asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state whether the finding of the Royal Commission on the Housing of the Working Classes in 1884 with regard to the rating of vacant land was based upon any evidence before that Commission?

The Commission do not refer in their Report to the evidence on which this particular finding is based, but evidence on the point was submitted to them by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West. Birmingham, who said that all lands surrounding urban improvements ought to be specially taxed, and, further, that the ground landlords of the urban area itself ought not to "escape scot free." If there is a general desire that that evidence should be reprinted, my right hon. Friend will be very glad to consider it.

asked whether the Government will take steps to give the same publicity to the findings of the Select Committee of this House on Town Holdings with regard to the separate valuation of ground and buildings as has just been given to the findings of that Committee with regard to a division of rates?

My right hon. Friend has already announced that he will be glad to cause a Supplementary Volume to be published, containing any extracts which hon. Members may think necessary to complete the information in regard to taxation of land values recently laid before the House. Perhaps hon. Members will be good enough to furnish him with lists of the extracts, etc., which they think should be included in such a volume. As regards the case mentioned by the hon. Member, my right hon. Friend hardly thought it necessary to cause the findings of the Select Committee on Town Holdings with regard to the separate valuation of land and buildings to be published in extenso in the Blue Book, because a full summary of the Committee's findings is included at page 251 in Extract A from the Local Taxation Commission's Report. The hon. Member will find that this extract from the Royal Commission's Report not only covers all the points raised in the Report to which he refers, but also contains much additional material on the subject.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain the reason for the publication of the findings of the Committee with regard to a division of rates, which is perfectly irrelevant to the matter, while that which is pertinent to it is excluded?

I cannot see that the principle in the one case and the other is different.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the findings in the Report?

:I have seen them.

They certainly are not relevant.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consent to the publication of the reasons of the late Marquess of Salisbury, the late Viscount Goschen, and Viscount Cross for dissenting from the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Housing of the Working Classes with regard to the rating of vacant land, in the same form in which the opinions of minorities on the Royal Commission on Local Taxation have just been published?

:I must refer the hon. Member to the reply which I have just given to the hon. Member for Worcester, in which I repeated the pledge given to the hon. Member himself by my right hon. Friend. The hon. Member is, of course, aware that in connection with the quotation from the Housing Commission's Report in the Land Taxation Blue Book, it is made quite clear that Lord Salisbury, Lord Goschen, and Lord Cross dissented from the recommendations in question.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman how we are to approach the Chancellor of the Exchequer in reference to those matters which we want published?

If the hon. Gentleman will send to the Chancellor of the Exchequer the extracts he wishes to be published the matter will be considered, and I am sure they will be published.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can explain why Part III. of the recent Blue Book on Taxes on Land publishes in extenso the minority Reports with regard to taxation of site values in the case of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation, and ignores the minority Report on the same subject in the case of the Select Committee of this House on the Land Values Taxation (Scotland) Bill, 1906?

As the hon. Member must be aware, it is not the custom of Select Committees of this House to issue minority Reports. Perhaps, however, he refers to the Special Report of the Select Committee on the Land Values Taxation (Scotland) Bill, 1906. My right, hon. Friend did not think it necessary to cause the whole of this Report to be reprinted in the Land Taxation volume, but extracted therefrom the section dealing with the Practicability of Land Value Valuation, to which subject the Committee devoted the greater part of their Report.

The right hon. Gentleman cannot have seen what is published in the Blue Book. There is no reference whatever to the minority Report.

The hon. Member is not entitled to make a speech.

May I ask why the Government dodge these things in such a way that only evidence in their favour is published, and not evidence on the other side?

That is not the fact.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will publish these portion of the Report which tell against the proposals of the Government?

If there are any which tell against the proposals of the Government they will be published.

Will the right hon. Gentleman publish them?

I have already stated that the Government are perfectly willing to publish any extracts on the subject.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman means that the whole of the minority Report will be published in extenso?

I have pointed out that there is no minority Report. There is no possible way in which there can be a minority Report of a Select Committee.

Does the right hon. Gentleman draw a distinction between the Reports of Royal Commissions and the Reports of Select Committees in dealing with these questions?

Of course; there is all the distinction in the world. Every hon. Gentleman who has ever sat on both knows that a Royal Commission can present, and frequently does present, a minority Report. A Select Committee cannot, and therefore does not.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can see his way to grant to veterinary surgeons the same exemption in respect of the tax on motor spirit as it is proposed to grant to medical practitioners?

My right hon. Friend regrets that he cannot see his way to extend to veterinary surgeons the concession which he has promised to medical practitioners in respect of the duty on petrol.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will explain why the Blue Book published last week on Taxes on Land contains two Memoranda in favour of the separate taxation of site values contributed to the Royal Commission on Local Taxation, and does not contain any of the Memoranda adverse to such taxation contributed to that Commission by the late Lord Farrer, Sir Robert Giffen, and other experts?

The two Memoranda referred to—namely, those by Mr. Edgar Harper and Lord Justice Fletcher Moulton —were included in the Blue Book because they are discussed at considerable length in the separate Report of the Local Taxation Commission on Urban Rating, which appears in the Blue Book immediately preceding the two Memoranda in question, and which contains a large number of references to passages in them. In the Memorandum by Sir Robert Giffen only four lines are devoted to the subject of rating ground values, Which he dismisses as impracticable. Lord Farrer, on the other hand, suggests as an alternative to the separate rating of ground values the imposition of municipal Death Duties, and the whole of his observations on this subject would, of course, have had to be given in order to make clear his attitude on the question. I may add that the Memoranda by Sir Robert Giffen and Lord Farrer appear in a special volume of 250 pages, together with the views of 14 other authorities, all of whom might well have been quoted had space permitted. Of these 14 only three expressed an adverse opinion on the rating of land values.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will allow to be published extracts from the memoranda of Lord Farrer and Sir Robert Giffen which derogate from the proposals of the Government?

I have already pointed out that the whole of Sir Robert Giffen's memorandum consists of only four lines. I shall be glad to consider the hon. Gentleman's request.

asked when the Government will put on the Paper the Amendment to the Finance Bill exempting small owners of land from the Increment Duty?

My right hon. Friend hopes to put the Amendment in question on the Paper on Wednesday.

asked what is the total amount of mineral royalties in the United Kingdom, according to the latest available statistics?

The latest available statistics are those which appeared in the Report of the Royal Commission on Mining Royalties issued in 1893. Their estimate, which related to the year 1889, was as follows:—

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether in the Report of that Commission any reference is made to stone, salt, or other minerals of that character?

The question on the Paper is—"What is the total amount of mineral royalties?" and I have given an answer to that question.

Are there no royalties on these particular minerals at present?

If the hon. Gentleman will put a question on the Paper, I will see whether I can get the information for him?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to a case in South Wales where the owners of a colliery had a valuation made of the ungotten minerals within their workings; is he aware that this valuation occupied several months and cost the owners £900; and that, on the basis of this valuation, the mineral duty at ½d. in the £ would have realised £125 for the Exchequer, or less than one-seventh of the cost of valuation; and whether, if this ratio between cost of valuation and realised duty is even remotely approximate for the United Kingdom, he will consider the advisability of substituting for the mineral duty a substantial tax on mineral royalties?

My right hon. Friend has reason to believe that in the case to which my hon. Friend refers the cost of the valuation included not only the cost of valuing the unworked minerals within the workings of the colliery, but also of valuing the plant, works, railways, rolling stock, brick works, house property, etc., belonging to the company. The question, therefore, is based on a misconception, as the cost of valuing the minerals alone would only amount to a relatively small proportion of the cost of the whole valuation.

When is the Chancellor of the Exchequer likely to make his statement in regard to the proposed taxes on royalties?

When we reach that part of the Finance Bill.

asked whether, under the Frankfort regulations for Land Taxes, any Increment Duty is payable on gifts inter vivos; and, if so, under what conditions?

The original Frankfort law of 1904 contained a provision to the effect that when a property was acquired by a gift inter vivos the tax was payable on the amount by which the donee was enriched by the gift. This provision, however, disappeared from the revised law of 1906, and section 9 of the present law runs: "The tax shall not be payable on the passing of property at death or by a gift inter vivos in the sense of the Imperial Inheritance Tax Law of June 3rd, 1906."

asked whether, in the Frankfort regulations, where an estate is sold in portions, the loss on one part may be set against the gain or profit on another part, as in Cologne, in the assessment of Increment Value Duty?

There appears to be no provision of the kind mentioned by the hon. Member in the case of Frankfort. In the case of Cologne, the estate to which their regulations apply must be locally and economically a single and separate property, and in order that any set-off for loss may be allowed either the sales must be simultaneous or the loss must have occurred on the part of the estate within three years before a sale against which the set-off is claimed.

Why has the Chancellor of the Exchequer taken the Frankfort regulations rather than the Cologne regulations for the tax on increment?

He has taken them because on the whole they are the better set of regulations.

Is it a fact that the Chancellor has followed these Frankfort regulations?

He has followed the regulations that seemed best.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is now prepared to state his intentions with regard to altering the principle on which the Finance Bill proposes to assess Licence Duty on grocers licences?

My right hon. Friend has, on full consideration, come to the conclusion that it will be desirable to modify his proposals, as embodied in the Finance Bill, for the assessment of Licence Duty on what are commonly known as grocers' licences. He is in communication with representatives of the holders of these licences in England, Scotland, and Ireland, and hopes to be able to propose a scheme which will be accepted by the general body of traders in the three countries.

Would the right hon. Gentleman refer to the word "now" in the question? The Chancellor of the Exchequer has been in sufficient communication with the representatives of the licensees, and he ought to be able to state definitely his intentions.

He hopes to do so at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the yield of the Estate, etc., Duties in each of the last three years; and if he will explain, in view of the fact that he stated on the introduction of the Budget that the revenue from Estate Duties on the old basis of taxation was estimated at the average amount of the previous three years, how the figure £18,600,000 was reached?

The yield of the Estate, etc., Duties in each of the last three years was as follows:—

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, before deciding to propose his new taxes on site values, his attention was drawn to the statement made in the conclusions to the Report on Urban Ratings on Site Values, signed by Lord Balfour of Burleigh, Sir E. Hamilton, Sir George Murray, and others, to the effect that there is no large undeveloped source of taxation available for local purposes, and still less for national purposes; and whether the Treasury officials still adhere to this view?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the latter part, the hon. Member must be aware that it would be contrary to all precedent to make any statement in this House as to the personal views of permanent officials on subjects connected with the business of their Departments.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the exceptions now made of certain properties from the incidence of the Increment Value Duty under the Finance Bill will cause any material reduction in the estimate given of the yield of this tax; and, if so, whether he will give a revised estimate of the yield of this tax?

My right hon. Friend does not anticipate that the estimated yield for the current financial year of the Increment Value Duty will be materially affected by the exemptions which have been introduced into the Finance Bill. In regard to subsequent years, it is too early as yet to form a reliable estimate as to the probable yield of the tax.

Is it any good making these concessions if the owner of the land does not reap the benefit of them?

I do not think that it has been suggested to us that the owners of land do not welcome the concessions which have been made.

Did the right hon. Gentleman state that the result of these concessions would be to impoverish the Exchequer?

No. What he said was he does not anticipate that the estimated yield will be materially affected.

asked if the books and records of the local land registries will be open to the inspection of the public on payment of fees?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he proposes to move the financial resolution authorising the establishment and maintenance, of local land registries to carry out the land clauses of the Finance Bill?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can supply any estimate of the cost of establishing the local land registries and of their annual maintenance under the Finance Bill; and if the cost of maintenance exceeds the estimate of the amount of the Increment Duty on land to be collected through them?

asked in which towns it has been decided to establish local land registries?

asked what will be the status and emoluments of the higher officials to be appointed to the new local land registries; how many such appointments are contemplated; and when the Supplementary Estimate will be presented?

I will answer these five questions together. My right hon. Friend did not mean to imply in his remarks on the 14th instant that it was proposed under the Finance Bill to create immediately local registries of titles to land, but that one of the results of the measure would be the gradual establishment of a system of local land registration in this country. The questions put by the hon. Members are, therefore, premature. I may, however, explain that at the same time my right hon. Friend stated that local Inland Revenue offices will have to be established in important centres, such as Liverpool, Birmingham, etc., in order that it may not be necessary for all transactions in respect of Increment Duty to be dealt with at Somerset House.

How is it possible to have land registration without first establishing land registries?

I think that there must be some little confusion of thought both with regard to the registries, that is to say, the registration of titles to land and the stamping of documents, which requires a local stamping establishment; and the answer I have given has, I hope, cleared up any misapprehension on that point. If not I will answer any further question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that there will be no registration of the documents that need stamping?

There will be local offices in which instruments sent to be stamped can be stamped, and there will be a central register for the registration of title in the land.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say, or shall I put down a question, how many of these local offices are going to be established, and whether he has any estimate at all of the cost?

Perhaps it will be more convenient to the Noble Lord and to myself if he puts the question down.

asked what opportunities will be afforded to the House of considering the qualifications, salaries, and terms of appointment of the referees to be appointed under the Finance Bill?

Opportunities for discussing the matters to which the hon. and gallant Member refers will arise when Clauses 22 and 23 of the Finance Bill are reached in Committee.

asked whether, in the event of the Finance Bill being modified in its passage through this House, either in regard to the Duty on Petrol or the Estate Duties, the right hon. Gentleman would cause the Customs and Inland Revenue Commissioners to keep a complete record of all the duty paid at the higher rates in order that Returns may be made in the event of such alteration in the Bill?

In the event of such a contingency arising, the existing Departmental records will contain all necessary information on which to base repayments of duty.

asked whether Estate Duty is now being demanded and paid at the higher rates proposed in the Finance Bill; and whether there is any precedent for the alteration of the rates of duty, other than those relating to Customs and Excise, before the Finance Bill has passed into law?

I may refer the hon. Member to my answer on the 8th instant to a similar question by the hon. Member for Windsor. A similar course was pursued in regard to the alteration of the Estate Duties effected by the Finance Act, 1907.

asked whether, having regard to the fact that existing licence duties do not expire until 10th October, and by the provisions of the Finance Act the new licences are to be taken out on 1st October, the loss in the value of such unexpired licences on the existing number of 87,000 public-houses in the United Kingdom will mean a loss of about £50,000 to the licensed trade; and whether the right hon. Gentleman will take steps to make an adjustment or rebate in respect of such 10 days?

The greatest possible loss in respect of any one licence would be less than £2, but the aggregate figures quoted by the hon. Member appear to be substantially correct. My right hon. Friend will consider the desirability of making an adjustment in this respect.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman has had any opportunity of making further inquiries as to the sale by Land Tax Commissioners of Land Tax to private persons at the beginning of the last century; and if he has been able to ascertain any cases of such sale?

No, Sir.

asked what was the consumption of spirits in the United Kingdom last year; what the right hon. Gentleman estimated the consumption to be this year; and how much he estimated a tax of 3s. 9d. a gallon on that amount to produce?

I assume that by "consumption" the hon. Member means the amount of spirits paying duty and retained for home consumption. On this basis the figures are as follows:—

• 1908–9–38,626,000 gallons, which included forestalling clearances.
• 1909–10–29,700,000 gallons (estimated).

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what proportion of the last figure he has given was collected on the old rate?

In the figures given there were not only increases of the revenue, but there were decreases of the expected revenue in this year, and the two together account in double degree for the reduction I have pointed out as possible.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman can tell us by now the proportion of spirits in this year which paid duty on the old rates?

That is not the question on the Paper.

Will the right hon. Gentleman find out?

I will see whether the figures are available.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that anxiety and difficulty were recently caused to a number of old age pensioners in Manchester by their not receiving fresh supplies of coupons by the due date and by their not being able to obtain any information on the subject; and whether he will take adequate steps to avoid such delays in future?

The work of delivering the pension order books was practically completed by the date on which the first payment of pension was due—viz., 25th June. In one area, however, there was an interruption in the delivery owing to the officer's illness, but even in that area the delivery was completed by the 26th.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the same difficulty arose in other parts of the country?

I am not aware. I will make inquiries.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has recently received a copy of a resolution passed at the annual meeting of the Association of Tax Surveying Officers to the effect that surveyors of taxes are emphatically of opinion that the work arising out of the Finance Bill, other than that relating to Land Taxes, is beyond the powers of the present Income Tax staff; whether he is aware that many surveyors are now, and have been for a considerable time, working 10 to 12 hours a day, exclusive of meal hours; what hours are laid down by regulation as reasonable for a surveyor of average ability to work per day or per week; and what steps he proposes to take to prevent surveyors being overworked when the Finance Bill becomes law?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second part in the negative. As regards the third part of the question, the duties of surveyors of taxes are not susceptible of regulation in the manner indicated. The last part of the question is purely hypothetical.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that Thomas Wallace, Ballincor, Shinrone, who applied for £3,970 for the purchase of 209 acres at Balloughboy and 58 acres at Kilmurry Ely, both on the Atkinson estate, and received an advance of £3,000 for the purchase of his holdings at Ballincor and Clonaheen, namely, 796 acres, Tollemache estate, holds also another farm of about 84 acres at Kilmurry Ely on the Atkinson estate, which he recently acquired from William Carroll, Arabeg; whether agreements for the purchase of this latter farm were lodged with the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, by whom, and for what amounts?

No purchase agreement signed by either Thomas Wallace or William Carroll for the purchase of 84 acres of the lands of Kilmurry Ely on the Atkinson estate has been lodged with the Estates Commissioners.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that Mr. Richard Wallace, Bellfield, Shinrone, who applied for £288 of an advance to purchase his farm at Shinrone (Lloyd estate), and for £327 to purchase his farm at Kilmurry Ely (Atkinson estate), and who now holds the Garbally farm lately held by William Woods, namely, 120 acres (Ford estate), for the purchasie of which Woods had lodged purchase agreements applying for an advance of £1,749, holds also in the parish of Shinrone, King's County, the following lands: Kilfrancis, about 167 acres, held in fee; Maheramore, about 76 acres, estate of Trinity College, Dublin: Ardavagga, about 43 acres, Donovan estate; Snugsborough, about 67 acres, Day estate; and Gurnalee, Queen's County, about 334 acres, Palmer estate; will he say if agreements for purchase of any of these lands have been lodged with the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, what is in each case the amount applied for?

I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that Richard Wallace has signed an agreement to purchase 67 acres of Snugsborough on the Day estate for £795. As regards the lands on the Trinity College estate, the Donovan estate, and the Palmer estate referred to in the question, the Commissioners cannot identify proceedings for sale as pending before them. They do not know what lands Richard Wallace may hold in fee.

asked whether William H. Atkinson is now in the occupation of Cangort demesne, Atkinson estate, King's County, and, if so, will he say how he holds the same; has he lodged purchase agreements for the same with the Estates Commissioners; and, if so, what is the amount of the proposed purchase advance?

The Estates Commissioners inform me that William H. Atkinson has signed an agreement to purchase 340 acres of the lands of Cangort demesne, on the estate of Frances E. Atkinson, and has applied for an advance of £6,322. He is returned as holding the lands under a yearly tenancy.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention has been called to the fact that the Land Commission court held at Kenmare on the 6th instant was adjourned indefinitely, although a number of cases set down for hearing were not dealt with; whether, seeing that many of the tenants had to travel a long distance and bring their witnesses, he will state why these tenants were not notified in advance that their cases would not be dealt with, or, alternatively, why the court did not sit for an extra couple of hours in order to complete the list; and can he state when the hearing will be resumed at Kenmare?

I am informed by the Land Commission that on the occasion in question the Sub-Commission Court was unable to hear 15 of the fair rent cases which had been listed. Owing to the number of applications which ultimately came up for hearing it was found in court that it would be impossible to have the holdings in these 15 cases inspected and judgment delivered by the 31st instant when the Sub-Commission Courts adjourn for the vacation.

Did the Sub-Commissioners in two cases where sales were pending deliberately put back the fixing of a fair rent?

If the hon. Member will give me notice I will investigate the case.

asked whether, in the matter of old age pensions, the Local Government Board is not bound to accept the recommendations of a pension committee unless proof can be furnished that the applicant is not entitled to a pension; or whether it is open to the Local Government Board, where documentary proof is not forthcoming, to accept the opinion of the pension officer as against the decision of the committee?

The Local Government Board can only intervene when a pension officer or claimant appeals against the decision of a pension committee, and it is obvious that the Board cannot be bound by the decision which they are called on to review. It is open to them to accept any recommendation or opinion of either pension committee or pension officer which appears to have a sufficient basis of fact.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman's attention has been called to the recent trial in Dublin of Dolan v. Birmingham and others, arising out of alleged boycotting at Monte, county Westmeath; if he had noted the admissions made by witnesses for the plaintiff of fraudulent misrepresentation for the purposes of obtaining advances to purchase land, and the judge's comments thereon; and what action, if any, the Irish Government proposed to take in this and similar cases when fraud was admitted, or proved, to punish the offenders, and protect the Treasury and the ratepayers of Ireland?

The attention of the Estates Commissioners has been called to this case and to the learned judge's charge, as reported in the daily newspapers. Proceedings have been instituted before the Commissioners for the sale of the estate in question, but it has not yet been inspected. When it comes to be dealt with in order of priority, the Commissioners will consider the matters disclosed in this case.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention has been called to the apprehension existing in Glenville, county Cork, respecting the way in which the division of untenanted lands on the Kinahan estate may be carried out, in consequence of the action of an inspector in entertaining applications for allotments made by farmers and their sons who live several miles away and are in independent circumstances, while there are evicted tenants and their representatives, poor tenants with uneconomic holdings, on the estate, small cottiers, and many other deserving applicants possessing prior claims, which should be provided for before other applications are considered; if he will represent to the Commissioners the necessity for a careful examination and revision of the list, when submitted by the inspector, before giving their approval to the allocation of these lands; also if he can state what price has been paid, or agreed to be paid, for the lands in question; whether the holdings of tenants on the estate, who have signed provisional agreements to purchase, will be inspected for value; and will these tenants be provided with turbary on the mountain as an adjunct to their holdings?

This estate is being sold to the Estates Commissioners under section 6 of the Irish Land Act, 1903. In allotting the untenanted lands, when acquired, the Commissioners will consider all applications made to them. They do not think it desirable at this stage of the proceedings to state the estimated price of these lands. The tenanted holdings on the estate have been inspected, and the question of turbary will receive due consideration.

What is meant by saying that "the Commissioners will take all the circumstances into consideration"? Does that mean that the three Estates Commissioners will make personal inquiry, or whether they will accept the report of the inspector who makes the inquiry?

It means that the report of the inspector will be duly considered by the Estates Commissioners.

asked whether the Estates Commissioners have received from Mr. Thomas O'Dowd, D.C., of Bervaish, electoral division of Drumrat, Boyle (No. 2) District, an application for reinstatement in the farm on the Jackson estate, near Ballymote, county Sligo, from which his father was capriciously evicted in 1864; whether particulars of this case, in all its bearings, were furnished, on reference form No. W. 26676 1–7, to the Estates Commissioners in 1907; and, if so, will the right hon. Gentleman say what decision has been come to in regard to the matter?

The Estates Commissioners have received the application referred to. As the eviction did not take place within the period of 25 years before the passing of the Irish Land Act, 1903, mentioned in section 2 of the Act, the Commissioners cannot take any action in the case.

asked whether the Estates Commissioners have received an application from Mrs. Catherine O'Connor, of Annamade, Cullooney, county Sligo, claiming reinstatement in her father's evicted farm, situate at Knocknahar, Culfadda, Ballymote, county Sligo, Boyle (No. 2) Union, on the Jackson estate; and, if so, what decision, if any, the Commissioners have come to in the matter?

The Estates Commissioners have not received any application for reinstatement from Mrs. Catherine O'Connor.

asked if the Estates Commissioners can now state what steps they have taken to settle the claims of outstanding evicted tenants on the Kenmare estate, county Kerry, and what has been the result; and if the Commissioners have taken any steps to acquire any grazing or untenanted land on the estate for the purpose or for the improvement of holdings?

The Estates Commissioners have not yet completed their negotiations for the reinstatement of the outstanding evicted tenants. As I have already informed the hon. Member, in reply to a question asked by him on 19th March last, such portions of the un- tenanted lands on the estate as would be suitable for evicted tenants have been inspected.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the fact that a Provisional Order for the construction of the Cromarty and Dingwall Railway was obtained several years since, and that the Highland Railway Company on the 3rd July last signified their intention not to proceed with the construction of the line, will he state when the promoters proposed to commence this long-delayed railway; and when will the Provisional Order expire?

I have communicated with the Light Railway Company, and have received a reply from the chairman, of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy. The powers to construct this line will expire, unless again extended, in August, 1911.

asked the Attorney-General whether he is aware that Sir Robert Geffery's Almshouses in Shoreditch are threatened with destruction at the hands of the Ironmongers' Company, and that the garden of these almshouses, extending to about an acre, is the only open space of appreciable size (except one or two churchyards) in the borough of Shoreditch; whether he is aware that the Charity Commissioners, after holding a public inquiry, decided that no case had been made out for the destruction of the almshouses, and that, a second inquiry having been ordered by the Chancery Division of the High Court in a suit commenced 200 years ago, an application by ratepayers of Shoreditch to attend the inquiry was recently opposed by his representative and refused by the court; and whether, under these circumstances, he will take steps to ensure that a public inquiry shall be held into the case of the almshouses?

I am aware of the proceedings with regard to this charity, and have myself appeared in court in support of the decision of the Charity Commissioners, which was adverse to the removal of the almshouses. The Court of Chancery, however, directed an inquiry into the matter in Chambers, and I am informed that it is contrary to the practice for the public to take part in such an inquiry. My representative was willing to let the application on behalf of the public stand over in order to take my directions, but this was declined by those who appeared for the public. They insisted on the judge dealing with the application forthwith, and he did so, deciding in accordance with the practice.