Commons Sitting of 25 February 1892

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS, 1891–2 (SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES.)
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)

  CLASS I.
  £4,735, Supplementary, Houses of Parliament Buildings.

  £1,500, Supplementary, Art and Science Buildings, Great Britain.

  £20,000, Supplementary, Revenue Department Buildings, Great Britain.

  £498, Supplementary, Lunacy Commission, Scotland.

  CLASS II.
  £1,690, Supplementary, Public Works Office, Ireland.

  CLASS III.
  £2,000, Supplementary, Law Charges.

  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £100, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1892, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Police Courts of London and Sheerness."

  MR. LABOUCHEREI do not want to go over the arguments in regard to the scandalous character of this particular Vote, but it is well known that almost every Gentleman on this side of the House who does not happen to be a London Member is of opinion that any charge for the Police Courts of London ought to be thrown upon London itself. We are obliged to pay a sum towards the Bow Street Court because some extradition cases are tried there; but we on this side of the House do not see why we should be obliged to pay for Police Courts at Sheerness and Wandsworth and other places in the vicinity of London. Though really anxious as I am to expedite Public Business—
  THE CHAIRMAN (Mr. COURTNEY,The hon. Gentleman is not to enter into the subject of the original Vote, except so far as it is necessary to illustrate the present Vote.
  MR. LABOUCHEREI merely wish to point out how monstrous and excessive the original Vote was, and how super-monstrous it is to ask us to pay £100 more. I certainly shall divide on this Vote.
  DR. CLARKIt certainly happens in our country that we have to pay all these charges out of local rates; and when we clean our Courts and have these medical witnesses we pay for, it is not out of the Imperial Exchequer, but from the local rates; and I think it is right that the people of London should be in the same position as all the people in the provinces, and that they

  1319
  should put their hands in their pockets and pay for the cleaning of their Courts, and not ask the poorer parts of the country, such as Caithness, to pay for it. I join with my hon. Friend in protesting against this Vote.
  MR. MORTONI certainly objected last Session to pay these expenses out of Imperial Funds, whereas the expenses for other Courts outside London have to be paid by the constituencies themselves. I join in the objection to this Vote for £100; and I think we ought to have some explanation from the right hon. Gentleman why he wants more than was voted last year. I am not aware of any reason why the Courts should want more cleaning this year than the year before, or why they should want more cleaning than was estimated during the last Session. I object to this Vote, therefore, on two grounds—the one is, that we ought not to be called upon to vote this sum out of the Imperial Funds at all; and the other is, that we have had no explanation from the right hon. Gentleman at all as to the reasons for asking these supplementary sums.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. STUART-WORTLEY,The explanation of the necessity for the sum stated in the Supplementary Estimates for which we have had to apply is this. The House will remember that a Committee was appointed under the presidency of Mr. Justice Wills for the purpose of seeing what improvements were necessary to be made in certain of the Police Courts for the better accommodation of untried prisoners. The recommendations of this Committee have led to a very considerable enlargement of some of the Courts and an increase in the number of cells, and further improvements. That necessitated considerably increased labour for cleaning. These improvements proceeded gradually step by step, and some of the expense has fallen outside the time in which the ordinary Estimates could be presented to Parliament.
  MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)When we ask for money for improving the Courts in Green Street, in Dublin, as we have done
  1320
  over and over again, not one single sixpence can be screwed out of the English Treasury, and we have been met practically with a stern refusal unless the Corporation pays a certain amount. But the moment Mr. Justice Wills says he is not quite comfortable because there is a draught on his poll, there is an Estimate for better accommodation presented to Parliament. The explanation of the hon. Gentleman is quite acceptable, and we shall know how to turn it to account at the proper moment.
  MR. MORTONThe hon. Gentleman did not explain as regards the medical fees. I know there were very many complaints, especially during last August, of the want of medical attendance. In one case a prisoner died who was said to be drunk, and I think there should be more attention paid to these police cases by the medical officers. I should like to have a little explanation of this item.
  MR. STUART-WORTLEYThe amount for the medical witnesses' fees fluctuates very much, and is an item extremely difficult to estimate; but it forms a very small portion of this Estimate which is applied for.
  Question put.
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 125; Noes 90.—(Div. List, No. 7.)
  Resolutions to be reported.

  CLASS V.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £22,600, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1892, for the Expenses of Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad."
  MR. MORTONI see in this Vote a sum of £5,000 for telegrams "consequent on the state of affairs in America and China." The only information we have on these matters is contained in the daily papers. No right hon. or hon. Gentleman has given us any information. I gather from the daily papers that there have been difficulties in China with regard to the missionaries, and that, no doubt, put the Government to extra expense. I am still in some difficulty with regard o America. An hon. Gentleman beside me says he does not know where America

  1321
  is. I am glad we adopted free education last year, for in the future people will get to know where America is. But, Sir, I have not been able to gather from the newspapers any information as to any extraordinary condition of affairs in America. I do not know whether the extra expenditure arises in connection with the election of the President. Three years ago we tried to interfere. Whether that is the way this money has been expended I cannot say. I trust we shall have information.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. J. W. LOWTHER,I hope to be able to satisfy the hon. Member by saying, shortly, as I said in the Debate on the Address, that with regard to China, Papers have been in an active state of preparation and will shortly be laid upon the Table. Considerable apprehension was excited during the autumn of last year in reference to the anti-foreign riots that took place in various parts of China. It became necessary to enter into telegraphic communication with Her Majesty's Representative at Pekin, which, as the hon. Gentleman is aware, is a considerable distance from London, and the cost of telegrams to Pekin and back is very considerable. With regard to America, the telegrams which have passed between Her Majesty's Government and Her Majesty's Representative at Washington were due to the protracted negotiations which have been in course of progress during the autumn with reference to Behring Sea America also comprises South America, and, as the hon. Member is probably aware, there was a revolution in Chili in the autumn, by which British interests were considerably affected and endangered, and it became necessary to communicate very frequently by telegram with Her Majesty's Representative in that country. Papers on that subject are being prepared, and I hope to lay them on the Table next week.
  MR. MORTONCan you say what proportion of this extra expenditure is applicable to Chili, and what is applicable to America?
  MR. J. W. LOWTHERI am afraid I cannot answer that question straight off.
  MR. MORTONI think the hon. Gentleman has made out my case, and I think I may appeal to the First Lord of the Treasury to have this Vote postponed. We ought to have the Blue Book promised by the hon. Gentleman before voting this money, and with regard to America we should have more information.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURThe Government have no desire to take any controversial Votes to-night, and I do not think this is a controversial Vote. The extra expenditure was owing to the telegrams rendered necessary by the peculiar state of things in America and China, and on the ordinary Estimates the hon. Gentleman will have ample opportunity of discussing the policy of the Government in these matters. The question of policy does not now arise. I hope the Vote may now be taken.
  MR. LABOUCHERENobody admires more than I do the strenuous exertions in the interests of economy of my hon. Friend third behind me (Mr. Morton), but at the same time I think he is now going a little too far. There were difficulties in China, and whether Her Majesty's Government conducted the negotiations properly or not, telegrams had to be exchanged. There was a mistake about the Behring Sea dispute, and about that it was also necessary that telegrams should be exchanged. I should be sorry if by any premature vote my hon. Friend abridged our opportunities of going fully into these matters hereafter.
  MR. MORTONI do not object to my hon. Friend intervening. I do not object to these telegrams. I said I knew there were troubles in China; but I said that as a matter of principle we ought to have this information before voting this money. I move that Item E. be reduced by £200.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item E (Telegrams), be reduced by £200."—(Mr. Morton.)
  MR. T. M. HEALYI should like to know when the Chilian Papers will be produced. We do not condemn the action of Her Majesty's Consul there; but we have some observations to make with regard to some other Representative of Her Majesty's Government there. We are anxious to see the instructions given to Her Majesty's

  1323
  Minister. I think Her Majesty's Government acted very properly, but I should like to see the exact instructions they gave.
  MR. D. CRAWFORDI quite agree with the hon. Member for Northampton (Mr. Labouchere). I do not think that an item for telegrams is a very suitable occasion for opposition on our part. We may think, and I suppose we do think, that the administration of these matters might be placed in other hands when the administration would better command the confidence of the country; but so long as the country leaves the present Government with power, I think it is unworthy of the Liberal Party to take a Division on this Vote of £5,000 for telegrams. I have perfect confidence that the right hon. Gentleman opposite has formed a just and proper decision as to the expenditure of such a sum as this. I do not think we ought to make this a subject for division; we have much more important subjects than this, upon which we shall have to join issue with the Government.
  MR. DILLONI do not agree with the hon. Member for Lanark (Mr. Crawford); I think this is an unprecedented—a monstrous —sum to ask for telegrams in a Supplementary Estimate. Look at the original sum asked for last year—£14,000—and here we are asked to vote £5,000 in addition without any explanation of the causes requiring this enormous expenditure. I think we might be told what portion of the expense is due to affairs in China, and what portion to America or to Chili. For my part, I confess I think if the Government had abstained from interference in Chilian affairs and had sent fewer telegrams there, it would have been better. I think that most of the troubles arose in Chili, if not from the interference of the British Government, yet from the attitude of British subjects there. That, however, is a matter of opinion. In the first place, I object to the Vote because it is too large; and, in the second place, we have not the information to justify us in voting so large a sum; and I think these Estimates are prepared in a way that seems to me disrespectful to the Com-
  1324
  mittee. We have not definite information. Part of the amount is debited to the negotiations in reference to the Behring Sea Fisheries, but it will be observed that the next item is one of £7,000 for the Behring Sea Commission, and I do not see why the cost for telegrams in this connection should not be charged to the expenses of that Commission. I should like also, before the Vote is passed, to have some assurance that we shall have, during the Session, an opportunity to discuss, with due information before us, the policy of the Government in reference to their interference in the affairs of Chili.
  MR. A. J. BALFOURassented
  DR. TANNEROf course I fully recognise the argument of the hon. Member for North-East Lanark (Mr. Crawford), but, at the same time, I think hon. Members will recognise the fact that upon many of these apparently trivial items, even on such an item as this for telegrams, very great points of policy have frequently been threshed out in Committee of Supply. There can be no doubt, from the various remarks which have been made in the course of the last few minutes, that this question of telegrams does attach itself in an intimate degree with the state of affairs in Chili, in China, and other places. I do not wish to go into details upon these matters, but it strikes me as a matter of convenience and common-sense after having heard the speech of the hon. Gentleman who is new to his office as Under Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and we having also another neophyte in the position of Secretary to the Treasury, it does seem to me that these gentlemen are not really in a position to give us that full information to which we are entitled when dealing with these matters. I do not wish to raise any captious controversy, or put any foolish questions, but here is a large sum charged—large for the purpose—and it is our business to know how, and why, the money is spent. For this reason I support my hon. Friend (Mr. Morton). In a somewhat diffident way the Under Secretary has expressed himself, and we are promised Blue Books which, I think, ought to be in our hands when we are

  1325
  asked to vote this money. Under the circumstances, I do think that the First Lord of the Treasury, whose ability we recognise, would do well to postpone the Vote now, giving to his two neophytes the opportunity to make themselves acquainted with all the facts, and so we shall dispose of the Vote with full information before us.
  Mr. WOOTTON ISAACSONrose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put;" but the CHAIRMAN withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.
  Debate resumed.
  MR. T. M. HEALYWill the hon. Gentleman say when we shall have the Blue Books he has mentioned?
  MR. J. W. LOWTHERI cannot say definitely. I had hoped they would have been circulated before now. I will inquire, and will push forward the work as rapidly as possible.
  MR. FLYNNWhen reference is made to Chili, we cannot but be aware of certain very suspicious circumstances in connection with British interests there, so that I certainly think we ought to have Papers on the subject. I do not wish to interpose any undue delay in the proceedings of the Committee, but somehow of late years a bad custom has grown up—a double-barrelled, bad custom. I might say, first of all, the ordinary Votes are taken so late that we have not time to discuss them, and then, on the other hand, when we approach these Votes early in the Session we are told discussion is premature. Are we premature in seeking a discussion on this the proper opportunity, and why should we wait until the autumn? As regards affairs in Chili, distinctly I am of opinion, and it is an opinion I think will be shared by all Members who are interested in the comity of nations, that we should have full information before we vote this large sum, part of which is due to negotiations arising out of suspicious circumstances in relation to the revolutionary movement in that country.
  DR. CLARKI would appeal to my hon. Friend to withdraw his Motion for the reduction of the Vote. I do not see
  1326
  that he has given sufficient ground for it. I am quite willing to debate the question as one of expenditure on telegrams; but as a matter of the policy of the Government in Chili or in China, we shall have better opportunity for discussion on the Foreign Office Vote, and on the Admiralty Vote will arise the question of the conveyance of specie. There is no question of policy indirectly arising on this Vote for telegrams that could not better be discussed on the Foreign Office Vote.
  MR. MORTONI trust that even now the Government will consent to postpone this Vote. Personally, I do not wish to take a Division. I do not oppose the item, for, indeed, I do not know the particulars, nor does any Member of the Committee. Possibly, the Government may feel stronger, being re-inforced by the assistance of the hon. Members for Northampton, North-East Lanark, and Caithness, but what they have said does not alter my opinion as to the facts of the case. There was one point particularly mentioned by the hon. Member for East Mayo (Mr. Dillon), who pointed out that while the total sum asked for last year was £14,000, we are now asked to vote a supplementary sum nearly a third of the original sum, and yet not the slightest information is given as to the expenditure of the money. We are told that in a day or two Blue Books will be laid on the Table, but, apparently, the Under Secretary cannot give us any information now. Well, then, there is a sufficient reason for postponing the Vote. I find it stated that part of the amount is consequent upon the state of affairs in America, and I am reminded that this may include South America, but our information does not say so. In answer to the question from myself the Under Secretary frankly owned he could not tell us how much of the money was spent in relation to Chili, and how much in relation to the United States. With this absence of information it is absurd to ask us to take the Vote tonight. I make no charge of improper expenditure, but, as a matter of principle, I say before we pass the Vote we are entitled to require information

  1327
  about it. I am sorry the Government do not see this. It can make no difference to them if the Vote is postponed for a day or two. If they had acquiesced in the suggestion they would have saved time, and by now we might have passed a number of other Votes. As it is, I do not see my way to withdraw my Motion for a reduction, although I should be sorry to take a Division. I should be much better pleased if the Government would consent to postpone the Vote until they could give us the required information. As I have said, this is a matter of principle, and I emphasise the point because it refers, perhaps, to hundreds of Votes on the Estimates. We are entitled to have the fullest possible information when we take the Votes, and not afterwards. It is ridiculous to ask for the Vote and say we shall have the information at some future time. Another point has been raised by the hon. Member who mentioned the Behring Sea Fisheries Commission; and, certainly, I think that if any of this expenditure is due to that account, it should be included in Item "M." I quite understand why this should be a separate item, but it does not represent the expenses of the Commission if the telegraphic expenses are not included.
  MR. SYDNEY GEDGErose in his place and claimed to move "That the Question be now put;" but the Chairman withheld his assent, and declined then to put that question.
  Debate resumed.
  MR. MORTONcontinued: I do trust the right hon. Gentleman will consent to postpone the Vote. I am anxious not to take a Division, but to obtain information which we have a right to demand with the Vote before us. It is very well for the Leader of the House to tell us that opportunities for discussion will arise later in the Session; but I am sorry to say that, so far as my limited experience goes, we do not get those opportunities. If we leave matters over until the regular Estimates for the year are before us, we shall find ourselves in exactly the position we were in last year at the end of the Session, when Votes for millions of money were forced through
  1328
  at late hours of the night when public discussion was impossible. It is absurd to tell us to take our chance of another opportunity; we shall never get our opportunity unless we make it. I have made up my mind that we can only hope for discussion early in the Session, and whenever matters require it I shall endeavour to raise discussion on Supplementary Estimates and Votes on Account. So far as I have been able to read the newspapers, and that is the only source of information in regard to this expenditure—and I admit that hon. Members have a right to laugh, for it is ridiculous that Members of the British House of Commons should have to go to the daily Press for information they ought to obtain here—the greater part of this expenditure arises upon a subject fairly open to our discussion—the foreign policy of the Government.
  It being Midnight, the Chairman left the Chair to make his report to the House.
  Resolutions to be reported tomorrow.
  Committee also report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.

  MLLBANK PRISON BILL.—No.140.)
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clause 1.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Clause 1 stand part of the Bill."
  MR. T. M. HEALYYesterday, at an hour equivalent to this, when we had a Bill before us to which no opposition was expected, the Municipal Franchise (Ireland) Bill, the First Lord of the Treasury, in a manner as offensive to Irish Members as he could make it, refused to allow progress to be made with the Bill. I therefore now move that you report Progress, and ask leave to sit again.
  Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again," put, and agreed to.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again to-morrow.

  LOCAL AUTHORITIES (ACQUISITION OF LAND) BILL.—(No. 139.)

    SECOND READING.
    Order for Second Reading read.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Knowles.)
    MR. M. J. KENNYThis is rather a technical Bill; may I suggest that the hon. Gentleman should give us some explanation of it?
    MR.KNOWLESA memorandum on the back of the Bill sets out in concise and clear terms the object of the Bill, and I do not know that I can give an explanation in a better form, and so I will read the memorandum as follows:—
    "Assurances by deed of land for the purposes of a public park, a schoolhouse, an elementary school, or a public museum, or for the purpose of providing dwellings for the working classes in any populous place, are already exempted from the operation of Parts I. and II. of the Mortmain and Charitable Uses Act, 1888. It is proposed by this Bill to extend that exemption to all assurances by deed of land to Local Authorities for any purpose for which such authorities are authorised to acquire land. The restrictions on the assurances of land which it is proposed to remove occasionally create very great local inconvenience. For instance, if a landowner wishes to grant a plot of land, however small, to a local authority for any public purpose, other than one of those specially exempted from the operation of Parts I. and II. of the above-mentioned Act, without full and valuable consideration,' the deed must within six months of its execution be enrolled in the central office of the Supreme Court of Judicature, and if the grantor dies within twelve months of the execution of the deed, the grant is void."
    I may add that I noticed in yesterday's papers the case of a grant of land to which the Bill would apply. Supposing the grantor should die within 12 months, then the grant would be void.
    MR. CHANCEAre we to assume from the silence of the Government that they approve of the Bill?
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir RICHARD WEBSTER, Isle of Wight)The principle is one which I think may be conceded, but I do not pledge myself to the details.
    MR. T. M. HEALYWill the hon. Gentleman
    1330
    say is it the same Bill which was read a second time last year? Does it apply to Ireland?
    MR. KNOWLESThe same Bill, and it does not apply to Ireland.
    (12.6.) MR. ESSLEMONT (Aberdeen, E.): Does it apply to Scotland.
    MR. KNOWLES: No.
    Objection being taken to further proceeding, Debate adjourned till tomorrow.

    MOTIONS.

      SHERIFF CLERKS DEPUTE (SCOTLAND) BILL.
      On Motion of Mr. Philipps, Bill to improve the position of Sheriff Clerks Depute in Scotland, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Philipps, Mr. Haldane, Mr. M'Ewan, and Mr. Sinclair.
      Bill presented, and read first time. [Bill 197.]

    COAL MINES REGULATION ACT (1887) AMENDMENT BILL.
    On Motion of Mr. David Thomas, Bill to amend "The Coal Mines Regulation Act, 1887," and to provide for the giving of certificates to workmen on leaving their employment in Mines, ordered to be brought in by Mr. David Thomas and Mr. William Abraham (Rhondda).
    Bill presented, and read first time. [Bill 198.]
    POOR LAW (IRELAND) AMENDMENT BILL.
    On Motion of Mr. Mahony, Bill to amend the Poor Law (Ireland) Acts, ordered to be brought in by Mr. Mahony, Mr. O'Kelly, Mr. Carew, Mr. Hayden, Mr. Patrick O'Brien, and Mr. Harrison.
    Bill presented, and read first time. [Bill 199.]

    TOWN HOLDINGS.
    Ordered, That the Select Committee be reappointed to inquire into that portion of the original reference to the Committee which the Committee was precluded by want of time from reporting on last Session, namely, "into the question of imposing a direct assessment on the owners of ground rents, and on the owners of increased values imparted to land by building operations or other improvements."
    Ordered, That the Committee do consist of Twenty-three Members.
    The Committee was accordingly nominated of,—Mr. Tyssen Amherst, Mr. Gerald Balfour, Mr. Baumann, Mr. Beadel, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Channing, Mr. Cameron Corbett, Mr. Crilly, Sir John Ellis, Mr. Elton, Mr. Esslemont, Mr. Munro Ferguson, Mr. Lewis Fry, Mr. Seale-Hayne, Mr. Knowles, Mr. Lawson, Sir William Marriott, Colonel Nolan, Sir Charles Pearson, Mr. Randell, Mr. James Rowlands, Mr. Mark Stewart, and Mr. Powell-Williams.
    Ordered, That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.
    Ordered, That Five be the quorum.—(Mr. Akers-Douglas.)

    TRUSTEE SAVINGS BANKS (INSPECTION COMMITTEE).
    Copy ordered—
    "Of Scheme for the appointment of an Inspection Committee of Trustee Savings Banks; for determining the mode in which the members of the Committee are to be appointed, and their term of office; and, subject to the provisions of 'The Savings Banks Act, 1891' (54 and 55 Vic., c. 21), their powers, procedure, and duties; together with a list of Members of the Inspection Committee of Trustee Savings Banks."—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)
    Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 86.]

    ENDOWED CHARITIES (CAMBRIDGE).
    Copy ordered—
    "Of Digest of the Endowed Charities in the county of Cambridge, the particulars of which are recorded in the books of the Charity Commissioners for England and Wales, but are not recorded in the general digest of Endowed Charities for that county, 1863–4 (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 433 (16), of Session 1868)."—(Mr. Brand.)

    RAILWAY SERVANTS (HOURS OF LABOUR) COMMITTEE.
    Ordered, That Sir Edward Reed be discharged from the Committee on Railway Servants (Hours of Labour).
    Ordered, That Mr. Flynn be added to the Committee.—(Mr. Akers-Douglas.)

    RAILWAY RATES AND CHARGES PROVISIONAL ORDER BILLS.
    Ordered,That all Bills of the present Session to confirm Provisional Orders made by the Board of Trade, under "The Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888," containing the Classification of Merchandise Traffic, and the Schedule of Maximum Rates and Charges applicable thereto, be referred to a Joint Committee of Lords and Commons.
    Ordered,That a Message be sent to the Lords to communicate this Resolution and desire their concurrence.—(Sir Michael Hicks Beach.)

    RAILWAY RATES AND CHARGES PROVISIONAL ORDER [NORTH LONDON, &c.] BILL.
    Order [10th February, 1892,] that the Railway Rates and Charges Provisional Order [North London, &c.] Bill be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, read and discharged.
    Ordered, That the Bill be withdrawn.—(Sir Michael Hicks Beach.)

    RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND),1890–91.
    Return ordered—
    "Of Particulars of Relief Works undertaken in certain parts of Ireland in the latter end of 1890, and in 1891."(Mr. Jackson.)
    Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 85.]

    SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE (CIRCUIT ALLOWANCES, &c.)
    Address for—
    "Return showing the number of days the Judges of the Queen's Bench Division were absent from London on the business of the Assizes held in 1891, and stating the amounts paid to them and the circuit officers for allowances and expenses."—(Mr. Morton.)

    ALLOTMENTS ACTS (ACQUISITION OF LAND BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES).
    Returns ordered—
    "Of the number of instances in which (1) Rural Sanitary Authorities, under the provisions of The Allotments Act, 1887; 'and (2) County Councils, under the provisions of the Allotments Acts, 1887 and 1890, have acquired land for allotments by (1) compulsory purchase; (2) purchase by agreement; (3) hire by agreement; showing, in each case, the parish within which such land has been acquired, the acreage, and the number of tenants to whom allotments have been let under the Act.
    "And, of the Rural Sanitary Authorities ho have not taken land for Allotments, and in each case the reasons why the Authority have not provided land for the purpose, whether in consequence of their deeming it unnecessary to do so, or otherwise."—(Mr. Channing.)

    JUSTICES OF THE PEACE IN PORTS (ENGLAND AND WALES).
    Address for—
    "Return of the names and descriptions of the Justices assigned to keep the Peace in all Ports in England and Wales having a separate Commission of the Peace, distinguishing as far as possible those Justices who own ships, or shares in ships, or in companies owning ships, from the others."—(Mr. Chamberlain.)
    House adjourned at ten minutes after Twelve o'clock.