measure was considered necessary, that the East India Association praying for other conservancy bodies would be inquiryobliged to conform to the general provisions of that measure.

"Whether the delay, vexation, uncertainty, and expense of litigation might not be materially reduced by restoring the ancient and customary institution of village Pancháyets,” or courts of arbitration; and, whether any practical measures have been adopted by the Government in reference to this Memorial?

SIR CHARLES W. DILKE said, he would also make an appeal to his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Southwark (Colonel Beresford) not to divide the House. He did so, not on the same ground as the other speakers, but as one who agreed with his hon. Friend. He thought it would be better not to divide in opposition to the decision of the Select Committee. It was quite clear that it would be of no use to divide the House; and he hoped, therefore, that his hon. and gallant Friend would not do so. He had only one other remark to make. His right hon. Friend the Chairman of the Committee (Mr. W. E. Forster) had given a fair account of the SELECT COMMITTEE ON PARLIAMENT

matter, except in one single respect. In answer to the hon. and learned Member for Carmarthen (Mr. B. Williams), the right hon. Gentleman referred to the case of Hudson v. Tabor. He thought his right hon. Friend was wrong in saying that that case did not apply to the Metropolis. [Mr. W. E. FORSTER said, it was not certain that it did.] He would remark that that question was not really gone into by the Committee; and certainly, in the opinion of some of the Members of the Committee, the case of Hudson v. Tabor clearly bore upon the

MR. E. STANHOPE, in reply, said, that the question referred to by the hon. Member had been carefully considered; and a Bill on the subject prepared by the Government of Bombay, based on the suggestion of the Home Government, was now before the Supreme Council of India.

ARY REPORTING-THE REPORT.

QUESTION.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, before any steps are taken to carry out the recommendations of the Report of the Committee on Parliamentary Reporting, he will undertake that an opportunity shall be previously given to this House of expressing an opinion thereon?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHE

QUER, in reply, said, that, as far as he knew, the Committee on Parliamentary Reporting had not yet laid their Report upon the Table-in fact, he believed they had not reported; and he could not, therefore, say what course might be taken with regard to their recommendations. He presumed, however, that any steps they might recommend would be such as would, of necessity, have to come before the House before anything could be done. But, as he had already indicated, he spoke entirely in the dark as to what their Report might be.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN gave Notice that he would ask a Question on the subject when the Report was prepared.

FLOGGING IN THE ARMY.—QUESTION. MR. HOPWOOD asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether his attention has been drawn to a statement in the number of "Truth" of the 8th instant— "Three troopers of the 1st Dragoon Guards were flogged on their voyage out

for gross insubordination ;" and, if he is | answer sufficiently clear. He was posiaware, or, if not, will inquire, whether tively informed, and had no reason to such punishment was inflicted; if so, doubt, that Colonel Cameron had not on board what ship and under what cir- been a member of such a Court of Incumstances, whether after trial by court quiry. martial, and what was the sentence?

measure was considered necessary, that the East India Association praying for other conservancy bodies would be inquiryobliged to conform to the general provisions of that measure.

SIR CHARLES W. DILKE said, he would also make an appeal to his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Southwark (Colonel Beresford, not to divide the House. He did so, not on the same ground as the other speakers, but as one who agreed with his hon. Friend. He thought it would be better not to divide in opposition to the decision of the Select Committee. It was quite clear that it would be of no use to divide the House; and he hoped, therefore, that his hon. and gallant Friend would not do so. He had only one other remark to make. His right hon. Friend the Chairman of the Committee (Mr. W. E. Forster) had given a fair account of the matter, except in one single respect. In answer to the hon. and learned Member for Carmarthen (Mr. B. Williams), the right hon. Gentleman referred to the case of Hudson r. Tabor. He thought his right hon. Friend was wrong in saying that that case did not apply to the Metropolis. [Mr. W. E. FORSTER said, it was not certain that it did.] He would remark that that question was not really gone into by the Committee; and certainly, in the opinion of some of the Members of the Committee, the case of Hudson v. Tabor clearly bore upon the

-Whether the delay, vexation, uncertainty, and expense of litigation might not be materially reduced by restoring the ancient and customary instinction of village Panchayets," or courts of arbitration; and, whether any practical measures have been adopted by the Government in reference to this Memorial ?

MR. E. STANHOPE. in reply, said, that the question referred to by the hon. Member had been carefully considered; and a Bill on the subject prepared by the Government of Bombay, based on the suggestion of the Home Government, was now before the Supreme Council of India.

SELECT COMMITTEE ON PARLIAMENT.
ARY REPORTING THE REPORT.

QUESTION.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN asked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, before any steps are taken to carry out the recommendations of the Report of the Committee on Parliamentary Reporting, he will undertake that an opportunity shall be previously given to this House of expressing an opinion thereon?

THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER, in reply, said, that, as far as he knew, the Committee on Parliamentary Reporting had not yet laid their Report upon the Table-in fact, he believed they had not reported; and he could not, therefore, say what course might be taken with regard to their recommendations. He presumed, however, that any steps they might recommend would be such as would, of necessity, have to come before the House before anything could be done. But, as he had already indicated, he spoke entirely in the dark as to what their Report might be.

MR. CHAMBERLAIN gave Notice that he would ask a Question on the subject when the Report was prepared.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON said, he would ask, on Thursday, why the Return in question was not in accordance with the terms that had been adopted in the Address moved to the Crown.

for gross insubordination ;" and, if he is | answer sufficiently clear. He was posiaware, or, if not, will inquire, whether tively informed, and had no reason to such punishment was inflicted; if so, doubt, that Colonel Cameron had not on board what ship and under what cir- been a member of such a Court of Incumstances, whether after trial by court quiry. martial, and what was the sentence? COLONEL STANLEY: Sir, I did not see the statement referred to; but I have made inquiry, and have ascertained that three men of the 1st Dragoon Guards were tried by court martial on board the transport ship Spain. The sentence on the first two was that they should receive 25 lashes, and the sentence on the third was that he should receive 20 lashes. I believe these sentences were carried out.

ARMY COURT

OF INQUIRY AT

NETLEY IN 1873.-QUESTION.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is true that Colonel Cameron succeeded Colonel Hawley as President or Member of a Court or Board of Inquiry which assembled at Netley in 1873 to investigate certain irregularities; and, if so, if he will explain how his name came to be omitted from the Return asked for by the House

"Of the names of all officers who sat as President or as Members of any Court of Inquiry held to investigate the irregularities which led to the trial of Assistant Controller Godrich;" and, whether it is true that Colonel Cameron, having sat on the Court of Inquiry which investigated the irregularities above mentioned, was afterwards the President of the Court Martial held for the trial of the person who was thereby implicated?

COLONEL STANLEY, in reply, said, he was informed that it was not the case that Colonel Cameron succeeded Colonel Hawley as president or member of the Court of Inquiry.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON said, he would repeat his Question on Thursday, and at the same time would ask the Secretary of State for War if he would take steps to ascertain whether Colonel Cameron did or did not sit on any Court of Inquiry held to investigate the matters referred to. What he wanted to know was whether the officer referred to was or was not a member of such a Court of Inquiry?

COLONEL STANLEY said, he was sorry if he had not made his former

SOUTH AFRICA - THE ZULU WAR

TRANSPORT SERVICE IN NATAL.

QUESTIONS.

MR. W. H. JAMES asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is true that the transport service in Natal is paying for the hire of waggons at the rate of £80 each per month, besides engaging to pay drivers' wages and to make good any injury done either to the waggons or the bullocks; whether equally exorbitant prices are being paid for the requisites needed by the troops engaged in military operations in Zululand; and, whether, having regard to the great expenditure of English money involved in these transactions, it is not desirable that the Commander in Chief should be instructed to " requisition the articles he needs, and to pay for them at a fair valuation?

COLONEL STANLEY: Sir, I have reason to believe that the hire of waggons has, in certain cases, reached the amount stated in the first Question of the hon. Member; but it includes the wages of the drivers, who only draw commissariat. I should add that the waggons convey from two to three tons, and are drawn by from 14 to 16 oxen. With regard to the second Question, it is not the case that equally exorbitant prices are being paid for the requisites needed by the troops engaged in military operations in Zululand. The Departments made such shipments as they thought necessary to give us command of the market, and the prices of the main articles of supply are now very moderate in Natal, so much so that in some cases we are reducing the shipments. With regard to the third Question, the War Department in February last drew the attention of the Colonial Government to the exorbitant charges on account of transport, and requested that measures should be adopted, by requisition, or otherwise, of obtaining the

necessary transport on paying reason- | present; but I presume that if the able rates. Instructions have been sent, others give way he will do so also. and recently repeated, to Sir Henry Bulwer, that such steps should be taken as might be deemed necessary in order to secure proper provision for transport. It has not been found necessary to resort to requisition for other supplies.