They made a most violent attack upon the poor fellow, and injured him in such a horrible manner that I will not describe it to the House. I am bound to say that, in my opinion, the sentence is not at all too severe. CUSTOMS DEPARTMENT-THE RE ORGANIZATION SCHEME. QUESTIONS. MR. RITCHIE asked the Secretary to the Treasury, with reference to his statement that no further delay need occur in the issue of the re-organization scheme for the Customs Department after the reports that had been called for from that Department had been received, Whether such reports have now been received by the Treasury; and, if so, when the scheme will be issued? MR. PEASE asked, When the decision on the scheme for the improvement of the position of the Customs Establishment, mentioned at page 32 of Parliamentary Paper No. 106 (ordered to be printed on 19th March 1879), is to be produced for the information of the officers in the Customs Establishment? SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON, in reply, said, that different branches of the Customs Department had been dealt with separately in Reports from the Customs to the Treasury. These separate Reports required, each of them, very careful consideration, and the last of them was only received on the 7th of April. Three of the most important of the schemes proposed had been considered and approved generally, and no delay would take place in the consideration of the others. The moment all were considered no time would be lost in bringing the re-organization scheme into operation. ADMIRALTY AND WAR OFFICE REGU to inquire into the Secretariat of the Admiralty, and he was daily in expectation of receiving communications. PUBLIC HEALTH ACT-SUPERVISION OF SLAUGHTER-HOUSES. QUESTION. SIR EARDLEY WILMOT asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether, if public slaughterhouses for killing butchers' meat cannot be established throughout the country, after the manner of many Continental States, Her Majesty's Government will not consider the propriety of bringing private slaughterhouses and other places used for killing animals for human food more directly under Government supervision, as well for economic and sanitary purposes as to prevent the cruelty to animals often practised under the present system? MR. SCLATER-BOOTH: In reply to my hon. and learned Friend's Question, I may be permitted, perhaps, to state what the law is on this subject. My hon. and learned Friend is aware that the whole of the Kingdom is under the jurisdiction of urban or rural sanitary authorities. With regard to the former, the Public Health Act enables all urban sanitary authorities to provide slaughter-houses and to make by-laws for their management; and, as regards private slaughter-houses, urban sanitary authorities are empowered by the same Act to make regulations for the licensing, registering, and inspection of such slaughter-houses, for preventing cruelty therein, and for keeping the same in a proper sanitary condition. Moreover, the Local Government Board may, on the application of any rural sanitary authority, confer upon them all the above-mentioned powers regarding slaughter-houses. The Local Government Board have issued a series of model LATION ACT—THE SECRETARIAT OF by-laws for the regulation of slaughter THE ADMIRALTY.-QUESTION. MR. CHILDERS asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, with reference to the Admiralty and War Office Regulation Act of last Session, Whether any steps have been taken to deal with the Secretariat of the Admiralty? MR. W. H. SMITH, in reply, said, some six weeks ago application was made to the Treasury for a Committee houses, which have been adopted in numerous instances. Such being the existing provisions of the law, I am asked whether I will consider the propriety of bringing slaughterhouses under Government supervision? But I must say that, having regard to the duties and responsibilities thus vested in the local authorities, I cannot think it would be expedient to adopt the course proposed. INTOXICATING LIQUORS (IRELAND) BILL.-QUESTION. MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY asked the honourable and learned Member for Louth, Whether, having regard to the advanced stage of the Session, the desirability of pushing on many Irish measures of importance now pending, and the virtual impossibility of continuing the discussion of the Intoxicating Liquors (Ireland) Bill, he will move that the Order for its Second Reading be discharged? MR. SULLIVAN: I quite agree with my hon. and learned Friend that it is desirable to push on Irish measures as much as possible, and I should, therefore, be glad to push on this particular one. I feel, however, that while, on the one hand, it would be exceedingly undesirable to leave it on the Paper from week to week without its being possible to discuss it, it is due to hon. Members who are opposed to it to endeavour to give them an opportunity of arriving at its discussion; and, therefore, if I can not bring on the discussion in a week or so, I shall move that the Order be discharged. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: The Question of the hon. and learned Gentleman is-what Department of the Government is responsible for the proceedings to which he has called attention? I have to say that it is the Department of the Lords of the Treasury. With respect to the circumstances to which his Question refers, I can only say it is a long story, and I could not possibly trouble the House by going fully into it; but I will endeavour, in an observation or two, to make the matter plain. The remarks referred to as having been made by the learned Judges. were delivered under a misunderstanding as to the course which the Treasury had pursued. The state of the matter appeared to be this-By the Irish Church Act, the Church Temporalities. Commissioners were authorized to pay various officers such salaries as might be recommended and sanctioned by the Lord Lieutenant and approved of by the Treasury. In regard to Mr. Ball there were two alternatives-that he should be paid by fixed salary, or that he should be paid by fees. The Treasury were asked to choose which alternative they preferred, and they preferred the former. They understood certain letters IRISH CHURCH TEMPORALITIES COM- as meaning that the fixed salary was to MISSIONERS-MR. BALL. QUESTIONS. MR. SULLIVAN asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If his attention has been called to the proceedings in the Court of Appeal, Dublin, on Tuesday last, in reference to the claims of Mr. Ball, late Solicitor to the Irish Church Temporalities Commissioners, opposed by the Treasury; more especially to the language of the Master of the Rolls, who, in delivering judgment, is reported to have said "A more discreditable or more disgraceful course was never pursued than that adopted by the Treasury before Judge Flanagan;" and the language of Mr. Justice Deasy, who said "It was one of the most unjust attempts ever made in a court of justice to defraud a man of money due to him for plain services under a contract sanctioned by the very people who now come forward to oppose him;" and, if he can inform the House what Government Department or what Government official directed and is responsible for the proceedings thus characterised by the Irish Judges? cover all the services that would otherwise have been paid by fees. A question arose, however, as to whether it did cover certain classes of fees. In the litigation that followed Justice Flanagan upheld the view taken by the Treasury, and the case was so decided; but, subsequently, it was taken before the Court of Appeal, when the former decision was reversed, and the other view taken. I do not express any opinion as to which view was right; but I think the view expressed by the learned Judge was stated under a misunderstanding that could be easily explained. MR. SULLIVAN: Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman was the Treasury represented by no one before the Court of Appeal that could explain the matter; and if not, why not? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: The Treasury was not represented directly at the suit. The suit was one between the Church Temporalities Commission and Mr. Ball, and the Treasury was not represented by anyone. I regret it was not, and I am unable to account for it. MR. MELDON: Sir, I beg to give Notice that to-morrow I shall ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Treasury intends to appeal to the House of Lords? POST OFFICE-AUSTRALIAN COLONIES -CONVEYANCE OF MAILS. QUESTION. MR. BAXTER asked the Postmaster General, If the Post Office has employed any line, other than that of the Peninsular and Oriental Company, of full powered steamships, for the conveyance of the Mails to and from Australia; and, if so, whether he can state the average time occupied by such steamers, as compared with those of the Peninsular and Oriental Company; why tenders were not invited for the conveyance of the Mails direct between this Country and Australia; if there will be any objection to lay upon the Table of the House the Correspondence which has taken place with the Australian Colonies on this subject; and, if he can state to the House, in the event of the Contract of the 7th of February being ratified, what sums are to be received from the Australian Colonies for the conveyance of their Mails between this Country and Point de Galle? LORD JOHN MANNERS: Since the beginning of 1874, the Imperial Post Office has not employed any line of steam vessels for the conveyance of mails to and from Australia, the conveyance of all such mails from Point de Galle, Singapore, and San Francisco having been provided for by the Governments of the several Australian Colonies. Bags of ship letters have, at intervals during the last two years, been despatched from the United Kingdom by steam vessels other than those of the Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Company; but the Post Office has no record of the average time occupied on each voyage by such steam vessels. Tenders were not invited by the Home Government, because, as already stated, the arrangements have been left in the hands of the Australian Colonies. There has been no Correspondence between the Post Office and the Australian Colonies on the subject. The arrangements under which the Australian Mails will be conveyed between this country and Point de Galle, in the event of the contract of the 7th of February being approved by the House of Commons, are being considered at the Treasury. But there is no reason to suppose that any sums will be received on that account from the Australian Colonies. ARMY MILITARY PENSIONS-ROYAL WARRANTS, 1877, 1878.-QUESTION. COLONEL ARBUTHNOT asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he is aware that certain officers who retired from the Army on pensions under the provisions of the Royal Warrants of 1877 and 1878, and who now hold appointments in the Prison Department, are precluded from drawing any portion of their pensions; that one of these officers is actually drawing less income by £55 10s. per annum than he would be in receipt of if he drew his pension and were not serving the State; if he would state under what Clause of what Act the withholding of these Military pensions is justifiable; and, whether it is intended to place all retired Military and Naval officers who may be holding Civil appointments on the same footing as other Civil servants, viz. that they shall be permitted to draw their pensions until their Civil salaries amount to three times their pensions on half-pay? SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON: I am aware of the cases referred to by my hon. and gallant Friend. The withholding of the military pensions is in accordance with Clause 1,174 of the Royal Warrant of May 1, 1878; but, inasmuch as considerable dissatisfaction has been caused in several cases by the operation of that clause, it has been arranged by the Secretary of State for War that representatives of the War Office and Treasury should meet and discuss the conditions under which the clause shall be applied in future. TREATY OF BERLIN-ARTICLE 23. QUESTION. SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, since it has been officially stated that all the provisions of the Treaty of Berlin have been or are being duly carried out, except that portion of the twenty-third Clause which provides that institutions analogous to those of Crete shall be granted to those parts of European Turkey not specially provided for, he can say whether Her Majesty' Government are determined to insist on the fulfilment by the Turks of the stipulations in consideration of which they were saved from extinction, as firmly as they have insisted on the stipulations by which the advance of Russia was restrained? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Her Majesty's Government have more than once pressed upon the Porte the importance of taking speedy action under the 23rd clause of the Treaty of Berlin; and representations to that effect have recently been repeated. ISLAND OF CYPRUS-ORDINANCES OF THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL. QUESTION. SIR CHARLES W. DILKE asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Sir Garnet Wolseley has sent home Copies of all Ordinances enacted by the Council in the Island of Cyprus; and, whether in any case the Cyprus Ordinances will be laid before Parliament, or placed from time to time in the Library of the House? MR. BOURKE: Many of the Ordinances passed by the Legislative Council in Cyprus have been received; but I am not quite sure that we have as yet received all. I said some little time ago that I should place these Ordinances in the Library, and that I purpose to do before very long. THE SAMOAN ISLANDS.-QUESTION. COLONEL MURE asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he can give the House any information as to a Treaty lately concluded between Germany and the Government of the Samoan Islands, by which certain rights of property have been guaranteed to German subjects in those islands; and, whether British subjects in those islands have complained that under Article 6 of the said Treaty their proprietary rights are endangered? MR. BOURKE: I think my hon. and gallant Friend is correct in supposing a SOUTH AFRICA - THE ZULU WAR-Treaty has been lately made between THE EXPENSE.-QUESTION. MR. CHILDERS asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, When the Estimates of the Expenditure of the War in South Africa during the present financial year may be expected to be laid upon the Table? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHIEQUER: I am anxious to lay the Estimate upon the Table as soon as I am in a position to submit an Estimate that would give information to the House. The same reason that prevented me laying one before the House at the time of the Budget still prevents me doing so, until we get some further information. I hope that before long we may be in a position to propose a Vote of Credit. Of course, before the close Sir George Campbell the Governments referred to. Last communicated to Her Majesty's Consul January the German Consul in Samoa the German Government and the Goa Treaty which had been made between vernment of the Samoan Islands about that time. It was at once ratified by not heard whether it has been ratified the Samoan Government; but we have by the German Government. We have received a copy of the Treaty; but have had no complaints from British subjects or others affected by it. THE LAW OF DISTRESS-LEGISLATION. QUESTION. COLONEL BARNE asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether the Government intend to introduce a Bill and, if | THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHElay it QUER, in reply, said, that Papers were now being prepared. to amend the Law of Distress; so, whether they will be able to before Parliament this Session ? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, in reply, said, it would not be possible for the Government to introduce a Bill this Session to amend the Law of Distress. EDUCATION DEPARTMENT— TEACHERS' SALARIES.-QUESTION. MR. SAMPSON LLOYD asked the Vice President of the Council, Whether, in the Return, No. 3, in Parliamentary Paper, No. 71, of Session 1879 (which gives the average salaries of teachers in various schools), the principal teacher only of each school is reckoned in computing such average, or whether all the teachers of every grade are so reckoned? LORD GEORGE HAMILTON, in reply, said, the Return included all the teachers who held certificates. POST OFFICE, EDINBURGH. QUESTION. MR. M'LAREN asked the Postmaster General, Whether, referring to applications which have been made at various times on the part of the Telegraph Clerks in the City of Edinburgh Post Office, it is intended to raise their pay to an equality with that given to the Clerks in the principal towns in England performing similar duties; and, if so, when the advance will take place. LORD JOHN MANNERS: The telegraph establishment of the Edinburgh Post Office has been recently revised, and there is no intention of making any alteration in the existing scales of pay. ARMY-THE 60TH RIFLES-COURT MR. FRENCH asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he will be able to lay upon the Table of the House Copies of the Evidence produced at the trial by Court Martial in South Africa of a sergeant of the 60th Rifles for retiring a picket on an alarm of the enemy without the order of his officer, at which he was sentenced to five years' penal servitude and reduction to the ranks? COLONEL STANLEY: I have not yet received the Papers to which the Question refers, and I am bound to modify the answer I made the other day, in which I stated that the Papers were privileged. In the strict sense of the word they are not; but it is only when special causes have been assigned that it has been considered convenient that such Papers should be produced. Until I have seen the Papers I am not able to say whether there is anything special in their character or not. I expect them by the next mail. PUBLIC WORKS LOANS COMMISSIONERS-THE REPORT.—QUESTION. GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR asked the Secretary to the Treasury, If he can arrange to furnish the House, before the debate on the Public Works Loans Bill comes on, with an Account of the Public Works Loans Commissioners with an explanatory note of the errors for the year ending 31st March 1879, to the Account of those Commissioners for the year ending 31st March 1878 ? SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON, in reply, said, he hoped to be able to present in the course of next week the annual Report and Accounts of the Public Works Loans Commissioners, in which explanatory notes of the errors referred to would appear; but he could not promise to wait until it was in the hands of hon. Members before proceeding with the Public Works Loans Bill. BLIND AND DEAF-MUTE CHILDREN (EDUCATION) BILL.-OBSERVATIONS. MR. MONK, who had the following Notice on the Paper : |