§ SIR M. HICKS BEACH, (Bristol, W.)said, he understood that they would have a statement as to Business. When might they expect it?
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. MARJORIBANKS,) Berwickshiresaid, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would make a statement to-morrow. He might add that Vote for salaries and expenses of the officials of the House of Lords would be postponed till then.
§ MR. T. P. O'CONNOR (Liverpool, Scotland)inquired whether the Vote could not be postponed until Monday?
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELL (Tyrone, S.)said, on a point of Order, he would like to know whether they could postpone a matter of this kind on Report?
§
Resolutions read a second time.
Res. 1. "That a sum, not exceeding £142,176, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of Public Buildings in Ireland, for the Maintenance of certain Parks and Public Works, and for Drainage Works on the Rivers Shannon and Suck.
§ COLONEL NOLAN (Galway, N.)said, he would like to draw attention to the necessity for providing the Suck Drainage Board with the necessary funds to complete the works. He had been informed by The O'Conor Don, a Member of the Board and a former Member of the House, that the works could be completed in November if the money was provided, and he hoped the Secretary to the Treasury would see his way to provide the money.
§ THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Sir J. T. HIBBERT,) Oldhamsaid, he was in entire agreement with the hon. and gallant Gentleman on this question. According to his information, it was probable the money would be found for carrying on the works; but he was not prepared at the present moment to say how it would be found, and he hoped the hon. Member would not press him on the point.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLsaid, for his part, this being a question he wished to raise, he was prepared to accept the statement of the right hon. Gentleman.
§ MR. MACARTNEY (Antrim, S.)said, he wished to ask what had been done with regard to the Shannon Drainage Works. Had the Board of Works' scheme been approved by the Treasury?
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTYes.
§ MR. A. C. MORTON (Peterborough)said, the hon. and gallant Colonel (Colonel Nolan) wanted to get more money.
§ COLONEL NOLANNot exactly.
§ MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, if there were money to spare he thought they should have some of it for Peterborough.
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, the money referred to by the hon. Member was obtained under Act of Parliament.
§ MR. A. C. MORTONsaid, it was the duty of the Government to pass an Act of Parliament.
§ MR. JACKSON (Leeds, N.)said, he wished to ask a question about Arklow Pier. It would be in the recollection of the House, when the pier was about to be constructed, that the estimated amount was £7,000, half of which was to be provided by the Government and the other half by the Local Authority. The work was going on, and he did not know whether the work had been completed, or whether the whole sum had been voted. With regard to the Suck Drainage Works, was he to understand from the Secretary to the Treasury that if the money was required means would be found for saving the landlords and the Local Authority from the very large loss of interest which they would otherwise suffer, because he understood that the interest was falling due at the rate of £5,000 a year? But, so far as that was concerned, he understood the money would be found, so that the difficulties might be considered at an end.
§ SIR A. ROLLIT (Islington, S.)said, he was anxious to know what conclusion had been arrived at with regard to running the Baltimore Railway to the water side? It was a matter of great moment to the fishing industry in Ireland.
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLThis is a different Vote.
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, in reply to the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Jackson), it was expected that the work at Arklow would be completed this year, and that the money would be sufficient.
§ MR. JACKSONAnd all the money would be expended?
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTYes.
§ Resolution agreed to.
§ SIR A. ROLLITsaid, his question had not been answered.
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTwas understood to say he had dealt with the matter at a previous period in the Debate.
Res. 2. "That a sum, not exceeding £8,676, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1894, for Payments under 'The Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, 1883,' and 'The Light Railways (Ireland) Act, 1889.'
§ SIR T. ESMONDE (Kerry, W.)said, he wished to know whether any action had been taken in regard to the inquiry into the Tralee and Dingle Railway accident? The matter was one of a good deal of importance to his constituents. It was now three weeks since the interview on the matter had taken place with the Secretary to the Treasury, and he wished to know what the Government intended to do?
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLIs not this the very question you ruled out of Order last night? [Cries of "Order!"]
MR. DEPUTY SPEAKERMy ruling last night related to the management of the railway, and that question is out of Order on this Vote.
§ MR. SEXTON (Kerry, N.)May I point out that what my hon. Friend is asking is as to what steps the Treasury have taken or are about to take upon the statement made by the Secretary to the Treasury, that an inquiry would be instituted?
§ MR. T. W. RUSSELLI ask you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, whether this matter is not out of Order? I submit that the principle is the same as the question raised last night, and which was ruled out of Order?
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, he would just say, in reply to the hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir A. Rollit), in the matter of the Baltimore Railway, there were at present no funds available for the completion of this railway to the waterside. The work was not included in the Railway Vote, and unless funds could be obtained from the Congested Districts Board, who had money at their disposal, he did not see how this small portion of the line could be completed.
§ SIR A. ROLLITWill the right hon. Gentleman bring the matter under the notice of the Congested Districts Board?
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTsaid, he would do this.
§ MR. SEXTONI wish, Sir, to ask the Secretary to the Treasury with regard to the charge to the Treasury of £2,400 included in this Vote for the Tralee and Dingle Railway—
§ MR. MACARTNEYI rise to Order—[Cries of "Order!" and "Chair!"]
§ MR. SEXTONI am perfectly in Order, and I submit that, notwithstanding the great intellectual powers of the hon. Member (Mr. Macartney), he is unable to say what I am about to ask until I have asked it.
§ MR. MACARTNEYagain arose amid cries of "Order!"
§ MR. SEXTONWhat I wish to ask is, do the Treasury propose to take any steps to alter the incidence in regard to this sum of £2,400 in respect of the guarantee of this line?
§ MR. MACARTNEYThat was the very point I was wishing to raise last night, when I was asked to sit down—[Cries of "Order!"]
§ MR. SEXTONIs it out of Order to ask, in regard to a charge of £2,400 to the Treasury actually included in the Vote, whether the Treasury propose to make- any arrangements to alter the incidence of that charge?
§ SIR M. HICKS BEACHMr. Deputy Speaker, I submit that the hon. Member for North Kerry is endeavouring to evade your ruling of last night.
§ SIR J. T. HIBBERTMay I suggest to the hon. Gentleman that if he will put the question down on the Paper for to-morrow I will endeavour to answer it?
§ Resolution agreed to.
-
cc356-60
- CLASS II. 1,263 words