To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that at a meeting of the Governors of the Cork Lunatic Asylum, held on the 7th instant, a resolution was passed condemning the crown in the centre of the badge worn on the caps of the attendants, and deciding I to discontinue its use in future on the grounds that it was a Party badge and repulsive to the feelings of the attendants; and, if so, will he say if such resolution has the sanction of the Irish Government. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) I am informed that a resolution of the character mentioned was passed at a meeting of the Asylum Committee on the 18th instant after a number of members had left. The resolution does not require the sanction of the Government.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state in how many British prisons mats are made by the prisoners; whether such mats are sold in competition with privately-made British mats; if so, by whose authority; or, if not, what is done with them; whether he can state the approximate number of prisoners in Great Britain employed on making mats, brushes, or other articles which compete in the market with private enterprise; and whether he will consider the advisability of marking such goods with a broad arrow or other distinctive mark. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) I can answer only for prisons in England and Wales. In twenty-two of these mats have been made in the current year. Government Departments take almost the whole output, the rest is sold to private firms. The quantities are so small that they cannot, I think, interfere with the general trade; and the Prison Commissioners take great care that there shall be no competition with free labour at "cutting prices." About 11,000 prisoners are engaged daily in productive industries, including those mentioned in the Question, and of these it is estimated that about 100 may be engaged on mats for private sale. Articles other than mats are very rarely sold to private firms, and only when exceptional necessity arises. I do not think that the suggested marking of the goods is desirable; it might have an effect precisely the opposite of that which my hon. and gallant friend probably desires.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he has been furnished with a profit and loss statement of the several properties belonging to the London and India Dock Company, particularly the result of the working and number of ships entering during the last twelve months of this dock of 100 acres, the working of St. Katherine Dock of twenty-three acres, and the tonnage of rubbish shot into barges there, and amount received for same during the year, also the working account of Cutter Street five acres, showing the profit and loss during the last twelve months. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) No, Sir, I have no information on the subject.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the awards of Arbitrators in trade disputes are liable to stamp duty; and, if so, since what date have they been so liable, and what is the amount of the stamp duty charged. (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) There is no exemption from stamp duty in favour of the documents referred to, which are chargeable with the usual scale of duty under the heading of "Award" in the First Schedule to the Stamp Act. 1891.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he is aware that the night messengers at Sheffield and other English offices are established officers with the advantages of a yearly rise of pay and pension; and, as the work performed by the Scotch night messengers is equally important, will he now grant them established appointments similar to those held by the night messengers at Sheffield and other English offices. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am aware that at two offices in England, namely Sheffield and Hull, a few of the adult night telegraph messengers are established on scale wages; but the arrangement is exceptional, and, on vacancies, unestablished messengers are to be employed.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the Milford Rural District Council, being the local authority for the district in which the town of Rosnakill is situate, have unanimously agreed to give to the Post Office the usual guarantee requisite for the establishment of a telegraph station at Rosnakill, county Donegal; and, if so, seeing that Rosnakill has a large monthly market, and is the chief business centre for that district, he will reconsider his decision and accede to the wishes of the Milford District Council by establishing a telegraph office at this town. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) My predecessor explained to the hon. Member, in answer to a Question on the 5th March last year,† that he would not be justified in opening a telegraph office at Rosnakill even under guarantee, because there was already a telegraph office within three quarters of a mile, which appeared to meet the needs of the district. I will have renewed inquiry made and let the hon. Member know the result in due course.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is prepared to consider any representations for the improvement of the present salaries and positions of sub-postmasters in Ireland; whether he is aware that a sub-postmaster handling £20,000 a-year of public money is only paid a salary of £74 a year, out of which he has to provide a competent assistant, an office fire, light, twine, and sealing-wax, leaving him about £10 a year for himself by way of salary; and whether he would be prepared to consider a graduated scheme for emolument based upon the amount of business transacted in each office. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I have recently sanctioned a scheme under which the remuneration at some of the sub-offices throughout the United Kingdom, especially the smaller ones, will be improved, and instructions are being issued to give effect to it as soon as possible. Without fuller particulars I am unable to identify the case to which the hon. Member specially refers. The emoluments at a sub-office are based upon the total amount of business transacted. In addition to the salary, commissions are

† See (4) Debates cxviii., 1542.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he will say what subsidy is paid for the conveyance of mails to South Africa and East Africa respectively; and if he will take into consideration the expediency of calling for tenders for service from London to the Cape by the east and the west route alternately. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The amount of the subsidy paid to the Union Castle Mail Steamship Company for the conveyance of mails to and from South Africa is £135,000 a year; and a payment of £9,000 a year to the British India Steam Navigation Company is the only subsidy at present given for the conveyance of British mails to East Africa. The contract for the conveyance of the South African mails is between the company and the Cape Government, and, as it will not run out till the year 1910, some years must elapse before such a change as that suggested can come into practical consideration.

To ask the Postmaster-General if postmen are still eligible for appointment to established postmasterships; and, if so, will he state why only one vacancy out of seventeen occurring in the Manchester surveyor's district since June, 1897, has been awarded to a postman; and, if any special qualifications are necessary for these postmasterships, will postmen be allowed opportunities for qualifying. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) Postmen are eligible for appointment to established postmasterships, and applications from them are always carefully considered with those of other candidates. If one only has been appointed recently in the Manchester district it is because other candidates were more suitable. A postman can, in the performance of his work, exhibit the qualities desirable in a postmaster, and it would not be practicable to employ him on other work.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education if, and under what circumstances, a foundation manager of a voluntary school is personally liable for expenditure ordered by the general body of managers. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) As the right hon. Gentleman is probably aware, there is no distinction to be drawn as regards pecuniary liability between one manager and another. I have nothing to add to the answers as to managers appointed by local authorities which I gave to the hon. Member for the Luton Division of Bedfordshire on 25th February,† and to the hon. Member for North Monmouthshire on 7th March.‡

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether, with a view to the guidance of the School Boards, which, in the ordinary course, will shortly have to make a precept for the expenses of the coming half year, he can state what will be the appointed day for the coming into operation of the Education Act in the county of Monmouth. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) The Board are making an Order for fixing 1st June as the appointed day for the coming into operation of the Education Act in the county of Monmouth, or such later date as the Board may appoint. I have every hope that no delay beyond 1st June will be necessary; but, as has been explained to the county council, the Board of Education do not consider it consistent with their duty to bring the Act into operation in an area where the local authority has decided not to administer the Act in its integrity.

†See (4) Debates, cxxx., 987.

‡See (4) Debates, cxxxi., 282.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether on the registration of deeds in Ireland there are paid, in addition to office fees, a duty on every affidavit lodged for the purpose of registration and also a duty on every memorial; whether any such duties are levied or leviable in Scotland, or in England outside York, Middlesex, and Kingston-upon-Hull; and whether, if any distinction is made in this matter to the disadvantage of Ireland, he will take steps to end it. (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) The duties levied in Ireland are not peculiar to Ireland, but are prescribed by the Schedule to the Stamp Act, 1891, as chargeable on the instrument in question wherever such instruments are used. It is possible that there may be differences between one part of the United Kingdom and another, as regards the extent to which it is necessary or customary to make use of such instruments. But no difference is created under the Stamp Acts.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the special grants to schools in the Highland crofting counties for the year ending 31st December, 1903, amounted to £970, a decrease of £1,280 as compared with the previous year; and can he state what circumstances have brought about this decrease. (Answered by Mr. A. Graham Murray.) The amount of special grant referred to in the Question is £1,200, and it has all been expended at the close of each financial year, 31st March. The table from which the hon. Member has taken the figures relates only to the calendar year. It may sometimes happen that within that period a smaller amount has been paid, although the total for the financial year did not vary. This did happen in 1903, which has misled the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state the number of licensed victuallers in the county of London upon the 1st day of January, 1904, and the average number in the last five years of transfers and of bankrupts among these licensed victuallers. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) Returns from the clerks to the licensing justices show (1) that there were 5,417 licensed victuallers in the county of London in the year 1903, and (2) that the average number of transfers of victuallers' licences during the last five years has been 1,345. It appears that the average number of bankruptcies among licensed victuallers in the county of London during the last five years was forty-nine.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the 14,906 experiments upon living animals in 1902, he can obtain from the institutions or persons to whom certificates were granted, a statement of the practical results in scientific knowledge or in the improvement of medical treatment which can be traced to those experiments. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) Certificates are not granted under the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, to institutions. Persons holding certificates under the Act publish in considerable numbers in books, journals, and the proceedings of learned societies, reports of the experiments performed by them. I think that these reports enable those who are interested and qualified to judge as to the results which the experiments have yielded, or are likely to yield, in the advancement of scientific knowledge or the improvement of medical treatment. I may point out that by far the most of the experiments quoted in the Question are inoculations, many of which are performed either for diagnosis or in connection with the preparation and standardising of drugs and curative sera, of which the practical utility is well known.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether summonses under the Education Acts are now heard by the justices in certain districts of London in other places than police Courts; and if so, whether it would be possible to make such an arrangement obligatory in all metropolitan districts and in all populous places; and whether summonses under the Children's Employment Act, 1903, could be similarly treated. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) In one or two districts of London the county magistrates hold sittings to hear cases under the Education Acts, and these sittings are necessarily held in places other than the metropolitan police Courts. To make such an arrangement obligatory in London or in other populous places would require legislation. There has not yet been sufficient experience of cases under the Employment of Children Act to enable me to form any opinion as to how they should be dealt with.

To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if his attention has been called to the evidence given at the Clare Petty Sessions held recently, where persons were charged with poaching; that in some instances men were caught with guns who had not even a house licence for firearms; and, if so, will he say what action he proposes to take; and will he further state the number of detections made by the Inland Revenue officers in King's county for breaches of the Gun Licence Acts daring the past five years; the number of detections made by the police under the Peace Preservation Act in the same county; and the number of arms seized for the past five years. (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) Two persons, L. Daly and J. Kelly, were proceeded against on the occasion mentioned. The brother of the former, who was duly licensed, left the country some time ago, and the defendant, in ignorance of the law, failed to get a transfer of the licence. He has now remedied the omission. Kelly was proceeded against in error for his brother, and I understand fresh proceedings are about to be instituted against the latter. When the case has been heard the question of a prosecution under the Peace Preservation Act will be considered. Inquiries are also being made in another case in which it is reported that a man carried a gun without a licence of any kind. There have been ten detections by the police under the Peace Preservation Act, and eleven weapons seized in King's county during the past five years. I have no information respecting detections by officers of the Inland Revenue.

To ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether he will now state if it is the intention of the Government to introduce a measure this session dealing with the present state of the Solway salmon fishery laws; and, if so, when the measure will be introduced. (Answered by Mr. Ailwyn Fellowes.) A Bill dealing with the fishery laws at present governing the Solway is in a forward state of preparation, and I hope that it may be possible to introduce it at an early date.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the claims made by Sirdar Balvant Ramchandra, native of Poona, which are set forth in a letter dated 25th August, 1901, addressed to the Secretary to the Government of Bombay, have yet received the consideration promised; and, if so, will he state the nature of the decision arrived at. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) There has been no change in the situation, so far as I am aware, since my predecessor answered a similar Question of the hon. Member's on the 7th May last.†

†See (4) Debates, cxxii., 15.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether ho is now in a position to state the number of writs and warrants issued in each province in India against land revenue defaulters for the year 1902–3; and will he say how the figures compare with the year 1892–3. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I have received from the Government of India the Return which they undertook to have prepared on a uniform plan for the year 1901–2 by the local governments, and I will lay it upon the Table of the House. For the reason mentioned by my predecessor in his answer to the hon. Member's Question on 23rd July,‡ 1903, I am unable to furnish comparative figures for the year 1892–3.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the attention of his military advisers has been directed to the fact that as a result of the unification of the Indian Army, officers are liable to be shifted, on promotion, and more frequently without promotion, from one end of India to another, sometimes within short periods, each change involving a break up and renewal of establishment, and a considerable expense to the officer concerned, and whether, at least in cases where the transfer is not accompanied by substantial promotion, but is made with no advantage to the individual, reasonable compensation for the expense involved to him by such transfer could be awarded. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I will consult the Government of India on this subject.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether His Majesty's Government proposes to sanction the Act to amend the Indian Official Secrets Act of 1889, lately passed by the Government of India; or whether, in view of the opposition to the Act voiced by the Indian and Anglo-Indian Press, and by large and influential sections of

‡See (4) Debates, cxxvi, 55.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will take care that, in the construction of the new College of Science in Dublin, Irish materials will be used as far as possible, and that, in especial, those persons in Ireland who are engaged in working quarries will have a full opportunity of tendering for contracts for stone. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The designs have not yet been settled, but every consideration will be given to the suggestion in the Question. The foundation stone, I may observe, will be Newry granite.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he would now consider the desirability of dividing Mitchelstown and Kildorrery into separate petty sessions districts, as Mr. Browne, clerk to the magistrates, has resigned, and such a division would remove the inconvenience at present experienced by the inhabitants of the Kildorrery district. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The reported resignation of the clerk of petty sessions has not been received. In the event of a vacancy it will be competent to the magistrates to elect different

†See (4) Debates, cxxxi., 573.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, on the 17th instant, Head Constable O'Hare of the Royal Irish Constabulary, refused on receipt of sworn information to put a lunatic under arrest, and that the man was permitted to be at large eight hours after his wife had given sworn information; and, if so, will he say what action, if any, does he intend taking in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) On the 17th instant the magistrate to whom application for a committal warrant had been made by the man's wife declined to issue same; but on the following day the requisite medical certificate was given and the man was committed to an asylum. He was detained overnight in the police barrack, and the action of the head constable was considerate.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state the number of superior officers, county inspectors, serving in the Royal Irish Constabulary, who have reached the age of sixty and are entitled to pension; under what circumstances is their service retained; and will he, in the interest of the public service, cause inquiries to be made, with a view to their compulsory retirement. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) Four county inspectors. They have not yet completed the pensionable period of service entitling them to full retiring allowance, and the Inspector-General is not aware of any reason why they should at present retire.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Roman Catholic chaplain of Strabane workhouse conducts mass every Sunday morning at the workhouse, to which services the outside public are admitted, and on special occasions preventing many of the inmates from gaining admission; if so, will he say whether such action is in accordance with the Poor Law regulation; and, if not, will he take steps to prevent the workhouse from being used as a place of worship by the outside public. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) A complaint has been made by inmates of the workhouse' to the effect stated in the first part of the Question. It has been referred to the guardians for their consideration. The regulations do not prohibit the attendance of the public at services in the workhouse chapel; at the same time they do not contemplate any interference with the discipline and management of the workhouse.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state what is the cause of delay in the payment to the shareholders of 4 per cent. debenture stock in the matter of the Limerick and Kerry Railway Company, in liquidation. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) The Government has no information in this matter.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether a man named M. C. Kenny has recently, in Milltown Malbay, been allowed by the police to be in possession of a gun without having a licence, and whether on a former occasion he discharged this gun on the public road; and whether attention will be called to this master. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) Kenny is duly licensed to carry a gun. On the 18th June last† I answered a Question put by the hon. Member in respect to the particular incident mentioned.

†See (4) Debates, cxxiii., 1317.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland from what places the extra police were drafted into the county Sligo, the cost of which was recently remitted by His Excellency; and if he would also state from what places the extra police were "drafted into the county of Armagh, the costs of which are now in dispute. (Answered by Mr. Wyndham.) In both cases the additional police were drafted into Sligo and Armagh, respectively, from other counties. In the former, however, the claim made upon the county council was in respect of a reserve force of Constabulary, and when it subsequently transpired that the additional men had not been drawn from the reserve which is located by statute at the depot in Dublin, the Government was advised that there was no legal power to recover the claim. In the case of the extra police drafted into Armagh, the circumstances were not the same. There the men were on ordinary detachment duty, employed under different statutory authority and the decision of the Government in the Sligo case is not applicable.

To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office what proportions of the orders for Army clothing have been placed with London and provincial firms, respectively, for the current year and for last year. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) Last year orders for rather more than half the garments contracted for were secured by London firms, and this year nearly two-fifths. Owing to the completion of reserve stocks this year's orders are much smaller than last year's.

To ask the Secretary of State for War why the gratuity which Major Silverthorne, Royal Garrison Battalion, elected to take in lieu of pension, while serving with the 4th Royal Garrison Regiment at Malta, was stopped during his absence on leave in England; on what ground is it ruled than an officer of Reserve serving abroad is only entitled to a gratuity of £50 per annum pro rata while on leave at home, as a Reserve officer [serving abroad receives a gratuity at the rate of £100. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.)Only actual service abroad entitles an officer to the higher grant of £100, and ordinary leave is held to form part of such service. This officer, however, was on leave at home for a period of five months prior to resignation, and therefore is only entitled to the lower gratuity of £50.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will publish the terms of reference to the War Office Reconstitution Committee.

I gave the terms on Tuesday in answer to a Question by another hon. Member.†

asked if the terms then stated covered the whole terms.

Yes.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that Messrs. Miskin, Limited, contractors to the War Office for the work being done at Purfleet Garrison, are not paying the painters employed by them the recognised rate of wages in the district—viz., 7½d. per hour, but only 7d. per hour; and whether he will see that the Fair Wages Clause is applied in this case and all future contracts.

†See page 403

It appears on inquiry that only one painter is now employed by Messrs. Miskin on War Department work and that he is receiving 7½d. per hour. It is not possible to ascertain what rate was paid to others recently employed, as they have now dispersed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state whether the persons who have been at Tien-tsin for some weeks past recruiting coolies for the Transvaal have been licensed under Regulation I. (Recruiting) of the Regulations under the Ordinance, as set forth at page 3 of the Parliamentary Paper issued on Monday last; and if so, by whom, and to whom, such licence or licences were issued.

No recruiting licence has yet been issued under the Regulations.

Is it not a fact that two gentlemen from the Transvaal I have been recruiting in China? I desire to know under what authority Messrs. Hamilton and Perry have been acting, as stated in my Question, since 22nd February.

I do not know that I ran answer the Question more clearly than I have answered it. If the hon. Member chooses to recruit or to take preliminary steps for recruiting he can do so. Anybody can recruit Chinese in China and will be beyond our jurisdiction and control. Of course, when it conies to taking Chinese into the Transvaal, then no doubt any Chinese nut recruited in pursuance of the Ordinance will be rejected, and have to be taken back at the recruiter's expense.

Will the Chinese who have been recruited be introduced under the Ordinance.

I do not know whether there have been any.

It is a fact there have.

The right hon. Gentleman said that an Englishman recruiting Chinese would be "beyond our jurisdiction and control." Would he not be punishable by us, we having extraterritoriality?

required notice of the Question.

Can we have an assurance that Chinese already recruited will not be introduced under the Ordinance until proper officials have been appointed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what regulations are to be proposed for the treatment of the children of coolies in the Transvaal en reaching sixteen years of age.

No regulations appear to be necessary seeing that no children over ten will be introduced and the labourer cannot remain for more than six years.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will lay upon the Table of the House the last accounts of the Crown Agents for the Colonies, as audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, an abstract of which is rendered to the Secretary of State for the Colonies.

The last abstracts of the Crown Agents Office Fund and Office Reserve Fund Accounts which have been audited by the Comptroller and Auditor-General are those for 1902. I will lay copies of these accounts on the Table of the House as soon as they can be prepared.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the negotiations with the Chinese Government relative to the enlistment of labourers for the Transvaal are now completed; and when he will be able to present Papers on the subject.

No, Sir. I cannot at present fix a date for Papers.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any communications have passed between the High Commissioner and the owners of the Witwatersrand gold mines as to the grievous mortality among the Kaffirs working underground; and whether he will lay Papers on the subject upon the Table.

I am in communication with Lord Milner on this subject, to the importance of which he is fully alive. I am not in a position to lay Papers at present.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will inform the House if the Pacific Island Labourers Act, 1901, of the Commonwealth of Australia, prohibits the entry into Australia of any Pacific Islander after 31st March, 1904, and enacts the deportation from Australia of Pacific Islanders from there after 31st December, 1906.

The Act in question prohibits the entry into Australia of any Pacific Island labourer after 31st March, 1904, and gives power to the Minister for External Affairs to order the deportation of any Pacific Island labourer found in Australia after the 31st December, 1906.

asked whether that answer was consistent with the right hon. Gentleman's statement on Monday night.

I stated that the Acts to which I referred have not been repealed. Those Acts were alleged to authorise slavery. I still think it is entirely inconsistent with that allegation that the Commonwealth of Australia should keep those Acts in operation from 1901 to 1906.

said his statement was that the system had been put an end to.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state for what offences a justice of the peace in Western Australia can sentence a native, serving under a white man, to be flogged and to two years imprisonment.

Under certain Acts of Western Australia known as the Aboriginal Offenders Acts, 1883, 1892, and 1893, a justice of the peace had power to order the whipping of an aboriginal native for certain offences when no other justice of the peace within twenty miles could be obtained to constitute a Court of two justices, but these Acts were repealed by the Criminal Code Act of Western Australia, 1902, and so far as I am aware the provisions of the repealed Acts have not been re-enacted.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he will say whether the Council of India were unanimous in approval of the proposal in June last to charge the revenue of India with the cost of a large portion of the British troops then intended to be stationed in South Africa as part of its permanent garrion; and, if not, can copies of any opinion or dissent, with reasons for such dissent recorded by any members of the Council on that occasion, be placed before Parliament, as provided for in Section 23 of the Government of India Act of 1858, together with the Secretary of State's opinion and his reasons for such approval as provided for in the same section.

The Council of India were not unanimous in approval of the proposal that India should, on certain conditions, contribute towards the maintenance of a garrison force in South Africa. Two members of Council recorded dissents under Section 23 of the Government of India Act, 1858. The section also gives power to the Secretary of State to require that his opinion, and the reasons for the same, shall be entered on the Minutes; but my predecessor did not exercise this power on the occasion to which the Question refers. The Question not now being before us and the proposal having been dropped. I do not propose to lay Papers.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Permanent. Commission of the Brussels Sugar Convention has met, as was expected last week; and whether they have arrived at any decision with regard to the question whether the limitation of the surtax provided in Article III. applies to sugared goods; and what steps His Majesty's Government have taken in the matter.

The Permanent Commission met on the 10th inst. The question whether the limitation of the surtax provided in Article III. applies to sugared goods was not before the Commission, having been decided in the negative at the previous meeting. The discussion on the question whether a surtax of an amount sufficient to give rise to a bounty is allowable in the case of sugared goods has been adjourned until the next meeting of the Commission on the 10th of November next, in order to allow time for the collection by the Bureau of information and statistics from the different countries, which are necessary to enable the Commission to arrive at a decision.

But has not the House been promised that this question of sugared goods should be brought before the Permanent Commission and settled in March?

We could not possibly promise it should be settled. I have stated the steps that are being taken and the reasons for them.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, having regard to the fact that a clause was introduced into the treaty negotiated with the Chinese Government in 1902, under which that Government undertook to remove within the space of two years the artificial obstructions to navigation in the Canton River, will he state whether any steps have yet been taken by the Chinese with a view to the removal of these obstructions.

His Majesty's Consul-General at Canton reported on 5th October last, that the Viceroy had instructed the Hoppo to immediately request the Commissioner of Customs to take the necessary steps for carrying out the provisions of the treaty; and a preliminary survey of the harbour has been made by a Chinese revenue cutter with a view to the removal of obstructions. His Majesty's Government have received no further report.

Will the noble Lord make further inquiries? It is not in the harbour of Canton that the obstruction exists, but it is half-way between Canton and Hong-Kong, where there is a most serious obstruction.

My answer deals with the obstructions which the Chinese Government is pledged to remove.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that throughout the Protectorates of East Africa and Uganda there is no qualified practising dentist; and if he will take into consideration the desirability of offering a free passage there to a suitable practitioner.

I am not aware that there are any private practitioners in the Protectorates, but I understand that a dentist recently visited them, and there is at least one member of the medical staff who has a practical knowledge of dentistry. We have received no complaints or suggestions on the subject from His Majesty's Commissioners.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department at what date in the present session the Report of the Chief Inspector of Factories and Workshops will be in the hands of Members.

The preparation of this Report involves heavy personal labour for the Chief Inspector. Important though it is, it cannot be done at the expense of other matters requiring his attention, upon which there are just now particularly urgent demands, especially; in connection with the inquiry into the draft regulations for Docks. He will, however, endeavour—though it is impossible to make any promise, to have the Report ready by about the same date as last year, i.e., early in June.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state whether the Budget will be introduced on an early day after the Easter Vacation.

Yes, Sir.

Can the right hon. Gentleman name the date?

No, Sir.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state whether the Exchequer Balances as at 1st April, 1902, included a sum of £4,029,000, the unexpended balance of the £60,000,000 Consol Loan of 1901 issued to meet war expenditure, and whether it is now proposed to apply a sum of £4,000,000 out of the present balances in reduction of war indebtedness.

The hon. Member has only taken one year. If he had taken the whole war period, the amount borrowed in excess would have been less than he states. I do not propose to anticipate any information which seems properly to belong to my Budget statement.

Is it not the case that in 1902 there was £4,000,000 of borrowed money in the Exchequer which is still there?

I have answered the Question, and that answer gives a more accurate view of the facts than is put forward in the Question. You must await the Budget speech for further information.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that re-exporters of foreign goods which have been imported into the United Kingdom are now required to furnish to the Board of Customs particulars of the countries from which those goods were originally consigned, he will say whether any remonstrances against this measure, on the ground that it involves the disclosure of trade secrets has been received by himself or by the President of the Board of Trade from chambers of commerce or from others; and, if so, will he say whether he will withdraw this order.

The name of the country whence the goods were originally consigned is required to be furnished in the case of all goods imported into the United Kingdom and of all such goods which are subsequently exported. This requirement was brought into operation on 1st January last, at the request of the Manchester and other chambers of commerce, and no difficulty appears to be experienced by the majority of traders in complying with it. Remonstrances have been received by the Customs from a few firms only, and arrangements are now being made whereby traders who buy foreign goods and sell them to other firms for export may communicate direct to that department the required information as to the countries whence the goods were originally consigned, and thus obviate disclosure of the particulars to their customers. Such information is for statistical purposes only and is treated us confidential.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, before proposing to continue or extend the existing taxation on commodities used by the poorer classes in this country, he will cause an inquiry to be made into the duties on publicans' licences, with a view of making them more nearly equivalent to the monopoly value of such licences.

I do not think that any further inquiry into this matter is required.

I beg to give notice that I will call attention to the gross inadequacy and unfairness of the existing scale of licensing duties.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Government or the Board of Inland Revenue have at present in contemplation any scheme for the improvement of the position of the clerks to the surveyors of taxes; and whether, if any such scheme is in contemplation, he could state the nature of it and what class of clerk it affects.

No further changes in the position of the clerks to surveyors of taxes are contemplated at present.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is empowered, under the licence granted to the National Telephone Company, to take possession of that company's system on the 31st of December, 1904, by giving six months notice from June next; and whether any negotiations are proceeding between the Post Office and the Company with a view to exercising this option.

The Postmaster-General has power, under the licence granted to the National Telephone Company, to purchase the company's business on 3lst December, 1904, by giving six months notice, the price being settled, in case of difference, by arbitration. I am considering whether steps should be initiated, under this power or otherwise, for taking over the Company's system, and some preliminary discussion has taken place with the Company. I am prepared to undertake that the House shall, by Select Committee or otherwise, have an opportunity of considering any proposed agreement with the Company before it becomes binding.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can state what regulations, if any, exist concerning deferred and arrested increments of pay; whether an arrest of increment for one, two, or three years is irrecoverable under any circumstances; whether it involves a loss of seniority on pay and holiday sheets; and whether such regulations as exist apply equally to barrier increments and to all classes of Post Office servants.

The regulations respecting the allowance of ordinary annual increments to civil servants are contained in the Order in Council of the 29th of November, 1898. In paragraph 20 of that order it is prescribed that no increment can be allowed to an officer unless a certificate can be furnished by his immediate superior officer that during the preceding year his conduct has been approved; and that if such certificate cannot be given when the increment falls due the grant may be deferred until the officer shall have completed a continuous period of twelve months approved service, when the increment will become payable from the date of such certificate. It is also laid down that if the officer's conduct shall continue satisfactory the head of the Department may, after a certain interval, and subject to the consent of the Treasury, increase the officer's salary to an amount not exceeding that at which it would have stood if no increment had been withheld. These regulations apply to all civil servants. The deferment of an ordinary increment does not affect an officer's seniority in any way. As regards the classes in the Post Office where an efficiency bar exists in the scale of pay, an increment which would carry an officer over the bar can be allowed only on a certificate from the superior officer that the officer is fully qualified to perform the highest duties of his class.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he proposes at an early date to issue a rule requiring the use of brake vans behind trains running between Penarth Junction and Penarth Dock on the Taff Vale Railway.

The hon. Member's Question appears to be based on a misapprehension. A rule already exists requiring brake vans or other suitable vehicles to be provided on all trains working upon running lines beyond station limits. The Taff Vale Railway Company have applied for an exemption from this Rule for portions of their line, including the section mentioned by the hon. Member, and the Railway and Canal Commissioners to whom the application was referred have held that the company is entitled to some exemption. A draft Rule giving effect to the views of the Commissioners is being prepared and will shortly be published.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education when the additional grants promised for the training of pupil teachers will come into operation.

The additional grant will first be payable for the period commencing on 1st August, 1904.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether he can sav when the Education Code for 1904–5 will be laid.

I hope the Code for 1904–5 will be laid shortly after Easter.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will state how many certificates of exemption from vaccination were granted during the year ending 31st December, 1903.

The Returns made to me show the number of certificates of conscientious objection received by the vaccination officers during each year, and this number may be taken as substantially agreeing with the number granted during the year. The Returns for the year 1903 are not quite complete, but the number of certificates of the kind referred to received during the year may be stated approximately as 37,200.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the fact that the method adopted by the Government of distributing the aid grant to schools in Scotland, being the compensatory sum paid to Scotland in respect of the additional grant made last year to English schools, has resulted in Episcopal schools receiving out of that grant a sum equivalent to nearly four times the amount per pupil in average attendance and per teacher employed as compared with what is paid in respect of public schools and Roman Catholic schools; whether this result was foreseen by the Government when this method was adopted by them; and whether a more equitable method of distribution will now be adopted.

The general aid grant was distributed under the Minute submitted to Parliament, the conditions of which are absolutely uniform for all classes of schools. The insinuation contained in the hon. Member's Question as to a scheme on the part of the Government to secure a distribution in favour of one particular section of schools is quite unwarranted, and his figures are only brought out by confusing the expenditure under the two branches of the Minute, which have no relation to each other, and then dividing by the numbers of children in average attendance, which is an arithmetical operation of no significance. Under the first section of the Minute, which dealt with special payments to small schools in respect of extra teachers, the public schools received £13,100, the Episcopal schools received £300, while the Roman Catholic schools received £220. The reason of this was that, although a larger number of Roman Catholic schools were eligible, a smaller proportion of these schools fulfilled the conditions as to staff. The great bulk of the grant is paid under Section 2 and is per capita, and of this the Roman Catholic schools received £8,590 while the Episcopal schools received only £1,512. The whole subject of the aid grant, as of all funds devoted to education, will be dealt with in the Bill which I hope to introduce next week.

I shall call attention to this matter later in the day.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether lie is aware that a necessity exists for the construction of a road in the electoral division of Maum, near Killarney; and whether, in view of the fact that in April, 1903, its construction was agreed to by the rural district council, can he say what obstacle prevented its being completed.

The road referred to cannot be identified from the description given in the Question, hut if the hon. Member will write to me I will inquire further.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in the recent appointment of petty sessions clerk in the district of Portmagee, county Kerry, which is a purely Irish-speaking district, care was taken to select a man who knew the Irish language.

All the people in this district, with a few exceptions, speak Irish and English. The petty sessions clerk was not required to have a knowledge of Irish. No inconvenience has been caused at any time. An interpreter is always present in the Petty Sessions Court, but his services have been seldom utilised.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Longford, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state what has been the result of his inquiries into the sanitary condition of the lock-up for prisoners in the Royal Irish Constabulary barracks at Longford.

Negotiations are proceeding with the landlord of the premises. The matter, it is hoped, will soon be arranged.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Longford I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state on what grounds the Local Government Board for Ireland have refused to sanction the recently appointed master of Granard Union; whether, in the case of the appointment of Mr. Leamy by the Local Government Board, no sureties were asked from him by the Local Government Board of any kind; and, if so, will he explain why a different rule is now applied in the case of a master elected by the representatives of the people.

The Board has not refused to sanction the recent appointment. The person elected is undergoing a course of training at another work house, and his fitness for the position will shortly be reported upon. It was the guardians who failed to require the late master to furnish sureties.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Longford I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state if any negotiations hive been entered into by the Estates Commissioners for the purchase, with a view to resale to the tenants, of the Cusack Estate, in town-land of Knocka-Tarry, county Longford; and, if not, whether, as negotiations for the purchase of this estate have been begun on both sides, he would recommend the Commissioners to offer their services towards a speedy completion of same.

The matter is in the same position as when I replied to the hon. Member's previous Question of the 3rd instant.†

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the cause of the delay in issuing the new plans for building Irish national schools; whether he is aware that inconvenience is caused in Eyrecourt Convent by this delay; and whether steps will be immediately taken so as to enable the managers to have this necessary work proceeded with at once.

†See Debates, cxxxi., 69.

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member's similar Question of the 15th instant.

What was the answer?

The matter is under consideration and no decision has yet been arrived at.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the number of persons killed, and the number injured, by the steam trams from Terenure, Dublin to Blessington, since the trams commenced to run over that line; also how many animals were killed, and how many injured, during the same period; the damage done to property situated on either side of the line by sparks from engines and other causes attributable to the service; and what was the total amount of compensation paid to claimants.

Fifteen persons were killed and four injured. Thirty-nine animals were killed, 'there were fourteen cases of burning. Compensation to the amount of £1,100 has been paid to claimants.

In view of the large number of accidents on this line, will the right hon. Gentleman order some inquiry?

I should like to have notice of that Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the success of the system of family care of harmless imbeciles on the Continent and in Scotland, he will introduce a Bill to legalise family care in Ireland of such persons.

I replied on the 11th February last to a similar Question put by the hon. Member for St. Patrick's Division.†

†See (4) Debates, cxxix., 1015.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he has received a communication from the County Council of North Tipperary drawing his attention to the present state of the law, debarring county surveyors from immediately dealing with defaulting contractors, inasmuch as the county surveyor must wait for a general meeting of the county council to enable him to serve a ten days' notice, whereas, under the Grand Jury Act, the then county surveyors were entitled to serve such notices at their own discretion; and if he will consider the recommendation of the county council to have the law amended by restoring the former practice.

Yes, Sir. The suggested change in the law is desirable, and will be dealt with when a suitable opportunity arises.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Longford I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland on what grounds the application of Francis Yorke, of Mullawornia, county Longford, for restoration as an evicted tenant, has been rejected by the Estates Commissioners.

The eviction took place in 1872, and the case, consequently, is outside the scope of Section 2 (d) of the Act of last year.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will grant the two Returns relative to the Marlborough Street Training College, standing on to-day's Paper.

The Returns will be prepared and communicated to the hon. Member. I hardly think they are of sufficient importance to lay on the Table as Parliamentary Papers. The Returns are as follows:— Marlborough Street Training College (Roman Catholic Students): Return showing the number of Roman Catholic students who completed a two years course of training in Marlborough Street Training College in each year from 1893 to 1903 both inclusive, and the number of Roman Catholics so trained for two years in Marlborough Street Training College who on the conclusion of their course of training were employed as principal or assistant teachers in National schools in Ireland in each year from 1893 to 1903 both inclusive; the figures to distinguish in each case between those who obtained permanent employment and those who were engaged only as substitutes in a temporary way. Marlborough Street Training College (Students trained): Return showing the number of students who completed a two years course of training in Marlborough Street Training College in each year from 1893 to 1903 both inclusive; the number of students so trained for two years in Marlborough Street Training College who, on the conclusion of their course of training, were employed as principal or assistant teachers in National schools in Ireland in each year from 1893 to 1903, both inclusive. The figures to distinguish in each case between those who obtained permanent employment and those who were engaged only as substitutes in a temporary way.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. Ellis, Local Government auditor, has surcharged the Urban Council of Tipperary in sums of £37, £53, and £69 16s. 1d. in respect of a building contract and arrears of rates; that the councillors so surcharged took proceedings by certiorari to have them set aside; that the Court of King's Bench decided the auditor had no jurisdiction to make such surcharges; that he exceeded his duty in the matter, and set them aside; that the ratepayers are held to be liable not only for their own costs but the costs of the auditor as well; and whether, under the circumstances, the auditor being an official of the Local Government Board, provision will be made to indemnify the ratepayers against the costs incurred in quashing these illegal surcharges.

The facts are correctly stated. The persons aggrieved by the surcharges sought redress in the Court of King's Bench and did not appeal to the Local Government Board. The Court did not award the appellants their costs and they must abide by the decision of the Court. The Board has no power to remit the costs, as suggested.

Is not the Local Government Board responsible for the acts of the auditors?

Do I understand the council did not appeal in the first case to the Local Government Board?

That is so.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this auditor has been surcharging people all over Ireland?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if complaint has been made of the destruction of dogs by poisoning in Ballynahinch, county Down; whether any of the offenders have been discovered; and if any and what prosecutions have been instituted.

Complaint has been made. The police have instituted careful inquiries, but have not detected the offenders. The matter is receiving their special attention.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Mayo I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Lord Oranmore is the landlord of the police barracks in Ballindine, county Mayo; whether, for a number of years, the police authorities were regularly paying him a yearly rent; whether he has demanded an increase of nearly 50 per cent., and that, as a protest, the police are about leaving; and, if so, whether he will see that they will not be allowed to go into a house from which another tenant was evicted until after the introduction of the promised legislation for tenants in towns.

The landlord has asked for an increased rent for the barrack. It has not been decided that the police shall leave the existing barrack, but inquiries are being made with a view to ascertain what other suitable houses are available. The concluding inquiry is also raised in a subsequent Question.

On behalf on the hon. Member for South Mayo I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a farm of land, known as the Quilka Farm, in the townland of Quilka, county Cavan, is at present in the Land Judge's Court; that it has been advertised for letting for a period of seven years, with the right to purchase; and that the farm had been in the landlord's hands; and, if so, whether, seeing that there are a number of tenants in the neighbourhood with poor and small holdings, he will give instructions to the Estates Commissioners to purchase this grazing farm for the purpose of enlarging the holdings of the other tenants.

There is some difficulty in identifying the farm referred to from the information given in the Question. Further inquiry is being made, and perhaps the hon. Member will repeat the Question on Monday.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Mayo I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the expenses in connection with the trial of the two policemen who are charged with committing perjury at Ballinrobe about the 2nd of February last, must be borne by themselves or by the public; whether these policemen will be put forward at the next assizes in Mayo; and, if not, when will steps be taken to remove from the force entrusted with the protection of the lives and properties of the people, members who lay themselves open to such charges. I also beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is' aware that the two policemen stationed at Ballinrobe, county Mayo, j against whom the Attorney-General for Ireland has instituted a prosecution for perjury, are still doing ordinary duty in Ballinrobe, and that they have not been interfered with by their authorities since the Crown decided on prosecuting them; and, if so, will he say whether it is his intention to have them immediately arrested or bound over to appear when necessary, or at least to remove them from the police force until the charge against them is either proved or their acquittal obtained from a jury of their countrymen.

The two constables were suspended on the 14th instant. The procedure, in accordance with the ordinary practice in such cases, will be by summons. The accused must in the first instance bear the costs of their defence. Whether the Crown will ultimately contribute to the expense will depend on the issue of the trial. The other portions of the Questions seem to assume the guilt of the accused and anticipate the decision of the justices I must decline to answer them.

Will you take steps to see that these two men do not fly from justice?

It can only be asked if it deals with an urgent matter of public importance.

It does that. The hon. Member then proceeded to ask the Question, which had reference to the nature of the evidence to be called, and inquired why certain magistrates had not been summoned.

Order, order! That obviously is a Question of which, notice must be given.

In order to show the urgency of the matter, may I point out that the case is to be heard next Monday and we have no opportunity of putting a Question before then, unless we do it to-day.

I must confess that the matter, although it may arouse great interest in the locality, does not seem to me to amount to one of urgent public importance.

On behalf of the hon. Member for South Mayo I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been 'called to the action of the police in Ballindine, county Mayo, in urging on the landlord of a house in that town the desirability of evicting a tenant named Carey, with a view to turning it into a police barrack; whether he is aware that Carey had been in possession of the house for over thirty years, that he had paid in rent over £400, that he was evicted although he had paid his rent and was willing to continue paying it; and, if so, whether he will see that the police authorities will not be allowed to carry into effect the eviction of this man.

The statement in the first part of the Question is without foundation. Carey was evicted from the house two years ago, but under what circumstances I am unable to say. It has since been occupied by the owner, and inquiries are being made as to its suitability for a police barrack.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland when it is intended to place the staff of the School of Art, College of Science, and Museums in Ireland on the settled terms of wages already granted to the attendants of the English and Scotch Museums, and also granted to the attendants of the National Library in Dublin.

The matter is under the consideration of the new Department. Detailed inquiries are being made, and it will be some time before a decision can be arrived at.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Longford: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to state whether he is aware that, on 1st June, 1901. Patrick Farrell, of Lismacmanus, county Longford, was informed by Mr. J. M. Ross Todd, solicitor for the receiver of the Annaly Estate, county Longford, that the Land Commission had sanctioned the advance for the purchase of his holdings at Lismacmanus and Carrownphull; and whether he can state the cause of the delay in the issue of the vesting order in this man's case.

This question has been referred to the Land Judge's Court, but so far I have not received a report on the statements in question. I regret, therefore, to have to ask the hon. Member to again postpone the Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that certain clerks in the Irish Agricultural Department who have up to twelve years service, and whose salaries are approximately £90 a year, were recently notified, in response to an application for advancement, that such application could not be entertained in view of an intimation from the Treasury in February, 1903, to the effect that the time had come when the recurrent applications should cease, and the sanctioned scales should be left to their operation; will he state whether the communication conveying this refusal was brought under the notice of the secretary; and will he say whether the Treasury intimation referred to relates only to the clerks mentioned; and, if not, whether he can explain why, while refusing to submit to the Treasury the application of the latter, recurrent applications have since been made for increases in the salaries of better paid officials of the Department; and whether he will see that such interpretations are not put upon Treasury communications as may act to the detriment of any of the Department's employees.

The clerks referred to in the first part of the Question were employed in a temporary capacity only before their appointment, within the past few years, to the permanent establishment. In the former capacity their services were determinable at a week's notice and they had no prospects of advancement. They are now pensionable officers, and their promotion carried with it other substantial advantages. The Department considered their further application, but felt unable to recommend it to the Treasury. The decision arrived at was the decision of the Department, and it would be entirely subversive of official discipline to discuss the grounds upon which it was come to, or admit or deny that it was brought to the notice of the secretary. The Department must use its own discretion as to the communications it may make to the Treasury on behalf of members of the staff. Each case is dealt with on its merits, and there is no foundation for the suggestion that it acts to the detriment of any of its employees.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will say how may sub-postmasters are employed in Ireland; what are their hours of duty; what salaries and commissions do they receive; what rental allowance do they get every year; what are their prospects of promotion to higher branches of the service; what is the proportion of the total post office revenue earned by sub-postmasters; and whether he intends to take any steps to improve the position of this body of public servants.

There are about 2,680 county and 205 town sub-offices in Ireland. The former are usually open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., and the latter from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. The salaries and value of the commissions vary according to the business done. No special allowance in aid of rent is given under the ordinary circumstances. Sub-postmasters are not as a rule qualified for advancement to higher branches of the service, but occasionally they obtain promotion to postmasterships. I am unable to say what proportion of the total post office revenue is derived from sub-offices. I have recently obtained Treasury sanction for improving, in certain directions, the remunerations of sub-postmasters, especially at the smaller offices, and instructions are being issued upon the subject.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he has received a communication from the board of guardians of Nenagh Union with reference to the case of a man named Edward Doheny, formerly a postman at Nenagh, who became insane and was committed to Clonmel Lunatic Asylum, being awarded a pension of 8s. per week; whether a deduction of 1s. per week has been made by his Department on the grounds that the Government make a contribution towards the maintenance of pauper lunatics; and, if so, whether, having regard to the circumstances of this case, that Doheny has left a delicate wife and a family of nine helpless children, he will allow the full pension of 8s. per week, and not leave them a burden on the ratepayers to the extent of 5s. per week out-door relief.

The communication referred to by the hon. Member has been received from the board of guardians of the Nenagh Union, and it is the fact that a deduction of 4s. a week is made from the pension of Edward Doheny, late postman at Nenagh. The deduction is rendered necessary by the provisions of the Superannuation Act, 1887, and I regret that, in these circumstances, it is not possible to pay the pension in full to Mrs. Doheny.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether, for the benefit and advantage of the public in Edgeworthstown, he will direct that an office for the sale of Inland Revenue and other stamps be opened in that town.

I will inquire and give the hon. Member an answer as soon a possible.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Longford, I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state the grounds upon which it has been decided to increase the interest on loans to public bodies in Ireland, as outlined in a recent circular of the Local Government Board for Ireland.

The recent increase in the rates of interest applies to all loans made out of the Local Loans Fund on the security of local rates, in Great Britain as well as in Ireland. The money required for the purpose of these loans has to be raised by the issue of Local Loans Stock; and, under present conditions, the price at which the stock can be issued would not enable the previous rates of interest to be continued without loss to the Local Loans Fund.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Longford, I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in the interest of the health and comfort of passengers on the Midland Great Western Railway of Ireland, he is prepared to recommend the directors of that company to have cushioned seats supplied to their third class carriages, as is the case on all the principal railway lines in Ireland.

No, Sir; I am not prepared to interfere with the discretion of the railway company in this matter.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury on whose advice was the prerogative of the Crown exercised infilling up the appointment to the Provostship of Trinity College, Dublin; and under what Vote can the advice so given be subjected to Parliamentary comment and criticism.

The responsibility rests wholly with me, and it is the privilege of the hon. Gentleman to move the reduction of my salary if he disapproves of the advice which I have given.

Was the appointment made in recognition of Dr. Traill's eminent services to education or was it made in recognition of his services to the Landlords' Convention.

I am not sure that it is a good precedent to cross-examine a Minister of the Crown as to the ground of the advice that ho has given, but I may say that Dr. Traill's connection with the Landlords' Convention never entered the head either of myself or of anybody else in connection with the appointment.

Are we entitled to assume that the appointment of Dr. Traill gives any indication of the view of the Government on University education.

indicated that he would raise the question on the Vote for the salary of the First Lord of the Treasury.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that twelve hon. Members occupied the time of the House for ten hours between them in the debate of Monday last; and whether he would give facilities during the course of this session for moving a Resolution on the subject of duration of speeches.

I have caused the report of the debate on Monday last to be analysed, not as regards the arguments, but in reference to time occupied by speakers; and I find that the Leader of the Opposition occupied seventy-eight minutes, my right hon. friend seventy-two, and that I was guilty to the extent of fifty-three minutes, leaving 267 minutes for the remaining nine speakers, an average of half an hour each. Some of the nine speeches occupied less than half an hour, while others were very distinctly over half an hour. I can only express my regret that so few speakers were able to take part, not so much in regard to that particular debate, for it was on a subject upon which the House was engaged for several nights before, but because I admit that the length of speeches does, and must, exclude from participation in discussion a large number of Members competent to express opinions; and if each of us in his own sphere—I speak as a sinner myself, not as a saint preaching to sinners—if we could—those who have not to expound a policy or deal with a whole policy—confine ourselves to what we conceive to be novel in argument there would be a manifest advantage. I cannot, in the present state of business, promise to give my hon. and gallant friend time for the discussion of this question, and if I did promise, on the average I have just described to the House, only three speakers would be able to express their opinions.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether the proper remedy is not Home Rule.

I have never denied that Home Rule would get rid of some of the speeches to which we have to listen.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he has yet considered the precedents furnished to him with reference to the publication of Cabinet Memoranda; and, if so, whether he has any statement to make modifying his previous decision with regard to the publication of the Memorandum submitted by him to the Cabinet embracing propositions in favour of preferential tariffs and the taxation of food.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his courtesy in sending mc a letter which he afterwards published in the newspapers. But the precedent to which he referred in that interesting communication was one in which Mr. Forster, in order to verify his statement with regard to a particular conversation alleged to have occurred with the then hon. Member for Clare, read out a Cabinet Memorandum which he had himself prepared for his colleagues. Mr. Gladstone referred to that transaction without expressing either approval or disapproval, and, without saying whether it was right or wrong, it is evidently in quite a different category from the transaction which so exercises the mind of the hon. Gentleman.

Has the right hon. Gentleman refreshed his mind with his own speech on that occasion, on 15th May, 1882, in which he advanced some broad propositions?

I rarely read my own speeches, and I confess I have not done so on the present occasion.

said in that speech the right hon. Gentleman highly approved of Mr. Forster's action.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the case of a Mr. Austin Dobson, who now receives a pension of £533 6s. 8d. in addition to the sum of £250 from the Civil List-in all £783 6s.8d. or very nearly full pay, his salary on his retirement being £800 a year; and whether he can explain why this gentleman has such a pension. In putting the Question the hon. Member said he regretted that, owing to an inadvertence, the letter "a" had been placed before Mr. Austin Dobson's name. He had no intention of making this a personal matter. The question was levelled against the principle, or want of principle, on which these pensions were granted.

I am sure the hon. Gentleman would be the last man in the House to offer a deliberate insult to one who has been a distinguished Civil servant and is a distinguished man of letters. We shall all accept his disclaimer of the letter "a" with absolute confidence. The course that has been pursued on my responsibility in this matter is one that, I believe, will have the approval of every man interested in English literature. The hon. Gentleman appears to suppose that there is some incompatibility between a Civil Service pension and Civil Service office. That is not so. Mr. Gladstone gave the late Mr. Matthew Arnold, while in full employment and not on a pension, a pension on the Civil List, and I think it was a proper course for Mr. Gladstone to pursue. In the present case, Mr. Austin Dobson, I think immediately after or immediately before this pension was offered to him, left, on grounds of health, the Board of Trade, of which he was a Civil servant. I do not suppose the hon. Gentleman means to suggest that the pension was not deserved by Mr. Austin Dobson's great literary qualifications. It would, if I may say so respectfully, be a condemnation, not of Mr. Austin Dobson, but of the hon. Gentleman's familiarity with recent con-temporary English literature if he was to form an unfavourable judgment of this transaction.

asked whether this pension was intended only for men who had little or no fixed income and were doing, or had done, good literary work.

The hon. Gentleman will see, if he looks at the original statute under which the grant is given or at the actual practice of the First Lord of the Treasury, that he has not given anything like a full or accurate account of the mode in which that fund is administered. I have had great difficulty in administering it during my tenure of office, but never have I given a pension with less doubt than I gave it in the case of. Mr. Austin Dobson.

drew attention to the fact that, owing to the manner in which the Questions had been arranged, several important ones addressed to the Colonial Secretary had not been reached by five minutes to three. Was it not right that Questions of such importance should have a chance of being answered verbally? Why had the Questions to the First Lord of the Treasury been interpolated with those to the Colonial Secretary?

The arrangement was made by my direction and with the assent of the First Lord in order to comply with what I understood to be the wish of the House, that the Questions addressed to the First Lord of the Treasury should if possible not be pushed out by the time limit. I directed that those Questions should in future begin not later than fifty-one.