§ Mr. MAURICE HEALYasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, with reference to the reason given for the action of the Treasury in making a deduction from the Government contribution in lieu of rates payable to the Cork Corporation in respect of the Cork barracks because of the non-removal of refuse by the corporation staff, that many precedents exist in English municipalities for similar deduction, and that a case of the kind exists in the borough of Woolwich, he will say whether the arrangement in Woolwich arose out of an agreement entered into in the year 1877 between the then Woolwich Local Board and the War Department whereby the War Department agreed themselves to remove refuse from all the Government buildings in the parish, including barracks, dockyards, Arsenal, etc., whereas in the Cork case the corporation were giving the military authorities exactly the same services as they render to other ratepayers, which is the basis of the Government contribution in lieu of rates; will he say whether the other English precedents are of the same character as the Woolwich case; and whether he can specify any case in England where a deduction has been made in the same circumstances as in Cork, namely, without agreement, and where the municipality 1062W was giving to the Government the same services as rendered to other ratepayers, and were willing to continue to do so?
§ Mr. HOBHOUSEThe arrangement with Woolwich was made owing to the unwillingness of the local authority to empty ash-pits more frequently for the Government than for ordinary ratepayers, and, by way of acknowledging their liability to that extent, they offered to pay a fair proportion of the cost of the work. This offer was accepted and the arrangement has never been disturbed. The circumstances at Cork appear to be similar, as they were also in the many other precedents referred to in my previous answer. The only difference is that the local authorities in the other cases have recognised the equity of the arrangement.