mentary legislation, a position eminently | missioners and the County Courts. He mischievous and calculated to interfere would give the power to either one or with the useful discharge of their func- the other of these jurisdictions, and by tions. preference to the Charity Commissioners. With the amendment of these and some other matters, so that, if possible, no substantial loss should accrue to any charity, the Bill might be reduced to an acceptable form; and he would, therefore, suggest to the noble Lord that he should allow the Bill to be read a second time, and that it should be amended in detail as might be considered desirable when it got into Committee. He hoped that, with that understanding, the Bill would be allowed to be read a second time. THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that he was bound to endeavour to mediate between the opposing views of noble Lords on this question-those who were and those who were not interested in the Bill. There was, no doubt, a desire on the part of all parties to promote the best and most proper use of the lands dealt with by the Bill, and there could be no difference of opinion as to the desirability of permitting allotments of this description to be granted, if they were granted in a proper manner. The object of the Bill was to enable persons to hold allotments of land given for the benefit of the poor and vested in trustees; and it was with the view of promoting that object that the Representatives of the Government in the House of Commons had facilitated the passing of the measure of a private Member. While thinking the Bill would prove serviceable if passed into law, he felt that there was much truth in what the noble Lord who last spoke (Lord Colchester) had said, and that the Bill would require considerable amendment. If it were not easy to meet the views of the Charity Commissioners, it would be difficult to pass the Bill; but he should be glad to do so, and the attempt to satisfy them should be made, and he did not despair of success. The framers of the Bill had thought that land fit for the purposes of the Bill might be held in trust for others than the poor people of the parish in which the lands were situated. So far as that could be done without substantial loss to the income of the charity, he saw no objection to the proposal; otherwise it would be open to an objection, which might be met by an Amendment, saying that no part of any land falling within the description contained in the Bill should be separated from the rest, if it materially interfered with the value of the remainder. Then, again, the Bill might be amended so as to preserve all existing leasing powers. With regard to Clause 11, it would be a new mode of legislation first to indicate that certain things should be done, and then to give the Charity Commissioners power to say they were not to be done. The 10th clause proposed a roundabout course of jurisdiction between the Charity Com Lord Colchester THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES) said, that he thought their Lordships ought not to be expected at that period of the Session to put the Bill into that shape in which it was desirable to pass it. But he entertained a strong objection to the Bill, as it would cause infinite trouble to the trustees of lands situate in distant parts of the country. He objected to it on the further ground that the trouble and expense of working the machinery of the Bill were such as should not be thrown on anyone. He would like to know who would have the duty of looking after these allotments and seeing that they were properly cultivated. The Bill was a very ill-considered one, and badly drafted, and there would be no time to consider the Amendments suggested by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack. The principle of the Bill was wrong, and he should oppose the second reading. It was a bad measure, and should not be allowed to pass a second reading-certainly not at that late period of the Session. LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRIVY SEAL) suggested that their Lordships should wait until they saw the proposed Amendments on the Bill, which were already prepared, and would be on the Paper to-morrow morning, before they decided to reject the measure. Contents 13; Not-Contents 7: MaOn Question? Their Lordships divided: jority 6. Resolved in the affirmative. Bill read 2 accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow, PARLIAMENT-PUBLIC BUSINESSTHE AUTUMN SITTING. MOTION. Moved, "That this House adjourn during pleasure."-(The Lord Privy Seal.) THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES) said, it was very desirable that their Lordships should have some understanding as to what was to take place with regard to the proposed long Adjournment of the House, and what was to be its effect upon certain Bills. There were a number of Bills which, when before their Lordships, were ordered to be read that day six or three months, and that might bring these measures within the time when the House met again in October, a result that would be somewhat awkward. LORD CARLINGFORD (LORD PRIVY SEAL) said, that his noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Earl Granville) would be in his place to-morrow, and would make a statement on the subject of the Adjournment of the House. THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, that the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees having asked a Question relative to the effect which the Adjournment would have upon Bills postponed for three months, he (the Lord Chancellor did not, as a matter of fact, believe there had been any within the last two months, and as it was not probable that they would meet again. for two months, the question would not arise. Motion agreed to; House adjourned accordingly at 5.15 P.M. PARLIAMENT-SCOTCH BUSINESS. GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR asked the Lord Advocate, To state how many Scotch Bills have been prepared during each of the past three years, and how many have passed through each House of Parliament, the total amount expended in each year, and sums paid to parties for drawing the Bills, and names of the parties so remunerated; and, what money has been spent in remunerating parties for making disgests of Scotch Acts; and, if any, what digests have been made? THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. ing this information, which would be laid BALFOUR), in reply, said, he was obtain before the House in the form of a Return. 11.30 P.M. House resumed by the POOR LAW (SCOTLAND) Lord MONSON. After an interval, House adjourned at Twelve o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock. ILLEGAL REMOVAL OF A PAUPER FROM GLASGOW TO LONDONDERRY. MR. DALY asked the Lord Advocate, date of 8th of July, the Poor Law AuthoWhether it is true that, by warrant of rities of Glasgow transmitted to Cork on 15th July a pauper named John Donnachie; whether it is true that John Donnachie had been resident in Glasgow for fourteen years; whether it is true that, previous to his admission to Glasgow Workhouse Hospital, Donnachir had lived for three years and theee months in Hyde Park Street, Glasgow, and had previously lived for one year and three months in McAlpine Street, and previous to that had lived one year in Forth Street, all three residences being in the same parish; whether it is true that, having spent two weeks in Glasgow Workhouse Hospital for medical treatment, and having claimed his discharge, employment being ready for him, he was detained in the workhouse for three days and brought before a magistrate, was then placed in the workhouse van and sent to the Railway station, placed on board a steamer at Greenock, and forwarded to Londonderry; and, whether the Poor Law Authorities of Glasgow acted legally in transmitting John Donnachie? been done, or, if nothing, what is intended to be done, with the thirty-six complete armaments prepared by the late First Lord of the Admiralty for merchant steamers, to be used, in case of need, as vessels of war, to defend the ocean routes of British commerce? MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMAN: Sir, the armaments to which the hon. Member refers are intended to be put on board merchant ships in time of war, and they are available for that purpose if required. OLDCASTLE POOR LAW (IRELAND) THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR): Sir, on inquiry, I find that the Poor Law authorities of the Barony Parish of Glasgow, by warrant, dated 8th July, transmitted to Cork a pauper named John Donnachie. He was removed from Glasgow on 13th July, and arrived at Cork on the 15th. It is substantially true that Donnachie had been resident in Glasgow for 14 years. It is not the case, however, as appears both from the Inspector's report and from a written statement signed by Donnachie himself, that he was resident for more than one year and nine months previous to his chargeability in the same parish -namely, the parish of Barony. M'Alpine Street is not in that parish, but in the City parish. It is true that on 11th THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR July, after the warrant for his removal IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON): Sir, had been granted, Donnachie intimated in answer to the first part of the inhis desire to leave the poorhouse rather quiry, I am not able to ascertain the than be removed to Ireland, and that, religious persuasions of the Poor Law notwithstanding, his removal was pro- Guardians of the Oldcastle Union. As ceeded with. The parochial authorities to the second, I believe the senior mado not know whether there was employ-gistrate of the Oldcastle Petty Sessions ment ready for him or not. Donnachie had been previously chargeable to the parish in 1881. I am of opinion that if the parochial authorities had reason to believe that Donnachie's proposal to leave the poorhouse was not for the bond fide purpose of procuring his living by industry, and that he would immediately become chargeable again, they were justified in proceeding with his removal. NAVY-ARMAMENTS FOR MERCHANT STEAMERS. SIR EDWARD WATKIN asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, What has Mr. Daly district is a Protestant. Other local magistrates, one of whom is a nephew of his, and a Resident Magistrate, whom I am informed is a Catholic, also attend the same Petty Sessions. As to the third part, the hon. Member is doubtless aware that the appointment of county magistrates rests, not with Her Majesty's Government, but with the Lord Chancellor. RAILWAYS-PRINTING FARES ON MR. GEORGE RUSSELL (for Mr. Board of Trade, Whether it would not be possible to impose on all Railway Companies regulations such as are already in force on the Metropolitan Railway, as to printing clearly on all Railway tickets the price of the passenger's fare? MR. CHAMBERLAIN, in reply, said, he had no doubt it would be conducive to the convenience of passengers if the fares were, in all cases, printed on the tickets; but he had no power to compel the adoption of such a proceeding by the Railway Companies. The subject had been brought before the Railway Rates and Fares Committee, and various suggestions had been made; but the Committee themselves had not made any recommendations on the subject. All he could say was, that whenever there was legislation with regard to the railways, that was one of the matters which would receive careful consideration; and, whenever it could be done without undue interference with the railways, he should be very glad to see it carried out. LAW AND POLICE (IRELAND)—DUB LIN METROPOLITAN POLICE. THE IRISH LAND COMMISSION-THE GEORGE M'CARTHY. MR. WARTON asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Whether Mr. McCarthy, the present legal Sub-Commissioner for the county of Kerry and the adjoining western part of the county of Cork, was up to the date of his appointment a member of the firm of McCarthy and Hanrahan, solicitors, extensively practising in the county of Kerry; whether he was for many years, and up to the time of his appointment, solicitor to and an active member of a society called "The Cork Land Loan Society," which carried on its operations in the counties of Kerry and Cork, chiefly among the farming classes; and, whether, having regard to the statement of the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, to the effect that Mr. McCarthy ought not longer to act as a Sub-Commissioner in West Cork on account of his professional connection with that district, he would not, on the same grounds, cause him to cease to act as Sub-Commissioner for the county of Kerry? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR MR. MACFARLANE (for Mr. GRAY) IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON): Sir, asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, Mr. M'Carthy was formerly a member Whether an unusual number of resig- of the very respectable solicitor's firm of nations have of late taken place from M Carthy and Hanrahan, whose office the Dublin Metropolitan Police; whe- was in the city of Cork. I am aware ther he is aware that considerable dis- that they carried on their profession in satisfaction exists owing to there being most parts of Ireland, including the no announcement on the part of the Go-county of Kerry. I never heard the vernment of any intention to give to the members of the force additional remuneration, as is proposed in the case of the Constabulary; and, whether it is the intention of the Government to propose any extra grant for the Dublin Metropolitan Police? society referred to called the Cork Land Loan Society. Its usual appellation, so far as I know, is the Cork Building Society; its operations were not confined to the counties of Cork and Kerry, but its loans were made to anyone who gave satisfactory security. There were about THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR a dozen loans, I understand, in the IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON): Sir, County Kerry. All of them were mortthe number of resignations recently in gages of leasehold interests, and, therethe Dublin Metropolitan Police Force fore, did not and could not come within has been above the average, and the Mr. M'Carthy's judicial cognizance as reason assigned is that the men desire an Assistant Commissioner. With reto better their condition by emigrating.gard to the final paragraph of the QuesI cannot say whether the dissatisfaction tion, my answer is as follows:-The alluded to in the second paragraph of the Question exists; but I am aware that the Government is at present considering the question of a special grant to the Force. Land Commissioners inform me that they can only say that in allocating Assistant Commissioners to districts they will carefully consider every circumstance and antecedent of each Assistant Commissioner, and will make such arrangements as will, in their judgment, be most conducive to the public interests. It is a matter which is entirely in the hands of the Land Commission, and over which the Government have no control. EGYPT-REFUGEES AT MALTA. SIR HENRY FLETCHER asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the Treasury and the Colonial Office have agreed as to the amount which should be contributed by the Imperial Government towards the cost of maintaining the distressed refugees which were sent from Alexandria to Malta by the Commander-in-Chief, and which have hitherto been supported by charity or by the funds of the Island of Malta? MR. COURTNEY: Sir, the amount to be contributed from public funds towards the maintenance, of refugees at Malta has not yet been agreed to, as it depends on the actual expenditure, on the number of British subjects, not natives of Malta, and on the amount which may be contributed from charitable sources or otherwise. As all these elements are still undetermined, it is obvious that no definite reply can be given to the Question of the hon. and gallant Member. EGYPT (MILITARY OPERATIONS)-- THE ROYAL MARINES. SIR HENRY FLETCHER asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, As a large number of men of the Royal Marines are now under the command of the General Commanding in Egypt, and are not serving in the Fleet, why a previous custom in the Crimean and China campaigns of appointing a special Brigadier belonging to the Royal Marines has now been departed from? MR. CAMPBELL - BANNERMAN: Sir, I have already, on several occasions, explained that the Marines now attached to the Fleet in Egypt are required to perform services in connection with the Fleet, for which the Navy is responsible. The Marines will not be attached as a brigade to the Army, as was the case in the Crimea and China; and, therefore, in the present instance the services of a brigadier are not required. The Attorney General for Ireland PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PROPERTY (IRELAND) ACT, 1881 — MR. LAWRENCE DALY. MR. T. D. SULLIVAN asked Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, If he will consider the advisability of ordering the release of Mr. Lawrence Daly, a suspect now detained in Dundalk Gaol, having regard to the fact that he has undergone a long imprisonment which, in addition to causing him loss and injury in other respects, has seriously impaired his health? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON): Sir, His Excellency has been pleased to order Mr. Daly's release. POST OFFICE-FEMALE CLERKS. MR. BIGGAR asked the Postmaster General, If it is a fact that young girls, employed in the service of the Post Office as assistants, are required to give from ten to twelve hours' daily duty in the respective offices in which they are engaged, and are also required to discharge the entire of the duties of the office both Postal and Telegraph, being only relieved by their Postmasters during the periods which they are allowed for meals, and also for the short periods they are allowed for recreation, which rarely extends over two hours in any day; this comprising the entire assistance rendered by Postmasters in discharge of routine duties of their office; is it a fact that they have to begin their duties at hours varying from 2 a.m. and have to continue on duty, excepting during the periods referred to, until 8 p.m. or such times after 8 p.m. as they have accounts for the day settled for transmission to the chief office in Dublin; and, does he sanction for females such exceptional hours and duties as these in his Department; and, if not, will he be good enough to take such steps as will prevent its continuance, and give to these assistants the same privileges, or something nearly approaching to them, as awarded to females who hold appointments in the same service? MR FAWCETT: Sir, I am not aware of any female assistants, in the service of the Post Office, working under such conditions as those described by the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar). If any such cases existed, I should think, |