To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will investigate the conditions under which the telephone operators at the Halifax Post Office are compelled to perform their duties, with a view to preventing the discomfort and danger to health resulting from overcrowding. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I shall have pleasure in inquiring into the matter, and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that assurances were given by previous Postmasters General that telegraphists who entered the service previous to 1896 should not be compelled to perform the duty of letter sorting; and that experienced telegraphists at Halifax, with eighteen years service, are compelled to do letter sorting, whilst junior men from the sorting department are placed on duties attached to the telegraph office; and whether, in view of repeated official statements that the services in large towns are in course of being separated, he will explain the reasons for this action. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.): I am inquiring into this matter, and will give the hon. Member an Answer as soon as possible.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state as to the case in which estate duty on £132,300 was paid in 1898 in respect of an estate successfully floated in 1900 with a capital of £450,000; whether a discharge was applied for under Section 11 of the Finance Act of 1894; and, if so, will he give the date of the certificate granted under that section. (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) No application was made.

To ask the Secretary of State for India, whether Bombay is the only province in India to which the increase of pay in the police department has not yet been extended; and whether, seeing that five lakhs were sanctioned last year and two and a half lakhs this year for that purpose, it will be possible to bring the new re-organisation scheme into force with effect from the 1st April, 1906, in Bombay, so far as relates to the European administration officers. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The new scale of pay was extended to the Bombay Presidency on the 31st August last, with effect from the 1st April, 1906.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has received from India the report of a meeting held at Darjeeling on the 27th September to protest against the delay caused by his postpondement of the Sara bridge project, adopted by the Government in 1903, and the resolutions passed at the meeting; on what ground the execution of the project has been so long delayed; and when it is intended to carry it through. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) I have not received a Report of a meeting at Darjeeling on the subject of the Sara bridge project. The resolution adopted by the Secretary of State in 1904 was to defer a decision as to the best site for a bridge over the Ganges, in Bengal, until further experience had been acquired of the direction of the traffic on the completion of certain lines then in progress. The question of the site to be adopted has not yet been settled, and I am unable to say when the bridge, which will be very costly and involves serious engineering considerations, will be undertaken.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether he has received, through the Indian Government, memorials addressed to him by twelve European police officers in the Madras police force who complain of having been superseded, to the injury of their immediate and future prospects, by the importation from Burma of an official of junior standing; whether he has yet received any official information as to the reasons which led the Government of Madras to assign to the officer transferred from the Burma to the Madras police the particular place in the list allotted to him; whether it is proposed to relieve the grievances complained of in the Burma police, by further transfers of officers to other provinces; and, if so, whether due regard will be had in giving them appointments to the interests and prospects of those who are already on the lists in those provinces. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The memorials have not yet been received through the Government of India, and I am afraid that I can at present add nothing to the Answer given to the hon. Member on 14th May last.†

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to state his proposals with regard to disposing of the sites and buildings connected with the defences of London. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) It is presumed that the hon. Member refers to the mobilisation centres. A definite announcement as to the disposal

2020; See (4) Debates, clvii, 344.

To ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he is aware that the flowers in Parliament Square facing Canning's statue, by which motors pass, have this season been killed, while the flowers in the rest of the square, by which motors do not pass, have not been affected; and can he say whether he has any official reports showing that petrol smoke was the cause of the flowers dying. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) There are no official reports on this subject, but the damage is believed to have arisen from the creosote fumes arising from the new wood paving.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware if any official or other documents exist in connection with the appointment of Sir Antony MacDonnell as Under-Secretary; if so, whether he will lay copies of them upon the Table for the information of Members; if he can say whether the Under-Secretary is at liberty to publish any letters he may have on the subject without the authority of the Government; and, if not, will he grant him the necessary permission. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) There is no record in the Chief Secretary's office of any documents connected with the appointment of Sir Antony MacDonnell as Under-Secretary except those of a purely formal character. With any correspondence which may have taken place between Sir Antony MacDonnell and any member or members of the late Government, His Majesty's present Government have no connection or responsibility, and over it they have no control. Sir Antony MacDonnell has asked me to say on his behalf that he has no personal objection to the publication of the correspondence referred to, but he sees no reason why he should take the initiative in publishing it, and he thinks that if his own letters are published all others relating to the matter should be published likewise.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether any alterations are contemplated in the rates of payment for piecework at the Government Clothing Factory at Pimlico; and whether, in view of the known desire of the present Government to set an example to the community as model employers of labour, he is in a position to undertake that such alterations will not be reductions. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Alterations are constantly being made in the rates of pay for the different garments produced at the Royal Army Clothing Factory to ensure that all classes of work are fairly remunerated. I cannot, therefore, undertake that no reduction shall be made; but, as I said in answer to a Question last Thursday, † notice of any alteration of rates will be given, and full opportunity afforded to the workers to interview the representatives of the Government on the matter should they so desire.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will say when it is probable that he will lay upon the Table of the House the Return moved for in February last and ordered to be made as to the countries within the Empire where coolie labour is employed and the conditions regulating the same, and also regulating the housing of such coolies. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) Several Colonies have not yet replied, but every effort will be made to complete the Return before the close of the session.

To ask the Under-Secretary of

†See Cols. 406, 407.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies when the letters patent conferring responsible government on the white inhabitants of the Transvaal will be issued; and whether opportunity will be given to Parliament to consider the terms thereof before final confirmation. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The House has already had an opportunity of expressing an opinion upon the principles of the Transvaal constitution, in accordance with which the letters patent are being framed. I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by debating the main question over again before the issue of the letters patent which will be expedited as much as possible. I cannot at the moment fix a precise date, but it is hoped they may issue during the month of November.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a Report received from Consul Nightingale as to his recent visit to the Islands of San Thomé and Principé to inquire into the condition of contract labourers recruited for service therein, with other correspondence bearing on the recruitment of natives in Angola for that and other service in Portuguese territory; and whether he will inform the House as to action taken or contemplated by His Majesty's Government with a view to fulfilment of international obligations entered upon by the Portuguese Government as regards the suppression of slavery and slave trading. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) A Report from Consul Nightingale has been received, but it was not written in a form for publication, and it deals only with part of the question. I may say generally that the conclusion is that the labourers in San Thomé Principé are well treated, but it is doubtful whether the provisions for repatriation under the new regulations have hitherto been made effective. This and other information, which has been received or is expected soon, will be brought to the notice of the Portuguese Government, in the hope that they will take steps to remedy the evils that exist. When this has been done and a reply has been received I will see whether Papers can be laid.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether, in connection with the ordnance survey in Ireland, a very large number of maps of one-inch scale and four-inch scale are being procured from Southampton; and whether work which could be more conveniently and economically done in Ireland has been transferred to Southampton. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The coloured editions of the one-inch and one quarter-inch maps are printed at Southampton, but no work has been transferred to Southampton which could be done more conveniently and economically in Ireland.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will state the amount of the gratuity granted to the late clerk, an inspector of taxes, who was compelled to retire after thirty-nine years service on account of reaching the age of sixty-two; and whether he will state what pension would have been awarded him had he been a Treasury official of the same service and at the same remuneration. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The amount of the gratuity was £78. I can give no reply to the hypothetical question contained in the second paragraph, beyond assuring the hon. Member that the mere fact of services in the Treasury would not have secured for this officer more favourable treatment than he has received.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that certain tenants residing in Camberwell New Road received a peremptory notice to give up, without compensation or reduction of rent, the greater portion of their back gardens, under penalty of eviction; whether he is aware that blocks of buildings are being erected close to the backs of the existing houses, almost to the exclusion of necessary light and air; and whether he will have this matter inquired into and reported upon by the local authority's surveyor. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I have made inquiry on this subject, and am informed that it is the fact that the greater portion of the back gardens of the houses in question has been taken away and that a garage is being erected on the site. I understand that a clear space of about twenty feet from the back walk of the houses has been left, and that the district surveyor has been instructed by the Building Act Committee of the London County Council to report if any infringement of the Act takes place. The matter is not one with respect to which the Local Government Board have any jurisdiction.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if the Report of the inquiry on the application of the Saxmundham Urban Council for power to borrow £5,200 for a water scheme, held on 31st July, is yet completed; and, if so, when it will be made public, and if not completed, what the cause of the delay has been. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The Report has been received and considered, and on the 25th instant I caused a letter to be addressed to the district council on the subject to which it relates.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board to which of the distress committees under the Unemployed Workmen's Act he had sent Circular No. 1, expressing the Board's willingness to consider an application for a grant out of the Parliamentary Vote of £200,000. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I will forward my hon. friend a list of the distress committees to whom the circular has been sent.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the circumstances attending the inquest held on 15th August last on Charles Henry Buck, who was drowned in the Bristol Channel and whose body was removed from his home at Pill to Bristol for the purpose of holding the inquest there; and whether he will take steps to prevent any such occurrence in the future. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I find on inquiry that C. H. Buck was drowned in the River Avon, and that that river and its banks are within the limits of the city and county of Bristol. In these circumstances, the course followed in this case appears to be the only one permissible by law, and I have no authority to intervene.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will grant a Return stating how many aliens have been convicted in Metropolitan police courts, and for what offences, since the passing of the Aliens Act; how many have been recommended for deportation; and in how many cases such recommendation has been carried out. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) I can give full details as to the cases of aliens recommended for expulsion. They will be found set out in the table below. As regards the cases of aliens convicted in Metropolitan police courts I regret that the information is not available. It could only be obtained by prolonged inquiry and could not in any case be relied on as complete, even if confined to cases for which expulsion could be recommended.

To ask the First Commissioner of Works whether in view of the feeling existing amongst residents in Regent's Park, he will replace the existing oak fencing with fencing of the same material instead of by iron railings; and whether he can give any estimate as to the approximate cost of upkeep per year with regard to painting and otherwise of oak fencing and iron railings. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) The recent cost of upkeep of the oak fence has been £250 per annum as compared with an estimated cost of £20 per annum for iron fencing. The cost of replacing the whole fencing in oak as at present would be £12,000, and in iron £4,200. I regret that in these circumstances I do not see my way to renew the oak fencing.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether the sanction he has given to the Kent County Council to give lessons in rifle shooting applies to all the schools under its jurisdiction; if not, whether he will give the names of the schools affected, with the ages of the children who are permitted to use rifles. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I have nothing to add to the full reply which I gave this afternoon on this subject to the hon. Member for South Lanarkshire.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether he will lay upon the Table any correspondence which has taken place in reference to the teaching or the practice of rifle shooting in schools. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The full information, which I have given in reply to the Question put to me this afternoon by the hon. Member for South Lanark-shire, is all that I have in my possession, and no useful purpose would be served by laying upon the Table the very brief correspondence in which that matter was dealt with.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether the Madras Government proposes to refer the revised Estates Land Bill to district and divisional officers, to public bodies, and to experts before passing into law a measure to which many of those interested entertain strong objections. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The provisions of the Bill are still under discussion. I have no doubt that it is the intention of the Government of Madras to give all proper facilities for public criticism before the Bill is passed into law.

To ask the Secretary of State for India whether, in view to developing trade in general, and trade in particular between India and Tibet, the Government of India proposes to make the road to Chumbi fit for cart traffic or otherwise to improve the trade routes. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley.) The Government of India have submitted no proposals as to the road to Chumbi or the improvement of the trade routes.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can supply a list giving the names and addresses of the evicted tenants in Queen's County, or their representatives, particulars of whose claims have been lodged with the Estates Commissioners; and also the number of those who have been reinstated or got other holdings. (Answered by Mr. Bryce.) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that the number of applications for reinstatement as evicted tenants in Queen's County is 211. The number restored, to the knowledge of the Commissioners, is thirty-nine, including two evicted tenants from whom applications were not received. The Commissioners do not think it feasible to furnish a list giving the names and addresses of applicants. The preparation of such a Return for each of the counties of Ireland would take up a considerable portion of the time of their staff, which is already fully occupied upon its regular duties, and the benefit to be derived from such a Return would be quite incommensurate with the time and labour involved in its compilation.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Gaelic Athletic Association have applied to the Board of Works for football and hurling grounds in the Phœnix; Park, Dublin; and whether he can state why their request has not been complied with, in view of the fact that other clubs have received accommodation when required and requested. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) I understand that it is not possible to allocate a greater area of the Phœnix Park for grounds for games than is now allocated. The apportionment of the area between different games is determined by the requirements of each, and the Commissioners of Public Works inform me that the area assigned for Gaelic football and hurling grounds is fully proportionate to the relative demand. Since last season an additional ground has been assigned to these games. If the hon. Member requires further particulars he will find them in the Answer given by me to a Question by the hon. Member for the North Division of Dublin on the 28th February last.†

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is yet in a position to state when the marine works will be commenced at Innishlyre, county Mayo; whether he is aware that the Under-Secretary for Ireland addressed a letter to the Mayo County Council on 10th March, 1903, informing them that it was proposed to construct, out of the money provided under the Marine Works (Ireland) Act, 1902, a harbour at Innish-lyre, near Westport, which was to cost £40,000, and that, as a condition of the the work being carried out, the county council should agree to raise a county fund for the repair and maintenance of the harbour; and whether, seeing that the county council passed a resolution, on 12th December, 1904, agreeing to raise

† See (4) Debates, clii, 1146.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can state when he will be able to give detailed particulars respecting the division of the £60,000 allotted as additional wages amongst the employees of the Royal Dockyards.

Detailed particulars will be published in ten days time.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the attention of the First Lord has been drawn to the serious damage suffered by Plymouth drifters at the hands of French trawlers on Monday night last, resulting in a great loss of gear; and whether he will consider the possibility of giving effective protection to the Plymouth fishermen against a repetition of such attacks.

The attention of the Admiralty has already been called to the incident, and inquiry is being made. The Admiralty are now in communication with the Foreign Office and the Board of Trade with regard to the question of protecting fishermen in these waters.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the question of the disposal of the site of the Duke of York's School has been considered by the Inter-Departmental Committee, and with what results?

This matter is still under the consideration of the Inter-Departmental Committee.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the pattern for the new bayonet to be issued to the troops has now been selected.

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

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the reason for the increase in the strength of the Mauritius garrison which has been taking place during the last five years; what has been the amount paid for the purchase of land from private people for military purposes during that period; what has been the cost of the erection of new barracks in Mauritius; and can he state what has been the amount of local taxation levied in order to meet this additional military expenditure.

The establishment of the Mauritius garrison has been slightly reduced during the last few years, though the actual strength was somewhat depleted at the beginning of that period, owing to the war. The amount paid for purchase of land during the last five years was £4,024, and £124,050, was spent upon new barracks. As the colony pays a. fixed percentage of its revenue as a military contribution, no additional local taxation has been levied for military purposes.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any decision has been yet come to as to raising the wages of labourers at the Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield, to the level of the wages now paid to the same class at Woolwich.

I regret that I am not yet in a position to give a final decision in regard to this question, which is receiving consideration.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many men were employed by the Government at the Royal Arsenal at Woolwich on the 1st of January last, and how many are employed at the present time; and if the Government propose to make any further alteration in the number of the workmen employed there.

The number of men employed in the Ordnance Factories at Woolwich was 14,709 on the 30th December, 1905, and 13,775 on the 20th instant. I am afraid that further discharges will be necessary before the normal establishment of the factories is reached, but I hope that these will not be more than 150 or 200 men.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Government of India has proposed the mustering out of the two battalions of Moplahs, on the ground that they return excessive sick rates; whether he is aware that such battalions of men from a climate of which excessive moisture and heat are the characteristics were removed, immediately after leaving Southern India to a North-West frontier station, the characteristics of the climate of which are extreme dryness and cold; whether at all recruiting centres in South India an agency is now engaged in dissuading men from enlisting, on the score of the treatment the Moplah battalions have received; whether South Indian regiments have participated in the increases in the number of officers allotted to North Indian regiments; and whether, in view of the effect of returning discontented Moplah ex Sepoys to the Malabar distinct in which so many Moplah outbreaks have occurred, he will take steps to prevent the discouragement of recruiting in Southern India, in view of the fact that recruiting in the Punjab and Northern India is becoming more difficult and precarious.

One of the two Moplah battalions was sent to Dera Ismail Khan with a view to training them for the Field Army and giving them Frontier experience. They were withdrawn after three months having broken down in health. No proposal has reached me fur the reduction of either of the battalions. I am not aware of any agency being engaged at recruiting centres in dissuading men from enlistment, and I do not know that any steps are required to prevent the discouragement of recruiting in Southern India. I have not yet received a Report as to the allotment of the officers provided Under the recent increase, but it is the intention of the Government of India to allot British officers proportionately to established native strength, which in the case of some Madras regiments has ecently been reduced.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that since the amended rules governing the presentation of memorials from aggrieved Indian natives have come into force, cases have occurred in which petitions have failed to reach the Secretary of State owing to technical objections on the part of the authorities, although the aggrieved person or persons have observed the necessary formal preliminaries; and, if so, whether he will issue instructions directing that in all cases in future where the necessary preliminaries have been complied with petitions shall be transmitted to the Secretary of State.

The rules relating to the presentation of memorials are perfectly accessible to the public, and a Return of memorials that have been withheld under them is furnished to me quarterly. I am not aware of any such cases as the hon. Member describes, but if he will give me particulars of those which he has in mind, I will satisfy myself as to the reasons for which the memorials were withheld.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether representation has been made to him regarding the appointment of the present Siem of the Cherra State in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills District, pointing out that Lord Curzon, in making such appointment, violated the usual and traditional custom by which the clans and people of Cherra State considered, selected, and submitted to the proper authority for ratification the name of a successor to the Siemship who, in their judgment, was best fitted for the position; and whether, in view of the protest of the clans and people of the Cherra State, he will grant an investigation into the matter by an officer conversant with the language, manners, and customs of the people, with a view of remedying, if possible, the grievance complained of.

No memorials as to the Siemship of the Cherra State have been received by the Secretary of State through the Government of India since the statement made by my predecessor on 18th February, 1904, in reply to a similar Question. † As was then explained, the Government of India, having regard to precedents and to all the circumstances of the ease, were unable to approve the recommendation of the Chief Commissioner that the decision of the majority of the Durbar, at which only the twelve heads of the clans constituting the State were present, should be accepted, and ordered a popular election to be held at which Roba Singh was chosen unanimously. The Government then confirmed Roba Singh as chief. I see no sufficient reason for re-opening the question, which was very carefully considered both by the Government of India and the Secretary of State in Council.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Down I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India what steps the Government has taken to carry out the unanimous Resolution of the House of Commons in favour

† See (4) Debates, cxxx., 235–6.

The hon. Member is no doubt aware that the Chinese Government are understood to be contemplating the issue of regulations for restricting the cultivation, import, and consumption of opium. His Majesty's Government have not received any communication on the subject from the Chinese Government; but, as I have already stated, they are prepared, when specific proposals are put before them by that Government, to consider them in a sympathetic spirit, and His Majesty's Minister has been instructed to make a communication to this effect to the Chinese Government.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he proposes to lay any Papers revealing the history of the agitation against the constitution of the new Province of Eastern Bengal and Assam, the origin of such agitation in Calcutta, the encouragement of such agitation in England, and the intentions of the Government in respect of the maintenance of the existing administrative arrangements.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the expediency of laying Papers relating to the resignation of Sir Joseph Bampfylde Fuller, recently Lieutenant-Governor of Eastern Bengal, with a view to dispelling any misconception to which that resignation may have given rise.

As regards the Question on the Paper, I consider it would be contrary in the highest degree to the public interest to present Papers such as the hon. Gentleman describes. As to the future, it has already been stated so often and so explicitly that His Majesty's Government look upon the partition of Bengal as a settled fact, that it appears superfluous to publish any further statement on the subject. In answer to the Question of the noble Lord, if he will ask for Papers I see no objection whatever in presenting to the House the Papers— not very voluminous—which immediately concern the resignation of Sir Bampfylde Fuller.

I have received Answers to the other Questions which I have on the Paper and will not trouble the right hon. Gentleman.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, if he can state what is the date fixed or the approximate date for the elections in the Transvaal.

It is impossible to say more at present, but that it is hoped the voters roll may be completed in January, and that the elections may take place about the end of February.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether any, and, if so, what steps were taken to insure that the Government of Newfoundland should be informed as to the terms of the modus vivendi with the United States of America recently concluded prior to their acceptance; and on what date the first information of a definite character was conveyed to the Colony from the Colonial Office or other official sources.

The decision of His Majesty's Government that a modus vivendi was necessary, and their intention to make proposals to the United States Government for such an arrangement were communicated to the Colonial Government by telegram some days before the United States Government were informed. In the same telegram the Colonial Government were asked to give their views as to the form which the modus vivendi should take. No proposals were actually made to the United States Government until the reply of the Colonial Government had been received. Throughout the negotiations the Colonial Government were kept fully and promptly apprised by telegram; and His Majesty's Government answered no communication from the United States Government without first consulting the Colonial Government and endeavouring to obtain their concurrence. The note from the United States Ambassador ratifying the arrangement embodied in the previous correspondence was telegraphed verbatim to the Government on the same date as it was written and received—viz., the 6th inst.

Then did not the Government succeed in obtaining the concurrence of the Colonial Government?

I said the other day we had not been fortunate enough to do so.

When will Papers be laid?

Perhaps the noble Lord will address that Question to the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that, under Article 16 of the Customs Union Convention provisionally agreed to by the South African Colonies, it is proposed in the Transvaal to substitute for the existing duty of 15s. per gallon on spirits a preferential duty of 7s. 6d. to 9s. per gallon on brandy manufactured within the Customs Union, including the cheap Cape brandy mainly relegated to the use of natives and coloured persons, while raising under Article 2 the general duty on spirits to 19s. per gallon: and that, in spite of the prohibition of the supply of drink to natives and coloured persons in the Transvaal under the law of 1902, there has been illicit sale of spirits to such persons, which illicit sale will be facilitated by the increased supply of cheap brandy owing to the lowered duty: and that the Witwatersrand Church Council, composed of representatives of all the Baptist, Congregational, Presbyterian, and Wesleyan Churches on the Rand, opposed the change when it was before the Legislative Council, which, however, carried it against the votes of all but one of the non-official members of the Legislative Council; and whether, seeing that the Church Council has now appealed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies to refuse his assent to this part of the Customs Union Ordinance, he will take steps to secure that this alteration of the spirit duty shall not be made until after the grant of responsible government to the Transvaal.

The Secretary of State is aware of the facts stated by the hon. Member, He has not seen fit to accede to the request of the Witwatersrand Church Council as he understands that in agreeing to the provisions of the Customs Convention which are in question, the Transvaal Government took note of the fact that, with similar provisions in the law of the Orange River Colony, prohibition had been effectively enforced on the natives, and that prohibition had been substantially effective in their own, Colony when spirits were still manufactured at the Hatherley Distillery. The position of the new Legislature is safeguarded by the fact that the arrangement can be determined at six months' notice, without prejudice to the remainder of the Customs Convention. In answer to a further Question, Mr. CHURCHILL said the position of the new Legislature was fully safeguarded.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any Report from the British, Consul at Madrid concerning the arrest and expulsion from Spain of a British subject named Guy Bowman, who had gone to that country in pursuit of his calling as a journalist; and whether he proposes taking any action in connection therewith.

His Majesty's Government have heard from His Majesty's Ambassador at Madrid of the arrest of Mr. Bowman, upon whom papers were found addressed to Spanish anarchists, including one who was connected with the Madrid outrage. Mr. Bowman was to be conducted to the frontier in accordance with the Spanish Police Regulations, and His Majesty's Government do not intend to interfere with the action of the Spanish authorities.

asked whether a copy of the papers alleged to have been found on Mr. Bowman had been asked for.

The incriminating papers have been seen by His Majesty's Vice-Consul.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether any agreement has been arrived at between His Majesty's Government and that of Russia in relation to Persia: and, if so, whether he is in a position to give the terms of such arrangement.

No general agreement has been arrived at. The two Governments have discussed the events which have recently happened in Persia, with the object of avoiding any conflict of interest and of acting together when possible to preserve the status qua.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, it his attention had been drawn to the convenience resulting from the increasing use of nickel in the coinage of foreign countries; and whether he will consider the desirability of following this example by the issue of nickel coins of the value of a penny and twopence, either in substitution for or for use concurrently with the present bronze ones.

I have no evidence that the present coinage is regarded as other than satisfactory by the public generally, and in the absence of any general demand for an alteration I should not be prepared to take the responsibility of interfering with it.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, if his attention has been drawn to the work done in estate duty offices in England, Scotland, and Ireland, as represented by the revenue received per head of the staff employed; is he aware that in England the average annual amount of revenue dealt with per head during the five years ending 1000–1 was £74,859; that, owing to the increase in the staff during the next five years the average per head dropped to £50,111, and to £40,436 for the year 1905–6; that the corresponding figures per head of staff in Scotland are £77,066, £70,083, and £66,210, and for Ireland £36,229, £29,312, and £25,433; will he give the reason for the difference in the amount of revenue dealt with per head in England and Ireland as compared with Scotland; and will he take these figures into his consideration, and not only prevent further increase in the staff, but adjust the staff to the requirements of the service.

The figures quoted by the hon. Member are correct. A reply to a Question does not provide a suitable opportunity for dealing in detail with the causes of the higher apparent cost in proportion to the amount of revenue collected in England and Ireland as compared with Scotland, or the conclusions to be drawn from it,—matters which can only be adequately discussed in Committee of Supply.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can now state the measures he proposes to take, or has taken, in reference to the petition of the prison officers in His Majesty's local prisons, asking that they may be placed upon the same scale of pay as the officers of His Majesty's convict prisons.

I have made proposals to the Treasury with a view to certain improvements in the position of these officers. I cannot yet make any further statement on this subject, but I hope to be able to do so shortly.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that ship cork fenders, made by prisoners in Durham Gaol, are being sold to firms outside at a price much below (2d. as against 2½d. per pound) what they can be made outside by the blind people engaged in this work; and, if so, whether it is his intention to take any action likely to minimise this competition and so enable the blind to make a living at this trade. The hon. Member explained that 2d. represented the retail price and 2½d. the net cost.

The manufacture of ship fenders for private customers is carried on to a small extent only in prisons, and the prison authorities regulate prices, so far as possible, so as to avoid interference with the outside market. I have no information as to the manufacture of these fenders by blind people, but as I have ahead informed my hon. friend privately, I shall be happy to consider, and if possible to remedy, any cases of hardship to them which may arise in the manner suggested, if he will kindly bring the particulars to my notice.

The information is on the way.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to a circular issued by the Imperial Stock and Share Exchange, 19 and 21, Queen Victoria Street, London; and whether, in view of the provisions of the Public Acts relating to Lotteries and Gambling, he proposes to take any action in the matter.

I have seen the circular and have caused inquiry to be made. As at present advised I do not think proceedings could be successfully taken under the Acts referred to, but I am considering the matter further.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who pays the expenses of the return voyage of undesirable aliens who are refused permission to land in this country.

I have no information on this point, and can only say that these expenses are not paid from public funds.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether, seeing that Mr. A. H. Stokes, His Majesty's Inspector of Mines, in his Report for 1905, states that the disastrous explosion at the Manners colliery showed even a well-ventilated mine cannot be trusted with naked lights, he will say if any other of His Majesty's Inspectors of Mines have reported to the Home Office the danger to life by the use of naked lights.

Yes, Sir. The danger connected with the use of naked lights in mines which are subject to firedamp is one to which attention is frequently called by the Inspectors of Mines in their Reports.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, seeing Messrs. Cunynghame and Atkinson have reported to His Majesty's Government that the Courriéres mine disaster was, in their opinion, due to a coal dust explosion without any evidence of gas being present, and that if an explosion from the same cause occurred in this country the loss of life might equal that at Courrières, he will say if he has taken any steps to get special rules established prohibiting the use of naked lights in all British mines.

It would be impracticable to attempt to establish a special rule prohibiting the use of naked lights for every mine in the country. Special rules have to be proposed separately for each mine, and must have regard to "the particular state and circumstances" of the mine. If the owner objects to the rule proposed for his mine he has the right to take the matter to arbitration. It is by no means every mine in the country which is liable to a coal dust explosion, and in those that are so liable the mere prohibition of the use of naked lights alone would not be a sufficient protection. The question, however, whether the existing rules on the subject of the use of safety lamps require amendment, is included among those which have been referred by me for the consideration of the Royal Com mission on Mines now sitting, and I would suggest that my hon. friend should address to that Commission any observations upon the subject which he may desire to make.

Is the light hon. Gentleman aware that there is no case on record at the Home Office where a coal dust explosion has been set up in any other manner than by shot firing? Will he introduce legislation dealing with shot firing in mines?

That matter is now and has been for some time past under the consideration of the Royal Commission, and, of course, no legislation can be undertaken until we have received the Report of the Commissioners.

Is the question of the proper watering of dry dusty mines also under consideration?

Yes, Sir.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether lie is aware that orders hitherto made under Section 116 of the Factory Act 1901, relating to particulars of rates of payment in home industries, leave it open to employers either to affix a list of prices or to supply the particulars of prices to each outworker; and whether, seeing that this system has enabled employers to pay different prices for the same class of work, thus facilitating the establishment of the lowest price paid as the sweating rate, he will consider the advisability of utilising the powers conferred by this section by requiring employers to both affix and supply such particulars.

The employer has no such option in the case of out-workers as my hon. friend thinks. Particulars of prices have to be supplied to each outworker in writing. With regard to the suggestion he makes, I am advised that I should have no power, in an order extending the requirements of Section 116 of the Factory Act, to carry it out. The section itself, in its general application, requires only a placard or a wages note, and not both; and in extending that requirement to other trades the only modifications that may be introduced are such as may be necessary to adapt the requirement to the circumstances of the particular trade.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if his attention has been drawn to the constitution of courts or boards of commissioners of sewers who possess and exercise extensive powers of spending money and levying rates without any control, and without publishing any accounts; and whether he will take into consideration the desirability of promoting legislation to abolish such commissioners, and to confer such of their powers and duties as may seem desirable upon district or county councils.

My attention has boon drawn to the constitution of these bodies. The matter was considered by a Select Committee of the House of Lords in 1877, and has from time to time come before Parliament. There would be serious difficulties in the way of such a transfer of powers and duties as is suggested in the Question, and I understand that the Royal Commission on Erosion of the Coasts have before them the circumstances of these bodies where they exercise powers on or near to the sea coast. It would be necessary for me to communicate with my noble friend the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries before any promise of legislation on the subject could be given, and at present it does not appear to me that the time would be opportune for proposing legislation.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that 800 men have been turned out of their allotments by Lord de Ramsey on his estates in Huntingdonshire, and that the urban district council has refused to put into operation its compulsory powers under the Local Government Act, 1894; and what steps the Local Government Board have taken or intend to take to procure land for the men who have been deprived of their holdings. The following Questions on the same subject also appeared on the Paper:—

To ask the President of the Local Government Board, if he is aware that the urban district council at Ramsey, in Huntingdonshire, have refused to apply for compulsory powers to enable them to provide allotments for the 800 men who last January got notice to quit their allotments from Lord de Ramsey, and that eleven out of the twelve members of the council are tenants of Lord de Ramsey; and whether the Local Government" Board as an independent authority will use its influence to secure land on reasonable terms for the dispossessed men.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that 800 allotment holders on the Ramsey Estate in Huntingdonshire have received from Lord de Ramsey notice to quit their holdings; that the Ramsey Urban Council have not applied for compulsory powers to enable them to provide allotments for these men; that by the taking away of these allotments the men are robbed of one of the most effectual means of preventing the rural labourer from overcrowding the labour market in the large towns; that their eviction will make thousands of allotment holders in other parts of the country now feel insecure; and that nearly the whole of the members of the urban council are Lord de Ramsey's tenants; and, if so, I whether the Local Government Board are taking any steps to help these men to secure suitable land for allotments.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will hold an immediate local inquiry into the circumstances under which the 800 allotment holders in the district of Ramsey have been turned out of their holdings by Lord de Ramsey, and the failure of the district council to supply them with land on fair and reasonable terms.

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer together this and the three other Questions on the Paper relating to the same subject. I am aware that Lord de Ramsey has given, notice to 800 allotment holders on his estates in Huntingdonshire to relinquish their allotments, and that the Ramsey Urban District Council have declined to apply for powers to hire land compulsorily for allotment purposes. I have no authority to direct an inquiry of the kind suggested by my hon. friend the Member for South-west Norfolk, nor am I empowered to procure land for the men who have lost their holdings. The matter is one which rests with the district council, or, upon their default, with the county council. I have, however, not yet been informed by either of these councils of the reasons why they have not thought fit to exercise their powers under the Allotments Acts in the present case, and I am in communication with them on the subject. I may add that I have expressed my willingness to confer on the urban district council the power of hiring land compulsorily for allotments if the necessary application is made to me for the purpose.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board how many boards of guardians have consented and how many have refused to keep the register referred to in the Board's Circular of 18th September last.

I have received communications from about 300 boards of guardians on the subject of the suggested register of paupers, from which it appears that in about 140 cases the guardians have not adopted the suggestion that a register should be kept. I understand that in some instances the Return, for the purpose of which the register was intended, can be prepared from the existing records, and I am considering what arrangements should be made to secure that the Return shall be furnished in other cases where objection is raised to the keeping of the register.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether in view of the decision of the Government to appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the case of the King v. the West Hiding of Yorkshire County Council, he can make any statement for the guidance of local education authorities as to the continuance of payments for the provision of religious instruction in non-provided schools.

The difficulty which the local education authorities feel in this matter appears to arise out of the doubt whether payments of the kind referred to in the Question will be disallowed by the district auditors. The expenditure which comes before the auditors at the audits now being held relates to the financial year ended 31st March—i.e., before the decision of the Court of Appeal was given. The Local Government Board are sanctioning this expenditure under the Local Authorities' (Expenses) Act, where application is made to them for the purpose, if no objection is raised by ratepayers at the audit. No disallowance can then be made. Where ratepayers object at the audit to the expenditure, the Board think that the matter had better stand over until the decision of the House of Lords has been given. Expenditure during the present financial year will not come before the auditors until after 31st March next, and presumably, therefore, after the decision of the House of Lords has been obtained. It is premature to consider now what course should be taken after that decision, but I may say that there will be no desire on the part of the Government that members of local authorities should suffer personally for bona fide expenditure incurred before the decision is given.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state the total amount of money which has been spent by the Poplar Board of Guardians upon the erection of schools at Hutton, Essex, including provision of fittings and furniture; and what number of children the schools are intended to accommodate.

As I have stated in reply to previous Questions, the total amount sanctioned in respect of the pro- vision of these schools, including the cost of the site, is £156,545. I am not able to state the exact amount which has been spent on them. The schools are intended to accommodate 621 children.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has I been called to the fact that the Islington Board of Guardians are precluded from stipulating with their bankers for payment of interest on their monthly balances if such balance at any time falls below £2,500; and whether he will take steps-to enable the guardians to stipulate for interest on their actual balance without any minimum limit.

The treasurer of the Islington Board of Guardians was appointed without salary, and was not bound to allow any interest on the balances of the moneys of the guardians in his hands. I understand that in fact he allows interest on the daily balances exceeding £2,500. The interest on any sum below this amount must be regarded as remuneration for the discharge of his duties, and the arrangement could not be altered without his consent.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been directed to the fact that great combinations of capital, or price rings, or both, have been formed in connection with the manufacture of iron and steel, tobacco, soap, sewing-cotton, wall-paper, cement, and other products, with the result that monopolies or quasi-mono-polies have been created and prices raised against the consumer; and whether he will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to establish public competition with the monopolists or to-secure public control of the monopolised trades.

I have heard of the existence of combinations of manufacturers of a number of articles including those mentioned in the Question of my hon. friend. The Board of Trade are fully alive to the importance of the matter, but I am not at present prepared to introduce legislation on the subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the action of the London and South Western Railway Company in reducing the guard of the train in the Salisbury disaster to the position of ticket collector, at a loss of wages of 6s. 6d. per week, as a direct result of the Report of the Board of Trade inspector; and whether he will make inquiry into the general practice and responsibility of guards in regard to the speed of trains.

My attention lad not previously been drawn to the matter referred to, which appears to be one within the discretion of the railway company. An inquiry as suggested does not appear to be necessary or likely to serve any useful purpose.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been directed to the new pension fund which the London and North Western Railway Company propose to institute for their locomotive staff, which fund is being made a test of employment; and, if not, whether he will make full inquiry in reference thereto.

My attention had not been previously called to this matter, but I have communicated a copy of the hon. Member's Question to the railway company for their observations.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether there is any foreign country or British colony in which compulsory education begins at so early an age as five.

I am unable to answer for the school laws of all foreign countries in the world, but so far as I can learn from information easily available compulsory attendance, where there is any, begins at a later age than five.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been called to the recommendation of the Inter-Departmental Committee on Physical Deterioration that school attendance in rural districts should not be compulsory till the age of six, or possibly seven, and should be discouraged, if not absolutely prohibited under five; and whether he proposes to take any steps to give effect to this recommendation.

As at present advised the Government have no intention of prohibiting the attendance of children under five years of age in rural districts. The question of requiring the attendance of such children or not rests with the option of the local education authorities.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will discourage local authorities from permitting children under five to attend school?

I am rather shy of any interference with local authorities.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether the rifle shooting in the Kent board school was experimental; if so, what will be the cost of the experiment; and whether he has it in contemplation to make rifle practice universal in our national schools.

May I also ask the President of the Board of Education if he will state under what authority permission has been given by the Department to the Kent Education Committee to include instruction in rifle shooting in the school curriculum during ordinary school hours and at the public expense; if he will state if the Board has sanctioned the syllabuses submitted for such teaching for the schools at Eynsford and Shoreham; if this application from the Kent Education Committee is the first of the kind received by the Board of Education: and, if not, what other such applications have been before the Board, and with what result in each case.

The case in which the question of instruction in rifle shooting in a public elementary school first came before me was that of an undenominational British school at Bushey in Hertfordshire (not in Kent) in March last. My own personal view, and the advisers of my Department have advised me in the same sense, is that it is not desirable that rifle shooting should be included in the time-table of public elementary schools, since it is unsuitable for children of the ages likely to be found in these schools, and is not in itself a good means of physical exercise. But as, in the particular case before me, both the county authority and local persons closely conversant with the circumstances of the school were strongly desirous that the instructions should be given, I decided not to give a direct prohibition from the first, but to permit an experiment to be made for a time, and after closely watching it, to give a definite decision on the point at the end of the school year now current. I attached careful conditions to the experiment and in particular (a) that it should not encroach upon the time required for proper physical exorcises, (b) that it should be restricted to boys of proper physique and to boys who have reached the age of twelve years, and (c) that a special syllabus, shewing the nature of the teaching, should be submitted to and approved by the Board. The manager of the Bushey School estimated that the cost of the experiment would be £20 in the one year, and there is an annual income from endowment which will be much more than sufficient to meet this expenditure. As I have said, the sanction given in the Hertfordshire case was strictly experimental and provisional, and pending a report on its results in the Hertfordshire case, I had not the smallest intentions of extending it elsewhere. I find, however, that by some misunderstanding of my intention in this respect a provisional consent to a similar experiment, subject to the submission of a satisfactory syllabus, has been given by letter in the case of four other schools, viz., Hay ward's Heath, St. Wilfrid's National School in East Sussex, Overbury National School in Worcestershire, Shoreham Council School and Eynsford National School in Kent. These are the only other applications which I have received in regard to rifle shooting. I am sorry that any extension of my permission in the Bushey case should, have taken place, but the House may rest assured that no further permission of any sort or kind will be given.

In either of these cases were the parents of these children consulted before the order was given?

In no case is any child to be allowed to practice rifle shooting unless the consent has been first obtained of the parents.

Would not bows and arrows be more suitable to the tender age of these young warriors?

Very clever that.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Ireland not only are the children, but the grown up men, forbidden to make use of firearms?

Seeing that the consent has been given inadvertently, does the right hon. Gentleman intend to go on and not wait for the experience obtained at Bushey?

Having regard to the letter written by the persons in my Department it would not be fair to withhold the permission that they were certainly justified in giving. But the experiment will be confined to these places only.

What is the opinion of these parents? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great difference of opinion with regard to the experiment and that many parents object?

Such parents would not of course allow their children to receive the instruction.

May we take it that until the authorities have made a scrutiny of the system in these five cases it will be no good for other local authorities to apply for any further sanction in these circumstances?

None whatever.

In the event of the experiment at Bushey turning out a success, will the right hon. Gentleman give permission for rifle practice in other schools?

That depends on the report I receive from my own educational authorities.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay the Report on the Table of the House?

I am perfectly content to do that.

I wish to ask the President of the Board of Education whether rifle-shooting is regarded by the Board of Education as a necessary part of physical training, or whether the Board considers it necessary for the purpose of national defence; and whether he is aware of any new danger confronting this country, rendering necessary increased preparations for defence, or whether the Board of Education is to become a preparatory training authority and auxiliary of the Army.

I do not regard rifle shooting in elementary schools as a necessary part of physical training. I do not consider it necessary for the purpose of national defence. I am not aware of any new danger threatening this country nor, while I am President, will the Board of Education become a preparatory training authority and auxiliary of the Army.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a member of the Committee of the House of Commons, appointed to investigate the question of wages of Post Office servants, presented himself at the Swansea Post Office and asked to inspect the buildings; that, in view of the fact that in London and elsewhere representative men from the Postal Telegraph Clerks' Association accompanied members of the Select Committee during the inspection of offices as well as departmental officials, the local committee of the Postal Telegraph Clerks' Association asked the postmaster of Swansea for the same facilities, which they were refused; and whether, seeing that they were afterwards reprimanded for making the request, he will inquire into the circumstances and state if the reprimand has been entered on the official records to the detriment of the men.

the matter in question was brought to my attention, and I inquired into it. There is no official record to the prejudice of the officers in question.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can state why the late fee for letters posted after the final clearing of the box at 9.45 p.m., at the chief post office at Margate, has been abolished; and whether he will consider the advisability of taking steps to re-establish it.

There has never been any late fee posting at Margate in connection with the present night mail despatch. Prior to 1899, when the hour for posting was changed from 8.12 p.m. to 9.45 p.m., there was a late fee collection at 8.40 p.m., but there has been none since.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that grave inconvenience is being caused in the northern islands of the West Indies owing to the lack of adequate postal facilities; and whether he will endeavour to secure these at an early date.

A contract was recently concluded by the Crown Agents for the Colonies providing for a regular monthly mail service to the northern islands of the West Indies from Barbados; and I have not been made aware that the service, which has not been arranged by the Post Office, is found to be inadequate by the West Indian communities. Mails for these islands are as a matter of fact despatched fortnightly from the United Kingdom to Barbados for onward transmission by any opportunity which may arise in addition to those afforded by the inter-colonial packets under the contract referred to.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, how many labourers employed by the drown on the Harwell Estate in Cambridgeshire have been discharged from their employment in connection with the scheme for converting the estate into small holdings; the length of service of each of them on that property; how many of them have been re-housed; how many of them have been compensated for their loss of employment and the loss of their homes.

The Crown farm at Burwell, comprising 917 acres, which was in hand, has been let on lease for twenty-one years to my hon. friend the Member for Newmarket. He has sub-let it to fifty-nine small holders who are now settled on the land. The number of labourers who received notice was thirty-nine, eight of whom had worked on the farm for over twenty years, two between fifteen and twenty years, four between ten and fifteen years, twelve between five and ten years, and thirteen under five years. A sum of £389 has been paid by my hon. friend to these men as compensation, in accordance with a scheme drawn up by the Office of Woods, and based on length of service. A considerable number of the men were at once taken on by the new tenants, and all the others have now found other employment in the neighbourhood. There are fourteen cottages on the farm, which were occupied by twenty-two of the labourers. The occupants of nine of these cottages have had to leave their cottages, but they have found other accommodation in the neighbourhood, and the cost of their removal has been paid. The remainder have been allowed to remain, and it is unlikely that they will be disturbed at all. I may add that I am informed by my hon. friend that every labourer on the estate was given an opportunity of taking a portion of the land, and that although he only entertained applications from those who lived in Burwell or the immediate neighbourhood it has been quite impossible to satisfy all their demands.

Does the £389 comprise the whole amount of compensation to be divided among the thirty-nine labourers and their families who have been disturbed?

I may say that the hon. Member for New-market has acted in a most generous way in agreeing to provide all compensation provided for on the scheme drawn up by the Office of Woods and Forests. He left the matter entirely to that body.

The hon. Baronet has not answered my Question.

Is it proposed to carry out any more wholesale evictions on Crown Lands?

There have been no wholesale evictions.

How many of the dispossessed labourers were settled on the newly created holdings?

asked for notice of that Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, if he will state the reason why, in the official reports of the proceedings of the Houses of Parliament, the speeches of Members of the Upper House are invariably reported in the first person, whereas this, with few exceptions, is not the practice in reporting the proceedings of this House: whether the speeches of Members of the Upper House are reported verbatim, and if so, what is the extra cost involved; and whether steps will be taken to have a similar method adopted in the Upper House to that which exists in this House.

I regret that I can add nothing to the Answer which I gave the hon. Member to the same Question on the 30th July last.†

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Government have yet come to a decision with regard to the feuing for building purposes of a portion of the King's Park and Knot, Stirling.

The Question is still under consideration.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that an advertisement appeared in a Scottish paper on Saturday offering, what seemed to be the site referred to, for feuing?

The matter is not vet settled and is still under consideration.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether his attention has been directed to the fact that a number of photographic firms have established stalls for the sale of reproductions of national pictures on the ground floor of the National Gallery; and if he can state what rent is paid by those firms?

In three cases the trustees and director of the National Gallery have authorised the sale of photographs of pictures in the collection in the outer Hall of the Gallery. No rent is paid for this permission.

Is not a source of revenue being overlooked?

This is primarily a matter for the Trustees of the National Gallery. I will consult them about it however.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he has received the Report of the proceedings in the case of Rex v. Blackler, what action he proposes to take to recompense the defendant for the loss he has suffered in consequence of these proceedings; and whether he will lay

† See (4) Debates, clxii, 408.

I may call the attention of the hon. Member to the answer I gave in July last.‡ This defendant was acquitted after being tried by a jury, although he had been committed to take his trial by the unanimous order of a bench of nine magistrates. A claim for compensation has been received by the Treasury, who have come to the conclusion that it cannot be entertained. With regard to the production of the correspondence to the Director of Public Prosecutions, such correspondence has always been held to be strictly privileged, and in my opinion it is exceedingly important in the public interest that it should retain that character. I am not therefore prepared to advise that it be laid.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has considered the report of the proceedings in the case of Rex v. Fowler, what action he proposes to take to recompense Fowler for the injury and loss he has suffered by these proceedings; whether he will lay upon the Table of this House the correspondence in the matter which has passed, between the Solicitor to the Treasury and the Liberal election agent named Huckley; and whether he proposes to take any steps to prosecute any persons connected with this case for perjury. I beg also to ask Mr. Attorney-General how many prosecutions have been instituted by the Director of Public Prosecutions for alleged offences against the Corrupt Practices Acts at the late general election; whether in any case the accused was alleged to have acted in the interests of a Liberal candidate; whether any of the prosecutions were successful; and whether any, and, if so, how many prosecutions of a similar character are pending.

said that in the case referred to in the first Question there vas a mass of evidence given on both

‡ See (4) Debates, clxii, 1333.

May I ask whether in point of fact the prosecution in the case referred to in my Question was not abandoned practically at the dictation of Counsel for the Treasury? Did he not practically invite the magistrates to dismiss the case?

I believe he took the view that his case had practically broken down.

Is it the habit of the Treasury Solicitor to employ Radical election agents to collect evidence for the Treasury in these cases?

The Public Prosecutor docs not concern himself with the politics of the gentlemen he employs, and I certainly have no such concern.

But is it not a fact that the Radical election agent who assisted the hon. Member for Reigate was employed by the Treasury with a full knowledge of his occupation?

I have no knowledge of that.

May I as a matter of personal explanation say I did not intend to cast the slightest reflection on the Public Prosecutor?

asked the Attorney-General a Question of which he had given private notice — namely, whether his attention had been called to the action of a house agent and King's tax collector at Old Ford and Bow, who had given his tenant notice to quit for exhibiting a board in his front garden advocating the claims of a Labour candidate at an approaching borough council election, and what action it was proposed to take to prevent this form of intimidation being continued.

The conduct the hon. Member complains of, however regrettable it may be, does not, I fear, constitute any breach of the statutes relating to corruption. A throat in connection with the giving of a vote might infringe the Corrupt Practices Act; but I am not aware of any provision by which it becomes a breach of the law for a landlord to threaten a tenant with eviction for exhibiting a political placard. The hon. Member only gave notice of his Question a short time ago. I will consider the matter further. If a breach of the law has been committed, I will see that the necessary steps are taken.

said that as the election would take place on Thursday he would repeat the Question to-morrow.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the application of the Ecclesiastical Assessments (Scotland) Act, 1900, is causing, in its incidence, annoyance and discontent amongst small feuars in Scotland who were not aware that they could be made, under this Act, liable to this assessment; that, on at least one estate in Scotland, leaseholders who hold building leases are being assessed on the full value of their improvements, which does not appear to have been contemplated in the Bill; and whether he can give any date upon which the Government will bring forward a Bill to relieve the country altogether from this mediæval imposition. I beg also to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the fact that small feuars and leaseholders who have been forced to pay assessments under the Ecclesiastical Assessments (Scotland) Act, 1900, have apparently no mutual rights of ownership, as valued rent heritors have, over these manses and churches which their payments have helped to build; that the valued rent heritors, in fact, claim the whole ownership, and allocate all the seats entirely amongst themselves; and whether he intends to take any steps in the matter.

My attention has already been drawn to the state of opinion described by my hon. friend, and as he is aware, a Return has been ordered by the House and is now under preparation, showing the Ecclesiastical Assessments levied for these purposes during the ten years ending 15th May, 1905. The relations of small feuars and leaseholders to valued rent heritors is stated in my hon. friend's second Question with substantial accuracy. I can at present name no such date as is suggested, but I shall be glad to have any further information such as is offered by my hon. friend in the second portion of his first Question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can inform the House of the progress made by the Estates Commissioners in the reinstatement of the evicted tenants up to the present date; what are the causes of the practical breakdown of the Land Act of 1903 in this vital matter; and what steps the Government propose to take to remove these obstacles to a settlement of the Irish Land Question.

Applications to the number of 5,912 have been received from evicted tenants or their representatives. Of these applications, 1,047 have been finally dealt with, 505 having been rejected as untenable, while the evicted tenants were restored in the remaining 542 cases. Of these 542 tenants, 381 were restored by the landlords on the sale of their estates under the Land Purchase Act, the tenants being, inmost cases, assisted by grants from the Estates Commissioners for the equipment of their farms. The balance of 161 tenants have been either restored by the Estates Commissioners on their old holdings on purchase of the estates, or placed in new holdings provided for them. Under the former regulations, the Estates Commissioners were not allowed to negotiate with owners of untenanted land for the purchase of it with the view to providing farms for evicted tenants, and they were also prohibited from proposing the reinstatement of evicted tenants on a holding unless the estate on which the holding was situated had itself been proposed for sale. Both these restrictions were removed by the regulations of 13th February, 1906, and subsequently, in May last, the Estates Commissioners were given a special staff of six inspectors for the purpose of promoting this work. Since that date the inspectors have inquired into applications from 1,285 evicted tenants. Of these, 272 cases have been rejected; in 444 cases the landlord refused to allow the inspectors to visit the lands; in 242 cases the present occupants of the evicted holdings were unwilling to vacate them, some having purchased under the Land Purchase Act; in 100 cases terms have been proposed for the restoration of the tenants, and in eighty-six cases the tenants have been reinstated. In the balance further inquiries are being made. I do not consider that the Act has practically broken down, but its operation has no doubt been much slower than was expected, partly owing to the impediments interposed, until the beginning of the present year, by the regulations then withdrawn, and partly to the following causes, viz: (1) The unwillingness of tenants who hold evicted farms to relinquish them in favour of the former holders. (2) The difficulty of finding, especially in Ulster and Munster, untenanted land which the owner will consent to sell. (3) Local opposition which is sometimes offered to the introduction of strangers. Local public opinion might do much to remove this obstacle. (4) Objection taken by landlords in whose hands evicted farms are to the giving up of those farms for the reinstatement of evicted tenants. Those are the main results that have so far emerged from the inquiries now in progress, which it must lie remembered are in the nature of preliminary investigations to ascertain wherein the obstacles really lie. Those inquiries are being energetically prosecuted in the same way, and it is intended to obtain additions to the staff so as to deal with the remaining cases if possible within the next six months. Until the whole of the evidence is before the Government, and until the administrative measures taken and capable of being taken by the Estates Commissioners have matured, I am not in a position to state whether further legislation upon the matter will be necessary, but that aspect of the Question will continue to receive the most careful attention of the Irish Government.

Does the right hon. Gentleman seriously mean to convey that one cause of the delay is the fact that the Commissioners are engaged in preliminary investigations, although the Act has been in operation for three years?

Yes, Sir. I mean to convey that since the restrictions in operation in February have been removed it has been necessary to approach the subject in a much more systematic and complete manner than hitherto, and the time occupied by those investigations has necessarily delayed the progress of reinstatement. But we look upon these investigations, which are nearly at an end, as work of permanent value, and of great service in enabling the process of reinstatement to proceed more rapidly.

This is a matter of such extraordinary and vital importance, affecting, as it does, questions of law and order as well as of land settlement, that I must ask the leave of the House to move the adjournment.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can state at what, if any British tidal ports he has recently curtailed the hours during which the post offices are open for telegraphic and other public business; if he can likewise state at what Irish tidal ports he has recently curtailed public postal facilities; on what grounds, if any, has this change been made; in cases where such change has been made, have the local municipal or harbour authorities been consulted; if not, will he state on what information he has acted; and whether in view of the fact that in certain cases whore such changes have been made the local authorities allege that serious inconveniences have arisen, without any compensating advantage to the Revenue or any one, he will put himself in communication with such authorities, with a view to ascertaining the exact facts in the matter and remedying the inconvenience which is alleged to have arisen.

It has recently been decided to close the post offices at Newry, Dundalk, and Drogheda at 8 p.m. instead of 10 p.m. the Returns of counter transactions which were taken for some long time prior to this decision, showed that the amount of business transacted at the counters of these offices after 8 p.m. was insignificant, and not sufficient to warrant the expense of keeping the offices open to an exceptionally late hour, or of imposing the late hours on the staff. Telegrams can, of course, still be sent after 8 p.m. on payment of the usual late fees, and I cannot find that the curtailment of postal facilities has caused, or is likely to cause, any practical inconvenience, and there seems to be no sufficient grounds for granting facilities to the towns in question which are denied to other towns of equal or greater importance.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman receive representations from Irish local authorities on the subject.

Yes, but the decision was based on the records of the transactions.

On ex parte statements.

No, on the official records.

I beg to ask the Prime Minister when he will lay upon the Table of the House the Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the self-government proposals sent to the South African Colonies in the summer of this year.

The mission of the Committee sent to South Africa was essentially of a confidential character, and the Report deals not only with the Transvaal Constitution, but with that of the Orange River Colony. His Majesty's Government do not propose to consider the question of its publication until after the latter Constitution has been determined and declared to Parliament.

I beg to ask a Question of which I had given private notice— namely, whether the British delegates at the international conference on wireless telegraphy in Berlin are empowered to sign a binding agreement on the part of this country, or whether opportunities for discussion in Parliament will first be given.

The delegates at this conference are acting under instructions from His Majesty's Government, and any convention agreed to will be reserved for subsequent ratification. I can say nothing at present as to the discussions in Parliament.