THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE his promised intervention in the interest COUNCIL (Sir JOHN GORST, Cambridge of a settlement of the dispute between University): The Science and Art De- the landlord and tenants on this estate partment refuse to recognise examina- has taken place, and if so, with what tions at which irregularities have result? occurred, which make it doubtful if the examinations have been fairly conducted. The Committee of Council could not modify the stringency of their regulations as long as the examinations involve the grant of public money. The Alsager examination is proceeding.

MR. WARD asked whether the examinees, who took part in the examination referred to in his Question, were to suffer for what had occurred?

SIR J. GORST replied that the examinees would meet with no difficulty.

SOUTH METROPOLITAN DISTRICT

SCHOOL.

The following Question appeared on the Notice Paper in the name of Mr. DRAGE: I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether it has been reported to the Board that part of the buildings of the South Metropolitan District School, which are used as an infirmary, are quite unfit to be inhabited by any class of children; and, whether any steps have been taken or are contemplated in the matter?

The HON. MEMBER said: I beg to withdraw this Question, because the grievance to which it refers has been redressed.

LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL. MR. ENGLEDOW: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he will make provision in the Clauses of the proposed Land Bill, having reference to the evicted tenants, that in all cases where it has been shown to the satisfaction of the Land Court that the houses of the evicted tenants had been wilfully burned down or thrown down by the landlord or his agents, that provision be made for their rebuilding from advances to be made out of the Irish Church funds.

*MR. J. L. CAREW (Dublin, College Green) As this Question obviously relates to the Clongorey Estate, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether

My

*MR. GERALD BALFOUR: answer to the Question on the Paper is that I cannot undertake to make an exception to the general principle which I laid down in connection with this matter in my speech on the introduction of the Land Bill. With regard to the supplementary Question, the position is this: I stated in this House that I should be glad to co-operate in bringing about a settlement between landlord and tenants when I received an invitation from the parties to do so. I have not yet received any direct invitation to intervene, and, as I have said, I shall not take action in the matter until I have. But there may be some difficulty now in consequence of the fact that the six months for which the 13th Clause or Act of 1891 was re-enacted have now elapsed.

Until the Land Bill is passed, with the provisions for re-enacting the clause for a further period, it is doubtful whether anything can be done in this matter at all.

MR. ENGLEDOW asked, whether the right hon. Gentleman was aware that many of the demolished houses had been built by the tenants themselves, and that their erection had involved great toil and expense?

MR. GERALD BALFOUR: That may be So, but it cannot affect my

answer.

MR. JOHN REDMOND (Waterford): In reference to what the right hon. Gentleman has said as to his willingness to act in the character of a mediator in this matter, and with reference to the difficulty that has arisen owing to the lapse of the 13th Clause of the Act of 1891, I desire to ask him whether, in view of the introduction of his Land Bill containing provisions for the reenactment of the Clause, and the probability of those provisions becoming law, he would take advantage of an opportunity of conducting negotiations for a settlement if such an opportunity should present itself, and not neglect it merely because the 13th Clause of the Act of 1891 has lapsed for the moment?

MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Of course I shall be glad to consider the

advisability of doing as the hon. and | arrears being represented on the baronies learned Member desires, but my conduct at the summer assizes, when no arrears must depend ultimately upon the passing of the Land Act.

actually existed; and, if so, will he ascertain from the Auditor how much of those erroneous arrears had been illegally collected, and what he proposed doing with that amount?

The

LABOURERS' ACTS (IRELAND). MR. ENGLEDOW: I beg to ask the MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant Secretary to the Grand Jury has been of Ireland, with reference to the letter of asked to state whether any action has the Local Government Board, dated the been taken on the recommendations made 20th March 1896, on the subject of Loans by the Auditor, who it appears drew Labourers Acts, in which it is stated for attention to the fact that arrears for two the information of the several sanitary baronies had been incorrectly represented authorities that the Lords Commissioners at summer assizes, and that in some of Her Majesty's Treasury have decided baronies such arrears did not exist. I that loans for the purposes of the may add, in reference to the concluding Labourers' Acts shall, in future, be sentence of the first paragraph, that the granted on the same terms as those pre- Local Government Board have no jurisscribed for loans under the Housing of diction over Grand Juries, and that the the Working Classes Act 1890; and, Board have no power to take any steps whether that circular letter authorises to support or enforce the Auditor's the several sanitary authorities through- recommendations. out Ireland borrowing money at this new and reduced scale of interest to pay off loans contracted for the same purpose under the old and higher scale, and thus very materially relieve the taxpayers of Ireland; and, if not, whether he would consider the advisability of taking steps to facilitate such an arrangement?

MR. GERALD BALFOUR: The Circular in question notifies to Rural Sanitary Authorities the terms on which future loans are granted for the purposes of the Labourers' Acts, but it does not authorise the borrowing of money at the reduced rate to pay off loans previously obtained.

CARLOW GRAND JURY. MR. ENGLEDOW: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland(1) whether the recommendations contained in the Report by the Local Government Auditor, having reference to the accounts of the Carlow Grand Jury, which was read to the Grand Jury at its last meeting, have been carried out; and, if so, will he ascertain what resolutions were adopted by the Grand Jury, carrying out those suggestions; and, if not, will he state what steps he intends taking in order to support or enforce that official's recommendations; and (2), whether it is a fact, as stated by the Auditor in his Report, that there were two or three instances of

ARRESTS FOR DRUNKENNESS.

MR. W. F. LAWRENCE (Liverpool, Abercromby): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether his attention has been called to the varied system of tabulating the arrests for drunkenness, by which the usual annual Return is prejudiced in value as an index of intemperance; whether his Department would consider whether by some general instructions from it the local authorities could be persuaded to adopt some common basis of tabulation; and, whether, failing any adequate results therefrom, he could suggest the issue of any other Return likely to be more accurate as an index of intemperance, such as the coroners' verdicts on persons found to have died of intemperance? *SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: My attention has not been called to this matter, but I know that in the case of all Returns of this description there is great difficulty in securing their preparation on a uniform rule. If the hon. Member will inform the Home Office as to the points on which the preparation of the Return differs in different forces, instructions will be issued with a view to securing uniformity. The hon. Member will find that the number of verdicts of deaths from excessive drinking is given in the Coroners' Returns in the Judicial Statistics, but there is reason to think

that coroners' juries vary much in giving | Lord of the Treasury was Chief Secretary; this verdict, and that it cannot be re- if so, whether such application will be garded as an index to the amount of granted? intemperance.

MR. HANBURY: Mr. Robertson's warrant of appointment was dated the 1st instant, and he has taken up his duties at the Board of Works. He has not applied to be allowed to give evidence for or against any Bill. I personally informed Mr. Robertson that his appointment was deferred until he was able to give an assurance that he was under no obligation to the Great Northern Railway Company to give evidence. That assurance was accordingly given before the 1st instant, the date of his appointment.

SHIRT TRADE (DERRY). MR. VESEY KNOX (Londonderry): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that his refusal to exempt the Derry shirt trade from the provisions of the Factory Act 1895, requiring no work to be given out to girls employed in a factory, has caused grave discontent in Derry, which threatens to dislocate the industry; and, whether, having regard to these facts, he will reconsider his decision? MR. W. JOHNSTON (Belfast, S.) MR. KNOX: I beg to ask the asked whether the right hon Member President of the Board of Agriculture, was aware that similar dissatisfaction whether the importation of swine from was felt in the shirt and collar trade in Derry to the port of Morecambe is proBelfast? hibited; and, whether he will endeavour to have the prohibition removed now that there is no longer any swine fever in Derry or district.

*SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: I believe that certain representatives of the trade in Belfast desire that there should be some exemption. No, Sir, I am not aware that any discontent has been caused by my decision not to grant an exemption to the shirt and collar industry under Section 16 of the Act of 1895. No communications or complaints to that effect have reached me, nor have I seen any reason for reconsidering my decision?

*SIR CHARLES DILKE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Derry Trades' Council have passed a unanimous resolution asking that no exemption shall be given?

*SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: Since I made my decision I have not received any representation whatever on the subject.

IRISH BOARD OF WORKS. MR. KNOX: I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, whether Mr. Robertson has yet taken up his duties as Chairman of the Irish Board of Works; and, whether he has applied to be allowed to give evidence in favour of his former employers, the Great Northern Railway Company, against the Donegal Railway Bill, which is designed to extend the light railways built under Board of Works control when the First Sir Matthew White Ridley.

SWINE FEVER.

*THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (Mr. Walter LONG, Liverpool, West Derby): With a view to guard against the introduction of swine fever into Lancashire, the local authority have made a regulation prohibiting the movement of swine into the administrative county, except for slaughter and under licence, but the regulation does not affect the through transit of swine to the districts of other local authorities under certain specified conditions. I should not feel justified in asking the local authority to remove restrictions which they consider necessary, and I think rightly, for the protection of their district, and which it is quite competent for them to impose.

PLATE LICENCE.

MR. T. G. ASHTON (Beds., Luton): I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether any reason exists for the retention of the plate licence other than that of its being a source of Revenue.

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: There exists a considerable difference of opinion on the subject of the plate licence amongst the various branches of the trade, and many of those

who pay the licence are opposed to its removal, and that seems to me a reason against its removal. But in the course of the last few days I have received a large number of memorials in favour of the removal of this licence, many of them forwarded by Members of this House. I think there is some misapprehension on the subject, because those who have got up these memorials, which are drawn up a printed form, evidently suppose that it has something to do with the Budget, whereas it has nothing whatever to do with the Budget. The proceeds of the licence are paid into the Local Taxation Account and distributed to the various local authorities, and I very much doubt whether the local authorities would like to see it abolished.

on

NAVAL COLLEGE.

SIR BARRINGTON SIMEON (Southampton): I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, if, before coming to a final decision with regard to the site for the proposed Naval College, he will order and consider a Report on the suitability of the shores of Southampton Water and the Solent for such an institution?

THE FIRST LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. G. J. GOSCHEN, St. George's, Hanover Square): The Admiralty have given consideration to the claims of the various sites, and they have decided upon Dartmouth.

PRISON CLERKS.

tion, as will give to every clerk who paid such examination fee a reasonable prospect of reaching a maximum salary of £400 to £450 before being compulsorily retired at 60 to 65 years of age; whether, in view of the number of such clerks now waiting for promotion at a salary of £150 after 15 years' service, any special claim for consideration or compensation existed in equity, annual increments of £10 for the next 25 years being necessary to enable them to reach £400 before retirement, even if immediately promoted; and, whether, in view of the great importance of the question, and in the event of the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown being considered unsatisfactory, the Treasury would sanction and bear the cost of a test action being brought in the High Courts on a point of law or the amount of compensation.

*MR. HANBURY: The Treasury do not consider that any point of law is involved, and they are not prepared to consult the Law Officers or to bear the cost of a test action in the High Court. I must repeat what was stated by my predecessor, on the 9th April 1895, namely:—

"Candidates before 1891 paid a fee of £3 because there were posts in the Department of which they could be promoted without further the maximum value of £400 and upwards to certificate. This rule still holds good for such clerks. There has been no loss of prospects, and there can be no question of compensation. In 1891 the fee was reduced to £1, because clerks since appointed cannot be promoted to the higher posts without the issue of a fresh certificate and the payment of a fresh fee."

MR. H. C. F. LUTTRELL (Devon, Tavistock): I beg to ask the Secretary It is not obligatory on the Treasury to the Treasury, whether he will take to maintain or create posts with unnethe opinion of the Law Officers of the cessarily high pay for the benefit of any Crown as to the legal rights, if any, of class of civil servant, and no prisons clerk the clerks serving in Her Majesty's enters the Service with a claim to rise prisons, who paid an examination fee of to a salary of £450 a year before retire£3 to be placed on such a scale of payment, or to compensation if he fails to as will, with reasonable probability, do so.

insure their succeeding to a maximum salary of £400 to £450 per annum, in accordance with the terms of the Order in Council of 22nd March 1879, and The London Gazette Notice of 9th September 1879; whether it is obligatory upon the Treasury to approve or to allot such a number of positions in the Prison Department, with reasonable annual increments and without undue classificaVOL. XXXIX. [FOURTH SERIES.]

BISHOP MONKTON PARISH
CHURCHYARD.

MR. HENRY J. WILSON (York, W.R., Holmfirth): I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he has received a statement from Mr. Walter Renton, of Bishop Monkton, near Ripon, to the effect that 3 A

THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD

don): The matter referred to in the hon. Member's Question, could only be dealt with by legislation, which should only be introduced after most careful inquiry. I cannot hold out any hopes that such legislation will be introduced. It is scarcely possible for me to deal within the limits of an answer to a Question with the last paragraph.

the Home Secretary has been wrongly | informed as to what occurred at the oF TRADE (Mr. C. T. RITCHIE, Croyrecent burial of Mr. William Simpson in the churchyard of that parish, and stating that on the occasion in question, the gates which are usually opened for funerals were locked, and the funeral party had to enter at a gate which has not been used for any purpose since the last Nonconformist funeral eight years ago, and by steps which are old, dangerous, and overgrown with weeds and moss; and, whether he will make further inquiry into the facts?

SIR MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY: I have received the statement, and see

no

ACCIDENT ON BOARD THE STEAMSHIP
WESTBURY.

MR. M. AUSTIN: On behalf of

reason to question the accuracy of the hon. Member for Middlesbrough the allegation that the gate through (Mr. HAVELOCK WILSON), I beg to which the funeral had to enter, though ask the President of the Board of Trade formerly the principal entrance to the whether his attention has been called churchyard had not been used for some to the accident which happened on time. Under these circumstances, whe- board the steamship Westbury, in the ther it can properly be described as the main entrance, is perhaps open to question. As I stated before, the matter is one in which I have no authority, and I cannot undertake to make further! inquiry.

RAILWAY BILLS (PARLIAMENTARY

DEPOSIT).

MR. W. O. CLOUGH (Portsmouth): I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, whether, in the interests of the public and with a view to assist in the promotion of new railways, especially suburban lines, he would consider the advisability of proposing a material reduction in the amount of Parliamentary deposit on Railway Bills, especially as existing railway companies, if they paid a dividend at their last half-yearly meeting, are exempt from making any deposit when proposing any extension or a new line; and, whether he is aware that the promoters of an important suburban railway in 1894 were compelled, in accordance with Standing Orders, to deposit the large sum of about £100,000; and that the directors of the said railway were, in the Session of 1895, placed in the position of having two Bills before the House at the same time, one for abandonment, in order to satisfy the requirements of the bankers who advanced the money for the deposit, the other for additional powers? Mr. Henry J. Wilson.

North Sea, on the 5th March last, whereby the second engineer of the vessel lost his life; whether he is aware that the accident was caused in consequence of the vessel having a deck load of bale goods, which at the time of the accident was covered with tarpaulins, thus making it very dangerous for the crew getting from one end of the vessel to the other; and that after the second engineer fell overboard considerable delay took place in getting out the boat, in consequence of the bales of goods being stowed around and about the tackle of the boat; whether any Inquiry has been held into the cause of the loss of life of the engineer in question; and what powers, if any, have Board of Trade officers to prevent officers taking vessels to sea loaded with deck cargoes, and thus rendering it dangerous to the lives of those on board?

MR. RITCHIE: My attention has been called to the case of the Westbury, and a formal investigation has been held into the circumstances referred to in the Question. The Court of Inquiry found the master in default for not having fixed life lines or taken other precautions for the safety of his crew. He was severely censured, but, owing to what were regarded as extenuating circumstances, his certificate was not dealt with. The Court also found that the slight delay that occurred in getting the boat into the water did not contribute to the loss of the life of the second engineer.