Sitting of 7 April 1887

Preamble
The House met at Two of the clock.

MR. SPEAKER'S INDISPOSITION.
The House being met, the Clerk at the Table again informed the House of the continued indisposition of Mr. Speaker, and of his unavoidable absence from the House this day.
Whereupon Mr. Courtney, the Chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means, proceeded to the Table as Deputy Speaker, and, after Prayers, counted the House, and, Forty Members being present, took the Chair, pursuant to the Standing Order of the 20th day of July 1855.

PUBLIC PETITIONS.
Ordered, That the Select Committee on Public Petitions have leave to sit this day, notwithstanding the sitting or the Adjournment of the House.—(Sir Charles Forster.)
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
  GREAT EASTERN RAILWAY BILL.

    CONSIDERATION.
    Order of Consideration, as amended, read.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now considered."—(Sir Charles Forster.)
    MR. SHAW LEFEVRE: It is my duty to oppose this Bill.
    MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Then, in that case, the further consideration must stand over till Tuesday next.
    Consideration deferred till Tuesday next.

QUESTIONS.

  NLAND REVENUE (IRELAND)—REMOVAL OF OFFICER FROM BANTRY TO SKIBBEREEN.
  MR. M'CARTAN(for Mr. GILHOOLY)asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the officer of Inland Revenue stationed at present in Bantry is to be removed, and the duties which he now performs are to be executed by the Inland Revenue officer stationed at Skibbereen; whether the district in which Bantry and Castletown-mere are situated extends 50 miles from Skibbereen; and, whether, considering the great inconvenience which this would involve to poor persons applying for probate of wills and letters of administration, he will reconsider the proposed change?
  THE SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. JACKSON): The removal of the Revenue officer at Bantry is in contemplation; but no step will be taken without fully considering the requirements of the district and the convenience of the inhabitants. The districts of Bantry and Castletownmere ex-tend from 40 to 50 miles west of Skibbereen. Inconvenience to persons seeking grants of probate is not apprehended, such cases arising in that district being inconsiderable in number.

  ARMY —THE ROYAL IRISH RIFLES—REMOVAL FROM NEWTOWNARDS TO DONAGHADEE.
  MR. M'CARTANasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that a Memorial has been sent to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, by the inhabitants of Newtownards, praying that the 3rd Battalion Royal Irish Rifles may not be removed from Newtownards to Donaghadee for annual training, on the ground, among others, that it would inflict "great hardship on the men, and much suffering on their wives and families; "whether a Memorial has been sent to the Lord Lieutenant, from "the inhabitants, ratepayers, and visitors of Donaghadee," requesting that this regiment of Militia be not sent there for annual training, as it would "interfere very much with Donaghadee as a watering place;" and, whether he will bring
  676
  the Memorials under the notice of the Secretary of State for War before definite arrangements are made for this year's training?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): His Excellency authorizes me to say that he received the Memorials mentioned, though not in his capacity as Lord Lieutenant, and he has sent them forward for the consideration of the Commander of the Forces in Ireland.

  THE IRISH LAND COURT—FAIR RENTS—CLAIMS DISMISSED.
  MR. FINUCANEasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, How many claims to have a fair rent fixed have been dismissed by the Land Court, from the 136,692 that have been before the Court up to 31st January, 1887, under the Clause in the Land Act of 1881, which excludes all farms on which the improvements have been made and substantially maintained by the landlord?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The number of claims that have been dismissed is about 12.

  AFRICA (WEST COAST)—KIDNAPPING ON THE NIGER —NATIVE REPRISALS.
  MR. W. F. LAWRENCEasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether, as it appears that the seizure by Natives of Messieurs Lander's launch was an act of reprisal for the policy of the Royal Niger Company in seizing certain children as hostages, and inasmuch as the Company has since received a Charter from Her Majesty, Her Majesty's Government will advise the Company to compensate Messieurs Lander for their loss sustained by reason of its policy; whether the Foreign Office is in possession of, or has at any time seen, the 230 Treaties referred to by him made by the Royal Niger Company with Native Chiefs, or the 37 Treaties mentioned in the Schedule to the Charter; and, if some only, of how many; whether Her Majesty's Forces are still employed in the pacification of the Niger territories; and, whether the Government will lay upon the Table any Despatches regarding the recent engagements with the Natives, and the causes which led to it?
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (Sir JAMES FERGUSSON): Respecting the seizure of Mr. Lander's launch, I must refer the hon. Member to my answer of the 31st of August. The Company has since succeeded in recovering the launch and' cargo, which have been restored to the owner. Her Majesty's Government see no ground for interference. The whole of the Treaties made by the Company are in the possession of the Foreign Office. The actual number is 237, including those mentioned in the Schedule. Her Majesty's Forces are not employed on the Niger. The only occasion of their employment since the grant of the Charter has been that of an expedition from Her Majesty's ship Royalist in December, to chastise some slave-hunting tribes on the Wari branch who had attacked one of the Company's factories, inflicting loss of life. These tribes were allied with the robber Chief who seized Mr. Lander's launch. The expedition was successful; but the affair was trifling, and there are no Papers on the subject, except, I presume, the ordinary Reports of the officer in command of Her Majesty's ship Royalist to his superiors.
  In reply to Mr. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (Donegal, E),
  SIR JAMES FERGUSSONsaid: I stated, on the 31st of August, that as soon as it was known that some children had been detained as hostages by the agents of the National African Company their attention was called to the impropriety of retaining them, and on the 13th of July the Company telegraphed to their agents to release them at once.
  MR. W. F. LAWRENCE: Is it not the fact that the children were not restored until seven months afterwards?
  SIR JAMES FERGUSSON: I am not aware how long they were in fact detained.

  LAW AND JUSTICE (IRELAND)—AFFRAY AT MICHELSTOWN.
  MR. J. O'CONNORasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is a fact that O'Neill, bailiff at Michelstown, was, on the 25th March, fined 10s. by Mr. R. Eaton, R.M., for having assaulted with a pike and inflicted a
  678
  severe wound on the head of a deaf mute named Looting whether he is aware that a late Attorney General directed that personal found guilty of this charge should be returned for trial to the Assizes; whether O'Neill rushed through the town of Michelstown on the fair day, 25th March, with a naked knife in his hand, and assaulted Mr. W. Casey, and whether Mr. Eaton refused informations to be sworn against O'Neill on that occasion; whether, on 12th March, O'Neill and another bailiff named Davis tried to force themselves into Mr. Casey's shop, who remonstrated with and tried to prevent them from entering, when O'Neill struck Casey with clenched fists; Casey, having retaliated, was summoned to Petty Sessions, and was fined 20s. and costs by Mr. Eaton, who dismissed the cross case against O'Neill; whether Mr. James Skinner was also fined in a similar sum, although he produced several witnesses to prove he had only been looking on; whether Mr. Eaton is an extensive land agent; and, whether he will inquire into the above statements regarding the judgments of Mr. Eaton, Resident Magistrate?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The necessary Report in this case has not yet been received.

  LABOURERS' (IRELAND) ACTS—MILLSTREET, MACROOM, AND BLARNEY, CO. CORK.
  MR. J. O'CONNOR(for Dr. TANNER)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is a fact that great difficulty is experienced in promoting the erection of labourers' cottages in the Millstreet, Macroom, and Blarney districts of the County of Cork; and, whether he will take steps to facilitate the erection of such cottages in these districts?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The Local Government Board are not aware that any special difficulty has been experienced in the erection of labourers' cottages in the Unions named. If the hon. Member will be so good as to communicate to me any reason he may have for holding a contrary opinion, I will have them fully investigated.

  THE MAGISTRACY (IRELAND)—ELECTION OF CORONER FOR KENNAUGHT, CO. LONDONDERRY.
  MR. SEXTON(for Mr. T. M. HEALY)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether there is a vacancy in the Coronership for the Barony of Kennaught, County Londonderry, to which an election is now pending; whether he is aware that there is only one polling place in the said barony or district—namely, at Limavady, about 16 miles from one extremity of the district and 12 miles from the other; and at the time that Limavady was fixed on as a polling place for the election of Coroner, it was also, under the old Parliamentary Franchise, the sole polling place in the said district; whether, in pursuance of the Ballot and Franchise Acts, additional polling places have been fixed at Dungiven and Ballarena in the said district; and, whether, in view of this, and the fact that the franchise qualification entitling persons to vote for a Parliamentary Representative and for that of Coroner are identical, and that if the polling places at pending election in the Barony of Kennaught be restricted to Limavady, the voters in the outlying portions of the district, amounting to at least one-half of the entire constituency, will be practically disfranchised owing to the distance they would have to travel to record their votes, steps will be taken to fix additional polling places at Dungiven and Ballarena at once, so as to be in force for the pending election of Coroner for the Barony of Kennaught, in the County of Londonderry?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): I am informed that no such vacancy has as yet been notified to the Lord Chancellor. It is quite true that the qualification of voters for the election of Coroners is the same as for Parliamentary elections; but the area of representation differs, there being four Coroners and two Parliamentary Divisions. The polling places are fixed by Special Sessions, and cannot be altered except at similar Sessions, which may be held on Memorial. Such a Memorial has been received to-day, and will be duly considered.

  LABOURERS' (IRELAND) ACTS —THE BIRR UNION.
  DR. FOX(for Mr. MOLLOY)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What has delayed the erection of labourers' cottages in the Huntstown and Shannonbridge Electoral Divisions of Birr Union, the sites selected by the Guardians being approved by the Local Government Board Inspector, the landlord, and the occupier; and, if steps will be taken to carry out the approved and unopposed scheme?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The hon. Member appears to be under some misapprehension. The Local Government Board inform me that no improvement scheme was submitted by the Guardians of Birr Union for the erection of cottages in Huntstown Electoral Division. With regard to the other Division named, a Provisional Order confirming the scheme was made on the 24th ultimo, and will become absolute on the 24th instant.
  MR. J. O'CONNOR: I beg to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether it is a fact that the Privy Council persistently throws out these applications at the request of the landlords, giving costs against the promoters?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid, that the Privy Council in this matter was a purely judicial body.
  DR. FOXgave Notice that he would bring the conduct of the Privy Council, in connection with these schemes, under the notice of the House.

  ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY—THE ARREST OF THE REV. M. RYAN— DISMISSAL OF SUB-CONSTABLE DORNEY.
  MR. FINUCANEasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is a fact that Sub-Constable Dorney, of Kilteely, County Limerick, who was dismissed for his refusal to aid in the arrest of Rev. M. Ryan, addressed his sergeant in the following language:—
  "I have been in the force for 12 years, during which time I have done my duty, and without a stain on my character; but when I am asked to lay hands on the priest of my

  681
  church I refuse to go any further with the English Government; "
  whether his superior officer still persists in saying that Dorney is a man of indifferent character; and, if so, will he specify the acts by which he has earned such character; whether Doctor Cleary, medical officer to the Kilteely Constabulary, was ordered to inspect Dorney on the evening of his refusal as to his mental condition; and, whether the Constabulary Regulations direct that the mental condition of any policeman refusing to act shall be tested by medical examination; and, if not, why was the examination made in this case?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): I have already stated, in reply to the hon. Member's former Question, what words the constable used when refusing to go on duty. They were not those mentioned in the Question. The description of the man's character as "indifferent" is fully warranted by the facts. He was three times punished for drunkenness, and upon the last occasion was warned that he was in danger of dismissal. The medical examination referred to was made by order of the local Constabulary officer in consequence of Dorney's excited appearance, and it seems to have been a very proper proceeding. The opinion given by the doctor was that though the man was excited there was nothing the matter with him.
  MR. EDWARD HARRINGTONasked, how the constable stood on the promotion list when he resigned?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid, he could not give that information, but would make inquiries, if the hon. Member desired.

  POOR LAW (ENGLAND AND WALES)—ELECTION OF GUARDIANS FOR CLAPHAM PARISH.
  MR. GILLIATasked the President of the Local Government Board, If he can state why the Local Government Board have refused to divide the parish of Clapham into wards for the election of Guardians of the Poor, as requested by the letters to that Board from the representative Vestry of Clapham?
  THE PRESIDENT (Mr. RITCHIE), in reply, said that representations had from time
  682
  to time been made to the Local Government Board by the elected Vestry of Clapham, in favour of the division of the parish into wards, for the election of Guardians. There is, however, no case in London in which a parish with a population not exceeding that of Clapham has been so divided. In deciding not to comply with the request I have adhered to the views of my three Predecessors in the Office of President of the Board.

  HARBOUR WORKS LOANS—HYPOTHECATION OF RATES.
  ADMIRAL MAYNEasked the Secretary to the Local Government Board, Whether the Local Government Board will take the steps necessary to afford facilities to towns and villages in the vicinity of harbours to hypothecate their local rates as security for loans to be advanced by the Public Works Loan Commissioners for harbour works?
  THE SECRETARY (Mr. LONG): A Question on this subject was put to the First Lord of the Treasury on Tuesday last, and in reply he stated that the facilities referred to would probably be given by a clause in the Public Works Loan Bill.

  WAR OFFICE (ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT)—ROYAL ARSENAL, WOOLWICH (ACCOUTREMENT DEPARTMENT)—APPOINTMENT OF "VIEWERS."
  COLONEL HUGHES-HALLETTasked the Surveyor General of the Ordnance, Whether it is a fact that, in the Accoutrement Section or Department at the Royal Arsenal at Woolwich, the Inspector, three out of the seven permanent "viewers," and three out of the four temporary "viewers," come from the firm of Ross and Company, of Bermondsey, Government contractors for leather and saddlery; whether the Accoutrement Inspector does not also inspect and "pass" the saddlery; who were responsible for the appointment of these men; and, whether any steps will be taken to remedy, for the future, so apparent an evil?
  THE SURVEYOR GENERAL (Mr. NORTHCOTE): I am informed that it is a fact that the Inspector of Accoutrements came from the firm of Ross and Company. He was selected

  683
  from 47 applicants for the post, with the approval of the then Surveyor General, with the full knowledge that he had been employed for some years by this firm. It is not the fact that three out of seven permanent viewers, and three out of four temporary viewers, came from the firm of Ross and Company. One permanent viewer, appointed 10 years ago, came from that firm. The Inspector of Accoutrements has temporarily, while the appointment of Inspector of Saddlery has been vacant, inspected and passed new saddlery. This arrangement will now cease, as an Inspector of Saddlery has been provisionally appointed. The appointment of viewers is in the hands of the Commissary General of Ordnance, Royal Arsenal. The Inspector's appointments are approved by the Surveyor General of the Ordnance.

  ADMIRALTY—SECRECY OF DESIGNS, &c.
  COLONEL HUGHES-HALLETTasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, To what extent, up to the present time, it has been customary, at any of the offices of the Admiralty or of Her Majesty's Dockyards, to allow designs, plans, and specifications of Her Majesty's Ships of War and of Her Majesty's Dockyards, and information generally of a more or less confidential character, to be imparted to foreigners, and to allow foreigners to make sketches of any portions of those ships, dockyards, or fortifications; and, whether, pending the issue of the Regulations to which he referred on the 5th instant, he will take steps, by printed notices or otherwise, to prevent any information of an important character being given by any Government employé to foreigners, except on the written authority of some senior and responsible officer?
  THE FIRST LORD (Lord GEORGE HAMILTON), in reply, said, the Question must have been put under some misapprehension. The Admiralty had never given authority to the officers of Her Majesty's Dockyards for information of a confidential character to be furnished to foreigners, or to allow them to make sketches of ships, dockyards, or fortifications. Any official so acting, without the authority of the Admiralty, would be guilty of a breach of trust, and would be liable to punishment.

  LAW AND JUSTICE (IRELAND)—MACROOM QUARTER SESSIONS.
  MR. J. O'CONNOR(for Dr. TANNER)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the County Court Judge presiding at the Quarter Sessions held in Macroom on Monday the 4th April, owing to the fact that the Criminal Calendar was blank, was presented with a pair of white gloves; whether, subsequently, the Judge refused to receive a Resolution unanimously adopted by the Grand Jury against the Criminal Law Amendment (Ireland) Bill; whether the Riding in question is one of the districts the condition of which is relied on by the Government to prove the necessity for the application of the Bill; and, whether the Judge in question will be one of the Judges to hear appeals in cases under the said Act?
  MR. CONYBEAREasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the following report from The Daily News of the 5th instant, respecting the absence of crime in the Macroom district of the County of Cork:—
  "At the Macroom Quarter Sessions to-day there was but one criminal case before the Sessions, and this, on the application of the Crown Solicitor, was sent forward to the Cork Assizes. It was a charge preferred against a man named Buttimer, of having been one of an armed party who entered the house of a farmer named O'Keeffe, and carried away a gun, with £15 in money. The Chairman, addressing the Grand Jury, congratulated them on the peace that prevailed in the district, there being no criminal business. The Grand Jury were then discharged. The foreman said they had a Resolution which they wished to submit to his Honour, who absolutely declined to receive it. The Grand Jury, however, adopted in their room a Resolution stating that, having regard to the crimeless and peaceable condition of the district, the Grand Jurors earnestly solicited his Honour to recommend the exclusion of the Division from the provisions of the Chief Secretary's Bill;"
  and, whether he will give effect to the recommendation of the Grand Jury?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): I have no reason to doubt the substantial accuracy of the newspaper reports upon which both Questions appear to be founded; but I would observe that the absence of criminal cases from the Calendar is no

  685
  satisfactory evidence of the real state of the country, as was clearly pointed out by the learned Judge when opening the recent Commission for the county in which Macroom is situated. The powers which the Government seek under the Bill now before the House will be exercised by the Executive with a due sense of the responsibility under which they act.
  MR. J. O'CONNORasked, whether this County Court Judge was not a landlord himself; and, whether on recent occasions he had delivered violent harangues in favour of coercion and against Home Rule from the Bench?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am not aware.
  MR. SEXTON: May I ask, Sir, if the learned Judge on this occasion said there was anything in the condition of the Riding to alter the conclusion which one would draw from the state of the Criminal Calendar?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I am not aware that the County Court Judge did so. But there was a very bad case of Moonlighting in that district, which was sent to the Assizes.

  CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT (IRELAND) BILL—THE WHITEBOY ACTS AND LATER STATUTES.
  MR. M'LARENasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, How soon he expects to fulfil his promise to reprint and issue to Members all the Whiteboy Acts, and Acts amending the same, enumerated in the Interpretation Clause of the Criminal Law Amendment (Ireland), and also such portions of 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 13, as relates to the appointment of Resident Magistrates; and, whether he will undertake to have them distributed by such a date as will leave Members time to study them before the House is asked to come to a vote on the second reading of the Bill?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The reprint of the Whiteboy Acts, so far as they refer to the Criminal Law Amendment (Ireland) Bill, and so far as they are unrepealed, will be ready by Monday, and will be in the hands of Members early next week.
  MR. M'LAREN: I suppose that includes the 6 & 7 Will. IV.?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: It includes everything referred to in the Crimes Bill before the House.

  WEST INDIA ISLANDS—THE CATHOLIC CEMETERY OF PLYMOUTH, MONTSERRAT.
  MR. TUITEasked, the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether his attention has been called to a Despatch (No. 225), from the Governor of the Leeward Islands, forwarded 15th August, 1885, to Her Majesty's Government, transmitting, at the request of the Catholic Bishop of Roseau, a copy of a Correspondence relating to the appropriation of what is known as the old Catholic cemetery of Plymouth, Montserrat, and the desecration of human remains, by the Trustees of the Anglican Church and Schools, while carrying on certain excavations connected with the enlargement of these premises; whether the same work of desecration is still being carried on with the connivance of the Local Authorities, notwithstanding the protests of the inhabitants; whether large quantities of human remains are daily carted away to the cane fields, and tombstones removed and destroyed; whether the cemetery has been used by Catholics and Europeans only, including planters, merchants, military officers, and clergy, for over 100 years, and only ceased to be used as a place of interment in the year 1838, as proved by the Register in the possession of the Bishop of Roseau; whether Mr. Attorney General Gatty examined the Register, and gave his opinion that the cemetery belongs to the Catholic congregation; whether he is aware that in 1841 the Anglican Body applied, through the Legislature of Montserrat, to Her Majesty's Government for a title to the site referred to, and that the then Secretary of State for the Colonies, Lord John Russell, replied that the Crown could not make such a grant, as the land in question having been for a very long period in the possession of the Catholics as a place of interment, and might be claimed at any time by the person in whom the title was invested in trust for the Catholic congregation (see Despatch, No. 95, dated Downing Street 28th February, 1841); and, whether, under the circumstances, Her Majesty's Government will take

  687
  steps to prevent any further appropriation of the cemetery, compel the Trustees of the Anglican Church and Schools to pay rent for the portion already appropriated, and desist from desecrating the remains, and destroying monuments contained therein?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Sir HENRY HOLLAND): In 1884 and 1885 the Anglican Church, which was built in or about the year 1840 on a part of the old Roman Catholic burying ground at Plymouth, Montserrat, was enlarged. In the course of the work some human remains were disinterred, and. having been carefully kept in the church during the work, were re-interred under the new portion of the building. The Roman Catholic Bishop of Roseau complained to the Governor of the Leeward Islands of the alleged trespass on the burying ground and the interference with human remains, and the Correspondence has been transmitted to the Secretary of State. Lord Stanley of Preston considered that there was no case for the interference of the Government. No further interference with the cemetery, or with the remains interred therein, has been reported to the Secretary of State; but inquiry shall be made. I have no reason to apprehend any further appropriation of the cemetery, or desecration of the remains or destruction of monuments, is probable. In view of the doubt as to the legal title to the property, I do not see my way to instruct the Governor to demand rent from the Anglican Trustees for the site of the church.

  LAW AND POLICE (IRELAND)—KILRUSH PETTY SESSIONS—DISMISSAL OF A SUMMONS.
  MR. JORDANasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been directed to a report in The Kilrush Herald, County Clare, of 2nd April, of a case in which a Constable Holmes summoned Mr. Andrew Bourke, because his hound barked at the dog of Captain Welch, the Resident Magistrate; whether Holmes so swore in Court; whether Holmes, in conjunction with Head Constable Kennedy, summoned several other inhabitants of
  688
  Kilrush on the same day; whether the cases were dismissed by the other four magistrates, the Chairman (Captain Welch) alone dissenting; whether Holmes is a police recruit, and Kennedy was only recently appointed to that station; whether he is aware that these summonses have caused considerable irritation in the district; and, whether he will cause an inquiry into the circumstances of the case?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): These inquiries cannot be answered without local inquiry in the County of Clare, for which no opportunity was afforded by the short Notice given of the Question.

  CRIME AND OUTRAGE (IRELAND)— THE RIOTS AT BELFAST—ASSAULT ON JOHN JOHNSTONE.
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is true that an old labourer named John Johnstone, who on the 13th of August last year, according to Commander M'Hardy's Report on the Belfast Riots, was suddenly attacked by a number of his fellow workmen (in the shipbuilding yard of Messrs. Harland and Wolff, Belfast), beaten, covered with tar, and compelled to leave the employment, after a service of 34 years, was, during and after his illness resulting from the injuries he had sustained, refused any allowance from the sick and accident fund of the establishment, to which, whilst an employé, he had been compelled to subscribe; whether the managers of the fund refused to furnish a copy of their Rules to Mr. M'Erlean, solicitor, who applied for them on behalf of Johnstone; and, whether the fund is subject to public authority?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): I have no official information as to the fund referred to, which, so far as I can judge from the terms of the Question, appears to be one under private management.
  MR. SEXTON: Might I ask, Sir, whether a sick or accident fund of this kind is not under the control of a public officer, like Friendly Societies?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: I should imagine not; but I have not yet received any information.

  PARLIAMENT—HOUSE OF COMMONS— THE ALL-NIGHT SITTING ON MARCH 21—EXTRA PAY TO MESSENGERS.
  SIR ALGERNON BORTHWICKasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is true that the messengers of this House were given any extra pay for the All-night Sitting on the 21st of March; and, whether the police, who served so many additional hours, have not received any special remuneration as usual on occasions of All-night Sittings; and, if so, why is there any departure from the custom?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. MATTHEWS), in reply, said, he was informed that the messengers engaged during the recent All-night Sitting would be granted an allowance of 5s. each. It was not the regular custom to grant extra remuneration to the police for extra duty; but, as he believed on two previous occasions a special allowance had been made, he would be prepared to consider any application the Commissioners of Police might address to him.

  CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACTS—OUTBREAK OF ANTHRAX—COMPENSATION.
  SIR EDWARD BIRKBECKasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Whether, in the event of an outbreak of anthrax on any farm, and an order being given for animals to be slaughtered to prevent further spreading of the disease, the tenant will receive compensation in the same manner as in the case of foot-and-mouth disease under the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act; and, whether, if no such power is in force to grant compensation, Her Majesty's Government will at once introduce a Bill to remedy such defect?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE DUCHY (Lord JOHN MANNERS): The Government do not propose to give Local Authorities power to slaughter on account of anthrax, or otherwise to deal with anthrax as with foot-and-mouth disease, which is a totally different affection. Slaughter in anthrax would be impracticable, as the animals are usually found dead, or die soon after the symptoms become apparent; and, further, as the disease does not spread
  690
  by the mere association of the diseased with the healthy animals, slaughter end compensation would only be for the benefit of the owner, and not for that of the community.
  SIR EDWARD BIRKBECKasked, if the noble Lord was aware that a tenant farmer in Lancashire was ordered by the Local Authorities to slaughter his animals in consequence of an outbreak of anthrax, and that he received no compensation?
  LORD JOHN MANNERS: I am not aware of it.

  THE MAGISTRACY (IRELAND)—REMOVAL OF DR. CLARKE, OF PHILIPSTOWN, KING'S COUNTY.
  DR. FOXasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he has received a copy of a Resolution, passed unanimously by the Board of Guardians of the Tullamore Union, at their meeting on the 29th ultimo, in reference to the removal of Dr. Clarke from the Commission of the Peace; and, whether the reasons stated in that Resolution for the removal of Dr. Clarke are correct; and, if not, whether he will state the reasons specifically?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The hon. Member sent me a copy of the Resolution to which he refers. That Resolution does not correctly set forth the grounds of Dr. Clarke's supersession. I have already stated the true reasons in reply to the hon. Member's former Question.
  DR. FOX: the right hon. Gentleman gave no specific reason. He merely said that Dr. Clarke had been connected with an illegal act.
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: The Lord Chancellor's grounds for dismissing Dr. Clarke were, as I stated to the House, that he took part in meetings and proceedings inconsistent with respect for the laws and the free exercise of legal rights. [Cries of" What proceedings?"]
  MR. CONYBEARE: Will the right hon. Gentleman lay upon the Table of the House a Return of all the magistrates who have been, or are being, superseded, because—
  MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, order! That does not arise out of the Question on the Paper.

  INLAND REVENUE—LEGACY DUTY OFFICE, SOMERSET HOUSE—COMPULSORY RETIREMENT—DIVULGENCE OF OFFICIAL SECRETS.
  MR. CONYBEAREasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether the Board of Inland Revenue have submitted to the Treasury a scheme for the revision of the Legacy Duty Office at Somerset House, which will involve the compulsory retirement of a number of clerks who are in the prime of life; and, if so, whether he will undertake to postpone the consideration of any scheme which will further unnecessarily burden the Pension List, until the Royal Commission on the Civil Service shall have had an opportunity of inquiring into and reporting upon the constitution, &c, of the Board of Inland Revenue, and of the Departments under its control; and, whether, in the case of offices where work has fallen off, or where, on other grounds, it may be necessary to reduce numbers, he will consider the advisability of doing this by transferring the supernumerary clerks to other Departments, rather than by adding to the Pension List?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN), in reply, said, that by a reprehensible act of disloyalty, such as rarely occurred in that extremely well-managed and satisfactory Department, the Inland Revenue, the existence of a plan for the re-organization of the Legacy Duty Office had been revealed to the hon. Member. The plan was still in an inchoate stage, and was not yet decided upon; and he was surprised to learn that it had been already divulged before any official steps had been taken with regard to it. He was unable to say, from personal knowledge, whether any of the clerks who were to be compulsorily retired were in the prime of life or not; but, with scarcely an exception, they had all seen over 30 years' service. He should at no time consent to any scheme which would unnecessarily burden the Pension List, for he was quite as alive as the hon. Member, or anyone else, to the danger of increasing that list. He could not undertake to defer any reforms in the Civil Service Departments till the Commission had reported, for that Commis-
  692
  sion had a vast amount of work before it; and if there were any reforms that could be carried out for the benefit of the Public Service before it reported, he could not undertake to delay such reform. As to the last part of the Question, he should always consider whether it would not be better to transfer officers who had still good work in them than to place them on the Pension List.
  MR. CHILDERSasked, whether the right hon. Gentleman would take any stops to ascertain how the secret was divulged?
  MR. GOSCHENsaid, he would undertake the painful task of considering whether any steps should be taken in the matter; but he would say, meanwhile, that it would be more satisfactory if hon. Members to whom such revelations were made would themselves point out to the persons making them the injury they inflicted on the Public Service, and the likelihood thereby of defeating the necessary reforms.
  MR. CONYBEAREobserved, that he had not the slightest idea that it was an official secret that was divulged, else he should probably not have asked a Question on the subject.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked, whether it was the practice of the Treasury, or whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer could adduce a single instance in which the Treasury had prevented an increase in the Pension List by adopting the principle of interchangeability of clerks?
  MR. GOSCHENreplied that he could not answer the Question off-hand. No doubt it would be a more satisfactory mode of proceeding to give employment to clerks rather than pensions. The hon. Member would be aware that when clerks were pensioned they were not the most efficient in the Service.

  POST OFFICE (IRELAND)—TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION AT KILTIMAGH, CO. MAYO.
  MR. DILLONasked the Postmaster General, If he will consider the claims of Kiltimagh, in County Mayo, to telegraphic accommodation; whether Kiltimagh has a population of 1,300; and, whether many smaller towns in Mayo have not telegraph stations?
  THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (Mr. RAIKES): In

  693
  reply to the hon. Member, I have to say that I shall be glad to consider the claims of Kiltimagh to telegraphic accommodation. I have called for the necessary Reports; and as soon as I receive them, I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

  ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY—A FORCE SENT TO RANDALSTOWN, CO. ANTRIM.
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, By whom the Irish Government wore induced to send a Divisional Magistrate, a Resident Magistrate, a County Inspector, a number of other Inspectors, and a force of about 100 constables, to Randalstown, County Antrim, on St. Patrick's Day; and, from what fund the cost of the exhibition will be defrayed?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The Government received information that a Roman Catholic procession was intended to march into Randalstown through the Protestant quarters, and that an adequate police force would be required. The cost would be defrayed by the Constabulary Vote; but about £19 would eventually fall on the county in respect of such men as were drafted from other counties.
  MR. SEXTONasked, what steps the Government intended to take with regard to the gentlemen who gave them this false and misleading information on the subject?
  MR. A. J. BALFOURsaid, he had no ground for believing the report was false. On the contrary, he believed the procession actually was intended.

  ALLOTMENTS ACT, 1882—HILL'S CHARITY, COLLOMPTON.
  MR. JESSE COLLINGSasked the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, Whether the Charity Commissioners directed the Trustees of Hill's Charity, Collompton, to carry out the provisions of "The Allotments Act, 1882;" whether the Trustees, in disregard of such instructions, and in direct violation of the Act, have let the lands of the Charity on lease, thereby depriving the labourers of their legal right to allotments conferred upon them by the Act; and, whether the Charity
  694
  Commissioners will take steps to cancel the lease, or, failing their power to do that, will call upon the Trustees to hire other land for the purpose of allotments, in accordance with section 5 of the Act of 1882?
  THE VICE PRESIDENT (Sir WILLIAM HART DYKE): In May, 1884, the Charity Commissioners directed the Trustees of Hill's Charity to carry out the provisions of the Allotments Extension Act, 1882. The Commissioners are informed that the Trustees, in disregard of such instructions, have let the whole of the Charity land on lease for a term of six years from Michaelmas, 1885. Notwithstanding this, the Commissioners are taking, and will continue to take, all steps in their power to compel the Trustees to set apart and to let the Charity land in allotments under the Act.

  COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS—GENERAL INDEX TO THE REPORTS.
  MR. HOWELLasked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether a "general Index to Reports from the Committee of Public Accounts, together with selections from the Reports," has recently been printed at the expense of the Government; whether the said Index is to be issued as a Parliamentary Paper to Members of this House; and, if not, whether it can be obtained by payment at the Sale Office at this House; and, if not printed for circulation, nor to be had by purchase, will he state to this House why the Index was printed, how many copies have been printed, and the cost, and how those copies have been disposed of; and, whether copies will be placed in the Library for the use of Members of this House?
  THE SECRETARY (Mr. JACKSON): The Index referred to was prepared by the Exchequer and Audit Department for the use of that Office, and 100 copies were printed with that object. It was not intended for general circulation; but copies were supplied to the Public Accounts Committee. Copies have now been placed in the Library for the use of Members of this House.

  THE MAGISTRACY (IRELAND)—MR. KELLY, CLERK OF PETTY SESSIONS AT TOOMEBRIDGE, CO. ANTRIM.
  MR. H. CAMPBELL(for Mr. PINKERTON)asked

  695
  the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Mr. Kelly. Clerk of Petty Sessions at Toomebridge, County Antrim, when appointed two years ago, gave an undertaking in writing that he would reside in the district before he was elected by the magistrates; whether the said Mr. Kelly has recently been appointed Clerk of Petty Sessions for the district of Mahera and Magherafelt, and whether he will now be able to fulfil his engagement; and, whether he is aware that serious public inconvenience will result from there being only one clerk in these three populous districts, the extremes of which are so far distant from each other, and situated in different counties?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The facts are as stated in the first and second paragraphs. The question as to where Mr. Kelly shall be required to reside is now under consideration, various Memorials having been received on the subject.

  NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND)—PAYMENT OF RESULTS FEES AT ROUNDSTONE.
  MR. FOLEYasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What is the cause of the delay in paying the results fees accruing to the schools of the parish of Roundstone, the examination of these schools having taken place during the first fortnight of February last; and, whether it is customary for all results fees to be paid within the month following the month in which the examination is held?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): This Question is down without Notice. It has been referred to the Commissioners of National Education for inquiry.

  LAW AND JUSTICE—SENTENCE ON ANNIE SHIPTON, CONVICTED OF CHILD DESERTION.
  MR. J. ROWLANDSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Annie Shipton, who, being in great distress, left her child at the house of the child's father, was sentenced to a month's imprisonment; and, whether he is prepared to re-consider the case, with a view to a mitigation of the sentence?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. MATTHEWS), in reply, said, his attention had been called to this case, and he was now in communication with the magistrate; and as soon as he received his Report he would consider whether the case was not one in which he would advise Her Majesty to interfere.

  ADMIRALTY—DISMISSAL OF LIEUTENANT HALL—THE QUEEN'S REGULATIONS.
  MR. HANBURYasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether it is the fact that Lieutenant Hall has been sentenced to dismissal from the Service in consequence of his misconstruction of a Regulation which Mr. Justice A. L. Smith has declared to be
  "So framed as to leave considerable doubt as to its meaning,"
  adding—
  "It seems to us that even a lawyer of some learning and experience might be excused if he failed to interpret it correctly;"
  and, whether the Admiralty will undertake to revise the Code of Regulations, so as to make them less open to misconstruction on the part of officers and others interested?
  DR. FARQUHARSONasked, whether the noble Lord would undertake to revise the sentence on this officer, which had really been passed for inability to read an incomprehensible Regulation?
  COMMANDER BETHELLasked, whether, as the case had been undertaken rather with the desire to vindicate the position taken up by the Admiralty than to punish an individual, the noble Lord could, without detriment to the Public Service, remove the stigma of dismissal from Lieutenant Hall?
  THE FIRST LORD (Lord GEORGE HAMILTON): Lieutenant Hall has been dismissed from the Service because he was found guilty by a court martial of the grave offence of desertion, having left his ship when employed on foreign service. The plea attempted to be set up in his defence was that he was entitled to act under a certain Regulation of the Service. Such an interpretation would enable every or any commissioned officer to leave the Navy whenever he chose, regardless of the wants and exigencies of

  697
  the Service, and carries with it its own refutation. I can hold out no hope of remitting or altering the sentence. As the wording of the Regulation in question is not as clear as it should be it will be cancelled.

  THE CURRENCY QUESTION—REPORT OF THE ROYAL COMMISSION.
  MR. S. SMITHasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If his attention has been called to a paragraph, in the money article of The Times of Wednesday, to this effect—
  "The Royal Commission on the Currency Question has adjourned for the Easter Holidays; but we have reason to believe that sufficient evidence has already been taken to enable the members to make up their minds as to the nature of the Report which they will publish, and that the preponderance of opinion is decidedly in favour of maintaining the status quo;"
  and, whether there is any ground for this assertion?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN): I am unable to answer the Question with regard to the proceedings of the Royal Commission. I have already stated in the House that Royal Commissions act entirely on their own responsibility, and that the Government do not interfere with the discharge of their duties. But the hon. Member will observe that fresh appointments have recently been made to the Commission; and I have no reason to believe myself that the statement made in the newspaper referred to is correct.

  INLAND REVENUE—THE PROPERTY AND INCOME TAX—DEFAULT OF COLLECTIONS.
  SIR FREDERICK MAPPINasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If a Collector, who is appointed by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue to collect the Property and Income Taxes, absconds, leaving a deficit in the amount collected, have the Commissioners power to collect a proportionate rate, to make up the deficiency from those persons who possess receipts, showing they have already paid these taxes; and, whether, if such is the practice, he will give instructions that this injustice be discontinued in the future?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. GOSCHEN): No parish is answerable for the acts, or offences, or defaults of collectors appointed by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue. If a parish is responsible, it will be for the defaults of those who are appointed by local Commissioners.

  THE IRISH LAND LAW BILL.
  MR. DILLON: I wish to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he is aware that the supply of copies of the Irish Land Law Bill is utterly insufficient for the demands of hon. Members? As I have been informed, a supply of only 400 copies was sent into the Vote Office, which were almost immediately exhausted; and hon. Members were besieged by applications from their constituents for copies of this Bill, which they were unable to meet.
  THE FIRST LORD (Mr. W. H. SMITH), in reply, said, he was not aware of that fact; but he would immediately communicate with the officers of the other House, with a view to obtain a supply of copies of the Bill which would be adequate to meet the requirements of hon. Members.

  CRIME AND OUTRAGE (IRELAND)—THE RIOTS AT BELFAST—THE COMMISSION.
  MR. SEXTON: I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland a Question, of which I have given him private Notice. It is in reference to the recent engagement which the right hon. Gentleman gave that the Government intended to accept in principle the recommendations of the four Commissioners who inquired into the Belfast riots, and who reported in January last. The Report of Mr. Wallace M'Hardy, the other Commissioner, has not yet been circulated amongst Members, but it has appeared in the Press. I find from it that he is directly at issue with the representatives of the authorities in Belfast and the four Commissioners upon very important points in reference to special constables, the formation of a Committee to regulate a Committee of Local Justices for control of the police, and the adjudication upon the Bench by Local Justices. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether he adheres to his engagement that the Government

  699
  will accept on principle the recommendations of Mr. Justice Day, Major General Bulwer, Mr. Le Poer Trench, and Mr. Richard Adams; and, whether they will pay any attention to the individual recommendations of Mr. Wallace M'Hardy?
  THE CHIEF SECRETARY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR): The hon. Gentleman sent me Notice that he intended to ask this Question, though I did not exactly understand the terms in which it is put. I hope he will understand from me that the Government have arrived at no final decision with regard to the details of their arrangements with regard to Belfast. I have not had an opportunity of studying the details of Mr. M'Hardy's Report; but no decision will be taken by the Government within the course of the next few days, and I will be glad to communicate any decision immediately it is made to the hon. Gentleman.
  MR. SEXTON: Do I understand, in the meantime, that the Government maintain their former pledge—that they will generally adhere to the recommendation of the four Commissioners?
  MR. A. J. BALFOUR: Well, Sir, I shall certainly withdraw from no pledge given by the Government. I will be very happy if the hon. Gentleman will communicate with me on the subject.

MOTION.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE—THE EASTER RECESS.
  THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH): I have received a communication from the other side of the House, to the effect that it would be agreeable to hon. Members that I should now move that the House, at its rising, adjourn till Tuesday next, and if that is the desire of hon. Gentlemen on both sides I will conclude with that Motion. The Bill for the amendment of the Criminal Law in Ireland stands on the Paper for to-day; and under these circumstances, if this Motion is accepted, the Bill will not be proceeded with today, but will be taken again on Tuesday next. I think it is right that hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House should know that that is the arrangement. I understand the Motion will be
  700
  accepted, so as not to involve delay and debate. That, I believe, is the wish of both sides of the House, in order to enable Gentlemen to get away by the afternoon train. In making this Motion I am carrying out the engagement I made to the House a few days ago—that if it was the desire of the House generally that this step should be taken I would do everything in my power to meet that wish; and it is in accordance with that wish that I now make the Motion that the House, at its rising, do adjourn till Tuesday next.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House will, at the rising of the House this day, adjourn till Tuesday next."—(Mr. William Henry Smith.)
  MR. SEXTONpresumed that there would be no attempt to make progress with any of the Government Orders of the Day at that Sitting.
  MR. W. H. SMITH: No, Sir; nothing.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid that, though he would not oppose the Motion which the right hon. Gentleman had made, he and those who sat near him did not approve of the holiday being so short.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked, when it was proposed to take the second reading of the Coal Mines, &c, Regulation Bill, as he understood the Representatives of mining constituencies were anxious to have some discussion on the subject?
  THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. MATTHEWS), in reply, said, that if hon. Members wished to have a discussion on the second reading of this Bill, he must fix a day on which discussion could be taken; but he had been under the impression that a second reading discussion would not be necessary, as all the points that arose on the Bill were really points for Committee.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, that he had gathered from consultation with hon. Members specially interested in the measure that it was desirable to have it discussed on the second reading.
  MR. BIGGARalso urged that the Representatives of the miners wished to have the Bill discussed on the second reading at an hour when the debate on it could be duly reported.
  MR. TOMLINSONspeaking for colliery proprietors, said, that they would be quite content that the Bill should be taken without a discussion on the second reading. It was one in which the safety of miners was deeply concerned; but he understood that the Bill was not to be discussed in a hostile spirit, and there would be an opportunity afforded to those who desired to argue questions of principle on the Motion for going into Committee. He would suggest that that would be the proper stage at which to take any discussion.
  THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. STUART-WORTLEY)said, he had full reason to believe that not only the hon. Member for Morpeth (Mr. Burt), but also the hon. Member for the Wansbeck Division of Northumberland (Mr. Fenwick), and the hon. Member for Mid Durham (Mr. W. Crawford)—all Representatives of the miners—had been fully prepared and willing that the Bill should be read a second time without discussion to-day.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, that some of the hon. Members whom the hon. Gentleman had just mentioned were the very Members whom he had consulted on that subject.
  Motion agreed to.
  House adjourned at Three o'clock p.m. till Tuesday next.