CLASS VII.—MISCELLANEOUS, SPECIAL AND TEMPORARY PURPOSES. (Hansard, 20 March 1879)

§ MR. BIGGAR
said, he should be glad to know if the hon. Gentleman would give any information as to the Irish Poor Law Commission and the Commission on the Municipal Boundaries of the Irish Towns?

§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON
said, as to the Poor Law in Ireland, the Commission was appointed in March, 1877, the office of the Commissioners being to inquire into what was alleged to be excessive accommodation in Irish workhouses, and to report as to the dissolution or amalgamation of the existing Unions. That body was called the Poor Law (Ireland) Commission, and that was completed at the present moment. That Commission also inquired into the system of taking lunatics as well. With regard to the other Commission on the Taxation of Cities and Towns in Ireland, it would be remembered that a Parliamentary Committee sat in 1878, and that Committee found that further inquiry was necessary, and the condition of some towns, as regarded their municipal boundaries, was not satisfactory, and they recommended that a Commission should be appointed to investigate the subject in its detail. To carry out the recommendations of that Committee this Select Commission was appointed—in the first instance for six months—but when it was found that the work could not be got through, it was reappointed.

§ MR. BIGGAR
thought the explanation in reference to the Poor Law Unions was perfectly satisfactory, for they knew perfectly well that the accommodation for paupers in certain parts of Ireland was much in excess of what was required. With regard to the Commission to inquire into the Municipal Boundaries of Irish Towns, of course, the Government were perfectly justified in nominating it, if the large Committee reported in its favour; but he could not help thinking that the recommendations of the Committee were nothing of the sort. In all the towns which he knew, there was no intention to increase the boundaries, but rather the reverse.

§ SIR CHARLES W. DILKE
asked where the Bed Sea Cable, referred to in the Estimates, started?

§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON
said, he was sorry to say this was the unfortunate cable for which the Government of the day had made a contract to pay interest for the amount expended on it, and it had never been in working order since. They had, therefore, been saddled with this amount in years in which no profit had been made. This year, they had had to take the whole guarantee. He believed the cable ran to the Red Sea; but he was not informed of the exact spot where it started. He would ascertain, however, and let the hon. Baronet know.

§ MR. WHITWELL
said, he was afraid the unfortunate page of Miscellaneous Payments was always accumulating. There they had accounts long deferred from 1868, Expenses charged now on the public for the maintenance of the Prince of Abyssinia, and other payments equally strange and remarkable. He hoped that next year they would cease to see such evidence of neglectful book-keeping as was here afforded. There was an item down of £3,040 5s. 2d. for the supply of Land Force to the Sultan of Zanzibar; but he was not aware that there was any original Estimate for that, but they found it amongst the "Miscellaneous Expenditure," in a lump sum. They all knew, no doubt, that that amount was spent in assisting the Sultan of Zanzibar to put down the Slave Trade, in which the people of this country were so much interested; but here the expenditure was found as if nothing had gone before it.

§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON
said, he was quite as anxious as the hon. Member to get rid of the system to which he objected, and to avoid, as far as possible, the way of accounting for expenditure. At the same time, the hon. Member was quite aware that it was not so easy to do. With regard to the sum spent on supplying the Land Force 1362 to the Sultan of Zanzibar, the explanation of that amount appearing there was that it came in after the Estimates were made up, and as the money had to be paid at once, it had been classified as it stood.

§ MR. MACDONALD
said, there was an item of £36 which he should wish explained? It was paid to The Journal of the Geological Society for copies of an article contained in it.

§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON
said, he was not able to answer the question fully. He believed that amount was given in aid of the publication, giving the results of recent naval expeditions. It was thought that the public took sufficient interest in these results, and the Government thought it prudent, as he imagined, to encourage that interest.

§ MR. BIGGAR
asked, that as the Irish Church was disestablished and disendowed, he would like an explanation of the payment made to the incumbent of St. Paul's Portarlington, page 33?

§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON
said, the payment to this reverend gentleman was originally made under an Act of George III., charging upon the Consolidated Fund the stipend to the clergyman of the place, whoever he might be, for services rendered to the French community at Portarlington. He ascertained last year that there was now no French community at Portarlington, and that no service was performed. He felt, under these circumstances, that it was not proper to continue this charge to the Consolidated Fund, but as the clergyman in question had accepted the living with this payment as a part of his income, it was felt that they could not deprive him of it. Therefore, it had been determined to include this stipend amongst the Miscellaneous Charges. He asked the Committee to sanction the payment of that amount to the present holder so long as he occupied the position.

§ MR. BIGGAR
asked whether the hon. Gentleman would say if the reverend incumbent had obtained compensation under the Irish Church Act? If he did, it would be clearly the duty of the Committee to object to the Vote.

§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON
It was not taken into account at the time.