in town houses are dealt with in Ireland; and, if he cannot permit a Parliamentary inquiry, will he appoint a Royal Commission to inquire into this ques is much more easy to do mischief than good, I do hope that hon. Members will not press upon me Questions which relate strictly and entirely to matters of policy. That applies to the two Question? tions of the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Onslow), and also to the Question of the hon. Member for Eye (Mr. AshmeadBartlett) as regards the latter part of it. With regard to the former part, which relates to matters of fact, I believe they are matters upon which full information has already been given in this House. If the hon. Member desires that it should be enlarged as to matters of fact, the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs will be ready to give him any information he desires. MR. ONSLOW said, he thought it would be desirable that the House and the country should know what was the national policy to which the right hon. Gentleman referred, and whether it was the determination of the Government to abide by it. MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT said, he did not propose to press his Question; but he would remind the House that when the other day he put the last part of the Question, the right hon. Gentleman had asked him to put it on the Paper. MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR said, it would be interesting to know whether the Ameer and the majority of the people of Afghanistan cordially endorsed our policy; or, might he ask the right hon. Gentleman, in regard to the policy which he had described as a national policy, Whether Her Majesty's Government has any good ground for supposing that the views of the Ameer of Afghanistan are cordially shared by the majority of the inhabitants of Afghanistan; and, whether it is the fact that many Afghans have expressed themselves as only too willing to become brethren in arms with the Cossacks? [No reply.] TOWN TENANCIES (IRELAND)— TENANTS' IMPROVEMENTS. COLONEL NOLAN asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If his attention has been called to the fact that on Tuesday thirty-two out of the thirtyfour Irish Members present voted for a Parliamentary inquiry into the system under which the improvements of tenants VOL. COXOV. [THIRD SERIES.] MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, he was aware that a very large majority of the Irish Members present in the House voted for the inquiry into house tenure in towns. He was one of those desirous of giving every possible weight to the authority of Irish Members, if the question were one sufficiently and exclusively Irish; but it was proposed to appoint a Select Committee-without the alternative of a Royal Commission- to inquire into the system under which the improvements of tenants in town houses were dealt with in Ireland. That was a very different question from the town parks question, which, at the time of the discussion on the Irish Land Bill, they were disposed to admit was a fair matter for consideration, as to which his right hon. Friend behind him (Mr. W. E. Forster) did say that the Government might assent to inquiry. The town parks question could be considered an Irish question in some degree; and his hon. Friend the Member for Tyrone had made a suggestion which the Government were perfectly willing to agree to― namely, that, so far as town parks were concerned, an inquiry might be made. The question of the tenure of houses in towns was not alone an Irish question. Town houses existed in England and Scotland in exactly the same manner as in Ireland; and he was really not aware of anything distinct in the law of Ireland relating to town houses. It was quite evident that the question was not an Irish, but an Imperial question. He was therefore not able to agree with the desire of the Irish Members to have an inquiry into the tenure of town houses, on the ground on which it was asked for. THE ESTIMATES-INCREASE OF THE ARMY. SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOT: I wish to ask the Secretary of State for War a Question with regard to the proposed increase of the Army. I see in The Times to-day that the Army is to be increased by 15,000 men. should like to know, Whether that statement in regard to an addition of 15,000 men is a correct statement; and, whether that is in addition to the proposed F I increase of 3,000 men, which is the figure stated in the Estimates? THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON, in reply, said, that when he laid on the Table the Vote of Credit for the operations in progress in Egypt and the Soudan, it would be necessary to ask for a number of men in addition to those asked for in the Supplementary Estimates. He was not, however, now prepared to say what that additional number of men would be. SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE asked the noble Marquess when the Supplementary Estimates and the Vote of Credit would be brought forward ? THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON said, he could not state with certainty. He believed it would be necessary to go on with Supply on Monday aud Thursday; but it would depend upon the progress that was made. The Army Estimate would be taken after the Navy Estimate was disposed of. The Vote of Credit had not been prepared yet. SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE asked the Prime Minister, whether the Vote of Credit would be taken before the end of the financial year ? MR. GLADSTONE said, that it was not the intention to take the Vote in the present financial year. ARMY-THE FORCE IN IRELAND. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: Might I ask the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to reduce the garrison now in Ireland, by sending from it troops to the war in the Soudan? If so, how many troops is it intended to take; and, when is it intended to take them? THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: There is no such intention. The number of troops in Ireland was slightly reduced some time ago, and it is not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to reduce it further. ARMY ESTIMATES-THE SUPPLEMEN. TARY ESTIMATES. THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON, in reply, said, there would be none. COLONEL STANLEY asked, whether a portion of the charge for the 3,000 men asked for since the Supplementary Estimates were laid on the Table would be included in those Estimates? THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON said, there would be no further démand for money, as the 3,000 men would be included in the Supplementary Esti mates. PUBLIC MEETINGS-THE RIOT AT ASTON HALL, BIRMINGHAM. SIR FREDERICK MILNER: I wish to ask your ruling, Sir, upon a point of Order arising out of an answer given by the hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General. The point is, Whether a Member of the House is not, by the understood Rules of the House, compelled to withdraw any statement made in the House, when that statement has been proved in a Court of Justice to be a scandalous and malicious libel? MR. SPEAKER: No case has arisen on the facts stated by the hon. Baronet for any interference of the Chair. REGISTRATION (OCCUPATION VOTERS) BILLS. MR. HEALY asked the President of the Local Government Board, If he will the Irish Registration Bill a separate consider the expediency of not making measure from that for England; but, as in the case of the Franchise and Redistribution Bills, will introduce one measure for the Three Kingdoms? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir HENRY JAMES), in reply, said, it would not be necessary to have a Bill of the same character for England as for Ireland. It was thought advisable that there should be three separate Bills for the three countries. He could assure the hon. and learned Member that the Government felt the obligation of carrying the measures for Ireland and Scotland quite as much as for England. MR. HEALY: The hon. and learned Gentleman is aware that the House of LORD GEORGE HAMILTON asked, Lords has three times in succession reWhether any Supplementary Army Esti- jected the Registration of Voters (Iremate for the present year would be pre-land) Bill; and, of course, if it is brought sented in addition to that already on the in now in a separate form, they will Table of the House? He did not see reject it a fourth time, and the only proany Vote for the extra 3,000 men for the tection is to bring it in as a part of the present year. English Bill. Sir Walter B. Barttelot said: Sir Arthur Otway, before this Vote is put, it may, perhaps, be for the convenience of the Committee that I should offer a few words of explanation. The first two items included in this Supplementary Estimate provide for the pay and victuals and the number of officers and men which are now overborne. There has been an increase in the number of officers on full pay of about 120. That increase has been necessary, partly on account of the military operations in Egypt, and partly in consequence of the increase in the Naval Force in the Red Sea. The number of seamen overborne, partly owing to the same causes, is 330. We have also to provide for a larger force of Marines, the number overborne being 170. Recruiting has been going on briskly and most satisfactorily for the battalions now serving in Egypt, and there is an excess of 920 boys over the number voted. In recent years it has been found that the number of boys in training has been insufficient to maintain the necessary strength in the bluejacket classes, and we shall be obliged to propose a considerable increase in the number of boys in the Estimate for next year. When the House, in December, sanctioned an increased expenditure, it was understood that in the Dockyards we should do all that was in our power to hasten shipbuilding, without materially increasing the number of men. A scheme of profitable overtime has been recommended by the officers of the Dockyards, which scheme has been approved by the Admiralty. It will involve an extra sum for wages of about £38,000 for the Home Yards, and £9,000 for the Foreign Yards, chiefly in respect of the valuable Yard at Malta. It is not necessary to ask Parliament for the full sum involved in this increased expenditure, for the reason that we have been unable to expend, under Vote 10, Section 2, the entire sum voted last year for gunnery in consequence of the delay in the delivery of the gun-mountings. A less sum has also been required than was estimated for repairs and alterations of ships. I regret extremely the delay in the delivery of the gun mountings. We have pressed Messrs. Armstrong to use all possible despatch; but in consequence of the difficulties inseparable from the introduction of new patterns, some portion of the payments anticipated this year will be necessarily post year. poned until the next financial year. The Vote of £30,000 for Stores is the necessary consequence of the increased amount of shipbuilding. We have devoted the increased expenditure in stores and shipbuilding and wages more particularly to pushing forward those iron-clads which are now in the most advanced stage; and we hope in the present financial year to complete the Colossus, and in the next financial year the Collingwood, the Edinburgh, the Warspite, and the Impérieuse. The larger portion of this Supplementary Vote may be described as being entirely in connection with the Egyptian Expedition. A sum of £250,000 for transport is an addition to a sum of £170,000 which has been provided in previous Supplementary Estimates, and it is exclusive of the repayment to the Indian Revenue for the transport of the Indian Contingent. That payment cannot be made in the present financial The list of ships which have been engaged for the transport of the Egyptian Expedition is distributed as follows:Troops and horses, 13 ships, one hospital ship, five condensing ships, five tank ships, seven for camels and mules, 25 for railway material, including the employés on the railway, nine for stores, one ice ship, two colliers, and two tugs. The approximate cost averages 178. 6d. per ton per month for the troop-ships, and from 118. to 128. for the cargo vessels. I believe that these rates are quite unprecedented in the experience of the Admiralty. At the time of the Crimean War, the rate was 45s. to 50s. for vessels affording very inferior accommodation; and for the ships taken for the last Expedition to Egypt we paid 30 per cent higher rates than those which we are paying at the present time. I am sure the Committee will be glad to be assured that every care has been taken to provide for the requirements of the gallant men we have despatched on the Expedition to Egypt. The Ganges, one of the finest vessels in the Peninsular and Oriental Company's Service has been taken as a hospital ship, and has been most carefully fitted up. The condensing arrangements at Suakin will be capable of furnishing 1,200 tons of fresh water per day. We have now at Suakin two or three ships with ice-making machinery. In addition, we are despatching one small refrigerating vessel with a cargo of Sir Thomas Brassey 400 tons of ice to be kept frozen. By these arrangements we propose to keep up a supply of ice, not only to those for whom it is so essential-namely, the sick; but we hope also that there may be some to spare for the troops generally. With these observations, I beg to move the Vote for the additional Expenditure for Navy Services arising out of the Military Operations in connection with the Egyptian Campaign, and for Shipbuilding in Her Majesty's Dockyards. (1.) Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a Supplementary Sum, not exceeding £330,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray additional Expenditure for certain Navy Ser vices arising out of the Military Operations in Egypt, and connected with Shipbuilding in Her Majesty's Dockyards, which will come in 31st day of March 1885."-(Sir Thomas Brassey.) course of payment during the year ending on the MR. W. H. SMITH: I do not propose, Sir Arthur Otway, to find any fault whatever with the provision which the hon. Gentleman seeks to make for seamen and Marines, for the victualling and clothing of the seamen and Marines, for the transport expenses, and for the other services included in the Vote; but I cannot help expressing my very great sorrow that my hon. Friend has had again to announce the further postponement of the completion of those ships which the House so earnestly desires. The hon. Gentleman has been obliged to tell us that while a larger sum has been expended in wages in the Dockyards and in stores for building ships, there is a delay in the furnishing of the gun-mountings, which places in the hands of the Department something like £40,000. Hon. Members who are acquainted with the working of the Department will know what that means. A delay in the delivery of gun-mountings to the extent of £40,000 means that the ships for which the gun-mountings are required are incomplete, and are not able to take the sea until they are provided. Therefore, there is to be a further unexpected delay, which certainly comes upon the House by surprise. SIR THOMAS BRASSEY: The saving upon gun-mountings does not cover the whole sum of £40,000. The actual saving on gun-mountings gun-mountings alone is £19,000. MR. W. H. SMITH: My impression was that the gun-mountings covered the whole saving. I presume that the statement of the hon. Gentleman relates to Sub-Section 2 of Vote 10-the Vote under the head of Machinery. minds as to what they did intend to do. Well, November passed, and on the 2nd of December a statement was made in this House which led us to believe that a large addition would be made to the strength of the Navy. But up to the present moment not a single ship has been ordered. Four months of the financial year have elapsed, and nothing of the kind has been done. SIR THOMAS BRASSEY: There is also a saving of £18,000 on the repairs and alterations of ships; and the two items together come to about £40,000. MR. W. H. SMITH: At all events, we have an intimation conveyed to the House that the gun-mountings necessary for the guns in order to enable the ships to take the sea have not been supplied; and, therefore, the ships on which the country was entitled to rely, and on which it thought it could rely, cannot be available for the service of the country. These ships were promised to be in readiness and efficient at a certain date; and as they are not, it shows that sufficient foresight has not been exercised, and sufficient care taken to secure that, as far as the Admiralty were concerned, the promise made to the House should be fulfilled. The hon. Gentleman has stated that the Collingwood, the Edinburgh, the Warspite, the Impérieuse, and the Colossus, will be delivered in the course of the coming financial year. I am sure that the House will receive that statement with satisfaction. But I would ask my hon. Friend if he is quite certain that the guns and mountings will be ready for them in time? From the information which has been furnished to the House I very much doubt whether the guns and mountings will be ready in the coming financial year. I hold that there is no security whatever that the guns and gun-mountings will be in the possession of the Admiralty when required. And now I cannot help referring to what is not in the Estimate as well as what is. On the 23rd of October, Parliament was informed that the Admiralty had carefully considered the whole position of the naval defences of the country, and that the Government would make a statement to the House in the course of the month of November. I think the inference to be drawn from that was that the Government had fully considered the whole subject, and had made up their minds as to the course it was necessary to take, and the additions that were necessary to be made to the Navy in order to provide additional strength. If they did not contemplate an addition to the strength of the Navy, at all events they had made up their SIR THOMAS BRASSEY: Six Scouts have been ordered. MR. W. H. SMITH: Well, I am very glad to hear that. I was only, however, repeating the information given by my hon. Friend to the House in answer to a Question. I understood him to say that the tenders would not be dealt with until the 6th of March. SIR THOMAS BRASSEY: Six have already been ordered. MR. W. H. SMITH: The answer which I obtained to a Question the other day was that no one ship had been ordered. At all events, there is no provision in these Estimates, nor has any been made in the course of this financial year, for payment to any contractor of a single farthing for the building of a single ton. The position I wish to take is this-that the Government ought to realize the necessity for this provision, and the sooner it is made the better, in every sense of the word. It does not cost more to build a ship as rapidly as it can be built consistently with good work than to spread the building of it over a long period of years. On the contrary, we have evidence before the House, given before a Committee appointed by the House, including that of Mr. Barnaby, the Chief Constructor of the Navy, that it costs less to build a ship rapidly. Rapid shipbuilding is conducive to greater economy than slow shipbuilding, which involves an unnecessary expenditure of time. Then, again, there is the question of torpedo boats. We were promised that a certain number of torpedo boats should be built within the year. If there is one thing in which this country is more deficient than another at the present moment, as compared with the Navies of other Powers, it is in torpedo boats; and, from what we all know, great reliance in future naval wars will be placed on torpedo boats for the defence of harbours and strong places. But though four months have elapsed since the statement was |