To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if his attention has been called to the fact that the executors of a deceased gentleman domiciled in New Zealand, after having paid estate duty at the rate of 10 per cent. in New Zealand in respect of certain New Zealand securities, have been compelled to pay estate duty again in England at the rate of 5 per cent. in respect of the same New Zealand securities, making a total estate duty of 15 per cent.; and whether, with a view to the reciprocal operation as between this country and the Colonies of Section 20 (Sub-sections 1 and 3) of the Finance Act, 1894, he will take such steps or make such representations as will prevent such double payment. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) My attention has been called to a recent case of the nature referred to by the hon. Member, and I am in communication with the Government of New Zealand on the subject.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will present to Parliament the recently issued Report of the South African Commission on Native Affairs. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Lyttelton.) I propose to lay the Report in the form in which it has recently been published in South Africa.

To ask the hon. Member for West Salford, as Church Estates Commissioner, if he will state the total administrative expenses (including legal expenses and fees to architects and surveyors) of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England in each of the financial years from 1890 to 1904, both inclusive, and the income of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in each of the said years. (Answered by Sir Lees Knowles.) The information desired is, in relation to each financial year of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, contained in their Annual Report laid before both Houses of Parliament. For the years mentioned in the

To ask Mr. Attorney-General, with reference to the statement made on behalf of the then Government, July 12th, 1897, that it was their intention to turn the compensation warrant as to Crown workmen into a scheme under the Workmen (Compensation for Accidents) Act, whether the scheme under the Act is still in force, and will be reconsidered in connection with any changes to be introduced by the Government Bill of the present session. (Answered by Mr. Victor Cavendish.) The scheme accepted by Government workmen under Section 3 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1897, is still in force. Before any new scheme is proposed for their acceptance full consideration will be given to any alterations that

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to an advertisement of a patent whistle for motor-cars louder than a railway whistle, which can be heard half-a-mile ahead; and whether he can take any steps to prevent the use of an apparatus of that kind. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I have not seen the advertisement referred to by my hon. friend, and I do not at present see my way to take any steps in the matter.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the legislation promised on the subject of the unemployed, he will advise the Central Mansion House Committee to prepare a Report, to be presented to Parliament, giving a detailed account of their proceedings, and of the results as yet obtained. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I contemplated that the Central Committee would make a Report, and I understand that preparatory steps for this purpose are being already taken. I fear, however, that some time must necessarily elapse before a detailed Report could be presented to Parliament.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether under the proposed electrical equipment on the District Railway there will only be one motor-man to each train; whether, having regard to the safety of the public, he will take steps to secure that there be two motor-men to each train. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) I am informed by the railway company that every electrical train, whether of seven, four, or three cars, on the District Railway will, in addition to the motor-men, have one or more men who will be thoroughly instructed in the control of the motors. It may be added that the effect of the withdrawal of the motorman's hand from the lever would simply be to cut off the current and stop the train. As a further precaution, if a train passes a signal set at danger it will instantly be stopped through the automatic application of the brakes. I see no reason to take any action in the matter.

To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can state what part, if any, of the Kingston Estate is excluded from the five sections into which the vendor has applied to the Estates Commissioners to have the estate divided; and if he will give the names of the townlands comprising each section respectively, and the number of tenants in each such proposed separate estate who have signed the purchase agreements; lodged with the Estates Commissioners. (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) The Commissioners have declared all the lands comprised in certain specified townlands to be four separate estates. There are nearly 200 of these townlands, and I do not consider that any useful purpose would be served by enumerating them. The agreements to purchase have not yet been checked, and until this has been done the number of tenants included in each separate estate cannot be given. It is understood that the vendor proposes to include the remainder of the property in a fifth originating application.

To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he is aware that, on the 9th ultimo, the refusal of Sergeant Booth of the C Division to investigate the theft of £5 belonging to a man called Hannah, was reported to the Commissioner of the Dublin Metropolitan Police in writing; whether, seeing Hannah occupies apartments in Sergeant Booth's house and that other thefts of money belonging to Hannah were traced by the sergeant to his son, he will state why the Commissioner has not replied to Hannah's complaint and no action has been taken in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) Hannon, who was a lodger in the house of Sergeant Booth, received notice to quit on January 2nd. A few days subsequently he stated to the sergeant that a £5 note had been abstracted from a box belonging to his father, and demanded that the sergeant should investigate the alleged theft. The sergeant considered it would be indiscreet for him to take up the case, and requested Hannon to report the matter at the police station, with a view to its investigation independently by another officer. Hannon neglected to take this course, and took no further action until February 9th, when he made a written report to the Chief Commissioner. The police have not yet succeeded in tracing the missing note or in obtaining any information which would corroborate Hannon's account of the reported loss. Hannon is aware that inquiry is being made, and he will be informed of the result in usual course when the inquiry has been completed. The Chief Commissioner is not aware of any foundation for the insinuation in the Question that the sergeant's son, who is a boy under ten years of age, has been guilty of any theft of money.

To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can state what is the average Dumber of men in the Royal Irish Constabulary in charge of a county and district inspector respectively; and will he say whether the two officers by which the force has been reduced since August, 1903, were county or district inspectors. (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) The average number of men in charge of a county inspector (including the force in Belfast) is 261. The average number of men in charge of a district inspector is forty-eight. The two officers by which the force has been reduced since August, 1903, were district inspectors.

To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if he is aware that Mr. Barnewell Crofton, Local Government Board Inspector, held an inquiry in the Board Room of the Athlone Union on July 9th last, and approved of the erection of eight labourers' cottages, and that on the next day he visited the sites and approved of them; and, if so, will he say what is the cause of the delay in erecting the cottages; and will the plots be given to the labourers this spring in order that they may be fenced in and potatoes planted. (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) The Provisional Order, authorising the erection of six of the eight cottages proposed, became absolute on the 21st ultimo, and the rural district council are now in a position to apply for a loan to put the scheme in respect of these six cottages into effect. The remaining two cottages were petitioned against, and the council have abandoned their intention to provide them.

To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if he will give the number of national school teachers in Ireland promoted from third to second grade, second to second of first grade, and second of first to first section of the first grade respectively, for the triennial period ending March 31st 1903; and of the number thus promoted how many up to the present time have been advanced to a higher class pension scale. (Answered by Mr. Atkinson.) For the triennial period ended March 31st, 1903, 580 teachers were promoted to the second grade, 113 to the second of first grade, and 55 to first of first grade. In 601 of these cases the question of pension advancement does not arise, inasmuch as the teachers interested were not promoted to a grade higher than their previous respective classes. In the remaining 147 cases the teachers were promoted to a grade higher than their previous classes.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has received a memorial in favour of a pillar letter box being placed at Redford-Moy, county Tyrone; and if he can remove the grievance of a large district in regard to the posting of letters. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) An application has been received for the erection of a letter box at Redford near Moy, and inquiries are now being made on the subject.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the post of chief telegraph superintendent has been vacant at Bristol since February, 1904; and, if so, whether, in view of the recommendation of the Tweedmouth Committee that vacant superior appointments should be filled without delay, and the stoppage of promotion in the Telegraph Department, he will direct that the necessary appointment be made speedily. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The vacancy is not an ordinary one, but is caused by the creation of a new and important appointment. Matters relating to the telegraph department at Bristol have required special consideration, and I have not yet been in a position to select a thoroughly suitable officer to fill the vacancy, but I hope to be able to do so very shortly,

To ask the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that a new regulation will come into force on March 15th requiring letters bearing the late fee of an extra halfpenny stamp to be posted in a special box at a post office instead of as at present in any pillar box, he will, in the interest of the public convenience, consider the advisability of retaining the existing facilities of posting. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) Owing to the enormous growth of the correspondence falling into the 7 p.m. collection in the central districts of London it is not now possible in the short time available to pick out all the letters, etc., bearing a late-fee stamp if they are posted in the same box as other letters. The result is that some of them fail to be selected in time for inclusion in the mails for which they are intended. To obviate this I have reluctantly been compelled to restrict the posting of these late-fee letters to special boxes which have been provided at all post offices in the districts affected.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he will give a Sunday post between Belturbet and Milltown, county Cavan, and, if necessary, even withdraw one of the ordinary week-day deliveries, seeing that Sunday is availed of almost exclusively for country correspondence, and that it is the day on which American letters, local newspapers, etc., are due to arrive. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) I will make inquiry on the question of establishing a Sunday post between Belturbet and Milltown, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member in due course.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether his attention has been called to a leaflet issued by the Emergency League in which it is stated that Circular 512 sent out by the Board of Education is practically a dead letter, and the League is prepared to defend any case of prosecution under it; and whether he is ready, under these circumstances, to support authorities in enforcing the demands of the circular. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) My attention has been called to the leaflet in question. There is no ground for the statement there contained that Circular 512 is a dead letter. The Circular sets out the interpretation placed by the Board upon the Education Acts so far as they relate to school attendance, and conveys certain instructions to inspectors. The Board have not departed and will not depart from that interpretation or from those instructions.

To ask the Secretary to the Board of Education whether the managers of a public elementary school have any right to refuse admission to a child on the ground that the parents do not reside within the area of the local authority in which the school is situate, assuming, always that there is room in the school for such child. (Answered by Sir William Anson.) The fact that a child does not reside in the area of the local education authority in which the school is situate is not of itself a ground upon which the managers of a public elementary school would be justified in refusing to admit the child. Where, however, children of one, area attend a school maintained by the local education authority of another area in such numbers as to entail a serious charge upon the rates, the Board consider that the maintaining authority would be justified in directing the managers to exclude such children, unless the authority within whose area they reside agrees to contribute a proportionate sum to the maintenance of the school.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the information received from Canada, Germany, and other countries respecting the working of legislation against gambling in options and futures is available for Members of the House; and, if not, whether it will be printed and circulated. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) If the hon. Member cares to call at the Board of Trade he can see the information that has been received on this subject.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if, seeing that under the existing tariff law of the United States the President has authority to enter into treaties of reciprocity with Canada, Newfoundland, the British West Indies, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, or any British colony or foreign country, he can say whether under it treaties have been negotiated with Newfoundland, British Guiana, British Honduras, and Trinidad, securing the preferential Customs treatment of American products in those colonies. (Answered by Earl Percy.) No treaty securing preferential treatment for American goods has been negotiated or is in process of negotiation on behalf of any British colony.

To ask the Secretary of State for India, having regard to the fact that petitions from natives of India for the redress of grievances have been again laid upon the Table of the House this session, will he take steps to make known to the people of India that no action in regard to such petitions is taken either by the House or by the Secretary of State for India. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) As promised in the Answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Ipswich on July 19th†last, a copy of the Report of the Select Committee on Public Petitions was sent to the Government of India last autumn, and they were instructed to make the recommendations of the Committee widely known. I find that my despatch and its enclosures were published in the Gazette of India on September 15th last, and were also sent to local governments and administrations for publication in their Gazettes, and for distribution to commissioners and district officers, who have no doubt done their best to give publicity to the matter.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that certain members of the Bombay University Senate objected to the legality of the rules framed by the Chancellor for the election of the provisional syndicate, and took no part in the election, and that their protest was supported by the opinion of counsel; and, if so, whether, in view of the Indian Universities (Validation) Act, he will direct the Chancellor to hold a fresh election for the provisional syndicate. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) As at present advised, I see no reason for taking the action suggested. If the hon. Member will refer to the speech delivered by the legal member of the Viceroy's Council on February 10th last, when the Indian Universities (Validation) Bill was under discussion, he will see that it was pointed out that under the law the Senate (not the Chancellor as stated in the Question) can only make one appointment of a provisional syndicate, and that

† See (4) Debates, cxxxviii., 415.

a fresh provisional syndicate could only be appointed if it were beyond doubt that the present provisional syndicate was not validly appointed. This is by no means the case. The hon. Member will find the whole matter explained in the debates on the Bill referred to, printed in the Gazette of India for February 18th, which is in the Library of the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that, under the rules framed by the Chancellor of the Bombay University, Mr. Justice Tyabji, Mr. Justice Chandravarkar, Mr. Justice Batty, Sir Pherozshah Mehta, the Hon. Mr. Setalwad, and other Fellows of the University have been excluded from the Faculty of Arts; and whether, seeing that these Fellows have for many years taken a leading part in the management of the University, he will withhold his sanction to the Indian Universities (Validation) Act of 1905 until this defect is remedied. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) I understand that the gentlemen named in the Question, though not members of the Faculty of Arts, are, nevertheless, Fellows of the Bombay University and members of the Faculty of Law, and as such have the opportunity of taking part in the management of the University in the future as in the past. I see no reason, therefore, on this account to advise His Majesty to disallow the Act mentioned in the Question, which is already law.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the fact that it was chiefly due to the exertions of the transport and special service officers on the lines of communication that the Tibet Mission Force was able to get to and was maintained at Lhasa, and that not one of them has obtained a reward; and, if so, whether he can explain the omission from the list of honours issued in connection with the Mission of the names of any such officers. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Brodrick.) The value of the services of those employed on the lines of communication in connection with the Tibet Mission both beyond and within the British frontier was fully acknowledged in General Macdonald's despatch, and in the Papers which have been presented to Parliament, and my hon. friend is mistaken in supposing that their names have been omitted from the list of honours. The officer commanding the line of communications received a C.B., two officers of the Supply and Transport Corps have received the D.S.O., and an officer of the Telegraph Department has been made a C.I.E. The names of many deserving officers were brought to notice, but it was impossible to give rewards in the cases of all who distinguished themselves, whether at the front or on the lines of communication.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, when a few years ago the old Army lists and muster rolls were transferred from the War Office to the Public Record Office, it was stipulated they should be available to all students under the rules in force there; if not, under what conditions they were handed over. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Arnold-Forster.) The reply is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the Gairloch, Loch Long, and Loch Goil, the head of Loch Striven and that portion of Loch Fyne above Otter Spit as suitable ground for the disused vessels now anchored in the Kyles of Bute and the Holy Loch, to the serious inconvenience of the public; and whether he will arrange to have the matter reported upon by the proper Admiralty official, and the result communicated to the House.

These lochs were all considered as possible mooring places for the vessels requiring to be laid up temporarily, but none of them possess the advantages of the East Kyle of Bute and Holy Loch.

Will the hon. Gentleman lay the Report on the Table?

There is no Report. The matter has been carefully considered and this is the result, but there is no formal Report.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the estimated number of recruits required annually, under the present nine years system of enlistment, in order to maintain the establishment at full strength, and how many recruits have actually been obtained since January 1st of this year.

The number of infantry recruits enlisted for nine years required to maintain the establishment of the new Army organisation scheme when in working order is as shown in the document presented to Parliament in 1904 (Cd. 1910). At present a large number is required for reasons that I have already explained to the House. The number of infantry recruits actually obtained since January 1st to February 28th is 4,810.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state whether the scheme for the formation of the new localised short-service regiments is now definitely abandoned; and, if not, when it is proposed to take steps to bring the scheme into operation.

I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state whether the general-service Army, consisting of men enlisted for nine years with the colours and three with the reserve, explained by him in the House of Commons on July 14th, 1904, and in the Memoranda dated August 2nd, 1904, is now intended to be a temporary measure.

As I have already explained, this scheme of short-service enlistment has not been abandoned, but only postponed until the nine years enlistments have proved sufficient to provide the men necessary to furnish the Indian drafts for the next two years and to stiffen the battalions. The scheme of enlistment for nine years forms part of the whole scheme of Army reorganisation together with the short-service scheme, but has been temporarily applied to all infantry enlistments until the infantry has been rehabilitated in the manner above mentioned.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the present establishment of the Army, and what was the number actually serving on March 1st of this year.

The latest numbers available are those for February 1st, and are as follows:—British establishment—establishment, 206,783; effectives, 206,170. Indian establishment—establishment, 74,648; effectives, 78,141.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what has been the cost of the range at Whitchurch, Gloucestershire; whether the range is now closed; and, if so, for what reason, and for how long it is likely to remain closed; and what arrangements are being made to permit the men of the depôt at Horfield, and the Militia and Volunteer Battalions to fire their annual course of musketry.

The range cost £5,000. It is now closed, owing to some cottages in the rear being unsafe, as there is not sufficient danger area. It is not possible, however, to state at present whether it will have to be abandoned. The 4th Militia Battalion of the Gloucester Regiment will fire the annual course on Salisbury Plain. Arrangements will be made for the other troops using this range to fire their annual course, but the places have not yet been definitely selected.

asked if the cottages were there before the expenditure was incurred.

I must request notice of any further Question.

:I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India what are the chief causes of the Indian Government's increased expenditure during the first eight months of the financial year, under the head of Military Services, of 100 lakhs in excess of the Budget estimates; have there been any recent savings under that head, or has an estimate been made for an excess during the remaining portion of the year ending with next month; to what unforeseen circumstances is attributable the excess in these eight months under the head of Civil Debts; to what amount beyond the Budget estimate of £18,435,500 for Home Charges have the Secretary of State's drawings on India reached at the present date, and to what purposes are these excess drawings being applied; and what is the present amount of the Secretary of State's cash balances in this country and in India.

May I refer the hon. Member to the Answer which I gave to a similar Question asked by the hon. Member for North Manchester on March 2nd.†

I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the latest information given to the House is dated August, 1904, the Government will lay upon the Table further correspondence relating to the European provinces of Turkey.

It would not be desirable to present further correspondence on the subject until the important negotiations which are still

† See p 172

pending have been brought to a definite issue.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any, and, if so, how many of the houses in the six villages in Malesia and the nineteen villages in Debritza, which were totally destroyed by Turkish troops, have been rebuilt, as promised by the Turkish Government.

We have received no information as to the rebuilding of these particular villages, but His Majesty's Ambassador at Constantinople will be instructed to make inquiries on the subject.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the amount of Consols purchased by the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt on account of the Post Office Savings Bank (exclusive of the amount purchased for depositors) in the years 1894 to 1899, inclusive; what was the average price paid for the stock so purchased; what was the deficiency in respect of the total amount of Consols bought in these years, taking the price at which the stock was valued on December 31st, 1903, namely, 87⅞ per cent.

The details of the figures now asked for by the hon. Member will appear in the Return which has already been promised to him, and which is now in preparation.

Will the Return be unopposed?

Yes Sir. I understood it had been given, and was being prepared. Perhaps the hon. Member will communicate with the Secretary to the Treasury.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the fact that the average rate of interest allowed to depositors by the Post Office Savings Bank is higher than the average rate of interest on deposits paid by the London Joint Stock Banks; and in view of the fact that, in addition to the deficiency in the capital account of the Post Office Savings Bank, it is estimated that for at least several years to come there will be, as there has been in the last two years, a deficiency in the income account, he will take steps to secure that persons belonging to the well-to-do classes do not, as Post Office Savings Bank depositors, enjoy a rate of interest partially made up by contributions of the general body of taxpayers.

I do not admit that the average rates of interest allowed to depositors by the London Joint Stock banks, which derive profit from the monies placed on deposit with, them, should determine the rate to be given by the Post Office Savings Banks, which were established to encourage thrift and do not trade for profit. But, however that may be, the evidence given before the Select Committee of 1902 did not support the view that any considerable proportion of depositors are outside the classes for which the Savings Banks are intended to provide. It has been suggested that the Savings Banks Act, 1893, passed at the instance of the Party opposite, by extending the limit of annual deposit from £30 to £50, has led to the introduction of depositors of a different class; but the evidence before the Committee was that the proportion of depositors of different classes had not been altered by that Act. I see no present necessity for taking any step to diminish the facilities afforded by the Savings Banks.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the new rules relating to the use of electricity in mines have been agreed upon; if so, can he state the date upon which they will come into force.

In settling these rules, I consulted representatives both of the owners and of the men. The notices proposing the rules were sent out between February 20th and March 1st, and the rules come into force in each case at the end of twenty days from the receipt of the notice by the owner of the mine, unless he has previously objected to them in writing. So far, very few objections have been received.

I beg to ask the President of the board of Trade whether he can state the reason for the delay of the publication of the Tenth Annual Abstract of Labour Statistics, and when it is likely to be ready for issue.

This volume will be published very shortly; its preparation has been somewhat delayed by the pressure of work in connection with the preparation of special Returns.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether the rule as to limit of deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank is evaded by the opening by the same person of two or more accounts in his own name, or in fictitious names, or in the names of members of his family or other dependents.

Cases have come to light in which the limit of deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank has been exceeded by the opening of two or more accounts in the same name or in fictitious names by means of a false declaration; but such cases are very rare. There is no information available as to the extent to which the limit is evaded by the opening of accounts in the names of members of a depositor's family or household; as such evasions would not come to light so long as deposits and withdrawals were made by the persons in whose names the accounts were opened. There is, however, no reason to suppose that evasions of this nature are numerous.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he will take steps to give the rural postmen who start from the Oswestry Post Office the same rate of wage as those who deliver letters in the town.

I have already announced to the staff that rural postmen starting from towns will be given the same pay as the postmen in the towns, and the rural postmen at Oswestry will be dealt with on these lines.

Does that apply to Ireland?

Yes it applies everywhere throughout the United Kingdom.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if, in renewing the mail contracts for steamer services for the Barra, Uist, and Benbecula districts of the West Highlands, he will endeavour to arrange a more convenient service, having Oban and Mallaig as termini; and if he will make it part of the contract that the mail steamer should call at Petersport Pier in Benbecula.

There is at present no question of renewing the contract for the mail steamer service to the districts to which the hon. Member refers; but I may state that with the existing train service it would not be practicable to afford so good a mail service by way of Mallaig as is at present provided via Oban. There are also other objections to the adoption of the Mallaig route, as was pointed out in the letter sent to the hon. Member on August 17th. 1901. As regards the suggestion that the mail steamer should call at Petersport Pier, I find that such a call would delay the boat, and would prejudicially affect the mail service to and from the most important places in the districts concerned. In these circumstances I regret I cannot comply with the hon. Member's wishes in the matter.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Chorley, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether the negotiations for the preservation of the ancient walls of Berwick-upon-Tweed, dating from the reign of King Edward the First, have now been completed by His Majesty's Office of works; and, if so, whether they have resulted in a scheme which will prevent the threatened destruction of these interesting monuments.

The negotiations have now so far advanced as to give reason to hope that they mar be brought to a successful issue. The scheme proposed includes a lease of the historic ground and monuments to the Commissioners of His Majesty's Works which, if concluded, will effectually preserve them from destruction.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether any application has been made to the Estates Commissioners for the purchase by them of the Archdale (county Longford) Estate; and, if so, to state the terms of such offer.

No such application has yet been made.

And supposing, one is made——

I cannot answer a hypothetical Question.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland when the next sitting of the Chief Land Commission for the hearing of appeals will take place in and for county Longford; how many such appeals are now pending when the last sitting of the Commission took place in Longford; and on how many occasions since have Longford appeals been sent to other venues because of the refusal of the Commissioners to come to Longford.

A sitting for the hearing of appeals has been provisionally fixed for May 30th. There are 204 appeals pending. The last sitting of the Commissioners to hear appeals was held in July, 1903. Appeals from Longford have not since been heard elsewhere.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can now state the result of the Government inquiry into the case of Nurse Holland, who was reported by the Inspectors of Lunacy as entirely unfitted for her position, having regard to her faithless-ness in the discharge of her duties and the untrustworthiness of her statements.

I have carefully considered this case. The appointment and dismissal of asylum nurses is vested solely in the committee of management of the asylum. The only way in which the Government could intervene would be by withdrawing the capitation grant paid to the Monaghan Asylum under Section 58, Sub-section 2 (c) of the Local Government (Ireland) Act of 1898, on the ground that the asylum is improperly managed. In the present instance the charge preferred by Nurse Holland was found to be false. The action of the committee in deciding to retain her services under the circumstances is much to be regretted, but I do not consider that their action can be held to bring the case within the provisions of the Act to which I have referred.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland, is he aware that the estate of Mr. Robert Jevers, of county Limerick, is up for sale in the court of Mr. Justice Ross; does he know whether any bid has been made for it as yet; and, if so, by whom, and what is the amount of it; can he say whether the notice of sale has been brought before the Estates Commissioners with a view to their purchasing it in the public interest for the benefit of the evicted tenants, small farmers, and labourers of the district; is he aware that a brother of the owner, by name William Jevers, is an evicted tenant, having been evicted off the Langford property convenient; and, if so, will he recommend to the Estates Commissioners that William Jevers will have the first claim for a farm on the estate of his father and brother of equal area to that from which he was evicted.

The estate was offered for sale in the Land Judge's Court on the 1st instant. An offer of £3,250 was made and was considered insufficient. A motion on behalf of the owner was thereupon made to the Court that an application be made to the Estates Commissioners to issue a request under the 7th Section of the Act of 1903, and the solicitor having carriage of the sale was authorised to make such application. I am inquiring whether the matter has been brought before the Commissioners.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he is aware that the chief clerk of the Agricultural Department recently suggested to one of the Catholic clerks of the veterinary branch that he should withdraw from the representations which they had put before the Department in May last; and, if so, whether he will say what steps he proposes taking to put a stop to such action.

This is a repetition of a Question put to me by the hon. Member on the 1st instant.† I have nothing to add to the reply given by me on that occasion.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case

† See page 27.

of James Jordan, of Derrycassan, Granard, who was evicted by Colonel Dopping in 1886, although offering to pay the full amount of rent which he was decreed for; whether he is aware that subsequently Jordan obtained a decree for £47 10s. for illegal eviction against the agent; and whether, having regard to the fact that this man's holding now forms part of the demesne of Derrycassan, and is therefore in occupation of the landlord, he will take steps to bring his case under the notice of the Estates Commissioners with a view to his reinstatement when the property is being sold.

I am informed that Catherine Jordan deceased, and her son James Jordan, were evicted in January, 1887. Payment of the amount of the decree was offered, but not within the period allowed by the County Court Judge. No decree for illegal eviction against the agent was obtained. The evicted holding appears to be in the possession of a new tenant. The application of James Jordan for reinstatement will be considered by the Commissioners should the estate come before them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in this case the evicted tenant actually paid the money to the sheriff? Whether it was paid to the agent I know not.

I am not aware that it is so.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether any reply has yet been received from the Estates Commissioners on the subject of the proposed purchase of the Dopping Hepenstall Estate, in North Longford, under the 7th Section of the Land Act of 1903.

No proceedings are at present before the Commissioners in respect to this estate, and it does not appear, so I am informed, that the sale of this estate is pending in the Land Judge's Court. If particulars of the property are supplied to the Commissioners they will consider the question of issuing a request under the enactment referred to.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in this case a petition was signed by the leading men of the district, and the priests and clergy of all denominations, asking the Commissioners to take action? Will he draw their attention to it?

I am sure if the petition has been received it will receive the attention of the Commissioners.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he is aware that a memorial, signed by seventeen members of the board of guardians and rural district council of Kenmare, was sent to the Local Government Board on January 30th, assigning reasons why a public inquiry should be held relative to the case of a fever patient named Cottar who died recently in the union; can he state on what grounds the inquiry has been refused; and whether, in view of the charges made against the Rev. Mr. Duggan, Protestant rector of Kilgarvan parish, steps will be taken to hold an inquiry immediately.

Such a memorial has been received. The grounds upon which the memorialists urged the Local Government Board to hold an inquiry on oath were that the Rev. Mr. Duggan had gratuitously afforded medical advice to a poor person named Cottar. As this clergyman is not in any way under the jurisdiction of the Local Government Board, they were advised that the matter was not one in which they could intervene. Moreover, there was nothing to show that the rev. gentleman had done anything illegal or actionable, rendering him liable to a penalty under 21 and 22 Vic., Cap. 90, Sec. 40.

But seeing that this man died from fever and not pneumonia and the rev. gentleman has asked for an inquiry, cannot one be held?

The Local Government Board have no power to hold an inquiry.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the acreage of the Longworth Estate, in county Galway, purchased by the Congested Districts Board; how much of it is untenanted; how long this portion is in the possession of the Board; what use is being made of it; when it is intended to divide it up amongst small adjoining occupiers; and what is the cause of the delay in currying out the work of dividing this land.

The estate contains 1,316 acres, all untenanted. It has not yet been vested in the Board, but it is expected this will be done in a few weeks. The lands are being let for grazing until the Board are in a position otherwise to deal with them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the large quantity of untenanted land in this neighbourhood is giving rise to a great deal of dissatisfaction? Will he draw the attention of the Congested Districts Board to the fact?

The Board have stated that they are dealing with the question.

To whom are the lands being let? Is it to the adjoining tenants?

I cannot say.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he can state how many and what county councils have declined to accept the financial responsibity of keeping the roads in the condition required by the promoters of the Pirrie-Iveagh scheme; and whether any negotiations took place between the promoters and any member of the Government with reference to providing funds from the Treasury for putting the roads in order.

The local authorities in the counties of Mayo, Galway, Londonderry, and Antrim declined to incur the expenditure necessary for putting the roads into proper condition for motor traffic. In reply to the second part of the Question the hon. Member is doubtless aware that, acting on a suggestion made by the Galway County Council, the Government proposed an Amendment to the Labourers Bill of last session which contemplated the expenditure of the whole or part of the unexpended balance of a county's share in the Exchequer contribution for labourers' cottages for purposes such as the schemes referred to in the Question. There was never any intention, so far as I am aware, to provide funds from other sources.

Is that statement made with the knowledge and concurrence of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover?

The statement I make here is, of course, not made with that right hon. Gentleman's knowledge.

Are we to understand that this scheme has broken down? Are we to hear no more of it?

"Broken down" is not the phrase to use. It has not been carried into effect because the roads have not been put in proper repair.

Is it not a fact that several county councils in Ireland have offered to repair the roads if they could secure the introduction of this motor scheme, but their offer has been refused?

I must ask for notice of that.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland if he is aware that some time last June the tenants of Sir George Colthurst or Lady Colthurst, in the parish of Ardpatrick, and county of Limerick, signed agreements for the purchase of their holdings: is he aware that the Hon. W. C. Trench, of Clanadfoy Kilfinane, purchased the mountain portion of the estate in which they had the right of turbary and grazing young cattle, thereby depriving the tenants of the advantages of cheap turf and rearing of some cattle; and can he state whether, in negotiations with the tenants, stipulations were made that the turbary rights should belong to the tenants, and if the tenants were compelled to pay the amount of interest usual in such circumstances; and have the tenants communicated on the subject with the Estates Commissioners; if so, with what result.

The mountain referred to does not form part of the estate for sale. It has been sold to Captain Trench. For some years past the tenants have ceased to cut turf on the mountain as the bog is practically cut out. The Commissioners have no knowledge of any stipulations as to turbary in the negotiations for sale. The tenants have been required to pay the interest payable under the statute pursuant to their agreements.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the sale of the Gore Booth estate, situate in the county of Sligo, has yet been ratified or agreed to by the Estates Commissioners; and, if not, whether, seeing that the town of Ballymote forms portion of that estate, and that the landlord agrees to sell to his town tenants, through the Estates Commissioners, the latter will be instructed to look into this matter with the view of having the proposed sale sanctioned.

The lands in the neighbourhood of Ballymote on this property have been declared an estate for the purpose of sale. But the town of Ballymote was excluded from the originating application.

Why is the town of Ballymote excluded?

I must ask for notice of that.

Is it not a fact that Boyle, on a neighbouring estate, has been sold, and was not Strokestown purchased by the Congested Districts Board?

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether he is aware that the Central Chamber of Agriculture have recently reported that beet grown in Ireland yields as much sugar as that grown in Germany; and that beet has been successfully grown on inferior bog land in the counties of Sligo and Mayo, as ordinary crops, such as mangold and turnips, are grown; and, if so, whether the attention of the Board of Agriculture will be called to this matter, with the view of establishing experimental plots for the purpose of ascertaining how far this crop can be profitably grown in Ireland.

The Department are aware that the Central Chamber of Agriculture issued a Report in June, 1901, dealing with beet sugar experiments carried out in 1900 in several counties in Ireland, as well as in other centres in Great Britain. They are also aware from their own experiments, a report of which appeared in the Department's Journal for February, 1901, that beet of a good quality can be grown in Ireland. They cannot, however, feel justified in recommending beet as a general crop in this country for the reason mentioned in my Answer to the hon. Member's Question of February 24th.† The obstacles to the successful establishment of the industry in Ireland are more detailed in a memorandum which I have communicated to the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will name the religious denomination to which the teacher of Lugnadiffa National School, near Cullooney, county of Sligo, belongs, also the religious denomination of the children on the rolls of that school on

† See (4) Debates, cxli. 1212.

December 31st, 1904; will he state the name of the school nearest to Lugnadiffa, the religious denomination of the teacher, and also the name of the nearest school taught by a Catholic teacher; and whether, seeing that the patron of Lugnadiffa and Larkhill Schools is the landlord of the district, and that he has refused a site for a new school, and in view of the fact that the people of the district are mainly Catholic, the commissioners of National Education will co-operate with the Rev. E. H. Connington, the parish priest, with the view of having the needs of Catholic children attend to.

Lugnadiffa School is a Protestant. The number of children on the rolls on December 31st last was eighteen, all of whom were Protestants. The nearest school to Lugnadiffa is that at Larkhill, the teacher of which is a Protestant. The nearest schools under Catholic teachers are at Rockfield and Ballysodare. The Rev. E. H. Connington has already been informed by the Commissioners that the proposed additional schoolhouse at Larkhill is quite unsuitable and unfitted for school purposes, and that his application for a grant would be considered when these objections were overcome.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state if he has any official reports in regard to an alleged outrage at the residence of Mr. Persse, Woodville, county Galway; and, if so, whether he will state their purport.

Reports have been received from the police who are investigating this matter. It is obviously impossible to disclose the purport of these confidential reports without injury to the public service.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the report that shots were fired into this house was true or false? Was it not mere sensational journalism?

In view of the fact that a sensational account of a desperate outrage has been published, would it not be advisable also to publish a correct statement of fact?

asked for notice of further Questions on this subject.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what local public bodies in Ireland have up to the present made representations to the Irish Agricultural Department regarding the dissatisfaction which exists in that Department on account of the inequality in the treatment of its staff; and what action has been taken in the matter.

Six public bodies have made representations to the Department in the terms of the resolution which was proposed by the hon. Member himself at a meeting of the King's County Council and passed by that council. The receipt of these representations was acknowledged.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether the attention of the Estates Commissioners has been called to the circumstances connected with the farm forming the estate of Palms Spread Morgan, who is at present confined as a lunatic, and from which farm James J. Greene was evicted in 1889; and whether, seeing that this holding is now in the occupation of Captain Jonathan Morgan, brother and administrator of the owner, the Commissioners, having regard to his position as remainder man, will refuse to sanction an advance to Captain Jonathan Morgan to enable him to purchase this estate to which he is the heir in succession.

The hon. Member has been in correspondence with the Commissioners in this matter. The property is under the control of the Court of Chancery, and an offer made by Captain Morgan to purchase the holding in question was accepted by the Land Judge in July last. The Commissioners, under the circumstances, have no authority to intervene, but in the event of their acquiring untenanted land in the neighbourhood the application of James Greene will be further considered.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Irish Congested District Board has purchased the estate of Lord de Freyne in counties of Roscommon, Galway, and Sligo; and, if so, whether he can state the total purchases money and the number of tenants, also the particulars of the arrears, current rent, and untenanted land.

The negotiations have not yet been brought to a conclusion.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state under what statute the Inspector-General of the Royal Irish Constabulary was empowered to forbid the execution of the warrant issued by a resident magistrate in public Court, for the arrest of H. J. Livingstone, of Newry; whether he can state the precedents, if any, for suck a course; whether Fearon's solicitor was consulted as to the evidence available against Livingstone: and, if so, by whom and with what result; whether any private representations were made to any official in Dublin Castle as to the advisability of preventing the warrant from being enforced; and whether the whole question will now be reconsidered.

The facts are not accurately stated in the Question. I have already informed the hon. Member that when inquiries were made to determine whether steps should be taken to obtain the extradition of the accused, if found in America, or his re-arrest and deportation to this country under the Fugitive Offenders Act, if found in Canada, it was ascertained that there was no available evidence to sustain the general charge made on the information of Fearon on which this warrant was granted in Ireland. Under such circumstances, it would be futile and improper and contrary to the practice to attempt to take action in the matter, and the Inspector-General was directed accordingly. The course taken was the usual and proper course, and precedents frequently occur. It was Fearon's duty, when asked, to supply the evidence, which he failed to do. The district inspector consulted Fearon's solicitor and informed him of the nature of the evidence required before the Crown could take action. There is no foundation for the insinuation contained in the latter part of the Question. Of course, if sufficient evidence be at any time supplied action will be taken by the police.

Is it not the fact that this man is still in Toronto, and that the Chief Constable of the city has provided the Government with his address?

He is supposed to be somewhere in Canada, but we have no definite information.

He is on the railway there.

He cannot be arrested unless we have sufficient evidence.

Why was he not arrested before he went there?

He absconded before the issue of the warrant.

But——

Order, order! If Questions are to be treated in this way it will be impossible for other Members to ask their Questions within the time limit.

On a point of order, Sir, I want to submit the right hon. Gentleman has utterly reversed the Answer he gave the day before yesterday.

That is not a point of order. It is not in order now to discuss whether Answers to Questions are consistent with previous Answers.

What I want to do——

Order, Order! I call on Mr. Kilbride——

I want to inquire——

I hope the Member will submit to my ruling.

But the right hon. Gentleman has given contradictory Answers.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction expressed by representative bodies in county Clare at the reductions of five per cent. in West Clare and ten per cent. in East Clare given by the Sub-Commission at the last hearing of fair rent applications; will he state what previous knowledge or experience had this gentleman who inspected these lands of Clare farming or the nature of Clare land and the climatic conditions of that county; and whether, in view of these expressions of want of confidence in the Lay Sub-Commissioner, he will represent to the Land Commission the advisability of transferring the services of this gentleman to a part of the country with which he has had some previous acquaintance.

:This Question has been referred to the Judicial Commissioners, who are at present in the country hearing appeals. Perhaps the hon. Member will repeat the Question on Monday.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that the Harbour Commissioners of Galway had repeatedly pointed out to the late Chief Secretary the damage which was being done to the trade of the city owing to the silting of sand at the entrance to the docks, which caused great difficulty to steamers trading to the port; whether he is further aware that the late Chief Secretary promised to place a dredger at the disposal of the Commissioners: and if he can now say when the dredger will be available.

The Board of Works, in whose charge the dredger is, have no knowledge of any communications between the Harbour Commissioners and the late Chief Secretary, or that he made any such promise as stated. The Board are now in correspondence with the Harbour Commissioners as to the date when the dredger will be available for Galway, but they are not yet in a position to state when that date will be.

Have not the Board of Works received a deputation asking——

Order, order! That does not arise out of the Question.

Then may I ask if representations have not been repeatedly made during the last two years asking for the hire of a dredger?

Order, order!

I will raise the matter on the Estimates.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the proposed guarantee given for a telegraph line from Granard is given in respect of a line through Cloonagh to Scrabby and not to Dring; and that the distance from Scrabby to Aghnacliffe is only two miles, and would be, moreover, the easiest way to reach that district; and, if so, pending an arrangement of the line of route which will be satisfactory to the local people, will he suspend any order made in the matter for the present.

I am not aware that any guarantee has been proposed for a telegraph line to Scrabby. As to the other places referred to, I made a suggestion to the hon. Member in replying to his Question of the 27th ultimo,† and I shall be glad to wait a short time to enable him to consider whether it can be acted on.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that, in reply to an application from Mr. Thomas Murphy, asking of particulars of the errors which were alleged to be in Irish address of the letter written by him to a correspondent in Kilronan, Aran, the Post Office authorities refused to give the information; and whether, in view of the fact that the sub-postmaster of Kilronan could not read Irish, he will state who is responsible for the statement that the Irish address of the letter was incorrect, and will he state what the alleged errors were.

The Postmaster of Galway reports that the address on the cover of the letter to which the hon. Member refers was considered by those competent to judge to be incorrect, both as regards spelling and in the formation of the Irish characters. As a knowledge of the Irish language is not at present made a condition of the Postmaster-General's appointment, and as I do not happen to know the language, I should be unable to explain the errors of the letter before me.

Who is the official responsible for the statement that there were errors in the address?

The Postmaster of Galway.

Does he know Irish?

:He got information from who are competent to judge.

I will put a further Question on this.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can state how many years service had the successful candidates

†See (4) Debates, cxli., 1336

dates recently appointed to the post-masterships of Tralee, Carrick-on-Shannon, and Arklow at the date of their several appointments; and what were the years of service of the senior applicants in each of the three cases.

I do not think it desirable to enter into details as to the qualifications or seniority of the candidates for postmasterships from amongst whom my selection is made; but I may mention that in the case of Tralee and Carrick-on-Shannon the senior recommended applicants were officers at Sheffield and in London respectively, who did not possess all the qualifications necessary; while in the case of Arklow the senior recommended applicant was a postman unacquainted with telegraphy.

Were there no Irishmen fit for these positions?

Yes, but these postmasterships are open to the whole United Kingdom, and there were applicants from other parts senior and more suitable.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether the proposed direct mid-day mail service between Longford and Elphin has yet been begun; and, if not, when he proposes to inaugurate it.

The question of establishing a day mail service between Longford and Elphin has been carefully considered, but I regret to find that I should not be justified in giving this accommodation in view of the additional expense which would be involved. The cost of the existing service is very high as compared with the revenue from the correspondence.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the War Office authorities took over the bog situate at Curramore, near Athlone; that awards for compensation to the tenants were made as far back as November 29th, 1903, and that the tenants were notified by the police authorities not to further use the bog on May 28th, 1904; and, if so, whether, seeing that the tenants have been deprived of their principal means of livelihood, though the compensation awarded them has not yet been paid, he can state when the money will be paid to these tenants.

The awards were delivered on December 23rd, 1903. No tenant was disturbed until August 16th, 1904, when possession of the portions of the Curramore turf bank which projected into the danger area was taken over by the War Department. This only affected the turf banks of ten of the twenty-three tenants, all of whom had other banks in Curramore which have not been interfered with. The necessary arrangement will, it is hoped, be completed and the money paid during the present month. The tenants concerned in the portion taken over will be entitled to interest on the purchase money.

By what authority was the land taken from these people before the money was paid?

That is a legal Question for which I must ask for notice.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, in view of the resignation of the Chief Secretary, it is still the intention of the Government to retain the services of Sir Antony MacDonnell as Under - Secretary at Dublin Castle.

My hon. friend will readily understand that I could not offer any opinion upon the subordinate members of the Chief Secretary's Office until I have the advantage of the advice of the Chief Secretary. The Chief Secretary is not yet appointed, and, therefore, I fear I cannot answer the Question.

May I ask whether in the meantime the House is to understand that conditions under which Sir Antony MacDonnell accepted the Under-Secretaryship have not been with-drawn, and still hold good?

Sir Antony MacDonnell, as I have explained, in my opinion, holds his office on the ordinary tenure of a Civil servant.

Has the right hon. Gentleman appealed to any of the Ulster Unionists to see if they will take the Chief Secretaryship?

Sloan will take it.