the part of Her Majesty's Government as to the action of the Porte in suddenly bringing the new Tariff into force in disregard of the assurances given to Her Majesty's Embassy, that no change would be made before October next. MR. BOURKE asked under what Treaty the duties were now levied on British manufactures? LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE said, they were now levying under the Treaty of 1863. MR. BOURKE: So there has practically been no change? LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: They are now levying the Duty under the Treaty as they have a right to levy it up to 8 per cent. British merchants are of opinion that in regard to several important classes of articles this change is by no means unfavourable to our manufacturers, as compared with the Tariff which the Porte claims has expired before the Treaty. THE IRISH LAND COMMISSION (SUB- Whether, as the land agent is the person who, presumably, is the most likely person to with the property which he is in the habit of managing." elicit the truth in reference to matters connected I hold a contrary opinion altogether; and I submit that these words are of a distinctly argumentative character, and, according to the Rules of the House, ought not to be put. be a matter of controversy whether the MR. SPEAKER: No doubt, it may likely to elicit the truth in reference to land agent is the person who is most matters connected with the property he manages; but, at the same time, I have not thought it necessary to object to the form of the Question. section of the Land Act specifies the persons who may conduct a case before the Sub-Commission. A landlord's agent is not included in the list; and a Sub-Commission, consequntly, acts properly in refusing to allow an agent to crossexamine a tenant, or, in any way, to MR. TREVELYAN: Sir, the 52nd conduct a case. COLONEL KING-HARMAN: Have the Sub-Commissioners acted improperly in allowing land agents to cross-examine the tenants up to the present? MR. TREVELYAN: I conclude that classes of persons specified in the 52nd that is the case. There are only four section, and undoubtedly the landlord's agent is not included. Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that the Sub-Commissioners in Mayo have recently refused to allow the agents of landlords, who have been brought into the Court for the purpose of having their rents reduced, to cross examine the tenants on matters of fact; and, whether, as the land agent is the person who, presumably, is the most likely person to elicit the truth in reference to matters connected with the property which he is in the habit of managing, and as there appears to be no Clause in the Land Act which prohibits a person acting as agent for a property, under power of attorney, from personally ap. pearing in a case in which his principal is concerned, he will call the attention of the Land Commissioners to the hard-regulation, it is proposed to grant them ship which is inflicted on owners of property by this new regulation, with the view of enabling the landlords' case to be brought before the Courts in the simplest and fairest way, and without the necessity of extraneous professional advice? MR. O'CONNOR POWER: I rise to Order. I wish to direct your attention, Mr. Speaker, to the opening lines of the second paragraph of this Question, which state that POST OFFICE-THE PARCELS POST. MR. KENNY asked the Postmaster General, Whether notice has been served on the mail car contractors in Ireland, setting forth that from the 18th of August next no parcel under seven pounds in weight can be received or carried by mail car other than what passes through the Post Office; if, in consequence of the loss which contractors will suffer by this fair compensation; and, if so, what facilities will be afforded to the contractors to prove their exact losses; and, whether the Post Office authorities have adopted any scale by which to regulate such compensation? MR. FAWCETT: In reply, Sir, to the hon. Member's Question, I may say that notice has been served on the contractors for mail services throughout the Kingdom, that parcels up to the weight of 7 lbs. will form part of Her Majesty's mails from the date on which the Parcels Post comes into operation; and in a certain class of contracts it has also been necessary to restrict the carriage of parcels entirely to such parcels as may be sent through the post. The terms of payment under these altered conditions are a matter for negotiation, and a settlement has been already arrived at in a very large number of cases. Where fresh terms cannot be agreed upon, it is open to the contractors to terminate the contract by three months' notice, when the service will be put up to public competition. TREATY OF BERLIN-ARTICLE X.THE VARNA RAILWAY. MR. DIXON-HARTLAND asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty's Government can now see their way to insist upon the strict fulfilment of Article X. of the Treaty of Berlin, so as to avoid such terms being forced by Bulgaria on the Varna Railway bondholders as practically confiscates their property; whether, the bondholders having been obliged to take the guarantee of Bulgaria for the £140,000 a-year, Her Majesty's Government will take such steps as are necessary to preserve their rights; and, whether, before any final arrangement is agreed to by the agent of Her Majesty's Government at Sofia, he will be directed to secure the payment of all arrears of interest to the bondholders as a precedent condition ? MR. DIXON - HARTLAND: The noble Lord has not in the least answered my first Question. I would ask him, whether the Bulgarian Government only agreed to remit the matter to arbitration on the absurd condition that the decision should be unanimous; next, whether there has been any alteration of the Ministry at Sofia since March last? LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE : The question of unanimity has been one of the points under discussion between Her Majesty's Government and the Bulgarian Government; and it is on this and on other points that, as I stated the other day, Her Majesty's Government regret that they have been unable to obtain any understanding.. MR. DIXON - HARTLAND: What change has there been in the Ministry at Sofia since the 11th of March? LORD EDMOND FIZMAURICE: I am not aware that there has been any change of Ministry, but there have been changes of individual Ministers. MR. DIXON-HARTLAND said, he would repeat his Question that day week. THE ELECTORAL FRANCHISE (IRELAND). MR. DAWSON asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he is aware that, owing to the defects in registration, many persons in Ireland entitled to the franchise are precluded from obtaining it; whether, owing to the provisions contained in the sixty-third section of the Act 11 and 12 Vic. c. 91, many thousands of persons otherwise entitled to the Poor Law, Municipal, and Parliamentary Franchise in Dublin, are deprived of any share in the selection of Poor Law, Municipal and Parlimentary represen encourage Constitutional action in Ireland, he will press forward the Registration Bill he has introduced, and amend it so as to remove the difficulties which at present exclude many thousands of people in Ireland from franchises which the Law intends they should enjoy? LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: Sir, the Bulgarian Government, after long negotiations with the Varna Railway Company, have, at the instance of Her Majesty's Government, agreed in principle to refer the amount of their liability to the arbitration of the Am-tatives; and, whether, with a view to bassadors of the Great Powers at Constantinople. The precise terms of the agreement of arbitration are still under discussion; and Her Majesty's Government regret that the Bulgarian Government have neglected to answer the last two Notes on the subject addressed to them on the 3rd of April and the 4th of May last. The reason given for the delay being the recent change of Ministry and the absence of the Prince of Bulgaria at Moscow. Her Majesty's Agent at Sofia has been instructed to press urgently for a reply to the above-mentioned communication. Mr. Fawcett MR. TREVELYAN: Sir, I am well aware of, and I regret, the circumstances referred to in the second paragraph of this Question, which the hon. Member has in so patriotic a manner brought before me more than once. I think this is a matter which would more properly bo dealt with in a measure relating to the franchise, whether Municipal or Parliamentary, than in a Bill dealing exclusively with registration. I almost doubt whether it would be considered within the scope of a Registration Bill by the opponents of the measure. With regard to the defects of the existing system of registration, I may say that among the proposed Irish measures of this Session there is none that I am more anxious to see promptly carried than one dealing with this question. But the delay in the Government Bills has been so great, and was so unexpected by me when I first brought forward my programme of Irish measures, that I must own I have not now the same confidence of being able to get them carried this Session. MR. DAWSON asked whether it was not a fact that in the English Registration Act of 1878 the provisions referred to in his Question were incorporated from political motives? MR. TREVELYAN said, the provisions were practically determined by the Act of 1869, introduced by the right hon. Member for Ripon (Mr. Goschen); That Act was undoubtedly of a political nature, and was only carried after considerable discussion. POOR LAW (IRELAND)-THE RATHKEALE UNION - INSURANCE OF THE UNION BUILDINGS. MR. SYNAN asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether, by letter of the 18th April 1883, the Board of Public Works informed the Board of Guardians of the Rathkeale Union that they had effected an insurance on the Ballastkerry Dispensary buildings for the sum of £1,150, at the rate of 38. per cent.; whether, by resolutions of the 21st March and 2nd May 1883, the Board of Guardians objected to pay more than 18. 6d. per cent. being the usual rate in the Union, and whether the rate was reduced in consequence of said resolutions; whether, by resolutions of the 11th April and 2nd May 1883, the Board of Guardians called upon the Board of Public Works to inform them how the sum of £1,150 was apportioned over the separate buildings in order to enable the Board of Guardians to effect an additional insurance; and, whether the Board of Public Works have complied with those resolutions, or will now do so? MR. COURTNEY: Sir, the facts appear to be correctly stated in the Question; and I learn that the Board of Works have already complied with the resolutions referred to. POST OFFICE ANNUITIES AND LIFE ASSURANCE TABLES. MR. HOLLOND asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, When the new Post Office Annuities and Insurance Tables, authorised by the Act of last Session, will be ready; and, whether, in view of the fact that these tables must be laid upon the Table of the House thirty days before they come into operathat they will be presented in sufficient tion, he can give the House an assurance time to be approved during the present Session, and thus avoid another year's delay in bringing the Act into opera tion? MR. COURTNEY: Sir, I have agreed master General, that the two sets of with my right hon. Friend the PostActuarial Reports on which the annuity tables should be issued together. The tables must be founded are still under review; and, though the work will be pressed forward, I do not think I could give the assurance for which my hon. Friend asks. ARTIZANS' AND LABOURERS' DWELLINGS ACTS-REBUILDING. SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, What provisions have been agreed to between the Secretary of State and the Commissioners of Sewers as to rebuilding on the sites cleared under the Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings Acts 1875 and 1882; and, when the Correspondence, for the production of which an Address was agreed to on the 3rd May, will be in the hands of Members? SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT said, the terms of the arrangement relating to the various sites would be found in the Correspondence which was in the hands of the printers, and would shortly be laid upon the Table. SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, When a Bill will be brought in for confirming the Provisional Orders made in the four schemes under the Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings GOVERNMENTAL DEPARTMENTS THE HOME OFFICE. SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS asked the Secretary of State for the Home. Department, Whether his attention has been drawn to a leading article in the "Times" of 6th June, which states that "an attempt has been made to relieve the Home Office of a part of its work," a scheme for transferring to the Local Government Board the control of business relating to factories, artizans' dwellings, and burials; and, if the statement is correct; and, if so, under what statute such transfer has been made? SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: No, Sir; it is not the fact that anything that could be properly called a transfer of business has taken place, nor do I think that any such scheme would be practicable. It is true that during a pressure of business, my right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board had been good enough to render me assistance in looking through Papers; but there has not been, nor could there be without Statutory authority, any transfer of responsibilities to that Board. SIR R. ASSHETON CROSS asked Mr. Attorney General, When the Report of the Standing Committee on the Court of Criminal Appeal Bill be presented to the House, so that the Country may have an opportunity of considering the Amendments which have been made in that Bill by the Committee? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES), in reply, said, this Bill was being considered together with the Criminal Code Bill. The Standing Committee on Law had not made such progress as he could have wished, but he should be the last to give up the hope of proceeding with these Bills during this Session. He would promise that the Report of the Committee should be presented at such a time as would allow the House and the country the fullest opportunity of examining the Amendments which had been introduced. Sir R. Assheton Cross SIR. R. ASSHETON CROSS said, the hon. and learned Gentleman had not answered the last portion of the Question? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES) said, that would be acting in opposition to the Instruction to the Committee, which was to deal with both Bills jointly. MADAGASCAR - INTERVENTION OF GREAT BRITAIN WITH FRANCE. MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether, in accordance with the declaration of Her Majesty's Government recognising "the Queen of Madagascar as absolute Monarch of the whole Island" and with the understanding between Great Britain and France" that the two Governments should maintain an identic attitude of policy in Madagascar and act in concert in the matter," Her Majesty's Government has made representations to the French Government concerning the action and the claims of France in Madagascar? LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: No representation, other than those contained in the Blue Book already presented to Parliament, has been made to the French Government on the affairs of Madagascar. MR. SHEIL asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the Guardians of Oldcastle Union granted a superannuation allowance of £38 28. 8d. a-year to Mr. John Flood, aged 67 years, which was duly sanctioned by the Local Government Board; whether the same Guardians granted a superannuation allowance of £12 a-year to Mr. Francis Hartley, age 71 years, which was disallowed by the Local Government Board on the ground that Mr. Hartley did not devote his whole time to the service of the Union; whether the Oldcastle Guardians pointed out that Mr. Flood had not given his whole service to the Union; and, whether the Local Government Board in continuing the sanction of the payment of a pension to Mr. Flood is acting legally? MR. TREVELYAN: Sir, the facts are substantially as stated; but it should be mentioned that when the Guardians submitted to the Local Government Board the claims of Mr. Flood to pension, there was nothing whatever to show that his entire time had not been devoted to the two Poor Law offices in respect of which it was proposed to pension him; and it was in the belief that this was the case that the Local Government Board sanctioned the grant. The Superannuation Act does not contain any express provision enabling the Board to cancel the grant; but they will take legal advice as to whether they have power to take such a step. SIR JAMES M'GAREL-HOGG: I most distinctly state that they have not been systematically refused. MR. THOROLD ROGERS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he is aware that Mr. Henry Hill, of 81, Barlow Street, Old Kent Road, was summoned at the instance of the Metropolitan Board of METROPOLITAN BOARD OF WORKS-Works before the Lambeth Police Court PROHIBITION OF PUBLIC MEETINGS ON OPEN SPACES. MR. THOROLD ROGERS asked the Chairman of the Metropolitan Board of Works, Whether the Board of Works have systematically refused, since the 18th January 1883, to allow any public meetings to be held on any of the open spaces which they are required to protect and allowed to regulate? SIR JAMES M'GAREL-HOGG: I beg to state, Sir, that the Board has not systematically refused, since the 18th of January, 1883, to allow any public meetings to be held on the open spaces; but, having regard to the powers given to the Board to prevent acts or things tending to interference with the use of the open spaces by the public for the purposes of exercise and recreation, the Board has not seen fit to grant permission to persons desiring to hold public meetings for the purpose of discussing religious and other topics upon Sundays. I may add that the magistrate at the Lambeth Police Court, on the 7th instant, in convicting two persons charged with the infringement of the bye-laws, stated his opinion that meetings such as I have mentioned would interfere with the use of the open spaces for the purposes of exercise and recreation. for speaking on the occasion of a public meeting at Peckham Rye on 1st April; that the hearing of the summons was adjourned to 7th June, when Mr. Hill was fined twenty shillings and three guineas costs, with the alternative of fourteen days imprisonment, though four witnesses, whose testimony was not impeached, deposed that he had not spoken; whether the Metropolitan Board of Works have extended their powers in prohibiting meetings on public places, when the Law under which they exercise their powers allows them to regulate such meetings only; whether it has not been the custom for various meetings to be held for many years past, especially by advocates of temperance, on Peckham Rye, without objection, and even with the sanction of the vestry; and, whether, considering that working people cannot assemble to discuss grievances, or assist reforms in other than open spaces near London, owing to the expense involved in hiring rooms, he can check the action of the Board of Works? SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: Sir, so far as the Home Office has anything to do with this matter, which is confirming and sanctioning the orders and regulations made, I have expressed my opinion to the Chairman of the Metro SIR WILFRID LAWSON : Are people allowed to discuss religious ques-politan Board of Works that the power tions on week-days? to regulate public meetings in these open spaces ought not to be extended to an absolute prohibition of such meetings. I have expressed my opinion that in sanctioning the orders and regulations made, I did not contemplate that public meetings should be prohibited altogether. On the contrary, I think it would be very inexpedient to prevent meetings being held. They are allowed |