I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is yet in a position to state the intentions of His Majesty's Government with regard to the laying down of special vessels for the purpose of showing the flag in outlying portions of the Empire and the performance of detached police duties.

The shipbuilding programme for next year is in course of being considered, and I will take care that the point referred to by the hon. Gentleman shall not be lost sight of.

Is it intended that any warship bigger than a gunboat shall patrol, or, at any rate, occasionally visit, the Persian Gulf?

I can make no definite statement.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if any compensation was paid to Messrs. Inglis, the builders of the royal yacht on account of their having been deprived of the sub-contract for upholstery and internal decoration; and, if so, how much; and if he is aware that the decorative designer of the upholstery and internal work of the "Victoria and Albert," executed by Warings, was the same man, Mr. F. S. Murray, who designed the work for the Glasgow sub-contractor who was deprived of the contract on the pressure of the Admiralty.

My hon. friend of course understands that his Question refers to transactions which took place before the present Government came into office. I am informed that it has never been admitted that Messrs. Inglis were deprived of any subcontract for upholstery, etc., as alleged in the Question, and no compensation has in fact been paid to them. In answer to the third Question, the Admiralty have no information on the subject.

Was not Mr. Murray engaged for the same class of work by Messrs. Waring?

I have no information.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty contemplates or has ordered a re-introduction into the Royal Navy of sail-drill and mast-and-yard exercises for purposes of training; and, if so, in what manner, at what time, and to what extent will this re-introduction be carried out.

The Answer is in the negative.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether His Majesty's cruiser "Scylla," which is at present charged with the sole responsibility of carrying the flag in the Carribean, is entirely in an efficient state as regards the condition of the ship and the health of the crew to discharge that responsibility.

According to the latest reports the condition of the "Scylla" and the health of her crew are in all respects satisfactory.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the vessel was last docked and what percentage of the men were in the sick bay last week?

asked for notice.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether railway companies are obliged to supply a Volunteer officer travelling on duty with a return ticket at a single fare; and, if so, whether he would take action in the case of an officer proceeding in obedience to command orders to present himself for examination who was refused this privilege.

Railway companies are not obliged to take officers of Volunteers at single fares for the return journey. The Cheap Train Act only provides for payment at three quarters of the fare charged to the public. Any arrangements for the payment of smaller fares than this are the result of voluntary concessions on the part of the railway companies.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the decision to reduce the Royal Horse and Foot Artillery by sixty-seven officers and 3,712 of other ranks has been reconsidered; and whether he now proposes to abandon the reduction of the establishment of this arm. I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for War what addition has, up to the present date, been made to the strength of the Royal Horse and Foot Artillery to compensate for the reduction of sixty-seven officers and 3,712 men of the establishment of the regular branch of that arm; and whether, in fact, a single officer, non-commissioned officer, or man has yet been added.

In reply to these Questions I have nothing whatever to add to what I have stated over and over again. I must refer the hon. Member to my reply to a Question put by the right hon. Member for Croydon on the 1st instant † The second Question of the hon. Member is unintelligible. In this Question he seems to suggest that reductions have actually taken place. His first Question proceeds on the footing that they have not.

I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies if he can state the extent of land which has been reserved for the Natives in the Kikuyu district in East Africa: and if it is clearly understood that this reserve will be retained for the natives.

The

ߤ See(4) Debates, clxxvii, 346-7.

land which has been declared reserves for the Kikuyu tribe amounts to about 14,000 square miles in the Kenya Province, and about 350,000 acres in the Ukamba Province. There is no present intention of rescinding this reservation.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not within his knowledge that practically all the native troubles have arisen through land grabbing, and would it not tend to the peace of that country—

The hon. Member must give notice of that Question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take this matter into consideration and see into it?

The hon. Member must give notice.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to render the sale of reserved lands—?

That does not arise out of the Question.

asked what the right hon. Gentleman meant by "no present intention."

Some of these tribes have hitherto pursued a perfectly nomadic course over large areas of country; but it is the absolute intention of my right hon. friend the Colonial Secretary to secure for them ample location in which they may live and multiply.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was not aware that the Kikuyu was not a nomadic tribe; and whether it would not be possible to place their lands in the hands of trustees so that they should not be alienated.

That is a matter of policy; and hon. Members must give notice of all such important Questions.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state the extent of land from which the Masai were removed for the benefit of a syndicate, and a comparative estimate of members of the Masai; and how many English, Irish, and Scottish settlers have replaced the Masai.

The area from which the Masai were removed was nominally about 920,000 acres. I say "nominally" because the Masai, being a nomad pastoral tribe and having no fixed abode, occupied at one time or another all grazing land in that part of East Africa, the areas so occupied being however very much in excess of their present requirements. Three hundred and twenty thousand acres of the land in question were granted to the East Africa Syndicate and the remainder made available for other settlers. The Masai affected by this arrangement numbered about 11,200 souls. The number of white settlers in the area is at present forty-eight, of whom ten are Boers and the remainder of British descent, but this number will no doubt be increased as white settlement progresses. I should add that the Masai have been granted ample lands in two reserves, and that they have acquiesced in the arrangement.

Do the forty-eight settlers include women and children —

I believe not.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, if ho can state the number of identured East Indian immigrants entering Trinidad for the past two years who have been charged with and punished for crime; whether the cost of such prosecutions is borne by the estates employing them or by the Government; and, if by the latter, could he state the total cost of such prosecutions to the Government for the said two years.

The annual Returns furnished by the Trinidad Government do not specify the number of indentured immigrants punished for crime. The number of natives of India punished for various offences in the two years 1904–5 and 1905–6 was 4,640 out of a total East Indian population exceeding 98,000. Of these 3,565 were punished for breaches of the Immigration Ordinance. The cost of these prosecutions cannot be ascertained without reference to the Colony; and it is doubtful whether the proportion of the cost borne by the Government on this account can be separated from the total cost of the judicial and police services of the Colony.

asked whether, seeing that breaches of the Immigration Ordinance are merely technical offences, there was any reason to believe that crime was more rife among East Indians than among any other class of the community?

No, Sir; I believe that in matters of morality and public order they have proved themselves to be a very law-abiding people.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state the cost of the prosecutions?

No, Sir, but I will inquire.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state whether the Secretary of State for the Colonies has recently received from the Working Men's Association of Trinidad a communication calling attention to the discontent now existing amongst the railway employees of that Colony as to their conditions of service; and, if so, whether he could state if it is the intention of the Government to take any action as to any of the points raised by the said association.

The communication to which the hon. Member refers has been received. The Secretary of State is not at present prepared to admit that the railway employees in Trinidad have valid ground for discontent, but he will consult the Governor on the subject.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can make any statement respecting the number of men unemployed in Winnipeg; and whether, seeing that immigrants from this country are regularly adding to the number, he can take any action concerning the statements of emigration agencies and others which mislead people who go to Canada for employment.

No, Sir, I am not aware that there is any number of unemployed in Winnipeg. Employment in Canada generally is easy to get on farms and on railway construction.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the fact that the British troops in Johannesburg were called out several times during last week; and whether he can state the circumstances for which their services were employed.

The latest official information at my disposal is that the Infantry have been withdrawn, but that 800 mounted troops remain to support the police. I have no information yet as to the occurrences of last week.

I beg to ask the Under- Secretary of State for the Colonies whether on the Rand a police officer with-out any civil intervention can call upon the British troops to fire upon an assembly of more than six persons, after having commanded them three times to disperse; and whether he will draw the attention of the Transvaal Government to the fact that such practice is not in accordance with the law in Great Britain, and that His Majesty's Government cannot agree to the use of British troops under such circumstances.

I do not think that the law is correctly stated in the Question. Responsibility for firing must, as I understand, still rest with the officer commanding the troops as it does in this country.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any, and, if so, what, conditions governing the importation of labour into the Transvaal prevent the employment of British subjects, other than Asiatics, in the Transvaal mines.

The hon. Member will forgive me for saying that I find some difficulty in answering his Question, because without further explanation the point is somewhat obscure, but I think I am justified in saying that I know of no such conditions.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a punitive expedition has been landed in one of the islands of the New Hebrides from His Majesty's cruiser "Cambrian"; and, if so, whether he can give the House any information regarding it.

I understand from the Admiralty that one sailor was killed during the course of a disturbance in the island of Malekula. His Majesty's Government have no further information on the subject at present.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the average contribution per head of the population of the United Kingdom towards the duty paid on tea during the year ending 31st March, 1907.

:2s. 6.72d.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether Alfred Lincoln, who attacked Principal Warder Alford while working on the Dartmoor Prison farm on 8th June, and Michael Hogan, who assaulted Assistant Warder-Nurse Brown in the casual sick hospital on 1st July, were each ordered to receive eighteen strokes with the cat, to undergo dietary punishment, to wear chains for six months, and to wear the black dress; whether he confirmed those sentences inflicting flogging upon these two men; and whether those sentences have since been carried out.

The sentence on each of the convicts mentioned was to undergo a corporal punishment of eighteen strokes with the cat, and to forfeit certain marks. No dietary punishment was awarded in either case. The convicts were ordered to be placed in the distinctive dress worn by prisoners who assault or attempt to assault officers, and to be restrained in leg chains or cross irons. This is a necessary measure of precaution; the chains or irons are not necessarily worn for six months, but only so long as the directors deem advisable and according to the conduct of the prisoner. Six months is the maximum limit; as a rule the time is shorter. The Answer to the last two paragraphs is in the affirmative.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman will be good enough to inquire whether there is really any necessity for placing these men, who have already been severely punished, in chains and especially in leg chains?

It is a precaution necessitated by the fact that they have used violence to officers.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is not aware that the practice of putting aboriginal prisoners in chains in Australia has been severely condemned, and whether in view of that condemnation the placing of prisoners in chains in this country will be allowed to continue?

These cases are exceptional and necessitate exceptional measures for the protection of the officers.

By what authority were the sentences passed?

I should like notice of that Question.

But that is in the Question.

Of course, the sentences have to come to me for confirmation.

Are the sentences first of all adjudicated upon by magistrates?

Yes.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give me the names of those magistrates?

I think the hon. Member must give notice of that.

But that is in the Question.

We are discussing Question 35.

I beg pardon, I see it is in the next Question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman able to say if the dietary punishment which these prisoners have to undergo is three days bread and water, or a longer period?

I believe in this particular case there was no dietary punishment awarded.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether two convicts, Thomas Ellis and Alfred Parrish, who were convicted in North London, and who eluded capture on Dartmoor for thirty hours, were ordered nine days bread and water diet and twenty-one days No. 2 diet, to lose all marks which would count for remission of sentence, to wear chains for six months, and also to wear a yellow dress, by the visiting board of magistrates; and, if so, whether he will state the names of the magistrates who inflicted these five separate punishments upon each of these convicts; what is the weight of the chains they have been condemned to wear; and for how long a period every day have they to wear these chains.

:The terms of the sentences are not accurately stated in the hon. Member's Question. There are not "five separate punishments"; each convict's sentence is a period of punishment diet and a forfeiture of marks. The bread-and-water diet, however, is imposed only for six days—two terms of three days each, and the convicts do not forfeit the whole of their remission, but only marks equivalent to six months. In addition, not as punishment but as a measure of precaution, they have been ordered to wear the distinctive dress for convicts who escape or attempt to escape, and to be restrained in "chains" or cross-irons. The last is a necessary precaution; but the maximum time that the chains are worn is six months, and they may be, and in most cases are, discontinued sooner. Every case of restraint is considered by the directors once a month, and the restraint is continued only if absolutely necessary in the interest of security. The chains weigh from 4½ to 6 lbs. They are worn continuously, but the leather belt by which they are fastened round the waist can be undone at night or at meals, thus allowing the chains to slip down. The names of the visitors were Lord Seaton, Vice-Admiral Wilson, Mr. Walter Wilson and Colonel W. G. Armstrong. Under the circumstances I consider the sentences proper ones and not severe for an attempt to escape which was almost successful.

Liberal cheers for chains !

will the right hon. Gentleman be willing to place in the tea-room samples of the chains which were used, and will he give an explanation of what is the meaning of the cross-iron?

I see no necessity for adopting the course suggested by the hon. Member.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the fact that, in the Chester City Police Court on Wednesday, 3rd July, 1907, upon the hearing of an information under the Vaccination Acts against Thomas Bowden, a threat was made both by the magistrate's chief clerk and the chief constable that, in consequence thereof, his licence as a lodging-house keeper might be taken from him; and whether he will take the necessary steps to prevent any such course, seeing that no provision for it is authorised by any Act of Parliament, and the prescribed penalties under the Vaccination Acts are being imposed upon the defaulter.

It appears that on the 3rd inst. an Order was made for a child of Thomas Bowden to be vaccinated within twenty-eight days, and no further proceedings have been taken. The clerk to the justices remarked that as Bowden kept a common lodging-house, possibly the corporation committee might consider the question of refusing the licence if the child was not vaccinated, and the chief constable acquiesced in this remark. No threat was made, and the clerk has no control over the committee who deal with the licensing of lodging-houses. I cannot take any action in the matter.

asked if it was legal for a clerk to make such observations in order to intimidate an anti-vaccinator?

was understood to reply that he could not control the observations of people in Court.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the increase in cases entering hospitals suffering from trachoma; and what steps are being taken to prevent the spread of this contagious disease.

Trachoma comes within my jurisdiction only so far as the operation of the Aliens Act is concerned, It is a disease on account of which alien passengers who are subject to the provisions of that Act may be excluded from this country; and since that Act came into force numerous cases have been excluded.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the fact that, under the present law, the fees which conscientious objectors to vaccination have to pay for exemption certificates are public moneys, he will say why it is proposed that part of the fees for making the statutory declaration which it is proposed to substitute for these certificates shall go to commissioners for oaths and other private persons.

Justices' clerks are remunerated by salary, and any fees received by them have to be paid over to the fund from which the salary is defrayed. Commissioners for oaths do not receive any salary, and consequently they retain the fees paid to them.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether firms having contracts with his Department are asked to comply with the terms of the fair contracts resolution; whether Messrs. Harrison and Sons, Grantham, have contracted to supply 500 baskets to the Post Office, and are paying the men 2s. 6d. instead of the trade standard sum of 3s. 9d., and are sub-letting some of the work; and, if so, what action he can taka in the matter.

I am strict in enforcing the "fair wages" clause in all Post Office contracts. I am informed that there is no standard rate of 3s. 9d. in Grantham. If the hon. Member will furnish me with the evidence on which ho bases his statement that 3s. 9d. is the current rate in the district, I will have further inquiry made. I am assured that none of the work is sublet.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education what is the reason that the Roman Catholic School at Low Valley is not now placed on the grant list, in view of the fact that there is a considerable deficiency of accommodation now admitted in the district; and, as it is obvious that this cannot be made good by the end of the summer holidays, can he see his way now to replace the school on the list.

This is one of the matters which I propose to discuss with a deputation from the local education authority to-morrow, and I am not, therefore, in a position to make any statement on the subject to-day.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that within the last two weeks, since the closing of the Anglican school, forty-one children have been unable to obtain education, and if the Roman Catholic school is to be closed, at least 160 children will not get education?

That is one of the questions I propose to discuss with the deputation to-morrow.

But this House should be told before a deputation.

I am seeing the deputation in order to get at the facts. I shall approach the question with an open mind.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether the teachers in the voluntary schools in the county of Merioneth are not paid their salaries till after the summer holidays, while the teachers in the council schools are paid before the holidays; and, if so, what steps he is taking to remedy this hardships on the voluntary school teachers.

The Board have no information as to when school teachers' salaries in Merionethshire are paid.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether the requirements of His Majesty's inspector as to the supply of desks for the voluntary school at Llandwrog have been left unsatisfied by the local education authority for the county of Carnarvon for more than two years; and, if so, whether the Board will take steps to see that the requirements of their inspector are satisfied.

The Answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. I am in communication with the local authority on the question of the supply of desks, and I hope that there may be no further delay in this case.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate if he will, in order to cheapen and expedite litigation in Scotland, bring about the abolition of appeals from one judge to another single judge, and particularly from sheriff-substitute to sheriff principal.

By the Sheriff Courts Bill now before the House the Government propose considerably to raise the limit of actions in which the sheriff-substitute's judgment is final, and otherwise to simplify and cheapen procedure. No further steps are at present in contemplation. Crannagh Farm

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a labourer named Thomas Gaffney applied for a cottage and allotment of land in the Mountmellick rural district on a particular farm of land known as Crannagh; that the sites committee of the council subsequently altered Gaffney's representation and marked the site on a farm known as Clonian, far distant from his work, and took the representation of the labourer who had originally applied on the latter holding and changed it to the site which Gaffney had selected in the first instance; and will he inquire from the district council what is the explanation of this juggling with representations, and why Gaffney's cottage was not marked on the site selected by him.

The Local Government Board understand that the facts are as stated in the Question. The responsibility for selecting proper sites for labourers' cottages rests with the rural district councils. It is not the practice of the Local Government Board to interfere on behalf of individual applicants in such cases. The Board are not prepared to give any support to the view that the labourer himself should have the absolute selection of the site.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state whether arrangements have now been made for the placing on the Irish Estimates for next year of a small sum so as to enable a discussion to take place on the question of the Intermediate Education Vote for Ireland.

I have carefully inquired into this matter, and find that there would be considerable difficulty in the way of taking the exceptional course suggested in the Question. The funds administered by the Intermediate Education Board have been assigned to the Board by statute and are not voted by this House. Seeing that Parliament has thus placed the Board in an independent position in respect of funds, it does not appear to me that the object in view would be attained by placing on the Estimates a small sum for which the Board have not asked and which they probably do not want. The rules, however, which the Board annually make for carrying out the purposes entrusted to them are subject to the approval of the Lord-Lieutenant and are laid before Parliament in order that Parliament may disapprove of them if it should think fit. I cannot at present say what discussion of the Board's policy may be possible next session, but I should think that there will be no difficulty in finding a suitable opportunity, and on that point I will consult the Prime Minister when the time arrives.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the opportunity of discussion of rules which were laid on the Table of the House only arises after 11 o'clock, which is no real opportunity at all, and whether it was not a fact that the sum of £80,000 or £90,000 a year is voted without any opportunity whatever of discussing the amount; and further, whether there are not several precedents for putting down what is known to Parliament as a token vote upon the Estimates for the purpose of enabling matters of this kind to be discussed?

That sometimes is done, but it appears to me to be a clumsy mode of raising a question having regard to the fact that some £80,000 or £90,000 a year is voted. I will, however, consider the whole question. I agree it is of the utmost importance to have a discussion even after 11 o'clock.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that Article 13 of The Labourers (Ireland) Order, 1906, sets forth that the clerk of every rural district council shall forward to the Local Government Board a copy of every representation upon which the council have declined to take action, together with a statement of the council's reasons for so declining endorsed thereon, he will say why the Local Government Board framed this article unless they intended to take some executive or administrative action in cases where it could be shown to them, as a result of the inspector's investigations of repeated representations at the local inquiry, that cottages and allotments were refused to labourers on unjust or frivolous grounds; and, if the Local Government Board cannot make any addition to the lands proposed in an improvement scheme to be taken compulsorily, will he say whether the Board will order that representations improperly and illegally rejected should be included in a special supplementary scheme.

In framing the article referred to in the Question the Local Government Board wore merely requiring that the provisions of Section 10 of the Labourers Act of 1883 should be carried out. The statutes do not give power to the Board to override the decision of the rural district council in individual cases. The inspector, however, may make representations to the council in regard to any case in which he thinks that an application has been rejected on insufficient grounds, and in such case the council might reconsider the matter when the next scheme should be under their consideration. There do not appear to be any grounds for supposing that the councils generally have unduly rejected applications; for I understand that the schemes which have already been made would involve an expenditure considerably in excess of the amount provided by the Act.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the important debate on the Irish Department of Agriculture which is to take place shortly, he will secure that the Report on Irish exports and imports is published before the debate takes place.

My hon. friend the Vice-President of the Department informs me that the Report and Tables of Irish exports and imports is in the printer's hands, and that, while the Department cannot promise that the Report will be ready by the 25th instant, every effort will be made to present it to Parliament before that date.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will introduce legislation amending the Land Law (Ireland) Act of 1881, so as to give to tenants who have been evicted and subsequently restored as future tenants the right of applying to have fair rents fixed.

I can only repeat the Answer which I have given to previous similar Questions, namely, that I am not in a position to make any statement as to the possibility or desirability of extending to future tenants the fair rent provisions of the Land Acts.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the report of the county surveyor for Queen's County, dated January, 1907, in which the attention of the district council is again drawn to the condition of the River Barrow at Tinnahinch, on the road from Mountmellick to Clonaslee, and stating that the Local Government Board and the Barrow Drainage Commission have had their attention drawn to the matter, and that, unless the river is sunk sufficiently below this point, very considerable damage to roads, walls, and bridges, through the action of the floods, may reasonably be anticipated in the near future; and whether, seeing that the county council have no authority under the Local Government Act to prevent the threatened destruction of the bridges and damage to public works, he will say what steps will be taken by which the threatened destruction of public works can be prevented. I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has received a copy of the schedule of losses sustained by Mr. John Donohoe, of Fisherstown, Ballybrittas, caused by the floods from the River Barrow, covering a period from 1901 to 1905, and showing a loss in cattle drowned and injured, hay, corn, and root crops injured and destroyed, of a total money value of £429; can he say what relief, if any, will be provided for the occupiers in the flooded area; and what action, pending legislation, the Government intend to take to mitigate the evils admitted to exist, and which Sir Alexander Binnie's Commission declared it was impossible for local effort to cope with.

I have received from the hon. Member the report of the county surveyor referred to in his first Question, and the schedule of losses which Mr. Donohoe states he has sustained, referred to in the second Question. I regret that I am not in a position to add anything to the replies which I have given to the hon. Member's previous Questions on the general subject of the Barrow drainage. Legislation will be necessary before any large drainage schemes can be carried out, and, having regard to the large amount of money involved and to the intricacy of the subject generally, it is impossible to consider the question of legislation during the present session.

asked whether in view of the fact that the last two months were exceedingly wet, producing constant floods, some temporary relief, at all events, might not be provided for the people of this district, or could nothing be done by the Government to help those people who had bought their farms and whose crops were destroyed, to enable them to pay their annuities and discharge their obligations.

The hon. Member knows, I am sure, that nothing would give me greater pleasure than to answer this Question in the affirmative. At the present moment I am not in a position to give a satisfactory reply.

I beg to, ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what are the qualifications necessary for appointment as auditor under the Irish Local Government Board; are appointments made by nomination or as the result of competitive examination; what is the difference in the duties discharged by auditors of county accounts and auditors of district accounts; and how many of the sixteen auditors employed have passed a Civil Service examination.

Auditors are appointed by nomination, subject to their obtaining from the Civil Service Commissioners a certificate of proficiency in certain prescribed subjects, including a knowledge of accounts and of the Irish Poor Laws. The division of the staff into county and district auditors is a purely departmental arrangement in connection with the distribution of the work. The persons nominated undergo examination by the Civil Service Commissioners in all cases unless the Commissioners are otherwise satisfied that they possess the required knowledge. All of the present auditors obtained Civil Service Certificates, and fourteen of them after examination.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman is he prepared to lay upon the Table of the House, as a Parliamentary Paper, the subjects of examination to which an auditor is subjected?

I do not know about a Parliamentary Paper, but I shall be glad to give that information to the hon. Member, and will look into the matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the gentlemen appointed as auditors have had no previous experience?

The knowledge of accounts is one of the subjects in which they are examined.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland can he say what is the salary of prison warders in Ireland; whether the minimum and maximum salaries are considerably below the minimum and maximum salaries paid to prison warders in England of the same rank and who discharge the same duties as warders in the Irish prisons service; can he say what are the minimum and maximum salaries paid to clerks and storekeepers in the Irish prisons service; whether the salaries of those officers are considerably below the minimum and maximum salaries paid to officers of the same rank and standing in the English prisons service and discharging the same duties; and can he say on what grounds Irish prison officials of the same standing and discharging equally important duties are denied equality with their brother officers in England.

The hon. Member will find full information as to the scales of salary of prison officers in England and Ireland in the published Estimates for the current year. It is the fact that the scales of salary in Irish prisons are somewhat below the corresponding scales of salary in England; but I understand that the principle has never been admitted that the emoluments of Irish prison officers should necessarily be equal in every respect to those of English prison officers. The rates of pay of the officers referred to in the Question are, however, at present under review.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware if Mr. W. H. Wilkinson was appointed assistant clerk to the Land Commission in 1905, at the salary of £300 a year, on the recommendation of a firm of land agents, excluding a number of the permanent staff who were qualified for the position; whether he is aware that, during the months of May and June, 1907, Mr. Wilkinson accepted service of writs and other documents in connection with the Kirkpatrick estate; can he say whether it was as land agent or in what capacity Mr. Wilkinson accepted service of those documents; whether Mr. Wilkinson still continues to act as land agent or clerk in a land agent's office; and if he is now on the permanent staff of the Land Commission Office and bound to give his entire time to the duties of his office.

I find that on 3rd May, 1906, † my predecessor fully informed the hon. Member of the circumstances of Mr. Wilkinson's appointment. The Land Commission inform me that it is not the

† See(4) Debates, clvi, 701.

case that Mr. Wilkinson accepted service of writs as stated in the Question, or that he acts as land agent or clerk to a land agent. On the contrary, his time is wholly devoted to the Commissioners' service.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform us whether any legal documents have been lodged in the offices in Dublin, of which Mr. Wilkinson has accepted service in connection with this estate?

Full inquiry has been made in that matter, and on previous occasions I answered the Question that one of the tenants served legal notice on Mr. Wilkinson in mistake for his brother.