To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the Government of India is willing to sanction the recruiting of Indian coolies for work in the Transvaal, either on the railways, or on the farms, or in the mines, upon the terms of the British Guiana Ordinance. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) No application for Indian coolies has been addressed to the Government of India by or on behalf of the Transvaal Government, and I cannot at present say whether, if such an application were made, the Government of India would be willing to agree to it on the terms mentioned in the Question.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland, if he will lay upon the Table before Whitsuntide the promised Minute with reference to the training of teachers in Scotland, so that members may have the opportunity of consulting their constituents about it during the recess, in anticipation of the discussion of the Scottish Estimates on 14th June. (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The Minute will be laid upon the Table upon the re-assembling of Parliament after Whitsuntide.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland, if he will state whether the persons to whom the Congested Districts Board have granted loans for the purposes of building houses are crofters under the Act. (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The persons are crofters in some, in others they are feuars, or persons in process of becoming proprietors.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, if he will state the names of the Gentlemen of the Admiralty Board who select, by oral examination, candidates for training at the Royal Naval College, Osborne, for cadetships; and will he state the qualifications of these Gentlemen for the examination work which they thus undertake; will he state the number of youths who have presented themselves for the oral examinations, and how many of that number were selected by the Admiralty Board after these examinations. (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) The hon. Member apparently refers to the Interview Committee appointed before each qualifying examination to interview and report on the various candidates. This Committee always includes a distinguished naval officer and an experienced schoolmaster. A new Committee is appointed each time, and the names are not published in advance, but the hon. Member will find in Parliamentary Papers [Cd. 1962] of 1904, and [Cd. 2450], of 1905, the names of the first six Committees appointed and a full account of their proceedings.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any invention for means of escape from submarine vesssls in case of accident has been discovered; and, if so, have the submarines been fitted with it since the lamentable accident of last year where several of the crew were drowned. (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) No reliable means of escape from submarine boats, under all conditions of submergence caused by accident, are known which it would be practicable to introduce into vessels designed for warlike purposes. Arrangements exist in submarines of A Class and later boats which would permit of the escape of the crew from a boat sunk in shallow water, provided the men were not incapacitated from other causes, and these arrangements existed in A 8 at the time of the accident last year.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when the next examination for assistant factory inspectors will take place. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) The next examination for factory inspectors' assistants will, I expect, be hold in the month of July.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the danger to the public morality, he will consider the question of the illegality or otherwise of the practice adopted by certain newspapers of offering rewards for special omnibus and tram tickets; and whether he will instruct the police to put a stop to the habit which has grown up on the part of boys and young persons of waylaying passengers in order to obtain these tickets. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I regret the practice of the newspapers referred to, as it seems to me to be a part of a widespread and increasing tendency which I cannot but regard as contrary to the public interest, but I am not able to say definitely whether it is contrary to the law, as this point is at present under consideration. As regards the second part of the Question, if the boys cause obstruction they will be dealt with by the police on the spot.

To ask the President of the Board of Education, when the Return promised in another place as to the religious teaching in provided schools will be presented; and whether any partial Return of the nature promised can be made. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I fear that the complete Return can hardly be ready for some time to come; but I am arranging to lay an instalment of it upon the Table at once, and to issue the remainder, by instalment or otherwise, with the least possible delay.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state under what circumstance an evicted farm called the Windmill Farm, on the Robinson estate, near Streamstown, County Westmeath, was sold by the Estates Commissioners to a man named Jeeves, who held no land before he acquired this farm, nor did he live in the locality of the evicted farm; will he say what were the reasons which induced the Commissioners to take this course; why was the land not divided amongst the poorer and smaller farmers in the neighbourhood of the farm, in view of the intention of the Land Act of 1903; and whether, if the sale of this farm is not finally concluded, he will ask the Estates Commissioners to distribute the land between the poorer tenants around Windmill. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they did not sell the farm in question, or any portion of it, to any person named Jeeves. The larger portion of this farm was sold by the Commissioners to the widow of the evicted tenant, a small portion to an occupier named Daly, and the balance to a judicial tenant named Moore. The Commissioners have no knowledge of any man named Jeeves in connection with the case.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. Bretland, formerly engineer to the Belfast Town Council, and Mr. Munce, the assistant engineer, condemned certain sites used for building purposes in Belfast as unsanitary and a danger to the health of the people; and, if in view of these facts, he will communicate with the Local Government Board with the view of having further inquiry made into the matter. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Local Government Board have no knowledge whether the facts are as stated in the first part of the Question. I informed the hon. Member on Friday last † that the general suitability of building sites is a matter for the decision of the corporation. The Local Government Board have no functions except when a site is acquired by the corporation for the housing of the working classes, in which case a local inquiry is held before a loan is sanctioned.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a clothing contract is under consideration by the Board of Works for some time past; whether he will make inquiry and take precautions so as to prevent this contract being given to any firm which does not carry out the Fair Wages Resolution, but mainly employs women in contravention thereto; and whether he will arrange that this contract will be carried out by men and not by factory labour. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) A small contract for clothing for about a score of park constables, gatekeepers, &c., is under consideration, and full inquiry is being made, and precautions will be taken to secure that the contract shall only be given to a firm which carries out the Fair Wages Resolution.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the persons employed by the clerk of the urban district of Rathmines and Rathgar to perform the duties in connection with elections of councillors for the urban district of Rathmines and Rathgar, are the accountant, engineers, sanitary, and other officials of the said urban district; whether, seeing that these officials, are withdrawn from their ordinary duties for which they are paid out of the rates of the urban district, any surcharge has been made in respect of same; whether it is customary for these officials to canvass electors on behalf of the outgoing councillors; and whether, seeing that the corporation of Dublin, and other public bodies, prohibit their officials from taking any active part in elections under the Local Government Act, and in view of the desirability of future elections of councillors for the urban district of Rathmines and Rathgar being conducted in an independent manner, he will cause an order to be issued by the Local Government Board prohibiting the employment of these officials in any capacity connected with. The elections. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Local Government Board have no information as to the persons employed by the clerk of the urban district of Rathmines and Rathgar, or by the town clerk of Dublin, to assist in the conduct of Local Government elections, nor have they any information as to the alleged practice of canvassing by officials. The Board are not aware that any surcharge has been made in the matter. They have no authority to issue an order restricting the powers of returning officers in the manner suggested in the Question.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether in view of the Resolution passed by the House in favour of putting the study of Erse on the same footing as that of Latin, French, and German in the Irish Intermediate Examinations, he will place in the library of the House copies of the Erse classics which are used for the purpose of instruction (with translations if possible), and copies of the text books used in connection with intermediate examinations. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Assistant Commissioners of Intermediate Education inform me that they will furnish copies of the books in Irish prescribed for the examinations of 1906, with translations if possible; and I have no objection to show these books to the right hon. Gentleman or, if it is desired, to place them in the library of the House.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the Resolution of the Nervy Union urging that electoral division rating should be established instead of union rating; and whether this matter has engaged the attention of the Local Government Board. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Local Government Board have received the Resolution referred to. The Local Government (Ireland) Act of 1898 established union rating for Poor Law purposes instead of electoral division rating, and the Board are not aware of any facts tending to recommend a reversion to the old system.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mrs. Margaret McDonnell, schoolmistress in the Rathkeale Workhouse, tendered her resignation after forty-two years service with an application for superannuation; that the workhouse school is under the Board of National Education, whose inspectors examine the children as in the national schools, but that the Board decline to superannuate her; and whether, under the circumstances, he will take steps to see that it does so. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The fact is as stated in the first part of the Question. Mrs. McDonnell is entitled to a pension of £60 per annum, which is chargeable on union funds in pursuance of Section 118 of the Local Government (Ireland) Act, 1898. The Board of Guardians have applied to the Commissioners of National Education to grant a pension to Mrs. McDonnell, but the Commissioners have no power to do so. Teachers of workhouse national schools receive no remuneration whatever from the funds for national education, and are therefore ineligible for pensions under the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1879.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will grant the Return relating to pauperism (Ireland) appearing on this day's Notices, and similar to the monthly Returns issued for England and Wales. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The preparation of the Return asked for in the Question would greatly add to the duties, already heavy, of the clerks of local Poor Law authorities and of the Local Government Board, and would not, in the opinion of the Board, be of a practical value commensurate with that labour. The information desired can practically be obtained from the Annual Report of the Board.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can give the House any information as to the reason for doubling the charge for post boxes at the post office Johannesburg. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) I cannot; but inquiry will be made.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps are being taken to carry out the assurances that have been given as to extending the policy of the abolition of the legal status of slavery to the ten mile coast strip of the East African Protectorate; whether they are aware of the decision of the Provincial Court of Mombasa of 25th April, 1898, whereby it was laid down that all slaves imported into the coast territories since the decree of 18th April, 1876, were illegally held in bondage; and whether a large proportion of the slaves now held in the territory have been imported since 1876. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The buying and selling of slaves in this strip of territory has been prohibited since 1890, and all persons born in it since 1900 have been born free; with the result that, as appears from a Report received from the late Sir Donald Stewart, slavery has become almost nominal, and is dying out. The Secretary of State has heard of the decision of the Mombasa Court to which the hon. and gallant Member draws attention. He is not aware that any slaves are hold in contravention of it; but he will make inquiry of the Commissioner on the subject.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is in a position to give the House any detailed information on the separate treatment of children's cases in courts of summary jurisdiction. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) Yes. I have now received information from the Metropolitan police courts, the county boroughs, and some of the more populous petty sessional divisions. The Metropolitan police magistrates are unanimous in the opinion that the working of the Home Office regulations for keeping children's cases separate from others is quite satisfactory. From the information before me I find that the regulations suggested by the Home Office or others similar to them are in force in thirteen of the county boroughs, namely: Blackburn, Cardiff, Devonport, Hull, Liverpool, Newport, Norwich, Portsmouth, Preston, Reading, South Shields, Tynemouth, and West Ham. In sixteen other county boroughs charges against children are heard before others, and it appears that care is taken to keep children apart. The names of these are: Birkenhead, Bournemouth, Bristol, Burton-on-Trent, Gloucester, Grimsby, Leeds, Newcastle, Northampton, Oldham, Plymouth, Rochdale, St. Helen's, Salford, Sheffield, and West Bromwich; in nine county boroughs children's cases are taken at the end of other business, and the children are kept in a separate room till their cases are reached; the names are: Dudley, Hanley, Leicester, Oxford, Stockton, Swansea, Wigan, Worcester, Yarmouth; in eleven county boroughs separate courts are at present or soon will be in use for children's cases; the names are: Bath, Birmingham, Bolton, Bradford, Bury, Canterbury, Halifax. Hull, Lincoln, Manchester, Walsall, while at Burnley it is sometimes found possible to form a second court. In other county boroughs it appears that precautions are already taken or that arrangements will shortly be completed for securing the separation of children's cases. At Barrow-in-Furness, for instance, plans for new courts, which would include a separate children's court, have been drawn up, but cannot be carried out at present in view of the other expenditure to which the borough is committed. In the meantime children's cases are taken either at the beginning or at the end of the other business, and children are kept out of court except when their cases are being heard. The replies to inquiries made in certain petty sessional divisions show that the regulations suggested by the Home Office are being carried out entirely or in effect. At Tottenham there is a second court which is used for children's cases.

To ask the Secretary for the Home Department, in view of the fatal accidents which occurred in the Walworth Road to William Warren Rider on May 2nd, who was killed by a motor omnibus, to Frederick Hill on May 3rd, to Leonard Boot, and also to Mrs. Harrison, who was severely injured and has since died, he proposes to take any steps to better secure the safety of the public. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I am informed that in one of the cases mentioned the man, who was a motor driver, was killed through missing his footing while endeavouring to mount the seat of a motor-bus which was in motion; and that in another case a man slipped and fell into the roadway while attempting to enter a tramcar in motion, and before he could recover himself was run over by a motor-bus which was following the tramcar. I have not been able to obtain particulars of the other accidents. The police will not fail to take action where there is reckless driving or other infringement of the law, but in the cases I have referred to there seems to have been no blame attaching to the drivers.

To ask the Postmaster-General, why the Newmarket post office is registered as a Cambridgeshire office, when the whole of Newmarket for administrative purposes is in Suffolk; and which county benefits in its county rate from the revenue derived from the Newmarket office. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) So far as the Post Office is concerned, Newmarket, like all other head offices, is not registered under any county. The Post Office revenue is paid into the Exchequer. The revenue derived from licences sold by the department on behalf of the Inland Revenue is paid to the Inland Revenue Department.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that in the public lobby in the General 'Post Office, Cork, a poster is displayed setting forth the alleged attractions of Canada and other Colonies, for intending emigrants; will he say if this publication is allowed with the sanction of the postal authorities; and, seeing that all classes of earnest Irishmen are engaged in an endeavour to limit the tide of emigration, will he issue instructions immediately that posters of this kind, which often contain misleading statements, shall be removed from the Irish post offices. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Notices of the kind referred to have been exhibited at all post offices for many years at the request of the Colonial Office, to whom any complaint in regard to the statements therein contained should be addressed.

To ask the Postmaster-General, whether he has been able to arrange for better postal facilities for Chedworth in Gloucestershire. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I have not yet been able to improve the postal service at Chedworth by using the railway as the hon. Member has suggested, but I am in communication with the railway company on the subject.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether any reason exists for C. Seward, late of parcel post office, Paddington, not receiving His Majesty's Imperial Service Medal; and, if so, what that reason is, considering that C. Seward had thirty-five and a half years of postal service, as well as eight years in the Rifle Brigade and five years in the Reserve, with a discharge character of very good. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Mr. Seward's record was not considered sufficiently good to justify a recommendation for the Imperial Service Medal in his case.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the attention of his Department has been called to the repairs recently made to the tunnel on the Great Northern Railway of Ireland at Dungannon; whether he can state the length and age of the tunnel and the number of times it has been repaired; and whether he will call for a report as to the necessity of making an open cutting. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The tunnel in question is 814 yards in length, and was opened for traffic in 1861. I cannot say how many times it has been repaired, nor has my attention been called to repairs recently made. The Board of Trade have no power to require the railway company to substitute an open cutting for the tunnel, but I am forwarding a copy of the hon. Member's Question to the company for their observation.

To ask the President of the Board. of Trade what quantities of hay and straw have been imported from foreign countries and our Colonies during each of the last five years.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether all the registration authorities or overseers in London have complied with the terms of the circular of the Local Government Board, issued on April 26th, 1906, as to the instructions with regard to the preparation of the lists of inhabitant occupiers, in consequence of the decision in the case of Kent v. Fittall; and if not, which of these authorities or overseers have not complied. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) In one instance, viz., at Islington, some difficulty has been felt in giving effect to the suggestion in the circular, and I am in communication with the borough council on the subject. I am not aware of any other case in London in which the suggestion has not been complied with.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether the Board (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The following statement gives the particulars, asked for:—

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether the proposed abolition of the register of teachers is due to the fact that in his view it contravenes the provisions of 62 and 63 Victoria, c. 33, s. 4; and, if so, in what respects the register, as at present constituted, departs from or falls short of those provisions. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The reason suggested in the Question is only one among various reasons. The matter is too complicated and technical to admit of elucidation within the limits of an Answer to a Question on the Paper. But I shall be happy to lay upon the Table, for the information of Parliament, the Official Memorandum already sent, I think, to the hon. Baronet and others interested in the subject, in which are set out the various considerations which in the Board's view render it inadvisable to continue the existing statutory requirements regarding a register of teachers.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Act passed by the Legislature of New South Wales with a view to obtaining the benefit of Section 20 of The Finance Act, 1894, was communicated to the Imperial Government early in the month of February, 1905, but, nevertheless, the Order in Council under Section 20 was delayed until May 29th, 1905; whether he is aware that the delay in passing the Order has involved a loss to one estate alone of upwards of £900; and whether, in order that individuals may not suffer by the delay of a public department, he will give instructions that in the case above referred to and in all similar cases the Order in Council shall be treated as retrospective, and a return of duty shall be made. (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) The usual course of procedure was followed in this instance. It was necessary to take legal advice as to the effect, not only of the Act referred to, but of other legislation of New South Wales, before the issue of an Order in Council could be agreed to. The Colonial Act was made to take effect from the date of the Order in Council, and there was therefore no ground for making the operation of the Order retrospective.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether in view of the fact that native meat is supplied to the naval authorities in Portsmouth and Gosport, he will consider the advisability of applying the same system in supplying the troops in the three kingdoms. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that native meat is exclusively supplied to the Navy at Portsmouth and Gosport.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the advisabity of appointing a representative of the Scottish Volunteer Force on the new Committee on Home Defence. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) I am afraid that I cannot undertake to further enlarge the Committee, which has already reached ample proportions, in the direction proposed.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether in view of the fact that the fifty-six cadets who joined the Royal Military Academy in January last have been offered commissions in the Cavalry and Infantry, at the end of their year's training, to rank junior to the Sandhurst cadets of the same standing and without the option of joining the Indian Army, which is extended to the Sandhurst cadets, he will take steps to secure that the Woolwich cadets shall not be placed at a disadvantage seeing that they passed a higher examination. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane,.) Some inquiries were made in the direction indicated by the hon. Member, but he is mistaken in supposing that any definite offer to this effect has been made. There is now no intention of making any such offer.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty which of the armoured cruisers allowed for in the Estimates of 1905–6 have been laid down.

The "Invincible," "Inflexible," and "Indomitable" have all been laid down, but the fourth armoured cruiser included in the programme of new construction for 1905–6 has been abandoned, as intimated in the statement explanatory of the Navy Estimates for the current year (Cd. 2837).

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state the proportion of candidates to vacancies submitting themselves to examination papers set by the Civil Service examiners for H.M.S. "Britannia" in 1902, and the proportion of candidates to the numbers passed submitting themselves to the examination papers set by the Oxford and Cambridge examiners for the qualifying examinations in 1905 under the new system for Osborne.

The proportion of examinees to vacancies in H.M.S. "Britannia" in 1902 was roughly three to one, and at Osborne in 1905 was eight to seven; but as the examination in the former case was competitive, and in the latter only qualifying, the figures are in no way comparable.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether advantage may be taken of the Territorial Army Committee to inquire into the question of the unpreparedness of this country in regard to the obtaining of recruits for foreign service in the time of war; and whether he will address to the Committee such questions as will enable him to construct machinery whereby on the outbreak of hostilities the pick of emergency Volunteers who do not belong to any branch of the service may be most readily obtained without friction.

As I have already explained to the House, I am not prepared at the present moment to state the various questions which are being put to this Committee. I am not, therefore, in a position to give the hon. and gallant Member any information on the points raised in his Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Army Council contemplate any, and, if so, what, change in the method of training mounted infantry; and is any reduction contemplated in this branch of the force.

It is not at present intended to make any change in the method of training mounted infantry. As regards the last part of the Question will the hon. and gallant Member kindly refer to my reply to a Question put by the hon. and gallant Member for the Central Division of Sheffield on May 21st.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is in contemplation to reduce the Royal Artillery by forty-five batteries, or by any other number of batteries, and to create Militia field batteries instead; and, if so, whether it is the opinion of the Army Council that from the point of view of efficiency in war, the processes of reduction for the purpose of effecting economies are most advantageously commenced by the destruction of the Royal Artillery.

put a Question of which he had given private notice, namely, whether the attention of the Secretary for War had been directed to the results obtained by the training of Militia field batteries in Canada, Australia, and Switzerland, and whether it would be possible to furnish the House with information as to the comparative cost of such batteries, and as to the standard of efficiency attained.

My attention has been called to the mode of training in use in Canada, which, I believe, was much more successful than was expected by experts in this country. The whole matter is under consideration, and no decision of any sort has been arrived at, but I will consider whether I can give my hon. and gallant friend the information asked for in the latter part of his Question. It would not appear expedient to discuss in the form of an Answer to a Question any possible measures for reduction which might be in contemplation at the War Office. I am afraid therefore that I am not at present in a position to give the hon. and gallant Member any reply to his Question, but he should not assume from my silence that such a decision as he suggests has been made.

As the right hon. Gentleman is unable to state that he is not going to destroy forty-five batteries will he undertake to inform the House before taking any steps which might have such a result?

said he was not going to destroy forty-five batteries, nor did he propose to do anything without the matter coming fully and properly before the House.

asked whether this was one of the subjects under the consideration of the Territorial Army Committee; and, if so, whether there were any officers commanding field batteries or brigades serving on the Committee.

said this was an hypothesis he could not answer, because it was obvious that the question of the Regular Artillery could not have been submitted. How could the Territorial Committee decide what the proportion of artillery was which was necessary to the Regular Army? That was obviously a question for the General Staff and the Army Council.

said he was sorry he had been misunderstood. The question had reference to the conversion of batteries into Militia, and he presumed the Militia would form part of the Territorial Army.

said there might be some surplus batteries. That question was under the consideration—not of the Territorial Committee; the matter was one for the General Staff, and ultimately for the Army Council, to whom the General Staff reported.

asked what surplus was meant.

said it was difficult to answer these Questions. It was-obvious that however large a striking force one took, even a much larger striking force than we had at present, one could tell how many batteries were necessary for it. That was a calculation which could only be made by the General Staff, and if, when they had arrived at it, there was a surplus, that surplus might be dealt with on a less expensive footing.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will give instructions that the Union' Jack be hoisted on the War Office building on Empire Day, May 24th, annually in; future.

I have nothing to add to the reply which I have already given the hon. and gallant Member on this subject.

Arising out of that Answer, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will consider the flying of the Union Jack on the War Office buildings all the year round, night and day, as it will relieve the right hon. Gentleman of the necessity of choosing days on which to hoist it. [Cries of "Order."] I am perfectly in order.

Order, order! I think the hon. Member had better give notice of that.

Is it not the fact that the Union Flag cannot be hoisted as the Jack except on board ship?

That is too abstruse for me.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War with reference to the Annual Report on the Army [Cd. 2696], page 77, what wore the names and corps of the two men on whom the death penalty was inflicted abroad in 1905, what wore the offences for which they were tried, on what dates were they tried, where and by whom; also the names of the persons who confirmed the sentences, and what opportunity was given to these men to appeal; and whether the evidence has since been submitted to the Judge Advocate-General, and if he approved of the sentences.

The death sentences referred to were those inflicted in India on two privates of the 1st Battalion Lincolnshire Regiment and 1st Battalion Royal Scots Fusiliers for murder. The men were tried by General Courts-Martial at Secunderabad and Chakrata respectively, in July, 1904. The sentences wore both confirmed by the General Officers Commanding Secunderabad Division and Eastern Command, and were approved by the Governor-General of India in Council, after review by the Judge Advocate-General in India. It is not considered desirable to make public the men's names. As regards the appeal there is no provision under the Army Act for an appeal; the sentence, however, is revised by the confirming officer and the legality of the proceedings, including the finding, by the Judge Advocate-General; and all courts martial proceedings pass through both these individuals.

asked whether the murder was a murder of natives or Europeans.

asked for notice of the Question. If the hon. Member would communicate with him privately he would try to furnish him with details.

further asked whether, as there was to be a Court of Criminal Appeal for civilians, a similar Court of Appeal would be provided in connection with courts-martial.

said this was a very big question. The present procedure was one of the most merciful he could conceive. A very considerable number of cases were quashed or the sentences reduced.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War with reference to the Annual Report on the Army [Cd. 2696], page 77, what were the names and corps of the nine men serving at Home who were sentenced to penal servitude and the fifteen men serving Abroad who were likewise sentenced in 1905, will he give in each case the offence or offences for which each man was tried, and when, where, and by whom they were tried, also the names of the persons who confirmed the sentences, and what opportunity was given in each case to appeal; and whether the evidence has since been submitted to the Judge Advocate-General, and if he approved of each sentence.

I am glad my hon. friend has given me an opportunity to correct a clerical error in the return. The figures for soliders sentenced to penal servitude in 1905 should have been stated to be, one serving at Home; eleven serving Abroad. All these sentences were inflicted by General Courts-Martial and were confirmed at Home, by His Majesty the King; Abroad, by the General Officer Commanding the troops. The proceedings have all been reviewed by the Judge Advocate-General concerned, and, in India, the confirmations were approved by the Governor-General in Council. The particulars of the cases are as follows:— At Home: a man of the Manchester Regiment was tried at Ashton in January, 1905, for deserting from Ladysmith during the siege. Abroad: a man of the 2nd Border Regiment was tried at Thayatmyo in September, 1905, for wounding with intent to murder, and another of the 1st Royal Munster Fusiliers was tried at Mooltan, in November, 1904, for a similar offence. Seven men of the 1st West India Regiment were tried at Barbados in October, 1904, for perjury. A man of the 1st Battalion Northumberland Fusiliers was tried in Mauritius, in October, 1904, for striking a lieutenant on duty, and another of the 3rd Lancashire Fusiliers was tried at Middelburg in April, 1905, for striking a sergeant on duty. It is considered, in the interests of the men, not advisable to make public their names. As regards appeal the reply is as given to Question No. 58.†

Why is it considered necessary to conceal the names of men who deserted to the enemy?

The necessity does not apply specially to that case. The information is always available if required.

How did the discrepancy in the figures arise?

It was a clerical error in making out the return.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the pattern for the new bayonets has been decided upon; and, if so, when the orders for the same will be distributed.

The pattern for the new bayonets has not yet been settled.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the present rifle range at Maldon, and, seeing that the War Office inspector has approved a new proposed range, whether he will consider the desirability of recommending the Treasury to defray one-half (£225) the estimated cost of this range.

My attention has been drawn to this matter. The whole of the money that was available under the Military Works Loans for contributions in aid to Volunteer ranges has already been allocated and no further grants can be made from this source. I can hold out no hope whatever of any provision being made in Army Estimates for such a purpose.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any alteration has been made in the form of tender for contracts for supply

‡See preceding Question and Answer

of meat to the Army; whether such forms until recently stipulated for supply of home-fed meat; whether the new forms have been adopted in order to enable foreign-fed meat to be supplied to the Army.

The reply to the first two Questions is in the affirmative. The object of the alteration in the contract is not that stated by the hon. Member, but to get the best fresh meat at the lowest price for the soldier, as explained by me in an Answer to a Question put on the 14th instant by the hon. Member for the St. Patrick's Division of Dublin.‡

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will consider the advisability of recommending that a limit be placed on the time during which the new repatriation notices are to be posted in the Transvaal mines, so that, in the event of coolies at present at work, or arriving in the near future, being satisfied that the conditions of indentured labour do not constitute slavery, no further inducement to break their contracts may be held out to them, thus securing a definite settled policy to the mining industry.

No limit will be placed upon the operation of the repatriation notice during such time as His Majesty's Government may retain any direct responsibility for the conduct of Transvaal affairs.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, under the new Government repatriation notices posted up in the Transvaal mines, the bare statement of any Chinese coolie that he considers the present conditions of indentured labour constitute slavery will be a sufficient plea to justify his demand for immediate repatriation at Government expense without further inquiry.

The hon. and gallant Member will be able to satisfy

†See (4) Debates clvii., 172

himself by careful and intelligent scrutiny of the terms of the notice which I read to the House that such a bare statement would not necessarily be deemed conclusive in itself.

Arising out of that Answer, will the hon. Gentleman state when a copy of the translation I asked for previously will be ready.

said that he received the hon. Member's Question before he went away, and promised that he would ask the Secretary of State for a translation to be made, informing him that the hon. Member was willing, if necessary, to bear half the cost of telegraphing. During his absence he had not been able to bring this matter to the notice of the Secretary of State. Inquiries had been made by the ordinary mail, and it was scarcely worth while at this juncture that a telegram should be sent.

It will give me more time to master the language.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now state the number of Chinese coolies employed in the Transvaal mines who have applied to be repatriated under the terms of the notices recently issued; and what will be the cost to the Treasury of returning them to China.

Lord Selborne has reported that so far twelve Chinese coolies have applied to be repatriated. The cost to the Treasury will not exceed £17 10s. each.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state the total number of unexpired licences for the importation of Chinese coolies into South Africa; and at what date all further importation will have ceased.

2,110 coolies are at present on the sea and 8,142 remain to be recruited. Lord Selborne reports that the date of cessation of importation cannot be fixed at present.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, having regard to the evidence that the Chinese coolies are unwilling to leave the mines at Johannesburg and return to China until their contracts expire, the Government will now reconsider the Resolution to grant no more licences for the introduction of Chinese into the Transvaal under the Ordinance.

No Sir, His Majesty's Government have no intention of removing a prohibition deliberately determined and declared to Parliament.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the fact that on Sunday last Lord Selborne received a petition from coolies employed at Jumpers Deep Mine, in which they declared that they did not want to go home, and that if they were compelled to do so they wanted the balance of their three years' wages, as they had given up situations in China; and will he state to the House the exact terms of this appeal against repatriation.

Lord Selborne reports that the purport of the petition was to state that they had come to the Transvaal for the purpose of earning money where with to support their families in China; that they had heard they were going to be compelled to return to China and that if the Government compelled them to return to China without fault on their part before they had served their three years' contract they prayed that they might be paid the money they would otherwise have earned during the three years and on which they had been reckoning.

Are these the same coolies who petitioned Lord Selborne that they might be continued to be flogged.

I admit there seems to be a family resemblance.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any report has been received from Lord Selborne of his inspection of coolies in the Chinese compounds on the 27th instant; whether his attention has been called to the fact that representatives of the coolies declared that they were fairly treated and comfortable, and earned more than they could earn in China; that they did not want to go home, and if compelled to do so against their will would demand three years wages; and what further inducements do the Government intend to offer to the Chinese to break their contracts and return to their own land.

Lord Selborne has made a report of his inspection of the coolies in their compounds on May 27th, and the account which my hon. friend reproduces is generally correct.

Do the coolies who declared that they could earn more than they did in China include "the ruined gamblers and thorough scoundrels" alluded to by Lord Selborne in his recent dispatch?

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether he will lay papers and maps showing the results, up to the present time, of the investigations which have been made under the auspices or with the assistance of His Majesty's Government into the sleeping sickness in the Uganda Protectorate; and whether he will state what administrative steps are being taken to prevent the spread of the disease.

A series of Reports by the Sleeping Sickness Commission, working under the direction of the Royal Society and subsidised by the Government, has been issued, partly by the Royal Society and partly by the Stationery Office. If copies are not available in the Library of the House I shall be happy to take steps for having them placed there. No administrative measures of any importance have yet been taken to check the spread of the disease because no practical solution has yet presented itself. The subject is receiving the most earnest attention.

asked if a sum of from £3,000 to £4,000 was not included in the estimates of 1904–5 for the purpose, among other things, of cutting down trees with a view to improving the condition of affairs. Was that still being expended, and could not the balance be devoted to improving sanitation.

asked for notice of the Question.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has noticed the opinion publicly expressed by Mr. W. B. Morcom, K.C., a member of the Natal Legislative Assembly, that, as there had never been a state of war in the country, martial law ought never to have been proclaimed; and that the prisoners could just as well have been indicted and tried at a session of the Supreme Court; and, seeing that the proclamation of martial law tended to engender racial animosity, will the Secretary of State bring pressure to bear on the Natal Government to put an end to it.

The Secretary of State has read Mr. Morcom's statement in the newspapers. As Mr. Morcom is a member of the Natal Legislative Assembly he is readily enabled, and no doubt fully qualified, to press his views upon the Government of Natal by speeches from his place in Parliament.

asked whether the Government at home would bring pressure to bear on the Natal Government.

I do not think that the fact that a Member of the Natal Parliament has made a speech to his constituents or at a public meeting affords any fresh grounds for the Imperial Government's adopting any action different from that which they have hitherto taken.

asked whether, seeing that there were a million of natives towards whom the Imperial Government had responsibility, and that in the opinion of Mr. Morcom martial law was unnecessary, the Imperial Government would not exercise pressure on the Natal Government to withdraw martial law.

I cannot think that is a new fact that justifies a new policy.

asked whether the Government would make representations to the Government of Natal with a view to bringing this martial law to an end.

I am afraid that its continuance must necessarily be governed by the continuance of a state of serious insurrection and of the military operations.

Is it not more the cause than the consequence of the rebellion?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to a case in the Rawalpindi Cantonment, in the Punjab, in which a party of British soldiers molested certain public women, and, on their crying for help, caused such injury to an Indian policeman who came to their rescue as resulted in his death; and also to a case in the Jullundhar Cantonment, in the Punjab, in which a punkha coolie was kicked to death by a gunner of the Royal Field Battery; and whether, looking to the face that these are the third and fourth cases in which it is alleged that Indians have met with their death at the hands of British soldiers during the past two or three months, he will cause inquiry to be made into the facts of these cases, and take measures which shall prevent, by the improvement of discipline or otherwise, the repetition of such occurences.

I have not received any information as to the cases referred to in the Question, but will make inquiries.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether having regard to the statements of responsible Indian authorities that the agitation against the partition of Bengal is rapidly growing and that the boycott of Manchester goods is serious and threatening, he can make any statement to reassure the Manchester trading public.

I am not aware that responsible Indian authorities have made such statements as the hon. Gentleman refers to; but he may be assured that, the Government of India is watching the course of events with all possible attention.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether in the event of the Chinese Government terminating the Convention of Cheefoo, the Treaty of Tien-tsin would then revive; whether under the Treaty of Tien-tsin China is compelled to accept as much opium as India desires to send, subject to an import duty of thirty taels per pecul; whether he is aware that the opium habit is widely prevalent in China and seriously demoralises the Chinese people, physically and morally; and whether he will intimate to the Chinese Government that they are now free to regulate the opium traffic, or to exclude opium from Chinese territory by high tariff or otherwise as to them shall seem right, and that irrespective of any existing convention or treaty?

The Answer to the first Question is in the affirmative. It is legal to import opium at the Treaty ports under Rule 5 of the rules of trade attached to the Treaty of Tientsin, subject to a duty of thirty taels per pecul. The third and fourth Questions raise large questions of opinion and controversy, which cannot be satisfactorily dealt with in the limits of a departmental answer, and which I would ask my hon. friend to defer till they can be dealt with on behalf of the Government in debate.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the total amount of poundage paid, and to how many collectors, in respect of the collection of income-tax during the financial year 1905–6, at what rate was that poundage calculated, and on what ground was it paid; were any payments of poundage made during that year in cases where the income-tax was levied by deduction at the source; and, if so, at what rate, on what ground, to how many collectors, and to what total amount.

On page 42 of the Revenue Departments Estimates for the current year will be found the amounts provided for remuneration of collectors (and assessors) of income-tax. The amounts expended in 1905–6 corresponded very closely with the sums provided in the Vote for that year. The remuneration of collectors in England and Scotland is made by means of fixed allowances in lieu of poundage, and poundage is only paid to them in respect of a very small fraction of their duties, viz., that connected with the collection of tax on certificates of removal. In Ireland collectors are still paid by poundage, of which the rate is fixed from year to year according to the circumstances of the year. The poundage payable to bankers and others for assessment and collection of duty on foreign dividends is at present 4d. in the £., or 1d. in excess of the minimum fixed by the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1885. The number of collectors receiving pound-ago could only be ascertained by a detailed investigation of the accounts, which would entail considerable labour.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that at a public auction of wines and spirits to be held in the City of London on the 31st instant, there are to be offered for sale 436 aums (13,952 gallons) of Rhenish wine which has never paid duty, being imported into this country as unfermented grape juice and fermented in London, involving a loss to the National Revenue of £872, and causing unfair competition with duty-paid wines; and what action he intends to take in the matter.

My attention has been called to the advertisement of the sale referred to, and I am causing inquiries to be made into the matter. The Revenue Bill of this session contains a clause imposing a licence duty upon the manufacture for sale of wines in the United Kingdom, with a view to bringing the industry under the supervision and control of the Inland Revenue Department. This will enable me to obtain more precise information than I have at present of the extent to which such manufacture is carried on, and to judge more accurately what further steps are necessary for the protection of the Revenue.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in view of the increase in the number of motor 'bus accidents in London, he will consider the advisability of suspending the licences of motor 'buses the owners of which require the drivers to work an excessive number of hours each day.

I have no power to take the action suggested by the hon. Member.

Can you not take some action against these infernal machines?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department by whose authority, and upon what representations, the necessary funds were recently provided out of the Secret Service Fund to send Shuttle, one of the witnesses at the trial of Hugh Watt, to Canada; and whether there is any objection to stating the amount which he received and the conditions, if any, upon which he was sent away.

The hon. Member is mistaken in referring to a payment from the Secret Service Fund. In answer to a question on the 28th, I stated that the money came from the Special Service Fund. That is a fund which forms part of the Civil List Fund which is under the control of the First Lord of the Treasury. A sum of £16 6s. 8d. was granted for Shuttle's benefit. The greater part of this sum was applied for Shuttle's outfit, passage and railway fare. The remainder (£3) was given him after reaching his destination. No conditions were imposed upon him.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think it a friendly act to dump these undesirable aliens on Canada?

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the fact that in mills and factories in small towns in the north of Ireland the workers are paid fortnightly instead of weekly; and whether, in view of the inconvenience thus caused to workers, and of the encouragement given to gombeenism and usury, he proposes to remedy the grievance by introducing a suitable provision into some of the labour Bills now before Parliament.

I have been asked to Answer this question by the President of the Board of Trade. I have received no representations on the subject, and I am not prepared to suggest legislation.

suggested that the right hon. Gentleman should make further inquiry.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the Motion authorising the payment out of moneys to be provided by Parliament of an additional annual grant, not exceeding £1,000,000, to be distributed among local educational authorities, to meet the cost arising out of an Act of the present session to make further provision in respect to education in England and Wales; and whether he is prepared to recommend a grant for a similar amount to be distributed among local distress committees, to enable them to make further provision with respect to providing work for the unemployed, in pursuance of the promised Act of the present session dealing with distress due to lack of employment.

I am aware of the Motion referred to in the Question. The circumstances in which the Government propose that the new education grant should be made differ, I think, from those affecting the other matter mentioned by my hon. friend, and I am afraid that I could not promise to make the recommendation which he suggests.

I will call attention to this matter later on to-day.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the sanction of his Department has been refused to the guardians of Fulham to carry out certain painting works to buildings under their control by direct employment of labour; whether he is aware of the fact that similar work was carried out three years ago without the intervention of a contractor, with the approval and to the satisfaction of the Local Government Board; and, in view of that, will he have the matter reconsidered.

The facts are as stated in the first part of the Question. I am not aware that the approval of the Local Government Board was given to work similar to that now proposed being carried out at Fulham three years ago without the intervention of a contractor, though it is the case that no objection was offered by the Board to a small work involving a cost of about £150 being carried out in this way in 1902, in connection with the infirm wards of the workhouse.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can give figures showing the pauperism of West Ham and Poplar at the present time as compared with what it was at the beginning of this year and on January 1st, 1905.

The total number of paupers at West Ham on the 19th instant was 4,057 less than on January 1st last and 9,339 less than on January 1st, 1905. The total number at Poplar was 2,442 less than on January 1st last and 2,875 less than on January 1st, 1905.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will reconsider his decision limiting loans for new school buildings to thirty years; and whether he will grant an extended period where the buildings contemplated warrant such an extension.

The rule upon which the Local Government Board usually act is not to allow more than thirty years for the repayment of loans for buildings. I have given careful consideration to the matter, but I do not think that an exception to this rule can he made as regards loans for schools.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board how many boards of guardians have adopted the Order which was issued in December last authorising the relief out of the workhouse of the wife and family of any able-bodied male person who is relieved in the workhouse; have any Metropolitan boards adopted the Order; and, if so, will he say which; how many families in all have been relieved under the Order, and how many in the Metropolis alone; has he received any report from his inspectors as to the operation of the Order, and will he state the effect of those reports; and does he intend to continue the Order, which was made operative for six months only.

No Order on this subject was issued in December last, nor has there been any general Order with regard to it. But last November separate Orders were issued to Kensington and Islington, authorising the arrangement referred to for six months, and in January similar Orders were issued to Wandsworth and Hampstead. The two former Orders have just expired, and I have not received any application for their renewal. The other Orders will not expire until July next. So far as I am aware, no families have been relieved under these Orders. The Poplar Guardians, however, did avail themselves of the powers conferred on them by a similar Order which was issued early in 1905, but I cannot state precisely to what extent.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he has had his attention drawn to cases of interference of the postmaster at the Congletion Post Office with the postmen and officers under him; whether he is aware that the postmaster has issued orders that no wages are to be paid till after 5 p.m., and that some of the officers have not received their wages till after 9 p.m. on Saturdays; whether he is aware that the same postmaster has issued orders for absolute silence in the postmen's room, and has threatened to deprive one of his officers of a stripe for talking to fellow workmen when waiting for his round, and that the same officer has been cautioned that he will have his increment and stripes arrested if he is found wearing his cap in the office; and whether he will take any, and, if any, what action in the matter. I beg also to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to a complaint of the sub-postmaster at Biddulph; that he accepted the sub-postmastership on condition that he received the same scale of pay as his predecessors; and that the scale has since been reduced 30s. by the Congleton postmaster, who also ordered the sub-postmaster at Biddulph to dismiss a man, who was performing his duty satisfactorily, at once without notice or reason assigned; and that this man has since been reappointed at a reduced rate, and has now to perform a round of eight and a half miles on six mornings each week for 6s. per week; and whether he will cause inquiries to be made into the treatment of the workers in this district of his Department, and take steps to pay proper wages for the service they render.

I am making inquiry respecting the matters referred to in the hon. Member's Question and will communicate the result to him.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether when the House rises for the Easter and Whitsuntide holidays the Post Office employees in the House, or any of them, are allowed those holidays; and, if not, will he consider the desirability of allowing those officers who are not required on duty in the House during Easter and Whitsuntide to have the benefit of those holidays in turn, in consideration of their long hours and the duties so efficiently discharged.

I fully appreciate the efficient way in which the duties of the post office at the House of Commons are performed, but I should not be justified in allowing the staff the same holidays as the House takes. Those of the staff who perform late duties receive an additional week's holidays in consideration of the irregular hours of their duty. The hours per week are those of their class generally, i.e., forty-eight a week.

I will bring the matter up again.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury how many second class clerks, lower section, and how many second class examining officers were in the Customs Department on March 31st, 1901; how many of these clerks and officers, respectively, had been promoted to the next higher grade since that date; what were the average salaries immediately prior to such promotions; what salaries and what average immediate increases in salary did the promotions carry with them in each case; and what was the average service in the clerical department of the clerks and the average service in the outdoor department of the officers when they obtained these promotions.

The number of second class clerks, lower section, in the Customs Department on March 31st, 1901, was 120, and of these 104 had, to March 31st last, been promoted to the next higher grade, the salary of which is £200–£300. The average salary of these clerks immediately prior to their promotion was £114 1s. 5d., and the average immediate increase in salary upon their promotion amounted to £85 18s. 7d. Their average service was six years nine months. The number of examining officers, second class, in the Customs Department on March 31st, 1901, was 846. Of these, 166 had—to March 31st last—been promoted to the next higher grade, the salary of which is £230–£340. The average salary immediately prior to the promotion of these officers was £211 1s. 8d., and the average immediate increase in their salaries upon promotion amounted to £18 18s. 4d. The average service in the outdoor department previous to their promotion was twenty-three years eight months.

I beg to ask Mr. Attorney-General whether he will take steps to ensure the attention of the Public Prosecutor being called to a scheme for distributing a sum, said to be £1,000 weekly, to certain holders of tram and bus tickets, with the view to ascertaining whether such scheme is a breach of the Lottery Acts.

was understood to say that he was in communication with the Public Prosecutor, who had taken advice upon the matter. He had been advised that in an analogous case it was held that no breach of the Lottery Acts had been committed, and that view had been taken by a magistrate of the City of London.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland for what reason and under what circumstances he has superseded the present burgh auditor of Dunoon, who has performed the duties of the post with complete satisfaction for many years; and what advantage to the public, in either efficiency or economy, will result from the change.

In appointing burgh auditors for 1905–6, the Burgh of Dunoon has, in furtherance of the policy of grouping, already applied with much advantage in the case of counties, been grouped with several other burghs, subject to similar conditions as to accounts and audit under one auditor and in the interest of public efficiency. In accordance with this same principle, the former auditor acts as auditor for an important group of counties. Burgh auditorships are held on a yearly tenure, and auditors are annually reminded of this in the formal intimations of appointment made to them.

In view of the general dissatisfaction caused, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of reverting to the old system?

replied that he had no evidence of dissatisfaction such as would justify him in doing so.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland the amount of money required to moot outstanding sales voluntarily arranged, agreements for which are in the hands of the Estates Commissioners; and can he give the date by which it may reasonably be expected the last of them will be dealt with.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that the amount of advances applied for and not yet made, in respect of sales by direct agreement between landlord and tenant, is £25,123,572. The Commissioners are unable to forecast the date by which all these advances will be made.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will inquire into the allegation that the criers in certain Irish county courts, amongst others those of Limerick, Meath, Galway, Fermanagh, and Tyrone, are in the habit of exacting fees from suitors for which there is no legal warrant; and whether he has made any inquiry on the subject from the Irish county court judges, or otherwise called their attention to the alleged prevalence of this practice.

This Question has been referred to the county courts judges of the five counties named, all of whom have replied that they have no knowledge of any illegal exaction of fees by the criers of their courts, and no complaint on the subject have been received. If any such complaint should be made to any of the judges, it will be duly investigated.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will consider the advisability of adding to the Commission about to inquire into the Poor Law matters in Ireland a member of the medical profession who is in thorough touch and sympathy with the Irish Poor Law medical profession, with a view to bringing before the Commission the grievances and disabilities under which the profession labours at the present time.

My right hon. friend the Prime Minister has already stated that it is not intended to appoint to the Royal Commission on the Poor Law a member representative of the Irish medical profession. On this subject I may refer to the reply which I gave to the Question of the hon. Member for North Fermanagh on April 30th. †

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Royal Irish Constabulary Reward Board accorded favourable records and money grants to the police stationed at Moy, county Tyrone, for conduct at a fire in December, 1905, and refused to make a similar reward to the constabulary at Keady for their courageous conduct at a fire in May last; can he state why this difference was made; and whether the officers on the Board were the same at the consideration of both cases.

The Inspector-General informs me that the facts are as stated in the first part of the Question. The reason why a difference was made in the two cases was that in one case the fire was a very dangerous one, and the men rewarded exhibited exceptional courage and all were scorched and burned or otherwise injured. In the other case referred to, the duty performed by the police was not of such an exceptional nature as would warrant the granting of rewards. The officers comprising the Reward Board were the same in both cases.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the new rules of the Board of Intermediate Education for Ireland received the official sanction of the Lord-Lieutenant before they wore laid upon the Table of this House; and whether there is any precedent for the action of the Chief Secretary in supporting an amendment of rules in such circumstances.

The rules received the formal sanction of the Lord-Lieutenant, no representations on the subject having been addressed to him from any quarter. But, subsequently, facts which at the time were not known to His Excellency have led to a consideration of the rules, which disclosed objections.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Galway County Council have represented to him the opportunity afforded, by the inquiry into the working of the Agricultural and Technical Instruction Department, of placing the sea fisheries on a sound and practical basis by appointing a representative Fishery Board, as in Scotland, with competent and practical experts as instructors, and establishing a Government brand for mackerel and herrings, which has proved of such great advantage to Scotland in its herring fishing, and has been often asked for by smaller merchants engaged in fish curing in this country; and, if so, what action does the Government intend taking in the matter.

I have received resolutions to the effect stated from several county councils, including, I believe, Galway, and have referred these resolutions to the Committee of Inquiry into the working of the Department, because the subject of Governmental action in fishery matters seems to fall within the scope of their inquiry.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord. Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will consider the advisability of recommending the addition to the commission of inquiry into the police force of Belfast of some English chief constable known to be capable of bringing to bear practical views on the subject of the inquiry.

The Belfast Police Commission of Inquiry has already set about its work, and the competence of its members makes it unnecessary to add to the number.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Leitrim County Council have appointed to the position of rate collector for the divisions of Ballinamore, Nos. 1 and 2, Mr. P. Curran, who tendered at the commission of sixpence in the pound, although they had before them a local candidate, of approved character and competency, who was willing to undertake the work at a commission of twopence in the pound; and whether he will direct inquiry to be made into the conditions under which the Leitrim County Council make appointments for which they are responsible.

The Leitrim County Council have appointed as poor rate collector for the Ballinamore No. 1 division Mr. Patrick Curran at a poundage of sixpence, the rate at which he tendered. The Local Government Board understand that other candidates tendered for this appointment, two of them at twopence in the pound. The Board doubt the expediency of the course adopted on this occasion by the county council of inviting tenders for the collection of the poor rate. The Board are of opinion that the council should be guided in their selection for this important, office by the character and competency of the applicant and not by the rate of payment at which he is prepared to undertake the work. The necessary particulars have not yet been received to enable the Local Government Board to decide as to the fitness of Mr. Curran for the office. Since August last, however, he has given satisfaction as a temporary poor rate collector in the same and at the same poundage fee.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a copy of the resolution passed by the Irish Cattle Traders' and Stockowners' Association, protesting against the change recently made in the Army meat tender form, under which contractors can supply foreign meat killed at the port of entry instead of native home-bred meat; and whether, in view of the injury which this change will inflict upon Irish farmers, he will make representations on the subject to the Army Council with the view of having home-bred substituted for home-killed in the forms of tender.

A copy of the resolution in question has been received by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, who are in communication with the Army Council in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the superintendent of the Dublin Metropolitan Police Force who examines candidates for promotion is the same superintendent who issued the memorandum to certain inspectors urging them to make cases against licensed traders; and, if so, can he say what are the qualifications of this officer for conducting these examinations.

I am informed by the Chief Commissioner that when examinations for promotion take place a board, comprising two superintendents, conducts that part of it which consists of police duties and drill, and reports the result to the Chief Commissioner. The superintendent referred to in the Question takes his turn in this duty, and is fully qualified to do so.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether evidence elicited at inquiries, conducted in privacy, into charges and complaints against members of the Dublin Metropolitan Police Force is taken on oath; and, if not, whether he will take stops to insure that in future witnesses at such inquiries shall be sworn; whether such inquiries have been held in the absence of the accused; whether, during the chief commissioner-ship of Mr. Jones, every encouragement was given to accused policemen to produce all evidence that could possibly bear on their cases; whether such encouragement is now withheld; whether, during Mr. Jones's period of office, complicated cases were usually adjourned and sometimes submitted to two or three superintendents, who were delegated to make searching investigations, at which the evidence was recorded by a shorthand writer; whether this practice has since been abandoned; and whether he will take steps to insure that such procedure, it abandoned, shall be reverted to.

The Chief Commissioner of the Dublin Metropolitan Police informs me that disciplinary inquiries in his force are not conducted in privacy. Evidence is not taken on oath at these inquiries, nor is it considered necessary or desirable that it should be so taken. Inquiries are never held in the absence of the accused. The Chief Commissioner understands that his predecessor permitted witnesses to be examined on behalf of accused constables when he considered it necessary or desirable, and a similar course is followed now. Complicated cases are now, as formerly, adjourned when necessity arises; and when occasion requires such cases are now, as formerly referred to two or more superintendents for investigation. The practice of having a shorthand note taken by a member of the force at such investigations was found not to greatly facilitate matters, as the note taker in many cases was not a rapid writer; and the practice was therefore abandoned. The Chief Commissioner does not think a return to the practice necessary or desirable.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether it has come to the knowledge of the police that any defalcation has taken place in the rates collected for the county of Tyrone; and, if so, who was the defaulter, and what are his present whereabouts.

The Local Government Board have received information that in November last, upon the resignation of Mr. Warmington, poor rate collector, it I was found that his accounts were deficient to the extent of £600, and the amount was made good to the county council by his sureties. No application has been made to the police by the local authorities to take action against the late rate collector, and the local authorities themselves have not taken any proceedings against him. I have no information as to his whereabouts.

asked if this Mr. Warmington was not secretary to the County Orange Lodge, and whether influence was brought to bear by prominent Unionists of the county to prevent a prosecution by the police.

I have no information. I believe the question of prosecution would be one primarily for the county council.

Where is this gentleman now?

I do not know.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Local Government Board are prepared to sanction the appointment of a principal workhouse teacher, at the same salary as the principal teacher of an ordinary national school, without rations, in case of a board of guardians desiring to make the appointment on such terms in accordance with the Local Government Act; and is the Local Government Board also willing to sanction the appointment of a trained nurse on similar terms.

The Local Government Board do not sanction the appointment without rations of intern officers unless the circumstances are very exceptional, and this rule would apply to the case of a trained nurse. The system is, in the Board's opinion, open to grave objections. In the exceptional cases in which the Board sanction an allowance in lieu of rations such allowance is not regarded as salary for the purpose of recoupment under Section 58 of the Local Government Act, 1898.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the respective claims of Malin Head and Moville, county Donegal, to grants under the Marine Works Act will be promptly considered by the Government.

I am afraid I cannot hold out any hope that a grant under the Marine Works Act will be made for works at either of the places named. I find that a scheme for providing harbour accommodation at Malin Head was originally considered, but it was found that no work of permanent utility could be constructed there owing to the exposed situation, and the funds which would have been available for works at Malin Head were, before I entered office, allocated to other places in county Donegal. Moville is not within a congested district, and is therefore not qualified, in any case, to receive a grant from the Marine Works Fund.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is now prepared to encourage corporations and urban councils in Ireland to provide houses for labourers by granting loans on the same terms as regards repayment and rate of interest as it is now proposed to give to rural councils.

No, Sir.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will give the number of sergeants, of the Dublin Metropolitan Police Force reduced and the number restored to their rank during the last five years, and the number of sergeants reduced and the number restored during the last five years of Mr. Jones' term of office as Chief Commissioner.

The Chief Commissioner of the Dublin Metropolitan Police informs me that he does not consider that it would be in the interests of the public service or of the discipline of his force to give the information asked for.

Is it because he is implicated himself?

That has nothing to do with it.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether at a recent sitting of the Sub-Land Commission at Roscrea, before Commissioners Tuckey and Baggot, the rents were raised in any eases on the estate of Miss Cecilia Griffiths; if so, will he give the names of the tenant or tenants, and state the amounts by which rents were increased over the valuation put upon the holdings by the landlord's valuer; and will he say whether any tenant has appealed against the decision of the Sub-Land Commission; and, if so, who, and on what grounds.

The Land Commission inform me that at the sitting of the Sub-Commission Court referred to rents were judicially fixed on the estate mentioned in the case of four tenants only. Appeals at the instance of both landlord and tenants are pending in all four cases. I have no further information in the matter.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he could give any information as to very serious events which had occurred on Tuesday, and which were repeated yesterday, in connection with some evictions instituted by Lord Clanricarde at Loughrea.

I am sorry to say that there were serious disturbances in the town of Loughrea yesterday, arising out of the resistance offered to the carrying out of an eviction from a place of business —a store and shop. The eviction was completed as regards the store, but not as regards the shop. There were a good many stones thrown. Some of the police were hurt, although, I trust, not seriously, and windows were broken. Except that there is a certain amount of commotion in the town to-day I am not informed at this moment as to what has actually passed.

asked whether, with reference to this eviction, Lord Clanricarde's agent had not declared in a published document that the person evicted was a tenant who had given him every satisfaction, but as secretary of the Loughrea branch of the United Irish League he begged to give him notice of eviction; whether in these circumstances the Government felt justified in spending large sums of the taxpayers' money in affording the assistance of the forces of the Crown to carry out these proceedings.

It is perfectly true, as far as my information goes, that a letter to that effect, and I think almost in those words, was written by Lord Clanricarde's agent to Mr. Martin Ward. I took the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown when I heard that this eviction was going to come off. I was informed by them—and I also read the cases on the subject—that it was the absolute duty of the Executive to give assistance in the case of these evictions. That appears to have been affirmed by the Court in two cases, and I am so advised. In the circumstances I consider that I had no option—no executive discretion whatever.

gave notice to call further attention to the subject on the Motion for adjournment.

How many police have been sent into Loughrea?

said he believed that a hundred police had been sent.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he will consider the advisability of increasing the scale of payment to Poor Law medical officers attending Post Office officials in Ireland to a rate approximate to that which is paid in the case of attendance to members of the Royal Irish Constabulary; and also the question of eliminating from the duties consequent upon such attendance a great deal of the clerical work which at present presses on the Poor Law medical profession.

The scale of payment to Post Office medical officers is uniform throughout the United Kingdom and is believed to be sufficient.

I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether, in view of the continued injury to the agricultural interests of Ireland, caused by the incidence of the fiscal system of Great Britain, he is prepared, on an early date after the holidays, to give facilities for the discussion of the subject.

The hon. Member's Question is of a somewhat controversial character. As at present advised I am not prepared to assent to his assumption that injury to the agricultural interests of Ireland is caused by the incidence of the fiscal system of Great Britain. The hon. Member will therefore see that he cannot in reason ask me for facilities for the discussion of his conclusions.

I will take the first possible opportunity of raising this question.