To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that in March last the town council of £rourock bought half an acre of ground at a cost of £6,750; that the resolution, under Section 99 of The Town Councils Act, 1900, authorising the purchase, and also the subsequent resolutions of the council approving the action of the committee, are headed in the minutes, sites for burgh purposes; that on March 22nd last an official statement was made by the council that the ground had been bought for the erection of a court hall, burgh offices, and a town hall; and will he say whether, before making the purchase, the town council complied with Sections 306 and 315 of The Burgh Police (Scotland) Act, 1892, and gave the ratepayers an opportunity of voting on the question of the purchase; and whether, seeing that expenditure on ground for a court hall, etc., falls to be borne by the general improvement assess- ment; that that assessment is in Gourock within ½d. per £ of the statutory maximum and is unable to bear the cost of the purchase; that the town council have paid the cost by borrowing under The Public Parks Act, 1878, the rate under that Act being unlimited; and that Section 44 of The Burgh Police Act, 1903, allows the erection in public parks of temporary buildings only, such as pavilions and shelters, he will say, in view of the statutory provisions in favour of ratepayers contained in Sections 306 and 315 of The Burgh Police Act, 1892, what stops he proposes to take to prevent a permanent stone building, such as a court hall and burgh offices, being erected on ground paid for with money borrowed under the Public Parks Act. (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) As advised, I understand there is recourse for any ratepayer who considers himself aggrieved provided by the 96th section of the Town Councils (Scotland) Act, 1900, and also at common law by way of interdict. As the matter may, therefore, come before the law courts, I am precluded from expressing an opinion in regard to the legality of the action taken by the town council.

; To ask the Postmaster-General if he can say when a reply will be made to the communication sent to him from the clerical staff at Belfast; and if it has been definitely decided to remove the Belfast headquarters to Dublin. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Before arriving at a final decision in regard to the proposed removal of the superintending engineer from Belfast to Dublin, I am considering the memorial from his clerical staff.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. Orr, R.M., Dungarvan, has refused to issue a gun licence to Mr. Edmond Power, who is farmer and manager of a co-operative creamery; whether the refusal is based on the fact that the applicant was convicted some time ago for trespass in pursuit of game; and whether, seeing that the duty of a resident magistrate, under the Peace Preservation Act, is confined to the consideration as to whether the applicant may or may not use the gun for offences which have no concern with the preservation of game, he will direct the attention of the Lord Chancellor to the several cases in which Mr. Orr has refused applications for gun licences, on the ground that the applicants, in his view, would be likely to shoot game without having previously obtained a game licence. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I understand that it is the fact that Mr. Orr has declined to grant to Mr. Power a licence to carry firearms. The power of issuing such licences is vested in the resident magistrate of the district. It would be contrary to practice and undesirable to state grounds for refusal in a particular case. Mr. Orr, however, informs me that he has never refused an application upon the ground that the applicant would be likely to shoot game without having previously obtained a game licence. I am not aware of any reason for bringing the matter to the notice of the Lord Chancellor.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he can say when the regulations were made that parcels sent from Adare and Rathkeale by the afternoon train and reaching Limerick at 3.30 p.m. are to be despatched in a direct parcel mail to Dublin at 3.55 p.m. on Mondays and Wednesdays, and on other days at 11 p.m. on same day. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The arrangements mentioned in reference to parcels sent from Rathkeale and Adare have, I understand, been in operation for a great number of years.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he can say what has been the result of his inquiries into the case of Timothy Fitzgerald, rural postman in the district of Athen, county of Limerick, whose wages were reduced from 11s. per week to 6s. 6d. per week, and 1s. per week for cleaning bicycle, since the date of change from a walking to a cycling route; and whether he will allow him to use a bicycle of his own and fix his wages on a fair basis. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) My inquiries in this matter are not yet quite complete. I will communicate with the hon. Member on the subject at an early date.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the attention of the Department of Agriculture has been called to the appointment, by the Diseases of Animals Committee of the Donegal County Council, of an inspector for the compulsory dipping of sheep in the rural district of Glenties; will he say how many suitable men, with, long experience of sheep-dipping, applied for the position; has the person appointed any knowledge of sheep-dipping; what was his former occupation; whether he is aware that his brother is a county councillor and a member of the Diseases of Animals Committee which made the appointment; and will he say what action does the Department intend to take in this matter. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Department of Agriculture have approved of the temporary appointment by the local authority under the Diseases of Animals Acts for county Donegal of inspectors of sheep-dipping for the various rural districts in the county, Glenties included. In the case of Glenties district the information before the Department does not show that there was more than one candidate for the appointment. The Department have not felt called upon to inquire into the qualifications or connections of any of the persons appointed. They do not propose to interfere with the discretion of the Donegal local authority in regard to appointments of this kind.

To ask the President of the Hoard of Education whether his attention has been called to the correspondence between the Education Committee of the London County Council and the Rev. T. Carey, of Eden Grove, Holloway; was the permission of the Board of Education sought before the letter, dated July 12th, 1906, was sent by the London County Council; can he explain how the removal of one of the partitions contributes to the efficient working of the school, and, if so, why would not the removal of a like partition in the other room also contribute to its efficient working; and whether, in view of the expense caused by the changes required to be made, he will say who is to indemnify the managers. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I have made inquiries as to the circumstances referred to, and I find that the apparent inconsistency of the local education authority was duo to a misunderstanding. Their letter of July 12th was written to the managers in ignorance of the fact that the partition in question had already been erected, and with the object of relieving the managers of expenditure which it was not absolutely necessary for them to incur. I understand that in the circumstances the local education authority will not press for the removal of the partition.

To ask the President of the Board of Education with reference to the correspondence between the London County Council and the Rev. T. Carey, of Eden Grove, Holloway, if he can say how it comes that sixty children on one floor divided into two classes of thirty each, separated by a partition, can be efficiently taught, whereas sixty children on the next floor cannot be effectively taught if they are so divided and accommodated; if the sixty children on one floor in one largo undivided room were transferred to the next floor and divided into two classes, and if the other sixty children were transferred so as to take the place of these sixty children, how comes it that the teaching would be still effective; and can he say what steps he proposes to take so that managers of schools may not be subjected to harassing and contradictory requirements. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The somewhat abstruse problems to which the hon. Member asks for replies raise ques- tions of educational administration into which the occasion of Question and Answer in this House does not appear to offer a suitable opportunity to enter. I think the essential purpose of the Question is met by the Answer I have given to the hon. Member's previous Question.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that appeals are being continually made in the Press for charitable assistance on behalf of twenty-nine needy survivors of the Balaclava light brigade charge; and whether he will consider the advisability of making sufficient provision from public funds for their maintenance in order that they may no longer be dependent upon any form of public charity. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Provision is already made for the award from Army funds of special campaign pensions up to 1s. a day to all necessitous survivors of the Balaclava Charge. In addition, grants are made from a fund administered by the Royal Patriotic Fund Corporation. Application should be made to the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital in the case of any necessitous survivor who is not in receipt of any Army pension.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Royal Canal requires to be cleansed, and that boat owners using the canal complain of its condition; and whether he will arrange with the responsible parties that the canal shall be cleansed at once. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I am informed by the Board of Works that the ordinary maintenance of this canal, including cleansing, is being carried on. The Board are prepared to consider and inquire into any specific complaints which may be made to them by boat owners.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state under what circumstances contracts for the erection of glass houses in the Phœnix Park, Dublin, were given to a Scottish firm; and whether Irish firms were invited to tender for the erection of these houses. (Answered by Mr. M'Kenna.) The Board of Works have informed me that these houses were urgently required and that the work is of a special character, both as regards the design, the details of construction, and the arrangements for ventilation. In these circumstances the Board gave the contract, after being satisfied that the terms were reasonable, to a firm of well-known specialists in this kind of work, who had executed contracts in the past to the Board's entire satisfaction. There are considerable building works in connection with the erection of the glass houses, and these, I understand, have been carried out either by Dublin contractors after tender or by the Board's workmen.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland in reference to the Hungerford and Clorahn estate, Lacka, County Cork; whether the Estates Commissioners will state why they cannot take any action in respect to the application of James and Geoffrey Ring, evicted tenants, for reinstatement in their holdings. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The Estates Commissioners inform me that after careful inquiry and consideration of the cases of James and Geoffrey Ring, they came to the conclusion that these applicants were unsuitable for restoration as tenant purchasers, and accordingly decided not to take any steps towards their restoration.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will consider the advisability of introducing a measure to afford the same facilities with regard to the education of the blind children in Ireland as exists in Great Britain. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) It appears to have escaped the hon. Member's notice that I have already introduced a measure upon this subject. I refer to the Irish Education (Afflicted Children) Bill, which has been road a second time. The Committee stage stands on the Paper for 23rd October.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to the injury likely to result to Ireland by the disappearance of game from a great part of the country; and whether, with a view to preventing the destruction of this national asset, he will consider the advisability of taking steps to ensure more careful attention to game licences, and game dealers' licences, and of compelling game dealers to obey the laws as to recording in their books the names of persons from whom they buy game. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) The enforcement of the game laws is not a matter which falls within the province of the Irish Government. The police are directly prohibited by statute from enforcing the laws relating to the preservation of game. The matter of game licences concerns the Inland Revenue, and any question on the subject should be addressed to my hon. friend the Secretary to the Treasury, who answers for that Department.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the Ghaffirs of Denshawi who protected the wounded British officers and took care of them until relief came have been punished. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) I have no further information than that contained in the Papers already laid before Parliament.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Ombashi of Egyptian police, who accompanied the English officers on the day of the affray at Denshawi, gave evidence at the trial of the villagers of Denshawi; and, if so, by whom he was called on to give evidence; whether he has since been put on trial himself; and, if so, what are the charges against him; and before what tribunal is he to be tried. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) The Ombashi was called upon by the prosecution to give evidence before the court. I am not aware that he has himself since been placed on trial.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether in view of his statement that the Wai-wu-Pu are endeavouring to overcome the hostility of the local gentry in connection with the Anhui mining contract, he would consider the expediency of affording effectual assistance to the Central Government to enable them to carry out the concessions and obligations into which they have entered in the past: and, if not, by what other method does he expect to secure the legal rights of British subjects in China. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) The Answer to the first Question is in the negative. I have nothing to add to the statement already made in regard to this concession to the effect that the efforts of His Majesty's Legation have been and are being directed to obtaining, by means of representations to the Central Government, permission for the promoters of the scheme to commence operations.

To ask the Postmaster-General if the Post Office paid any part of the £700 recently awarded by the Caledonian Railway Company to Mr. Winskil as compensation for injuries received in a railway accident while engaged as a travelling letter sorter; and, if so, how much. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The Answer is in the negative.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has received representations with regard to the inconvenience of the postal arrangements in parts of Tollcross; and whether he will endeavour to give such increased facilities that it may be possible to reply to English letters on the day of receipt. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I have the question of the improvement of the postal arrangements at Tollcross now under consideration, and I will communicate further with the hon. Member when the inquiries are completed.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state when the Report of the Royal Commission on Tuberculosis will be issued; and whether it is intended to make a definite statement regarding the communicability of bovine tuberculosis to man. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The Royal Commission hoped that the Report which they propose to issue would have been published before the adjournment, but they now find that it will not be practicable to issue it before October. They think it necessary to include in the Appendix a larger amount of experimental detail than they anticipated, and to confirm certain important facts by-additional experiments, which are still under observation. I understand that a definite statement on the communicability of bovine tuberculosis to man will be made in the Report.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that the Report of the joint Committee of the Throe Counties Asylum, near Arlesey, shows that 32,800 gallons of beer were brewed in the institution last year for the use of the inmates and staff at a cost of £933; and whether, seeing that the experience of the London County Council Asylums Committee has proved the percentage of recoveries to be greater where no beer is given, he will consider the advisability of recommending the joint Committee to abandon the practice of giving alcoholic beverages to lunatics, except under direct medical orders. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I beg to answer this Question on behalf of my right hon. friend. I am informed by the Lunacy Commissioners that the beer used at the Three Counties Asylum is given to the patients generally on Sundays only, when each patient has half a pint at dinner. On week days patients are encouraged to work by an. allowance of beer to those who work. As, however, the use of beer has been discontinued in most asylums, I will make further inquiry into the matter.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will grant a Return showing the expenses incurred by the London County Council in promoting and opposing Bills in Parliament during the last six years, stating in each case the title of the Bill and whether or not it became law. (Answered by Air. John Burns.) I would draw the hon. Member's attention to a Return made to an Order of the House of Lords in 1903 (No. 214), which gives particulars of the expenses incurred by the London County Council in promoting and opposing Bills in Parliament in each session up to and including that for the year 1902. This return will perhaps be sufficient for his purpose.

To ask Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland whether any steps have been taken with reference to granting a new patent for the holding of fairs to the Ballina Urban District Council. (Answered by Mr. Cherry.) The Urban District Council of Ballina, county Mayo, recently expressed a desire to obtain a patent to hold monthly fairs at Ballina. The Lord-Lieutenant caused them to be informed that this could be effected only on an application by the owners of the existing patent of which the district council are lessees, the council as lessees to join in the application. No such application has since been received.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Board has received representations from the Canterbury Farmers' Club and East Kent Chamber of Agriculture with reference to the position of the hop industry in East Kent; and whether it is proposed to take any steps in the matter. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) We have received a resolution from the body named calling attention to the serious position of the hop industry owing to the unfair competition from foreign countries, but they do not make any suggestions as to action which might be taken by the Government. If, however they refer to the proposal that foreign hops should be marked or that an import duty should be imposed, the Government cannot take action in either direction.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can give an authoritative denial to the report that the newly appointed commander of Portsmouth naval barracks had intimated to the canteen committee his intention to override their considered and unanimous decision in regard to a matter intimately connected with the canteen funds; and whether this officer merely intimated to the canteen committee that he reserved to himself the right to submit a report to his superior officer on a decision of the Committee which appeared to him against the financial interests of the canteen. (Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson.) There is no foundation whatever for the report that any attempt has been made to override the decision of the Portsmouth Canteen Committee in any respect.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that the Board of Inland Revenue have frequently urged the establishment of the clerks to surveyors of taxes, and that the Treasury officials refuse all such schemes submitted to them, he will state his reasons for refusing to order an independent inquiry into the case of these clerks, especially in view of the fact that the surveyors recently petitioned the Board of Inland Revenue praying for their clerks establishment in the interests of the Revenue and the public. (Answered by Mr. M'Kenna.) I have already stated, in answer to a Question on the 26th ultimo of the hon. Member for South Down, the reasons for this refusal. They are "That all the facts are fully known, that they have been carefully examined and considered both by the Treasury and by the Board on more than one occasion in recent years, and that there is no reason to suppose that further inquiry would affect the judgment of the Treasury or of the Board of Inland Revenue."

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that the Board of Inland Revenue consulted the chief inspector and his assistants, on the surveyor's memorial last year, praying for the establishment of clerks to surveyors of taxes, he will state how many inspectors are employed by such Board; whether he is aware that the majority of the inspectors strongly urge the establishment of these clerks; whether he will state how many of such inspectors are in favour of such establishment; and whether the Board of Inland Revenue acted upon the advice of such inspectors in refusing the surveyor's prayer; and, if not, will he explain upon what grounds the Board based their refusal, seeing that not one of the members of such Board ever worked in a surveyor's office. (Answered by Mr. M'Kenna.) There are altogether six superintending inspectors and sixteen inspectors. I am not prepared to enter into any question as to the individual opinions of the several inspectors. The surveyors were informed of the grounds of refusal in a Minute of the Board of Inland Revenue, dated July 28th, 1905. As I stated in reply to an unstarred Question of the hon. Member for South Down on June 21st last, the present system is preferred, not only as being more economical, but also as more convenient for adaptation of the staff to the requirements of the localities.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will grant, as an unopposed Return, a statement of the Intercepted Public Revenue for the years 1904–5, 1905–6, 1906–7, in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 223, of 1905; whether he will grant in the same way a continuation of Return No. 243, of 1905 (Gross Departmental Expenditure), for the years 1895–6, 1905–6, and 1906–7; and, if not, upon what grounds it is considered necessary now for the first time to withhold this information from the House. (Answered by Mr. M'Kenna.) A Return of Public Revenue (Interception) will be given for the three years in question, if the hon. Member will move for it. The Return of Gross Departmental Expenditure has only once been furnished, namely, in 1905, when it was allowed experimentally. It is merely a recasting of the figures of expenditure, as ordinarily published, under a different classification. Such variations tend to confusion, and are to be deprecated unless they serve some really useful purpose. I do not think there is such justification in this instance, and I regret, therefore, that I do not see my way to incur the trouble and expense which its publication would entail.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, whether a Report has been received from the Board's inspector, who held an inquiry as to the extension of the Avon and Stour Conservancy to other Hampshire rivers; and whether such Report will be laid upon the Table. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The Report to which my hon. friend refers has been received, but it is made solely for the guidance and information of the Board, and it would be contrary to practice for it to be laid on the Table.

To ask the Secretary of State for India if he will state how many ryots have been evicted in the Bombay Presidency in default of payment of land revenue in each of the last five years; and what sum has been realised in each year through the sale of land previously in the occupation of evicted ryots. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) According to the annual land revenue reports of the Bombay Presidency the number of cases in which the occupancy right was forfeited to Government on

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Fair Wages Resolution clause has been inserted in the contract for the conveyance of military stores from Dublin to Kilbride; and if he is aware that the wages paid to the carters on this work is 2s. a week less than the wages paid by the contractor having the contract for conveyance of other military stores. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The contract contains the current rate clause. Some of the carters receive more and some less than the carters employed by the other contractor referred to, but no evidence has been produced to show that the minimum wages paid by the contractor are less than the wages usually paid in the district to carters of the same skill and experience.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will favourably consider the granting of the same fuel, light, and lodging allowance to sergeants and buglers serving on the permanent staff Militia on Militia

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the promised inquiries into Bremner's case have been made; and, if so, what course it is proposed to take in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) This Question is still under consideration.

To ask the Prime Minister, what are the reasons why he declines to recommend the appointment of an Irish medical man on the Royal Commission on the Poor Law to fill the vacancy created by the death of The O'Conor Don; and whether, as the Irish medical profession is vitally concerned in the investigations of the Royal Commission so far as regards Ireland, he will reconsider the matter. (Answered by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman.) I do not see my way to reconsider this matter in the sense desired by the hon. Member. The selection of members of Royal Commissions is governed by general considerations, and in any fresh appointment that may be made to the Royal Commission on the Poor Law the hon. Member may be sure that regard will be had to the Commissioner's qualifications for dealing with the Poor Law as it is administered in Ireland. It does not follow that, because Irish Poor Law medical officers are interested in the inquiry, the appointment of an Irish medical gentleman would necessarily be the most fitting to make.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the "Renown" is included in the number of first-class battleships appearing in the recently issued Return of Fleets; and whether the work of reconverting the vessel into a battleship has been commenced, and when it may be expected to be completed.

The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The work of restoring the "Renown"To her original condition has not yet been commenced, but it could, if necessary, be carried out in a very short space of time.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the advisability of allowing the non-commissioned officers and men in the 3rd Battalion of Scots Guards, and in other battalions to be disbanded the opportunity of re-engaging for extended terms of service, so as to enable them to qualify for subsequent employment with the auxiliary forces.

These non-commissioned officers and men will be granted the opportunity of reengaging mentioned in the Question.

I beg to ask the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Zulu rebellion is now at an end, and whether the Militia and irregular troops will be immediately recalled; what will be done with the 3,000 prisoners; and what steps will be taken to remove the conditions which produced disaffection among the hitherto loyal native population of the Colony.

The Governor does not anticipate further operations, and states that all districts are reported quiet. The Natal Government has given orders for the demobilisation of the active Militia, retaining about 600 men for further services, if required. The Secretary of State is not officially informed as to what will be done with the prisoners. The Natal Government proposes to appoint a Commission to investigate the question of native administration.

I beg to ask the Under - Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to a speech made at a public banquet in Pretoria, by Brigadier-General Jeffreys, in which he defended the military policy of giving no quarter and accepting no surrender in the recent operations against the Zulus; will he say whether General Jeffreys holds his commission from His Majesty; and whether the Colonial Secretary will take any notice of the speech.

From a newspaper report which I have seen it appears to be stated that Brigadier-General Jeffreys, who is an officer upon the staff in South Africa, said in the course of a speech largely devoted to historical references to bygone methods of warfare, that in the course of a "drive" through impenetrable bush it was impossible to accept surrenders. I do not know whether the report is correct; but even if it were, it does not seem to me to afford any grounds for the supposition that a British officer would defend the killing of unresisting men. I hope my hon. friend will endeavour to extend to the speeches of soldiers the benefits of that most favourable construction to which speeches in this House are in constitutional practice entitled, and of which they may sometimes stand in need. The Secretary of State does not consider that the matter calls for his interference.

I am not quite sure whether I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that a "drive through impenetrable bush" was an historic reference; if that is so, I am only too glad to accept the Answer, but I take it to mean—

Order, order ! The hon. Member is not now asking a Question.

I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether he is yet in a position to state whether the republication of the Repatriation Ordinance has been any more successful than the original publication in inducing the Chinese coolies in the Transvaal to realise that they wish to be sent back to China; what was the date of the republication; and has the Government no information, by telegram or otherwise, as to the number of coolies who have since required to be repatriated.

The new notice was posted in the compounds on July 18th. No information has yet been received as to the number of applications made.

I beg to ask the Under-secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Bewaarplaatzen is still in the possession of the Transvaal State to the same extent as before the war; and whether any mining operations are now being carried on under these reserved areas.

The Governor has not yet replied to an inquiry on the subject addressed to him. His attention is again being called to the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, having regard to the fact.that a sum of £150 12s. is placed on the Civil Service Supplementary Estimates, under Class VII., for repayment to the Civil Contingencies Fund, in respect of stamp duties payable on Letters Patent, creating Sir Thomas Sanderson, G.C.B, K.C.M.G., I.S.O., a baron of the United Kingdom, will he explain why the recipient of this honour is not required to pay the stamp duties.

The long and distinguished career in the public service of the recipient of the honour was held, following precedent, to justify the remission of the charges.

Might I ask the hon. Gentleman whether those charges are remitted on account of long service, and whether Members of this House after serving here for many years will be entitled to anything?

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can hold out hopes of substantial reductions and economies being carried out in the administration of the Civil Services Estimates for 1906–7, on somewhat similar lines to those effected on the Army and Navy Estimates.

The Civil expenditure of the State applies to a large number of services which are independent of one another and governed by entirely different considerations. It is not possible therefore by any general determination of policy to affect the Civil expenditure as the Naval or Military expenditure may be affected. It is, however, the hope and intention of His Majesty's Government to secure that the Civil Services shall be conducted with the strictest regard to economy.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the town council of Stirling had the option of acquiring the ground adjoining the King's Park and King's Knot, part of the King's Park; if so, at what price; whether the said ground has been sold to private parties; and, if so, will he say why this has been done.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that Crown land contiguous to the King's Park at Stirling is being feued for building purposes; whether applications for feus on this land have hitherto been refused on the ground that buildings placed upon the site would destroy one of the finest views in Scotland; and whether, having regard to the interests of the town, and the public dissatisfaction caused by the present action, he will reconsider any decision that may have been taken.

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer the Question addressed to me by the hon. Member for Ayr Burghs at the same time. I am informed that the land referred to is an arable field containing about four acres to which the public have never had the privilege of access. The Commissioner of Woods is not aware that previous applications for feus have been refused for the reason stated. I understand, moreover, that adjoining land on the same side of the Dumbarton Road belonging to the town council of Stirling has been built over. It has been arranged that the field shall be feued for the erection only of private residences of a style and character to be approved by the Commissioner, and the buildings are to be kept on the lower part of the field next the public road, where they will not be visible from the park or interfere with the amenities of it. The town council were, given the first opportunity of acquiring the land, but did not desire to avail themselves of it, nor, when the proposals for feuing were submitted to them as a matter of courtesy, did they intimate any objection to the land being feued to others provided the restrictions mentioned were enforced. In these circumstances I see no sufficient reason for interfering with the decision which has been arrived at.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the statement on page 57 of the Annual Report on Factories and Workshops that cases continue in which charges are made for insurance under the Work- men's Compensation Act and the amount deducted more than covers the premium; and whether the promise made by his predecessor on August 4th, 1903, is to be redeemed.

I am aware of the statement to which my right hon. friend alludes. In accordance with the promise given in August, 1903, the question of these deductions was brought by the Home Office before the Departmental Committee on Workmen's Compensation who reported that "if the practice were shown to be other than very exceptional it might be a question worthy of consideration whether the provisions of the Truck Acts should not be extended to check the evil." I agree with the Committee in the view that the matter is one to be dealt with rather by an Amendment of the Truck Acts than of the Workmen's Compensation Act, and I am informed that the Truck Committee now sitting has it in mind and has already heard evidence with regard to it.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has received communications from workmen's organisations asking for an increase in the factory laws inspectorate, by the appointment of more working class inspectors; and whether he can see-his way to accede to this demand.

This Question was pressed on my notice by the deputation from the Trades Union Congress in February last. I shall have an opportunity of dealing with it in the Estimates this afternoon.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if he will give the details composing the sum of £5,000 to be granted towards the expenses of receiving the Inter-Parliamentary Conference.

I have not yet received the information in the form of vouchers and. accounts, and therefore am unable to give particulars. They will be presented, however, in due course to Parliament and the balance-sheet will show how the money has generally been expended in fitting up the Royal Gallery for the conference, for the luncheon in Westminster Hall, the banquet at the Crystal Palace, for the striking of a medal, locomotion, postage, and stationery, and other matters. The expenses for the luncheon falling on the the public charge will only be the sum for our foreign guests, the cost of their own entertainment being paid by the British delegates. The total amount required will not be so much as has been voted by Parliament owing to the admirable management of the English committee here.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Mid-Derby, as Chairman of the Kitchen Committee of the House of Commons, in view of the late sittings of the House during the past few weeks, whether he will state how many staff's of waiters there are for the dining rooms, the number of hours they work, their starting time, and rate of pay; and whether any, and, if so, how many receive any payment when Parliament is not sitting.

A similar Question was asked last Monday. I would refer the hon. Member to my written reply.†

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he will give the items and particulars forming the sum of £200,000 to be allotted to certain local education.authorities; and when these grants will be paid.

The sum named is an estimate of the maximum sum likely to be needed to carry out the Regulations recently issued for the Special Grant which is payable this year, and this year only. I can give no accurate list of individual authorities or amounts until the audited Financial Statements of the Local Education Authority

† See Col. 433.

concerned have reached the Board of Education and been investigated there. The grants will, as a rule, be paid before the close of this year.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the decision of the High Court at Edinburgh confirming the decision of Sheriff Guthrie in regard to foreign trawling in the Moray Firth, will he state whether the commanders of Scottish Fishery Board cruisers have been instructed as to the action to be taken in respect of foreign trawlers found fishing in the Firth; and, if not, will he state when instructions will be issued.

I am not yet in a position to add to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Argyllshire on July 25th. †

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether I am to understand that the cruisers have captured one of these foreign trawlers not within the three-mile limit but in any part of the Moray Firth?

No, the hon. Member is not to understand anything further than what I stated in my answer.

Arising out of that Answer might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can tell us what the Government are inquiring into?

That was not the Question put to me. The Question put to me was whether the Commanders of the Scottish Fishery Board had been instructed as to the action to be taken in respect of foreign trawlers found fishing in the Firth, and, if not, when instnictions will be issued. That matter is now receiving the attention of the Government.

May the Members of this House go round with the cruisers to see how they are doing their duty.

† See (4), Debates, clxi., 1197.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he will take means to get a grant of money for the improvement of the main roads in the county of Sutherland.

The Answer is in the negative. I can add nothing now to previous answers to my hon. friend.

I beg to ask the Secretary of Scotland what is the number and total acreage of agricultural holdings in Scotland below £50 annual value.

So far as I am ware, there are no precise figures available. In 1890–91, the latest year for which figures are available, the number of persons assessed for Poor Rate in respect of the occupation of farms and paying rental not exceeding £50 as per Valuation Roll, was 46,828. Table VI. of the Annual Returns of acreage in the Agricultural Statistics, 1905, gives the total number of Agricultural Holdings in Scotland above one acre and not exceeding fifty acres as 53,358.

I suppose we shall have accurate information before we deal with the Bill in the Autumn?

I hope so, Sir, but accurate information is exceedingly difficult to obtain.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland what is the estimated cost of the new Scottish Land Commission, including the sums now devoted to the Crofters Commission and the Congested Districts Board.

I must ask the hon. Member to await the issue of the Bill.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether he proposes to take any action to enable the police in the town of Dunblane to deal with loiterers and beggars; whether Section 420 of the Act of 1892, as to retailers of coals, is in force in that town; and, if so, will he explain why offences of that nature are not reported to the borough prosecutor.

Dunblane is not. excepted from the operation of the Burgh Police Act, 1892. If, under that Act, or in any other manner, there is a failure of duty upon the part of the police, or in the reporting of the offences, the proper course is for any persons or authorities aggrieved to report the matter to the sheriff of the county. In view, however, of the inquiries by my hon. friend, such as the present and that on the Paper for to-morrow, I have adopted the course of sending the whole correspondence and documents to the Crown Agent in Edinburgh for report.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the Congested Districts Board paid eighteen years' purchase of first term rents for lands bought in 1906, compared with fifteen years' purchase in 1902, and twenty-one and a quarter years' purchase of second term rent in 1906,compared with eighteen and three-quarter years' purchase in 1902, they can now explain what circumstances have arisen to justify the increase of three years' purchase and of two and a half years' respectively.

The Congested Districts Board purchased land in 1906, as in other years since the passing of the Irish Land Act of 1903, at the lowest price at which they could obtain it. The price of land has risen since 1903.

Arising out of that, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there is any increase in the agricultural value of the land to justify paying this enhanced price?

The causes which affect the price of land are very numerous, and this increase I suggest is largely due to causes other than that suggested by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have yet arrived at any decision in regard to the case of Mr. Timothy C. O'Callaghan, Dromore, Mallow, who was excluded from the purchase arrangement on the Newman estate, though willing to purchase his holding on the same terms as the other tenants, and who has since been evicted from his holding; are the Commissioners aware that the landlord procured the exclusion of this tenant from the general scheme by a false representation, to the effect that he was entitled to the resumption of C. O'Callaghan's holding, on the ground of its being demesne land; and whether the Commissioners will take steps to procure his reinstatement.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have not yet arrived at a decision in this case. The matter is still under consideration.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the meeting of the council of the Irish Butter Trade Association at which the relationship of the Irish Department of Agriculture with the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society was discussed; will he say if the Department subsidised the society to the extent of £5,700 within the past two years; and whether, in view of the complaints of this trade society against the subsidising of an organisation which is in direct competition with private traders in the Irish butter trade, more especially in regard to the creameries industry, the Department will decline to subsidise the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society in future by withholding further financial assistance.

I have seen a newspaper report of the recent proceedings of the council of the Irish Butter Trade Association. The purposes of organisation for which grants in aid of a sum of £2,000 for the year ended February 28th last, and of a sum not exceeding £3,700 for the year ending 28th February next, were made by the Department of Agriculture, with the concurrence of the Agricultural Board, have already been explained in my answers to the questions of the hon. Member for East Mayo on May 21st and 29th.† The question of the continuance of the existing provisional arrangement for any period subsequent to the twelve months ending February 28th next, was discussed at the meeting of the Council of Agriculture in May last, and was postponed for further consideration to their next meeting, which will be held in the autumn of the present year. The result of the further deliberations of the Council will be a guide to the Agricultural Board and the Department as regards future action in the matter.

I ask the right hon. Gentleman is he himself aware that this Irish Agricultural Organisation Society is in direct competition with private traders in the Irish butter trade.

I think if the hon. Member will refer to what I said to the hon. Member for East Mayo on May 21st and 29th he will find that I have answered that.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the police have been able to trace the perpetrators of the cattle-maiming outrage on Mr. Bailey, in South Derry.

I am informed that the police have made every effort to discover the offender or offenders in this case, but up to the present have not succeeded in doing so. They are still pursuing their investigations.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman is he not aware that this is the third attack to which this gentleman has been subjected: that during the general election he was violently assaulted himself and that now his cattle are maimed; and whether the right hon. Gentleman does not think that is rather a high price to pay for his voting Liberal.

I have no power in the matter. I can only say that every possible

† See (4), Debates, clvii., 902; clvii., 257.

effort will be made to trace the perpetrators of this outrage, but hon. Members must remember that these outrages were committed at night and it is extremely difficult to trace a thing of that sort.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman supply North Derry with the same government which is supplied to South Tipperary in cases of the same kind?

Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Member for the Division has denounced these cruel outrages, and, if not, whether he may be deemed to be in favour of them.

That Question could hardly be answered by me.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the inefficient working of and delay to the travelling public on the Burtonport Railway on the 19th and 21st instant; whether he is aware that whatever improvement has taken place in the working of the line is due to the Lough Swilly Company procuring at its own expense new engines to replace those supplied by the Board of Works; and whether, seeing that all the public bodies in the districts through which the line runs have passed Resolutions asking for something to be done, he will take steps to have an inquiry made by the Board of Trade as to the defects and safety of the line, and the inefficiency of its rolling stock.

I am informed that the delay on the 19th ultimo to the traffic on the Burtonport line arose through an accident to an engine on the Lough Swilly Company's own line near Londonderry, the effect of which was felt throughout the Burtonport system. The delays on the 21st ultimo were due partly to causes which arose on the Lough Swilly Company's own line and partly to the failure of the injectors of one of that company's engines at Owenarrow viaduct on the Burtonport line The reply to the second part of the Question is in the negative. The engines referred to are not, it is understood, now working on the Burtonport line, the traffic on which is being worked by the original engines. I see no sufficient reason in the circumstances which I have described for altering the view which I expressed in answer to the hon. Member's Question of Juno 25th last.†

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what action the Commissioners of National Education propose to take in view of the action of school managers in Munster and elsewhere in declining to appoint assistant mistresses in boys' schools; and whether, in view of the generally expressed opinions of the managers, the rule will be altered so as to enable the managers to appoint junior assistant masters in such schools.

The Commissioners of National Education inform me that they have received a resolution urging the appointment of junior assistant masters instead of assistant mistresses in boys' schools under masters, but for the reasons which have already been fully stated the Commissioners do not propose to take any action on the Resolution. The Commissioners state that they continue to receive from clerical managers in all parts of Ireland, including Munster, applications for the appointment of junior assistant mistresses in boys' schools.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that in the case of the holding of Patrick McGloin (Gilbert), of Aghanlish, Largy-donnell, county Leitrim, the Estates Commissioners have now appealed from the decision of the county court judge fixing the tenant's second-term fair rent at £5; that that appeal is solely on the question of the jurisdiction of the county court judge to fix the rent; that no appeal on the question of value has been taken; that that appeal is to the Land Commision, who are thus appellants and judges in the same case; and whether, seeing that the only effect of that appeal, if successful, would be to compel the tenant to buy at

† See (4) Debates clix., 591.

thirty-eight and a half years purchase of the rent fixed by the county court judge, and in view of the comments of the county court judge on the action of the Land Commission towards this tenant, and of the expense incurred by the tenant in defending proceedings brought against him by the Estates Commissioners, he will say what steps he intends to take to protect the tenant from having to purchase on the said terms.

I am informed that the Estates Commissioners have appealed from the decision of the county court judge upon the question of his jurisdiction to fix a fair rent in the case, having regard to the fact that the Commissioners had already issued an order under Section 19 of the Act, declaring McGloin to be the purchaser of the holding. Until this question of law has been decided, the Commissioners are unable to say how they may eventually deal with the case, and in the meantime they do not think it desirable to enter into the facts alleged in the Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Veterinary Branch of the Department of Agriculture in Ireland has a laboratory and an experimental farm, as has the similar branch of the English Department of Agriculture, for the purposes of Identifying disease and of research work, and, if not, if he will consider the desirability of furnishing the Irish Department with similar facilities as the English in this respect; if the Treasury has received a memorial from the staff of the Irish Veterinary Department asking to be placed on an equal footing regarding pay with their English confreres; and what was the reply to this request.

The Answer to the first part of this Question is in the negative. The provision of a laboratory for the diagnosis of disease is engaging attention. There is no present intention of establishing an experimental farm in connection with the Department's Veterinary Branch. A memorial in the sense mentioned has been addressed to the Vice-President of the Department by.a number of Veterinary Inspectors employed in the Veterinary Branch. The Treasury have not as yet been communicated with in the matter, which is under the consideration of the Department.

On behalf of my hon. friend the Member for Galway, I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state if the grass lands of the Castle-blakeney Estate, near Ballinasloe, will be divided amongst the tenantry before next November.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they are unable to identify the grass lands referred to from the information furnished in the Question. If the name of the owner should be furnished to them they will make further inquiries.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Harbour Board have now submitted plans and estimates for the proposed works at Arklow, provision for which was made in the Vote for the Ireland Development Grant of 1905–6.

The Harbour Board have not yet submitted plans and estimates for the proposed works at Arklow. It is desirable that they should do so forthwith in order that the work may be begun. As to the general position, I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to my reply to the Question of the hon. Baronet the Member for North Wexford on Thursday last.†

Arising out of that Answer, might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will use his influence to expedite matters?

I will do all I can, as it is very desirable that the work should be done at the earliest possible moment.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is now in a

† See (4), Debates, clxi., 1421.

position to make any statement with respect to the intention of the Government as to the construction of a line of railway between Mullaranny and Belmullet; and, if not, whether he can undertake that the proposal will receive his personal consideration during the Parliamentary Recess.

I have lately visited both Mullaranny and Belmullet, and have quite recently received a Report from the Board of Works on the subject of the proposed railway. Inasmuch as there are four competing schemes for lines of railway to Belmullet, even the cheapest of which will involve large expenditure, the subject requires much consideration, and I am not yet in a position to make any statement regarding it. It will, however, continue to engage the attention of the Irish Government.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been directed to a letter addressed, on July 3rd, to the Irish Government by the Down County Council respecting the construction of improvement works at Portavogie Harbour; and whether, with a view to the settlement of plans for carrying out these works, for which funds have been voted by Parliament, but as to the details of which there is a difference of opinion between the county conncil and the Commissioners of Public Works, he will arrange that the Commissioners shall send down their engineer to confer at Portavogie with the committee of the county council.

I am aware of the correspondence which has taken place in this matter. The difference which has arisen can hardly be described as one respecting details, seeing that the scheme now proposed by the county council is entirely different from that originally put forward by them and accepted by the Government when the right hon. Gentleman was in office. It seems, therefore, to be doubtful whether the case is one for such a conference as is suggested. If the county council are prepared to abide by the arrangement agreed upon, there will be no difficulty in carrying out the works. I understand that the Board of Works do not approve of the change of plans now put forward.

Arising out of that Answer, might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the Board of Works would inform the local officials as to the local inquiry?

I presume that either the county council or the Irish Government would, but I do not know that anything would be cleared up by bringing in the officials at this stage.

I beg to ask; the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether work has yet commenced in the construction of sea defences at Wicklow, if not, what are the reasons for delay, and will he be good enough to undertake that every effort, will be made to commence the work before further serious damage is caused by the depredations of the sea; and if he will also state what is the present condition of the negotiations with respect to the proposed harbour works at Wicklow.

I understand that work-has not yet begun on these sea defences. The commencement and prosecution of the works rest entirely with the Wicklow Harbour Board, at whoso disposal a sum of £10,000 was placed by the Government for the purpose at the beginning of this year. The Government are disappointed that the works have not yet been commenced, and so far as the Government are concerned, there is no need for further negotiations. They have done all they can to enable the work to be begun forthwith. The Government conditions are well known to the Harbour Board and the other persons locally interested. The plans and estimates of the works have been submitted to the Government by the Harbour Board within the last few days, and are now with the consulting engineer for examination.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that under existing conditions it is impossible for future tenants in Ireland to avail of the Land Courts to have a fair rent fixed; and whether, in view of the fact that many of them are paying rents 100 per cent, in excess of the values of their holdings, he will take steps to have the alleged grievances of future tenants remedied.

I beg to refer to my reply to the Question of the hon. Member for South Leitrim on April 3rd, † in which I stated that I was not prepared, in reply to a Question, to discuss the possibility of legislation in regard to future tenants.

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether in the recess he will inquire into these cases very closely and see for himself the justice of these claims?

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that during the past six months the total take in sea fishing has gained by 218,000 cwt. in weight and £150,000 in England, whereas for Ireland the increase is only 2,600 cwt. and £6,000, including shellfish; and will he state whether he can ascertain the reason for the difference in the rates of increase for England and Ireland.

From the returns at present available it appears that during the first six months of the present year the quantity of fish, excluding shellfish, brought to land in England and Wales has decreased in quantity by 386,796 cwts. or about 8½ per cent., as compared with the corresponding period of last year; while in Ireland the quantity has, during the same period, increased by 2,655 cwts., or ¾ per cent. Including shellfish, the value of the fish brought to land in England and Wales has increased by £149,694, or 4½ per cent.; while in Ireland the increase in value has been £5,947, or 4 per cent. The hon. Member will see, therefore, that, as regards fish properly so-called, there has been a decrease in England and Wales and a small increase in Ireland; while if shellfish is included, there has been an increase at practically the same rate in both countries.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the

† See (4) Debates clv., 363.

Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on the night of the declaration of the poll in the East Tyrone election serious disturbances were caused in Dungannon by crowds of Nationalists, who paraded the streets smashing the windows of many houses in Thomas Street and Market Square; that the police were finally compelled to charge the mob; and that many of the police were hit by stones and other missiles; and what arrests have been made in connection with the disturbance.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on Thursday night, July 26th, at Dungannon, a band of Nationalists attempted to invade a Protestant quarter, where they broke a number of windows and did serious damage to the property of Unionists; whether he is aware that the police were pelted with stones and shot at with revolvers, several officers being badly beaten; and what steps are being taken in the matter.

I will answer these two Questions together. The facts stated in the first Question appear to be substantially correct. It is not the fact that the crowd attempted to invade a Protestant quarter, because that part was strongly guarded by the police; but volleys of stones were thrown and some windows broken. Some revolver shots appear to have been fired, but whether charged with bullets cannot be ascertained. No one appears to have been hit. Owing to the darkness—the lamps appear not to have been lit—it was found impossible to identifiy the offenders. The magistrates, in order to prevent any further disturbances, issued a proclamation forbidding band-playing and processions in Dungannon yesterday and to-day, these being occasions on which Party processions are usually in the town.

Arising out of that, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether the disturbance was not commenced by a shower of missiles being thrown at the Nationalists from a house owned by an Orangeman as they were returning to their own quarters?

I have no information.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the proceedings of the Dublin Corporation at their meeting on June 11th, when they adopted the Report of a committee of the whole House, dated March 30th, which met to investigate the conduct of Councillor Anthony Madden, High Sheriff of the City of Dublin, and Councillor Thomas O'Reilly, in regard to a carting contract; whether he is aware that the Committee arrived unanimously at the conclusion that the circumstances disclosed were discreditable to the two councillors named; and whether any action is contemplated with a view to relieving them from their present responsibilities.

The Local Government Board have no information concerning the proceedings of the Corporation in this matter beyond that which has appeared in the Dublin newspaper. The Board have no power to intervene in the matter.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any complaint has reached his office in Dublin as to the action of Superintendent Talbot, of the Dublin Metropolitan Police, in interfering on the 25th June last with the discharge of his duties, in the Kingstown Police Court, by Mr. Hawe, a reporter on one of the Dublin daily newspapers, by ordering him out of a seat at the table in the Court in question; if so, has any action been taken, or is it intended to take any action on the complaint; and whether any policeman has any authority of his own to order any representative of the Press or any member of the public to sit or not to sit in any particular place in any Court.

A complaint to the effect stated has been received, and the matter has been inquired into by the Chief Commissioner of the Dublin Metropolitan Police. The Chief Commissioner is satisfied that Superintendent Talbot's action on the occasion in question was taken with the object of preserving the usual arrangements which prevail in the Kingstown Police Court. It appears that Mr. Hawe was sitting at the table reserved for solicitors, and the superintendent indicated to him the usual seat occupied by reporters. The general arrangements of the Court are made- by the magistrates, and the police on duty carry them out. The Chief Commissioner is of opinion that it would have been wiser for the superintendent to have left the matter in the hands of the court sergeant, whose duty it is to see that the magistrate's arrangements are carried out. No incivility, however, appears to have been intended by the superintendent, who subsequently expressed to Mr. Hawe his regret that that gentleman had misunderstood his remarks.

I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's Answer that the superintendent admitted that he had acted wrongly on this occasion. Has the superintendent apologised to the gentleman whom he insulted?

I do not think it is a case of insult. It was mentioned to the superintendent and he expressed his regret. It is not an incident of very great moment, and I think it might now be regarded as closed.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the recent appointments by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland to the magistracy in the county of Antrim were made with the concurrence of His Excellency the Lord-Lieutenant, or if he had been consulted beforehand; whether they were made with the concurrence of His Majesty's Lieutenant of the county; if not, was the Lord Chancellor informed by him that there was no public need for any additional justices; on what considerations did the Lord Chancellor act in making the appointments; who is responsible for the status and respectability of the gentlemen so appointed by the Lord Chancellor where the Lieutenant of the county declines to concur; and what number of justices were available in the Ballymoney, Ballymena, and Larne districts respectively, before the recent appointments.

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that Question may I put to him a Question of which I had given him private notice, whether he is aware that the magisterial bench has been and is at present composed almost entirely of Tories and Orangemen, and that with one exception the Lieutenants of the counties are all Tories and Orangemen; whether he is aware that Catholics and liberals are over 85 per cent, of the country, and whether he will appoint to the Commission of the Peace a number of Nationalists and Liberals in proportion to the population.

The notice to which the hon. Gentleman has referred has not reached me. I did not know this Question would be put to me to-day, and I am not prepared to answer it. I may say the appointment of magistrates does not rest with me, but with the Lord Chancellor. As to the Question on the Paper, I have referred this Question to the Lord Chancellor, who has favoured me with the following observations:—The appointment of county magistrates rests with the Lord Chancellor, as Keeper of the Great Seal. The Lord-Lieutenant's concurrence in such appointments is not necessary, nor is His Excellency consulted in the matter. The recent appointments to the magistracy for county Antrim were made by the Lord Chancellor upon his own responsibility, and without the concurrence of His Majesty's Lieutenant of the county. The Lord Chancellor had carefully inquired into the suitability for the magistracy of the gentlemen in question, whose names he communicated to the Lieutenant of the county; but having waited for what he considered a sufficient time without receiving any reply from the Lieutenant, he considered it his duty, without further delay, to take upon himself the entire responsibility for the appointments. In so doing, he acted within his undoubted right. He considered the gentlemen whom he appointed to be fit and proper persons for the magistracy, and he deemed their appointment to be desirable. In considering the appointment of magistrates, the Lord Chancellor has always been desirous of securing the co-operation, and assistance of His Majesty's Lieutenant in each county, and he has been fortunate enough to receive such co-operation in nearly every case. It has, however, never been obligatory on the Lord Chancellor to confine the scope of his inquiries to any one source, or to limit his information to that which the Lieutenant of a county may afford him; and the Lord Chancellor reserves to himself the liberty to determine whether additional appointments may be desirable in any particular place. In making the appointments for county Antrim, in what the Lord Chancellor considered to be the public interest, he had before him the number of magistrates and the composition of the Benches in the particular district referred to in the Question.

Is it not a fact that 90 per cent, belonged to one political and religious Party?

I have no information as to that.

I know it.

This Question appeared on the Paper for another day and I sent a letter to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary giving him private notice both to his house and to his office.

I did not understand that the Question was going to be put as a supplementary Question to-day. I probably looked at it as a matter I should have to answer in due course, but not as a matter I should have to answer to-day.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a Resolution of the Kerry Catholic school managers asking for the removal of Dr. Starkie from connection with the administration of primary education in Ireland; whether he is aware that similar Resolutions have been passed by many other representative bodies in Ireland; and whether he intends to take any steps to comply with the wishes of a large number of the Irish people in this matter.

I have seen the Resolution referred to. It is not within my knowledge that similar Resolutions have been passed by many other bodies, as stated in the Question. The Government do not propose to dispense with the services of an official whose capacity and energy they value so highly as they do those of the Resident Commissioner.

Arising out of that Answer might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he thinks it is conciliatory to Irish opinion that he should proceed by Answers in this House to load this Gentleman with excessive praise?

I speak of what I know, and I believe Dr. Starkie to be a gentleman of very high integrity.

Might I ask, having regard to the fact that every Catholic in Ireland is opposed to Dr. Starkie, whether the right hon. Gentleman will consider the advisability of transferring him elsewhere?

It has never been brought to my knowledge that every Catholic in Ireland is opposed to him.

Is it not a fact that Dr. Starkie is a Roman Catholic himself?

I believe that is so.

I beg to ask the Prime Minister if the recent appointments by the Lord Chancellor to the magistracy in the counties were made on the suggestion of the Lords Lieutenant; and how far the Chancellor is prepared to act on the Resolution of the House of Commons of May 5th, 1893.

Some of the recent appointments in the counties were made on the suggestion of the Lords-Lieutenant in the usual way. Many were made on the suggestion of other persons after communication with the Lords-Lieutenant. I stated early in this session that the policy embodied in the Resolution referred to was approved by His Majesty's Government and it has been continuously acted on since the present Government came into power. If my hon. friend will explain what it is in particular that he wishes to see done and ask a Question. there will be no difficulty in telling him whether it will be done or not.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he will allow the Limited Partnerships Bill to be starred, so that it may be considered in the autumn session, seeing that it has already passed through the House of Lords and has the undivided support of the banking and commercial interests of the country.

The Government are very well disposed towards this Bill, but I cannot give any pledge of facilities at this stage.

It would be convenient if the right hon Gentleman the Prime Minister would now give us the terms of the Resolution that he will move on Saturday for the rising of the House, giving us first the date of the reassembling and telling us whether the Resolution will provide for the taking of the whole of the time of the House by the Government and what business the Government intend to put down on the first day the House reassembles.

The date of the reassembling of the House will be October 23rd. The Motion which I shall propose for suspending the sittings until that date will include the Resolution to give all the time of the autumn sittings to Government business. The business on the first day will be the Merchant Shipping Bill and the Trade Disputes Bill.

I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman will consider the desirability for leaving a part of the first day upon which we reassemble for private Members' Motions. The reason I ask the Question is that owing to a misunderstanding with reference to Irish Estimates we were prevented from raising most important questions with regard to Irish education which could under the circumstances be taken as a private Member's Motion.

I do not think I can make any exception for any individual case.

On the reassembling of the House, will the eleven o'clock rule be suspended all through the sittings?

I do not know what we may come to, but we certainly shall not start with the suspension of the eleven o'clock rule. All that will be done will be to give precedence to and limit the sittings to Government business.

May I ask at what hour this House will meet on Saturday morning?

I think on such occasions it usually meets at ten o'clock.

I beg to give notice that at an early date I intend to call attention to the appointment of magistrates in the counties of Scotland, and to move a Resolution thereon.