I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will explain why, although the cat, as an instrument of flogging, has been abolished in the Army, it has only been suspended in the Navy by an order of the Admiralty; will he state why the British seaman is still subject to flogging in naval prisons; and whether, on land or sea, cats are part of the equipment of the naval prisons; and, seeing that the statutory rules and orders as to discipline in naval prisons authorises the infliction of thirty-six lashes or strokes with the cat or birch in the case of a prisoner over eighteen years of age; he will say whether any steps will be taken for the abolition of this punishment in the Royal Navy.

Flogging with cat o' nine tails was suspended by an order of the Board of Admiralty in 1881. When the Naval Discipline Act was amended in 1884, the power of awarding this punishment was not abolished but remained merely suspended. There has been no amendment of the Naval Discipline Act since then and it is not likely that legislation would be obtained for this reason only. The rules governing the award of this punishment in the Naval Prison Regulations are practically identical with those contained in the statutory rules and orders for local prisons. The answer to the third part of the Question is "Yes." The

†To be substituted for Answer previously printed and circulated.

Then I take it that the cat is part of the necessary equipment of ships of war and training ships.

That was not the Question addressed to me.

Is it part, of the equipment of naval prisons ashore and afloat?

There are no naval prisons afloat.

Seeing that the cat has been abolished in the Army why retain it for the Navy?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if there is a record that in a brigade of Volunteers encamped in 1900 on Salisbury Plain 90 per cent, went home in consequence of three days' rain; and, if so, will he state the name of the brigadier, and what regiments constituted the brigade, and who were their respective commanding officers and adjutants, and further by what means, being then under military law, such Volunteers were able to leave the camp.

I can find no trace in any official record of any such incident as that referred to in the Question. If it occurred | it is not creditable to the brigade concerned. I may perhaps add that un-willingness to face hardship or to incur discomfort is certainly not characteristic of the Volunteer Force—a fact to which I can bear personal testimony, and which I believe all those who have been officially connected with the training of Volunteers will readily confirm.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, seeing that Article V. of the recent Anglo-Chinese Convention requires that indentured emigrants from China shall be embarked only at a treaty port, the embarkation at Hong-kong of coolies on the steamship "Tweeddale" was a contravention of this treaty; whether the Chinese Viceroy at Canton has forbidden the recruitment of any more coolies for the Transvaal; and, if so, whether his action was taken as a protest against the infraction of the treaty.

The Anglo-Chinese Convention does not apply to Hong-kong, which is not s, treaty port, and there has been no contravention of I embarkation that they had a right to the treaty. It is true that two months ago the Viceroy of Canton issued a proclamation declaring recruiting for South Africa in that district illegal. His Majesty's Minister at Deking has made representations to the foreign board, and they have requested the Viceroy to withdraw the prohibition.

Was the prohibition due to the fact that the Chinese authorities considered there had been a contravention of the Treaty?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can now state the total number of men, the total number women, and the total number of children of Chinese extraction who have arrived in South Africa under the Transvaal Labour Ordinance; and, if not, whether he will telegraph to Lord Milner for these facts by cable.

I informed the hon. Member for the Cleveland Division on the 7th of last month f that none of the emigrants who have come from Hong-kong had taken their families with them. The number of men is just over 1,000, according to the newspaper tele-

† See(4) Debates, exxxv., 923.

Did any women or children accompany the second batch of coolies?

asked for notice of the Question.

May I ask whether these particular coolies Ware recruited under the early advertisement, in which no mention was made of the fact that they might take their wives and children.

My information is that they were fully informed before take their families with them.

Then can the right hon. Gentleman give any reason why no women and children did accompany them?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now state by whose authority, and under what legal sanction, the Chinese labourers recently landed at Durban in Natal were confined in compounds, and locked in railway carriages, guarded by special police; by whose orders the police were detailed for this duty; and at whose charge they were maintained on this special duty?

I am informed by the Acting-Governor of Natal that the Chinese were not placed in guarded compounds; they were conveyed straight from the ship to the train which took them to the Transvaal. I am to receive a report on the circumstances of the landing and despatch of these labourers by mail.

I have already twice asked this Question and obtained no Answer. I want to know under what Act, by what sanction of law, this confinement was done, and I respectfully press for an Answer.

I have already answered that there was not a confinement.

There is no doubt that there was a confinement.

Order, order! It is not in order to debate the Question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state whether the labourers were locked in carriages, which is a deprivation of liberty?

I understand that the right hon. Gentleman has already answered the Question "whether he can now state by whose authority and under what legal sanction the Chinese labourers recently landed at Durban in Natal were confined in compounds."

And locked in railway carriages.

I have already said there was no confinement in compounds. I have no information with regard to the carriages; but, as I have stated on more than one occasion, I am to receive a report on the subject.

Should not the information on a matter of this importance be communicated to the House by cable?

I have not the slightest reason to believe that the Natal Government have done anything contrary to the law. I do not propose to satisfy myself, except in the manner I have already indicated.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the form of contract signed by the Chinese labourers before importation to the Transvaal contains any reference to their right to the transport of their wives and children to that country, to the obligation to work for ten hours per diem underground, and to their obligation to be confined in a compound during their term of servitude; whether a copy of the form of contract is in the possession of the Colonial Service; if so, whether he will lay it upon the Table of the House; and, if not, whether he will at once telegraph to the Governor of Hong-kong to transmit by cable the form of contract, and lay it upon the Table of the House on its receipt.

The form of the contract signed by the Chinese labourers was, I understand, that printed at pages 28–32 of Cd. 2026.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether there is any close time for the admission of Chinese labourers into the Transvaal; and whether any limit is to be placed upon the number to be admitted.

No close time has been fixed by the Government nor has any limit at present been placed on the number to be admitted.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Chinese laboure s, who were embarked for South Africa at the British port of Hong-kong, are exeluded from the purview of the recent Anglo-Chinese Convention, and from the protection it would afford, for the reason that the Convention applies only to labourers embarked at Chinese treaty ports.

The Convention cannot of course apply to Hong-kong which is not a treaty port but a British Colony. Labourers leaving Hong-kon; are protectel not by the treaty but by the Colonial law and administration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the fact that when the ss. "Tweeddale" arrived in Durban Harbour on Saturdav, 18th June, a floating cordon of pontoons containing police with loaded rifles surrounded her, police with loaded rifles paraded her decks and the wharves, the coolies were photographed and registered under armed supervision, and entrained for Johannesburg under armed military escort; and whether he will ask Lord Milner for a report on these proceedings by cable.

I am expecting to receive by mail a report on the circumstances of the arrival of these coolies, and I do not propose to telegraph.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay the despatch when received?

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that by the provisions of the Natal Act, Immigration (restricted), 19C3, the master and owners of any vessel, from which any person suffering from a loathsome or a dangerous contagious disease nay be landed, are liable to a penalty of from £100 to £5,000; whether the master or owners of the British ship "Tweeddale," from which immigrants suffering from beri-beri were landed at Durban, have been subjected to the penalties referred to; and whether he will take steps to warn the masters and owners of British ships of the penalties to which they are liable for any infringement of the provisions of the above Act while engaging in this traffic.

I have telegraphed for information to the Officer Administering the Government of Natal and have received the following answer:—"My Ministers suggest that you give following reply to Question. Begins—'It is the custom in Natal to subject persons to penalties after they have broken the law, not before. The "Tweeddale" did not infringe the Immigration Restriction Act. No British ships are liable to penalties for engaging in this traffic—namely, the conveyance of Chinese immigrants under a scheme approved by the Government of Natal. Both shipmasters and Transvaal Government have been duly informed of our law and of the requirements there under.'" It will be observed that the Natal authorities do not consider beri-beri to be a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease.

The Answer, though somewhat discourteous, does not cover the Question whether in point of fact such persons were landed, and, if so, whether the penalties were inflicted.

The hon. Member is aware that the Natal Government have, as a self-governing colony. Ministers who are the judges on this point— subject to the hon. Member. The Natal Ministers say that there has not been an infraction of the Natal law. [OPPOSITION cries of "Why]"] I presume the reason must be that they are satisfied that beri-beri is not a contagious disease.

With great respect may I point out that it is not denied that it is a loathsome disease?

If the hon. Member is not satisfied he must put down a more specific Question. The Answer given to the Question on the Paper is that, according to the right hon. Gentleman's knowledge and information, no breach of the law has been committed in Natal.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that forty-three cases of beriberi developed on board the "Tweeddale" during the voyage from China to Durban, that she was sent back to China with the surviving cases, thirty-five in number, and that beri-beri is a malady which infects a ship or place in which cases of the disease are collected, he will take steps to have this ship discharged from the service of bringing Chinese coolies to South Africa.

I have no reason to doubt that the Transvaal emigration agent at the port of embarkment will take any steps which are necessary in the matter. He has full power to obtain medical advice for his guidance in such matters.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will give the number and dates of the telegrams he has addressed to Lord Milner, asking for information respecting the outbreak of the disease beri-beri among the Chinese coolies; what were the dates of the reply or replies from Lord Milner; whether he is in a position to give any explanation of the delay in the receipt of Lord Milner's reply; and whether the text of these telegrams will be reproduced in the Blue-book about to be issued.

The telegrams I addressed to Lord Milner were sent on the 23rd, 25th, and 27th of June, I received an answer from Lord Milner dated 28th of June, and two subsequent telegrams dated 30th June. I eave in reply to the hon. Member for the Rye Division on Thursday last f my explanation as to the delay and have nothing to add thereto. I will include the telegrams in the Blue-book to be published this week.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the assent of the Crown to the Chinese Exclusion Bill, to which the Governor of Cape Colony reserved his assent for the consideration of the Crown, while that assent was given to all other measures passed by the Cape Parliament, has yet been given; and, if not, what is the reason for the delay in this formality.

No, Sir; the authenticated copy of the Bill referred to only reached me two days ago.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any communications have been received from the Transvaal or the Orange River Colony respecting the grant of representative Government; and whether the subject has been considered by Ministers; if so, can any statement be made as to the date when such representative Government will be granted.

I am not in a position at present to make any statement on the subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that three months have elapsed since the close of the financial year in Malta, he will undertake that a copy of the balance-sheet for the year will be available for Members of the House before the Vote on the Colonial Estimates is taken.

I am communicating the hon. Member's Question to the Governor of Malta, but pending the receipt of his reply, which I am requesting him to furnish by telegraph, I am unable to state at what date the financial statements for the year ending the 31st of March last will be ready.

I will put a further Question next week.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India if he has had information as to the request of the Tibetans for an armistice; and whether competent negotiators have been appointed to settle points of difference; and, if so, has the British Commander authority to receive and treat with such negotiators.

An armistice was granted up to 30th June and has been prolonged at the request of the Tibetans. The Ta Lama, accompanied by representatives of the three Lhasa monasteries, has been received by Colonel Younghusband and is now in negotiation with him. It is not yet known whether the Ta Lama has authority to effect an agreement with Colonel Younghusband, but in this event the British Commissioner has authority to treat with him.

Are representatives of the Chinese Government allowed to take part in the negotiations?

Representatives of the Chinese Government have been in communication with us throughout, and of course will be associated with us in the negotiations.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he it' aware that the British steamer "Allanton," whilst proceeding from Marsran, in Japan, to Singapore with a cargo of coals consigned to a British subject, was seized by a Russian vessel and taken to Vladivos-tock, and has since been condemned there as a prize and confiscated; and will he state what steps His Majesty's Government propose to take in order to obtain the release of the versel.

His Majesty's Government are aware of the fact and are in communication on the subject with His Majesty's Ambassador at St. Petersburg, who has asked to be supplied with an official statement of the grounds of condemnation. They understand that the owner of the vessel has taken steps to lodge an appeal, for which a month's time is allowed, to the Supreme Prize Court which will sit at St. Petersburg, and in these circumstances His Majesty's Government must await the decision of that tribunal before deciding what, if any, representation they can properly address to the Russian Government when the full facts of the case are before them.

Will the appeal be to St. Petersburg?

Yes.

Is nothing being done meanwhile to urge the Russian Government to release the vessel?

Is there an English representative at Vladivostock from whom the owner of the vessel may obtain assistance?

Has an appeal been made?

The minimum time for appeal is, I think, a month; perhaps a little longer.

If the captain and crew are confined, how can an appeal be made? It is a very serous matter for the owners of this Belfast vessel.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state the grounds upon which His Majesty's Government has decided to decline to be officially represented at the forthcoming International Conference to be held at Brussels to promote greater uniformity in the laws of the different maritime States with respect to collision and salvage liabilities.

His Majesty's Government have, in accordance with a long established and carefully considered policy, decline I to be officially represented at the Conference on the grounds that their participation might be held to bind them to accept its conclusions. They will, however, take steps to secure full information of the discussions and of the decisions arrived at by the Conference.

Does the Answer imply that a representative will be sent, but he will not have power to vote?

We shall probably instruct our Minister there to obtain a full report of the proceedings.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that circular letters associated with lottery drawings conducted by H. Langenhann & Company, Bremen, were on the 22nd June last posted at the Western Central District Office, London, to persons in the United Kingdom; and, seeing that his attention has been directed to similar circulars in connection with a lottery at Budapest, will he state what action he proposes to take in the matter.

The receipt in this country of lottery circulars from the firms in question was recently brought to the notice of the Foreign Office. His Majesty's Ambassador at Berlin, who was consulted on the subject, was of opinion that, as the Prussian Diet were considering the adoption of measures to check the issue of lottery circulars from the minor German States, no action on the part of His Majesty's Government was for the present desirable.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the reportel withdrawal of the Russians from Niuchwang, the active operations of brigands in the neighbourhood, and the uncertainty as to when a Japanese occupation will take place, also that Niuchwang is not now likely to be the scene of naval operations, His Majesty's Government will send a gunboat to Niuchwang for the protection of the lives and property of British subjects.

His Majesty's Government have no reason to believe that the Russians have withdrawn from Niuchwang, but the "Espiegle" has been ordered to that port.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state approximately the value of the licensed premises to which the Bill before the House applies; the maximum capitalised amount that could be raised by quarter sessions for the purpose of closing specified licensed premises; the approximate extra value that would be given to the licensed premises remaining by the decreased competition and by the absolute fixity of tenure secured for a long period.

I am afraid I am no more able now than I was a few days ago†, when the hon. Member

See page 163.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is yet in a position to state to what trades the provisions of the Workmen's Compensation Act will be extended.

The Report of the Departmental Committee has not yet reached me, and until I get it I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the information he desires.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the fact that another death was caused by the unprotected electric live rail on the North Eastern Railway at St. Peters, Newcastle-on-Tyne, on Wednesday last; and will he inform the House what steps are being taken by the Board of Trade to compel railway companies owning electric railways to take such steps as are necessary to avoid further loss of life.

The accident referred to, which caused death of a boy who had trespassed on the line, has been reported to the Board of Trade by the railway company. Inquiries have been ordered into the circumstances attending two similar previous accidents, and this case will also be investigated. When the reports of the inspecting officers have been received the question of precautionary measures will be fully considered.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether he is now in a position to state on what day this session he proposes to introduce the Solway Fishery Bill, which he has stated to be in a forward state of preparation.

I am unable for the moment to specify the day upon which the Solway Fishery Bill will be introduced, but if my hon. friend will put down his Question again in a few days time I shall hope to be in a position to give a more definite answer.

Can the hon. Gentleman say if it is intended to introduce any other legislation this session?

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if his attention has been called to complaints from the Rathmines Polling District of South Dublin to the effect that the voters' requisition forms, provided for by statute and distributed by the town clerk of Rathmines (in his capacity of deputy for the clerk of the peace of Dublin County) were in many instances, and to an extent calculated to interfere with the discharge of his duty by the town clerk, taken away from the custody of those residents to whom they were issued by unauthorised persons, inaccurately filled up and returned to the said town clerk; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any, and, if so, what action to secure that these inaccuracies shall be corrected and the persons entitled, and these only, placed on the supplemental list.

My attention has been called to the matter mentioned, which has been referred to the police for investigation.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the delay of the Local Government Board in giving their decision on the appeal of the Rathmines Commissioners against the decision of the Dublin County Council; and when this decision may be expected.

There has been no delay. The Inquiry was held at the end of May. The minutes of evidence, which are voluminous, were received by the Board on the 10th June. A decision will be come to as soon as possible.

Have the Local Government Board consulted the Law Officers of the Crown on this matter?

I must ask for notice of that.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the sale of the Ballydonlon Estate, county Galway the property of Mr. Mahon; whether he is aware that the tenants who held eleven months lettings on this property for a number of years past enjoyed same at an average rental of £1 1s. per acre free of taxes; and that, under the present purchase arrangements on this property, the instalment rentals per acre are increased on the tenants from £1 5s. to £1 15s. per acre, with taxes added; and, if so, whether it is proposed to pass this sale without inspection; and whether, having regard to the fact that Mr. Mahon is not selling the whole of this estate, the bonus will be granted in this case.

The entire estate has been sold, but the vendor has applied for an advance to enable him to repurchase the demesne. The holdings were vested in the tenant purchasers on the 29th April. The average annuity payable per statute acre is 19s. 10d. The estate was inspected before the advances were sanctioned.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Department of Agriculture have taken any, and what, steps to promote winter dairying in Ireland; and what has been the result of the operations.

The encouragement of winter dairying, wherever such is practicable, is part of the duty of the itinerant instructors in agriculture, of whom there are now eighteen at work. No statistics are available to show to what extent farmers have adopted the suggestions of these experts; but the subject will form part of the discussion at the Annual Conference of Itinerant Inspectors.

Has not a complaint been received from the Cork School that nothing has been done in this respect?

There is no mention of any complaint in the Question. As I have said, there are eighteen inspectors now on this work.

But they are doing nothing.

Have not the inspectors pointed out that capital is necessary to enable them to carry out the work?

I must ask for notice of that Question.

And is it not the fact that the creamery system in Ireland is proving a discouragement to dairy farming in that country?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Irish Land Commission has been notified by tenant purchasers on the estate of David Finlay and others, near Bawnboy, in the county of Cavan, that the receivable orders which have been sent from its offices in Dublin have not been delivered to the tenants; and, if so, will he say who is responsible for their non-delivery.

I am in communication with the Land Commission in the matter, and will ask the hon. Member to postpone this and the next Question till Wednesday. The second Question referred to was as follows—

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a number of the tenants on the estate of David Finlay and others, near Bawnboy, in the county of Cavan (which is under the control of the Land Judge's Court) who have signed their purchase agreements have been notified by the Irish Land Commission that their applications to purchase their holdings have been dismissed owing to delay; if so, will he state the cause of the delay; and, if the delay does not rest with the tenants, will they still be afforded an opportunity of completing their purchase.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether five of the Clanricarde tenants at Derrygoolan, Woodford, have been served with notices to quit in consequence of their asserting their right to the game on their lands.

I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) whether he can say if the Clanricarde tenants at Derrygoolan, Woodford, are non-judicial and in possession of their holdings as tenants from year to year for many years; and (2) whether there is any agreement in writing or otherwise made by them with their landlord in respect to game; and (3) whether, in view of the circumstances of the case, he will take steps to insure that the police shall not be allowed in future to accompany poachers on the lands, seeing that such proceedings are calculated to intimidate the tenants.

Five notices to quit have been served. No cause was assigned for their issue. I understand that no judicial rents have been fixed on this property in the locality mentioned. This being so, I am unable to say whether there exist any agreements, such as referred to; nor have I at my disposal any effective means of ascertaining the fact. In the absence of any information I presume the tenants are entitled under the Ground Game Act of 1880 to kill ground game. The fact that a notice to quit has been served upon a tenant does not prevent him from selling his holding or applying to have a fair rent fixed, and should any proceedings, founded on the notices, be taken to evict him from his holding he may apply to the Court in which the proceedings have been instituted to suspend the proceetings pending the result of the fair-rent application. Should the proceedings be suspended and the application to fix a fair rent be granted, the tenant will be in the same position as if his rent had been fixed at the date of the application, and will be protected from eviction from any cause other than one of those statutory conditions for which a judicial tenant may be evicted. Should the landlord in the case be not entitled to the right he seeks to exercise, of course the tenant has his remedy at law in any action of trespass.

The right hon. Gentleman has not replied to the last part of the Question—what instructions will you give to the police on the 12th August next? Are they to protect the poachers going on the lands of these tenants who, as he admits, are entitled to the game under the Act?

If these are yearly tenants does not that constitute them future tenants and, if so, what is the use of talking of fair rents when future tenants cannot get fair rents fixed?

The hon. Member has put the Question correctly. They are not judicial tenants. They are tenants at will. They are precisely the same as tenants at will in this country. I cannot tell if they have any right by agreement with their landlord or not other than the right conferred under Lord Cairns' Act.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that under the law the game belongs to the tenants, and in face of that assumption—

Order, order! If the hon. Member states any particular in which the Question has not been fully answered he is at liberty to ask, but—

Under these circumstances, if they go on the land on the 12th August next, will he be responsible for the consequences?

I have answered that. I decline, by any act upon my part, to decide a right which is not before me. If the right, as the hon. Gentleman says, is a clear one, the tenants can prosecute.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the principle on which Irish workhouses are classified; and whether he will grant a Return giving the workhouses at present included' in the various classes under which they are arranged.

There is no classification of workhouses. The Poor Law Commission now sitting was appointed to investigate the question of the amalgamation of workhouses, and the practicability of making better provision for the classification and treatment of the inmates. As a result of this investigation I hope it may be found possible to institute such a classification.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that it is a considerable time since the Land Commission sat at Enniskillen to hear appeals for fixing rents; if he will say when said Commission will next sit, in view of the number of cases awaiting their decision.

The last sitting of the Appeal Court at Enniskillen was in January, 1903. The Appeal Sittings for the Michaelmas term have not yet been arranged, but when settling the circuit the Commissioners will consider whether it is practicable to arrange a further sitting at Enniskillen before the close of present year.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that Mr. A. E. Humphrys, of Lisagoan House, county of Cavan (a justice of the peace), marked judgment against seven of his tenants on an estate near Bawnboy, in the county of Cavan, that these judgments were executed by the sheriff with an escort of constables, and that these judgments were set aside; and, if so, whether he will take steps to protect these tenants from such proceedings at the hands of Mr. Humphrys, in future; and if his action will be brought under the notice of the Lord Chancellor with a view of depriving him of his commission of the peace.

Certain writs of execution for recovery of rent were lodged with the sheriff by Mr. Humphrys for execution against three of his tenants. The sheriff, whose duty it was to execute these, requisitioned police protection. I am not aware whether the judgments on which these writs were issued have been set aside, but, if so, the tenants will no doubt have their legal remedy. It is not the privilege of the sheriff to hold any investigation into the legality of the judgments upon which writs of execution are based. His duty is to execute the writs lodged with him which appear correct, on their face, nor is the Executive entitled to refuse protection on any such ground.

On behalf of the hon. Member for East Mayo, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the estate of Sir Roger Palmer, in county Mayo, has been offered for sale to the Estates Commissioners or to the Congested Districts Board.

The estate in question has not yet been offered for sale to either the Commissioners or to the Congested Districts Board.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been drawn to a report by Dr. M'Carthy, on the 30th May, to the Local Government Board in reference to six dispensary districts composing the union of Enniskillen, namely, that the medical officer's attendance and report books, and the medical relief register of cases and the midwife's register, were not sent to the guardians for examination and that no arrangement has been made for the examination of the dispensary records; is he aware that the guardians, in view of the importance of such examinations, in the interest of the poor, and for the due discharge of the Medical Charities Acts by all officials concerned, on the 12th of August, 1902, requested the Local Government Board to sanction the appointment of local committees, consisting of the guardians representing the dispensary district, the clergymen of all churches, and five ratepayers in each district; the committee to meet monthly, examine the doctor's books, and report to the board of guardians; and, if so, will he, in view of the fact that the doctor's books have not been examined since the passing of the Local Government Act of 1898, and of the difficulty of inducing guardians to remain after the business of the board has terminated, take into consideration the necessity of devising some plan by which an effective examination of the doctor's books may be performed with the least tax on guardians' time.

Section 30 of the Act of 1898 abolished dispensarv committees and transferred their business to the board of guardians. Consequently the Local Government Board was unable to sanction the arrangement proposed in August, 1902. It is open to the guardians under Article 10 of the Dispensary Rules to appoint a small committee of its members for the purposes mentioned in the Question. In the majority of the unions the guardians themselves examine the books. Elsewhere the duty has been delegated to a committee of guardians with satisfactory results.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many landlords owning estates in the congested districts of South Kerry have offered their estates to the Congested Districts Board for resale to the tenants; can he state the terms demanded from the Board; and has the condition of the money market militated against the successful operation of the Land Act of 1903 in the congested districts of Ireland?

Negotiations are pending with eight landlords. Until these have been concluded no statement can be made in respect to the terms. The reply to the concluding query is in the negative.

What has been the price demanded by the landlords?

It would be most improper for me to express any opinion as to the terms, either on one side or the other.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state the number of national school teachers who have received promotion whose record was "fair" for the three years ending 31st March, 1903, together with the number promoted whose record was less than "fair" for the same period.

I am informed that no teachers received promotion whose records were merely "fair" for the three years ended 31st March, 1903, and that no teachers received promotion whose records were less than "fair" for the same period.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, if the Irish Government are about to advance £100,000 for harbour works in the neighbourhood of Belmullet, county Mayo; and, if so, is this sum by loan or grant, and if by loan on what terms; how much has this county received for like purposes since 1883, including the present advance; and what sums have in the same period been advanced to the county of Antrim for similar purposes.

If all the arrangements imposed by statute with the county council, railway company, and other interested parties are, as I trust may be the case, satisfactorily concluded, a sum of over £90,000 may probably be issued in respect of works in Mayo as a free grant under the Marine Works Act of 1902. That Act, in common with the Railways Act of 1896 and the Railways Act of 1890 (Mr. A. J. Balfour's Act) provides for free grants in connection only with counties of which portions are scheduled as congested. No sums under those Acts are applicable to other parts of Ireland, and no comparison can be usefully instituted between such exceptional expenditure in a 'congested' county and ordinary expenditure in an uncongested county, except for the purpose of criticising a policy consistently pursued since the year 1890. The Sea Fisheries Act of 1883 was of general application. Under it Antrim received a free grant of £1,342, and Mayo a free grant of £27,520, and a loan of £2,773. I am inquiring what are the sums granted or lent in respect of county Mayo by the Congested Districts Board under the Act of 1891, and in respect of Antrim from other sources since the year 1883.

As a matter of fact, has the hon. Member informed the right hon. Gentleman of the necessity for a harbour grant for this county?

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of its bearing on the question of University education in Ireland, he will assent to the Return standing on to-day's Paper in the name of the hon. Member for South Down.

No, Sir; I cannot see my way to assent to the proposed Return. It would involve a departure from precedent inexpedient in itself, and ineffective for the object which the hon. Member contemplates, inasmuch as it would take no cognisance of the larger number of officials employed in the various other Departments of the State in Ireland, for which I am not answerable, and the still larger number of Irishmen holding Crown appointments outside Ireland.

Is the objection to granting this Return to be found in the fact that there is a boycott of Catholics in Ireland—

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to a meeting convened by the Board of Works, of proprietors of lands in Lough Leagh district, which was held in the county Antrim Courthouse, Belfast, on 24th June, for the purpose of appointing trustees, not exceeding fifteen in number; whether such meeting was fully advertised beforehand; whether he is aware that when a vote was taken it was found that the proprietors were outweighed by proxies; whether these proxies were obtained and used in a legal manner; and, if not, whether he will order a new election; whether, in view of the present system of administering the Trust by men who are not ratepayers and who do not reside in the flooded district, he will consider the advisability of transferring the powers and duties of the Trust to the local authorities of the several parts of the district comprising the flooded area.

The meeting was convened by the Board of Works and advertised as prescribed by Section 120 of the Act 5 and 6 Vict., cap. 89. The secretary to the drainage trustees states that the proxies were in a majority. I have no reason to suppose that they were obtained or used in an illegal manner. The trustees are elected by the proprietors in the district, who are liable for payment of the rate for maintaining the drainage works. The law imposes no restriction upon the choice of trustees by the electors, and there appears to be no ground for interfering with that choice.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether this Trust is administered by those who are not ratepayers and who do not reside in the district?

I understand the trustees are elected by the ratepayers.

Does the Chief Secretary intend to allow the administration of this Trust by men who have no authority or right to do so?

The matter rests with my hon. friend the Secretary to the Treasury.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Rev. R. D. Patterson, of St. Barnabas Church, Dublin, has on several occasions complained to the police authorities that divine service in his church has been disturbed by the throwing of stones upon the roof, and that the notice board in front of the church has been damaged; and whether, in view of the fact that this clergyman when walking the public street is followed by persons calling him offensive names, he will explain why no action has been taken by the police upon these complaints.

Yes, Sir. Several complaints have been made. The reply which I gave on the 22nd June†was based on reports of communications made to the police by the Rev. Mr. Patterson on the 2nd May and by his Rector, the Rev. Mr. Griffin, on the 5th May. I now find that Mr. Patterson renewed his complaints on the 10th May,

† See(4) Debates, cxxxvi., 812.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Congested Districts Board make it a condition of letting their fish-curing stations on the west coast to fish buyers for the autumn season that the prices paid by buyers must be approved by the Board; if so, will he explain the necessity for it; has objection been made to this condition by any buyer on the ground that it interfered with freedom of bargaining with the fishermen; how many applications have been made for the stations at Porturlin county Mayo; did Mr. S. G. Gott occupy one of these last year; if so, under what conditions; and have any negotiations passed between him and the Board for a sub-letting during the forthcoming autumn.

Such a condition is imposed by the Board. The object is to protect the fishermen against unfair prices being fixed by a merchant who virtually enjoys a monopoly by reason of his having acquired from the Board the only available curing station in the district. No buyer has objected to the condition on the ground stated. Two applications were received this year for the station at Porturlin. Mr. Gott signed the agreement last year; he declined to do so this season.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that, in the case of the McGillycuddy Estate, which is now in the Land Judge's Court and in which an order for sale has been made, a number of tenants including Mr. Jeremiah J. Doyle, of Whitefield, have been excluded from negotiations without any satisfactorv cause; and whether representations will be made to have a sale to all the tenants carried out.

I have been informed that proceedings are in progress for the sale of the entire of this estate, and that it is not the intention of the owner to exclude any tenant who may desire and agree to purchase his holding.

May I point out I am personally aware that this tenant has been excluded?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the Dee Street of Belfast there are over 200 houses without any sanitary conveniences; and whether, in view of the outbreak of smallpox in that city, steps will be taken to induce the Corporation to more efficiently perform its duty under the Public Health Acts.

I am informed by the town clerk that there are only 106 houses in Dee Street, and that all have proper sanitary accommodation. The corporation have taken, and are taking, all necessary steps to carry out their duties under the Public Health Acts, and on Friday last adopted plans at a cost of £40,000 for the more efficient sewering of the two outlying districts recently added to the city.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he will arrange for a daily delivery of letters in the townlands of Readrinagh, Knockdoorah, Meentogues, Stagmount, Gortnaglagh, and Connearagh, between Headfort and Rathmore, county Kerry, seeing that the district is thickly populated and includes two schools.

Enquiry is being made on the subject. When it is completed I will acquaint the hon. Member with the result.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General, if he can explain under what circumstances did the funds at the money order counter in Belfast become exhausted on the 28th ultimo; is he aware that this has happened on several occasions; and whether, in view of the fact that the public were detained pending arrangements being made with the bank, he will give instructions for adequate arrangements for the prompt disposal of the public demands.

I am informed that on 28th June the cash in the hands of one of the clerks at the counter was exhausted by the presentation of a Savings Bank Warrant for a considerable sum. He at once took steps to obtain a fresh supply; and no serious inconvenience seems to have been caused to the public. There does not appear to have been any other case recently in which the funds at the money order counter were exhausted.

But is it not the fact that this has occurred several times, though perhaps not recently?

I am not told so.

It is the case.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will authorise a supplementary mail bag to be despatched from Belfast for London and other English towns, viâ Greenore and Holyhead, by the train leading Belfast at 6.45 p.m., and arriving in London at 7.30 a.m., thus giving the public of Belfast more than an hour extra in which to reply to their English correspondence.

As the hon. Member is no doubt aware there are already three dispatches in the evening from Belfast of London correspondence. It hardly appears that the expense involved for a fourth despatch would be justified. I am, however, in correspondense with the railway companies in regard to an acceleration of the Stranraer service which, if afforded, would, I hope, go far to meet the wishes of the public in Belfast. I may point out to the hon. Member that there is already a later service from Belfast (viâ Fleetwood) than the service viâ Greenore which he wishes to be used, and that letters sent viâ Fleetwood arrive in London in ample time to be answered the same afternoon.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General, if he is aware that letters from Belfast for London viâ Fleetwood are not delivered in the City before 2 o'clock, although they arrive at Euston before 11; and, if so, will he take steps to have an earlier delivery.

The mail from Belfast viâ Fleetwood is due at Euston at 10.50 a.m., too late for the City delivery, commencing at 11.20 a.m. It is accordingly included in the next delivery which begins at 12.20 p.m. and is completed about 2.0 p.m.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Great Southern and Western Railway Company on their line of railway from Gortatlea to Castleisland have removed the gatesman and locked the gate leading to a passage across the line hitherto used by the people of Gurrane,Glounbawn,and Ballymacpierce; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any steps to compel the company to carry out their obligations in this matter.

The Board of Trade communicated with the Great Southern and Western Railway Company on the subject of the Question and learn from them that the company assumes it refers to an accommodation crossing at Glounbawn where the gates have been provided with locks, of which keys are supplied to persons entitled to use the crossing. The hon. Member's Question is not very specific as to the position of the crossing, but if the assumption that it is merely what is called an accommodation crossing is correct the company would not appear to have violated their obligations in this respect.

I will send the right hon. Gentleman a specific statement on the subject.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the amendment of the law on the subject of fraudulent balance-sheets, promised as soon as possible during the debate on 19th February, 1903, will be introduced during the present session.

I should be very unwilling to add to the present programme of the Government, except in relation to Bills which are necessary for administrative reasons, unless the Bill which was added to that programme was of a genuinely uncontentious character. I suppose I may count on my hon. friend's support for the Motion before the House, which will, no doubt, add to the opportunities for Government business.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he promised this Bill a year and a half ago?

If the right hon. Gentleman cannot promise a Bill this session, will he give the House an opportunity of discussing this question on the Vote for the salaries of the Law Officers of the Crown?

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he proposes to proceed with the Finance Bill immediately on the conclusion of the Report stage of the Licensing Bill.

As at present advised I propose to proceed with the Finance Bill when the proceedings in Committee on the Licensing Bill are concluded.

I have to ask the Prime Minister whether he can make any statement as to business, and particularly as to the Supply for Thursday.