To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the Imperial Service Order and medal granted to officers and servants of the Post Office and other civil services can also be extended to officers and men of the police force. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) No, Sir, I fear not. The statutes of the Order and medal limit it to members of the civil services of the Crown, and these do not include the police.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that a telegraphist at Llandudno, aged twenty-two years, who is compelled to perform counter duties dealing with money order and savings bank business, is in receipt of 18s. per week; whether he will take into consideration that this officer remained unappointed four years, and that he rendered useful service during this period, and consider the same with a view to granting an increase in his salary. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The sorting clerk and the telegraphist to whom the Question refers is on a scale of pay rising to 44s. a week. He will, in the ordinary course, receive an increase of salary next month. His duties are the ordinary duties of his class.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether a petition was forwarded from the Dundee branch of the Postal Telegraphs Clerks' Association to the Secretary for Scotland in May last, asking that senior officers should be employed on the writing room duties in Dundee; whether he is aware that promotions have been given to junior officers on these duties at Dundee within the past few years out of proportion to their number; and whether he will consider the advisability of instituting a change in the method of selecting men for these duties. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The memorial was duly received by the Secretary to the Post Office in Scotland, and he informed the memorialists in reply that the general question of the rotation of writing duties was under consideration at headquarters and that, until a decision was given, he could not give them a de- finite answer. I am myself considering the general question, and I hope to be able to give a decision soon.

To ask the Postmaster-General if there will be a competitive examination early next year in Dublin for male learners; and, if so, how many vacancies will be reserved for postmen in the limited section. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) An open competition for six male learnerships in Dublin will be held in January. Postmen candidates will not in future have to wait their turn on the learner class, but will be allowed to compete for places as sorting clerk and telegraphist direct. There will thus be no places to offer to postmen until those who are now waiting on the learner class have received appointments.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received the promised Report as to the desirability of appointing a consul (unpaid) to represent British interests at the ports of Lorient and Hennebont. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) Sir H. Austin Lee has made certain recommendations with regard to consular appointments in Franco, but has so far not expressed his views upon the hon. Member's suggestion. His trip is however, not completed, and I am stil, awaiting further proposals from him.

To ask the Postmaster General whether any general rule exists that determines the position of telegraphists transferred from one office to another, at their own request or for departmental purposes, with reference to the duties expected of them; and whether, for the allocation of the quantity and quality of work, the whole period of an officer's service is computed, irrespective of the time spent in any particular office. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Transferred officers are employed as a rule on duties generally performed by officers of similar service and pay. A period of probation may be necessary after transfer; but, generally speaking, the allocation of duties depends upon the qualifications of the officers concerned, and is not governed solely by seniority or length of service.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will issue a Return of the amount of refrigerated and frozen beef condemned by the inspectors since 1st July, 1906, with the ports of origin, where known, and the names of the consignors. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Perhaps I may be allowed to answer this Question. The Local Government Board have not in their possession the information desired, and it would be necessary, in order to obtain it, to apply to some 1,800 local authorities in England and Wales alone. It is very doubtful whether the information could in all cases be obtained, especially as regards the names of the foreign consignors. It appears to me that the Return would be so far from being trustworthy and complete that it would not serve any useful purpose. In these circumstances, I regret that I do not see my way to assent to its being given.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can say what proportion of refrigerated meat imported into the United Kingdom is controlled by the United States Beef Trust. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) Taking the average of the last five years, a little over half of the fresh beef imported into the United Kingdom has come from the United States. I am unable to say what proportion of this was controlled by the Beef Trust.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department the number of deaths the causes of which were not certified in each of the years from 1902 to 1905. (Answered by Secretary Gladstone.) The numbers are as follows:—In 1902, 9,654; in 1903, 8,721; in 1904, 8,882; and in 1905, 8,446.

To ask the First Commissioner of Works whether the roadway between Old Palace Yard and Millbank is repairable by the Office of Works; and, if so, when it is intended to replace the present ancient and worn-out granite setts by pavement of a more modern and less noisy kind. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) The portion of the roadway only between Old Palace Yard and College Street is repairable by the Office of Works, and will be repaved shortly by the London County Council under Section 8 of the London County Council (Improvements) Act, 1900.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether there is any case or cases in which a member of a library committee co-opted under Section 8 (1) of the London Government Act, 1899, has been elected chairman of the said committee; and whether the Board would see any objection to such an appointment. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I am not aware of any case of the kind, but I see no objection to the arrangement. I have, however, no jurisdiction in the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty how much chocolate has been manufactured at the Deptford victualling yard since December, 1905; how much of this was for use in the Navy; and how much of this amount was for the (Military) Indian State Office.

No chocolate has been manufactured at the Deptford victualling yard since December, 1905, last year's conversion having ceased in that month. Climatic conditions render it inadvisable to manufacture except in the winter months. The manufacturing season for 1906–1907 is about to commence, and about 800,000 lbs. will be manufactured, all for Navy service.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that, on 27th November, the s.s. "Helmesmen" was at Deptford waiting to convey flour to the ships "Swift-sure," "Triumph," and "Illustrious," which wore lying at Portland, and on that date there was not one pound of flour in stock; and whether, in view of the detriment to the public service of such want of attention to Admiralty orders by private contractors, he will consider the advisability of using the flour mill at Deptford to its fullest capacity to avoid this state of affairs in future.

There has not been any failure on the part of the contractors for flour to furnish supplies promptly. The short delay in this particular instance was on the part of the Admiralty in deciding on the merits of the different samples, and the contractors commenced supplies as soon as the order was placed. The stocks of flour at the victualling yards are kept low advisedly, as it is of importance that this article should be issued in a perfectly fresh condition. There is no difficulty in obtaining ample supplies at short notice from the trade, whenever required, and it is not proposed to revert to the old system of direct Government manufacture.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what accommodation exists for cavalry at Maryhill Barracks, Glasgow.

These barracks were not intended for cavalry, the appropriation being as follows:—1 Infantry Battalion, 1 Depot Royal Field Artillery and Headquarters, West of Scotland Artillery. The latest returns show the following number of cavalry as quartered there:—5 officers, 151 men, 149 horses. They are the overflow of the regiment whose headquarters are at Piershill which is too small to hold an entire cavalry regiment.

Is it the intention of the Government to discontinue the Maryhill barracks as a cavalry station? Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration before coming to a decision the undesirability of leaving a large centre like Glasgow without cavalry?

was understood to reply that the whole matter had been considered.

Will the troops be removed from Glasgow when the Scots Greys go from Edinburgh?

It is highly probable.

Will the House have an opportunity of discussing this question before a final discussion is taken?

My hon. friend can move a vote of "No Confidence" on the Estimates.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to Lord Rosebery's threat, that if the cavalry are removed from Scotland he will become a Home Ruler?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether applications have been received from general officers commanding and officers commanding battalions for the issue of sub-targets for the use of the troops under their command.

The reply is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Governments of Russia, Germany, and France are experimenting with the sub-target with a view to its adoption in their armies.

I have no information on this subject.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state the number of Volunteers, officers, non-commissioned officers, and men, respectively, who attended camp for fourteen days training with the Field Army Brigades for each of the last three years.

The numbers are as follows:—

Having regard to the importance of these figures, cannot the right hon. Gentleman devise some means of giving the fourteen days training next year?

replied that he had considered the matter from all points of view.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether in view of the quantity of costly machinery now lying idle or only partially employed at Woolwich Arsenal, he will consider the advisability of appointing a small committee of experts to report on how far the machinery could be utilised in the production of articles of peace needed by Departments of the Government, other than the War Office; and whether much of the waste material might be turned to profitable account in various departments, especially the wood department.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if there is not also a large quantity of costly machinery now lying idle or almost idle in private factories throughout the country, and if, in consequence, a large number of men not less worthy than those of Woolwich Arsensal are out of work?

I am afraid I cannot succumb to the temptations held out by either of the hon. Gentlemen. I do not think that any useful result would come from the appointment of such a committee. The question is a broad one of principle, whether it is desirable that the Government should attempt the general business of manufacture of articles which can easily and at all times be obtained from the trade. I am not prepared to undertake the financial risk of such an enterprise.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, whether the circular issued to General Officers Commanding at Home and Abroad, urging them to act in respect to the technical training of soldiers so as to fit them for positions in civil life, contains any reference to the necessity of pensioned ex-soldiers not being employed at wages below the standard in the various trades; whether he has made any recommendation on these lines to bodies existing to secure employment for ex-soldiers; and whether he will state the manner in which certificates of trade proficiency are to be issued to the men.

The circular letter to which the hon. Member refers was confined to suggestions as to the lines on which technical instruction might best be imparted to the soldier. The letter did not deal with the question of wages or conditions of employment, nor have any recommendations on this subject been made to employment agencies. No decision has been arrived at on the question of the issue of trade proficiency certificates.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Hampshire, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the Committee appointed to consider the formation of a national army which has been assembled under the presidency of Lord Esher, has yet reported; and will he lay the Report of the Committee upon the Table of the House as soon as it is received.

The Committee in question was assembled to advise on such matters connected with the formation of a national army as might be referred to it from time to time, and it still exists for this purpose. Hitherto its functions have been wholly of a consultative nature, but should any Report be ultimately furnished, I will consider whether it might not be laid on the Table of the House.

On behalf of the hon. Member for North Hampshire, I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is proposed to put any check upon recruiting during the current financial year; and, if so, in which branch or branches of the Service will the recruiting be arrested.

Recruiting is only checked for any branch of the Service when the establishment of that branch is reached and is likely to be exceeded. This principle has been and is being applied.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether he can inform the House when it is intended to restore to his ordinary duties the member of the Indian civil service who has been appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal to be director of public instruction in that province, in disregard of public and departmental protests; and whether due consideration will be paid to public feeling in the matter by the selection of a member of the Indian educational service to succeed him in that office.

As I have already stated, I have no reason to think that the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal has abandoned the intention which he expressed in 1905, of replacing Mr. Earle by a member of the Indian educational service within two or three years from that time; but I do not know the precise date at which he pro- poses to effect the change.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether Mr. E. Candler, formerly a newspaper correspondent, who was on 21st September appointed temporarily to be a member of the Indian educational service, has now been appointed to be principal of the Maharajah's College in the Patiala State and, if so, whether he has given his sanction to this appointment, in view of the rule which prohibits the employment of any European in an Indian native state without such sanction; whether the appointment was offered to any of the distinguished University graduates, Indian and European, who are permanent members of the Indian educational service; and whether, seeing that the Patiala College has been for the past seventeen years in charge of a highly qualified Indian principal who has occupied the post with credit, and also that no reason has been publicly assigned for his supersession, he will state why the appointment of a gentleman, by profession a journalist, to this important educational office, has been permitted.

I am aware that there was a proposal to appoint a European graduate to the Mohindar College, Patiala, but I do not know if Mr. Candler (who is a graduate of the University of Cambridge) is the person selected. It is in the competence of the Government of India to sanction the employment of Europeans in native states.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is the intention of the Colonial Office to bring prominently before the next Colonial Conference the desirability of according to British Indians resident in the Colonies the same rights and privileges as those granted to other British subjects.

The agenda for the Colonial Conference has not yet been settled, and prominence must be given in he first place to those subjects which the Colonies themselves intimate a desire to discuss. It is, at present, impossible to say what place in the discussions can be allotted to the subject referred to by the hon. Member.

Is it expected that representatives of the Transvaal and Orange River Colony will be able to come?

That hardly arises out of the Question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the cultivation of opium in China is under observation and report, in order to ascertaining whether the recent edict of the Chinese Government is being effectively enforced within the Empire.

In answer to other Questions I have already explained the difficulty of procuring trustworthy information as to the area of opium cultivation. But the Consuls in China will report to the best of their ability as to the manner in which the edict will be carried into effect.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that at Mansourah, in Egypt, native girls of twelve and fourteen years work in the cotton mills from four o'clock in the morning to six o'clock at night, and at times till ten o'clock at night, in a highly deleterious atmosphere, at a wage of from 10 to 15 cents a day; whether it is in the competence of the British Control to urge on the Egyptian Government remedial interference with this state of things; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter. May I say that when I handed the Question in at the Table the words were "whether it is a fact" and not "whether he is aware."

If anything of this kind exists, the proper remedy would be factory legislation. But to make that binding on Europeans, who own most of the factories, would of course require the consent of all the Powers, and it would be necessary for the Egyptian Government to approach them. I will make inquiry into the facts stated by the hon. Member. Till that has been done I cannot say what action is required or can be taken.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Ex- chequer what is the number of tax surveys in the Kingdom in which there is no established officer besides the surveyors; what is the number of un-established clerks employed in such districts; what is the average number of days per annum upon which the surveyors in such districts are absent on leave or on official business; and by whom the daily business of the office is transacted during the absence of the surveyor.

(1) 216; (2) 428; (3) twenty-six days On leave—the number of days upon which a surveyor is wholly absent from his office on official duties is not available. (4) In forty-one out of the 216 districts above-mentioned (1), there are other surveyors in the same building, who are in charge during the absence of their colleagues. In the remaining 175 districts, the routine work is performed by the clerks; but the district is in charge of the "linked" surveyor, who deals with all important matters, visiting the office as required.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer at what date established clerks of the lower or second division were first employed on the outdoor clerical staff of the tax-surveying department: when the employment of such clerks ceased; what was the maximum number employed at any one time; and what was the number of surveys in which no established clerks were employed during the period of employment of such established clerks.

(1) 1877; (2) 1894; (3) 54; (4) 0.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to Mr. Sidney Webb's inquiries and conclusions as to race suicide; and whether he will consider the propriety of embodying in any future graduation of the Income Tax rebates dependent on the number of children in a family.

I have read Mr. Webb's interesting papers, though, I confess, without realising their bearing upon the graduation of the Income Tax. But, in the consideration which I am giving to the subject, I will not lose sight of my hon. friend's suggestion, which would, however, amount to a revival of the lex Papia Poppaca.

Would the right hon. Gentleman give the date of the lex Papia Poppaca?

I am afraid I must ask for notice.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has at length succeeded in ridding the country of those bands of foreign gipsies who for the past six months have put the counties of Yorkshire, Derbyshire, Lincolnshire, North-amptonshire, Lancashire and Nottingham-shire, and many of the cities and boroughs within them, to great expense, and exposed the inhabitants to assaults, damage, and other crimes, besides the evils of begging and fortune telling and divers contagious disorders.

Yes, Sir. As I informed the hon. Member for Great Yarmouth in reply to his Question yesterday, † the two bands of gipsies who have for some time been wandering about the country were successfully repatriated last week.

Now that the right hon. Gentleman has got rid of the gipsies will he introduce legislation to prevent them coming in again?

I am afraid that under present circumstances I can hold out no hope of that.

Will the right hon Gentleman instruct the Immigration Board not to admit them again?

My hon. friend knows I have no power to do that.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the case of the Marshgate Arms, Richmond, the licence of which was referred by the licensing authority in March, 1905, and refused subject to compensation in June, 1905, the compensation being settled by the Inland Revenue in January, 1906; whether he is aware that these licensed premises are now still open for sale owing to disputes among the parties interested over the division of the compensation money; and whether he will consider how best to shorten, by amending legislation, this procedure.

The licensed premises in question have hitherto remained open because the compensation money had not been determined. This determination has now, I understand, been practically finished, and only awaits the completion of the necessary formalities. The question of the procedure for assessing compensation will be very carefully considered in connection with the forthcoming Licensing Bill.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is now in a position to state whether he has been able to reform the position of the assistant factory inspectors.

I beg to refer the hon. Member to the full written Answer which I gave on the 28th November in reply to a Question by my hon. friend the Member for Sunderland ‡.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if his attention has been called to the vaccination of calves, and to the fact that the calf is strapped down upon the operating table, that its belly is then shaved, that 100 or more cuts are then made with a knife in its belly, and that vaccine matter is then rubbed into these cuts; will he say if the calf is put under anæsthetics during this operation; and whether, in view of the law preventing cruelty to animals, he will cause proceedings to be taken, or, if necessary, introduce legislation to deal with this question.

I have communicated with my right hon. friend the President of the Local Government Board, and I understand that the facts are substantially as stated in the Question. The operation is not an experiment, and therefore does not come within the provisions of the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, which is limited to the control of experiments. It is open to any person to take proceedings under the general law relating to cruelty to animals.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the inmates of convict prisons in the United Kingdom are precluded from the production of goods which can be sold to the public; and whether he will consider the desirability of allowing such occupation in prisons as will be useful employment to the inmates.

There is no rule or practice which forbids the production by prisoners of goods which can be sold to the public; but, as a matter of fact, prison labour in convict and in local prisons is employed almost entirely where it is not required for prison service, building, etc., on the fulfilment of orders received from the various Government Departments. The supply of such orders is, generally speaking, sufficient to ensure the employment of prisoners on occupations which are both useful and interesting, and calculated, not only to instil the habit of work, but to provide (where the sentence is sufficiently long to admit of effective instruction) a means of gaining a livelihood on discharge.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction that exists among the British exhibitors at the Milan Exhibition, especially in the section devoted to applied arts, owing to the bad organisation and arrangements of the British exhibits; will he say who is responsible for this organisation and for the status of the firms exhibiting; what his qualifications were; and whether he proposes to consider how the British Department of international exhibitions may be better organised in future.

The British section of the Milan Exhibition was organised by an unofficial Commission composed of a number of representative men chiefly drawn from British chambers of commerce and other bodies directly concerned with trade and industry. I understand that this body was formed mainly under the auspices of the London Chamber of Commerce. I am informed that no complaints of the character indicated in the Question have reached the Commission. As regards the last part of the Question, I may remind my hon. friend that a departmental committee is sitting to consider the questions affecting the participation of this country in international exhibitions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the London Chamber of Commerce is not exactly the best Chamber to go to in connection with matters relating to manufactures, and fine arts especially?

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the total cost to the nation of the present Government control and inspection of the railways of the United Kingdom, including the salaries of the Railway Commissioners and a proper quota of the Board of Trade Vote.

The cost of the Railway Department of the Board of Trade during the year 1905–6, including salaries, travelling and legal expenses, etc., was £12,847. This does not include cost of office accommodation or printing, or certain other expenses that cannot be allocated. On the other hand the Railway Department also deals with tramways and other subjects not connected with railways, so that for my hon. friend's purposes a considerable deduction, the amount of which cannot be accurately estimated, should be made on this account. The Railway and Canal Commission is a judicial body and not a Department of the Board of Trade. I am informed that the expenditure of that body in 1905–6 amounted to £6,140.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he has observed that, among the 8,593 cases of bankruptcy reported by the Inspector-General of Bankruptcy during 1905, there is not one municipal trading concern; and whether, in view of that and other advantages connected with the system of municipal trading, he will seek the cooperation of the President of the Local Government Board with a view to the promotion of a Bill empowering municipalities to undertake the control of all such industries as a poll of the ratepayers; shall decide upon.

Bankruptey proceedings do not apply in the case of municipal trading concerns, and their entire absence from the statistics of bankruptcy does not therefore afford any indication of their prosperity or otherwise.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Permanent Secretary of the Board of Trade has, during the present year, been appointed on any Commissions or Committees other than the Royal Commission on Canals and Waterways, the South African Committee of Inquiry into the Methods of Self-government for the Transvaal and Orange River Colonies, and the Royal Commission on Shipping Rings; how long he was absent from England on the South African Committee; whether it is usual to appoint the heads of the permanent staff of important departments of State upon committees of inquiry into matters unconnected with the business of such departments, and which necessitates their absence from this country for many months; did the Controller-General of the Commercial, Labour, and Statistical Department perform the ordinary functions of the Permanent Secretary during the absence of the latter in South Africa, and, if not, who performed them; and did the Permanent Secretary fully resume his duties as such upon his return from South Africa in July.

The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the negative, and to the second part thirteen weeks. As to the third part, I can add nothing to the replies which have been given by the Prime Minister and by myself to the noble Lord the Member for the Horsham Division on 2nd April, and to my hon. friend on the 28th ultimo.†

But did he fully resume his duties as Permanent Secretary upon his return?

Certainly.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the value of the various minerals raised in the United Kingdom during 1905 amounted to £95,870,700; and whether he can say how much of this sum was paid in wages and how much was appropriated by the owners of mineral rights, royalties and wayleaves.

The facts stated in the first part of the Question fire correct. It is not possible to state the aggregate amount paid in wages in the mining industries, as no exhaustive inquiry has taken place into the earnings of the various classes of workpeople in the United Kingdom since 1886. An-other inquiry of a similar character is now about to be made, and when that is completed it is hoped that definite information with regard to earnings in the mining industry will be available. The latest information available as to mining royalties and wayleaves is that collected by the Royal Commission on Mining Royalties, 1889–93, who estimated the amount paid in royalties and wayleaves on the output of 1889 at £4,873,000.

Is it not the fact that during the last five years the average profits including wages for the mines of the United Kingdom have amounted to £21,000,000, whereas the average profits of the preceding five years were £9,500,000? Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the increase of the wages during that time was in the same proportion?

Notice should be given of that Question.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, if he contemplates bringing in a Bill having for its object the regulation of certificates of competency of sea - going engineers; and, if so, would he state when such Bill will be brought forward.

The requirements as to the certificates to be held by engineers on British ships are contained in Section 92 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894. The Board of Trade do not see their way at present to introduce further legislation, but the matter will not be lost sight of.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, if he can say, approximately, what income arises from the official receivership of the Merthyr district; and whether, in view of the practice during the past five or ten years to fill vacancies occurring among the official receivers by appointing only members of the legal profession or persons having special knowledge of, or experience in the administration of the Bankruptcy Laws, he will explain why, in making the recent appointment, he selected a gentleman who had been connected with the Press at Carnarvon before he took up hi? present position of manager and editor of the Brecon and Radnor Express.

The late official receiver in this district was paid by fees, the gross amount of which varied very widely from year to year, from £600 to £1,800. I have no information as to his office expenditure, and am therefore unable to estimate the net income. As regards the last part of the Question I do not think I can add anything to the reply given by me to my hon. friend on Wednesday last.†

Has any decision been come to as to where the head office is to be?

No, the chief inspector is still looking into the matter.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether in view of the answer given to his Department by the North Eastern Railway Company respecting the hours of gate signalmen at Hull, the recent Returns of the hours worked by railwaymen represent the actual hours worked by the various servants to whom those Returns apply.

The Board are assured by the railway company that the Returns in question represent the actual hours worked, including all travelling time paid for.

How can they possibly have returned the true state of affairs when the company say they did not know that such long hours were worked?

I must ask for notice of that.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the number of cases of break-away of express passenger trains on the East Coast Route of England (comprising the Great Northern, North Eastern, and North British Railway systems); how many cases have occurred during the past twelve months, and at what speed the trains wore running when these breaks-away occurred; what is the name of the automatic coupling in use; how many alterations have been made in it during the above-mentioned period; and if it is still in its experimental stage.

I am in communication with the companies named in the hon. Member's Question and will inform him in due course of the result of my inquiries.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if his attention has been called to the statement in the Blue-book on Vaccination Expenses (Cd. 2421, 1905), that in the four years ended Lady Day, 1903, there wore 1,168,058 re-vaccinations charged to the rates, and if he will state under what statute the rates can be charged with re-vaccination, except in the case of voluntary applications for re-vaccination; if he has any official information showing that the bulk of these re-vaccinations were of persons who did not voluntarily apply for re-vaccination, but were compelled to do so by their employers on pain of dismissal; and if the auditors of the Local Government Board have surcharged the guardians with any portion of the amount paid for these re-vaccinations.

I am aware of the number of revaccinations the cost, of which was charged to the rates in the period referred to. I have no information to show that the bulk of these re-vaccinations: were of persons who did not voluntarily apply for re-vaccination, nor do I know of any surcharges made on the ground that any of the applications were not voluntary. It is the duty of the Public Vaccinator to re-vaccinate any person applying to him for the purpose who is not less than ten years old and has not been primarily vaccinated within ten years, and, subject to the observance of certain conditions which do not affect the present matter, he is entitled under Section 8 of the Vaccination Act, 1867, as amended by later Acts, to be paid for these re-vaccinations out of the rates. Whether the applications made to him are voluntary or not seems to be immaterial.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the remarks of the magistrates at the Burnley Police Court concerning the conduct of the vaccination officer of that union, in which, amongst other things, it was stated that he had instituted prosecutions four, six, eight,: and even eleven years after the birth of the children in question; whether he is aware that in one case a summons was taken out two and a half years after a child's death; and whether he will take steps to give the board of guardians control over this vaccination officer, so that the present unsatisfactory state of affairs may be ended.

I have seen a newspaper report of the proceedings before the justices. I understand that they have not been finished, as some of the cases, including the one specially referred to in the Question, were adjourned. I am not empowered to take action of the kind suggested by my hon. friend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that during the last three years no less than £250 has been expended by the working classes here in fines and costs.

I believe that statement is correct. I am looking into that matter.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that several Norwich telegraphists were asked in October last to take special duty at Lowestoft, and wore informed that their subsistence allowance would be 3s. per day; that the men declined to accept this rate; that two men were then ordered to proceed on this allowance, notwithstanding the fact that the recognised subsistence allowance is 5s. per day; and that the local authorities were aware that men accepting less than the recognised rate are liable to expulsion from membership of their trade union; and whether, seeing that the authorities have now raised the allowance to 4s. per day in deference to the repeated protests of the men, he will investigate the circumstances and take steps to obviate a recurrence of the grievance.

The question of the subsistence allowance is under my consideration. But the hon. Member is mistaken in thinking that there has been, or is, a recognised subsistence allowance of 5s. a day. The subsistence allowance is the repayment of necessary additional expenses of maintenance incurred by officers absent from their headquarters on official business, and will thus necessarily van' according to the circumstances under which the duty is performed.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General when the copies of the protocols and regulations in connection with the Radio-telegraphic Convention will be in the hands of Members.

I hope that copies of the Radiotelegraphic Convention and of the other documents will be in the hands of Members in the course of a few days.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he is aware that the Education Act of New Zealand requires that all boys should be instructed in military drill and all boys and girls over eight be taught physical drill; that, in forming twenty-eight battalions of 264 companies of 127,000 cadets, training them to shoot, and sending them annually to camp, the Colony spends over £5,000 a year with the approbation of the parents; and if he can inform the House how many cadet battalions and companies have been formed in the elementary public schools under his control, and what pecuniary encouragement is extended to them.

I understand that the hon. Member's statement of the law in New Zealand on the matter of military drill for boys is accurate, but he seems to have been misinformed in regard to the number of cadets, the figures quoted by him being, apparently, the number of children receiving physical instruction, and therefore including the girls. I imagine, therefore, that even in New Zealand this does not mean that this number of scholars have all received military instruction, or been trained to shoot. With regard to the third paragraph of the Question, if the hon. Member desires to know how many "cadet battalions and companies" have been organised in England and Wales as part of the organisation of a public elementary school as such, the reply is that there are none. As to the number of "cadet battalions and companies" that may have been organised voluntarily from among boys who attend public elementary schools, I have no information; being apparently wholly military in purpose, they would in no way come within the purview of the Board of Education.

repeated the last part of his Question. What pecuniary assistance was extended to such cadet battalions and companies?

None at all.

; I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he will state the names of the elementary schools which have been assisted by grants in aid of building out of the Lytham School Charities, Lancashire; the amount of assistance in each case; and whether a condition as to undenominational religious instruction was imposed when the grants were made.

There are three public elementary schools which are the property of the Lytham School Charities. The early history of the schools of the foundation is obscure, but the following facts have been ascertained as to the existing schools, the names of which as they appear in the official list are as follows;—Lytham Endowed Church of England School, which received a grant from the funds of the charities towards cost of buildings of £812 5s. 0d. in 1856; (2) St. Anne on-the-Sea, Hey-house's Endowed School, which received £1,688 10s. 7d. in 1880 and 1893; and (3) Lytham St. John's Church of England School, which received £1,000 0s. 0d. in 1899. As regards St. John's School, the Charity Commissioners made it an express condition of the grant of £1,000 from the Charities that the school site should be conveyed to the trustees on trusts containing no denominational provisions. In the case of the other schools, no such condition was apparently made. It was, however, a term of the general arrangement arrived at in 1898 at the local inquiry that in each of the three schools provision should be made for "Bible" instruction to be given in a separate room by a member of the staff to all children whose parents desired. This particular term was not expressly mentioned in the Charity Commission scheme of 1899, which directed simply; that in each of the three elementary schools of the foundation "religious instruction in accordance with the principles of the Christian faith" should be given under regulations to be made from time to time by the managers of each school. No alteration in these regulations was to take effect until the expiration of not less than one year after notice of the alteration had been given. I am not aware of any alteration having been made.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire if as a matter of fact in connection with St. John's School, although there is a stipulation that no denominational instruction should be given, the scholars are marched to the Church of England on Holy days?

I will inquire into that.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether, seeing that the Lytham Charities (Lancashire) were left for the schooling of the poor children of Lytham, and that the ratepayers of that parish are paying by means of the poor rate for the elementary education of the children of the parish, he will consider the advisability of arranging that the income derivable from the charity, or a portion of it, shall be paid to the overseers for the purposes of the trust, viz., in relief of the cost of elementary education.

It does not appear to be the case that the whole of the consolidated charities, now known as the "Lytham School Charities," were originally founded specifically for the schooling of the poor children of Lytham. The original trusts are, however, now super seded by the trusts of schemes made in 1899 by the Charity Commissioners, under which a yearly sum of £450 must, and a further yearly sum "not exceeding £200" may, be applied to purposes of elementary education. The Board have informed the local education authority that, in their opinion, the yearly sum of £450 is subject to the proviso in Section 13 of the Education Act, 1902; but it is for the trustees and the local education authority, in the first instance, to agree as to the portion, if any, of that sum which should be applied in relief of the local rates. Unless there is a difference between the parties concerned, the Board of Education have no power to determine the amount which should be applied in relief of the local rates. The Board have no information that any such difference has arisen. In any event, any share of the income applicable to relief of the local rates must be paid in the first instance to the local education authority and not to the overseers. And the hon. Member should direct his inquiries to the Lancashire County Council, not to the Board of Education, if he desires to investigate the present allocation of the £450.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that a grant of £450 for elementary education is sufficient, seeing that this charity is now bringing in £3,000 a year, and within the course of the next eight or ten years will be bringing in at least £10,000 a year?

I cannot alter a scheme which has been laid on the Table of the House and has the authority of an Act of Parliament.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he will state how much money from the Lytham Charities (Lancashire) is being used for the erection of a secondary school, and how much for the purchase of land for the same; what fees are intended to be charged at the proposed school, and if he will insist upon a substantial number of places being reserved free for the children of poor parents, seeing that these charities wore left solely for such children; and if he will prohibit the building of any place of worship in connection with the school, so that the children may attend such places as may be selected by their parents.

The Answer to the first Question is £31,000, and to the second £25,000, I believe. Under the scheme the fees must not be less than £6 nor more than £12 a year; proposals are under consideration for permitting a maximum of £15 for day scholars, and for allowing some boarding pupils at not more than £60 a year for board and residence. Some 20 per cent, of the total places in the school can, under the scheme, be provided free from any fee and with additional benefits of from £5 to £10 as maintenance bursaries. No proposal has been submitted to the Board for the erection of a place of worship in connection with the school.

Are the schemes of the Charity Commissioners ever submitted to the Board of Education for approval?

I should think so.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether he will press forward the negotiations concerning | the proposed Council of Agricultural Research, in order that the necessary steps may be taken to secure financial aid from the Treasury in the next Budget Statement.

The Board fully realise the importance and pressing necessity of the scientific investigation of agricultural problems and they will spare no pains to secure improvement both in regard to organisation and the financial resources available for the purpose. The matter is not however free from difficulty, and I should be very glad to have an opportunity of personal conference with the hon. Member respecting it.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether the plans for the proposed alterations upon the Scottish Law Courts in Edinburgh have been drawn up; whether they have been submitted to the Faculty of Advocates; and if he can now state when they will be proceeded with.

Certain plans have been prepared, which have been seen by the Faculty of Advocates and altered to meet their views. They are under the most careful consideration, but at this moment I am not able to make a more definite announcement.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Edinburgh Town Council instructed its head gardener to apply to the local distress committee under the Unemployed Workmen's Act of 1905 for extra hands to keep the public gardens in proper order, and that the distress committee paid one-half of the wages of men supplied and the corporation the other half; whether he is aware that the Edinburgh Trades and Labour Council have objected to this action, on the grounds that it is illegal to relieve the rates by paying to a public body half the wages of men employed to perform useful and necessary labour; and, if so, whether any steps will be taken to prevent this and other public bodies so using the Act?

The particulars stated by the hon. Member are materially correct. The town council had in view solely the assistance of several deserving men out of employment who had registered their names with the distress committee; but for this reason, the work in the gardens would not have been undertaken at the time. The proportion of the wages to be paid by distress committees in such circumstances is a matter for arrangement between the parties concerned. There does not appear to have been any illegal action in this case, and I do not, therefore, propose to interfere. These payments have been made out of funds contributed privately, but in future where the destination of monies voted by Parliament is concerned no payments will be sanctioned which involve relief of the rates.

Were these men employed full time on half wages?

I have given the House all the information I have.

I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland what sum, if any, the Treasury propose to give to the Royal Society of Edinburgh to enable them to secure suitable accommodation.

At the same time may I ask the Secretary for Scotland in view of the Report of the Departmental Committee, what steps he intends to take with regard to housing the Royal Society in Edinburgh; and what sum of money the Treasury has arranged to grant.

Negotiations with a view to housing the Royal Society in a suitable way are now in progress, and I hope to be in a position to make a full statement upon the Committee stage of the Bill.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a memorial signed by fish curers in the principal fishing districts of Kerry, Cork, and Clare, urging the adoption of a Government brand; and whether any and, if so, what steps will be taken to adopt a system which has been so successful in Scotland.

I have received the memorial referred to in the Question. As I stated in reply to a Question on 30th May last, I referred several resolutions of the same kind to the Committee which is inquiring into the constitution and working of the Department, and I am now informed that the Committee have taken evidence upon the question of a Government brand for Irish fish, and that the matter is under their consideration.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether the appeals of nine tenants on the Vandeleur estate at Kilrush, in the county of Clare, were heard at Ennis on the 12th June, 1906; whether four of these appeals have been fixed by Judge Fitzgerald, and the other five are yet undecided; and if he will have inquiries made as to the reason of the appeals not having been fixed.

I am informed by the Land Commission that in the cases of the five undecided appeals referred to in the Question, the holdings are either wholly or partly within the urban district of Kilrush, and some delay has occurred in ascertaining the amounts of the urban rates payable in respect of these holdings. This information has now been obtained, and judgment in the cases will be given in the course of a few days.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will ascertain if District-Inspector Rutledge, of Mullingar, reported to the Inspector-General of the Royal Irish Constabulary the formal complaint of the magistrates, Messrs. Sullivan, Hyde and Nooney, made to him in the magistrates' room on the 23rd June last, regarding Constable Scott's illegal conduct in a specific case; if any officer reported repeated reprimands administered from the Bench to Scott for his improper and illegal conduct; is it the practice, as in this case. to allow police officers to nullify the complaints of magistrates, by failing to report them, and then to deny and ignore the complaints and promote the constable reprimanded; whether, seeing that Scott failed to pass the requisite examination for promotion, and is not the senior constable in his district, he will explain the reason for his promotion; and, having regard to a letter from one of the magistrates placed in his hands, will he have this promotion reconsidered.

I am informed by the police authorities that at Mullingar Petty Sessions before Messrs. Sullivan, Hyde and Nooney, Constable Scott prosecuted a man for drunkenness. The defendant was unanimously convicted by the magistrates on Constable Scott's evidence. When the Court had risen, Mr. Nooney asked District-Inspector Rutledge to come to the magistrates' room, and he there stated that he strongly disapproved of the manner in which Constable Scott gave his evidence in the case referred to, and he desired the District-Inspector to tell the constable so. Mr. Hyde, J.P., said it was only fair to state that the magistrates had previously on several occasions commended the constable from the Bench for the manner in which he brought up cases. Mr. Sullivan, R.M., remarked that the constable was perhaps too keen in the way in which he gave evidence on that day. The District-Inspector did not regard this conversation as a formal complaint by the magistrates and did not therefore report the matter to the Inspector-General. I am informed that there is no foundation for the suggestion that Constable Scott has been repeatedly reprimanded from the Bench. The constable passed the requisite examination for promotion in 1901. The reasons for his promotion were stated in my reply to the hon. Member's previous Question on 14th November, The Inspector-General understands that there is no reason for the suggestion that the magistrates generally are dissatisfied with the promotion, though one magistrate appears to be dissatisfied. The promotion of constables rests with the Inspector-General, who informs me that he sees no reason for re-considering the decision arrived at.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutentant of Ireland is he aware that three years ago Mr. John B. Barrington sold to his tenants on his property at Castlewaller, Newport, county Tipperary, and can he say what progress has since been made with the Land Purchase Commission, or have the tenants as yet received their vesting orders; is he aware that Thomas Molony, one of the Castlewaller tenants, was evicted soon after the terms of purchase were arranged; has Mr. Barrington since consented to reinstate Mr. Molony; and, if not, will he instruct the Estates Commissioners to put themselves in communication with Mr. Barrington so as to bring about Mr. Molony's restoration to his farm in Castlewaller.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that no proceedings for the sale of the estate referred to have yet been instituted before them, and they have no knowledge of any negotiations for sale which may be pending. The Commissioners have received an application for reinstatement from Thomas Moloney, and will have the case inquired into as soon as may be possible.

Is the right hon Gentleman aware that the negotiations for the sale of the estate have been going on for three and a half years?

I have no information on that point before me.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that negotiations for the purchase of the Mayberry estate, near Kenmare, are now in progress; and whether, in view of the fact that there are several evicted tenants on this estate, some of whom have been out of their holdings for nearly twenty years with no means of procuring a livelihood except as labourers, the Estates Commissioners will consider the advisability of purchasing the evicted farms as a separate estate, and enabling these tenants to start fair with the aid of grants for building the houses and stocking the farms, as they have done in the neighbouring Warden estate.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that no proceedings have yet been instituted before them for the sale of the estate of F. G. Mayberry, which they assume to be the estate referred to in the Question, and they have no knowledge of any negotiations for sale which may be in progress. The Commissioners have received applications from six evicted tenants on the estate, and will have the cases inquired into by their inspector. The Commissioners will consider what steps they may take when they have received the inspector's report.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Estates Commissioners have asked Mr. Richard Gradwell of Dowth Hall, Drogheda, to sell his untenanted lands in the rural district of Coole, Westmeath; if they have asked him to restore his evicted tenants or to sell the evicted farms for the purposes of restoration; and, if so, what were the dates of their communications with Mr. Gradwell, and the nature of his replies.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have not yet approached the owner of the estate in question.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say when an inspector from the Estates Commissioners will be in Westmeath for the purpose of doing something practical for evicted tenants there, the past three years alleged consideration by the Commissioners having produced no result.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they hope to have inquiries made by an inspector in the early part of next year into the cases of evicted tenants in county Westmeath whose applications for reinstatement have not yet been disposed of.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state what it is that prevents the making of provision for evicted tenants in Westmeath, untenanted land being abundant there; how many owners of untenanted land in that county have been asked by the Commissioners to sell it; how many have given favourable replies; and can he say now, after three years working of the Land Act of 1903, when evicted tenants may expect to benefit under that Act.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that inquiries as to untenanted land in county Westmeath are in progress. Eighteen owners of such land have been asked whether they would be prepared to sell. Of these, three have replied in the affirmative, and the Commissioners have directed an inspection; eight have stated that they are not willing to sell the lands to the Commissioners; and replies have not yet been received by the Commissioners in the remaining seven cases.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that the property of Lady Bathurst is being sold to the tenants around Cappamore, county Limerick; and will he instruct the Estates Commissioners to put themselves in communication with the agent of Mr. Rochford, of Cahir, county Tipperary, so that the town tenants of Cappamore may be included in the sale.

The Estates Commissioners inform mo that no proceedings for the sale of the estate in question have yet been instituted before them; and they state that it is not their practice to insist upon the inclusion of a town or village in an estate which is the subject of proceedings for direct sale from a landlord to tenants.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland can he say what progress the Estates Commissioners have made in restoring to his evicted farm in Moohan, Herbertstown, county Limerick, on the Croker estate, Michael Power; is he aware that the Commissioners' inspector was with Kirby the planter, on the 6th instant; will he say if Kirby said to the inspector that he was prepared to leave, provided they supplied him with another farm on the Croker Estate; and, if so, are they taking steps to do so.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have caused inquiry to be made into the case of Michael Power, evicted tenant. Power has been offered a portion of the untenanted land on the estate, but has so far refused to accept any but the holding from which he was evicted. It does not appear to be the case that Kirby, the present occupant of the farm, has informed the inspector that he was prepared to surrender the farm if another holding were given to him. On the contrary, the inspector has reported that Kirby is not prepared to surrender the holding and accept another in lieu thereof.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the disclosures in the trial of "Duffy and Baily v. Lonsdale," before Mr. Justice Boyd in Dublin on Tuesday; whether he is aware that the defendants pleaded guilty to the posting of a defamatory typewritten notice and a printed placard regarding the plantiff in the town of Longford, where he carries on his business, and had thereby injured him in trade; and whether any proceedings have been instituted by the police.

My attention had not been called to the matter referred to in the Question, but I have now seen a newspaper report of the case. It appears from that report that the proceedings consisted in a civil action for damages, and it is stated that when the case was called it was announced that a settlement had been arrived at upon terms that the defendent should express regret for the publications and pay plaintiff's costs. No proceedings have been instituted by the police, and I am advised that the case is clearly not one for criminal proceedings by the Crown.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these boycotting notices were posted because the landlord had raised his rents, and is the Mr. Lonsdale referred to the gentleman who is putting a question as to boycotting notices in other parts of Ireland?

said he had no information beyond that he had given to the House.

The Answer is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have yet taken any action on the application of Samuel Calbick, who was evicted from his holding on the Wearing Estate, Kilmanagh, county Kilkenny; whether he is aware that about three years ago the present occupier of the holding offered to surrender possession on getting reasonable compensation, such offer being conveyed to the Commissioners, who were unable to deal with it, and that Calbick and his family, having had to live in a dilapidated and insanitary dwelling, became victims of tuberculosis, by which himself and two of his sons died and his wife at present is an incurable invalid; and whether the Commissioners will take special stops to restore the remainder of the family to their holding.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received an application for reinstatement from Samuel Calbick and have referred it to their inspector for inquiry with the view of effecting a settlement. The Commissioners have as yet no information in regard to the circumstances alleged in the remainder of the Question, but will deal with the matter when they receive their inspector's report.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how-many Land Commission appeals are now pending; what is the cause of delay; and is this matter having his attentfon.

I am informed by the Land Commission that the number of appeals outstanding on the 30th November was 8,392. The number outstanding on the 30th November, 1905, was 11,477. A decrease of 3,085 in the number of outstanding appeals has, therefore, taken place within the last twelve months, and the Commissioners inform me that they believe this rate of decrease will be maintained.

As this is a matter of extreme urgency cannot the right hon. Gentleman take any steps to deal with it?

I am aware of the urgency of the matter, and I hope to be able to do something to facilitate matters.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether a claim has been lodged with the Estates Commissioners by the representatives of Thomas Mullins, who was evicted in 1888 from a holding on the Castleinch, county Kilkenny, estate of the Karl of Desart; and whether, seeing that the holding has been farmed on the eleven months system by a publican named Martin Murphy, of Kells, he will say what steps, if any, have been taken by the Estates Commissioners to reinstate the representative of Mullins to the holding.

I am informed that Thomas Mullins was not a tenant of the Earl of Desart and was not evicted by him. Mullins appears to have been at one time a sub-tenant of the late Mrs. Margaret Sullivan, who was one of Lord Desart's tenants. The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have not received an application from the representatives of Mullins.

I bog to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the total amount of Stock issued up to date for the purposes of the Irish Land Act, 1903; the total cost of floating such Stock; and the total liability of the Irish Development Fund to make good, under Section 38 of the Act of 1903, the deficiencies in respect of the issue at a discount of Stock under that Act.

The total amount of Stock issued up to date, for the purposes of the Irish Land Act, 1903, is £21,201,444 8s. 9d. The total cost of floating such Stock was £42,616 14s. 9d. The annual liability of the Ireland Development Grant under Section 38 of the Act of 1903, for the purpose of making good the deficiencies in respect of the issue of Stock at a discount is £70,290 2s. 7d.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that a number of tenants on the Robert Tyndall estate, Kilmacow, county Kilkenny, have been served with notices preliminary to eviction; will he say whether the tenants on this estate invited the intervention of the Estates Com- missioners with a view of arranging terms of purchase; and whether, with a view to saving this district from disorder and disturbances, he will take steps to prevent evictions on this estate. The hon. Member had also given notice of the following Questions: To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to negotiations going on for some time back between the tenants on the Robert Tyndall estate, Kilmacow, county Kilkenny, and the landlord in respect to the purchase of their holdings; is he aware the tenants left the settlement in regard to price, etc., in the hands of the Estates Commissioners; and can he now state what reply was given by Mr. Robert Tyndall to the preferred mediation of the Estates Commissioners. To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the tenants of Mr. Robert Tyndall, Kilmacow, county Kilkenny, opened negotiations with their landlord with a view of purchasing their holdings, and that the landlord insisted upon twenty-six and a half years purchase, which with bonus would make the purchase money thirty years; will he say whether the Estates Commissioners used their power to try and bring about a settlement, and, if so, with what result; and whether the Government will allow the forces at its disposal to be used on this property to carry out evictions.

I will answer these three Questions together. I have no information as to whether the tenants on the estate of Mr. Robert Tyndall have been served with notices preliminary to eviction. The Estates Commissioners inform me that, having become aware that differences existed between the landlord and tenants in regard to terms of purchase, they approached both parties and offered their services as conciliators in pursuance of the Regulations. The tenants agreed to leave the purchase price of their holdings to the Estates Commissioners, but the landlord replied that having regard to the combination against payment of rent entered into by the tenants, he did not see that any useful purpose would be served by the intervention of the Commissioners. The Commissioners thereupon decided that they could not do anything more in the matter of settling the dispute. The Commissioners have no information as to the terms demanded by the landlord, beyond the statement of the tenants that he asked twenty-six and a third years purchase. It is not competent to the executive Government to refuse the assistance of the forces of the Crown for the protection of the Sheriff when engaged in the execution of the King's Writ.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will furnish to the House a Return setting out the names of the landlords in Kilkenny and Waterford, who, having been approached by the Estates Commissioners in the interests of the peace and order of the country to sell their agricultural holdings in the interests of the tenants, declined to do so; and whether he will take a note of the names of these gentlemen, to be considered whenever application is made for the forces of the Crown to carry out civil Bill or other decrees.

The Estates Commissioners inform me that in no case in which they have offered to intervene in the counties mentioned has the owner refused to sell. In one case the owner intimated that he could not see his way to accept the terms offered by the tenants. In another case, the landlord's agent replied that there was now no dispute, but there had been some doubt as to the ownership of the estate owing to the death of the former owner. In a third case, the Commissioners were asked to intervene, but the estate was in the High Court of Justice, and the estate therefore did not fall within the scope of the regulations as to conciliation. In reply to the concluding inquiry of the Question, I would refer to the Answer which I have now given to the Questions of the hon. Member for South Kilkenny.

I wish to ask the Chief Secretary a question of which my right hon. friend the Lord Mayor of Dublin has given him private notice—whether having regard to the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Ireland in the case of the King, Drury v. the Corporation, the Local Government Board will take immediate steps to have the accounts of the corporation audited by Mr. James King the auditor of the North Dublin Union.

The decision of the Court of Appeal referred to was given yesterday, and this morning Mr. King was directed by the Local Government Board to audit the accounts of the corporation.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, was the auditor selected by the Local Government Board or the corporation?

By neither I believe. He is the person whom the Statute indicated; the corporation had nothing to do with the matter.

What I meant to ask was this. I know the auditor was appointed by the Statute; but Mr. King's name is not in the Statute, and I ask who selected him.

I understand. If the right hon. Gentleman wishes I will have inquiries made. My impression is that he is the person indicated by the Statute as the person to audit the accounts. Certainly the corporation have not come into the matter at all; the appointment is. made by the Statute.

May I ask whether the Statute does not provide that audit should be made by the auditor of the accounts of the North Dublin Union, and whether Mr. King is not that person?

That is my impression.

I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether his promise to introduce temperance legislation next session applies to Scotland.

The measure of licensing reform contemplated for England next session will not apply to Scotland. I doubt whether, with our other legislative engagements for Scotland it will be possible to find time for a Scottish Licensing Bill. We are, of course, well aware not only of the importance of the subject, but of the interest felt in it in Scotland by the Scottish people.