laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the ease of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders which are applicable thereto have been complied with, viz.:—Gas and Water Orders Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Hamilton Gas Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]. Ordered, That the Bills be read a second time To-morrow. Bournemouth Corporation (Tramways) Bill [Lords]; Holywood Tramways Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time. Metropolitan District Railway Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; An Amendment made; Bill to be read the third time. West Riding Tramways Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; Amendments made; Bill to be read the third time. Buxton Urban District Council Bill [Lords]. Read a second time, and committed. Leith Corporation Tramways Order Confirmation Bill. Lords Amendments considered, and agreed to. Caledonian Railway Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Glasgow and South Western Railway Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Govan Corporations Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Canal Rates and Charges (Regent's Canal) Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No 5) Bill [Lords]. Read the third time, and passed, without Amendment. Aberdeen Joint Passenger Station Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]; Dumbartonshire (Vale of Leven) Water Order Confirmation Bill [Lords]. Considered; to be read the third time upon Wednesday. Gas Orders Confirmation (No. 2) Bill [Lords]. As amended, considered; to be read the third time To-morrow. Local Government Provisional Orders (No. l3) Bill. As amended, considered; read the third time, and passed. Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 7) Bill. Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table. Bill, as amended, to be considered To-morrow.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the sale of vegetables or fruit to be eaten uncooked has been prohibited in France when they are grown upon sewage farms; whether the attention of any of the Board's inspectors has been called to the importation of such fruit and vegetables from France; and if he will consider the advisability of taking steps to afford some greater security to the English consumer who may purchase them. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I have not received any representations as to the importation from France of fruit and vegetables grown upon sewage farms, and it appears to me that there would be considerable practical difficulty in identifying any produce so grown. I am advised that, speaking generally, vegetables and fruit grown upon sewage farms would not be unfit for food, though uncooked, unless they had been allowed to be in contact with the sewage; and I understand that one of the model regulations issued in France last year would forbid the disposal of matters from cess- pools or sewers on land on the surface of which are cultivated vegetables and fruit intended to be eaten uncooked.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any account has been furnished to the Colonial Office of the expenditure of the £3,000,000 voted by this House for compensation to, and repatriation of, the Boers; whether such expenditure has been audited by any authority responsible to this House; if not, what safeguards have been adopted to secure the application of all the moneys to the purposes for which they were voted by this House. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) The account of the expenditure of £3,000,000 has not yet been furnished. The expenditure will be subject to audit by the Comptroller and Auditor-General, in accordance with the terms of the Vote, but this has not relieved the local Auditor-General of the duty of auditing these accounts in detail, and owing to the fact that the expenditure on repatriation includes very large amounts of loan money in addition to the grant, and to the exceptional circumstances, such as drought and cattle plague, which have greatly prolonged the work, it has not, understand, been possible to complete this Colonial audit. The hon. Member will find explanations in regard to this expenditure at pages 11 and 12 of Cd. 2104.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state what is the nature of the new arrangement under which the Board of Works in Ireland proposes to obtain tenders for the supplies for public institutions. (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) As at present advised, the Board do not propose to alter the arrangements for advertising contracts except in the case of supplies of fuel in the smaller towns. Instead of inserting advertisements in local papers they intend to send notices to the local firms, whose names will be supplied by their officer resident in the district. In this way the necessary publicity will be secured and the expense of advertising avoided.

To ask the secretary to the Treasury if he will state the number of ancient monuments in Ireland inspected by the Board of Works during the last twelve months; the condition in which they were found; the number on which money has been spent in that period and the amount spent on each; and the number of ancient monuments that have come under their charge, or are likely soon to come under their charge, through the operation of the Land Purchase Act of last year. (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) One hundred and seventy-three ancient monuments in Ireland were inspected by the Board of Works during the year ended 31st March last, and were found to be in a generally satisfactory condition. £942 19s. 6d. was spent upon forty-two of the monuments in varying amounts. A list of the buildings repaired each year is published in the annual Reports of the Board. 206 monuments are now under their care. The Act of last year has not yet resulted in any addition to this number, and it is not expected to do so to any large extent, as county councils are empowered by the Local Government Act of 1898 to preserve ancient monuments of local interest.

To ask the Postmaster-General if the Gorey Towns Commissioners have objected to the proposed site for the new post office at Gorey; if so on what grounds; also if he will state where it is proposed to build the new post office; and if any alternative site has been suggested by the Towns Commissioners. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I have received a resolution from the Gorey Town Commissioners objecting to the site suggested by the local postmaster for a new post office at Gorey on the ground that it is not sufficiently central. No alternative site has been suggested by the Commis- sioners, but the fullest consideration will be given to their views before any site is selected. The site already suggested is about 100 yards from the main street in the road leading to the railway station.

To ask the Postmaster-General why the auxiliary postmen in Ireland are not supplied with overcoats as is the case with the men on the regular staff. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) It has not hitherto been considered necessary to provide overcoats for rural auxiliary postmen who work less than five hours a day or for town auxiliary postmen who work less than three hours a day. The rule applies to the United Kingdom and not to Ireland only.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has received a memorial from Mr. Richard Meagher, junior, of Ratmacan, Tullaroan, county Kilkenny, recently; and whether any reply has been forwarded to the same; and, if not, whether he would state the reason why. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) A memorial relating to the postal arrangements of Tullaroan was received in the Dublin Post Office a few weeks ago. This is perhaps the memorial referred to by the hon. Member, though the name of the gentleman by whom it was forwarded does not correspond with that mentioned in the Question. The inquiries on the subject are not yet complete. The surveyor has been called upon for an early report, and I hope soon to be in a position to reply to the memorial.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will state what is the custom of the Post Office in regard to the delivery of letters the address on which might entitle them to be delivered to any one or more persons of the same name residing in a particular locality; and whether he has received any complaints from Ireland in regard to steps have been taken to prevent their the custom referred to. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) A letter bearing an address which applies equally to two or more persons or firms, and leaves it a matter of doubt to whom the letter ought to be delivered, is endorsed "Insufficient Address" and returned to the sender, unless the persons or firms concerned have agreed that all such doubtfully addressed letters should be delivered at the same address. If the hon. Member will be good enough to give me particulars of any special case which he has in mind I will have the matter looked into.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to proposals for a reduction of the class of clerks in the telegraph department, Glasgow, substituting the work of these officers by the employment of messenger inspectors in the delivery branch; and, seeing that representations were made by members of the staff showing the need of additional clerkships on certain duties, to which the late Postmaster-General promised sympathetic consideration, and in view of the stagnation of promotion, whether he will take steps to provide, in the event of reductions in superior appointments taking place, adequate compensation to the staff for the loss of promotion and the abolition of their opportunities to proceed to a higher salary. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am having inquiry made, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he will explain why the officials at the Tain Post Office required persons calling for letters on the 7th instant to fill in a form and pay a charge of threepence before they would undertake to search the caller's box; and, seeing that a similar error was recently proved to have been made at the Cromer Post Office, will he state how these irregular charges originated and what steps have been taken to prevent their recurrence. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I am having inquiry made and will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that forged steel, supplied to the Admiralty for ships purposes under contracts with British firms, is stipulated to be of British-made billets, the Admiralty will take into consideration the desirability of similar practice in respect of brass castings for the same purposes, and stipulate that they be made from copper and tin of British manufacture. (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) This matter has been considered by the Admiral00ty; but, in view of the large demands which would be made upon the inspecting officers in securing the actual carrying out of such a stipulation, the ease with which it could be evaded by contractors, the impossibility of verifying the origin of all materials used by them for such work, and the enhanced cost involved, the Admiralty are not prepared to adopt the course suggested.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he can now state in what cases he will be prepared to sanction the employment as school attendance officers of persons who are also employed by boards of guardians or district councils. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) The question chiefly arises, I think, as regards relieving officers. The general principle upon which the Local Government Board have always acted has been that it is undesirable that a relieving officer should also be an officer of another local authority. Where, however, a relieving officer was a school attendance officer under a board of guardians, and has been transferred to a local education authority, I am willing that the arrangement should continue, subject to its being determined if it should be found to work unsatisfactorily in the particular case. As regards new appointments, whilst I approve of the general principle above mentioned, I do not propose to insist on it where two appointments would involve undue expense, and where, apart from the objection referred to, there seems to be no substantial reason why the two offices should not be held by the same person. I should propose in these cases only to assent in the first instance for a limited time. As a general rule the relieving officer should not be called upon to discharge duties outside his relief district.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the Seamen's and Firemen's Union calculates that some 2,000 British and Irish sailors are now out of a berth in the United Kingdom, while in the last six months no less than 6,407 alien sailors arrived to ship on British boats; and if he can state how many of them were acquainted with the English language and the Merchant Shipping Regulations of the Board of Trade. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I have no knowledge of the estimate attributed to the Seamen's and Firemen's Union, and I do not know on what materials it is based. Monthly returns published in the Labour Gazette indicate that the number of British seamen engaged at the chief ports of the United Kingdom in the first half of the present year has largely exceeded those in the corresponding period of any of the four preceding years. The number of alien seamen arriving in this country, as stated in the Question, includes sailors arriving to ship in foreign as well as in British vessels. The number of these is unknown, but is probably a considerable proportion of the whole. The Answer to the last part of the Question is in the negative.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will state how the matters stand of mak- ing of rules under Section 1, the inspection of railways under Section 13, and the making inquiries and experiments under Section 15 of The Railway Employment (Prevention of Accidents) Act, 1900. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) In my reply to a Question by the hon. Member on the 8th of February,† I mentioned certain experiments to be conducted in connection with the rule proposed as to either-side brakes on goods waggons. These experiments have now been carried out, with the result that none of the brakes tested proved thoroughly satisfactory. Further experiments are in contemplation, and I hope a satisfactory either-side break may be found. A Rule granting the Taff Vale Railway Company some exemption from No. 8 of the Rules of 1902 has been prepared in accordance with the decision of the Railway and Canal Commissioners, and certain objections and suggestions which have been received are being dealt with in the manner prescribed by the Act. Since the 8th February inspections have been ordered of seventy-two stations and sidings in connection with either the lighting thereof or the operation of propping and tow-roping.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will give instructions that all children apprehended in London shall be sent to remand homes pending the disposal of their cases by the magistrates, and in no case be permitted to remain in the police stations, as frequently happens at present. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) I cannot give the instructions suggested in the Question. As the law stands a child arrested after 5 p.m. cannot be taken to the remand homes until he has appeared, next morning, before the magistrate; and, even if the law were different, I doubt whether it would be desirable to send a child a long journey across London in police custody and often at a late hour in order that he might spend one night in a remand home. When a child has to remain for a night at a police station he is always wed treated, and arrangements are made to

† See (4) Debates, cxxix., 583.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his power over the Police Courts of the Metropolis extends so far as to enable him to issue orders for children to be conveyed to remand homes immediately on being charged instead of being detained at the Police Court, and to provide that the charges against them should be heard at a separate time and place from the ordinary police cases, as is done in many of the British Colonies and States of America. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) In reply to the first part of my right hon. friend's inquiry, I would refer him to my Answer to the previous Question, No. 68, in to-day's Paper, asked by my right hon. friend the Member for Oxford University, and the second part was dealt with fully in reply to a Question asked by the same right hon. Member, and circulated with the Votes for the 18th May last.†

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the increasing number of children of school age engaged in street-selling in the City of London; whether the City has made by-laws under The Employment of Children Act, 1903; and, if so, at what date they were submitted to the Home Office; and whether there is any special reason for delay in giving effect to proper by-laws under The Employment of Children Act within the City of London. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) I am informed on inquiry that there has been no appreciable increase in the number of children engaged in street trading in the City. Draft by-laws under the Employment of Children Act

† See (4) Debates, cxxxv., 163.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will grant a Return of the inquests held during the last year in which coroners have called in specialists to perform post-mortem examinations in place of the medical men specified in Section 21 of the Coroners' Act, namely, the medical man in attendance on the deceased or some medical man in actual practice in or near the place where death happened, and a Return of the coroners so acting; and whether he can take steps to insure an uniform practice by coroners in this matter. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Akers-Douglas.) I have no materials in my possession from which such a Return could be framed, and I do not think I ought to ask the coroners throughout the country to make a Return on the subject, which would involve much labour. I have no power, even if I thought it desirable, to require coroners to follow an uniform practice in this matter.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the 500 square miles in the East Africa Protectorate leased to the East Africa Syndicate, or any part of this land, includes grazing land over which the Masai have been in the habit of pasturing their flocks; and, if so, whether the Masai have acreed to surrender this right and have assented to the sale to the East Africa Syndicate; whether, in view of the report of Major Burnham to the East Africa Syndicate that the Kikuya furnish a fairly good quality of labour at the rate of four rupees per month per man, it is intended to lay clown a minimum rate of wage when natives are employed by the East African Syndicate equal at least to that paid to Chinese in the Transvaal. (Answered by Earl Percy.) If the hon. Member will refer to Africa, No. 8 (page 7), he will find that the Answer to the first two paragraphs of his Question is in the affirmative. The Answer to the last paragraph is in the negative.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the circular, recently issued by the chief inspector of taxes to surveyors, suggesting the division of all districts where the collectors of income-tax cannot complete their collections before the 30th April (instead of 30th June as formerly) has been issued with his approval; and whether, in view of the fact that such earlier closing of accounts will involve increased pressure and the making of a number of distraints, arid having regard to the present rate of the income-tax and the depression of trade, he will consider the advisability of postponing any action in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Austen Chamberlain.) No such circular has been issued.

To ask the Secretary of State for India, having regard to the fact that on the 12th April last a petition from Pandit Adya Prasada Misra for the redress of grievances was laid upon the Table of the House, will he state what action has been taken in the matter.

To ask the Secretary of State for India, having regard to the fact that petitions from Bandaru Appala Charyulu and from Muthia Gounden for redress of grievances were laid upon the Table of the House on the 3rd February last, will he state by whom the petitions have been considered, and what decision has been arrived at. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) So far as I am concerned no action has been taken in regard to these petitions, which were not addressed to me. I beg to refer the hon. Member to the Special Report of the Select Committee on Public Petitions, ordered by this House to he printed on the 29th June last.

To ask the Secretary of State for War when it is proposed to move the headquarters of the London Recruiting District from St. George's Barracks; and whether, if there is no prospect of early removal to a new building, some suitable temporary quarters could be procured. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) Negotiations in reference to a site for the new headquarters of the London Recruiting District are now in progress. I have every hope that this will render any provision of temporary quarters unnecessary.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the annual rental value of the realty held by the War Office in Malta for barracks, officers' quarters (including the auberges), and Governor's palaces, for which no rent or other payment is made to the Malta Government; and what is the acreage of land, including bastions and fortifications now disused as such. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) As the Colonial Government have not valued or considered the rent of buildings held by the military authorities without payment no reply can be given to the first part of the Question. As regards the acreage, the area of the old fortifications may roughly be estimated at about 560 acres, but no further detailed information is readily available.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will state the total sums which have been voted by Parliament by way of loan or free grant respectively since the year 1850 to the States now comprised in the Dominion of Canada; to those making up the Commonwealth of Australia; and also to the two self-governing Colonies of South Africa for purposes of railways, or agricultural or mineral development. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) Assuming that the last nine words of the Question apply to the whole of the rest, it is believed that apart from certain Parliamentary grants for "British Columbia," "Vancouver Island," and "Northern Australia," all made previous to the year 1865; some portions of which may have been devoted to the objects specified by the hon. Member, the advance of £400,000 made to the Cape Government in 1885 for the completion of the Kimberley Railway under the authority of the Imperial Act (48 Vict., cap. 7), is the only sum voted by Parliament, either by way of loan or as a free grant, which comes directly within the terms of the Question.

To ask the First Lord of the Treasury when the Home Office Vote will be taken. (Answered by Mr. A. J. Balfour.) I do not think it is possible to make this Vote first order on either of the next two days of Supply; but, subsequently, I will do my best to see what arrangement can be made to meet the hon. Member's request.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will state the number of floggings by caning inflicted on board the ships of war and training ships of the Royal Navy in the years 1900, 1901, 1902, and 1903, with a classification of the offences for which the floggings were inflicted and the age of the offenders who were thus punished.

I regret to be unable to accede to the request of the hon. Member. As intimated in my reply of the 5th July.†.

† See (4) Debates, cxxxvii, 636.

Does the hon. Gentleman understand I ask only for classification and not for particular offences?

Yes, but the hon. Member does not realise that what he asks for would involve an examination of the punishment returns of every ship in the service for a period of four years—a very great labour indeed.

Then is this punishment resorted to for very minor offences?

Order, order!

Then I will put a Question which is perfectly orderly. Why does the hon. Gentleman refuse this information when he has granted it in regard to other kinds of punishment?

Has the hon. Gentleman ever experienced this kind of punishment.

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether an understanding has been arrived at between the British and Russian Governments regarding the British expedition to Tibet, on the basis of an undertaking by Lord Lansdowne that the Mission will be withdrawn from Tibet as soon as its object has been accomplished; that no attempt will be made to enter Lhasa if an agreement can be arrived at before that capital has been reached; that the Russian Government has been assured that if the object of the Mission can otherwise be obtained no occupation of Lhasa is intended; and that the British officials will be withdrawn as soon as they have obtained an agreement on the questions of the delimitations of the boundary and the facilities that will be offered in the future; and whether the Russian Government is understood to be satisfied with these assurances.

With a view to preventing any misunderstanding the Russian Government was informed on June 2nd that His Majesty's Government still adhered to the policy laid down in a telegram to the Government of India of 6th November, 1903 (published at page 294 of the Parliamentary Papers relating to Tibet), though it was obvious that their action must to some extent depend upon the conduct of the Tibetans themselves, and that His Majesty's Government could not undertake that they would not depart in any eventuality from the policy which then commended itself to them; His Majesty's Government stated, however, that, so long as no other Power endeavoured to intervene in the affairs of Tibet they would not attempt either to annex it, to establish a Protectorate over it, or to control its internal administration.

The right hon. Gentleman has referred to the correspondence between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Russian Government. I now ask will he lay it.

I do not propose to lay any Papers.

This a matter of order.

It is quite obvious that it is not necessary to lay the Papers referred to.

But it is usual to publish in extenso Papers which are referred to by Ministers in this House and that should be done in this case.

I have come to a different conclusion.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the officer in command of the Tibetan expedition has definitely decided to at once begin the march on Lhasa; and, if so, has the Chinese Government, as the Suzerain Power, been communicated with, with a view to give its sanction to the advance.

The advance of the Mission to Lhasa has begun, the Tibetans having failed to send competent negotiators to Gyangtse. The Chinese Government has been kept duly apprised of the action of His Majesty's Government in Tibet.

My Question is, have the Chinese Government sanctioned this advance or not?

It is not a case for obtaining Chinese sanction. The negotiations are being conducted with the Chinese and Tibetan representatives and the advance has begun because of the failure of the Tibetans to send competent representatives.

But is not China the Suzerain Power

Yes, it is true China is the Suzerain Power, but it has committed its interests to the Amban, who is taking part in the negotiations.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state whether the various contributions and donations made from India to the Imperial Institute amount altogether to £150,000; whether of this total the sum of £41,309 was appropriated to the endowment fund, the balance having been expended in construction; and, if so, will he state what the income of the endowed sum of £41,309 is per year and in what way it is being spent for the benefit of India; and will he, in future, allocate that sum towards the annual contribution of £1,525 which is now required from the Government of India for the Institute.

The contributions from Indian sources to the Imperial Institute (including those paid into the general fund and subsequent donations for specific purposes) amounted roughly to the sum named in the Question. The contributions to the general fund, amounting to £114,528. were devoted in common with those received from other sources to the erection of the building and the formation of an endowment fund, but I have no knowledge of any definite apportionment of the Indian contribution as between these two objects. The income from the endowment fund is devoted to the general objects of the Imperial Institute as laid down in its Charter, from which it is believed that India derives a substantial benefit. There is no income available for allocation as suggested in the last part of the Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the annual contribution of £1,525 now made from the Indian Exchequer for the research work done at the Imperial Institute was volunteered by the Government of India, or whether they raised any objection in regard to it; and will he place the Papers relating to this payment upon the Table of the House.

The Government of India were consulted, and the amount of the grant was settled with their concurrence at £1,725 a year, since reduced to £1,525 in consequence of establishment changes, for five years ending March, 1906. It provides only £200 a year for research work, the balance representing the establishment and maintenance charges of the Indian section. Papers on the subject are contained in the Annual Report for 1901–2 of the Indian Section, Imperial Institute, presented to Parliament in 1902.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in consideration of the contribution amounting to upwards of £150,000 made by the Government, princes, and people of India to the Imperial Institute, and of the annual payment now made by India, he will move the Board of Trade to arrange for the reception and training of three or four graduates of Indian Universities in the laboratories of the Institute in such chemical research work as is now performed there for Indian purposes.

I am not aware that graduates of Indian Universities desire to be trained in the laboratories, and I have no reason to believe that the laboratories are adopted for instructional purposes. I consequently do not feel it necessary at present to move in the matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consult the head of the laboratories?

I have no objection to communicating with the authorities, but I should first require to be assured that the graduates do desire this training,

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Sub-Commissioner Bagge of the East Africa Protectorate Service, whose views in regard to land grants in the Masai Country were recently sustained by Lord Lansdowne as against those held by Sir Charles Eliot, had, immediately previous to the latter's resignation as Administrator, been removed from his post at Naivasha to the less desirable district of Kisumu; and, if so, whether that official will be reinstated in his former post if, in the opinion of Sir Donald Stewart, there was no adequate cause for such transfer.

The collector at Kisuma was in ill health and he was therefore sent to Naivasha, which is a healthier station than Kisumu. Mr. Bagge was sent temporarily to take his place.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact that a Russian warship, the "St- Petersburg," has overhauled and searched British vessels in or near the Red Sea; and, if so, can he state whether this is the same vessel, also named the "St. Petersburg," that recently passed through the Bosphorus under the Russian commercial flag; and, if so, whether it is in conformity with international law that the same vessel can at one time fly the commercial flag and at another time assert the authority of a warship; and whether this transformation cm take place on the high seas, or whether it is obligatory that a vessel holding a commission as a warship should be commissioned as such in a port of the nation to which she belongs.

The subject to which the hon. Member draws attention is one of the utmost importance and is engaging the earnest attention of His Majesty's Government. As. however, our information is still incomplete on certain points I should be obliged to him if he would postpone the Question.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the correspondence which passed in May, 1902, and June of the present year between the secretary of the Buckland Friendly Society and the Treasury, in which the former complained of income-tax being deducted from the dividends on the society's investments, although the total income was below the statutory limit of £160; and whether any decision has been arrived at by the Treasury as to the exemption of the income of unregistered friendly societies from income-tax where the total income is below £160.

I am consulting the Law Officers of the Crown on the subject. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put the Question down for a later date.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether, seeing that the weekly official Post Office Circular states that candidates for postmasterships are reminded that they are strictly prohibited from applying except through their immediate superior officers, and that applications through any other channel are calculated to defeat rather than promote the object in view; and that the postmaster of Stony Stratford secured his promotion by the help of Lord Kitchener, who is unconnected with the Civil Service, he will direct that when vacancies for postmasterships are next advertised the regulation shall be withdrawn in order to provide equality of opportunity for all postal servants.

The name of the officer who is now postmaster at Stony Stratford was brought officially before the Postmaster-General in 1902 by direction of Lord Kitchener, it respect of services rendered in South Africa under Lord Kitchener's orders, and without reference to any application for a postmastership. The rule to which the hon. Member refers was in no way infringed, and I have no intention of altering it; on the contrary, I mean to enforce it rigorously.

But does the noble Lord consider—in the case of men who cannot get such influential friends to recommend them—that—

Order, order!

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he will state the reason for the transfer of Mr. Kent, postmaster of Cork, to Southampton.

The Southampton vacancy was advertised in the Post Office Circular in the usual way, and I selected Mr. Kent from among the candidates who applied for the post as being in my opinion the best qualified for the appointment.

Will the noble Lord see that an Irishman gets the vacant position at Cork?

No, Sir. These positions are open to the whole service—English, Irish, and Scotch—and I shall always endeavour to select the best men I can for promotion.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state what is the weight of the birches used in the infliction of twelve strokes each, in accordance with the sentence of the magistrate at West Ham Police Court on Wednesday last, on two boys for altering a railway signal at Silvertown Tunnel, which passes through the Royal Albert Docks, the signal being altered from danger to all clear, with the result that the driver entering the tunnel would not lessen speed.

The weight of the birch used on this occasion has been ascertained to be 4¾ ounces.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, after disposing of all the stages of the Bill which gives compensation to brewers and licence-holders, he will introduce his promised Bill to give compensation to workmen for injuries received in their employments where no compensation is now recoverable.

I have not yet received the Report of the Departmental Committee on the Workmen's Compensation Acts, and considering the period of the session we have reached, I can hardly hope to introduce, much less carry, any measure this year.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether in view of the inaccuracy of the statistics admitted by the officials of the Board regarding the number of alien immigrants coming to reside in and of transmigrants passing through this country, he will take steps to improve the method of collecting the figures and classifying the duff rent categories of persons included in the Returns.

The statistics of alien immigration published by the Board of Trade cannot properly be described as inaccurate; they do not profess to show the number of alien immigrants coming to reside in, and of transmigrants passing through, this country, there being no power at present to require these particulars to be furnished. Pending fresh legislation giving additional powers to the Board of Trade, I fear that the method of collecting the figures cannot be materially improved, but the Department is considering the possibility of modifying slightly the form in which the statistics are published, so as to obviate any misunderstanding as to their basis.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been directed to the shifting of motor-bicycle numbers that the riders might escape in case of an accident, and to the evidence in the case of "The King v. Flood," tried by Sir Frederick Falkiner. K.C., the Recorder of Dublin, on 9th July, in which a boy was seriously injured by a motor-bicycle on which there was a fraudulent number; and whether he will, in accordance with the recommendation of the jury in that case, in which the Recorder concurred, initiate legislation to remedy defects in the law regulating the numbering and registration of motors, and to provide that the numbers be incised in or enamelled on the metal portion of the motor.

At my right hon. friend's request, I will reply to this Question. There would be much practical difficulty in giving effect to the suggestion made by the Recorder. The numbers if marked as proposed would not be visible when the motor bicycle was in motion. They would, therefore, have to be in addition to the plate now required to be carried, and if the ownership of the bicycle changed the latter might be altered and would not correspond with the incised or enamelled figures. The penalty for conviction of the offence of using a false number is very heavy and I have no doubt acts as a deterrent.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the practice is growing in Dublin and that several persons have been injured lately.

I quite agree that every effort should be made to render these persons amenable to justice, and the suggestion has been referred to the Local Government Board. There are other checks.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in reply to applications from landlords in Kerry offering to sell their estates, the Congested Districts Board has contented itself with sending a printed acknowledgment of the landlord's communication and has done nothing further; and whether the Contgested Districts Board is prepared to negotiate when the price asked by a landlord is a sum which, invested in any of the stocks which trustees are at Liberty to invest in, would produce an income to the landlord equal to his net income from second-term rents, in view of the fact that such an offer has been made.

Where such an offer is made to the Board, the case is referred to the inspector for investigation and report. The price to be paid for an estate is only one of the elements for consideration in determining whether an offer shall be accepted or rejected. Account is also taken of the circumstances of the tenants and the need, if any, that exists for the enlargement of their holdings.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Mr. William D. Webber, of Mitchelstown, county Cork, landlord of an estate at Leekfield, Skreen, county Sligo, has applied to the Estates Commissioners in connection with the sale of his property; and whether, seeing that the estate in question comprises a large grazing farm which the bailiff, Mr. J. Higgins, is endeavouring to secure for himself, steps will be taken to secure that this farm will in case of sale be used for the enlargement and improvement of uneconomic holdings adjoining it; and whether he will see that in this matter the intentions of Parliament in passing the Land Act of 1903 will be carried into effect.

Yes, Sir; this property is before the Estates Com, missioners. They have satisfied themselves that Mr. Higgins has been a bon a fide tenant in occupation for many years, and are aware of no sufficient reason for dealing with his application differently from other similar applications for advances.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the reply to the request of the Estates Commissioners for particulars of the Westropp Estate, county Clare, by the Judge of the Land Court, was a recital of the steps taken by the Court regarding this estate under the 40th section of the Act of 1896; whether the Commissioners did receive the particulars for which a request was made; and, if so, what steps do the Commissioners propose taking with the view of purchasing the estate.

The particulars have not been received, and the Commissioners are now considering what further steps, if any, they are empowered to take.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have considered the application of Frederick Morris, an evicted tenant from a farm in Collierstown, county Meath; whether the farm is untenanted; and what action, if any, the Commissioners have taken with the view of purchasing the farm on behalf of the evicted tenant.

The estate containing this holding has not yet come before the Estates Commissioners. An application has been received from the evicted tenant and will be duly considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Lord Chancellor of Ireland has considered the action of Mr. James Shanks in signing a licence certificate for a canteen situated in the county Wicklow, Mr. Shanks not being a magistrate for that county, and the local magistrates having refused to grant the licence on the ground that the canteen had been conducted in a disorderly manner; and whether he can now state what decision the Lord Chancellor has come to in regard to Mr. Shanks' action.

The correspondence in this matter is not yet concluded.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any, and, if so, what arrangements have been made for the introduction of the Bertillon system into Irish prisons; whether it is intended to apply it in the cases of untried prisoners and of political prisoners; and, if not, whether steps will be taken to expressly warn untried prisoners that they are not bound to submit to the tests.

The system of taking measurements and finger prints has been adopted in Irish as in English prisons. In the case of an untried prisoner the statutory regulations provide that if no objection is made by him the measurements and finger impressions may be taken in the prescribed manner on the application of a policy officer. There is no class of prisoners known as "political prisoners" and the regulations in force are identical with the English regulations. First-class misdemeanants are exempt from the regulations. The object of the system is to establish the identity and antecedents of prisoners. The identity of persons charged with offences falling within the category to which the hon. Member presumably refers is not a matter of doubt, and obviously, therefore, it would be unnecessary for the police to ask that their finger prints should be taken. There are no such prisoners in Ireland and the question of warning them, or the police, in the sense suggested, does not arise for consideration.

Will steps be taken to expressly warn untried prisoners that they are not bound to submit to the test

I do not think any such action is necessary.

Then will the right hon. Gentleman see that instructions are, given to the prison warders not to take photographs of untried prisoners. It can be done whether the prisoner consents or not. The police are very expert at that.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieuten ant of Ireland where is Constable Anderson, who was one of the three constables who received an indemnity at the secret investigation which preceded the dismissal of Sergeant Sheridan for procuring by perjury the conviction of innocent men for crimes perpetrated by himself, who was allowed to remain on at the depot of the Royal Irish Constabulary and discharge the duties of a constable of that force, not withstanding the fact his being Sheridan's accomplice in the fabrication of perjured evidence and the perpetration of crime; why was not Anderson compelled to resign like the two other accomplices of Sergeant Sheridan, Keegan who received a compassionate grant of £200; and Reid who received a compassionate grant of £50: does Anderson still wear the uniform of the Royal Irish Constabulary and receive the pay of a constable of that force, and under what circumstances has he been permitted to retain his position; and what safeguard have the public against this person.

This constable is still serving at the depot in Dublin under the conditions previously explained by me. The hon. Member will find information on the other matters in the numerous statements made by me in the session of 1902.

The right hon. Gentleman gave a pledge that this man should not be associated with young recruits.

Any undertaking given by me is being adhered to. I gave no such pledge, however.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this man is brother of the Anderson of Kiltimore fame?

Order, order!

I will put that Question down.

The hon. Member must not put down an irregular Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the four head constables stationed in Cork are Roman Catholics; and, if so, whether he will consider the advisability of enforcing the regulation that at least one of them should be a Protestant.

It was recently arranged that one of the head constables should be transferred to another county, and the man selected to replace him is a Protestant. There is no regulation to the effect stated in the Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ire- land whether he is aware that the written statement of the Reverend Father Gleeson to Sir Antony MacDonnell demanding the transfer of Sergeant Ryan and Constable Laidley from Roundstone was refused to the latter in the first: instance; and that, after repeated appeals from the men to be heard, the district inspector was ordered to hear them; and, if so, will he state the result of their evidence.

I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Reverend Father Gleeson, P.P., of Roundstone, county Galway, wrote a statement to Sir Antony MacDonnell, and demanded the removal of Sergeant Ryan and Constable 1Laidley from his district; and that a secret inquiry was held by the district inspector which resulted in the transfer of Constable Laidley and the sergeant being threatened with reduction from his rank; and, if so, will he cause an inquiry to be held in this case.

Both Questions refer to the same incident which occurred nearly a year ago. The Rev. Mr. Gleeson wrote to the Under-Secretary on the 17th August last, and complained of the conduct of Sergeant Ryan and Constable Laidley in respect to a display of flags and banners from licensed premises at Roundstone. The rev. gentleman did not demand the removal of the men. The Under-Secretary referred the complaint to the Inspector-General. The district inspector to whom the complaint was referred by the Inspector-General, made a report on it, and the county inspector in submitting the report recorded his personal opinion of the action of the sergeant and constable. The Inspector-General saw no reason to differ from the view of the county inspector, and his opinion to this effect was communicated to the men concerned. The sergeant was at the same time informed that if ho acted in a similarly indiscreet way in future the Inspector-General would consider him unfitted for his rank. The constable was not warned for removal in connection with this incident. As a matter of fact, the Inspector-General's decision to remove the constable was written on the 15th August, two days before the Rev. Mr. Gleeson made his complaint. The sergeant and constable represented to the district inspector that he had not given them an opportunity of explaining their action, and the county inspector of his own motion considered their explanations. These were forwarded to headquarters, and as a result the sergeant was exonerated from blame by the Inspector-General. In reply to the concluding query, I do not propose to intervene in a matter affecting discipline, with which the Inspector-General is competent to deal, and with which, as a matter of fact, he dealt nearly a year ago.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state when the promised inspection of Major Fox's estate at Ballymacrossin, King's County, will be made; and whether due notice will be given of such inspection to the evicted tenant, Miss Masterson, who is claiming reinstatement under the Land Purchase Act of last session.

A date cannot be fixed. The Inspector will make his inspection as soon as possible. He will inform the evicted tenant of the date.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have approached Langford, who is in possession of the farm upon the estate of Major Fox, Ballymacrossin, King's county, from which Miss Masterson was evicted in 1884, with a view to his surrendering the holding upon payment of reasonable compensation; and if he can state how long Langford has been in possession.

The reply to the first part of the Question is in the negative. Langford's tenancy is described as a leasehold created prior to 1st January, 1901; I am unable to say how long he has been in possession. He has lodged an agreement to purchase the holding, and the inspector will report what arrangement can be made to provide the evicted tenant with a holding.

Was this farm sold with the other property in order that they might grab Miss Masterson's farm?

I have no knowledge of that.

It is the fact.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the recent police inquiries in the district, he can state if, in the four town-lands along the road leading from Moy to the station at Trew and Moy, the population consists of thirty-four Catholic families, including 134 persons, and fifteen families, including fifty-four persons, of all other denominations; whether he is aware that on 15th August, 1898, two Nationalist bands proceeded by this route and that no disturbance occurred; whether he can state on what grounds the road has been closed against processions since that date; and whether, in view of the inconvenience to which some of the contingents will otherwise he put on 15th August, he will give Instructions to have the road open on that date.

There are ten town-lands between Moy and the station known as Trew and Moy. The proportion of Catholics to persons of other religious denominations in this area is as one to five. The proportion is reversed in two other townlands which adjoin the road, but in the aggregate the Catholics are in a minority. One Nationalist hand proceeded to the station in August, 1898. But the intention to do so was concealed, and a large hostile crowd assembled at Trew in the evening. The band returned, however, by road from Dungannon. With this exception, I understand that no Nationalist demonstration has either entrained or detrained at Trew during the past forty-five years. The hon. Member is doubtless aware of the melancholy fatality that occurred in a railway train at this station in 1875. In reply to the concluding inquiry, I have nothing to add to my statement in answer to his previous Question of Monday last.†

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Belturbet Urban Council applied for a loan to erect artisans' dwellings in the year 1899, and made a second application last year; and, if so, whether, seeing that the usual inquiry has not yet been held, and having regard to the want of suitable housing accommodation in Belturbet and the delay in dealing with this matter, he will take steps to secure an early inquiry.

The housing scheme of 1899 was accompanied by proposals for a water supply and street improvement. The carrying out of the latter works would have almost exhausted the council's borrowing powers, and the Local Government Board suggested a reconsideration of the proposed housing scheme. In the opinion of the Board, the provision of a proper water supply to replace the polluted water at present in use, is of primary importance to the district. The Board is in communication with the council on the subject.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have, in the case of the division of grazing lands or untenanted lands, made any provision for economic holdings for the herds, or members of the families of the herds, who worked on those grazing lands; and, if so, if he can state in how many cases such provision has been made since the passing of The Irish Land Act, 1903, up to the 30th June last.

Advances have been made in two such cases. Other cases are under consideration.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary

† See (4) Debates, cxxxvii., 1212.

The Land Commissioners hope to be able to arrange a sitting for the hearing of appeals in Tipperary during the present year. I am informed that no threats have been held out to tenants such as alleged in the Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether Dr. Starkie, who is in receipt of £1,500 from the Irish Primary or Education Board as a paid commissioner, acted with his sanction in absenting himself from his duties in the Education Office, Dublin, while accompanying Messrs. Dale and Stephens over the country on the business of another, the Intermediate Board; whether Dr. Starkie, during the period of such abstention from the duties of his office, drew his salary out of the National Education Vote, together with his expenses of support and locomotion; and, if so, to what extent from May last to the present date.

Dr. Starkie mentioned to the Under-Secretary that he had been invited by Messrs. Dale and Stephens to accompany them. As a member of the Board of Intermediate Education he had a right to visit intermediate schools, and the sanction of Government is unnecessary to his making such visits. The reply to the second part of the Question is in the affirmative. I have no information as to the duration of his absence from Dublin.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Local Government Board has been directed to the recent decision of the Court of King's Bench in the case of "Hastings v. Beegan"; whether the Local Government Board can explain why the Application of Enactments Order applying to this matter differs from Sub-section (c) 2, Section 46, of the 56 and 57 Vic., cap. 73; and whether it is the intention of the Local Government Board to issue an amending order assimilating the law of the two countries in this respect.

The case intended to be referred to is presumably "Hastings v. Cogavin." The decision turned on the interpretation of the expression "Public work" in the concluding lines of Article 12 (4) (e) of the Application of Enactments Order. These lines do not occur in the corresponding English enactment, Section 46 (1) (e) of the Local Government Act, 1894, because the procedure in relation to public works is quite different in England. The law, therefore, does not require assimilation, but in any case there is no power vested in the Board to amend the Application of Enactments Order.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state in how many cases during the last five years sentences of imprisonment without option of fine have been imposed by benches of magistrates in the county Roscommon, on charges preferred by the police for alleged cruelty to animals; and who was the resident magistrate chairman at the petty sessions Court where such a sentence was imposed.

This information will be procured, but some days must elapse before it is ready. It will be communicated to the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that one of the committees, composed of five Catholics and five Protestants, appointed to administer the provisions of the Compulsory Education Act in Dungannon Rural District, has, after a number of meetings, failed to agree as to the choice of a chairman; and that, as a means of solving the difficulty, the secretary of the Tyrone County Council suggested the casting of lots for the position, which suggestion the Protestant members refused to adopt; and if he will state what action is proposed to be taken to remove the deadlock at present existing to the working of the Act in this portion of the district affected.

It is a fact that the school attendance committee failed to agree in respect to the selection of a chairman. The local authority for the purposes of the Irish Education Act, 1892, is the county council, and in February last the Commissioners of National Education informed the council that it was competent to that body to submit for approval a regulation designed to provide a settlement of the difficulty. No reply has been received from the council in the matter and the Commissioners have no authority under the Act to determine the question.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he has received a joint protest from the proprietors of the Northern Whig and the Belfast News Letter, complaining of delay in the transmission of their telegrams by the Post Office; and, if so will he order an inquiry to be made into the circumstances of these delays.

The communication referred to has been duly received and the matter is under investigation.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he will state what is the period of probation for female learners in the post offices in Dublin and Belfast; what is the remuneration given to such learners during the probationary period and afterwards; whether the same conditions as to probation and payment apply to the rest of Ireland outside Dublin and Belfast, or, if not, in what the difference consists.

The situation of female learner in Dublin and Belfast is not an established one, and the appointment is not, therefore, subject to a fixed period of probation, but the whole service as learner is regarded as probationary; promotion to the established class of sorting clerks and telegraphists is not made unless the service as learner is satisfactory. The pay of female learners is 5s a week. On obtaining an established appointment the pay is increased to 10s. a week or upwards, according to length of unestablished service and qualifications. The same conditions apply to the paid learners at all other offices in Ireland and elsewhere.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that there is no Sunday delivery of letters in the district of Galway and Crosspatrick, county Kilkenny; that there is no delivery there from Saturday morning till Monday morning, and that letters reaching Johnstown by the midday and night mails on Saturday, and by the mail on Sunday morning, have to lie in the post office until Monday morning before being delivered; and, if so, whether, seeing that other districts with a smaller population have the benefit of a Sunday delivery, and in view of the small extra expense involved, he will endeavour to meet the wishes of the people of the Johnstown sub-district by instituting a Sunday delivery forthwith.

I will have inquiry made on the subject, and will acquaint the hon. Member with the result. May I ask that in such cases as this I shall have more notice. I cannot possibly investigate the facts at such short notice.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what regiment now occupies the Shamble Barracks, Galway; and how many men live within the building.

Ten non-commissioned officers and men of the Connaught Rangers live in these barracks with their families.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury when it is proposed to exchange the ratifications of the Convention between England and France of 8th April, 1904, relative to Newfoundland, the Gambia, the Isles de Los, the Niger and Lake Chad; in case the Convention should not be ratified, will the stipulations it contains in Articles IV. to VIII. as to the Gambia, the Isles de Los, the Niger, and Lake Chad become inoperative as well as the stipulations in Articles I. to III. as to Newfoundland; and have any steps been, or are any being, taken to carry out the Articles IV. to VIII.

As soon as the necessary legislation has been passed between the two countries steps will be taken with a view to ratification as contemplated in Article IX. of the Convention. The Answer to the second Question is in the affirmative—that is to say, the stipulations will become inoperative. The Answer to tile third Question is in the negative, no steps have been taken.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury are the two Declarations, one respecting Egypt and Morocco and the other concerning Siam, Madagascar, and the New Hebrides, essential parts of the Agreement with France represented by those two Declarations and by the Convention of 8th April. 1904, relating to Newfoundland the Gambia, and the Niger; and is it understood between His Majesty's Government and the French Government that the two Declarations will retain their effect and be carried into execution even in case the Convention fails to be ratified.

I do not think it will be very desirable to discuss a contingency which is not, I think, probable—which I firmly believe will not arise.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury have the Government of Newfoundland made any representations to His Majesty's Government or raised any difficulties affecting the rights conceded to the French under Article II. of the Anglo-French Convention of 8th April, 1904, in respect of Newfoundland local regulations as to bait, fishing, or access to ports on the so-called French shore, or in respect of the policing of the fishing; and was any agreement come to by His Majesty s Government with the Government of Newfoundland on these points before the Convention was signed.

No representations have been made to His Majesty's Government. The concurrence of the Newfoundland Government was obtained during the course of the negotiations.

Was any agreement come to with the Government of Newfoundland on these points before the Convention was signed?

I have said that the concurrence of the Newfoundland Government was obtained.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he can now say definitely when the Colonial Office Vote will be taken.

I am afraid I am not in a position to give the hon. Gentleman a definite answer. I rather think, from rumours which have reached me, that he suspects me of some sinister intention to postpone this Vote unduly.

I have no such idea.

I can assure him I am anxious to consult the convenience of hon. Members.

Take it on Thursday, then.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the general support on both sides of the House accorded to the Criminal Aliens Bill he can provide the necessary facilities for its passage.

I understand that in the course of the proceedings of the Committee upstairs some sort of compact, not distantly resembling this, was suggested, but that it was rejected by the Committee. It was understood that the very lengthy, talkative opposition to the Bill would cease if some kind of compact of a character resembling this was accepted, but that suggested transaction was rejected by the majority of the Committee. [OPPOSITION cries, "By the Government."] By the majority of the Committee. I also understand that this particular proposal is objected to by some Gentlemen on the ground that it goes too far and by others on the ground that it does not go far enough; in these circumstances to expect the passage of the Bill in the course of the present session appears to me hopeless.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the magnitude of the public and private interests involved and of the grave injury arising from uncertainty and delay, he will now say definitely whether the Port of London Bill will be proceeded with or whether it may be considered as abandoned, and in that case when its discharge from the Order-book will be moved.

I have already told the hon. Gentleman that the prospects of this particular Bill seem to me exceedingly gloomy, but I cannot give him the date when we shall remove it from the Order Paper.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman say something more definite in view of the fact that the uncertainty is a very grave matter from a commercial point of view?

No, I do not think the uncertainty has any ill effects. I think the non-passage of the Bill may have ill effects, but not the uncertainty, which does no harm whatever.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when the Report stage of the Shop Hours Bill will be taken.

May I also ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Shop Hours Bill passed through Grand Committee in two sittings; and whether he can say when the Report stage can be taken.

While I cannot fix a date when the Report stage of the Shop Hours Bill will be taken, I should hope that opportunity will be found for taking the remaining stages of what I believe to be wholly an uncontroversial measure.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the desire expressed by the late President Kruger that his body should be interred in the burial place of his family in the Transvaal will be allowed by the British Government to be fulfilled.

No request of the kind alluded to has been received from President Kruger's family, but I need hardly say that were it received we should do our best to give effect to it.

Have the Government considered the desirability of offering a warship for the transport of the body to South Africa?

Order, order! That Question hardly arises.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can state when the consideration of the proposals of the Secretary of State for War for the reduction of the land forces of the Crown will be resumed.

I hope to take both this Vote and the Colonial Vote in the course of next week, but I cannot give any pledge at present.

I presume the right hon. Gentleman intends to give an entire day to the Army Vote.

No, I certainly cannot give a pledge of that character, but it will be put down as the first Order.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that, owing to the discussion of a very important private Bill last Thursday, the War Office Vote only occupied four and three-quarter hours, of which two and a quarter hours were occupied, very properly, by the Secretary for War himself?

I have no grounds for doubting the hon. Gentleman's calculation.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, having regard to the fact that the Report of Sir E. Bradford's Committee has been laid upon the Table, when the Post Office Vote will be taken.

I am afraid I must give as unsatisfactory a reply to my hon. friend as I have given to an hon. Member opposite. I am not yet in a position to fix the date. I believe a certain interval has been promised before the debate is taken.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain how it is that this Report was in the hands of the newspapers last Friday, although it is not yet available for Members of this House?

I think I can explain that. There was one advance copy in print, and I sent it down here to the Vote Office believing the House would order the printing of the Report at once. I find I ought to have sent it to the Stationery Office and have had it printed from there. Having discovered my mistake I have given instructions to the Stationery Office to print it as soon as possible and place it in the hands of hon. Members. I hope my right hon. friend will carry out the pledge that the discussion on this Vote shall not take place until the Report has been in the hands of hon. Members a fortnight.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this practice of ignoring the claims of the House to see these Reports is growing more and more, and that hon. Members are thus ignored?

In this case it is entirely my own fault. I sent it down here myself under the impression that I was doing something for the benefit of hon. Members.

You sent this copy to the Vote Office, but how did the public Press get access to it?

I am afraid that I am not responsible for what happens in the Vote Office. I sent it there, and I should have recalled it before anybody had seen it, had I known it was wrong to send it.

Do I understand that the copy which was sent to the Vote Office was the one which was sent to the representatives of the Press?

That was the only copy that I know of that came down.

How did it get to Printing-house-square?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give approximately the date when the discussion will be taken?

I should be very glad to satisfy my hon. friend if I could, but he will see that in the present state of public business I can give no pledge.

In view of the difficulty of preventing the Press getting these Reports, would it not be better to remove the restrictions altogether?

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether the Government intends to follow the same course of procedure with regard to their present Army Organisation Scheme as they did with regard to their last scheme of 1902, and to submit a Resolution of approval for the consideration of the House.

I imagine the Question in which the hon. Member is interested would be in order upon the War Office Vote, end I hope an opportunity on that Vote will be found to deal with it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman invite the opinion and the Vote of the House upon the merits of this scheme as was done in regard to the last?

If the hon. Member is suggesting that I should devote a day outside Supply and put down a separate Resolution, my reply is that I do not propose to take that course.

Does the right hon. Gentleman contemplate fixing both the War Office Vote and the Colonial Vote for the same day?

No, Sir. I said there would be two days.

I would ask the Prime Minister whether he will give a day for the discussion of a Motion, which will be placed on the Paper in the course of this evening, calling attention to and complaining of "The action of certain members of His Majesty's Government who have accepted official positions in an association which has formally declared its adhesion to a preferential fiscal policy involving the taxation of food."

Of course, it is not for me to judge as to whether the subject of the vote of censure which I understand the right hon. Gentleman proposes, is wise or unwise, in accordance with practice or the reverse. I raise no objection to that. Such Motions must obviously be in favour of the side which is least divided on matters of important policy. While I am not at all puzzled as to whether I should or should not accede to the right hon. Gentleman's request, I am a little puzzled as to the method in which I can most conveniently carry it out in the present position of public business. I think it is in the highest degree important that we should finish the Licensing Bill so as to send it up to another place by the 26th inst. at the very latest. It is necessary that the Budget should be passed by the House of Commons on the 29th, and even if it passed its last stage on the 29th, that would involve a Saturday sitting on the part of the House of Lords.

Oh! [Ironical cries of "Shame" by hon. Members.]

It would involve a Saturday sitting on the part of the House of Lords in order that it might become law before 1st August, which is necessary. We must also take two days in Supply in the course of the present fortnight. I do not see how I can take Thursday in this week for that purpose; it will have to be devoted to other business, and it will therefore be necessary to take two days for Supply in the course of next week. If the right hon. Gentleman will consider all these facts together I think he will see that I am driven to one of two alternatives. If the House will consent to finish the Committee stage of the Budget Bill to-night ["Oh"]—it is but a hypothesis—then I could give Thursday for the vote of censure. But I am afraid, if the Committee does not take that course, I see no alternative but to put off the vote of censure till the first week of August.

asked whether, before the vote of censure came on, the Prime Minister would circulate the memorandum with reference to dear food which he laid before the Cabinet.

I desire to ask the Secretary for War a Question of which I have given private notice—namely, whether the name of Lord Dundonald is on the active list of the War Department, whether his services were dispensed with by the Canadian Government, whether it has come to the knowledge of the War Office that Lord Dundonald has been making inflammatory speeches in Canada against the Government of Canada at meetings, largely attended by the Opposition, at which he was cheered and hooted by the various Parties.

I hope the hon. Member's Question does not continue in the same tone, because these controversial expressions are not admissible.

I only desire further to ask whether the Secretary for War was warned that the action of Lord Dundonald would be resented and would greatly endanger the loyal feeling of the Dominion towards this country.

The hon. Member must feel that his Question is one which cannot be answered without fuller notice in the absence of my right hon. friend.