secures the use of the vessels of those raise doubts in my mind whether it companies as armed cruisers in war; deserved the concession I offered yesterwhether power is taken to prevent the day. As to the estimate of loss by that transfer or hire of these vessels to a offer, I had already allowed for a conforeign flag without the approval of the siderable loss from a diminution in the German Chancellor; and, if so, whether number of the small cheques to which it he can state the method or arrangements referred. So far as I can judge from the by which the condition against transfer statistics of the comparative numbers of or hire can be made effective and small cheques which I have been able to obtain, I think that an addition of £40,000 to the loss I already anticipated should cover the amount. enforced. LORD CRANBORNE: The German Government gives a Postal Subvention to the East African and North German Lloyd Companies. The use of vessels of these companies in time of war is secured by the law of 13th June, 1873, and this liability is mentioned in the postal contracts. During the term of the contract the sale or hire of subsidised vessels to a foreign Power is forbidden even in time of peace, unless by consent of the German Chancellor. This provision is contained in the contracts, which authorise the Imperial Chancellor, in case of the partial or complete mobilisation of the Navy, either to buy for full value the steamers of the line, or to employ them, on payment of compensation. According to German law, the removal of vessels in time of peace or of war can be prevented by armed force. Budget Proposals-Cheque Stamp Duty. MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.): I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the case of a single business in which 4,000 cheques a week are issued for amounts under £1; and whether he has made any estimate of the loss from his proposed revenue which will be caused by the concession he has announced in the cheque duty, and what has been the basis of such estimate. *THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir M. HICKS BEACH, Bristol, W.): The hon. Member has been good enough to send me some particulars of this case, from which I gather that it is that of a firm carrying on a large tea business, which is so profitable that they are able to give pensions of a few shillings a week to the widows of customers who have bought a certain quantity of tea, which must presumably be paid either by cheque or postal order. I do not know why he has called my attention to the case, unless he wished to MR. LOUGH: Are we to understand, then, that the right hon. Gentleman hopes to realise within £40,000 of his Estimate in the Budget Speech, notwithstanding this concession? *SIR M. HICKS BEACH: Yes, Sir, for the reasons I have stated. MR. LAMBERT (Devonshire, South Molton): I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider the advisability of avoiding the necessity of going to the Money Order Office for a penny stamp by arranging that cashed cheques under £2 may be used as postage stamps. *SIR M. HICKS BEACH: I suppose the hon. Member thinks this a joke. If he does, he is perfectly welcome to his amusement, but I do not think I need answer the Question. Cowdenbeath Railway Station. MR. JOHN HOPE (Fifeshire, W): 1 beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the railway station of Cowdenbeath, Fifeshire, is inadequate for the passenger traffic of that place; that a fatal accident recently took place owing to the crowded condition of the platform; and if he will cause an Inquiry to be made into this case with the view of compelling the North British Railway to provide a suitable passenger station to meet the requirements of the increasing population. THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE (Mr. GERALD BALFOUR, Leeds, Central): No, Sir, I have no information showing that the accommodation at the railway station mentioned is inadequate for the passenger traffic there dea't MR. GERALD BALFOUR: Yes, Sir; but I have no information as to the date which will be fixed by the Court for the hearing of the objections. No doubt the Court will give an intimation to the parties. Working Hours of Railway Servants. MR. BELL: I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he has yet called for the Return of hours worked by railway men; and, if so, for what period. MR. GERALD BALFOUR: I have caused letters to be addressed to the several railway companies, calling upon them to furnish a Return on the lines of that for 1892. The period will be the month of December of last year. THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG, Bristol, S.): I am informed that from Christmas last the Company referred to have reduced the rebate which, since 1894, they have allowed on water charges from 10 per cent. to 5 per cent. The alteration is stated to have been rendered necessary owing to the payment which the Company have to make to the City Chamberlain under their Act of 1894, and to increased rates and charges for labour and materials. Notice of the alteration was sent to the local authorities in the district on 1st November, and an explanation is printed on all the application papers. I am not aware whether any other of the Metropolitan Water Companies have recently raised their charges. Australia and Penny Postage. SIR JOHN LENG: I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Australian Commonwealth has resolved to adopt penny postage from he state when the new rate of postage all parts of the Empire; and, if so, can will take effect. THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN, Worcestershire, E.): The Postmaster General has received a telegram on this subject from the Commonwealth Government, but the meaning is not clear, and he will make further inquiry. In the meantime the rate of postage to all parts of Australia remains as at present, 23d. the half ounce. Cloudesley Trust Estate, Islington. SIR ALBERT ROLLIT (Islington, S.): I beg to ask the hon. Member for the Tonbridge Division of Kent, as Charity Commissioner, whether it is the general practice of the Charity Commissioners, where charitable property, such as the Cloudesley Trust Estate in Islington, is about to be let, merely to publish a notice of the proposed lease or letting by affixing notices to the church door or doors and by advertisement in local newspapers; and whether, with the view of following general usage and protecting the interest of such charities and their funds, he will consider the advisability of inviting tenders by public notices or of offering the property by public auction, as suggested by the Islington Borough Council. THE PARLIAMENTARY CHARITY COMMISSIONER (Mr. GRIFFITH BOSCAWEN, Kent, Tonbridge): The general practice of the Charity Commissioners is as stated in the first part of the hon. Member's Question. With regard to the suggestion in the concluding sentence, the Commissioners have considered, but are not prepared to adopt it, the r experience being that the system of publishing notice of the terms offered is more efficacious in securing the best rent for charity land than the alternative of inviting tenders; and, when the property is in demand, has the practical advantages of an auction without the attendant expense. Crofters' Holdings in Ross-shire. MR. WEIR (Ross and Cromarty): I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Secretary for Scotland has received a petition from the crofters of Morvich and Invershiel, on the estate of Kintail, in the parish of Glenshiel, Ross-shire, urging that arrangements may be made for the extension of their holdings, and pointing out that much of the land which is suitable for crofters' holdings has been converted into deer forest; is he aware that the Deer Forest Return, 1899, shows that the Forest of Kintail, which includes Morvich, comprises 12,000 acres, while the Sportsman's Guide shows that the forest contains 27,000 acres, or an increase of 16,000 since 1891; and will he state the nature of the reply which he proposes to send to the petitioners. THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. A. GRAHAM MURRAY, Buteshire): The Secretary for Scotland has received the petition referred to by the hon. Member, and the petitioners have been informed that it has been remitted to the Crofters' Commission for consideration. I may mention that Glenshiel is not a "congested district." MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether the Secretary for Scotland is aware that the farm of Inverlael, in the parish of Lochbroom, Rossshire, recently in the occupation of the late Mr. W. G. Mundell, at a rental of £188, is about to be converted into a deer forest; and, seeing that this farm contains some of the fertile land in the parish, and is shown by the evidence taken before the Highlands and Islands Commission, 1892 (Questions 56,066 to 56,185), to have formerly supported many crofter families, will he consider the expediency of communicating with the proprietor with a view to the acquisition of the farm by the Congested Districts Board for the creation of new holdings. MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: The Secretary for Scotland has not, I understand, heard about the conversion referred to by the hon. Member. He does not propose to make any inquiry on the subject. Scottish Private Bill Procedure- MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland, whether, in the case of the Aberdeen Tramways Provisional Order Bill and the Buckie Harbour Provisional Order Bill, the Commissioners appointed to hear the same under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, had of their own motion, with dueregard to the subject matter of the proposed Orders and to the locality to which their provisions relate, and without any reference to or instructions or suggestions from the Secretary for Scotland, determined to hold the inquiry in Edinburgh instead of at Aberdeen; if so, whether, in so deciding, the Commissioners had before them and under their consideration the nature of the inquiry and the extra expenses which would be entailed upon those promoting and upon those opposing the said Orders owing to the inquiry being held in Edinburgh instead of in Aberdeen. MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: It is very desirable not to delay the announcement of the place and date of an inquiry under the Private Legislation Procedure Act, to allow of the necessary arrangements being made by parties. It has, therefore, been the practice for the Secretary for Scotland as soon as possible to consult with the Chairman of Commissioners, and on obtaining his concurrence to announce the place and date immediately after the Commissioners aware that, in reply to a resolution of have been appointed. Under these the inhabitants of Tiernar, Mallaranny, circumstances no preliminary meeting County Mayo, passed at a public meeting of Commissioners has been usual for the purpose of determining the place and date of inquiry, and so far as the Secretary for Scotland is aware, no such meeting was held in the case referred to. MR. PIRIE: I beg to ask the Lord Advocate, as representing the Secretary for Scotland, whether he is aware that the Chairman of Commissioners, recently appointed under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, to hold the inquiry in the case of the Aberdeen Tramways Provisional Order, has stated that the decision to hold the inquiry in Edinburgh was come to by the Scottish Office and not by the Commissioners, and that, in his opinion, the inquiry should have been held in the locality concerned ; and whether, before the place of inquiry was decided upon, any opportunity had been afforded to the promoters and opposers of the Provisional Order of being heard on the convenience of the place for holding the inquiry. on the 28th of last December, the Con- THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. WYNDHAM, Dover): The inspection has not yet been made. I may add that the funds at present available for such works are all hypothecated to projects submitted at earlier dates. Emigration from Ireland. DR. AMBROSE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the increase in the number of emigrants from Ireland, special trains having to be provided to convey the emigrants to Queenstown; can he give any reason for such increase; and will he see that a Commissioner is appointed with a view to finding out the cause of such emigration. MR. WILLIAM JOHNSTON (Belfast, S.): Can the right hon. Gentleman say if there is any reason to think that these people are leaving Ireland through the tyranny of the United Irish League? MR. WYNDHAM: I am not prepared as to where the inquiry shall be held is to speculate on such points. There was left to the Commission? MR. A. GRAHAM MURRAY: Yes, the Commissioners are to hold the inquiry where they please. MR. PIRIE: I shall draw the attention of the House to this matter on the first possible opportunity. Ireland-Rossmurravagh Fisheries. a decrease of 579 in the number of emigrants during the first quarter of this year as compared with the corresponding quarter of 1901. No later figures are available. No useful object would, I think, be served by appointing a Commission. DR. AMBROSE: Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been directed. to the large numbers of emigrants very recently carried in special trains to Queenstown? 169 MR. WYNDHAM: I have seen the 17th April last; whether his attention paragraph which is no doubt the origin has been directed to the comments of of the Question, but I have given the Lord Chief Justice O'Brien and Mr. Justice Gibson on the action of the official figures. Crown in bringing the case before the King's Bench Division; and whether the Irish Government propose to continue a practice in favour of which counsel for the Crown was unable to cite one precedent from among the cases tried before the English Courts, CAPTAIN DONELAN (Cork Co., N.): Is it not the fact that, although the figures show a falling off, the percentage is higher in view of the decrease of population? *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order! The and for which, according to Mr. Justice Question has been answered. MR. SWIFT MACNEILL: Why don't you "proclaim" emigration? Gibson, there was no precedent among such cases. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. ATKINSON, Londonderry, N.): At the request of my right hon. Belfast Borough Accounts. MR. FIELD (Dublin, St. Patrick): I friend, I will reply to this Question. beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the My attention has been called to a newsLord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he paper report of the proceedings, includis aware that the auditor of the Local ing the interlocutory observations of Government Board, in his report dated the judges made during the argument. 6th January last on the Belfast Borough I am not in a position to say whetherAccounts for the year ended 31st March, it is accurate or not. The jurisdiction 1901, surcharged several sums, amount of the Superior Court to require, at ing to £4 423 18s., against members of the suit of the Crown, persons whothe Council, and refers in his report to used language similar to that used by other sums that he had not disallowed, Mr. Lynam to give sureties to keep but which he stated if they appeared at the peace and be of good behaviour, a subsequent audit would be reviewed; has been established in Ireland by three whether he is aware that this report of separate decisions, founded mainly on The jurisdiction the Auditor has not been supplied to or English authorities. brought before the members of the is undoubted; it, as well as the use Council generally; and whether it is of the language complained of, was, I the intention of the Local Government understand, admitted in the case by Board to take further steps to render the counsel for Mr. Lynam, and the Executive Government will apply to the effective their auditor's report. Court for its exercise, whenever they consider it their duty so to do for the maintenance of peace and order. The observations of the learned Judges referred to, as reported, only amounted, as I understand, to this: that there was no reported case among the English precedents where the form of the application was precisely similar to that before the Court, but that they did not attempt to lay down the entirely untenable proposition that the jurisdiction did not exist in England, and has not been exercised there. MR. WYNDHAM: The facts are correctly stated in the first part of the Question. The Board is not aware that the report has been communicated to the members of the Council generally. A Bill has been drafted amending the Local Government Acts, 1898-1901, and this Bill contains a provision enabling the Board to prescribe rules as to the publication of the reports of its auditors. M'Dermott v. Lynam. MR. M'KEAN (Monaghan, S.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he has seen a Report of the proceedings in the case. of M'Dermott v. Lynam, tried before the King's Bench Division of the High on the Court of Justice in Ireland Scottish Deer Forests. MR. WEIR: I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that the Deer Forest Return published in 1899 shows that sixteen deer |