asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if his attention had been directed to the arrest and detention for a month of the Oloye of Oye, the native ruler of the district, by the District Commissioner, and the evidence on which this action was taken; and if any communication had been, or would be, addressed to the Governor of South Nigeria?

Attention has already been directed to this matter, and the Governor has been asked to furnish a report.

asked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, whether, in view of the fact that a native, Sumoni Ewumi, was granted a concession to cut mahogany logs by Lapoki, the Oba of Aye, and that the said Sumoni Ewumi was deprived of this concession by the action of the District Commissioners, Captain Werry and Mr. T. P. Pinket, and the concession given to Mr. Matheson as agent for Messrs. W. B. McIver and Company, Lagos, that over twelve months ago full judicial inquiry was promised, and that no inquiry has taken place, he will inquire further into the matter?

A further inquiry has already been made by the Secretary of State, and the Governor's reply has been received. My hon. Friend will remember that in my reply to his question on 20th May last year I referred to certain technical questions as to the jurisdiction of the court. There have been further difficulties in this respect, but they have now been surmounted, and it has been settled that the trial of the case in the Supreme Court shall take place on the return of Mr. Matheson to the Colony.

asked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, if he would now revoke the order to tax the inhabitants of Lagos for half the cost of erecting an Episcopal church building and the expenses of maintaining the chaplain, seeing that of the 41,000 population one-third were Moslems and that only about 400 were Europeans, and that it was contrary to Liberal principles for the State to teach or pay for teaching the doctrines of any sect?

I can add nothing to the full statement which I made on 21st March last, except to explain that the expenses in question will not be borne by the inhabitants of the town of Lagos, but will be met from the revenues of the whole Colony; and also that it has been decided that whenever the chaplaincy shall become vacant, the whole question of its continuance or otherwise shall be reconsidered.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he would erect a Methodist meeting house and sustain a Methodist minister on the same terms?

I have stated on many occasions in this House that the Government pursue a policy of entire impartiality in this matter; and, if any other body wishes to set up a church, we shall be only too glad to consider it.

May I further ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he would entertain a proposal to erect a Moslem mosque and sustain a Mahomedan priest?

I think the hon. Member had better put his question down.

We do that already.

asked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, if his attention had been directed to a statement in the prospectus of the Boinsu Rubber Company that the Boinsu lands, comprising some 20 square miles in the Aowin district of the Gold Coast, had been granted under lease to Mr. W. S. Rogerson for 99 years for £5 per annum; if be would inquire of the Governor of the Gold Coast if the said lease had been submitted to him for his approval; and whether any adequate protection was secured to the natives whose lands had thus been disposed of?

The attention of the Secretary of State was directed to the issue of the prospectus, to which my hon. Friend refers. No such concession is valid, until its terms and conditions—including reasonable protection for the rights of the natives—are approved by the Supreme Court of the Colony and my Noble Friend recently caused a public notification to this effect to be made through the Press of this country.

asked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies whether it had been decided to appoint a new Mediterranean Fever Commission for the purpose of investigating the manner in which goats became infected, seeing that it was officially stated in evidence before the Royal Commission on Vivisection (Q. 14242) that no goats had been infected by the alleged Malta fever germ, that it did not give rise to any ill-health, and that it did not give rise to any fever; and, seeing that, according to official statistics, Malta fever had been practically extinguished from among the British garrison before the order of 1st July, 1906, for the prohibition of goats' milk was issued, what public ends were sought by spending time and public money in prosecuting a research which appeared to have no bearing whatever upon the question of Mediterranean fever?

It has been decided to appoint another Commission for the investigation of the question to which my hon. Friend refers. The evidence of Sir David Bruce before the Royal Commission on vivisection, to which allusion is made, was to the effect that the goats, though their blood and milk contained the micrococcus of Malta fever and they were therefore capable of infecting man with the disease, remained themselves apparently healthy. Such tolerance of disease germs is, the Secretary of State is advised, a common physiological phenomenon. My hon. Friend is mistaken as to the statistics of admissions to hospital among the troops for Malta fever. In 1905 there were 643 such admissions up to July, 1906; when the prohibition of the use of goats' milk was issued there were 123, for the re- mainder of the year, 40; for 1907, 11; 1908, 5; 1909, 1; and 1910 to date, 0. As it is not practicable to prohibit the use of goats' milk among the civil population it remains to investigate the causes of the infection of goats, and, if possible, to remove them.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any inquiry has yet been made as to the alleged ill-treatment of Indians working for the Peruvian Amazon Company in the Putumayo Valley; if so, whether this country was represented on that inquiry; and what the result of that inquiry has been?

The Peruvian Amazon Company have just intimated their intention of sending a Commission of Inquiry to the Putumayo, and I propose to suggest that one of His Majesty's Consuls and a Barbadian official should go with the Commission in case any British subjects are involved and require assistance.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed by the Sheffield Chamber of Commerce, expressing their anxiety at the proposal of the Imperial Government of Russia to deprive Finland of her local autonomy as regards her Customs tariff and other commercial matters, which would prejudicially affect the growing trade between Great Britain and Finland; and whether he has made or proposes to make representations to the Imperial Government of Russia in favour of the autonomy of Finland being preserved?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, may I ask whether the Russian Imperial Government has made any representations to His Majesty's Government in favour of the present relations between the two Houses of Parliament being preserved?

No, Sir, the answer to that is in the negative. I have received the communication referred to by the hon. Member, but His Majesty's Government are not in a position to make representations which would involve interference in the internal affairs of a friendly Power not based on any treaty right. I am not aware that commercial changes are directly involved.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any grave disagreement exists between Sir Eldon Gorst and the Foreign Office in regard to Egyptian administration; and can he state whether the British representative at Cairo continues to possess the complete confidence of His Majesty's Government?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, and to the second in the affirmative. I would take the opportunity of saying that His Majesty's Government very much appreciate the work which Sir Eldon Gorst has done and is doing in Egypt; nor am I aware that anything has occurred or been said to give rise to misapprehension on this point.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that a copy of that is sent to Mr. Roosevelt?

No, Sir, I see no reason for sending it. It has no reference whatever to his speech. There is certainly nothing in that speech to give rise to a question of this kind in the House.

I give the right hon. Gentleman notice that I shall put a supplementary question on this subject on Wednesday.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the recent Papal Encyclical, published on the occasion of the centenary of Saint Charles Borromeo, criticising the Reformation and condemning its authors, has been communicated to His Majesty's Government; if so, will he cause a translation of the Latin text thereof to be laid upon the Table of this House; and will he state whether His Majesty's Government propose to make any representation to the Vatican on the subject?

The Papal Encyclical in question has not been communicated to His Majesty's Government.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it would be possible to extend to the Navy generally the system of technical training which his explanatory statement (page 12) shows to be productive of excellent results in the case of the Royal Marines as a means of enabling the men to obtain satisfactory employment after leaving the Service?

It is not contemplated that the Admiralty shall take any direct steps in this direction, such schemes being matters rather for voluntary effort. The Admiralty view with satisfaction the steps that have already been taken on these lines at Eastney.

Is it not the fact that the steps taken have been promoted by the Admiralty, and cannot they see their way to extending it?

They have not been promoted by the Admiralty, but, as a matter of fact, we have made a very small Grant.

Is it not the case that the First Lord of the Admiralty, in a clear statement in his Memorandum, claimed credit for this scheme?

I think the attitude taken up by the Admiralty has been that we shall watch its progress with very careful attention.

Is it not the case that the Admiralty have made a Grant out of the Works Vote for this purpose, and is it not possible to extend the same consideration to other branches of the Service?

We have, as I said, made a small Grant. As to other branches we must consider each case on its merits. But this is a matter which we look upon as rather one for voluntary effort.

As to voluntary support—

I think notice should be given of further questions.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he was aware that two years had elapsed since the Fleet last visited Belfast Lough; and whether, under these circumstances, he could arrange for another visit at an early date?

Some torpedo craft visited the Lough last year. It is not convenient at present to arrange a visit by the Fleet.

asked on whose authority the order to close the Devonport Dockyard on 3rd June was given; at what time and on what day the order reached the yard; whether the dockyard would be closed on 24th June next; and, in that event, whether the men would be called on to work extra time to make up for the enforced holiday on 3rd June?

The order to close the yard on 3rd June was given on the authority of the Admiralty. It reached the yard on the 2nd. The holiday having already been given, the yard will not be closed on the 24th.

Can the hon. Member say at what time the order reached the yard on the 2nd?

I should not like to say off-hand.

asked what appliances, if any, the Admiralty have at their command for raising a submarine in the event of an accident and the vessel sinking; whether these appliances were as complete as possible and sufficient to meet the case of any emergency that may arise; and in what way our appliances differ from those used in similar circumstances by the German naval authorities?

There are numerous salvage appliances at the dockyards which are available for the salvage of submarines as well as of other vessels. These include lighters specially fitted for salvage work; and provision has been made in the current Navy Estimates for the commencement of a vessel which will be specially suitable for salvage of submarines. A large number of submarines are also fitted with special safety helmets for use of the crew in an emergency. The provision made generally is, in the opinion of the Board, adequate for any probable emergency. We have no information as to what appliances would be used in Germany in I similar circumstances.

Is there a helmet for each member of the crew?

I should not like to answer without notice.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if the time had now arrived in which he would take steps to place Nonconformist ministers on the staff of the Navy and naval pensions on the same terms as those which applied to clergymen of the Church of England?

So far as I am aware, the remuneration paid to Nonconformist ministers under the regulations, copies of which I will forward to my hon. Friend, have not hitherto been considered inequitable.

asked what squadron of British vessels will attend the Argentine Centenary celebration; and whether it would be possible for a vessel of the "Dreadnought" type to visit Bahia Blanca?

The "Hermes," "Argyll," and "Amethyst," under the command of Vice-Admiral Egerton, were ordered to attend this celebration, but were recalled from Maldonado owing to the death of His late Majesty. I may add that the naval celebrations terminated on the 29th of May.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether he is considering the circumstances attending the disaster in which the fishing boat "Olivia" was sunk in Falmouth Bay on the night of 30th May, with a view to adequate compensation being given to the families of the four men who lost their lives?

The report of a Court of Inquiry is now before the Admiralty. No claims have been received. If and when any are received, the Admiralty will give them their most careful consideration.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, in view of the fact that, under Section 5 of the Navy and Marines (Wills) Act, 1865, a will made on shore by a seaman of the Royal Navy must, in order to be valid to pass naval assets, not only be a valid will in the ordinary legal sense of the term but must also comply with Sub-section 3 of Section 5 of the said Act, which requires that one of the attesting witnesses must be one of those enumerated in that sub-section, and in view of the fact that this provision is not generally known among the men, with the result that the testamentary intentions of deceased seamen are often defeated, if he will take steps to have all seamen in the Royal Navy acquainted with the exceptional requirements of the Act as regards wills made on shore?

It is the fact that a will made by a seaman of the Royal Navy is not valid to pass naval assets unless it be attested in accordance with the requirements of the Navy and Marines (Wills) Act, 1865. The King's Regulations contain provisions relative to this Act; but as cases do occasionally arise of a character similar to that to which the hon. Gentleman has recently called my attention, I will take steps to supplement these by the issue of directions which will lead to the requirements of the Act being made generally known throughout the Fleet.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if, in view of the recent death of one of the workers at the gunwharf shop at Portsmouth, he will appoint a medical officer, who shall be, if not a specialist, at least thoroughly conversant with the disease known as plumbism, and shall give this officer authority to visit the gunwharf shop, to draft men suffering from the incipient or later stages of the disease from this shop to healthier work in the dockyard, and generally to report on all such cases and on the cause of the disease and on the possible remedial measures?

Medical officers are not appointed to dockyards unless they are thoroughly conversant with industrial diseases. Dockyard workmen whose business brings them into contact with lead are periodically examined by the dockyard medical officers for plumbism, etc., and, if considered necessary on medical grounds, they are placed on other work where there is no risk of contracting lead poisoning.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied with the state of affairs now existing in this wharf both as regards ventilation and the health of the men?

I think the dockyard regulations are satisfactory. I shall be glad to send a copy to the hon. Gentleman.

asked whether the appeal to the courts of the widow of the late George Horn, plumber, Naval Ordnance Depot, Portsmouth, has been successful; if so, whether the claim has been settled; and what amount has been paid?

The county court has reserved its decision in this case, which involves an important question as to the jurisdiction of the Court. Until this question is decided I fear that it will be impossible to settle the claim. I may add that before the case came on for hearing the claimant was offered the sum of £266 2s. 2d., the full amount due under the Government Compensation Scheme, and, in addition, as an act of grace, the reasonable costs incurred on behalf of the plaintiff. This offer the plaintiff's solicitors refused.

Was not the entire claim originally refused?

I am not aware of that.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can now inform the House as to the laying down of two Austrian battleships or armoured cruisers of the "Dreadnought" or "Invincible" type at Trieste and Pola respectively; and whether he has yet received official or unofficial information that two other vessels of a similar class have been, or are about to be, laid down in Austrian establishments?

We have no information beyond that which has appeared in the public Press.

Is it proposed to make a statement on the subject?

I cannot say.

asked whether the Admiralty have received official or unofficial information to the effect that the three battleships of the "Dreadnought" type and the one cruiser of the "Invincible" type provided for in this year's German Navy Estimates have already been tendered for and the estimates given out; and, if so, by what month in 1912 is it anticipated that these vessels will be completed?

According to the German Press, the orders have already been placed. It is not anticipated that any of these vessels will be completed before 1913 under normal circumstances.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that in the case of the death at Portsmouth of a Crimean or other veteran belonging to the military service, the military authorities, on application, allow the use of a gun-carriage, buglers, band, and a funeral escort to pay respect to the memory of deceased; whether he is aware that on an application being made under similar circumstances to the naval authorities the request is refused on account of the regulations precluding such respect being paid to the memory of naval veterans; whether he is aware that service honours being granted at a funeral makes a considerable difference to the cost which has to be borne by the relatives without any expense being borne by the State; and whether he can see his way to remove the present difference of treatment between the funerals of veterans in the Army and Navy by paying a fitting tribute to the naval veterans when borne to their last restingplace?

I am inquiring into the War Office practice in this matter, and will communicate with the Noble Lord later.

asked the President of the Board of Education if he is now prepared to take steps to make compulsory the feeding of those elementary school children whose parents, through no fault of their own, are too poor to properly feed them, seeing that the Report of the Board of Education on the feeding of school children shows that where feeding has taken place the children are mentally improved, regularity of attendance is increased, and the children are thereby trained in habits of orderliness and good behaviour?

My right hon. Friend is not prepared to introduce legislation of the character proposed, at any rate without further experience of the working of the Act of 1906. It is no disparagement of the excellent work which has been done under the Act by local education authorities to say that there does not appear to be that unanimity of opinion as to the nature of its effects upon the children which the terms of the question would appear to suggest.

asked whether the Grant payable to the Victoria Council School, Wrexham, will be reduced owing to the closing of a portion of the infants' department of this school owing to infectious disease, although no reduction of Grant would be made if the whole school were closed; and whether the Board can see their way to amend Articles 43–45 of the Code of Regulations, 1909, with a view to making the same allowance to schools partially closed as is made to schools completely closed under recommendation of the local sanitary authority?

The facts are generally as stated in the first part of the question. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative; my right hon. Friend is not prepared to amend the Articles in question except in connection with a general revision of the system of Grants for public elementary schools.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will arrange that the post offices at Caergwrle, Flint Mountain, Halkyn, Overton, Llanarmon, and Llanferres, which have telephone wires, may be used as telephone call offices, and also all other post offices which have telephone wires and instruments installed; and, if it is necessary for the purposes of intercommunication to make some arrangements with the National Telephone Company, will he enter into negotiations at once, so that this public convenience may be made available at an early date?

The telegraph lines at the offices mentioned by the hon. Member have been fitted with telephones for the purpose of sending forward telegrams to the local transmitting centres. They are not suitable for use for general telephone exchange communication, and in some cases are filled with existing traffic. I will, however, inquire and inform the hon. Member as to the steps that would be necessary before the facilities mentioned could be afforded at these offices. General arrangements are in force for intercommunication between the call offices and exchanges of the Post Office and the National Telephone Company's exchange system.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that important telegrams, addressed to the Atlantic Transport Company, Limited, at their offices. No. 38, Leadenhall-street, in the City of London, in reference to the position of a large steamship owned by that company and then stranded on rocks, were received in London on the morning of Sunday, 24th April, and that such telegrams were not delivered until Monday, 25th April; whether such non-delivery was due to some regulation or instruction that telegrams are not to be delivered in the City of London at night or on Sundays unless special request is made for delivery by the addressees; whether the existence of such regulation or instruction is made known to persons and companies in the City of London; whether persons in the provinces handing in telegrams on Sundays are informed of the rule; and whether it is possible to disregard the rule where the contents of a telegram disclose its urgency?

The hon. Member has correctly stated the rule. It has been in operation since 1877, and it has been found to work well by preventing the loss and delay of business telegrams, which previously not infrequently occurred through their being overlooked or mislaid after delivery at places of business which were closed. The public are notified of the rule at page 84 of the "Post Office Guide." As the rule does not apply in the case of firms who have requested that telegrams may be delivered immediately on their arrival, no useful purpose would be served by specially notifying the rule to persons in the provinces handing in telegrams on Sundays, since those tele- grams might be addressed to such firms. I may add that the company in question have now made formal request for delivery on Sunday. In reply to the last part of the hon. Member's question I would say that it is possible to disregard the rule where the contents of a telegram disclose its urgency or where it is marked "Urgent" or "Immediate." I am making arrangements for telegrams addressed to offices in London and other large towns at night or on Sundays to be examined with this object in view, and I trust this will prevent the recurrence of such an incident as the hon. Member has kindly brought to my notice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has had a communication from the Mold District Council requesting that a Labour Exchange be established in their district; and, if so, will he take into consideration the desirability of opening an Exchange in Flintshire?

I have received a communication from the Mold District Council on the subject referred to. The claims of Flintshire will receive careful consideration in connection with the future development of the Labour Exchange system in Wales, but I regret that it is not at present possible to establish an Exchange at Mold.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether it is his intention to open a Labour Exchange for Denbighshire and Flintshire at Wrexham; and, if so, on what date?

The Board of Trade intend to open a Labour Exchange at Wrexham during the course of the present financial year, but it is not possible at present to state the exact date on which the Exchange will be able to commence operations.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention had been called to the completion of the working agreement between the Great Western and the London and South Western Railway Companies; whether he had obtained a copy of such agreement; if so, will he lay the same upon the Table of the House; and, if no such copy has been deposited with the Board of Trade, whether he will ask for such copy?

A copy of an agreement which has recently been concluded between the two railway companies has been furnished to me through the courtesy of the companies. I may say, for the information of the hon. Member, that the agreement does not provide for the working by one company of any portion of the other company's undertaking. It relates mainly to the pooling of the receipts from competitive traffic, and a rearrangement of the train services at junctions wherever desirable in the interest of the travelling public and of the companies. The document is not one which the Board of Trade are entitled to require the companies to publish, and I am, therefore, not in a position to lay it on the Table.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that, on 21st June, 1909, Mr. S. D. Holden, locomotive superintendent of the Great Eastern Railway, stated, in his evidence to Lord Gorell in the Wages and Hours Arbitration, that in such work as that on the branch line between Mellis and Eye the Great Eastern Railway employs railway drivers who are not sharp and whom he would not dare put on a fast passenger train or mischief comes; is he aware that many important trains on these branches, such as those from Yarmouth to Cardiff or to Peterborough and York, as well as dining-car trains to Hunstanton, are worked by the men so described; is he aware that some thirty-two men at King's Lynn have had their wages reduced in consequence of the awards made upon this evidence; and, if so, can he take any steps to remedy this state of things?

The award of Lord Gorell, which was made after a hearing of arguments and evidence submitted on behalf of the railway company and the employés, provided that the company should be at liberty to vary the rates of pay of drivers on certain specified branch lines, but not so as to reduce them below the minimum drivers' rate for the district, and I presume that the reduction of wages to which my hon. Friend refers was made under this provision. I have no power to take any action to vary rates of pay which have been fixed in accordance with the award.

asked whether foreigners are able to secure employment through the Labour Exchanges of this country; and, if so, will he state the number who have thus obtained employment?

Foreigners are not precluded from registering their names at a Board of Trade Labour Exchange as applicants for employment, but it is not possible to say what number, if any, have made use of the exchanges or obtained employment through their agency.

asked what extra expense will be incurred by the railway companies in keeping the records and compiling the statistics necessary to enable them to prepare their accounts in the forms suggested in the Bill which he has introduced; and what will be approximately the sum total of that extra expense?

I cannot say how far any additional expense will be incurred by the companies should the Bill become law, but the forms of account and returns scheduled to the Bill were prepared, after prolonged inquiry, by a Departmental Committee, on which the railway companies were fully represented, and were accepted by the companies' representatives. The forms of account and returns were unanimously recommended by the Committee.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Bristol Corporation, acting as the pilotage authority for the port of Bristol, has committed a breach of Section 599 of The Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, by endorsing the pilotage certificate held by the master of the passenger steamer "Barry," for the purpose of authorising him to pilot the said steamer after a change in her ownership without examining the said master as required by the said Section; and whether, if so, he will communicate with the pilotage authority and point out that if a ship changes owners a pilotage certificate held by the master becomes invalid and that the master must be examined again before he can be authorised to pilot the said ship?

also asked the right hon. Gentleman whether his attention has been called to the action of the Bristol pilotage committee, which has recently endorsed the pilotage certificates of three masters of the steamships "Devonia," "Barry," and "Westonia," when these vessels changed owners, without re-examining these masters; and whether, in view of Section 599 of The Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, he will say what action the Board of Trade is taking in this matter?

I will answer these questions together. My attention has been called to these cases, and I am making inquiries with respect to the circumstances in which the certificates were endorsed.

All we ask is that the law should be carried out in these cases as in other similar cases.

asked whether the hearing of the inquiry into the loss of the "Thistle-moor," held at Bideford last month, and of the findings of the court, have been considered in connection with the present regulations for watching the coast in the interests of the mercantile marine; and whether new arrangements will now be made to increase the safety of our merchant shipping by better provisions for coast watching?

The report of the court of inquiry referred to is receiving careful consideration. Active steps are being taken, by local investigation and otherwise, to ascertain how far and in what way the existing arrangements for watching for wrecks on the coasts of the United Kingdom require strengthening, in order that the Board may be in a position to decide what further action it will be desirable for them to take in this important matter.

asked the Attorney-General whether his attention has been called to the judgment of the Court of Appeal in regard to the Weir Hospital, and to the misapprehension of their powers which the court found to be entertained by the Charity Commissioners; and whether he is prepared to adopt the suggestion of the court that he should consider whether steps may be taken to recover for the charity a sum of £5,000, which the Master of the Rolls and Lord Justice Farwell pronounced to have been misappropriated, without any justification, by the authority of the Charity Commissioners?

The attention of the Attorney-General has not yet been called to the judgment of the Court of Appeal owing to his absence at The Hague, where he is attending the Newfoundland Fisheries Arbitration. I am informed that there is no reason to apprehend that this sum of £5,000 will not be replaced. In the event of the sum not being replaced, the Attorney-General will doubtless consider whether any, and what, steps may be taken to recover this sum which has been misapplied.

asked the Attorney-General whether his attention had been called to the judgment of the Court of Appeal, setting aside as ultra vires a scheme of the Charity Commissioners in the Weir Hospital case, a charity involving £100,000, and by which judgment, in particular, a certain payment of £5,000 by the Charity Commissioners out of the trust funds in their hands belonging to the charity was declared to be clearly unjustifiable and so hopelessly wrong that the Attorney-General's counsel could suggest no ground of justification, and that if the payment had been made by trustees they would have been personally liable to replace it; whether, in particular, he has considered the statement and suggestion made to him in the judgment delivered by the Master of the Rolls that there was not a shadow of excuse for this payment, and it was alarming to find that a Government office is capable of such a misapplication of funds committed to its care, that he could find, however, that the Legislature had given the court no jurisdiction to set this right, and that the court could refuse to sanction a scheme, but no provision was made enabling the court to enforce repayment of money mistakenly applied by the Commissioners, but that he trusted that the Attorney-General would consider whether this sum could in some way be recovered for the Weir Charity; what conclusion, if any, has he arrived at; whether he has noticed the comments of the court upon the evasive and misleading answers given by the Commissioners, Members of this House, to three questions put to them by a Member of this House upon the subject matter; and whether he proposes to take any, and what, steps in relation to the mattar.

I have already answered this question. The observations attributed to the Master of the Rolls were made by Lord Justice Farwell. The Attorney-General does not advise upon the answers of the Charity Commissioners to Members of this House, and has no power to take any steps in relation to the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the recent disaster at Whitehaven, on whose authority Wellington Pit was sealed on 12th May?

I presume the hon. Member refers to the stopping of the intake-airway of the mine, which took place on 13th May, the return-airway being left open until several days later. The decision to close the intake-airway, by which the conflagration was being fed with air, and which further carried the poisonous gases generated by the fire through all the workings of the mine, was made by the authorities of the mine, acting on the advice of His Majesty's Inspector of Mines for the district. It was confirmed by the Chief Inspector of Mines on his arrival at Whitehaven a few hours after a conference, at which the managers of the mine, six inspectors of mines, and others were present, who unanimously advised that the stopping must be maintained. This decision was arrived at because it was clear that, in view of the extent and fierceness of the fire, any further attempt to penetrate the mine was useless; that it was impossible that any of the workmen in the workings should be alive; and that further operations were attended with imminent danger of another explosion, which would cost the lives of the would-be rescuers.

May we take it as the right hon. Gentleman's answer that the rumour to which currency has been given that the colliery owners sealed the mine to save their own property is wholly without foundation?

The sealing of the intake-airway was done on the advice and with the approval of His Majesty's Inspector of Mines.

asked the Home Secretary whether it is his intention to reintroduce the Government Shop Hours Bill which was brought forward in August of last year by his predecessor?

I see no prospect at present of passing this measure in this Session.

asked when the Report of the Royal Commission on the Church in Wales will be published; and whether any of the evidence submitted before the Commission will be published as well as the Report?

I am in communication with the chairman of the Commission. I am informed that it is intended to publish the whole of the oral evidence submitted to the Commission.

asked when this year's volume of Licensing Statistics (England and Wales) will be published?

The volume is in an advanced state of preparation, and will, I hope, be ready for issue before long.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether, having regard to the feeling of the country in favour of religious toleration, he proposes to legislate in the direction of modifying the terms of His Majesty's Declaration regarding the Roman Catholic faith?

also asked the right hon. Gentleman whether it is his intention to bring in a Bill this Session to amend the declaration of religious belief which the Sovereign is required by Statute to make on his accession to the Throne?

It is the intention of His Majesty's Government to introduce legislation on this subject at an early date.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government to include the Unemployed Workmen Act, 1905, in the Expiring Laws Continuance Act this Session?

I am not as yet in a position to say whether the Bill referred to in the question will or will not be included in the Expiring Laws Continuance Act.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can see his way to proceed at once with the appointment of a Committee to consider Procedure, as promised by him during the Autumn Session last year?

As I have already stated, in the absence of something more like general agreement than has yet been attained, I do not see that any useful purpose would be served by the appointment of the Committee referred to in the question.

asked the Prime Minister if he can state who was responsible for the fact that no proper accommodation was provided for the Members of this House and for Members of His Majesty's Privy Council to view the funeral procession of the late King; and why the Members of this House did not receive the same consideration as on the occasion of the funeral of Her Majesty Queen Victoria?

asked the First Commissioner of Works if he can state by whose authority the application of late Members of Parliament and Privy Councillors to pass through the House of Commons to Westminster Hall to view the lying-in-state of the late King was refused?

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he can explain why more satisfactory provision was not made for the Members of the House of Commons on the occasion of the funeral of His late Majesty?

The Prime Minister has asked me to answer the question addressed to him, and I will at the same time reply to those put to me which deal with the same subject. State funerals are by custom and tradition under the sole control of the Earl Marshal. On this as on other occasions he was assisted by a committee nominated by himself and consisting of those primarily concerned in the arrangement of the obsequies. It was by the Earl Marshal's directions that admission to the Parliamentary enclosure in Westminster Hall during the Lying-in-State was confined to Peers and Members of Parliament and the ladies they brought with them. The arrangements made for the two Houses of Parliament to view the funeral procession of Queen Victoria gave such universal dissatisfaction that it was decided not to repeat the experiment. No stands or reserved seats were erected for or at the disposal of the Government. I hope the House will believe that, within the limits of my own powers and jurisdiction, I endeavoured to afford them every possible accommodation and consideration.

May I ask whether, with regard to the arrangements for the funeral of the late Queen Victoria, the cause of the dissatisfaction was not due to the blunder of the office in charge of the arrangements in putting the stand far too far from the procession, and whether that was not the cause of the dissatisfaction—not the faults which were made with regard to the arrangements? Further, I would ask whether we are to understand from his reply that the Cabinet of the day, in the case of a great State ceremonial of any kind, has no authority to make representations to the Earl Marshal and to make sure that they are respected and attended to.

Will the right hon. Gentleman have any objection to giving the names of those who were associated with the Earl Marshal in making the arrangements.

I have no doubt the Cabinet can make representations to the Earl Marshal. Of course the funeral is not a Government matter, but one relating to the Royal Family, and the Earl Marshal manages these things. My hon. Friend is right in believing that the dissatisfaction was owing to the position of the stand at Queen Victoria's funeral, but it would be difficult, of course, to provide a stand in any other position on this occasion without occupying a space which would have otherwise been available to the public. In reply to the hon. Member (Mr. Wason) the names of those who assisted the Earl Marshal on this occasion, as a committee, were: The Earl Marshal himself, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Steward, the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, Viscount Esher (Constable of Windsor Castle), the Secretary (Office of Works), Sir William Carrington (Keeper of the Privy Purse), Sir Edward Ward (Secretary to the War Office), Sir Douglas Dawson (Controller in the Lord Chamberlain's Department), Sir Edward Henry (Commissioner of Police), Garter King-at-Arms, General Codrington (Commanding the Home District), Commodore Troubridge (representing the Ad- miralty), and Mr. Harcourt (First Commissioner of Works).

Does the right hon. Gentleman contemplate taking any step which will in future ensure that more respect is paid to the Members of the House of Commons?

I shall be happy to confer with my hon. Friend in designing such representations.

Is not the provision of stands, at any rate in the Royal Parks, a matter exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Office of Works?

Certainly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that I telegraphed to a Member of the Government, and that, arising out of that telegram, a correspondence did pass with the Earl Marshal?

I know nothing about the hon. Member's telegram.

Is the Earl Marshal also responsible for no special care having been taken that the staff of the House of Commons should have a special opportunity to see the funeral?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether it was the intention of the Board, in issuing the Order of the 16th April, 1910, relating to the exportation of decrepit and worn-out horses, to put a stop to such exportation in the case of all animals which cannot be shipped abroad without undergoing physical pain owing to age, infirmity, illness, or injury; and, if so, what is the exact meaning of the provision in the Order under which the veterinary inspector is only enabled to refuse his consent to the proposed shipment if unnecessary suffering is likely to be caused thereby; and whether, in the interests of humanity and to ensure that the Order shall be put into effective operation, the Board will amend it by providing that no horse shall be shipped from a British port if, in the opinion of the veterinary inspector, such shipment is likely to involve suffering, whether necessary or unnecessary?

The terms of the Order to which the hon. Member refers follow pre- cisely those employed in Section 22 of the Diseases of Animals Act, 1894, under the authority of which the Order is made. The Board see no reason to doubt that it is sufficient to carry out their intention in the matter which is correctly expressed in the question.

Will the Board take into account the extreme delicacy of the position of both the local authorities and of the local veterinary inspectors in moving in this matter, bearing in mind that it involves an increase of the local rates?

Certainly, we will consider it.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, whether he will give the number and total immediate amount paid per annum to the new officials, permanent and temporary, respectively, who have been appointed in Ireland up to the close of the year 1909 in consequence of legislation passed by the present Government?

The numbers as given in the Return (House of Commons 126) in the eight Irish Departments referred to in the List are as follows:—

asked what was the deficit on the working of Kingstown Harbour for the years ending 31st March, 1908, 1909, and 1910 respectively; by how much would the deficit have been reduced in the two latter years if the Treasury had allowed the Commissioners of Kingstown Harbour to charge the steamers of the London and North-Western and Great Western Railway Companies dues at the rate of 5½d. per ton on 50 per cent, of the gross tonnage of those steamers, in accordance with the powers of the Commissioners as provided by Section 70 of the Dublin Port and Docks Act, 1902; and whether the Treasury intend to continue to allow the steamers of the companies mentioned to use this harbour, which is maintained at the public expense, for a nominal charge?

The net charge against the Vote was:—

Year to 31st March,	1908	…	£7,959
do.	1909	…	£9,427
do.	1910	…	£8,051

If the London and North-Western Railway Company's steamers and the Great Western Railway Company's steamers had paid at the rates mentioned in the question (5½d. per ton on half the gross tonnage) the charge against the Vote would have been reduced by the following amounts:—

Year to 31st March,	1909	…	£6,550
do	1910	…	£6,700

No decision has yet been arrived at on the question of the rates to be charged in respect of the steamers of these companies, as the question is still under consideration.

Will these companies have free use of the harbour as soon as the legal proceedings have finished?

I could not make any promise of that sort.

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman made the statement in this House that the London and North Western Railway, pending the action, were allowed the use of the harbour without paying the tonnage rate stated in the Act of Parliament, and so used the harbour practically free of charge?

No, in any case they were not using it free of charge, I should like to refresh my memory on the point before I make any definite statement.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the fact reported in the third Report for this year of the Committee of Public Accounts, that there had been expended on 28th February, 1909, on old age pensions the sum of £69,531 l1s. 9d. in excess of the sum at that time voted by Parliament, and that this excess was defrayed out of moneys in the hands of the Postmaster-General; will he state out of what particular moneys the expenditure was defrayed, by whose direction it was thus defrayed, and whether by Treasury order; whether any, and, if so, what notice has been taken of the conduct of those responsible for this illegal act; and whether he will inform the House of the security there is that similar or other illegal acts shall not be committed with impunity by officers in high authority either at the Treasury, at the Post Office, or elsewhere in the public service?

The sum of £69,531 11s. 9d. referred to in the question represents the amount by which the orders on account of old age pensions cashed by postmasters throughout the United Kingdom out of their general balances up to 28th February, 1909, inclusive, exceeded the then available balance of the Vote for old age pensions. Against this excess there was available on the Civil Contingencies Fund on that date a balance of £65,114, leaving £4,417 11s. 9d. uncovered. The Treasury were aware that if the whole of the pension orders due on 24th February were presented before a further Grant was available there would be an excess on the Vote, but, having regard to the fact that any uncovered excess was likely to be of small amount—an anticipation which, as I have explained, was justified by the event—and that it was the clear intention of the House by the original Grant to provide for the continuance of the pensions to the end of the financial year, did not feel justified in directing that payment of the orders falling due on 24th February should be refused. The responsibility for the course taken rests with His Majesty's Government.

asked, having regard to the fact that the first Report and Evidence of the Royal Commission on University Education in London were laid upon the Table of the House on 3rd May when the Report and Evidence will be circulated to Members of the House?

I have made inquiry, and I am informed that the volume will be ready for circulation by the end of this week.

asked the Lord Advocate if he can state how many local authorities in Scotland in burghs and counties, respectively, have added pulmonary phthisis to the list of compulsory notifiable diseases under the Infectious Diseases Notification Act, 1889; and how many cases were notified in 1909?

The Local Government Board have approved the orders of forty-one burghal local authorities and of thirty-three landward local authorities extending the provisions of the Act referred to by the hon. Member to pulmonary phthisis; 1,902 cases of phthisis were notified in the year 1909.

asked whether it is the intention of the Government to at once introduce a Bill to amend the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act, to meet the difficulty that has arisen in connection with the single arbiter clause, etc.?

asked the Lord Advocate whether he will recommend that the legal expenses in the case of Stewart v. Williamson shall be defrayed from public funds?

asked whether, seeing that a decision has now been given by the House of Lords in the case of Stewart v. Williamson, the Government are now prepared to proceed with a Bill to take sheep stock and other away-going farm valuations out of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act, 1908; and whether the Government will consider favourably an application for a Grant towards the expense of the litigation, seeing it was undertaken to determine whether the intention of the House of Commons to exclude such valuations from the scope of the Act was borne out by the Act?

It is the intention of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries to introduce at an early date a Bill on the lines set out in the questions put by my hon. Friends. The matter referred to in the Noble Lord's question and in the latter part of the hon. Baronet's is under consideration.

When are the proper authorities likely to give a decision on the point?

It is impossible to say.

asked the Prime Minister if he will give time for the passing of the Small Holdings (No. 3) Bill?

I hope to make reference to this in a general statement.

asked whether Income Tax is refunded on amounts paid as single premiums in purchase of life insurance policies?

No, Sir.

asked whether there are any payments in respect of contracts or services which are due by the Government but have not yet been paid; and, if so, what is the amount of such payments due under each Vote of the Army and Navy Estimates, under the Customs and Excise, the Inland Revenue and the Post Office Estimates, and under each class of the Civil Service Estimates; and whether the proportion of the amount to the total net estimate in each case is greater or less than that obtaining at the same date in the years 1908–9; and, if so, what is the reason?

had also given notice of the following question: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any receipts received by any of the public departments in the present financial year have been applied as Appropriations in Aid; if so, what is the amount up to 9th June that has been so received under each Vote of the Army and Navy Estimates, under the Customs and Excise, the Inland Revenue, and the Post Office Estimates, and under each class of the Civil Service Estimates; under what direction by Treasury Minute or otherwise has such application been made; have the moneys in question been paid into the Exchequer; to payments under what Votes have they been applied; in virtue of what statutory powers has such action been taken in each case; and what has been the total sum so applied in the present financial year as compared with the sum so applied during the same period of the financial year 1908–9?

The answers to these questions appeared in the Official Report for Friday, 10th June, columns 1011–12.

asked whether, seeing that the total of the proposed Estimates of expenditure on Supply services for the year 1910–11 is more than £10,900,000 in excess of the Estimates for the previous year, and that the sum issued from the Exchequer in the present financial year to meet expenditure on these services, as published in the last issue of the "London Gazette," is more than £1,500,000 less than the sum issued in the similar period of last year, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will state the reason for the difference in the proportion in the two cases between the sum issued up to date and the total estimated expenditure?

I fear that I am quite unable to follow the hon. Member's figures. The Estimates for the current year for Supply services show an increase over the original Estimates for 1909–10 of £9,433,000, or about 7½ per cent.—not £10,900,000. The Exchequer issues for Supply services in the period to 4th June, 1910, show an increase over the corresponding period of 1909–10 of £1,610,00, or about 8¼ per cent.—not a decrease of £1,500,000, as suggested in the question.

May I ask whether these figures are the same as the figures which appeared in the issues from the Exchequer as published in the "London Gazette," these figures showing the decrease?

I should not like to answer that without seeing the figures. If the hon. Member will give notice of a question I will inquire.

asked whether Mr. N. F. W. Fisher, clerk to the Special Commissioners, of Income Tax, has given instructions that applicants for forms on which to make returns for assessment for Super-tax should be informed that such applications for forms will be regarded as an admission of liability to pay the Super-tax, and that forms should not be supplied unless this preliminary admission is made; if so, by whose authority Mr. Fisher gave such directions; and has such authorisation the sanction of the Government?

had the following question on the Notice Paper: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if an applicant for a form for the purpose of assessment for Super-tax is not entitled to receive one unless he first gives his name and address and admits his liability to pay Super-tax; and, if so, will he say by whose authority instructions to this effect have been issued to the Special Commissioners for Income Tax, and for what reason?

I will answer these two questions together. No admission is required from persons applying for the form of return, and no instructions of the kind suggested have been given by the clerk to the Special Commissioners. The request for the name and address of the individual for whom the form is intended is made partly in order to obviate the possibility of his being served direct from the office of the Special Commissioners with a further form, and partly in order to prevent the form falling into the hands of unauthorised persons.

asked whether a suggestion can be made to the Indian Government that they should make a Grant to the provincial cities of this country interested in metallurgy of some of the old Indian bronze cannon now lying in the yards of the fort at Calcutta, not only on account of their ornamental character but also for the purposes of instruction?

If the hon. Member will kindly supply me with fuller details regarding the precise purport of his suggestion the Secretary of State will be glad to consider it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Member for Commerce and Industry in the Governor-General's Executive Council of India has already been selected; and, if so, will he give the name of the person elected?

No appointment has yet been made. I may add that members of the Executive Council of the Governor-General are appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Secretary of State for India. Subject to statutory limitations, the Secretary of State reserves entire freedom of selection, and undertakes full responsibility.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when this post is likely to be filled up?

Shortly. I cannot say exactly.

Will the hon. Gentleman take into consideration the case of Mr. Dowd, and not make any appointment against the best Indian opinion?

Is it not a fact that there are statutory provisions with respect to the appointments which require that a servant so appointed should have served, in the public service in India for a certain number of years?

There are certain statutory provisions, but the hon. Member has not stated them accurately.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that, on Sunday night, the 10th April last, a cattle-drive took place on the estate of Captain H. H. Jones, Rathlea, Ballina; whether all the animals have been recovered; whether any arrests have been made in connection with the outrage; and what steps have been taken to prevent similar occurrences in that neighbourhood in future?

A cattle-drive took place on Captain Jones' estate on the night mentioned. All the cattle have been recovered. No arrests have been made, but it is hoped that the protection post which has been established on the property will have the effect of preventing further drives.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that on the night of the 16th April last eight head of cattle, belonging to a man named Peter Tarpey, of Ballyglass, county Galway, were driven off his farm through a gap maliciously made in the wall; whether Peter Tarpey had purchased his farm, and a rumour was current that he wanted to purchase an adjoining farm, which was resented by his neighbours; whether the cattle have been recovered; whether any arrests have been made; and what steps have been taken to prevent further outrages of a similar nature in the locality?

Tarpey's cattle were driven off his farm on the night of 16th April in the circumstances mentioned in the question. They have been recovered. The police have not been able to make any arrests, but they are doing all that is possible to prevent further drives.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he can state the number of cattle drives that have taken place in Ireland during the months of January, February, March, April, and May last respectively; and the number of arrests made and sentences imposed on the perpetrators of the outrages?

I find that there were fourteen cattle drives in January, six in February, twenty-two in March, twenty-four in April, and thirty-five in May. Two hundred and twenty-four persons were arrested in connection with these drives, of whom twenty-seven were discharged, 127 were bound to the peace and gave bail, and thirty-five were committed to gaol in default of bail, nine for one month, six for ten weeks, and twenty for three months. The charges against the remaining thirty-five have been adjourned, and are still pending.

May I ask whether it would not be possible to prosecute these cattle drivers for malicious injury, or cruelty to animals, or something of that sort?

Malicious injury or cruelty has to be proved. You cannot take action against people unless you have reason to believe that you can make good the charge.

May I ask whether it is not a fact that all former attempts to suppress cattle-driving have been absolutely futile, and whether the right hon. Gentleman will not take steps to stop this cruel form of outrage?

I am doing the best I can.

asked the Chief Secretary how many cases of cattle-driving have been reported to the police since 1st April last; and how many were similarly reported in the corresponding period of 1909?

Sixty-one cases of cattle-driving have been reported to the police between 1st April and 8th June of this year. There were sixty-six cases during the corresponding period of last year.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he will state the number of extra police drafted into the Ballysteen district, county Limerick, for the protection of cattle; and what is the cost placed on the ratepayers in respect of such police protection?

I understand that eight men have been sent from other parts of the county to the police stations near Ballysteen as a temporary measure owing to cattle-driving in the neighbourhood. This arrangement does not entail any increased cost to the ratepayers.

asked the Chief Secretary how many claims for compensation for injury to cattle have been lodged during the past three months; what is the amount claimed, the amount awarded, and the amount in respect of claims still unheard; and whether he proposes to proceed against those responsible for injury and cruelty to the cattle by driving?

The figures asked for by the hon. Member could not be furnished without local inquiries which would take some time. If he wishes to move for a Return I will consider whether it can be given. All persons found cattle-driving are proceeded against.

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been called to the cruelty practised upon animals in connection with recent cattle drives in Ireland; and whether he will direct that proceedings should be taken in such cases against offenders to recover the penalties imposed by the Cruelty to Animals Act for overdriving or abusing cattle?

Up to the present the police have found no sufficient ground for charging the persons who have taken part in cattle drives with cruelty to animals. Should cases of cruelty, such as is contemplated by the Statute, occur the police will take the necessary action.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can now state what action has been taken with regard to the disturbances on the Pollock estate; whether any arrests have been made and prosecutions instituted against any of the perpetrators; whether it is intended to hand any of the farms purchased to the people who took part in the cattle-driving; and what steps have been taken to prevent similar outrages in that neighbourhood in future?

No action has been taken in this case. No further outbreak has occurred. The distribution of the untenanted land is in the hands of the Estates Commissioners, and the impend- ing completion of the sale of the estate gives good ground for hoping that there will be no further trouble in connection with this property.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to answer the second part of the question?

No, Sir; there is no such intention. I said that the farms have not yet been distributed. There is no present intention to give them to any particular persons.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he was aware that an outrage was perpetrated at a place called Kiltulla, about three miles from Galway, at ten minutes past nine on Friday night, 20th May last, when a man named Martin Conroy, who was sitting with two of his neighbours in his own house, was fired at in the open door and hit in three places about the head; whether a police patrol had only just left the place, and whether there is evidence to show that the patrol was watched by the perpetrators; whether there is any evidence to prove that it was intended to kill Conroy; whether he has been under police protection for some time past; whether he is aware of the unrest in the district over the sale of a farm for which competitive offers for purchase were made by persons living in and around the villages of Kiltulla and Ballintemple; whether the landlord accepted the higher price offered by the tenants at Ballintemple, of whom Conroy is one of the principal, and after the sale had been completed reprisals were threatened on the part of the Kiltulla people; whether any arrests have been made; and what steps have been taken to protect this man against similar outrages in the future?

A man is at present awaiting his trial at the coming Assizes in connection with this matter. The case being sub judice, I cannot enter into particulars.

asked the Chief Secretary if he is aware that in 1908, in the presence of an inspector of the Estates Commissioners, the tenants on the R. W. Smith estate, county Limerick, offered to pay £10,000 for the lands then offered by the vendor, provided he would sell the same to the Estates Commissioners; that in July, 1909, after a second inspection, the Estates Commissioners offered £9,174; that the tenants again offered to pay £10,000, and the landlord accepted it and communicated his acceptance to the Estates Commissioners; that the Estates Commissioners took no further action till the Land Act of 1903 had expired; and that on 7th April, 1910, they have now reduced their offer from £9,174 to £8,519 on the plea that the Land Act of 1909 has altered the situation; and, inasmuch as this, coupled with the reduction of the bonus to the vendor under the Act of 1909, will prevent the parties coming to terms previously twice agreed on, will he introduce amending legislation to prevent land purchase as in this case from being defeated, and will instruct the Estates Commissioners to carry out their original undertaking?

The Estates Commissioners had a preliminary inspection made of this estate and intimated to the owner the amount they would be willing to advance if formal proceedings for sale were instituted. The owner was unwilling to sell at the price, and his agent informed the Commissioners that the tenants had met and expressed their willingness to purchase for £10,000. On a further inspection the Commissioners increased their offer to £9,174, which the owner was willing to accept if he got 12 per cent, bonus. Having been informed that only 3 per cent, bonus was payable at the time the owner did not institute proceedings for sale. If he now proceeds with the sale the annuities will be at the rate of 3½ per cent., and the Commissioners, having regard to security, cannot advance more than £8,519 exclusive of the bonus payable under the Irish Land Act, 1909. The owner has been so informed. There is nothing in the case calling for legislation.

May I ask whether the Estates Commissioners did not deliberately stop the sale which was satisfactory both to the landlord and the tenants, and whether, if that is the effect of the Act of 1909, he will not do something to alter it if possible?

The Estates Commissioners did not agree as to the value of the estate. They are not bound to pay the price even although the parties are willing to agree to the price.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he still considers that the Act of last year has facilitated land purchase?

That question does not arise out of the right hon. Gentleman's answer.

asked the Chief Secretary if land belonging to Mr. H. Dawson, of Ballynichal, Comber, county Down, was in 1908 taken by arbitration for the purposes of the Labourers (Ireland) Acts and £56 awarded to him; if the lands were subject to a purchase annuity of £15 12s. payable to the Land Commission; if the Newtownards Rural Council, the promoters of the scheme, paid £36 to Mr. Dawson in January, 1909 and £20 to the Land Commission in reduction of an apportioned part of the said annuity; will he say why no corresponding reduction by the Land Commission has been made in Mr. Dawson's purchase annuity; and if he will take steps to see that this is done forthwith?

The facts of this case appear to be correctly stated in the question, save that the amount payable to the Land Commission was not received by them until the end of September last. Owing to the very large number of similar payments which had then been received it was not found practicable to make the necessary calculations with respect to the reduction of the annuity before the ensuing gale day which fell on 1st November. The payment has, however, since been applied in reduction of the annuity, and the half-yearly instalment is reduced by 9s. 3d. as from 1st May last.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the townlands of Farnanes, Pulbrick, and others in the Muskerry estate of Daniel H. Conner were inspected in June, 1909; whether the purchase money of said lands was offered to the said Daniel H. Conner before February in the present year; and if not, why was not the estate dealt with in the order of priority?

This estate is being dealt with in order of priority. It was inspected in 1909, and the Estates Commissioners expect that the purchase money will be advanced, and the holdings vested in the purchasing tenants during the current financial year.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will state the number of land purchase agreements which were lodged with the Estates Commissioners up to the end of May last under the provisions of The Irish Land Act, 1909; the amount of advances applied for; and how many of such agreements represented direct sales between landlord and tenant?