Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

year' service, above the age of twenty, but have not such retrospective application in the case of officers who had left the Army between those dates, before completing twelve years' service above the age of twenty; whether, if this is the case, the distinction in this respect between the two classes of officers was intentionally made; and, if so, on what grounds, and whether he considers the ground for such distinction sufficient; and, whether he will take into consideration the propriety of extending the privilege of counting service given under the age of twenty as qualification for beneficial retirement to officers who left the Army between the 13th August 1877 and the 5th of February 1880, before completing twelve years' service above the age of twenty?

officers hereafter so promoted, full provision has been made, insuring the sufficient pensions.

TELEGRAPH ACT, 1868-POSITION OF

TELEGRAPH CLERKS.

MR. BIRKBECK asked the Postmaster General, Whether he will be able to make any statement with regard to the position of the telegraph clerks before the Whitsuntide Recess ?

MR. MACLIVER asked the Post

master General, If his attention L been called to the opinion given, on the 19th instant, by Mr. Attorney General, defining the legal status of the telegraph clerks, and whether he would adopt ani act upon it?

MR. FAWCETT: Sir, some days ag MR. CHILDERS: Sir, the Warrant of I submitted certain preliminary prothe 5th of February, 1880, to which the positions to the Treasury on the position hon. Gentleman refers, undoubtedly has of the telegraph clerks. These proposi the effect expressed in his first Question; tions are now being considered by the but, as I am not responsible for that Treasury in connection with the Post Warrant, which was issued on the advice Office; and I can say on behalf of the of my Predecessor, I cannot venture to Treasury, and on behalf of the Pust say what intentions may have passed Office, that we are both most anxious to through his mind. I have, however, re-arrive at a decision as soon as possible. ceived representations urging relaxations of the Warrant in the sense of the hon. Member's third Question; but at this moment I cannot say whether or not they will be complied with. Questions of the retrospective effect of new regulations are among the most difficult I have to deal with.

ARMY-THE FORTHCOMING ROYAL

WARRANT-OFFICERS PROMOTED

FROM THE RANKS.

MAJOR O'BEIRNE asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether his attention has been called to the fact that officers who have been promoted from the ranks will be most injuriously affected by the Royal Warrant intended to take effect on the 1st July next, as these officers seldom obtain promotion to the rank of commissioned officer until over thirty years of age; and that, as many of them have only two or three years' service, they will be compelled to retire without a pension?

MR. CHILDERS: Sir, I have not lost sight of the point raised by my hon. and gallant Friend, and when the new Warrant appears he will see that both as to officers now serving who have been promoted from the ranks and also as to

Mr. Cobbold

As soon as a decision is arrived at I shall make it known. With regard to the Question of the hon. Member for Plymouth (Mr. Macliver), I am sure the House will see that that is a matter with regard to which I ought to have Notice.

PRISONS (IRELAND)-GOVERNOR OF
LIMERICK GAOL.

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Mr. Eager, Governor of the Jail of Limerick, in which several persons are at present confined under the provisions of the Coercion Act, is the same Mr. Eagar whose conduct was brought under the attention of the House of Commons on June 1, 1869, by the late Mr. George Henry Moore, and who on that occasion was stated by Mr. Moore to have harshly and cruelly treated Mr. W. H. O'Sullivan, while imprisoned in the said jail, detaining him for fourteen days before he was allowed to see a solicitor, twenty-eight days before he could write a letter, and one hundred and twenty days before he was allowed to see his wife and children, leaving the said Mr. O'Sullivan with insufficient clothing at night, compelling him to wash filthy basins, to drink from

MR. T. P. O'CONNOR wished to know, Whether Mr. O'Sullivan had not written to the public Press challenging Mr. Chichester Fortescue to prove that there had been any exaggeration in the statement of his case; whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention had been called to statements in The Freeman's Journal as to the treatment of prisoners; and whether for 20 out of the 24 hours, prisoners were confined in a cell 12 feet by 6 feet?

filthy vessels, and to walk round a ring | tive Government, and that the regulain the prison yard in silence, Mr. O'Sul- tions were very strict in the matter. livan being a political prisoner never put There had been no complaint against on his trial either before or after his im- anything that the Governor had done. prisonment; whether, in the course of the same Debate, Mr. Chichester Fortescue did not admit that Mr. O'Sullivan was treated" with an amount of severity which was beyond the necessity of the case;" whether the same Mr. Eager did not punish the slightest breach of the silent system by the political prisoners with bread and water for fortyeight hours; and, whether in view of these circumstances, it is in accordance with the present treatment of political prisoners to commit the charge of untried prisoners under the present Coercion Act to persons exposed to such charges? MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, that he had really answered the first Question already. Mr. Eager was now Governor of the Limerick gaol, and his conduct was brought under the attention of the House in 1869. But the hon. Member quoted a speech of the then Chief Secretary for Ireland, and he (Mr. W. E. Forster) felt bound to call attention to a few words that went before and after that quotation. Mr. Chichester Fortescue had said that it was

"Unnecessary for him to go fully into Mr. O'Sullivan's allegations, but, after careful inquiry, he had ascertained that there was a large amount of exaggeration in his representations. At the same time his apprehension was that there was an amount of severity beyond the necessity of the case."

Then Mr. Chichester Fortescue also made use of the words that it was

MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, he declined to go into a case which happened in 1869. With regard to what was going on at the present time, he had answered a similar Question a day or two ago. He had no complaints brought before him. He could not take notice of complaints appearing in newspapers without any responsible authority. The orders were that any complaints made in the usual manner would be thoroughly and immediately investigated.

PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) ACT,

1881-LICENCES TO CARRY ARMS.

MR. O'KELLY asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the refusal of certain magistrates in Ireland to grant licence to carry arms to respectable persons on the ground that they had attended Land League meetings; and, if so, whether the Government approve of the action of such magistrates?

He must

"Worthy of remark that neither Mr. O'Sullivan nor any other political prisoner made any complaints of treatment whilst in prison." MR. W. E. FORSTER, in reply, said, He (Mr. W. E. Forster) quoted those that he had practically answered that remarks, because the hon. Member had Question a few days ago. Under the only given part of Mr. Chichester For-Peace Preservation Act magistrates were tescue's observations. He had no wish bound to exercise a discretion in any to attempt now to go into the case, which case brought before them. happened in 1869; but, having looked decline to lay down any general rule on carefully into the matter, there was the subject. If any person felt aggrieved, no doubt that the prison regulations of he had the remedy of applying to the that time were such as to require con- resident magistrate himself. siderable change, and changes had been made at the time of the passing of the Westmeath Act. He did not think that in the case alluded to any special blame attached to the Governor. But he wished to state with regard to the present position of affairs that the Governor was under the supervision of the Execu

VOL. CCLXI. [THIRD SERIES.]

POST OFFICE THE MAILS IN ARGYLL

SHIRE AND THE NORTH OF
SCOTLAND.

MR. MACKINTOSH asked the Postmaster General, Whether he has concluded any arrangements for expediting the mails to and from Inverness and

2 M

the North of Scotland, in consequence | if the banners referred to were seized of the numerous representations made and destroyed by the police; and what on the subject?

[blocks in formation]

MR. MUNDELLA: Sir, I have communicated with the Commissioners on Education in Wales, and I am informed that the labour attending the collection and arrangement of the materials and statistics necessary for the preparation of the Report and the examination of the vast amount of supplementary information furnished to the Commissioners during the progress of their inquiry has proved far greater than could at first have been anticipated. The task of arranging these materials is now nearly completed, and the Commissioners hope to be able shortly to present their Report.

LAW AND POLICE-ALLEGED OUT

RAGE AT GREENHITHE.

MR. DAWSON asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been directed to the statement contained in a circular of the 12th May 1881 from Mr. Samuel Charles Umfreville, of Greenhithe, to the following effect:-That some years ago; in consequence of his having obtained a true bill from the grand jury against the proprietors of cement works, the people of the works assembled with bands and having banners representing himself and his solicitor in the agonies of death. That the result of these demonstrations was that his wife was killed by the blow of a stone received at her own gate. That the perpetrator was never discovered. That persons who had signed affidavits in favour of the claims of a poor widow to compensation, were visited by crowds and intimidated and prevented from giving evidence; if he can inform the House

Mr. Mackintosh

steps, if any, were taken to apprehend persons reasonably suspected of intimi dating and inciting to violence and murder; and, whether the perpetrators have been since brought to justice?

SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT, in reply, said, he believed the events referred to were stated to have happened about six years ago. It was not easy to obtain information about circumstances which took place so long back; but, as far as he had been able to ascertain, the facts stated in the first part of the Question were without foundation. No banners, therefore, were seized or destroyed, nor had there been apprehensions of persons reasonably suspected.

THE STANDING ORDERS OF THIS

HOUSE.

MR. THOMASSON asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether he can undertake at the commencement of the Session of 1882 to submit the Standing Orders for the consideration of the House, with a view by their revision to economise the public time?

MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, we have not yet made sufficient progress in the present Session to enable me to make a categorical declaration as to what we may or may not do at the outset of next Session. But I must say that, with that reservation, I am of opinion that the condition of the House with regard to its arrangements for conducting Busiof the first magnitude, requiring the ness now constitutes a public question earliest attention as soon as the state of Business will permit.

POOR LAW (IRELAND)—ELECTION OF

POOR LAW GUARDIANS AT BELFAST.

MR. BIGGAR asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If his attention has been called to the manner in which the annual election of Poor Law Guardians for Cromae Ward, in the Borough of Belfast, has been conducted for the present year; if it be true, as disclosed in evidence before the magistrates at petty sessions, in Belfast, on the 13th May instant, that the policeman entrusted with the delivery and collection of voting papers at said election was guilty of grave neglect in the discharge of his duty, by failing to collect

Ross
Pendarves

Majority

462

360

-102

and, if, in his opinion, the existing machinery of the Ballot Act is suffi cient?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL (Sir

voting papers in the houses of several of the streets in which he had laid them down, and in other districts having called at the residence of the voters at ten or eleven o'clock at night, when many of them had retired to bed; if it be true that the policeman in company with Mr. James R. Christian, one of the succes-HENRY JAMES), in reply, said, he thought ful candidates, under their system of the Question ought to have been adelection, entered a public-house in the dressed to his right hon. Friend the Vice said ward, and partook of refreshments, President of the Council on Education, and whilst thus regaling themselves, is because the defect seemed to have arisen it true that the parcel of collected voting through the violation of one of the elepapers then in the constable's possession mentary rules of arithmetic. This was were opened, examined, and altered by a circumstance which could not always the said Mr. Christian, or one of his be guarded against; but he did not agents, who was also present; and, if think it afforded evidence that the maany or all of these assumptions be accu-chinery of the Ballot Act was insuffirate, will he take into consideration the form in which the last election for the Poor Law Guardians for Cromae was conducted?

cient.

SIR HENRY PEEK asked if the

Attorney General was aware that at the last Election his Colleague and himself received from the electors of Mid Surrey 1,330 more votes than were re

MR. W. E. FORSTER: Sir, the Vice President of the Local Government Board informs me that there ap-corded by the High Sheriff? pears to have been some irregularity in distribution in connection with the voting papers; but the Board do not think that they should exercise their powers under the 23rd section of the Act 67 Vict. c. 92. I requested a communication from the Inspector of Constabulary in Ireland with reference to the misconduct of the police-constable on the occasion. I have not yet received his Report, and therefore I cannot say whether it will be necessary for me to bring the matter under the notice of the Local Government Board or not. of the Local Government Board or not. I perceive, from the newspaper report referred to, that the magistrates before whom the police constable was brought on the charge of neglect acquitted

ARMY-INFANTRY MAJORS.

SIR ALEXANDER GORDON asked

the Secretary of State for War, Whemation as to the duties of the eight mather he can now give any further inforjors of an infantry regiment under the proposed territorial organisation, and especially whether they will pay companies?

him.

BALLOT ACT-THE ST. IVES ELECTION.

SIR HENRY PEEK asked Mr. Attorney General, Whether his attention has been called to the circumstances

attending the declaration of the poll at

the late St. Ives election :

"The result of the polling was in the first instance declared as follows: Ross (Conser

vative 517, Pendarves (Liberal) 395; majority 122. This result took both parties by surprise, and it was at once openly declared that some mistake had been made in the counting. So strong was the feeling in the matter that the returning ofheer directed another counting of the votes, and the correct numbers were then

found to be:—

hon. and gallant Friend, I have to state MR. CHILDERS: Sir, in reply to my that the captains promoted to be majors will continue to perform their present company duties, including payment of No change will, as a rule, be made in the men; but they will be mounted. the duties of existing majors until they

are promoted.

LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANIES ACT,

1870-RETURNS.

SIR HENRY TYLER asked the Pre

sident of the Board of Trade, Whether

he will consider what measures can be adopted to render the Return of "Life Assurance Companies," as annually issued, more valuable, by avoiding to a greater extent discrepancies of dates in the Returns, visible in the Blue Book issued to Members on the 17th May instant, as follows:-(1.) In the "Annual Returns" (Schedules 1 to 4, sections 5 and 6), taking care, even if the

issue be made later, that the majority of them may be (as stated in the heading) for the previous year, in place of being (as they are in fact) forty-eight for the previous year, and sixty-six (or the great majority) for the year before; (2.) In the case of the "Valuation and Statistical Returns " (Schedules 5 and 6, sections 7 and 8), that the compilations embrace more recent periods than those in the Blue Book referred to, varying, as they do, from 1872, and, in the case of twenty-seven Companies, not being

later than 1876 ?

MR. CHAMBERLAIN, in reply, said, he was afraid that it would not be possible to make the changes suggested. The accounts of Life Assurance Com

panies were made up to different dates; and the Act gave a period of nine months during which the Return might be made to the Board of Trade. Moreover, some of the Companies made quinquennial Returns; and in others the period was as long as 10 years. It would, therefore, be impossible to have all the Returns made up to the same date, unless the publications were kept back so long as to be practically of little value.

SOUTH AFRICA-THE TRANSVAALTHE NATIVE TRIBES.

MR. GORST asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether Her Majesty's Government will take any steps to ascertain the truth or falsehood of the statements that have been

publicly made that the Boers of the Transvaal are organising commandos to punish those native tribes which were loyal to the British Government in the last insurrection, and in particular against a chief named Montsuine; and, in the event of the Right honourable gentleman stating that Her Majesty's Government possess information of these facts, what steps it is intended to take to protect Montsuine and other natives from outrage?

MR. GRANT DUFF: Sir, we telegraphed on Saturday to Sir Hercules Robinson, and have received the following reply:

"Yours yesterday received. Administrator, Pretoria, heliographed, 11th May, that a field cornet had arrived there preceding night from Potchefstroom district, who stated Boer com

mando, about 400, proceeded under orders from Kronje, on 8th, to attack Montsioa, between whom and Machabi, other Caffre chief, hostili

Sir Henry Tyler

ties had been going on. Commission called ce Boer leaders for explanation. They said ther reports stated that Montsioa had attack-d Machabi, and was threatening Lichtenberg, and that Boer commando was simply to d-feni homes. We at once sent an Imperial of +7, Major Ernest Buller, with Piet Joubert, to Pchefstroom, to order Montsioa to keep quiet ar 1 commando to disperse. It was arranged that Kronje should appear before the Commission to explain proceedings. Montsioa was to be told that Commission would deal with whole question

of Keate Award."

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

MR. THOMASSON asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he thinks it desirable to fill the houses of honourable Members, at the public expense, with bulky copies of Provisional Orders Confirmation Bills, which they never read, or to deliver to honourable Members on every occasion when a Bill is upon the Order paper for Committee, copies of the Amendments on such Bill, when such copies of Amendments are identically, word for word, the same as those previously delivered (e.g. Alkali, &c. Works Regulation Bill); and, whether, in the interests of the Public Exchequer, he does not think it desirable to alter the practice in these respects?

LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH: The delivery of Bills and Notices of Motion to hon. Members is made under the general direction of Mr. Speaker, assisted, when necessary, by the Printing Committee. As representative of the

« ForrigeFortsett »