reading of this measure. Under these circumstances, I hope the right hon. and learned Gentleman will not press his Motion to a division; but if he does, I trust the House will adhere to its former decision. will be regarded in the House and in in this full House, in obedience to the the country as a snapped division. will of the House, we shall be allowed Everybody knows that it is so. Nobody to express our opinion on the second expected that the question of female suffrage would be dealt with to-night; and it would not be fair to the House or to the country that in a new Parliament, and at such an hour, a question of such magnitude should be dealt with in this absurd way. I shall certainly support the Motion of my right hon. and learned Friend for the adjournment of the debate. SIR JOHN GORST: I am surprised that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer did not second the proposal, because the Motion for the adjournment of the House was suggested by him to the right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite. THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: It was suggested by the right hon. Gentleman the late Home Secretary. MR. T. M. HEALY: I should like to point out to new Members what the Motion for Adjournment really means. If the Motion for Adjournment is agreed to, all hope of passing the Bill must be abandoned, for it will inevitably be blocked or talked out on future days, and would have no chance whatever of being passed. The proposal to adjourn the debate is exceedingly disingenuous; but the effect of it, if passed, would be to prevent the Bill now before the House having any legislative effect. The supporters of this Bill are entitled, when they get a chance, to bring it forward; and they should have the courtesy of the House extended to them now that they have secured an opportunity of doing so. MR. JAMES STUART: The history of this Bill shows that, for many years past, it has always been lost because of having been talked out on a Wednesday, or because of having been blocked after half-past 12 o'clock at night. On that ground, and because the measure has been fully discussed over and over again in past years, I beseech the House not to lose this opportunity of passing the second reading of the Bill, but to allow the subject a fair chance of being considered by the new Parliament. SIR JOHN GORST: When the right hon. and learned Gentleman opposite (Sir Henry James) rose, he had no intention of moving the adjournment of the debate until it was suggested to him by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. We have heard a great deal on previous occasions from the Chancellor of the Exchequer about submission to the will of the House; and if ever there was a division taken which showed the will of the House, it was that which was taken a short time ago, when the House deliberately decided that it would deal with this question now. What is the objection to this course? It is that the question has not been adequately discussed. If this was a new question, there might be a great deal in that argument; but it is a very old question, and has been discussed over and over again; and although we have had amusing speeches to-night, there has not been one single new argument that if we take a vote on the question advanced on one side or the other. Now the House, which is a full one, has decided that they would come to a division on the second reading to-night. The Chancellor of the Exchequer knows, and we all know, that there will be ample opportunity for those who oppose the Bill to express their opinions upon it in its future stages; but I do not suppose that there are half-a-dozen Members in the House who have not made up their minds upon this subject years ago; and all I ask is that The Chancellor of the Exchequer MR. PULESTON: Reference has been frequently made to-night to the position of the Bill, and its chance of coming on again if this opportunity is lost. I may be allowed to suggest what will be easily understood by everybody of the adjournment, it will be a direct vote against the second reading of the Bill, and not only a direct vote against the second reading, but against the principle of the measure. I would point out that this is not the first, or the second, or even the third time that this and similar Motions have defeated the Bill; and I shall be curious to know, after we have taken the division, how many hon. Gentlemen pledged up to the eyes to support the measure have gone into the Lobby on a Motion of this kind to defeat it, as they did last year | the second reading. If we do the result when the Reform Bill was before the may be misunderstood in the country. House. For my own part, I shall take no share in any division, as I think it desirable to make our stand on another stage of the measure. MR. ILLINGWORTH: I wish to make an appeal to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House (Sir William Harcourt) for one moment. It will be in his recollection that many Members on this side of the House, during last Session, and at a critical moment in the progress of the Reform Bill, deliberately supported the Government when they appealed to us not to give our votes in favour of this measure. Well, to-night I have been reproached by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Devonport (Mr. Puleston) for the course I took on that occasion. I would remind him that I got up on that occasion, and appealed to the House not to jeopardize the measure before it, but to postpone the vote on the principle of the proposed change to a time when the matter could be decided on its merits. I consider that that time has now come. I should be quite content if 25 out of every 100 Members have made up their minds on the Bill. When the Reform Bill was before us, and that curious move was made by the House in the sudden conversion of hon. and right hon. Gentlemen who were supposed to be supporters of this measure, I had an idea that the feeling then was that it would embarrass the Government to extend the franchise to women, and might lead to the defeat of the Franchise Bill. I would remind my hon. Friend that it will be found that all those who honestly express themselves in favour- MR. SPEAKER: The Question before the House is that of the adjournment of the debate; and I would remind the hon. Member that he must confine himself to that. Question put. The House divided:-Ayes 102; Noes 159: Majority 57.-(Div. List, No. 6.) SIR HENRY JAMES: I would crave the indulgence of the House just to say one word. I am not disposed, if I may say so, to press this matter further. We have made our protest in asking for the adjournment of the debate; but as the adjournment has not been agreed to, and as there is so large a majority against it, it would, it seems to me, be discourteous to continue further opposition. I would appeal to the opponents of the Bill not to take a division against ME. CREMER: I understand the right hon. and learned Gentleman (Sir Henry James) appeals to hon. Gentlemen below him to postpone the consi、 deration of the measure. I wish to observe that there are many Members of the House who would have been glad to have spoken on the subject if an opportunity had been afforded them-hon. Gentlemen who feel very strongly on the subject before us. For myself, I should be sorry to separate myself from my political Friends; but, in common with many others, I feel very strongly on the matter, and should have liked to have spoken. We have, however, come unprepared to do so, not anticipating that the subject would come on to-night; and, under the circumstances, I think we are entitled to ask the indulgence of hon. Members. Original Question put, and agreed to. Bill read a second time, and committed for Tuesday 2nd March. Resolved, That this House do now adjourn.-(Mr. John Talbot.) House adjourned at half after One o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, Friday, 19th February, 1886. Several Lords-Took the Oath. MINUTES.]-SESSIONAL COMMITTEES-Standing Orders Committee, appointed and nominated; Committee of Selection, appointed and nominated. PUBLIC BILLS-First Reading-Lunacy Acts Amendment (12); Lunacy * (13). THE UNIVERSITY OF MALTA. QUESTION. VISCOUNT SIDMOUTH asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he would lay on the Table a Report of an inquiry into certain irregularities alleged to have taken place in connection with the matriculation examination in the University of Malta ? LUNACY BILL [H.L.] A Bill to consolidate the enactments respect THE LORD CHANCELLOR ac-ing lunatics - Was presented by The Lord quainted the House that the Clerk of Chancellor; read 1a. (No. 13.) the Parliaments had received (by post) from the Lord Clerk Register of Scotland, House adjourned at half past Four o'clock, to Monday next, a quarter before Eleven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Friday, 19th February, 1886. MINUTES.]-NEW MEMBER SWORN-Stephen O'Mara, esquire, for Queen's County (Ossory Division). SELECT COMMITTEES-Printing, appointed and nominated; Mr. Octavius Vaughan Morgan, appointed. SUPPLY-considered in Committee-CIVIL SER- [69], debate adjourned. QUESTIONS. [94]; EDUCATION DEPARTMENT - CORPORAL PUNISHMENT IN SCHOOLSHILLESDEN NATIONAL SCHOOL. CAPTAIN VERNEY asked the Vice President of the Council, Whether his attention has been called to a case of severe corporal punishment inflicted by Ellen Scholding, schoolmistress of the National School, Hillesden, Bucking THE ROYAL COMMISSION. COLONEL BLUNDELL asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Why no Report has as yet been presented by the Royal Commission, appointed in 1879— hamshire, on Monday 18th January EXPLOSIONS IN MINES-REPORT OF 1886, upon Harriett Stuchbury, a monitress, aged fourteen years, for the offence of laughing in church the previous day; and, whether such a punishment for such an offence, inflicted by the schoolmistress in school hours, and justified by the school managers, meets with the approval of the Education Department? THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (Sir LYON PLAYFAIR), in reply, said, this was one of the cases, fortunately very rare, in which a teacher punished a child in the school for an offence committed in the church. The punishment was unduly severe, and the teacher was brought before the magistrates, who dismissed the case, but warned the mistress to be more careful in future. It had been the practice of the Department to abide by a magisterial decision. At the same time the mistress had been reprimanded, with a warning that a repetition of the offence would require more serious action than a reprimand. EGYPT-WAR IN THE SOUDAN-THE GARRISON AT KASSALA. MR. O'KELLY asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether Her Majesty'slate Government took steps to relieve the Egyptian Garrison of Kassala; and, if so, what success attended those efforts, and what is the present condition of the town and garrison? THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. BRYCE): The relief of Kassala was the subject of careful consideration by Her Majesty's late Government, as appears by the Parliamentary Papers laid before the House. The various proposals made, the steps taken, and the results could hardly be explained within the usual limits of an answer to a Parliamentary Question; but the hon. Member will find full information upon the subject in the Parliamentary Paper, Egypt No. 20, 1885, recently distributed, and in a further Paper only distributed this morning, Egypt, No. 2, 1886. MR. O'KELLY: Have the Government any information in regard to the present condition of the Kassala garrison? MR. BRYCE: The hon. Member will find the latest information we possess in the Paper issued this morning. VOL. CCCII. [THIRD SERIES.] "For the purpose of inquiring and reporting whether, with respect to the influence of fluctuations of atmospheric pressure upon the issue of worthy indications of the presence of firedamp, firedamp from coal, to the adoption of trustand generally to modes of systematic observation of the air in mines; to improved methods of ventilation and illumination; to employment of explosive agents in the getting of minerals; and to other particulars relating to mines and mining operations, the resources of science furnish any practicable expedients that are not now in use, and are calculated to prevent the occurrence of accidents or limit their disastrous consequences; and, how soon the Commissioners may be depended upon to present their Report? THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. CHILDERS), in reply, said, he had made careful inquiry as to the delay in the production of this Report. He was assured by the Chairman of the Commission that the delay had been inevitable, as the experiments on safer methods of blasting had been too important to be hurried over. The Commission was now sitting three days a-week, and hoped to have their Report ready by the end of the month. the Lords Commissioners of Her Ma- | fishery cutter Vigilant, were lying idle in jesty's Treasury to the Memorial of the Granton Harbour all fully manned? Civil Service Writers, which was recommended to their Lordships' favourable consideration by 120 Members of Parliament nearly six months ago? THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Sir WILLIAM HARCOURT) said, that this matter had not yet come before him; but he had reason to believe it would do so before long. METROPOLIS-ORDER IN THE STREETS -DUTIES OF THE HOME OFFICE. MR. BURDETT-COUTTS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether, when full notice is given of a public meeting to be held in the streets of London, under circumstances of obvious danger arising from industrial depression, it is in accordance with the practice of the Home Office to take the initiative in the defence of the public peace by giving such special directions to the police authorities as will support them in the unusual course of adopting severe coercive measures towards public demonstration ? a THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. CHILDERS): In reply to the hon. Member, I have to say that when notice is given of a public meeting to be held in the streets, the custom is for the Commissioners of Police to take the initiative by issuing such orders to their men as they may think necessary for preserving the public peace, such orders being afterwards sent to the Home Office in a printed form, as I explained yesterday. I am not aware that any different course would be taken if there was danger of the peace being disturbed by industrial depression, though, no doubt, the conduct of the Police Authorities in dealing with open-air meetings are always guided by their knowledge of the objects of the meeting and the behaviour of those attending it. THE MERCHANT SERVICE-THE SMACK "COLUMBINE." THE SECRETARY TO THE ADMIRALTY (Mr. HIBBERT), in reply, said, that the telegram asking for assistance in searching for the smack Columbine did not reach the Admiralty until Tuesday, the accident having occurred on the previous Saturday. The Active and the Eagle were Coastguard sailing yawls; the Vigilant, also a sailing vessel, belonged to the Scotch Board of Fisheries, and was not under Admiralty orders. Looking at the time that had elapsed since the accident, and the fact that there were local steamers that had been employed and that could be re-employed, the Admiralty informed the Board of Trade that they had no vessel that could be sent to search for the smack with any the Admiralty had any vessel lying at hope of success. He might add that if Lerwick, or anywhere in the immediate neighbourhood, they would have been their power. very glad to render all the assistance in EDUCATION-NON-ATTENDANCE AT SCHOOLS. MR. JENNINGS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to the large number of summonses issued against Parents of the poorest class for not sending their children to school, these in imprisonment; and, whether he is summonses in many instances resulting disposed to instruct the magistrates to in their power to inflict imprisonment, show greater consideration and leniency especially in cases where illness or great poverty occasions the non-attendance of children? CHILDERS): As far as the Home Office THE SECRETARY OF STATE (Mr. is aware, there is no reason to believe that the law is being administered with harshness, or without due regard to all the circumstances of each case. I, therefore, see no occasion to issue instructions to the magistrates with respect to their duties in this matter. MR. JENNINGS said, that as there were 40 summonses before the Police Courts lately he would ask the Question again on Monday. MR. JACKS asked the Secretary to the Admiralty, If he will explain why no proper search or pursuit was made after the smack Columbine, which lately drifted from Lerwick to the Norwegian Coast with an invalid on board, although two of Her Majesty's despatch boats, the Eagle and the Active, as also the the Exchequer, Whether in view of the Mr. Dixon-Hartland TARIFF AND CUSTOMS ACT, 1876. MR. KING asked Mr. Chancellor of |