I beg to ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can state what is the proportion of carbon dioxide in each 10,000 volumes of air in each of the six pressing rooms at the Army Clothing Factory.

Samples of air were taken last Friday from three rooms at the factory including one of the pressing rooms (being the room in which Alice Wright pressed her work). The proportion of carbonic acid in the press-room varied from 5·7 per 10,000 volumes at the south end to 9·0 at the north end. The samples were taken after the workers had been at work three to four hours, and the result was considered satisfactory by the District Factory Inspector.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that notice was given of the intended visit of the Factory Inspector; that the rooms were in consequence cleared in the morning contrast to usage; that they were sprinkled water contrary to usage also, and that the irons were cooled?

No, Sir, I am not aware of that, but I will inquire, and if necessary there shall be another test.

I do not suggest that the atmosphere was not as the hon. Member has suggested, because I do not know.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that on 1st May, 1902,† the Financial Secretary to the War Office stated in reply to a Question as to improving the accommodation in the pressing rooms of the Royal Army Clothing Factory, that the number of persons employed on pressing irons was 1,348, he will take immediate steps to improve the ventilation since these persons are now in the rooms in considerable numbers from time to time, although they are not constantly employed there. In putting this Question the hon. and gallant Member asked leave to explain that it was by inadvertence on a former occasion he omitted the date of the year when the Question was put and thus incurred the censure of Mr. Speaker.

In May, 1902, it was stated that before the war 1,348 women used the pressing irons, which then numbered about 170. At the present time there are 1,314 women using 180 pressing irons. The women only use the pressing irons occasionally, the time spent in the pressing rooms varying from one to two hours per week. My right hon. friend stated on Monday ‡ in reply to a Question that measures are being taken and will very shortly be completed to improve the atmospheric condition of certain of the rooms.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War when the summary of the Mowatt Committee's Report, stating its proposals and

† See (4) Debates, cvii., 425.

‡ See (4) Debates, cxxxvi., 1237.

In reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition, in debate on 9th March,§ the Secretary of State for War stated that such a summary could be published in lieu of the whole Report, but as the right hon. Gentleman did not press for such summary no further steps were taken in the matter. If the hon. Member now desires to have it published the measures necessary shall be taken.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the advertisement in Chinese of the terms of contract which appeared in the China Times of 29th March last, and which purported to contain and to explain the provisions of the Labour Ordinance under which the Chinese coolies were to be recruited; whether he is aware that in this advertisement no mention was made of the following points: that the labourer is to be compulsorily repatriated at the end of his term of service; that the work will be underground work; that the labourer is to be confined to a compound; and that he is prohibited from trading or from owning property; and will he state whether all mention of the right of the labourer to be accompanied by his wife and children was omitted; and whether the rate of wages for day work was not stated to be 25s. per calendar month; and whether any Chinese coolies were recruited under the terms of this advertisement. I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies on whose authority the advertisement in the Chinese Times of 29th March last, relating to the terms of engagement of the Chinese coolies, was drawn up and inserted; and whether he will have the advertisement at once withdrawn, and advertisements issued which will give a full and truthful statement of the conditions of contract.

At the same time may I ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to advertisements in the Chinese language, which have been recently circulated in the provinces of Shantung and Chihli, inviting coolies to go to South Africa, which do not inform them that they will have to work underground in the deep levels, do not inform them that they will have to live in a compound, which make no mention of the system of fines and penalties incurred by those leaving the compounds without leave, and which give the wages to be paid in pounds and not in dollars; and, if so, what steps the Government propose to take to prevent the circulation of such advertisements.

My attention has not been called to this advertisement, and if any coolies were recruited under it, they must have had the conditions of the contract fully explained to them before they signed it. With reference to the hon. Member's second Question on this subject, I am not aware by whose authority this advertisement was issued, but it was apparently drawn up before the conditions were finally settled, and if it has not been long since withdrawn I will certainly at once direct that this shall be done.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry if the original advertisement did contain the conditions; and if any coolies were actually recruited under it, and will he state what action will be taken with regard to coolies obviously recruited under misstatements.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is yet able to state the cause and extent of the outbreak of beri-beri among the Chinese coolies engaged for the Transvaal, and the methods adopted to prevent its spread.

Lord Milner has telegraphed: "Tweeddale arrived with forty cases of beri-beri. Three deaths took place at sea from this cause, and five at Durban. Remaining cases were sent back to China at once in Tweeddale. Since arrival of labourers on Rand twenty-five cases have occurred, and one death from heart failure. All remaining cases isolated in lazaretto and likely to recover. Neither medical officers nor labourers themselves have smallest anxiety about this outbreak, and former express opinion that general health of this batch is surprisingly good. Full report on arrival, landing, and despatch of coolies will go to you by next mail and I will keep you fully informed as to their health."

Will an inquiry be made into the cause of the outbreak?

The hon. Member had better put that Question down. No doubt an inquiry has been made.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us the date of the despatch of the telegram by Lord Milner, and the date of its receipt at the Colonial Office?

I deal with that in answer to another Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state the date upon which the first Chinese coolies arrived at Durban; the date upon which the first case of beri-beri broke out, and what steps, if any, were taken to combat the disease; also, the date upon which he telegraphed to Lord Milner for information upon these matters; and what has been the result of his inquiry.

The Tweeddale arrived at Durban on the 18th inst. I am not aware of the date on which the disease broke out, but only that three deaths took place at sea. I telegraphed to Lord Milner on the 23rd instant, but the telegram was written and settled on the 22nd, and I was informed that it was despatched on the morning of that day. It was, however, by an accident not despatched till the 23rd. I again telegraphed to Lord Milner on the 25th and 27th. As to the other points referred to in the hon. and gallant Member's Question, I must refer him to the telegram which I have just read.

What was the date of the dispatch by Lord Milner of his telegram?

I saw it for the first time this morning. I believe it arrived last night, but I cannot say with certainty.

I will put another Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is now in a position to make a statement on the circumstances attending the landing at Durban, under armed surveillance, of Chinese coolies indentured under the Transvaal Ordinance.

No, Sir. As I have already intimated, Lord Milner has promised a report by mail.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman, as promised, has requested Lord Milner for a reply by cable to this Question?

I do not recollect having promised to ask for a cabled reply. Will the hon. Gentleman quote my words?

It was in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Poplar.

It is not in order to discuss a Question and Answer given on a previous day.

I desire to know whether Lord Milner was requested by cable to send the report as the Colonial Secretary promised on Thursday.

I thought the hon. Member was asking whether I applied for a telegraphic reply. I did not ask by cable for a report by mail.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many Chinese coolies—men, women, and children—have arrived in South Africa up to date.

I have not been as yet informed by Lord Milner of the numbers which have arrived. They are stated in the newspapers to be rather more than 1,000.

Will the right hon. Gentleman secure from Lord Milner information as to the number respectively of men, women, and children?

By cable.

I have not received the numbers.

Does the 1,000 already there include any women or children?

If these particulars are wanted they should have been asked for.

They are asked for, Sir.

I have asked for the number of men, women, and children, and now I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will get that information from Lord Milner.

If the hon. Gentleman will look at the way the Question is printed he will see that what he asked for was the total number of Chinese coolies, and then in brackets were the words "men, women, and children." He has not asked for them separately.

rose to put a further Question, but was met with shouts of "Order!"

If the hon. Gentleman wishes to have separate figures they should be asked for. It is quite obvious that a Minister cannot bring down all these separate figures unless he is asked for them.

I have definitely asked for specific figures.

I did not so read it, and it seems that the Colonial Secretary did not so read it.

Very well, Sir, I will put it down in a more specific form.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what was the original intention of His Majesty's Government as to the strength of the South African Constabulary; and what is the present strength.

The intention was to have a police force of six thousand men. The present authorised strength is 5,000. The actual strength is for the moment rather less. Lord Milner is satisfied that a force of 5,000 is adequate for police purposes.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the number of shops open for the sale of intoxicating; liquor and drugs in India rose from 97,910 in 1901–2 to 99,497 in 1902–3; that the net revenue on liquor And drugs consumed in India for the year 1902–3 was £4,741,000, an increase of £502,000 on the figures for 1900–1; and that in the last financial statement of the Government of India a further increase of £498,800 is anticipated during the current year; and whether he is in a position to explain the reasons for this increase in the number of shops opened and the consequent increase in consumption.

The increase in the number of shops was considerable only in the two provinces of Bengal and the Central Provinces. In Bengal it was chiefly due to the fact that many shops sanctioned but unlet in 1901–2 were let in 1902–3; and in the Central Provinces to the Government taking over the Excise arrangements in certain semi-feudatory areas and to the consequent more strict enforcement of the law. As the increase of revenue in 1902–3 over 1901–2 in these two provinces was not marked, the additional shops could not have had much effect on consumption.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the East Africa Syndicate has exercised any of the rights or options secured to it on the concessions which appear as granted to it in the White Paper, 2nd April, of 1903; whether this syndicate has been granted subsequently any further concessions in Uganda and East Africa either in regard to minerals or land; and, if so, what is their scope, and what consideration has been received for them; and whether any company or syndicate has been granted, since the above White Paper was laid upon the Table of the House, any land, or property, or mining concessions; and, if so, what is their nature, and what are the names of the concessionaires.

The only agreements actually concluded with the East Africa Syndicate are for leases of land, particulars of which will be found in the Papers shortly to be laid before Parliament. These Returns will, it is hoped, also give all the desired information in regard to concessions generally both in East Africa and Uganda.

Will these agreements be subject to ratification by Parliament or are they final?

They do not require ratification by Parliament.

Then they are final?

Yes.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the issues from the Consolidated Fund for Supply Services are governed by the provisions of The Exchequer and Audit Departments Act, 1866, or whether the provisions of any later Act apply; whether the money granted by a Consolidated Fund Act to meet the expenditure authorised by Resolutions in Supply for Civil Services can, under any circumstances, be used for Army or Navy Services; whether the money granted by Consolidated Fund Act, No. 1, of this session for Naval Services is available to meet the expenditure authorised by Resolutions in Supply for Naval Services since the passing of that Act, and is the only money so available; and how much of the money so granted remains unissued up to the present time.

The issues for Supply Services are made in accordance with the provisions of the Exchequer and Audit Departments Act, 1866, and of Section 2 (1) of the Public Accounts and Charges Act, 1891. The money granted by a Consolidated Fund Act is not allocated to any particular head of Supply Services, unless the Act be also an Appropriation Act. The Consolidated Fund (No. 1) Act of the present session authorised the issue of the sum of £39,571,200, to be applied "towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1905." The Act does not allocate the money between the various Supply Services, and it will not be so allocated until the Appropriation Act is passed. The unissued balance under the Consolidated Fund (No. 1) Act is £15,521,500, and that balance can be made available for any Votes which the House has granted, either before or since the passing of the Act, for Army, Navy, or Civil Services.

The right hon. Gentleman has quoted the Public Accounts and Charges Act. Is he aware that under that Act issues are restricted to making good the Supply that was granted at the time of the last issue? Is that consistent with his present Answer?

I think the hon. Gentlemen had better put that Question down.

May I give notice that I propose to call attention to this matter on Report of Supply, when perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will take the opportunity to explain more fully the exact consequences of the present position.

I think I have given all the information that is in my power subject to the point raised by the hon. Member for Lynn Regis.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the new taxes proposed in the Finance Bill now under the consideration of the House are already being enforced by the collecting Departments; whether this is in accordance with the usual practice; and whether there is any legal authority for such a practice.

The Answer to the first two paragraphs is in the affirmative. The authority for the practice is its long existence and its recognition in a succession of Budget Acts. It further obtained special recognition by 39 and 40 Vict., Chap. 36, Section 18.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state when he proposes to introduce the Bill to amend the Workmen's Compensation for Accidents Act; and whether any endeavour will be made to pass the Bill this session.

As I have already intimated in reply to a previous Question from the hon. Member.† I can make no definite statement as to the date of the introduction of the Bill until I have

† See (4) Debates, cxxxiii., 531.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what steps the authorities intend taking in the execution of decrees on the estate of Mr. Rattigan, of Camlirk House, Edgeworthstown; whether he is aware that the tenants have declared their intention to resist the execution by every means in their power; and whether, in the interest of the peace of the district, he will refuse to lend the forces of the Crown to carry out these executions.

This is a small property, the rental of which is considerably below the Poor Law valuation. There are twenty-one tenants, all of whom, except four, have paid their rents. Civil bill decrees have been obtained against the latter. If protection is requisitioned for their execution it will, of course, be afforded.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is prepared to advise the Estates Commissioners to purchase for striping amongst tenants of Currool-Fox, Currool Kenny, and Currool Brennan the farm of Dernageas, in the barony of Rathclive, county Longford, on the estate of Mrs. Harriett Ledwith, whose agent is Mr. Webb, Corngard, Boyle, county Roscommon; whether he is aware that the landlady is willing and anxious to sell this farm for the benefit of the tenants; and whether, as Newtowncashel parish, in which this farm is situate, may be described as a congested district, he will advise the Estates Commissioners to expend money on the reclamation, fencing, and division of this farm.

The Estates Commissioners have not received any application from the owner of this estate. Should it be offered to the Commissioners-they will consider the question of its improvement and division.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the annual amount paid to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction; and what was the amount of the last payment, and to whom was it made.

No fixed annual grant is paid. The Department occasionally utilises the services of some of the Society's officers who have expert-qualifications in such subjects as egg packing, poultry rearing, fruit growing, and bee keeping; and they also use the services of two of the Society's organisers in connection with the organisation of Agricultural Banks. The total amount paid by the Department to the Society in this connection in the year ended 31 at March last, was £4,262 3s. 6d. The last payment, one of £100, was made on the 18th instant.

Having regard to the fact that this organisation is competing: unfairly with similar organizations—

Order, order! The Question on the Paper has been fully answered, and the hon. Member is now seeking to raise an entirely fresh point.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to-the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, with a view of preventing breaches of the peace at forthcoming demonstrations in some districts in Ulster, he will take steps to prevent the holding of such demonstrations.

The steps hitherto adopted for the maintenance of the public peace on such occasions will continue to be followed.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the amount estimated for 1904–5 for new officers appointed under the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, and the sum required to cover travelling expenses for same; and what is the additional amount that will be required for salaries and expenses of transferred officers.

For the salaries of new officers appointed since the establishment of the Department a sum of £25,469 is provided. The provision for their travelling expenses and subsistence allowances amounts to £5,050. In respect of officers transferred to the Department the provision for salaries amounts to £47,335, and for travelling and other allowances £2,950.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how long it will take to train the twenty young men recently selected by the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) for admission to the course of instruction in the manual training (woodwork) so as to qualify them to give instruction in woodwork, as itinerant instructors under county schemes, in the technical schools which are now being organised throughout Ireland, or in day secondary schools, under the conditions of the Department's regulations for such schools; how long will it take the instructors so trained to impart adequate instruction to the boys and girls in the Irish schools; is the Department considering how best to utilise the acquirements of the children so trained; whether, considering the lack of enterprise in Ireland, steps will be taken for employing the trained children in various industries; whether the Department has power to initiate such industries; and, if not, whether he will consider the desirability of giving such power to the Department, or to some other body.

The course of graining for these teachers will last six months. The time limits of the course to be given to pupils by the instructors when trained must necessarily vary according to circumstances. The object of the courses is educational, i.e., to form habits which will be of value to the pupils whatever may be their subsequent career in life. As regards the latter part of the Question, the Department's function with respect to industries other than those specified in Section 30 (1) of the Act of 1899, is to provide assistance by means of technical instruction, and to afford information and expert advice.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state whether any application has yet been made to the Estates Commissioners to declare a section of the Kingston Estate to be a separate estate, the tenants on such portion having been induced to sign agreements for purchase; whether he is aware that processes for payment of a year's rent have been issued against other tenants who, finding themselves unable to accept the landlord's terms, have refused to sign agreements; and if the Estates Commissioners will investigate the circumstances of the tenants on this estate, before creating any section of it a separate estate, or sanctioning advances for purchase of holdings on a portion of it.

No application has been received by the Commissioners in reference to any portion of this estate. If made all the circumstances will be considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state what are the results of his inquiries in o the lodging-out allowances granted to seven members of the Royal Irish Constabulary stationed at Millstreet, notwithstanding that there should be a sufficiency of accommodation for them in the barracks; and, seeing that Millstreet and Ballyvourney were formerly included in the Macroom police I district, will he consider the desirability of again attaching them to that station, and thus effect a substantial economy.

There is no accommodation for married men at the Mill-street barracks. The district inspector resides in one portion of the building. The nine remaining apartments are occupied by eight men. The question of abolishing the station as a district headquarters will be considered hereafter; at present it is considered premature to discontinue the station.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to an award, dated the 30th March last, made by Mr. Lawder, of Ballinamore, in his capacity as arbitrator, appointed by the Local Government Board, in the case of a proposed erection of cottages under the Labourers Acts in the Castleblayney union, in which award he allowed the owners the sum of £18 for ninety statute perches (an amount equal to thirty years purchase), at the same time reducing the occupier's rent by the sum of 12s., in addition to allowing said occupier £8 10s. for his interest, and £1 5s. for severance; and whether, seeing that Mr. Robert Haire, arbitrator on a former occasion, allowed the same owners only £11 5s. for a similar sized plot in the same field, he will take steps to secure that Mr. Lawder, being himself a landlord, shall not be employed as an arbitrator in such cases.

Mr. Lawder made his award on the basis of the facts deposed to by the claimant, and not disputed by the representatives of the district council who were present, namely, that he, the claimant, had, in respect of the plot, received £9 compensation at the former arbitration, and an abatement of 12s. in his rent. Mr. Lawder is confident his award is right. He is a very extensive farmer, a small landowner, and a civil engineer of much experience and high qualifications, fully competent to decide such matters. The reply to the last query is in the negative.

I must say the answer is not satisfactory. [Cries of "Order."] Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the amount awarded was £18, not £9.

My information is that it was £9.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can explain the action of Sergeant M'Gettrick, of the Royal Irish Constabulary force at Ballymahan, in requiring traders in that town to send in their weights and measures to be tested on a market day, thus inconveniencing these persons; and will a caution be sent to the sergeant to select a less inconvenient time on future occasions.

The sergeant adjusted weights and measures on various dates between the 11th and 23rd June. Two of these days were market days, on which nine traders sent in their weights. No complaints of inconvenience were made, and the nine traders in question might have sent in their weights on six other appointed days which were not market days.

If this is the practice of the sergeant, will the right hon. Gentleman direct him to choose other days?

I think it can hardly be described as his practice.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that there are seven married constables stationed in Millstreet in receipt of lodging allowances, and that one of these resides in the police barrack; and, if so, will he state under what rule or order he receives a lodging allowance.

Two of the married constables at Millstreet in receipt of the lodging allowance live in barracks, although their families are accommodated outside. The allowance of 2s. a week is payable under the rules of the force for the families of married men not accommodated in barracks.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Irish Land Commission is responsible for the upkeep of the banks on the estate of Sir R. Blennerhassett, Douglas, Killorglin, Kerry, purchased by the tenants in 1886; if not, who is responsible; whether he is aware that the tenants on the estate have suffered loss and inconvenience during the past twelve months from the inflow of the tide; and whether steps will at once be taken to have the tenants' property protected.

The Commissioners recently directed an inspector to visit the embankment in question. The inspector's report was received yesterday, and will be considered by the Commissioners.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, considering the work done by assistant teachers in Irish national schools and the remuneration they get for their services, he will place on the Estimate a sum of £8,000, the amount calculated to give assistants of ten years service, and classed under old rules, second or higher second grade salary.

I can hold out no hope that this suggestion will be adopted. There is no analogy between the proposal and the reduction to fifty of the average required for an assistant teacher, the cost of which it is proposed to place on the Development Grant Estimate. Under the existing rules increases of income are awarded to teachers as the result of continued good service, and the adopting of the hon. Member's proposal would be opposed to the principle underlying the new system of payments.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland when estates adjoining the sea, the banks of which before sale were kept in order by the landlord, are sold to the tenants, what authority will be responsible for the proper upkeep of those banks during the next sixty-eight and a half years.

In cases not coming within Section 4 of the Land Act of 1903 the tenant purchasers should keep up these embankments for their own protection. There is no obligation on the landlord or the State to do so.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that recently there has been a serious outbreak of smallpox in the City of Belfast; whether he can furnish any particulars as to the cause and extent of the outbreak; whether his attention has been called to the neglect of the Belfast City Council to ensure an efficient exercise of its powers under the Public Health Acts, and the custom sanctioned by the council of permitting all kinds of refuse to be dumped on ground intended for building purposes; whether he is aware that a number of cottages abutting on the workhouse cemetery in Donegal Road, Belfast, where upwards of ten thousand have been interred, are overcrowded and without any system of drainage; and whether, under the circumstances, he will bring pressure to bear upon the city council in order to secure an immediate remedy for this state of affairs.

The total number of cases admitted to the smallpox hospital is ninety-three. Two have died; fifty-five have been discharged; and thirty-six remain under treatment. The disease is supposed to have been introduced from Scotland. The Belfast Corporation, in the opinion of the Local Government Board, efficiently discharges the duties devolving upon it as the sanitary authority. Every effort is being made to prevent the further spread of the disease. No complaints have been made to the Board in respect to the alleged dumping of refuse or the overcrowding of cottages.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state what communication had passed between Sir Antony MacDonnell and the Rev. Denis O'Hara, with reference to the Anderson case prior to Sir Antony MacDonnell's official approval of Anderson's dismissal on 23rd January, 1904; and through what channels.

Except on one occasion, no communications, verbal or written, with reference to the case of Constable Anderson passed, prior to his' dismissal, between Sir Antony MacDonnell and the Rev. Denis O'Hara, who is, I should like to say, an esteemed colleague of my own on the Congested Districts Board, for whose services and character I have a warm regard. This was the occasion: At a meeting of the Congested Districts Board, Father O'Hara informed Sir Antony MacDonnell that he had applied for the removal from Kilti-magh of a constable, and asked him to look into the matter. Sir Antony MacDonnell replied that he would inquire from the Inspector-General on the subject. He did inquire from the Deputy Inspector-General—the Inspector-General being on leave at the time—what the matter was about. He was informed that a Court of Inquiry had been, or was being, appointed by the Inspector-General. Sir Antony MacDonnell heard nothing further in the case until the Inspector-General's recommendation that Anderson should be dismissed came before him in the usual official course.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what additional evidence of Constable Anderson's innocence, if any, was obtained between the date of the letter of 23rd January, approved of by Sir. Antony MacDonnell, confirming his dismissal from the force, and the date of his reinstatement; and, if no such additional evidence was forthcoming, did Sir Antony MacDonnell concur in Anderson's reinstatement without it.

Sir, I would refer my hon. friend to many previous replies given by me on the 13th, 15th, and 20th June,† and to the opinion which I have expressed, and now repeat, viz., that if further debate on this question is desired by my hon. friend, or any other hon. Member, it can be conducted more conveniently on the Vote for my salary than by way of Question and Answer. I should be glad of an opportunity to defend the exercise of my discretion and the action of the Inspector-General, if these are attacked; and to repudiate charges against Sir Antony MacDonnell and the Rev. Denis O'Hara if these are preferred. That opportunity is not to be found within the limitations of separate replies to a series of argumentative Questions; and I must respectfully decline to continue this controversy except by way of debate in Committee of Supply under conditions which would admit of my dealing fully with the whole matter.

On behalf of the hon. Member for East Mayo I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the district inspector and sergeant at Rossport, county Mayo, were asked to report on Constable Anderson's record while he was stationed there; and, if so, what was the nature of their reports.

I have given very fully all the grounds upon which the Inspector-General, Sir N. Chamberlain, recommended the dismissal of this constable, and all the grounds upon which I recommended his reinstatement. They were confined in each case to specific charges preferred in connection with Constable Anderson's conduct when stationed at Kiltimagh. It would not, in my opinion, be proper for me to enlarge that issue now by taking note of; other matters or allegations unconnected with those charges. But, in any case, I must respectfully decline to discuss the existence or character of confidential instructions and reports on matters of discipline in the Royal Irish Constabulary.

On behalf of the hon. Member for East Mayo, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, when constable Anderson was removed from Rossport to Mullaghmore, the police at these

† See (4) Debates, cxxxv., 1497, cxxxvi., 147,, 486.

I must respectfully decline to discuss the existence or character of confidential instructions.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will assent to the Motion for a Select Committee to inquire into the Incidence of Taxation standing on this day's Paper.

I doubt whether any useful purpose would be served by appointing a Select Committee with regard to this matter. It is an extremely complex problem, and I do not think that a Select Committee would advance it further than the learned professors who have already dealt with it have been able to do. It is my personal belief that when a strictly scientific question of this kind has to be investigated the appointment of a Select Committee is an indifferent way of arriving at an agreement.

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman dissents from the proposal to have an inquiry, whether by Select Committee or in any other way? Does he not accept the principle of inquiry?

It is not a question of principle but of expediency. So far as I can see, very little would be gained by an inquiry. Nothing would be learned from it except what can now be learned by any patient student of economic theory. The Motion referred to is as follows:— Incidence of Taxation: That a Select Committee be appointed to consider the relative incidence of Imperial Taxation on the various Classes and Incomes of the Population, and to report what readjustments are possible and advisable, with a view to secure that the contributions of all Classes and Incomes shall be more exactly proportioned to their taxable capacity.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he proposes to take steps to restore to the House that full freedom of discussing urgent matters of; public importance of which it has now been largely deprived owing to the operation of Motions placed on the Paper with the design of preventing such discussion.

I cannot say that in the matter of Motions for adjournment I have seen any extraordinary restriction on the use of the privileges of the House during the last few weeks. With regard to the Question on the Paper, I have more than once answered Questions of precisely similar import, and I have nothing to add to what I have already said.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a Motion down which prevents a discussion even of the question of blocking Motions.

We might have blocking Motion on blocking Motion ad infinitum. I do not see how the House could with advantage discuss the question of blocking Motions except in reference to some proposed amendment of the Standing Orders, and I have already explained that I do not propose in the present session to bring before the House any Rule dealing with the general question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is nothing in the Standing Orders relating to this matter? It is a question of the general practice of the House. Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to give time for the discussion of a Resolution which would correct the practice of the House in order to avoid these blocking methods?

There may be nothing in the Standing Orders, but it would require a Standing Order to correct the common practice of the House, and I do not think it would be desirable to give a day for such a discussion in the present state of public business.

But the right hon. Gentleman has indicated his willingness to remove the effect of blocking Motions from Motions for adjournment for the holidays and other occasions of that kind. Will he say whether he will be able to bring forward a scheme for that purpose during the present session?

I could not find time for such a Motion unless it is passed with the general assent of the House and without discussion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman put such a proposal on the Paper, so that the House may judge whether it can agree to it?

Yes, I think that is a very fair request.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will grant an opportunity to the Member for Coventry to bring forward the Motion that stands in his name in regard to labour in Africa. I beg to say I put this Question direct to the right hon. Gentleman at the special request of the hon. Member for Coventry.

My view is that of all subjects which the House has shown its desire to discuss, this, perhaps, is the one which has been most fully discussed during the course of the present session, and when I remember that it can be again debated on the Colonial Vote, it seems to me that it will be impossible for the Government so far to violate ordinary practice as to give a special opportunity for discussing a private Member's Resolution upon it.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can now state when the consideration of the Finance Bill will be resumed.

We shall not finish the Committee stage of the Finance Bill until we come to the concluding stage of the Licensing Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the trade concerned is completely at a standstill meantime, and does he really propose to allow that state of things to go on for five weeks.

I hope things are not so bad as the hon. Gentleman seems to suggest. If they are I hope he will give us his sedulous and earnest support in hurrying matters forward.

Is there any precedent for postponing the Committee stage of the Finance Bill to the end of July.

I have not looked up the precedents.