To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the purchase arrangements for the sale of the Heathfield estate, owned by Mr. Phibbs and situate near Collooney, county Sligo, have yet been sanctioned by the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, whether these arrangements contain a proviso for the reinstatement of John Kelly on the holding from which his father was formerly evicted.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that the sale referred to has not been completed. An inspection has been directed, and the inspector has been instructed to inquire, amongst other things, into the case of John Kelly, whose name does not appear in the proceedings as a purchaser.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state the number of years' purchase paid by the Congested Districts Board to Mr. Phibbs for his estate of Moylough, situated near Tubbercurry, county Sligo, and say whether the bog which forms a portion of the estate was included in the terms of sale.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) In this case the Congested Districts Board gave nineteen years' purchase of the first-term rents and twenty-three years' purchase of the second-term rents. A bog, 405 acres in extent, in the townland of Moylough was included in the purchase.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, on the completion of the sale, under the Land Act of 1903, of a portion of the Beresford estate, Carlow County, the case of the Waters family, as evicted tenants, has been ignored, and the Estates Commissioners have sanctioned the sale of their holding of Kilcloney, Borris, to an occupier under the eleven months' system having no legal title; and, if not, will he say how the Kilcloney farm has been disposed of, and will the Waters family be reinstated in their former holding.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that they are negotiating for the purchase as untenanted land, of the holding formerly occupied by Patrick Waters. If the purchase should be completed, the Commissioners will consider the question of reinstating Waters.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland is he aware that Timothy Corbett, of Rathany, Knockany, county Limerick, was evicted from his farm on the estate of the Earl of Limerick over twelve years ago; that a planter named McGrath now holds that farm; that an application on behalf of Corbett's restoration has been sent to the Estates Commissioners; and will he use his influence with the Estates Commissioners in endeavouring to reinstate Corbett.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have recently received an application on Corbett's behalf, which will receive consideration in due course. The Commissioners are not yet aware of the facts of the case.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland can he say whether Mrs. Bresnahan, of Ballinard, Herbertstown, county Limerick, applied to the Estates Commissioners for their aid in restoring her to her evicted farm on the Tuthill-Gab-Bett-Fitzgerald estate over which Mr. Tuthill, of Escar Lucan, county Dublin, is agent; and can he say whether there are at present any negotiations in progress for the sale of the estate; and whether he will recommend the Estates Commissioners to endeavour to arrange between Mr. Tuthill and Mrs. Bresnahan for sale and purchase on terms to be fixed by the Estates Commissioners.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have had inquiries made into the case of Mrs. Bresnahan, who has lodged an application for reinstatement, and that they are in communication with the agent of the estate upon the subject.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland is he aware that Thomas Molony was, a few years ago, evicted from his farm in Castlewaller, Newport, county Tipperary, by his landlord, Mr. John B. Barrington; has Mr. Molony applied to the Estates Commissioners asking their aid in effecting his restoration to the farm; and, now that the estate has been sold off to the tenants with the exception of this one tenancy, will the Estates Commissioners interpose and use their best offices in the reinstatement of Thomas Molony?

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that no application for reinstatement; has been lodged with them by or on behalf of Mr. Thomas Molony. The Commissioners have no knowledge of the eviction.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how matters at present stand as to the Mountshannon Estate, county Limerick; has the ownership yet passed from Mrs. Nevin to the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, will matters be expedited in the interests of the evicted tenants for whom it is intended, so that in the opening of the season they may be in a position to work the farms for meadowing, tillage, or grazing purposes.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I beg to refer to my reply to a similar Question put by the hon. Member for West Limerick on Friday last.† I then explained the causes of the delay, and stated that the Commissioners are occupied with the matter.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether the Estates Commissioners have received an application for reinstatement in his evicted farm from Michael Leahy, Ballykeeffe, Mungret, Limerick; is he aware that the heir of the planter, a Mr. Dowling, who took this farm, is now in the act of selling his interest in it; and will the Estates Commissioners take steps either to restore Leahy to his farm, subject to paying Dowling what money he expended on the farm, or induce Dowling to pay its full value, minus the sum which Leahy accepted under circumstances of poverty and duress.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that they have received an application for reinstatement from Michael Leahy, who states, however, that he received £100 as compensation from the new tenant of the farm from which he was evicted. The Commissioners are aware that the tenant's interest of the farm has now been advertised for sale, but no proceedings under the Land Purchase Acts have been instituted. The Commissioners do not regard the matter as one in which they have power to interfere.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will consider the desirability of appointing an additional member to the Royal Commission on Canals and Waterways, to represent Irish interests, before the Commission enter upon the consideration of the Irish portion of their inquiry.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I have conferred with my right hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade upon this subject, and he informs me that he will consider the points raised in the Question, and that he hopes, when the Commission approach the Irish part of their inquiries, to submit to His Majesty for appointment as an additional member of the Commission another member representing Irish producers and traders interested in transportation questions.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the statement, on Wednesday last, of the chairman of the Rathmines urban district council that, while there were 156 police in the district in the year 1863 as against 134 in the extended district of Rathmines and Rathgar in 1901, the sum demanded by the Government in the latter year towards the cost of the force was over £5,000, as against £1,500 in 1863, and will he explain the cause of this increase; and whether, in view of the repeated and uncontradicted allegations as to the existence of a similar state of things in the rest of the Dublin metropolitan police district, the Government will take any steps in the immediate future to relieve the ratepayers of that area of the present police rate therein.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Chief Commissioner of the Dublin Metropolitan police that there is no special police force for the Rathmines urban district, but the district forms part of a police division which includes the Pembroke urban district and part of county Dublin. There are no records which indicate the number of police exclusively employed in the Rathmines area, and as the police patrols of the different portions of the division overlap it would be impracticable to differentiate the force applied to each. The number of police employed in the various divisions of the Dublin metropolitan district varies from time to time according to police exigencies. I understand that the amount of the police tax for the Rathmines district for the years mentioned in the Question was substantially as stated. There has been no change in the rate of the police tax, viz., 8d. in the pound, since 1863, and the increase in the total amount levied is due to the enlargement of the area of assessment by the erection of new buildings. I have no information that a similar state of things exists in the remainder of the Dublin metropolitan police district. I understand that the question of reducing the police tax has been repeatedly considered by the Irish Government and the Treasury, but that it has been found impossible to make any reduction. It must be remembered that a considerable part of the cost of the force falls upon the Exchequer.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether, in view of his recognition of the rights of trade unionism in the postal and telegraph services, he will take steps to protect the local officials of the various organisations from persecution by their superior officers; whether in this connection he will ask for the production of the endorsement of the chief clerk at Chesterfield, in relation to a telegraphist named Smith at that office; and whether he will state what action he proposes to take in the matter.

( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) I have no reason to believe that any steps will be necessary in the direction indicated by the hon. Member, but if any case of alleged persecution is brought to my attention I will, of course, inquire into it. I have considered the case in the Question, and I do not find it necessary to take any action in the matter.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been directed to the report of a case tried before Mr. Justice Darling on the 20th December last in which evidence was given of the transmission through the Post Office of an offensive and libellous post-card; whether his attention has been directed to the report of a complaint made to the Ealing bench of magistrates on the 2nd instant by a person who had received through the Post Office a postcard containing an offensive expression; whether such deliveries of offensive postcards are frequent, in spite of the provision of the Inland Post Warrant of 1903 giving the Post Office power to detain offensive matter and to prosecute the offender; and whether he will take measures to prevent this abuse of the Post Office.

( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) The regulations strictly prohibit the transmission of postal packets having thereon any words, marks, or designs of an indecent, obscene, or grossly offensive character; and any packets which are observed to infringe those regulations are withheld from delivery. It is not, however, the duty of post office servants to read the communications on postcards, and some cards bearing offensive communications may therefore escape notice and get delivered, though it is my desire as far as possible to prevent their transmission.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the delay in completing the new post office in King's Road, Chelsea; what was the date of it being commenced; and when will it be opened.

( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) The work in this case was, I believe, begun in February, 1905, but there has been delay in consequence of certain legal difficulties which arose in connection with part of the site. These have been settled, and the new office will, I hope, be ready for occupation in a few months.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether in view of the fact that the Russian Government has imposed extra duties on Indian and Ceylon teas, by way of retaliation for the prohibition of Russian sugar by Great Britain, under the Brussels Convention, he can state if Russia has retaliated in any way against any of the other nations which were parties to the Convention; and, if not, why India, which was not a party to the Sugar Convention, should be singled out for vicarious punishment for Great Britain's action; and what steps His Majesty's Government propose to take for India's protection.

( Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey. ) The reply to the first Question is in the negative. With regard to the second, His Majesty's Government have not been informed of the reason why Russia retaliated upon India and Ceylon and not upon the United Kingdom. With regard to the third, I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given to him on the 22nd ultimo.†

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the case of the large British steamer "Briardale," which has been detained in the port of Genoa since March, 1905, under a sequestration order of the Italian courts, and that adequate bail has several times been offered by the owners so that the vessel could be released, and was refused; and whether, in view of the heavy losses already sustained by the owners, and likely to be augmented pending further legal proceedings, His Majesty's Government can intervene and make strong representations to the Italian Government, insisting upon bail being accepted and the release of the vessel.

( Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey. ) The case of the "Briardale" has already been the subject of representation by His Majesty's Ambassador at Rome to the Italian Government on more than one occasion. His Majesty's Government have now under their earnest consideration the question of what further assistance can be afforded to the owners, with a view to bringing about a satisfactory settlement.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the speech made in Australia by the Postmaster-General of the Australian Commonwealth, at Sydney, on 3rd February, in which he expresses his conviction that he will be able to give every man in the country a telephone in his own house at a cost of one shilling a week; and whether he is considering the cost of reducing to popular rates telephone charges in this country.

( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) The speech referred to by the hon. Member is probably that which was delivered at the annual picnic of the Electric Telegraph and Telephone Construction. Branch Union at Sydney, and I gather from a report in the Sydney Morning Herald that Mr. Chapman did not explain the nature of the cheap telephone service to which he referred. I understand, however, from another source that the rate referred to by Mr. Chapman is to be the minimum charge in small towns for a limited number of calls made on a four-party line, i.e., a line of which the use is shared by four subscribers. Additional calls beyond the minimum number would have to be paid for separately. I am looking into the present charges in this country, but it would not be possible to give an efficient service, with privacy, at the rate mentioned.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the extra distance to be covered by the mid-day rural postman from Longford to Leitrim Crossroads, and thence to Drumlish, would be only about one and a half miles; and whether, for the sake of the extra pay this would cost, he still persists in his refusal to gran the mid-day extension to Drumhsh.

( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) In view of the circumstances with which I have already acquainted the hon. Member I fear I should not be justified in incurring any additional expenditure on the service to Drumlish.

To ask the Postmaster-General, if, having regard to the fact that the adult night messengers at Manchester, Liverpool, Edinburgh, Dundee, Belfast, and other provincial towns on full-night duty receive only twelve working days' annual leave, while unestablished officers on full-day duty receive fourteen working days' annual leave, and also to the effects of constant night duty on health, he will consider the advisability of granting to adult night messengers the same amount of annual leave as is given to those on day duty.

( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) The annual leave proper to fully employed unestablished officers in the post office is twelve working days. Those who receive more obtained it before the present regulation came into force. I have no reason to believe that the employment of adult messengers on night duty is prejudicial to their health; and I may mention, incidentally, that at Manchester the night messengers have less sick leave than those employed in the day time.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board when the Report of the Commission on Bovine Tuberculosis will be issued; whether he can state the total expenditure on Royal Commissions up to the present; how many Commissions have been held, and date of appointment; and whether the Local Government Board have taken any steps to carry into effect the recommendations made by former Commissions.

( Answered by Mr. John Burns. ) As regards a Report from the present Royal Commission, I am not able to add anything to what I said in Answer to a Question by the hon. Member on this subject on the 20th February last.† Including this Commission, there have been three Royal Commissions (one of which was dissolved on the death of the chairman and reconstituted) on subjects connected with tuberculosis in relation to food. The first Commission was appointed on 21st July, 1890, and was reconstituted on 15th November, 1894. The next was appointed on 6th July, 1896, and the last one on 31st August, 1901. The total expenditure on these Commissions up to 31st March last amounted to £48,400. The Commission of 1896 is the only one which has made recommendations as to administrative procedure. The Local Government Board have on more than one occasion issued circulars to the local authorities on the subject of these recommendations.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws and Relief of Distress have written to the clerks of unions in Ireland, requesting to be furnished with a census of the number of persons chargeable to each poor law union who were in receipt of poor relief on March 31st, 1906, together with certain particulars relating to such persons; whether clerks of unions and other officers, on whom the work of preparing the census would fall, are bound to supply the information required; and, if so, what remuneration the Commission propose to pay to such officers for the time and trouble involved.

( Answered by Mr. John Burns. ) The Answer to the first point in the Question is in the affirmative. The Commission are empowered, by the Royal Warrant constituting them, to call for the information necessary for the conduct of their important inquiry. I understand that they recognise that the furnishing of the information which may thus be required in the course of their inquiry may in certain cases impose such extra work upon the officers of local authorities as might justify a claim for special remuneration. If this is proved to the satisfaction of the Commission, they would propose to communicate with the Treasury on the subject.

To ask the Secretarv for Scotland what were the areas of the deer forests in Scotland for the years 1883, 1898, and 1905, respectively; and whether, in view of the effect of the extension of these areas, what steps, if any, it is proposed to take in the matter.

( Answered by Mr. Sinclair. ) Return 232 of 1905 gives all the information at present available. I am unable at present to make any statement in reference to the latter part of the Question.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that, according to the recent investigations of Mr. Arthur Sherwell, one-third of the population of Edinburgh and one-half of the populations of Glasgow and Dundee live under conditions of overcrowding; and what steps, if any, it is proposed to take in the matter.

( Answered by Mr. Sinclair. ) In spite of inquiry it has not been found possible as yet to obtain any published result of Mr. Sherwell's investigations. If supplied with the data on which the Question is based it shall receive my consideration.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland what were the death-rates among infants less than a year old throughout Scotland as a whole, and in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Dundee, respectively, for the year 1905; whether these death-rates are excessive; and what steps, if any, it is proposed to take in the matter.

( Answered by Mr. Sinclair. ) The facts for the four burghs for the year 1905 are as follows:—Edinburgh, 124·8; Glasgow, 130·8; Aberdeen, 138·5; Dundee, 132·5. While these figures could hardly be called excessive as compared with those of other large towns in the United Kingdom, there is no doubt that it is possible to reduce them. It is hoped that the steady improvement in sanitation will conduce to this. In addition, steps have been taken in Glasgow and Dundee to deal directly with the question by the appointment of health visitors, lay and medical, and by the establishment of municipal depots for sterilised milk. Similar measures are under consideration in Edinburgh and Aberdeen.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state the number of officials whose salaries are on the Civil Service Estimates for Scotland for the current year whose salaries exceed £149 per annum each, with the aggregate amount of those salaries, and the number of these officials who are Presbyterians born in Scotland with the aggregate amount of their salaries.

( Answered by Mr. Sinclair. ) I regret that the information desired is not available. All such salaries are not stated separately in the Civil Service Estimates, and the particulars of religion and place of birth are neither recorded nor known.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been directed to the case of the widow of Charles Thornton, late senior smith in His Majesty's gunwharf, who, after thirty-two years' service, died on February 1st, 1905; and whether, in view of all the circumstances, it is possible to grant Mrs. Thornton, who is in poverty, some gratuity.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) This man died while in receipt of full pay, and, as his death does not appear to have been attributable to the nature of his duty, his widow is unfortunately precluded from receiving any grant from public funds.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether there is any immediate prospect of the Greenwich Hospital augmentation being awarded to pensioners of the Royal Navy who are over fifty-five years of age, and entitled to the increase of fivepence per day; and whether those who are not actually decrepit are, at present, regarded as ineligible for the pension.

( Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson. ) No pensioner can be regarded as "entitled" to Greenwich Hospital age pensions. The funds available for the pensions are fully appropriated to that purpose, and eligible men not in receipt of pensions can only be awarded them as vacancies occur on the list from time to time. It is therefore necessary to continue to select the oldest and most necessitous cases, but no man whose service qualifies him for the grant of a pension is regarded as ineligible. Although the number of pensions which will become available must necessarily vary to some extent according to the circumstances of the time, there is no prospect of a material increase being possible.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether H.M.S. "Donegal," which went ashore in the Red Sea and sustained such damage as to necessitate her return to this country, can be transferred from Devonport, where she has just arrived, and sent to Chatham for repairs, in view of the slackness of work at Chatham Dockyard, and the consequent contemplated discharges therefrom.

( Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson. ) It has already been decided that H.M.S. "Donegal" is to be repaired at Chatham, and the necessary arrangements have been made accordingly.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fact that on March 1st the Rev. S. Jones, Baptist Minister of Twickenham, unsuccessfully applied at Brentford for a vaccination exemption certificate; that the application was repeated on March 15th at his suggestion, when the certificate was again refused on the ground that the magistrates, by a majority, were opposed to it, although two of their number were prepared to sign it; and will he say what steps he proposes to take.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) I received a letter from Mr. Jones in February last, but I did not suggest a fresh application to the justices. From the dates given it would appear that the hon. Member has in mind another case heard at the same Court, in which the question as to the views of a majority of the Justices arose. Upon this latter point I beg to refer the hon. Member to the Answer which I gave to the hon. Member for the Ealing Division on the 5th instant.† I then stated that I was advised that where a majority of the Justices are not in favour of granting a certificate of exemption, it would not be proper for any minority to grant it, unless the other Justices present abstained from adjudicating in the case. As I then stated, the point is not one that I can decide, and in the circumstances there is no action which I could take with any advantage.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to stop reckless and furious driving of motor cars in Hampstead, especially Finchley Road and FitzJohn's Avenue.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) The special attention of the police has been already directed to this matter.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether any steps have been taken by the police to fine or caution the driver of motor car A 1022 for reckless driving at 10.40 a.m. on Friday, the 6th instant, in turning the corner at Netherall Gardens, Finchley Road; and, if not, will he state what action they propose to take.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) Steps have been taken to find the owner of this car. The police did not witness the occurrence. When the owner is found they will in any case inform him of the complaint made against him, and they will be prepared to take proceedings if evidence is available in support.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state what action, if any, has been taken by the police against the driver of a motor car for recklessly turning the corner at Netherall Gardens, Finchley Road, on the 29th or 30th ultimo, resulting in damage to a butcher's cart and serious injury to the driver of the cart.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) It is proposed to take action against the driver. The accident was not witnessed by the police.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state the maximum speed allowed to motor cars and motor' buses in the London area; and how many motor car and motor' bus accidents in the same area have been reported each month this year.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) The legal maximum speed for motor cars is twenty miles and for motor omnibuses twelve miles an hour. The number of accidents to persons or property known to the police to have been caused by motor cars (including cycles) during this year is, for—

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that during the year 1904 no fewer than 107,625 persons were received in prison in default of payment of fines; and whether he will issue a circular to magistrates calling their attention to the provisions of Section 7 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, which sanctions the allowance of time for payment and payment by instalments.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) Yes, Sir. I have seen the figure quoted by the hon. Member. It is taken from the volume of Criminal Statistics recently published by my Department. In June last the Home Office issued a circular calling the attention of magistrates to the provisions of Sections 7 and 21 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, strongly urging that in proper cases defendants should be allowed time for the payment of fines or allowed to pay by instalments, and suggesting that, in some cases, this should be done even if no application is made by the defendant. I shall be glad to let the hon. Member have a copy of the circular. I do not think I can add anything to what was then said.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that during the year 1904 no fewer than 367 persons, of whom forty-nine were eventually acquitted, were detained in prison before trial for upwards of twelve weeks, and that, in addition, 111 persons, of whom twenty were eventually acquitted, were detained in prison before trial for upwards of sixteen weeks; whether, in these circumstances, he will issue a circular to magistrates calling their attention to the provisions of the Bail Act, 1898; and whether he will also instruct every governor of a prison to inform the Home Office at once of any case where a prisoner is received into his custody on committal for trial, when the governor knows, or has reason to believe, that upwards of twelve weeks will elapse between the committal and the trial.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) I am well acquainted with the figures, quoted from the criminal statistics, to which the hon. Member calls attention, but I doubt whether I can usefully take the action which he suggests. The views of the Home Office as to the importance of allowing release on bail are well known to the magistrates; and, when inquiry is made in any individual case of long detention pending trial, the result is almost always to show that the case is one where the prisoner could not find sureties, and could not be realeased on his own recognisances without the certainty or probability that he would abscond before the trial. I will, however, consider whether any further action can be taken by the Home Office.

To ask the President of the Board of Education what is the expenditure, from Imperial sources, on primary education in England; what is the expenditure on secondary schools in England; and what is the rate per pupil in each case, according to average attendance and according to population.

( Answered by Mr. Birrell. ) The total estimated expenditure from Exchequer Grants for England and Wales on elementary education (including teachers' pensions) for the year 1903–4 was £9,798,512, equivalent to £1 17s. 9¾d. per unit of average attendance, and 5s. 10d. per head of population. The total grant to secondary schools for the same period amounted to £175,248, equivalent to £4 9s. 8½d. per each scholar upon whom a grant was paid, and 1¼d. per head of population.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether, as the preliminary Report of the Departmental Committee on Rates has not yet been presented, he will now furnish to the House a statement of the moneys expended on Education, under Part I. and Part II. respectively, of the Education Act, 1902, by each local education authority for the year 1904–5; and, so far as can be estimated, for the year 1905–6, showing the amount provided from Exchequer grants and from local rates respectively, and in each case the amount of the rate in the pound.

( Answered by Mr. Birrell. ) I am to-day laying upon the Table of the House a Statement which will, I hope, comprise all the information referred to in the Question. It will, however, take several days to print, and cannot therefore be in the hands of Members before Easter, as I had hoped.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that there are at present serving in the Irish Land Commission twenty assistant clerks who have completed the necessary number of years' service for eligibility for promotion to the second division; and, considering that forty second division clerks have recently been introduced into these offices, many of whom have had no previous official experience, can he undertake that no more second division clerks will be appointed without the claims of the assistant clerks being fully considered.

( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) Such promotions are only sanctioned exceptionally upon the recommendation of the heads of departments and on the ground of special merit. Any such recommendations always receive the most careful consideration of the Treasury.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state the total number of quit and crown rents accruing to the Government in Ireland, and to what purpose it has been allotted; whether he will arrange that this Irish money shall be devoted to Irish purposes; and whether he will consider the advisability of utilising it as a fund to enable reafforestation in Ireland.

( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) The quit and Crown rents accruing to the Crown in Ireland amount at present to about £32,700 per annum. This money forms part of the land revenues of the Crown, the surplus income of which is annually paid into Exchequer, as provided by the Crown Lands Acts, and goes in relief of general taxation in the United Kingdom and Ireland jointly. Any scheme of planting in Ireland would have to be considered on its merits, without regard to the Crown land revenues.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will arrange that, as the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction partially perform the functions of a Board of Trade in Ireland, he will instruct them to prepare every month a list of emigrants from Ireland and the place of their destimation.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I beg to refer to my reply to the Question of the hon. Member for East Clare on 21st March,† from which it will be seen that the Registrar General for Ireland will in future publish monthly Returns of emigrants.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can arrange that all children will be removed from the precincts of all workhouses; and whether he can have these children educated in schools established under the Industrial Schools Acts, the guardians to contribute to the support of such children.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I would ask the hon. Member to await the Report of the Poor Law Reform Commission which will shortly be received. I have no doubt that the subject of the Question has been considered by the Commission.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is against the policy of The Industrial Schools (Ireland) Act, 1868, or any Act amending or affecting the same to exclude crippled children from the benefits of an industrial education in such schools; whether rules have been framed for the exclusion of such children; and, if so, will such be rescinded.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many schools there are in Ireland in which cripples receive an industrial education, and under what management; and whether he will frame rules or, if necessary, introduce legislation enabling local authorities or other competent authority to establish schools for such children on the same lines and same policy now in force under The Industrial Schools (Ireland) Act, 1868.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The primary object of the Industrial Schools Acts is to provide industrial training for the classes of children to which the Acts apply, and there is nothing to prevent crippled children from being sent to an industrial school, provided that they are not so crippled as to be physically unfit for industrial training. No rules are in existence in Ireland providing for the exclusion of such children, and the Inspector of Reformatory and Industrial Schools informs me that, at present, there are thirty-seven children crippled in various degrees who are undergoing industrial training suitable to their cases in twenty-three industrial schools in Ireland. Of these schools twenty-one are under Roman Catholic, and two under Protestant management. I am imformed that there is also one other school in Ireland in which cripples receive industrial training, viz., the Cripples Home, Bray. I have no information as to the management of this school. I am not aware that it has been shown that legislation is needed.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that a definite undertaking was given by Mr. Lamphiere and his agent during the recent sale of that estate to the tenants, that Mr. James Feehan, and Mr. Patrick Cormack, evicted tenants, would be reinstated; that this undertaking was given in the presence of Mr. Ashby, J.P., a tenant on the property, and that Mr. Justice Meredith made an order on a case connected with this estate to the effect that the £700, the purchase money of the farms claimed by Feehan and Cormack, should be retained by the Estates Commissioners until further instructions; will he say if the Commissioners have advanced any money to the present occupant of the evicted farms for the purpose of sale; are the Estates Commissioners aware that the lands in question were let on the eleven months' grazing system, and that no permanent tenancy had been created previous to the passing of the Land Act of 1903; and will he state what steps the Estates Commissioners intend taking to secure the due fulfilment of the undertaking given by the landlord and his agent regarding the reinstatement of the evicted tenants on this estate.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that applications for reinstatement were lodged with them by James Feehan and Patrick Cormack, who claimed to be reinstated in the former holdings of Denis Feehan and Elizabeth Cormack on the estate in question. The Commissioners made inquiries into the matter, and ascertained that the former tenants were not evicted tenants. They had both received monetary compensation from the landlord for the voluntary surrender of their holdings. The Commissioners are informed that upon the sale of the estate the vendor stated that he would raise no objection to Feehan and Cormack being placed in the respective farms, provided that advances yielding annuities of £5 and £15, respectively, were made. These annuities, however, were not agreed to, and the proposed arrangement fell through. The sale of the estate has since been completed, and the plots claimed by the applicants were sold to, and vested in, one James Cormack on June 22nd, 1905. So far as the Estates Commissioners are concerned the matter is closed; but, on the application of Feehan and Cormack, and with the consent of the parties, a sum of £700 has been retained out of the purchase money of the estate by the Judicial Commissioners until he shall make a further order on the subject.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that persons placed in possession of parcels of land in the character of evicted tenants have disposed of the land at a profit; and whether steps will be taken to prevent the growth of a system of land jobbing under the Land Act of 1903.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estate Commissioners inform me that only one case has come to their notice in which a person placed in possession of a parcel as evicted tenant has sold the holding. As I have already informed the hon. Member, the Commissioners have no power to interfere with the sale by a tenant purchaser of his holding, and there seems no reason why such powers should be given to them.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a revaluation of Dublin city is about to take place; whether the Government intend to assimilate the procedure with that of Great Britain, by appointing local assessment committees to act in conjunction with the Commissioner of Valuation; and whether he is aware that the Dublin Corporation has twice passed resolutions against revaluation under the present system.

( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) Revaluation was asked for by the Corporation of Dublin shortly after the passing of the Dublin Corporation Act of 1900, and no communication has since been received from the Corporation objecting to the valuation being proceeded with. Legal difficulties, however, have intervened, and at present I am unable to say definitely when the revaluation will be begun.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state why station sergeants in the Dublin metropolitan police do not wear numbers on the collars of their tunics when on duty in the streets of the city.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed that station sergeants of the Dublin metropolitan police perform duty in the streets only on very exceptional occasions, in the absence of an inspector. They wear a distinctive uniform, and as there is no difficulty whatever in establishing their identity, if necessary, the Chief Commissioner is of opnion that no reason exists why police officers of this rank should wear numbers on their collars.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland (1) when do the Commissioners of National Education propose to carry out the recommendation of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Primary Education in Ireland, volume 1, page 531, that the existing provincial model schools should be gradually discontinued; (2) how many of the 1,961 national schools for boys only would be reduced to an average below fifty by the operation of Rule 127b; how many to forty or under; how many to thirty or under; (3) is there anything which prevents the National Board from consulting the representatives of managers and teachers of primary schools when making or repealing its rules; (4) if not, how often in the last five years were these representatives consulted; (5) how many of the Commissioners of National Education were students of Trinity College; (6) and how many passed through the Queen's Colleges.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The recommendation referred to in the Question is as follows:—104. That the existing provincial model schools should be gradually discontinued. This is followed by another recommendation, as under: 105. That all existing provincial model schools, which cannot be carried on by local committees as elementary schools on the present system, receiving only such sums as may be earned by their scholars on examination, or may be due to teachers, may be granted on lease to anybody applying for them as training schools, on easy terms such as will provide for their maintenance and repair. The Commissioners of National Education inform me that model schools have been aided like ordinary elementary national schools since 1900, and there is now no substantial difference between model schools and ordinary national schools vested in the Commissioners. The Commissioners have, from time to time, since the date of the Royal Commission referred to, closed several of the departments of the provincial model schools which they found were not required for the purposes of primary education, and they will continue to do so whenever necessary; but they have no present intention, in view of the circumstances above stated, to discontinue the provincial model schools generally. (2) If Rule 127b were enforced without reservation in the case of each of the schools referred to, it is possible that 202 would have the average attendance reduced somewhat below fifty, that 229 would have the average reduced to forty or under, and that 289 would have the average reduced to thirty or under. But Rule 127b is not enforced in the case of schools in which pupils under seven years of age have not been enrolled since the 1st July, 1905, and there may not have been any enrolments of the kind in many of the schools since that date. Further, the rule is not enforced in any case where there is the danger of loss of an assistant, and it is not enforced when there is no suitable school in the locality for boys under seven years of age. These reservations affect the application of the rule materially, and would render a detailed examination of each of the 1,961 case alluded to in the Question necessary before any statement, even approximating towards accuracy, could be made as to the effect of the rule. (3) and (4). There is nothing to prevent the National Board from consulting the representatives of managers and teachers when making or repealing rules if they consider such consultation necessary, and, as a matter of fact, such consultations have been held by the Board through, the Resident Commissioner. Deputations of managers or individual managers can at any time confer with the Resident Commissioner who attends at the Education Office daily, or appointments can be made for interviews on educational matters by letter. It is also known that individual members of the Board confer with managers and others concerned in education when important changes of rule are pending. But the Commissioners as a body do not confer with managers or teachers, nor do they consider it necessary to do so. The Commissioners always consider representations made to them by school managers or managers' associations in regard to their rules and regulations and adopt suggestions made of which they approve. Many such representations have been made to the Commissioners from time to time. The Commissioners further invite school managers to furnish them with an Annual Report in which the managers can express their opinions in regard to any matter connected with their schools or make suggestions for improvement of their schools. (5) and (6). There is no official information available on this subject.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Sheane estate, Cappanaclougher, Abbeyleix, Queen's County, has been withdrawn from the Land Judge's Court; and, if so, whether any steps are being taken with a view of sale to the tenants.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The registrar of the Land Judge's Court informs me that the lands of Cappanaclougher were never the subject of proceedings for sale in that Court, though other portions of the Sheane estate were. The Estates Commissioners have no knowledge of any proceedings for sale of the property.

TO ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can give the names, addresses, dates of eviction, and religion of the tenants evicted from their holdings, within the last twenty-seven years, on the De Vesci estate, Abbeyleix, Queen's County; how many of those farms are in the hands of planters; and what is the religion of the latter.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received nine applications for reinstatement from persons claiming as representatives of evicted tenants from the estate of Lord De Vesci, Queen's County. It appears from these applications that eight of the holdings are occupied by tenants, and that the remaining holding is in the owner's occupation. The Commissioners have no information as to the religion of either the evicted tenants or of the present occupants. To give the other particulars requested in every case in which they might be asked for would seriously add to the Commissioners' labour, and retard their proper work.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether proposals for sale to the tenants of the M'Neale (Minors) Estate, near Portarlington, Queen's County, have been received by the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, whether he will see that such sale be not sanctioned unless the Clonkeen portion of the property is included.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the negative. The Estates Commissioners are unable to make any statement as to what they may decide in a case which has not come before them.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, (1) what is the average daily attendance in urban and in rural national schools, and the respective urban and rural populations served by such schools respectively; (2) how many monitors are there in ordinary national schools; (3) what is the proportion of monitors to the average daily attendance; (4) (a) how many rural model schools are there in Ireland, ( b ) and the average daily attendance therein; (5) how many pupil teachers in model schools, and what is the proportion of pupil teachers to average attendance, and (6) the cost per pupil teacher; (7) how many pupil teachers trained during the last five years, and how many of these now teach in national schools; (8) and what is the cost per monitor in ordinary national schools.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Commissioners of National Education inform me that the following are the facts, according to the latest available Returns—

(2) Number of monitors in ordinary schools ( i.e., excluding model schools), 3,112. (3) Proportion of monitors to the average attendance, 1 to 150. (4) (a) There are no rural model schools; all the model schools are in cities or town; (b) the average daily attendance at the model schools, 6,650. (5) Number of pupil teachers in model schools, 172. Proportion of pupil teachers in model schools to the average attendance in such schools, 1 to 39. (6) Cost per pupil teacher who completed his service, about £58. (7) During the past five years 549 pupil teachers were appointed. During the same period 81 pupil teachers entered the service as teachers without further training, and 340 entered the training colleges with a view to becoming teachers subsequently. (8) Each monitor who completes his service receives as salary during that period £49, and each monitress receives as salary, for full period of service, £45.

TO ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the evening school session in Killadooly boys' school, Ballybrophy, Queen's County, terminated on the 9th March last, and the final inspection was held on the 2nd March, and that the grant has not yet been paid; and, seeing that similar delay has occurred in connection with other schools in the neighbourhood, can he say what has caused the delay; and whether he will see that payment is made to the teachers as soon as possible.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Commissioners of National Education that there has been no delay in the payment of capitation grants to evening schools. Payment has been made in the case of the Killadooly school. There are fourteen evening schools in Queen's County. In the case of ten, payment has been made; returns as to three are being awaited; and in the remaining case a question as to the non-observance of rules has arisen.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a family named Watters suffered eviction on the Beresford Estate at Kilcloney, county Carlow, in the year 1892; that the evicted farm of the Watters has been lately grazed on the eleven months' system by a man named O'Neill; that the estate is at present being sold under the Land Purchase Act of 1903; will he say whether an application for occupation and purchase has been received by the Estates Commissioners on behalf of O'Neill; whether the evicted farm is found by the Estates Commissioners as a parcel of untenanted land under the meaning of the Purchase Act; whether an application for reinstatement and purchase has been received by the Estates Commissioners on behalf of the Watters family; and, if so, will this family be reinstated in their old home.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I beg to refer the hon. Member to my Answer to his previous Question on this subject.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any application has been received from Terence Reilly, an evicted tenant, for restoration to his farm in Abbeylara parish, North Longford; and whether he can hold out any hopes that this man will be relieved in the near future.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received an application for reinstatement from Terence Reilly, whose former holding is now in the occupation of another tenant. The Commissioners have no power to interfere with the present tenant, but they will consider Reilly's application in the event of their acquiring untenanted land in the locality

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the reason why the free grant of school requisites has not yet been made to the six Catholic schools in the parish of Clonguish, county Longford.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Commissioners of National Education that the requisites in question are being distributed to schools in the order in which the applications for them were received. The requisites for the szhools at Clonguish were sent out on the 7th instant in order of priority.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any steps are being taken to restore to Joseph Mullooly, senior, and Joseph Mullooly, junior, to that part of the land of Rathcline parish from which they were evicted some years ago.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners inform me that applications for reinstatement have been received from Joseph Mullooly and Mrs. Bridget Mullooly. The holdings from which they were evicted were sold under the Land Acts in 1898. Each of the applicants is in the occupation of another farm, and the Commissioners have not so far taken any action upon their applications.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, in reference to the proposed appointment of junior assistant mistresses in boys' National Schools in Ireland, to state if the limit of age fixed for the candidates is from eighteen to thirty-five, their qualifications the same as those for manual instructresses, their salary £24 per annum without any prospect of increase and no pension; what special training will be required by these candidates; is there any precedent for the appointment of such mistresses; and whether, seeing that £24 a year is not an adequate salary for a young woman of eighteen to thirty-five years of age who has spent eighteen years of her life in the pursuit of education, he proposes to take any action in the matter.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Commissioners of National Education that the limits of age of junior assistant mistresses are eighteen and thirty-five; the fixed salary is £24 per annum; and there is no pension. No special training is prescribed. Candidates are appointed on probation, and are required to undergo examination at the next following Easter after appointment. Junior assistant mistresses who display ability are, after three years' service, eligible for appointment as assistant mistresses at a salary of £44 per annum and additional capitation grant. The Commissioners add that the post of junior assistant mistress has proved a very attractive one, and there is no lack of candidates for the appointments.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say how much of the shilling in the pound has been spent by the different unions in the city and county of Limerick for the building of cottages and acquiring plots of land for the labourers; and whether any of the unions are at present carrying through a scheme for the building of such cottages; what is the weekly rent for each cottage and half-acre plot, as well as for each cottage and acre plot, in the different unions; and how many of these cottages are there in each union in the county.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) A Parliamentary Return which is being prepared pursuant to an order of the House of Commons, dated 13th March 1906, will give the information asked for in the first part of the Question. The further particulars asked for are not at present available, but the Local Government Board will be prepared to give them when the annual returns for the year now ended have been furnished by the clerks of rural district councils.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state the amount which would be annually required to pay second grade salary to assistant teachers in Irish National Schools who have given ten years' efficient service; and whether, in view of the qualifications and training of these public servants, and of the salaries they receive, he will take steps to secure the sum required for the purpose out of the Development Fund.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Commissioners of National Education inform me that the amount which would be required in the case supposed could not be stated without the preparation of a Return involving considerable labour. Assistant teachers are, as a rule, uniformly paid third grade salaries, and under the former regulations they were, as a rule, paid third class salaries only. They cannot receive higher salaries than third grade unless they become principal teachers. If the suggestion made in the Question were adopted, the result would be, the Commissioners inform me, that some principal teachers would be paid third grade salary only, while many assistant teachers would receive second grade salary.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that the tenants' interest in a farm at Knockanore, Kilrush, county Wexford, from which certain tenants were evicted some years ago, is about to be sold by public auction on Thursday 11th April at Enniscorthy; and if the Estates Commissioners will take whatever steps are necessary to get possession of the farm, with a view to restoring it to the original tenants, in view of the fact that the estate on which this farm is situated is about to be sold under the Act of 1903.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners have no information as to the farm referred to in the Question. It does not appear that any proceedings for sale of the property are pending before the Commissioners, and, as the holding for sale appears to be held under a yearly tenancy, the Commissioners do not consider that they have any power to make an advance, or to expend money out of the reserve fund, for the purchase of the tenancy.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the number of officials whose salaries are on the Civil Service Estimates for Ireland for the current year whose salaries exceed £149 per annum each, with the aggregate amount of those salaries, and the number of these officials who are Catholics born in Ireland, with the aggregate amount of their salaries

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) To ascertain the number of officials whose salaries exceed £149 would be a very long process requiring the sending of circular to every department. The Irish Government have no information as to the religion of officials, and it would be entirely contrary to practice to seek to obtain such information.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. James P. O'Donnell, J.P., was appointed a delegate under the Londonderry and Lough Swilley (Burtonport Extension) Railway Adjustment Order of the 5th March, 1904, by the Glenties Rural District Council in April, 1904, January, 1905, and January, 1906, and that the clerk to the council has called the attention of the company to the fact that, during this period, Mr. O'Donnell has received no notification of the time and place of the holding of general meetings of the company at which business relating to the Burtonport extension was considered; and whether the Board of Works will obtain from the company an explanation of their failure to summon the delegate as required by the Order.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Local Government Board that the Order referred to, which is dated 1st March, 1904, requires the Glenties Rural District Council to elect a delegate, but neither the Local Government Board nor the Board of Works have any information as to the person appointed or as to the alleged failure of the company to give notification of the time and place of general meetings. I understand that the Board of Works have no power to compel the company to summon a delegate, but that the matter lies between the local authorities and the company.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a statement from the County Council of Donegal relative to the question of the appointment of natives of the county as instructors under a scheme of agricultural and technical instruction; what is the present position of this question; and will he request the Committee appointed to examine into the working of the Department of Agriculture to hold a sitting at Lifford, as desired by the county council.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I have received the statement referred to. I understand that there has been no change in the situation since my Answer to the Question of the hon. Member for South Donegal on 6th March.† The question whether the Committee of Inquiry will deal with the matter is one for their own discretion, but I am willing to transmit to them any suggestion the hon. Member may give me.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the increasing difficulty experienced by local bodies in the poorer parts of Ireland in doing their duty towards the sick poor, the aged, and other helpless classes, owing to the growth of the rates; and whether the Government intend to introduce any legislation on the lines recommended by the special Report of Lord Balfour of Burleigh and Lord Blair Balfour appended to the Report of the Royal Commission upon local taxation.

( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) There is no doubt much to be said in favour of the hon. Member's suggestion, but the question is one which affects the whole United Kingdom, and proposals on the lines indicated in the Question would probably be warmly contested.

To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in consideration of the fact that the wages of the labourers at the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich, have been increased from 21s. to 23s. per week, he will increase the wages of the labourers employed in the ordnance factories at Waltham Abbey and Enfield Lock to the same extent.

( Answered by Mr. Buchanan. ) The Question is under consideration.

To ask the Secretary of State for War the names of the gentlemen to whom the Sparkbrook factory was sold; the amount for which it was sold; the date of the agreement for sale; the value at which it stood in the books at that time; the number of rifles manufactured there in the last complete year before the sale; the average cost of each rifle; the number of rifles to be delivered to the Government annually by the present owners of Sparkbrook; and the price per rifle agreed to be paid to the company.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) The agreement for the sale of the factory has not yet been signed, and it would, therefore, be premature to give a reply to the Question of my hon. friend.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the bounty of Joseph Farrell, a militiaman in the 6th Battalion Rifle Brigade was stopped for a trifling error; and whether he will direct this man to be now paid, in view of his poverty.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) This man submitted his life certificate with a forged signature and the military authorities in Ireland ordered the forfeiture of the non-training bounty which was due on 1st October, in accordance with the regulations. There would not, therefore, appear to be any grounds for adopting the hon. Member's suggestion.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the refusal of the War Office to grant his quarter's pension to Daniel Harvey, of Longford, because he was three hours late at gun practice owing to the distance he had to travel by train; and will he revise this order and direct Harvey to be paid.

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) My attention has already been called to this matter by the hon. Member, who has been informed by letter of the true facts of the case, and that the Army Council upheld the decision to forfeit the portion of the man's reserve pay affected. To this information I have nothing to add.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the effect of the present system of paying Army pensions quarterly or monthly upon thriftlessness and pauperism among ex-soldiers, arrangements can be made for the payment of such pensions weekly

( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) The whole question of the mode of pay- ment of Army pensions is now receiving careful consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether one of the results of the Conference at Algeciras has been the virtual suppression of the clause in the Anglo-French Treaty which restricted the economic equality of all the Powers in Morocco to thirty years.

The Anglo-French declaration of April 8th, 1904, to which the Hon. Member no doubt refers, does not say that the economic equality of all the Powers in Morocco is to cease after thirty years. The mutual engagements entered into by the British and French Governments under that declaration are in no way modified, still less suppressed, by the stipulations of the convention signed at Algeciras.

Do I understand that the same result will take place as took place in the case of Madagascar?

My hon. friend must take the language of the Declaration as it stands; it does not imply that.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for East Bristol, as representing the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, whether he is aware that in 1903 the Commissioners sold nineteen acres, one rood, nine poles of glebe land belonging to the benefice of Brushford, Somersetshire, to Mr. G. F. Sydenham for £1,300, or about £67 per acre, although about seven acres of glebe land adjoining had been sold in 1872 to a railway company for £1,280, or about £183 per acre; and whether, before completion in July, 1904, part of the land had been resold and houses were being built thereon, and that, within three months of completion, six acres, twenty-two roods of the land, costing Mr. Sydenham about £410, were sold at public auction for £749; whether he is aware that the purchaser from the Commissioners, Mr. Sydenham, was attorney for his father, the then incumbent of the benefice, and at that time suffering from senile decay and unable to manage his own affairs, and that Mr. Sydenham was both acting vendor and actual purchaser; and will he say whether the Commissioners were aware at the time that the land was capable of being sold as building land and that the purchaser was managing the affairs of the incumbent; whether they made any local inquiries as to the facts; and, if so, from whom; and whether it is the custom of the Commissioners to have a report from a local valuer before making sales of this description.

The nineteen acres, one rood, nine perches of glebe land were sold by the late Rector of Brushford in 1903 with the consent of his patron (whose estate adjoined the land) and the approval of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for £1,300, but in addition a tithe rent charge of the commuted amount of £4 6s. 10d. per annum became on the sale payable by the purchaser to the imcumbent of the benefice. The Commissioners know nothing of the circumstances of the sale thirty years previously to a railway company nor of any re-sale of a portion of the nineteen acres by the purchaser. The proposal for the sale of the nineteen acres purported to be signed by the late rector himself and it was forwarded to the Commissioners by a local solicitor acting for him. The Commissioners were not informed that the purchaser held, as is alleged, a power of attorney for the transaction of the rector's business on his behalf, nor had they any knowledge of the rector's state of health. The Commissioners were advised by their own surveyors and refused the price first offered by the purchaser, but approved the proposal on the offer of an increased price, at which their surveyors were of opinion that the sale might be allowed in the interests of the benefice. It appears to me personally, unfortunate that the identity of name of the incumbent with that of the purchaser was not more fully noticed.

On behalf of the hon. Member for Denbighshire, W., I beg to ask the hon. Member for East Bristol, as Church Estates Commissioner, whether his attention has been drawn to a scheme made by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for the union of the rectories of St. Michael's, Cornhill, and of St. Peter-le-Poor, in the city of London; whether he will state what the population of the united benefices will be, and what will be the value of the united benefice, including the rent of the house formerly used as the parsonage house; whether the scheme permits the incumbent of the united benefices to be non-resident; whether he will state upon what basis the pension of the retiring incumbent has been calculated; and whether the Ecclesiastical Commissioners are prepared to consider a modification of the financial arrangements of the scheme.

The aggregate population of the parishes (according to the census of 1901) is 488; the population of the united parish will be somewhat loss, as a portion of the parish of St. Peter-le-Poor is to be added to the contiguous parish of All Hallows, London Wall. The income of the rectory of St. Michael, Cornhill, is now £1,578 (including the rent of the parsonage house). The income of the united benefice will be £750, and in addition, so long as the incumbent shall not be required to reside in the parsonage house (which is now let for £550 per annum), he will receive the rent thereof. The scheme contains no other provision in relation to the residence of the incumbent. The amount of the pension provided for the incumbent of the benefice of St. Peter-lo-Poor with St. Benet Fink in the event of his retiring for the purpose of brining the union into effect is the amount of the annual income of his benefice. In view of the great benefits to the Church in some populous suburban districts which will result from the proposals contained in the scheme, the completion of which has already been delayed by unavoidable causes, the Ecclesiastical Commissioners would deprecate any suggestion for a variation of its terms to which the consents of all parties have been given. Any variation would involve the reconsideration and consent of all the parties to the scheme.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will state the conditions under which; skinned lands, that is land from which the peats have been removed, have been offered to the crofters of the township of Garrabost, Island of Lewis, for the purpose of enabling the crofters to enlarge the agricultural land of their crofts.

No conditions, I am informed, were attached to the use of the skinned lands, except equal division.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the fact that the failure of an election for a School Board in the parish of Lochs, Island of Lewis, is attributable to the notice of the election not having been posted on the school door sufficiently early to admit of the nomination papers reaching the returning officer by the date specified, will he state who is responsible, and what steps have been taken to obviate a similar irregularity hereafter.

I beg to refer the hon. Member to Sections 6 and 8 of the General Order regulating the triennial election of School Boards (a copy of which has been sent to him). I have no information that the returning officer has failed to comply with the requirements contained therein.

I asked the right hon. Gentleman a specific Question. I asked who was responsible; this document with which I am furnished at the last moment does not give me the information I want.

^* Order, order; the hon. Member appears to be making a speech.

I do not desire to do that, Sir. What I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman is that he would give a specific Answer to that specific Question. Will he state who is responsible.

Will the hon. Gentleman put down a separate Question with regard to that.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that Dr. Dittmar, in his Report on the sanitary condition of the island of Lewis, states that, with three exceptions, every house in the township of Arnol, parish of Barvas, is grossly insanitary, and could be certified as a nuisance under the Public Health Act; and, seeing that it is now a year since this Report was made, will he state what action has been taken in the matter, especially having regard to the fact that the township contains a population of 347, all of whom might at any moment become the victims of an epidemic of typhus or typhoid fever.

I beg also to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that Dr. Dittmar, in his Report on the sanitary condition of the Island of Lewis, states that the water supplies in the whole of the island, with few exceptions, consist of shallow dip wells, liable to all kinds of surface pollution, and in the case of typhoid fever certain to be contaminated by drinking vessels from infected households; and will he state what action it is proposed to take to place the water supply for the island on a satisfactory basis, especially having regard to the fact that a recent outbreak of typhoid fever at Habost, Ness, Lewis, in which seventy-five persons were affected, is attributable to the water supply being contaminated.

These two Questions may be answered together. As the hon. Member already knows, the Government is well aware of the facts detailed in Dr. Dittmar's Report, generally, as well as in regard to the points mentioned in these Questions; every endeavour is being made to prepare plans for the improvement of existing conditions, which are the growth and accumulation of years.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether the chief inspector of schools, on his visit to Gartmoor on 20th March, succeeded in inducing the school board to rescind their resolution dismissing Mr. Menzies, or what other steps the Education Department have taken or contemplate taking in the matter.

The chief inspector at his visit, though he failed to induce the school board to rescind the resolution dismissing Mr. Menzies, seems to have succeeded in reducing the question at issue between the parties to that of the terms of an apology. The department is now in further communication with the board.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade what communications, if any, were addressed by the Board of Trade to the Midland Great Western Railway Company, pursuant to the Reports of the board's inspectors on the condition of the Royal Canal; and will he explain why the Board of Trade held inquiries, in view of the expense to those who obtain it and to the State, if the board are unable to give effect to the recommendations of their own inspectors and to protect this public waterway from destruction.

I am making inquiries into this matter, and if the hon. Member will put a further Question after Easter I will give him an Answer then.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade having regard to the facts that the Royal Canal was constructed as a waterway for public use, largely with moneys voted by the Irish Parliament, was subsequently acquired by the Midland Great Western Railway Company, subject to the statutory obligation of maintaining the canal in a navigable condition for public use, that the railway company in their own interest have allowed the canal to become unnavigable, and that all these facts have been ascertained and reported by inspectors of the Board of Trade, whether the Board of Trade will, on behalf of the public, enforce the statutory obligation by compelling the railway company to execute the works of restoration and maintenance which that company's neglect has rendered necessary.

In view of the special position of the Board of Control under the Acts relating to the canal, it is for that board to consider what are their legal powers to cause the matters complained of to be set right, and whether there is prima facie ground for proceedings to be taken. I understand that the necessary inquiries have been ordered in both these directions.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is of the Board of Control of the company of which we complain?

[No Answer was returned.]

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether under General Rule 39 of The Mines Regulation Act it is competent for the local (or workmen's) inspectors to select the portions of seams or pits which they would desire to inspect; whether at a colliery where there are three pits, and a partial inspection of No. 1 pit was made on Monday, would it be competent for the workmen's inspectors at their own option to demand to inspect No. 3 on Tuesday, before No. 1 is finished; and can he say who is the determining authority in such a case.

I am advised that under Section 49, General Rule 38 of the Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887, the persons appointed by the men to inspect a mine are entitled to go to any part of the mine, and there appears to be nothing in the rule to compel them to finish the examination of one pit before entering another. The owner, however, is entitled under the rule to send officials with the persons making the inspection; and reasonable notice of the latter's wish to examine a mine or part of a mine should be given to the management, so that arrangements can be made for other officials to perform the duties of those who for the time being are occupied in going round with the men's representatives.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that a woman named Mary Lyons died on Sunday last from anthrax, after having been employed for some time by Messrs. Campbell & Harrison, of Shipley, near Bradford; whether he is aware that at this firm's works sixteen cases of anthrax, resulting in eight deaths, have occurred during the last two years; and whether he proposes to take immediate action in the matter.

Inquiries have been made into this case. It appears that the deceased woman was employed on several kinds of wools, including Persian, but at a late stage of their treatment, in comb-minding, after the wool had been opened and sorted, washed in three wash bowls, and passed through other processes. Unfortunately, medical advice was not called in until a few hours before her death, and as she was only absent from her work for one day, and that day a Saturday, no suspicion was aroused at the works, or she would have been visited, I understand, at once by the firm's doctor. Since my previous Answer to the hon. Member with regard to this firm, the conditions have, I am informed, been further improved; and the present case cannot be traced to any neglect of the precautions required by the regulations, which are being fully observed. The state of things is undoubtedly serious, and I am communicating with the newly established Anthrax Committee with a view to special and early attention being given to the dangers arising from Persian wool.

^* : I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can take any steps, administrative or other, to promote the institution of special courts for the trial of children, and to secure provision that children before trial should be detained elsewhere than in police cells.

Yes, sir. I have already taken action in both the matters mentioned. I am in communication with magistrates as to the making of arrangements for the separation of cases in which children are concerned from the ordinary criminal business of the courts and with the police authorities as to the detention of children before trial. The replies I have received are on the whole satisfactory, and show that both magistrates and police are generally anxious to co-operate with the Home Office in preventing in every practicable way the association of children with adult offenders. In a few weeks, when the replies to my inquiries are complete, I shall be able to decide whether any further action is necessary.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has instructed Mines Inspector Ronaldson to prosecute Messrs. A. G. Moore & Company, owners of the Carronrigg Colliery in Stirlingshire, on the said inspector's information that Messrs. A. G. Moore & Company, having abandoned the Carronrigg mine on December 2nd last, had failed to send in a plan of the workings within the period of three months required by Clause 38 of The Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887; whether he is aware that Inspector Ronaldson's information was incorrect, inasmuch as, although actual working of coal in the mine was stopped, and the stoppage duly reported, on December 2nd, the mine was not abandoned till February 27th, when the pumps and rails were removed and the company's manager left the ground, and the abandonment was duly reported on March 30th; whether, under these circumstances, he will at once direct Inspector Ronaldson to withdraw from the prosecution of Messrs. A. G. Moore & Company, who have been summoned to appear before the sheriff in Stirling on Wednesday next, April 11th; and whether he will warn Inspector Ronaldson to avoid such proceedings in future.

Yes, sir, I instructed the inspector to take proceedings against this firm for failure to send in the plan required by the Act. In so doing, I acted on the formal notice previously given by the firm that the mine had been abandoned on December 2nd, and on the inspector's report that the plan had not been sent in within the prescribed period. Since the prosecution was directed the plan has been sent in by the firm, and a statement has been made to me by them that though working for coal was discontinued on December 2nd, men were employed for some time afterwards in the mine in removing rails and other materials, and it was not in fact actually abandoned till the end of February. I have no reason for questioning the accuracy of this statement, and in the circumstances, and as the plan has been received, I have decided to stay the proceedings. No blame whatever in the matter attaches to the inspector, who gave the firm, on receiving from them the notice of abandonment, the usual reminder to send in the plan within the prescribed period, and who has acted properly throughout.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what was the cost of the erection of the Law Courts in London; whether any new Law Courts have been erected in Dublin or Edinburgh during the last fifty years; and, if so, at what date and what cost; and whether any alterations or additions to existing Law Courts have been made in the same cities during the same period; and if so, at what cost, and from what sources did the money come.

The total cost of the erection of the Law Courts in London was in round figures £2,000,000, of which a considerable proportion was defrayed from the suitors' funds. During the last fifty years three additional courts have been built in Dublin, namely:—(1) The Landed Estates Court and Offices, 1858 to 1861, at a cost of £19,879; (2) Probate Court, 1863, £5,359; (3) Bankruptcy Court, 1865–1867, £10,931. During this period no Law Courts have been erected in Edinburgh. The information asked for in the last part of the Question would be very laborious to compile, as it would involve an examination of the accounts under several headings for a period of fifty years; and I trust that my hon. friend will agree with me that the trouble involved in the preparation of the return would scarcely be justified by the result.

But the return is not complete; in 1894 the Bank of Ireland advanced £15,000 for public works.

^* : Order, order. The hon. Member must not give information.

Well, I should like to ask whether, in view of the enormous amount of money spent in Dublin and London the Law Courts of Edinburgh should not be put into a proper condition?

I am not aware that they are not in a proper condition. The hon. Gentleman must address that Question to the First Commissioner of Works. With regard to the funds as to which I was asked: those funds were to build the Law Library and not the Law Courts

Is not my hon. friend aware that a recent Report has been issued, showing that accommodation in the Edinburgh courts is urgently necessary, and will he take steps to find such accommodation?

As I have already said to the hon. Member for the Central Division of Edinburgh, that is a Question which should be addressed to my right hon. friend the First Commissioner of Works.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury the cost per head of population for the salaries of the judicial courts in England and Wales, Scotland, and Ireland respectively, exclusive of the House of Lords; and the average salary earned by the county court judges of England and Wales and the sheriffs in Scotland respectively in the year 1905.

By "salaries of the judicial courts," I understand my hon. friend to refer to the salaries of the judges of the superior courts which are charged on the Consolidated Fund. On this assumption the answer to the first part of the question is:—England and Wales cost per head 1·1 penny, Scotland 2·5 pennies, Ireland 3·3 pennies. The average salary earned by county court judges in England and Wales in 1905 was £1,500 per annumn. The average salary earned by sheriffs in Scotland in that year was £914.

Does that include the charges for stipendiary magistrates in England?

No. My hon. friend asked me only in respect to county court judges. The salary of a county court judge is £1,500 a year, and therefore the average salary of the county court judges in England must be £1,500 a year.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware of the distress suffered by the unemployed in Manchester and of the fact that the last Report of the Distress Committee showed that 5,600 are still on the Manchester unemployed register; and whether, seeing that he has refused to receive a deputation from the committee, he will state whether he proposes to give better facilities to the committees for meeting the demands for work and announce when he intends to introduce proposals for meeting the difficulties and distress due to unemployment.

The number of persons remaining on the Manchester unemployed register yesterday was, I understand, 1,864. I cannot at present fix a date for the introduction of the Bill to amend the Unemployed Workmen Act, and I fear I must repeat what I have already stated, namely, that I cannot give any intimation as to the nature of the proposals which the Bill will contain.

I bog to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been directed to Section 54, Sub-section (4), of the Land Purchase (Ireland) Act, 1903, and the provision therein which makes void a charge on registered land created by will unless such charge is registered within six months from the death of the testator; whether, having regard to the fact that such registration is in many cases impossible owing to the will not being proved within six months, and to the fact that the person to whom a charge on registered land is loft may be unaware of the bequest, or may be kept in ignorance of it by the devisee of the land untill the time allowed for registration has expired, he will introduce an amendment of the section to make the six months run from the date of probate and throw upon the personal representative the duty of registering all charges on registered land created by the will.

My attention has been called to the section to which the hon. Member refers, and I agree with him that an amendment of the law is required in the direction pointed out by him. The matter is not, however, in the opinion of the Government, sufficiently urgent to justify the introduction of a Bill specially dealing with the subject, but in the event of a Bill being at any time introduced to amend the Land Purchase Acts generally, I shall most favourably consider his recommendation.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have any prospect of being able to reinstate Edward Fagan, evicted tenant, Westmeath, in his former holding, or of getting a new holding for him.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received an application from Edward Fagan, who claims reinstatement as the son of a deceased evicted tenant. The Commissioners wrote to Fagan on 16th March, asking him to indicate the estate upon which he claims reinstatement, but he has not yet replied.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will direct the Estates Commissioners to have James Lynch, of Monmore, near Kilrush, in the county of Clare, an evicted tenant on the estate of Mr. Marcus Keane, in the county of Clare, who is selling his property, reinstated, the necessary forms having been lodged with the Estates Commissioners in November, 1906; and whether, seeing that Lynch was decreed at the last quarter sessions in Kilrush for trespass on the farm from which he has been evicted, and has since appealed to the summer assizes, he will direct that proceedings may be stayed until the Estates Commissioners have reinstated him.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received no application for the reinstatement of James Lynch on the estate of Mr. Marcus Keane, no proceedings for the sale of which are pending before them. The Commissioners will doubtless consider any application which they may receive, but I have no jurisdiction to give the directions suggested.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the fact that the sale of this estate is pending, and Mr. Marcus Keane has expressed himself as being willing to reinstate this evicted tenant, the right hon. Gentleman will see whether something cannot be done to withdraw the prosecution against this man for trespass on the farm from which he had been evicted but upon which the landlord has agreed to put him back?

I could hardly say whether it is possible to do that, because to interfere with legal proceedings is not in my power. I should say the first thing to be done is for Mr. Lynch to make an application. he does not seem to have done that yet.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Michael Sheedy, who is a caretaker on the farm from which James Lynch, of Monmore, near Kilrush, in the county of Clare, has been evicted, fired two shots from a revolver at Lynch and threatened to take his life if he found him again on the farm from which he had been evicted; will he say if Sheedy has a licence to carry arms, and, if so, who gave him the licence; and will the matter be reported to the Lord Chancellor for Ireland so that the licence may be withdrawn from Sheedy.

I am informed by the police authorities that James Lynch has made a complaint to the effect that on March 20th when he was on the farm from which he had been evicted Michael Sheedy, the caretaker, fired two shots from a revolver, not at him, but as if to intimidate him. Sheedy possesses a licence under the Peace Preservation Act, which was granted to him by the resident magistrate of the district. The question of revoking that licence, which will be for the Lord Lieutenant to determine, will not be considered until the prosecution which is being instituted by Lynch has concluded.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Patrick W. Sullivan, of Greenane, Templenoe, county Kerry, applied for a gun licence on 1st January; and can he state why the licence has been refused by Captain Crane, R.M.

I am inquiring into this matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, having regard to the pressure within the law under which many tenants are now signing agreements to purchase their holdings, and the facility afforded for the exercise of this pressure by the abolition of inspection in cases within the zones, whether a record will be kept of all sales sanctioned without inspection, with a view to applications based upon that ground for relief from the payment of annuities so contracted.

Without discussing the foundation upon which the hon. Member bases this Question, I may say that I am informed that the records kept by the Estates Commissioners in every case of purchase show whether the case falls within or without the zones set up by the Act of 1903, i.e., whether or no inspection has been made.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland when a landlord proposes to sell his estate within the zones, and is primâ facie entitled under the Land Act of 1903 to have the sale sanctioned without inspection, how, by whom, and with what class of facts are the Estates Commissioners moved to exercise their discretion on the question of price; is it open to the tenants who, under pressure, have signed purchase agreements in such a case to afterwards invoke the protection of the Commissioners in this respect; and will the Commissioners entertain such an application.

The Estates Commis-missioners inform me that the reply to the first part of the Question is that they can exercise no discretion as regards price. The second part of the Question raises a point on the interpretation of the Estates Commissioners' powers under the Act of 1903 and former Acts, which is one of much complexity, and upon which I can hardly venture to offer an opinion, even if an opinion on so intricate a subject could be brought within the limits of an Answer. On the question of the meaning of equitable, I may refer to the judgment of Mr. Justice Meredith in the case of the King-Harman estate. As to what constitutes duress, the hon. and learned Member knows this to be a matter in which the principle is clear but the application often difficult.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state how many estates have been sold under the Land Act of 1903 without inspection for value or for security.

I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that full information as to the number of holdings sold which came within the zones, and which, therefore, were not inspected for security will appear in the Commissioners' Report to the 31st March, 1906, now in course of preparation.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the character of the duties of land valuers, inspectors, lay sub-commissioners, and assessors, engaged in the fixing of judicial rents, and the necessity for a code of instructions recognised by the most competent men so engaged, and recognised for analogous purposes by the Estates Commissioners, he will require the preparation and use of a code of instructions embodying the principles upon which those officials are to act and the elements they are to take into account in preparing their report, so that the suitors may know upon what principles their interests and property are being dealt with; and will he afford Parliament an opportunity of considering such instructions in draft before their final adoption.

This Question is based on a misapprehesion as to the constitution and jurisdiction of the Land Commission acting under the Land Law Acts in relation to the fixing of judicial rents. The executive Government have no right or legal power to interfere with the Land Commission in the exercise of their judicial functions. Any such instructions which may be in force were referred to in my reply to the hon. Member's Question of yesterday.†

^* : I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any of the witnesses examined on behalf of ex-Head Constable Farrell at the recent constabulary investigation in Belfast have been transferred from Belfast, and, if so, on what grounds; whether inquiry will be made into the conduct of District Inspector Redmond in connection with that investigation; whether this district inspector recommended, or has been consulted with regard to any transfer; and whether, having regard to the fact that the case for the defence was supported by twenty-six police witnesses and twelve civilian witnesses, and that the removal of any of the police witnesses conveys an implication of perjury on those thirty-eight witnesses, he will direct a reconsideration of the proposed removal of any of the witnesses.

I am informed by the Inspector-General that he has ordered the transfer from Belfast of two of the constabulary witnesses who were examined at the investigation referred to. Such transfer has been ordered, not on account of the evidence given at the inquiry, but because, in the Inspector-General's opinion, the officers in question had failed in the zealous performance of their duties. The Inspector-General does not consider any inquiry into the conduct of District Inspector Redmond to be necessary. The district inspector did

† See (4) Debates, clv., 1004.

not recommend any transfer, nor was he consulted in the matter. The fact that the transfers mentioned have been ordered does not convey any implication whatever that the witnesses who gave evidence were guilty of perjury, and the Inspector-General sees no ground for re-considering his decision in the matter.

^* : Will the right hon. Gentleman explain exactly why these witnesses were removed. He says they were removed not because they gave evidence for the defence but because of general police charges.

I do not say that these matters were "charges." They were thought by the Inspector-General not to have discharged their duties in a satisfactory way.

^* : Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it is highly desirable when two witnesses for the defence are removed from the town that this House should be told clearly why they were removed?

I have given the hon. Member all the information in my possession. Nobody is involved in a charge of perjury; there was no question of perjury. There were a great many differences of opinion and a great many different statements made but they did not involve perjury.

^* : I shall put down another Question on the subject after Easter.

^* : I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state by what means the solicitor for the prisoners in the prosecutions at the Tyrone assizes, for shooting at Nationalists, obtained access to the petty sessions records of the Crown witnesses; and whether he will ascertain if the petty sessions clerk, who is employed in this solicitor's office, assisted his employer in obtaining such access.

I am informed that the clerk of petty sessions supplied the defendants' solicitor with copies of the depositions in the case referred to, as he was bound by statute to do, but that he gave no access to any other records of the court either to the solicitor in question or to any other person. The clerk states that he was employed in the solicitor's office prior to his appointment as petty sessions clerk, but that he is not now so employed.

^* : I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland with reference to the recent prosecutions at the Tyrone assizes for shooting at Nationalists, whether he can state the names of the counsel who prosecuted on behalf of the Crown; whether he can say if the jury was exclusively Unionist; and what was the result of the prosecution.

^* : The names of the counsel who prosecuted for the Crown in the prosecution referred to in the Questions are Messrs. Alexander Lane and A. L. Horner, K.C. They are the ordinary Crown Prosecutor's for the county. I have no knowledge as to the political views of any of the jury, and the Crown Solicitor informs me that he did not enquire into their views or direct any juror to stand by. The prosecution resulted in an acquittal.

^* : Are we to understand that what was done when these Unionists were prosecuted was that the two counsel who were engaged in the case were the Unionist candidates for North and South Tyrone, that the prisoners were tried before a Unionist judge and jury, and is the hon. Member surprised that under those circumstances the prisoners were acquitted?

^* : Mr. Horner was a candidate for one of the Divisions of Tyrone, but I do not know that Mr. Lane was a candidate for any constituency. I found that these two gentlemen had been for some years the usual Crown prosecutors. It is not usual to remove prosecutors because they are candidates for Parliament. No attempt was made by the Crown to interfere with the ordinary balloting for the jury. No juror was asked to stand by.

^* : I did not suggest that Mr. Lane was a candidate. What I suggested was that the prosecution was conducted by the Unionist candidate for South Tyrone, and the defence by the Unionist candidate for North Tyrone.

The hon. Member has stated that no juror was asked to stand by. May I ask whether that practice will be observed in other parts of Ireland?

^* : I think the hon. Member is aware of the rules in force as to standing by. It is left in the hands of the Crown Solicitor and he gets instructions from the counsel, and I think the Crown Solicitor always acts in accordance with instructions.

^* : Is it usual for Crown prosecutors to prosecute in counties where they are the candidates for seats in Parliament.

^* : I really do not know. I must ask the hon. Member to put down a Question.

^* : I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that thirteen Orangemen, accused of firing revolvers and injuring property at Donemana, county Tyrone, after the Tyrone elections, have been discharged, although the magistrates were of opinion that the case was proved; whether he is aware that two respectable young men accused of injuring a hoarding for the purposes of a bonfire, after the West Belfast elections, were returned for trial to the assizes, when they were sent to prison for three months; and whether, having regard to the inequality of treatment, and to the nature of the offence in the latter case, he will order the release of the two young men sentenced at the Belfast assizes.

I am informed that in the Donemana case the defendants were discharged upon giving sureties to keep the peace for twelve months. I understand that the facts in the Belfast case are substantially as stated. It is not within my province to take the course suggested. The prerogative of mercy in such cases is vested in the Lord-Lieu- tenant, to whom any petition for mitigation of punishment should be addressed.

^* : In view of the fact that the offence committed in the county Tyrone was much the graver of the two, cannot the right hon. Gentleman make a representation to the Lord-Lieutenant upon this subject.

It is quite open for anybody to make a representation to the Lord-Lieutenant upon this subject, and I am quite sure that any representation made to him will be most carefully considered by him.

^* : I bog to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether in view of the fact that no periodical Returns are issued with regard to agrarian outrages in England, he will give directions to have the Irish Returns forthwith discontinued.

This Question is receiving my consideration.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that as a Sub-Land Commission was held in March, 1902, in Mohill, county Leitrim, when some of the cases were appealed against by the landlords, and that the Head Commission is to hold a court in Carrick on Shannon in this month, at which the appeals will be heard, he will explain why such a length of time—over four years—was allowed to elapse.

I am informed by the Land Commission that the last sitting at which appeals from the Mohill district were heard took place in January, 1905, when the list for hearing included all cases in which appeals were lodged prior to June, 1902. The list for hearing during the present month will include all cases in which appeals were lodged prior to February, 1905. The Commissioners inform me that it is not possible to hold more frequent sittings for this district and at the same time have due regard to the claims of other districts.

^* : I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state on what grounds a man named Crawford, sentenced to a year's imprisonment for illegal coining at Belfast, was released at the end of a few weeks; under what circumstances Constable Graham, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, was ordered to remove to county Tyrone; for what reason Constable Fraser was removed from detective duty to ordinary police duty; on what grounds Constable Irwin was censured; and whether any admonition was addressed to District Inspector Clayton in connection with the circumstances of the prosecution of M'Devitt and Crawford.

I am informed that Crawford was released by order of the Lords Justices. It is not usual to state the reasons for the exercise of the prerogative of mercy in such cases, but in this case I think it right to say that additional facts came to light which cast doubts upon the guilt of Crawford, and the learned Judge who tried the case advised that the prisoner should be released. The remaining facts of the Question deal with the internal decipline of the Royal Irish Constabulary, as to which it would be contrary to practice to give information. I may, however, state that it is not the fact that Constable Irwin was censured.

^* : Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is a fact that the whole charge upon which this man was convicted was organised by the police of Belfast, and whether the police at Belfast supplied the whole of the material used in the illegal coining.

I know nothing of the facts, but I cannot believe it to be as the hon. Member stated.

^* : Why then does the right hon. Gentleman decline to answer the Question as to why these police were removed from Belfast, and why Crawford was discharged from prison.

I have given all the information in my power. It would not be proper for mo to relate all that passed, but I have given the hon. Member all the information I have.

^* : Is it a fact that this man was convicted and sent to prison, and afterwards released by the Lords Justices? Is it a fact that he was released because he alleged that he was led into a trap by the police, and because the Lords Justices satisfied themselves that that charge was true?

I do not know anything of the facts. I have given the hon. Member all the information that I have.

^* : I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the case of the Earl of Annesley, landlord, John M'Crickard, tenant, in which Sub-Commissioner M'Connell added 50 per cent. to the acreable rent for proximity to the town of Newcastle; and whether he can state if there is any other land case recorded in which the rent has been increased to a similiar extent for a similar reason.

I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the land case of the Earl of Annesley, landlord, and John Rooney, tenant, in which the acreable rent was increased by 20 per cent. on account of proximity to Newcastle, county Down, whether he is aware that Sub-Commissioner M'Connell admitted in his report that the holding was fit only for sheep-grazing; whether there are any instructions to sub-commissioners to the effect that holdings fit only for sheep-grazing are more valuable when in proximity to a town; and, if not, on what grounds the increase of rent is sought to be justified.

These Questions appear to refer to judicial decisions of a Sub-Commission Court. The Land Commission inform mo that they do not think it right to enter upon a discussion of such judicial decisions, for reasons set forth in my reply to a similar Question put by the hon. Member for East Galway yesterday.† A remedy in such cases is afforded by the statutory right of appeal. I am informed that no such instructions as are referred to in the latter Question have been issued by the Land Commission.

† See (4) Debates, cxv., 1011.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can say if the Treasury, in calculating the terms of repayment on advances made under the Act of 1903 for the purchase of land, took into account the fact that an unchangeable annuity of £3 5s. for sixty-eight and a half years is the exact equivalent of the £4 annuity with decadal reductions for a period of seventy-two and a half years, the terms of repayment for loans advanced under the Act of 1896; whether he is aware that the price paid by tenants under the Act of 1903, without the safeguard to the Treasury of inspection for value, far exceeds the price sanctioned by the Land Commission under former Acts, these prices being reported on and approved of by the Land Commission inspector who visited the holdings to ascertain whether the State had security in the land for repayment of the loan; and, in view of the fact that the Estates Commissioners have been obliged to issue more than 1,000 processes for recovery of annuity or interest on loan due to the Land Commission under the Act of 1903, he will take such steps as may be necessary to safeguard the Treasury from loss and to prevent the necessity of evictions.

I am informed that the Treasury had regard to the amount of the annuity, 3¼ per cent., and did not take the comparison referred to into account. As to the remainder of the Question, I beg to refer to my replies to the Questions of the hon. Member for West Waterford on the 5th March,† and of the hon. Member for North Westmeath on the 27th March,‡ which fully dealt with the matter, and to which I can add nothing.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant, of Ireland whether, seeing that it was the practice in all transactions for the sale and purchase of land, under the Ashbourne Acts and Mr. Gerald Balfour's Act, for the Land Commission

† See (4) Debates, cliii., 104–5.

‡ See (4) Debates, cliv., 1077–79., 1045.

to send an inspector to make an examination of each holding and report whether, taking into consideration both the interest of the landlord and of the tenant, the holding was security for the advance before the price agreed on was sanctioned, he can say in how many cases in the counties of Cork and Limerick did the Land Commission inspector report that the land was not security to the State for the agreed price, and what was the number of years' purchase settled between the landlord and tenant to be paid in these rejected bargains.

; I am informed by the Land Commission that, under the Rules of the 16th March, 1897, all agreements for purchase and applications for advances under the Acts of 1885 and 1891 were referred to an inspector to report as to the security for the advance and other matters. It was, however, provided by the supplementary rules of the 17th May, 1901, that the inspection might be dispensed with if the Commissioners were otherwise satisfied as to the security for the advance. The Commissioners inform me that it would occupy considerable time and necessitate the withdrawal from their proper work of clerks at present fully occupied, to analyse all the applications for advances from the counties of Cork and Limerick which have been refused, dismissed, or withdrawn for defects in title, irregularity, insufficiency of security, and other causes since 1885, in order to ascertain the number of those which were refused for insufficiency of security. In the circumstances I do not think that the Commissioners should be asked to undertake the preparation of the statistics asked for, as it is undesirable to delay the progress of their very important work.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that agreements for the sale of the estates of the Marquis of Ely in county Fermanagh were perfected so long ago as November or December, 1903; whether the proceedings for sale to the tenants are still pending; if so, what is the cause of the delay in completion; and whether he will direct the attention of the Estates Commissioners to this property with a view to purchase by them, if direct sale to the tenants be not possible.

I understand that this estate is for sale in the Land Judge's Court. The Registrar of that Court informs me that no agreements for the sale of the estate were perfected in 1903 or at any time, but that negotiations for sale are in progress. The estate has not come in any way before the Estates Commissioners.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Kerry I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state, in connection with the sale of land by landlords, either to tenants, the Estates Commissioners, or the Congested Districts Board, in the county of Kerry, under the Act of 1903, the name of landlord, area of property, valuation, yearly rental, purchase money, bonus on purchase money, date when agreements to purchase were lodged, and date when sale was sanctioned or approved of.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that their Annual Report and Monthly Returns, now in course of preparation, will give ample information by counties as to all holdings sold under the Act of 1903. I am forwarding to the hon. Member a Return giving particulars of the purchases made by the Congested Districts Board in County Kerry.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Irish Government has taken any steps by way of carrying into effect the recommendations of the Viceregal Commission which recently inquired into the diminution of salmon and trout in the rivers of Ireland; whether the establishment of an Irish Fishery Department responsible to Parliament and independent of the Department of Agriculture is contemplated, as recommended by the Commission; whether anything has been done or will shortly be done for the establishment of hatcheries upon the River Erne; and, if he will recommend a subsidy from the Irish Development Grant towards the efforts of the Lough Erne Steamboat Company to develop tourist traffic in the Enniskillen district, by their establishment of a daily steamer service from Enniskillen to Castle Caldwell and Belieek, upon one of the most beautiful of the lakes of Ireland.

The Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction have taken steps to carry out the recommendations of the Commission referred to so far as the existing law and their available funds permit. The recommendations which have been acted on are:—The establishment and maintenance of fish hatcheries; the provision of grants in aid of Boards of Conservators and other bodies charged with the protection of fisheries; engineering and financial assistance in the construction of fish passes, and the making of scientific investigations into the life history and migrations of the salmonidæ. The hon. Member is mistaken in thinking that the Commission recommended the establishment of a Fishery Board independent of the Department of Agriculture. They recommended the creation of a Fishery Board under the Department of Agriculture similar to the Boards which at present exist for Agriculture and Technical Instruction. This recommendation has not been carried out, but I should suppose that it will be considered by the committee of inquiry into the working of the Department which has just been appointed. There is a hatchery on the Erne subsidised by the Department and capable of an annual output of about one million of fry. No application for a subsidy to the Lough Erne Steamboat Company has been received, and it would not be possible to give a decision in the matter until the scheme has been fully explained and considered. I may, however, say that having regard to the many claims upon the Development Grant, it is improbable that assistance to any private steamboat company would be afforded from that fund, much as I desire to see further development of tourist traffic on a lake of singular beauty.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of refusing all applications with regard to what is left of the Irish development fund, except for the purpose for which it was granted, namely, education.

It is very dangerous to give a general promise, but I am quite alive to the possibility to which the hon. and learned Member refers.