all Government officials and employees in Dublin.

This Question, in so far as it refers to the Board of Public Works, should more properly be addressed to the Secretary to the Treasury. If, however, there is any other Department in Dublin, for which I am answerable, in which the practice mentioned is alleged to exist, perhaps the hon. Member will communicate the name of the Department to me, when I shall be happy to make inquiry in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the provision in the Local Government Act which imposes on tenants of rateable holdings of £4 valuation and under full liability for the rates has invariably resulted in the increase of their rents by this amount; and, if so, will he consider the advisability of reverting to the former system of rating.

I have no information that the fact is as alleged. Section 54 of the Local Government Act, 1898, provides for the equitable adjustment of rents between landlords and tenants in consequence of the variation in the incidence of rates. In answer to the concluding inquiry, I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member's similar Question of the 24th February.†

† See (4) Debates, cxxx., 856.

What constitutes equitable adjustment between landlord and tenant?

An adjustment which is calculated to meet the legitimate claims of the parties.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Local Government Act has actually increased the rents of the weekly-tenement holders, and of the tenants under £4 valuation by the amount of the rates assessed on them?

The hon. Member must give notice of that Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the present position of the Annaly Estate with regard to its sale; whether the nine-teen tenants whose agreements to purchase I were signed but not sanctioned by the Land Commission will now have these agreements sanctioned by the Estates Commissioners; and whether, in the case of five evicted tenants on the estate, proposals for sale to them will now be considered.

Negotiations with these nineteen tenants are not yet complete. The Receiver will meet them very shortly and will also endeavour to deal with the evicted tenants.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the fact that the memorial to the Galway Council, in reference to the Marine Works Act, was only sent to that body on the 9th February, and as the reply of the council was forwarded to Dublin Castle on the 16th February, he will state when the proposed works at Cleggan, Roundstone, and Clifden will be commenced: and, if there is to be further delay in the prosecution of those works, he will state the cause of the delay.

The forms of memorial were sent to the county council early in October. They were received back from the council, perfected and sealed, on the 25th February. The Lord Lieutenant's certificates in respect of the proposed works at Roundstone, Cleggan, and Kilronan were communicated to the Treasury this morning. In the case of Clifden negotiations have not yet been concluded.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the head Land Commissioners, during periods varying from four years downwards, have not given their decisions in the cases sent forward on appeal from the sub-Land Commissioners Courts held in Limerick and around, he will take steps to ensure that a sitting of those head Commissioners shall take place as soon as possible.

The last sitting of the Appeal Court which heard cases from this district, was held in November, 1902. Decisions have long since been announced in all the cases heard. A further sitting will be held at as early a date as possible.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether his attention has been directed to the circumstances leading to the death of a farmer named John Holland, of Park, Athenry, county Galway, on the 11th instant, from the effects of a bullet-wound received on the night of the 1st of January last, and to the fact that at the inquest held the jury condemned the governing body of the Galway Hospital and held that this young man lost his life through their action in refusing him admission to that institution; and, if so, whether, in view of the Act of Parliament passed in 1896, creating this institution a public hospital for the county of Galway, and of the liability the upkeep of the hospital imposes on the ratepayers of the county, he will cause a sworn inquiry to be held into the circumstances leading up to this death of this young man, and consider the necessity for making some compensation to his family.

The Board of Management of Galway Hospital will meet on Saturday next, I understand, to consider the circumstances of this case, and I hive caused the hon. Member's Question to be referred to it for observations.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the tenants on the Lalor end Nolan Estate, Damerstown, Castlecomer, have come to terms as to the purchase of their farms, under the Land Act, with the owners; and, if so, will he state the cause of delay in completing the negotiations.

No application has been so far made to the Estates Commissioners for the purchase of this estate.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the arrangements made on the Kavanagh Estate, in the parish of Ballyraggett, county Kilkenny, as to the sale of their farms to the tenants under the Land Act; and, if so, will he state what arrangements have been made for the re-instatement of the families evicted on that estate.

No proceedings are j at present pending before the Estates Commissioners for the sale of this estate. The cases of the evicted tenants will be duly considered in the event of such proceedings.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Congested Districts Board have purchased the Burke estate, near Claremorris, county Mayo; and, if so, whether, seeing that on this estate there is a considerable quantity of grazing land suitable for distribution purposes, and that there are a number of evicted tenants on the estate, he will take immediate steps to put the provisions of the Land Act of 1903 into operation in that district by giving a preference to the evicted tenants before planting any other tenants on these lands.

The Congested Districts Board has purchased this estate, which is nearly ready for re-sale to the tenants. I am making inquiry into the hon. Member's suggestion in respect of the evicted tenants.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of inspectors employed by the Board of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in Ireland; how many of these are Irishmen, Englishmen, Scotchmen, and Germans; whether any competitive examinations took place at which Irishmen were allowed to compete for these offices; whether the appointments were the result of examination or recommendation by English and Scotch examining bodies; and whether the Department conducted any examination on its own account.

Seventy-one inspectors. None of these positions are filled by competitive examination. The qualifications are professional or scientific, and appointments are made on the principle of choosing the men best qualified by knowledge and experience, without regard to considerations of nationality. For the reasons explained in my letter of the 29th February, I am unable to give any information on the latter point.

How many Irishmen have been done out of appointments?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed by the Wexford County Council recommending that the unappropriated portion of the Equivalent Grant be applied to the heating, cleansing, and proper sanitary fitting up of primary schools in Ireland; and whether he proposes to apply this sum to this purpose as well as the increase of inadequate school staffs and encouragement of education by a system of school prizes for attendance and proficiency.

The manner in which it is proposed to allocate this money will be shown in the Development Grant Estimate shortly to be laid before Parliament.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can give the dates on which the tourists' services were established between Listowel and Tarbert by car, between Tarbert and Kilrush by steamer, and between Ennistymon and Ballyvaughan by car; and whether he will say if the service was a daily one; and, if not what portion of the year was covered by the service between Listowel and Tarbert, Tarbert and Kilrush, and Ennistymon and Ballyvaughan.

All three services were established on the 1st June, 1897. The Listowel to Tarbert service has been worked daily, Sundays excepted. The other two services have been worked from June to September in each year (both months inclusive)—the steamer service daily, except on Sundays, and the Ennistymon to Ballyvaughan service on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that an evicted tenant named Cornelius Sullivan, formerly living on the Beeves Estate, near Skibbereen, has failed to obtain shelter for himself and family for some months past, in consequence of the action of the police who have visited neighbours who had promised him a site for a house and induced them to break their promise to this evicted tenant; whether he will grant an inquiry into the conduct of the police in this matter and also direct the attention of the Estates Commissioners to this evicted tenant's case.

I am informed that this evicted tenant and his family are living in a labourer's cottage in the locality. The District Inspector of Constabulary assures me that the allegation in the Question affecting the police is entirely without foundation. Any application made by the evicted tenant to the Estates Commissioners will be considered.

Is it the fact that this tenant was refused the right of free sale by his landlord, who is a Dean of the Protestant Church?

I have no information as to that.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether, in view of the fact that the inspectors of Irish primary schools, while praising the enthusiasm and diligence of the teachers, have reported that the practical training of pupil teachers and monitors is unsatisfactory, he will consider how far this is due to the schools being understaffed and insufficiently equipped with teaching apparatus; and whether he will recommend that the balance of the Irish Development Grant should be devoted to the purposes of primary education in Ireland.

The Commissioners were not satisfied with the training given to pupil teachers and monitors, a result largely attributable to the defective system of training pursued by teachers in whose schools they were employed. The manner in which it is proposed to allocate the Development Grant will be shown in the Estimate shortly to be laid on the table. In reply to a further Question, Mr. WYBDHAM said he could not in an Answer across the floor of the House embody the speeches he had made on the Education Estimate.

Is there any Committee of Inquiry sitting on this?

The hon. Member must give notice of that.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, what is the amount of the unappropriated balance to the credit of the Local Taxation (Ireland) Account; and how it is proposed to deal with this sum.

A sum of £70,000, representing the unexpended balance of moneys paid into the account as the I equivalent of local taxation licences under Section 58 (1) of the 61 and 62 Vic. cap. 37. This balance cannot, under Sub-section 5 of the same enactment, be diverted from the Local Taxation Account except in such manner as Parliament may direct.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed by the Donegal County Council on the 19th ultimo urging that, inasmuch as the county councils may be liable to the Government for any default made by purchasers under the Land Act of 1903 in payment of annuities, the county councils should be empowered, in the absence of any inspection by the Land Commission, to intervene in all sales advertised between landlords and tenants in order to safeguard the ratepayers from being liable for the default of purchasers; and, if so, will he date what has been his reply thereto, and what steps, if any, does he propose to take by way of amendment to the Land Act of 1903 or otherwise to secure the ratepayers from liability for default in payment of such annuities.

The resolution was received and acknowledged. It calls for no further action.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on certain estates in Ulster the solicitors to the landlords are putting pressure on the tenants to come in and purchase on high prices by an assurance to the tenants, coupled with an offer of the best bogs, that the Estates Commissioners will treat as an estate any purchase of the property when an agreement is arrived at; and what steps, i any, does the Irish Government propose to take for the purpose of refuting this misrepresentation as to the intention of the Estates Commissioners.

I have no information on the first part of the Question. Any such assurance, if given, would be a misrepresentation of the provisions in the Act and the practice of the Estates Commissioners.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry?

I do not think it comes within my province to do so.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, having regard to the fact that the Midi ml Great Western Railway Company have purchased and fenced in a piece of land in the neighbourhood of Kilconnel, county Galway, for the purpose of building a station for the convenience of the people of that district, and that the number of stock frequently sold at the Kilconnell fairs require a special train for their removal, and at present have to be driven a distance of from five to nine miles to the nearest stations, and that the people of Kilconnell and the public boards in the district, together with the Lord Lieutenant and magistrates of the county, have frequently requested the directors to erect a station, he will bring pressure to bear on the directors of this company, on which special powers have been conferred, to comply with this request.

This matter was considered by the new Department a couple of years ago. The Department was then advised that it did not come within the scope of its powers under Section 17 of the Act of 1899.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will state the cause of the delay in forwarding to the No. 2 Tipperary District Council the first instalment of the loan under the Tipperary (No. 2) Labourers Order, 1903, Part 1, seeing that, at the January meeting in this year, the district council were asked by the Board of Works for the sum of £8 10s. to defray expenses in preparing deeds of mortgage, and forwarded this money so that the first instalment of the loan might be received in February, so as to give the plots for tillage to the labourers; but no instalment has come, nor has any labourer got his plot.

The necessary lodgment for legal expenses was not made by the Tipperary No. 2 Rural District Council until the 11th ultimo. Treasury authority has been given for the payment of the first instalment of the loan as soon as possible.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Report of the War Office Reorganisation Committee, published on the 29th February, has been approved by his Majesty's Government; if so, whether it is proposed to give immediate effect to the proposals contained in it; and whether the recommendations in the Report are to be considered as binding on the War Office.

No Reports of Committees can ever be binding on the Executive Government. As regards the particular representations contained in the Report referred to, and which have been recently published, they have not yet been considered by the Army Council, which was brought into existence in accordance with the recommendations of the first Report of the Committee. In these circumstances I am not yet prepared to state the opinions of the Government on the proposals.

On the fourth successive day I have to ask when this Report is likely to be in the hands of Members.

Since the right hon. Gentleman first put the Question to me I have looked further into the matter, and I shall be glad to give the House, if it cares to have it, a succinct account of what has happened. The Report, however, is actually in the Vote Office at the present moment, as probably a great number of Members of the House are aware.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the question of the better defence of the entrance to the Thames will receive the consideration of the Defence Committee.

The question of the better defence of the entrance to the Thames is part of a more general question which is receiving attention.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the public interest in the subject, he will now take some means of putting the public in possession of his pamphlet in advocacy of protection, which was placed before the Cabinet contemporaneously with his published pamphlet on "Insular Free Trade."

There was no pamphlet such as the hon. Member refers to, and I have never advocated protection in or out the Cabinet.

May I, as s, matter of personal explanation——

It is difficult to see how a personal explanation arises on this answer.

I wished to explain that I should not have put the Question had I not been fortified by a speech of the late Secretary of State for India.

That is not a personal explanation. The hon. Member should be more careful when claiming to make one.

With all due respect, Sir, I think every Member who puts down a Question is responsible for seeing that it is well founded, and I only wished to state my authority for this Question.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether it is now possible to indicate a date when a special opportunity will be afforded for discussing the recommendations of the War Office Reconstitution Committee and the changes consequent thereon.

I do not think it is possible yet to indicate a date such as my hon. and gallant friend desires; but, of course, such an opportunity must be given. I would, however, suggest to the House that it would be more convenient that that date should be deferred until we are in a position to state whether, and how far, we desire to modify the recommendations of the Committee. I cannot give a day first to discuss the Report of the Committee and afterwards to discuss the policy of the Government with regard to that Report. I, therefore, think it would be better to defer the matter until the Government are in a position to state what is their exact policy as regards War Office reconstruction, in addition to what they have already done and propose to do.

Does the right hon. Gentleman's answer apply to those points in the Report which are affected by the Estimates of the present year.

May I ask whether it is not the fact that there is a S third and even more startling part of the Report to appear, and whether my right hon. friend will consider the advisability of postponing the discussion until after that appears?

May I ask whether, if the Government have definitely adopted the first part of the Report, the Army Estimates ought not to be remodelled in order to exhibit the I effect of the change of policy upon the Estimates, so that some notion may be given to the House of what the cost of the change may be?

I do not exactly follow the right hon. Gentleman's Question; but if he refers to the cost necessitated by the changes in the staff at the War Office, I have already given him my undertaking that if I find that there will be any additional cost, which I do not anticipate, it shall be brought before the House. If the right hon. Gentleman refers to any organic changes in the distribution of the Army on a large scale, I do not think it is possible to bring any alteration that may be due to them into the Army Estimates for the coming year. I do not think that any alteration of expenditure can possibly be decided upon in the present year.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to ask the House of Commons to vote the salaries for offices which have been abolished?

The right hon. Baronet asked me whether the first part of the Report would come up for discussion on the Army Estimates. I would remind him that the whole of the first part of the Report has not been adopted by His Majesty's Government, though certain recommendations have been accepted; but, personally, I think if the House would abstain from leading the debate on the Army Estimates into a channel which deals with these changes it would be an advantage. I think it would be more convenient if we could discuss the changes as a whole when the Government are in a position to state what they are. That, of course, is only advice which I am not able to enforce. My hon. friend behind me asks me whether the general discussion which I have foreshadowed could be postponed until the third and, I believe, the final instalment of the Report of the Committee is before us. I have not seen the remaining instalment, and I have no idea of its contents; but I should think it would be better that we should discuss the Report as a whole and the action of the Government as a whole. The House will the a be in a position to criticise the Report of the Committee, and if the action of the Government differs from the Report of the Committee to criticise the Government for their departure from the Report.

Shall we not have to discuss reductions in cost and in the number of men? Also the decision of the Government on the linked battalion; and Army Corps systems?

Are we to be asked to vote the money first and discuss the abolition of the offices afterwards?