chance that the Treasury would reconsider their policy, for which, he thought, there were good and obvious reasons. ENDOWED SCHOOLS ACT-THE HULME TRUST. MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD asked the Vice President of the Council, What is ARMY MEDICAL DEPARTMENT—HOS- the position of the scheme for the Hulme Trust? PITAL QUARTERMASTERS. MR. O'DONNELL asked the SecreMR. MUNDELLA: Sir, I am glad to tary of State for War, Whether he is say that this important scheme has now aware that the Director General of the passed through all its stages, and only Army Medical Department represented awaits the next meeting of Council, to the authorities that the title of when it will be submitted for Her MaHospital Quartermaster is most distaste-jesty's sanction. On receiving this it ful to the officers of the Army Hospital will become law. Corps, and recommended its abolition or withdrawal; whether he is aware that very many officers of the Army Hospital Corps, not only prefer their present titles as Captains and Lieutenants of Orderlies of the Army Hospital Corps, even though remaining such entails remaining on their old rate of pay and pension, but that they have peti tioned the authorities to this effect; whether, if he is unaware of these facts, he will inquire why these representations have not been submitted to him; and, whether, meanwhile, he will order that no officer of the Army Hospital Corps shall be gazetted Hospital Quartermaster pending further inquiry? MR. CHILDERS: Sir, in reply to the first part of the hon. Member's Question, I have to say that the Director General of the Army Medical Department is himself "one of the authorities" at the War Office with whom I am in constant confidential communication, and that I must decline to state what advice he may from time to time give to me. I must, at the same time, beg the hon. Member not to assume from this answer that his Question is well founded. As to the second part of the Question, I find that two of these officers who belonged to the old class of apothecaries, and one lieutenant of orderlies, have applied to retain their former titles and conditions of service. These three applications have been received since my former answer to the hon. Member, and have been submitted to me in due course. I have not yet decided what action to take upon them. Other applications to retain the old title, but not the old emoluments, have been received; but I have no intention to entertain them. I do not propose to delay the gazetting of the hospital quartermasters. Mr. Trevelyan POST OFFICE – POSTMASTERS— OFFICE CIRCULAR. MR. BURT asked the Postmaster General, Whether it is true that all Postand pamphlets showing the advantages masters are obliged to distribute papers of the Army, and inviting young men to apply to them for forms of application to enlist; and, if so, whether Postmasters are informed before their appointment that, in addition to the regular duties of their own office, they are to distribute papers of this descrip tion? LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH : Sir, I have been asked by my right hon. Friend-who is compelled by indisposition to be absent-to answer this Question. Placards and circulars connected with the Army and other Government Departments have, on many occasions, been exhibited and distributed at post offices. The Post Office was asked last year by the War Office to have the notices referred to in the Question exhibited; but the arrangement only came into force on the 1st of this month. It is not thought that the exhibiting of a placard, and the handing of a small pamphlet across the counter, can appreciably increase the work of the postmasters. At any rate, I learn from my right hon. Friend that no complaints have reached the Post Office on the subject. LAW AND JUSTICE (IRELAND)— TRIAL BY JURY. VISCOUNT FOLKESTONE asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been directed to the Report in the "Times" of 20th July of a case tried on the Munster Circuit by Judge Barry, which contains the following words: "The jury finally announced that there was no chance of their agreeing. Mr. Justice Barry-Well, I hear that with the deepest sorrow; indeed, I might safely say I hear it more in sorrow than in anger. I am sorry for the sake of the country that I have been so long associated with in various ways; I am sorry for the sake of trial by jury, an institution which I prize a great deal more than any of you on the jury can prize it. Let it be understood that the question which is submitted to you being absolutely conceded, and you being sworn on your oaths on the gospel of God to find a verdict according to the evidence, and that evidence not being impeached, the jury of the county of Cork have under the circumstances refused to agree to a verdict. Gentlemen, I have no option but to discharge you;" and, whether he intends to take steps to remedy this state of affairs? MR. HEALY wished to ask, before the Question was answered, Whether the Grand Jury at Sligo Assizes had thrown out the bills against Sub-Constables Donnelly and M'Knight and a process server for murder, against SubConstable Hayes for manslaughter, and had found true bills against three peasants for riot; and, whether the right hon. Gentleman intended to take any steps to remedy this state of affairs? MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply to the hon. Member for Wexford (Mr. Healy), said, it was quite correct that "no bills" were found in the one case, and "true bills "in the other. In reply to the noble Viscount (Viscount Folkestone), there was no reason to doubt that Mr. Justice Barry had used the words attributed to him. But he need not tell the noble Viscount that the Irish Government had no power to control a jury one way or the other. ARMY (AUXILIARY FORCES) THE VOLUNTEER REVIEW AT WINDSOR -THE REPORTS. MR. MACLIVER asked the Secretary CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACTS-CATTLE PLAGUE IN RUSSIA. SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT asked the Vice President of the Council, Whether his attention has been called to the very serious and widespread outbreak of cattle plague in the Baltic provinces of Russia; and, whether every precaution has been taken against the possibility of its importation into this Country? MR. MUNDELLA: Sir, no reports have been received of an unusual prevalence of cattle plague (rinderpest) in the Baltic Provinces of Russia. The disease has a constant existence in Russia, and, consequently, the importation of animals from that country is entirely prohibited. The importation of cattle from Germany and Belgium is also prohibited. Siberian plague, which is a form of anthrax, and quite distinct from Cattle Plague, is now prevalent in the Provinces of Novgorod, St. Petersburg, Dorpat, and Riga; but, considering that no animals can be introduced into this country from Russia, and no cattle from Germany and Belgium, there appears little or no probability of the introduction of any contagious cattle disease from Russia into this country. CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS -THE BOSTON ELECTION. MR. O'KELLY asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether it is the case that all the Crown prosecutions for bribery and corrupt practices at Boston have failed in consequence of the juries refusing to convict; and, if he proposes to take further steps to vindicate the Law? any SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT, in reply, said, he should take no further steps to vindicate the law, which, in this case, would take its course. of State for War, If he will lay upon LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL — THE the Table the Reports presented to him by the commanding officers at the recent review at Windsor of the Volunteers? MR. CHILDERS: Sir, in reply to my hon. Friend, I may state that I have received the Report of the general commanding one of the two Army corps, but not the other. When the latter reaches me I will consider whether I can lay them both on the Table; but I do not anticipate any objection. 42ND SECTION AND SECTION 24 OF THE LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND) ACT, 1870. MR. HEALY asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether the repeal of section 24 of the Land Act of 1870 by the 42nd section of the Land Law Bill, in putting an end to the powers of the Court for Land Cases Reserved created by the former section and since merged by the Judicature Act in the Court of Appeal, ipso facto annuls the code of rules devised by that Court under section 31 of the said Act, and which form the machinery for the working of the whole of that Act; whether the repeal of section 24 involves the repeal of section 31; whether, if said rules will not continue in force, it is not desirable to make some provision for their revival; and, in case they should continue in force, what tribunal will in future have the power of rescinding, annulling, or adding to them, pursuant to the provisions of section 31 already referred to; and, whether it is not desirable to vest the powers created by section 31 in the Land Commission in future? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. Law), in reply, said, the repeal of the section in question did not in any respect annul the Code of Rules made by the Court for Land Cases Reserved under Section 31 of the Land Act. The Rules would still remain in force. The authority for altering them would be the Court of Appeal. It was, however, under consideration whether it might not be convenient to transfer that power to the Land Commission. LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL. MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD asked the noble Lord the Member for Woodstock (Lord Randolph Churchill), Whether it is his intention to proceed with his Motion with reference to the third reading of the Land Law (Ireland) Bill? LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL, in reply, said, most certainly, if the opportunity arose; but he did not wish to interpose his Motion between that for the third reading and the Motion of which Notice had been given by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Westminster (Mr. W. H. Smith) to recommit the Bill. If that Motion was not made, he (Lord Randolph Churchill) of Turkish Bondholders; and, whether the policy of Her Majesty's Government, with regard to the many questions still pending with the Porte as to reforms in Asia Minor and other matters of Imperial interest, will be in any way affected by this attempt to advance the interests of a special and limited class of speculators? SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: Sir, no notification has been made to Her Majesty's Government, who have not offered any opinion on the matter. The policy of Her Majesty's Government will not be affected in any way. EDUCATIONAL ENDOWMENTS (SCOTLAND) BILL. MR. BOLTON asked the Prime Minister, If he can say whether the Educational Endowments (Scotland) Bill is likely to come on this Session; and, if so, at what time? MR. GLADSTONE: I have, Sir, to apologize for asking more time yet in regard to this question; but if my hon. Friend will be kind enough to give me one or two days, I hope to be able to make a positive statement on the subject. It may be my duty on Monday to make a proposal to the House in regard to the course of Public Business, and I shall then state our intentions with reference to the Bill. SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether it is in the power of the Government, without the sanction of Parliawith a Foreign State binding this Country ment, to enter into Treaty engagements for a certain term of years not to increase the duties on goods imported from and, inasmuch as the engagements taken such State into the United Kingdom; by this Country towards France in 1860 were sanctioned by Parliament in consideration of the Treaty engagements contracted by France towards this Country, and as the Treaty has been MR. BUXTON asked the Under Se- denounced by France, whether Her Macretary of Ssate for Foreign Affairs, jesty's Government will undertake not Whether it is within the cognizance and to enter into a renewal of our engagehas the approval of Her Majesty's Go- ments towards France, or to accept any vernment that a Member of this House variation of the engagements of France is to proceed shortly to Constantinople towards this Country, without the sancin the interests and as the representative | tion of Parliament? would make his. TURKEY (FINANCE, &c.) TURKISH BONDHOLDERS. Mr. Healy MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, I do not believe, with regard to the first portion of the Question, that there are any absolute limits to the power of the Crown to bind the country; but, practically, it is the well-understood usage-and no Government, I apprehend, would depart from it-that where a question of our own fiscal arrangements, or a question of money is involved, invariably the jurisdiction of Parliament is reserved, and covenants of the Treaties are made conditional. That was the case in regard to the Treaty of 1860. Very important changes on our part in the Customs and Excise duties of the country were part of the stipulations of that Treaty, and, therefore, as a matter of course, it came before Parliament. The case is now different. It is quite evident that, under the present negotiations, if they should land us in a Treaty, as I hope may be the case, provided the terms are satisfactory, at the very least, the principal matter would really be the duties to be levied in France; and it is very doubtful whether any question relating to duties in this country would be involved. If it were to be so, the matter would, of course, have to be laid before Parliament. If it were not so, I am not sure that we could undertake in the terms here specified "Not to enter into a renewal of our engagements towards France, or to accept any variation of the engagements of France towards this country without the sanction of Parliament." I think that would be an engagement which is not supported by precedent, and which would be of inconvenient consequences. We are under great responsibility in this matter to be sure as to the ground under our feet-as to the state of public opinion, and the views of those interested and competent to judge. I do not believe we are likely to do wrong in that respect, or to go in advance of public opinion; but I do not think we can enter into any engagement in the matter at the present moment. SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF said, the object of his Question was this. In 1860 it was necessary that the Treaty should be laid before Parliament, inasmuch as the duties in England had to be lowered; but if an arrangement were now made with France that the existing duties should be retained for a certain number of years against new variations to be introduced into the French Tariff, VOL. CCLXIV. [THIRD SERIES.] it was perfectly plain that the conditions on which the Treaty of 1860 was based would be changed; and he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman, if, in consequence of that change, he would lay the new Treaty before Parliament previous to its ratification? MR. GLADSTONE: That is rather a nice question, Sir; but I am afraid I cannot enter into any engagement beyond what I have said. I think we have been very cautious not to proceed without ascertaining our ground, and we shall continue to be so. MR. NEWDEGATE said, he wished to put a Question to the Prime Minister arising out of the proceedings of the House in 1860. In that year, the Treaty with France involved an alteration of existing duties. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether the answer he had jnst given, with respect to reserving the functions of the House, was to be understood to extend to reserving the power of imposing duties, as well as of altering existing duties, in accordance with any agreement contemplated by the Government with France? MR. GLADSTONE said, that, as a matter of course, in a negotiation of this kind, if the power of Parliament was reserved, that reservation would preserve the power of Parliament intact and entire, either to lower, raise, or do anything else. PARLIAMENT-PUBLIC BUSINESS. MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR asked the Prime Minister, what would be the course of Public Business to-morrow; whether he had in contemplation to make any exceptional proposal with regard to the Business of Supply, and what would be the order of the different Departments? MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, that with regard to the order of Supply, they would proceed with the Civil Service Votes to-morrow; presuming they were able to achieve the third reading of the Land Bill to-night, as they all seemed to hope, the Business would be Supply. He thought, perhaps, that that statement almost dispensed with the necessity at the present time for any further explanation. SIR JOHN HAY asked, whether it was the intention of the Government to take the 27 Votes of the Army Estimates, C 35 Protection of Person and {COMMONS} Property (Ireland) Act, 1881. 36 or the four Votes of the Navy Estimates first? MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, he believed the Army Votes were of greater urgency than those of the Navy. Notice of the intentions of the Government in this respect would, however, be given in the course of the evening. with the Rivers Conservancy and Floods Prevention Bill this Session? MR. ARTHUR ARNOLD said, he also wished to put a Question on this subject to the Prime Minister, and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would forgive him (Mr. Arnold) for doing so without Notice, because he had never put one Question to him before. Was it not the case that the right hon. Gentleman had received a Memorial in relation to the Bill, signed by a large number of Members of all Parties of the House, begging him to proceed with the measure; whether the signatures of those in favour were not of a greater value than those of hon. Members opposed to the Bill on the ground of the inconve MR. CALLAN asked the Prime Minister, whether it was the intention of the Government to re-commit the Land Bill after Report for the purpose of enabling the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Westminster (Mr. W. H. Smith) to move the insertion of the clause of which he had given Notice? He put the Question, because, if this were the intention of the Government, his hon. Friends wished to move the inser-nience which would result from the posttion of clauses respecting the labourers. MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, there was no Question at all before the House for the re-committal of the Bill, except the limited Question of the right hon. Gentleman opposite. The proposal of the re-committal would be over the clause relating to the retirement of the Commissioners, enabling a discussion to be taken upon it, and for no other purpose whatever. It would in no way reopen the whole subject of the Bill. MR. CALLAN asked, whether it would not be open to any hon. Member to move an Amendment upon the clause intended to be moved by the right hon. Member for Westminster? He would suggest that the Instruction could be amended, in order to include the Question he had indicated. MR. GLADSTONE: The prospect which the hon. Member holds out is really so grave, and I might almost say so appalling, that I do not know what answer to make; but I really hope that when the time comes, he will be in a more reasonable frame of mind. No doubt, he has the abstract right to move to extend the purpose for which the Bill is being re-committed, but I trust that he will not exercise it. RIVERS CONSERVANCY AND FLOODS MR. HENEAGE asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he is in a position to state definitely for the convenience of Members, at this late period of the Session, whether it is the intention of the Government to proceed Sir John Hay ponement of the holidays; and, whether it would not be a circumstance almost without precedent for the Government to abandon a measure of this importance, which had passed the House of Lords, had been read a second time in that House, and been approved of by two Select Committees ? MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, it will, undoubtedly, be admitted by all persons whatsoever that this Bill has a considerable advantage in having passed the House of Lords, in having been approved by two Select Committees, and in having reached a certain stage in this House. At the same time, I am under a pledge to the House not to proceed with any measures which are not absolutely necessary. The shock of arms between opposing parties in relation to this Bill is very interesting; but, at this period of the Session, I may remind hon. Members that it is absolutely necessary that we should make rapid progress with Public Business. I must ask the indulgence of both the hon. Members in this matter, seeing that it is under the careful consideration of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board. I will give a more definite answer to the Questions of the hon. Members on Monday next. PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PRO- MR. T. P. O'CONNOR asked the Chief |