MR. FAWCETT: Sir, I am glad to be able to state that arrangements have been made for the employment, experimentally, of a certain number of deaf and dumb persons in the sorting of papers in the Post Office Savings Bank Department, and I can only express a hope that the experiment will turn out successfully. POST OFFICE (SAVINGS BANK DE PARTMENT)-PROMOTIONS. EARL PERCY asked the Postmaster General, with reference to the promotions about to be made in the Savings Bank Department of the Post Office, Whether it is the fact that it is proposed to pass over duly qualified officers in favour of others below them in their class; and, if so, whether he can state the grounds upon which this course is to be adopted? MR. FAWCETT: Sir, in reply to the Question of the noble Earl, I have to state that no names have yet been submitted to me for promotion in the Savings Bank Department. In order to prevent misapprehension, I think it may be well to mention that, by a long-established rule of the Service, promotion from the third to the second class depends upon seniority combined with full competency, and from the second class to the first. and to appointments above the first, upon superior merit. I can only add that in the promotions about to be made I shall endeavour to act on these rules with the strictest impartiality. THE LATE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD, K.G. INSCRIPTION ON PROPOSED MONUMENT. MR. MACDONALD asked the First Lord of the Treasury, If the Inscription which is to be placed on the Monument which he will propose to ask to be erected to the memory of the late Earl of Beaconsfield will contain any reference whatever to his actions as a leader of a political party? MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, as I understand this matter, according to the precedents and custom of Parliament, when the House arrives at a Vote of this kind, it expresses it in terms which are sufficiently full to afford a guide for the inscription to be placed on the public monument. That has been the course pursued on the present occasion, and I apprehend it would not be in accordance with precedent or policy, or within the authority conferred by the Vote of Parliament, to make any addition to what I may call the material words of the inscription. I do not think that any of the monuments, as far as I know, contain references to the acts of persons whom they commemorate in their character of Leaders of a political Party, and certainly I should not propose that there should now be anything that would be at variance with the established practice in the matter. ARMY RE-ORGANIZATION - MILITIA OFFICERS' UNIFORMS. EARL PERCY asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he will lay on the Table of the House a Statement of the probable average outlay which will bo imposed upon each officer of Militia by the changes in dress and appointments consequent upon the proposals of Her Majesty's Government, distinguishing between those officers belonging to Regiments which will change their facings and those which will not; and, whether this House will be afforded an opportunity of considering the proposed changes of uniform before they were put in orders? MR. CHILDERS: No. Sir; I do not propose to lay such a Return upon the Table. In many cases the alteration referred to will involve a very small expenditure, and I have already stated what I intend to do when material changes are involved. If, however, the noble Earl wishes to raise any discussion on these points, he can do so when the Vote for Clothing is being considered. ALKALI, &c. WORKS REGULATION BILL-CEMENT WORKS. MR. R. N. FOWLER asked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he is prepared to lay before the House the private reports of the Government chemists with reference to the tests to be applied to the gases or vapours emitted from cement works; and, whether he is aware that no means exist for consuming carbonic acid gas; and if, in these circumstances, he is prepared to state what are the best practical means which cement manufacturers are to be required to use, in order to comply with the Act? 1 EARL PERCY asked, whether the words "full Colonial relation with this country" have not been applied to the state of certain countries whose condition is to be that of the Transvaal with regard to Great Britain? MR. DODSON: Sir, there are no Re- | Majesty's Government through the Presiports, either private or public, from the dent of the High Commission. Government chemists as to the specific quantitative tests to be applied to these works. I am aware that no means of a practicable character exist for consuming carbonic acid gas; but that is not the gas complained of. What is complained of is the acidity other than that from carbonic acid, the density of the vapour, and the smell. Although I am not prepared at this moment to state what are the best practicable and available means cement manufacturers might be required to use, I am advised that these works may be conducted, in many instances, so as to give out less offensive vapour than is now the case, and that the vapour given out may be allowed to escape in such a manner as to be dispersed much better than at present. SOUTH AFRICA THE TRANSVAAL (POLITICAL RELATIONS). VISCOUNT FOLKESTONE asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether the Transvaal State will be in "full Colonial relations with this Country;" or, whether the relations between this Country and the Transvaal will be conducted through the Foreign Office, and not through the Colonial Office? MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, in answer to this Question as to the words "full Colonial relations with this country," which are put in inverted commas, I wish to say I never stated or implied that the Transvaal under the new condition of things, when settled, would be in full Colonial relations with this country. I do not think that that would be an accurate description, so far as I am able to form an opinion. With regard to the Question whether the relations between this country and the Transvaal will be conducted through the Foreign Office, and not through the Colonial Office, I have to say that the practice in South Africa, even with regard to a purely Foreign State-for example, the Orange Free State-has been to conduct the relations through the Colonial Office. Instructions have been given to the Royal Commissioners on this subject to the following effect:As regards communication with Foreign Governments, it will probably be found that the Transvaal Government should correspond on such matters with Her MR. GLADSTONE said, that the noble Earl had completely mistaken the bearing of his argument. His argument was, that as there were States in full Colonial relation with this country where the Queen did not appoint the Governor, à fortiori it could not be requisite that we should appoint a Governor in a State like the Transvaal. CRIMINAL LAW-THE QUEEN v. BRAD- LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL asked the honourable and learned Member for Launceston, Whether it was a fact that the Law Officers of the late Government decided not to proceed further with the prosecution against Mr. Bradlaugh and others for publishing obscene and immoral works after the first indictment had failed owing to a technical error? SIR HARDINGE GIFFARD, in reply, said, the Question of his noble Friend appeared to assume that the prosecution was at the instance of the Government. That was an error. It was begun by the City Police, and he had no knowledge of it. He must- SIR WILFRID LAWSON rose to Order, and asked, whether the noble Lord could ask a Question which had no reference to a Bill or other matter before the House? MR. SPEAKER: The Rule is, that a Question must refer to a Bill or Motion before the House; but as the present Question refers to a matter which has attracted much public attention in this House, and as it deals with the acts of the Law Officers of the Crown of the late Government, I thought it my duty to allow the Question to be put. SIR HARDINGE GIFFARD said, he would repeat what he was saying when interrupted-namely, that the case was begun by the City Police; he had no knowledge of it until after that time. It never was a Government prosecution, and no question of further proceedings ever came before him as Law Officer. He thought, however, he was bound to add that if he had been asked his opinion, it would have been against giving further publicity to an obscene and mischievous publication. APPOINTMENT OF COLONIAL MR. WARTON asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether there is any instance of a colony in which the appointment of its governor, even in those cases where that office has been hereditary or elective, has not been originally made by the Crown? MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, he should be most happy to answer any Question relating to a matter within his own knowledge; but as regarded that which formed the subject of the present Question, the hon. and learned Member was quite as competent as he was to ascertain the information for which he sought; and, considering the respective allowance of leisure, perhaps the hon. and learned Member was more able to find an opportunity. PARLIAMENT-ARRANGEMENT OF PUBLIC BUSINESS. MR. NEWDEGATE asked, Whether it was the intention of the Government to take the first three Orders of the Day on the Paper in the order in which they stood? MR. GLADSTONE: Yes. He would add that they did not propose to curtail the debate on the Land Bill for the sake of bringing on the adjourned debate on the Parliamentary Oaths Bill. MR. A. J. BALFOUR asked, Whether, in view of the narrow majority of Saturday morning, the Government intended to persist in their determination to ask the House to have a Morning Sitting to-morrow (Tuesday)? MR. GLADSTONE said, it would be more convenient to answer that Question when the Order was called on. LORD RANDOLPH CHURCHILL said, the Order might not be reached until 1 o'clock in the morning, perhaps later, and the delay would occasion inconvenience. He was sure the right hon. Gentleman would not propose to increase the inconvenience of a Morning Sitting, by keeping Members until a late hour before they received a definite announcement? VOL. CCLXI. [THIRD SERIES.] MR. GLADSTONE said, he should be prepared to take the judgment of the House upon the Order. He felt it necessary to do that, for reasons connected with the general position of the case, and, having said that, hon. Members would have knowledge that the subject would come on. MR. A. J. BALFOUR said, that he had arranged the matter with his noble Friend (Lord Richard Grosvenor). MR. GLADSTONE said, that he had not meant to convey any reflection on his hon. Friend the Member for Hertford. FRANCE AND TUNIS-THE TURKISH FLEET. SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF asked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is true that the French Ambassador at Constantinople has protested against the despatch of Turkish ships to Tunis, and has stated that French ships will fire upon such ships if they are despatched? SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: No information has reached Her Majesty's Government of the reported despatch of the Turkish Fleet to Tunis and the protest of the French Government; but an incident of this nature occurred in 1836. A similar threat was made by France in 1841, M. Guizot stating that the French Admiral had orders to turn back the Turkish Squadron, which it was rumoured was about to visit Tunis, by remonstrance if he could, but by force if necessary; and in 1864 Her Majesty's Government were informed that France would still oppose the presence of the Turkish Fleet in Tunisian waters. MR. OTWAY asked the hon. Baronet, whether he would complete his answer by stating what the answer of Lord Palmerston's Government was in 1864 ? SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: There was no answer whatever, Sir. MR. OTWAY would like to know, if the hon. Baronet would be so good as to allow the despatches to be laid on the Table? SIR CHARLES W. DILKE said, there were 15 volumes of these despatches from 1838 to 1864. On the occasion referred to, there was no direct communication made by the British Government with regard to the action of the French. The British Government was informed ୯ of it; but no request was made for an | (Ireland) Bill, and the great advisability answer, and no answer was given. of sending it up to the House of Lords in good time, so as not to give that House any excuse on that account to reject it, he will postpone all other Business not of the most urgent nature in its favour and take it day by day? MR. MONTAGUE GUEST: I should like to ask the hon. Baronet, whether, in his opinion, the French Government are justified in following the precedent of 1836? SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: I can only reply, in the words of the Government on a former occasion-it is never the custom of the Government to give answers to hypothetical Questions. MR. OTWAY gave Notice that he would ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, If he would allow despatches to be placed on the Table which should show whether in 1864 the British fleet was moved from Malta to the port of Tunis? MR. GLADSTONE, in reply, said, he was sure the hon. Member would not accuse him of want of sympathy if he declined to enter into the Question in detail. He would confine himself to saying that, as far as the Business of the Government was concerned, they attached the highest importance to the progress of the Land Law (Ireland) Bill being made as expeditiously as it could be done with due deliberation, and they would allow nothing but what was abso ARTIZANS' AND LABOURERS' DWELL-lutely necessary or of the very simplest INGS ACTS-ALLEGED REMOVAL OF MR. A. M. SULLIVAN asked the Chairman of the Metropolitan Board of Works, If it is the fact that the Metropolitan Board of Works, proceeding under the Artizans' Dwellings Acts, have given notice of immediate removal to nearly two hundred families, who are chiefly dock labourers residing in courts lying between Rosemary Lane (Royal Mint Street) and St. Katharine's Docks; and, if he can say whether the new dwellings which the Board proposes to erect will be suitable as residences for the same classes as those who are now about being disturbed in the locality specified? SIR JAMES M'GAREL-HOGG, in reply, said, that the hon. and learned Member was under a misapprehension. The Metropolitan Board had given no such notices as those to which he had referred; but they had, at the request of the Trustees of the Peabody Fund, to whom the adjoining land had been sold for the erection of artizans' dwellings, obtained and furnished the names of the persons residing in the locality mentioned in the Question, and the Trustees had issued notices to those persons that their new buildings were ready for occupation. The Board erected no dwellings themselves, but only sold or let the land for that purpose. LAND LAW (IRELAND) BILL. MR. MACFARLANE asked the Prime Minister, Whether, considering the supreme importance of the Land Law Sir Charles W.Dilke character to interfere with it. MR. SPEAKER said, that the Notice of Opposition that had been given applied only to the Motion of which the Attorney General had given Notice. The House was now engaged on an Order of the Day, altogether a different matter; and as there was no Notice of opposition to the Order of the Day, it could come on at any hour. MR. A. J. BALFOUR wished for a definite expression from the Prime Minister, whether it was on the question of the Morning Sitting, or on this Bill, that he intended to take the feeling of the House? Was it that the Government meant to bring on the question of a Morning Sitting the next day, when the Order of the Day was read? He believed it was competent to the Government to adopt either course. MR. GLADSTONE: Sir, there is no intention on the part of the Government to bring in anything relating to the proposal of my hon. and learned Friend. The question of the Morning Sitting only will be considered to-night. In answer to Mr. ONSLOW, MR. SPEAKER said, that the adjourned debate on the Bill could come on at any hour. FRANCE THE COMMERCIAL TREATY -THE NEW FRENCH GENERAL TARIFF. MR. SLAGG asked the Under Secre tary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the present Treaty of Commerce with France will not expire on Nov. 8, and what attempt is being made to avoid delay in fixing its future form? SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: Sir, Her Majesty's Government have been officially informed that the new French General Tariff was promulgated yesterday, and accordingly, in pursuance of the Declaration signed on the 10th of October, 1879, the Commercial Treaties and Conventions between Great Britain and France now in force will expire on the 8th of November next. To avoid the delay referred to by the hon. Member, I beg to state that Her Majesty's Government urged on the 18th of June, 5th of August, 12th of October, 15th of November, 15th of February, and several times in March and April last, that negotiations should be entered upon; but the French Government replied that they could not proceed until the Bill for establishing the new General Tariff had been passed by the Senate. When the discussion in the Senate was approaching its conclusion, Her Majesty's Government asked that, in order to avoid delay, some person should be sent to London to furnish preliminary explanations on questions of detail. The French Government, however, preferred to give them in Paris, and Mr. Kennedy was accordingly sent there for the purpose. It will thus be seen that there has been in the past no delay on the part of Her Majesty's Government. I would add that in the official notification from the French Government to which I have referred, no proposal with respect to formal negotiations is made by that Government. This point will not be lost sight of in the answer which will be returned to M. Challemel-Lacour. MR. BOURKE asked, whether in the negotiations any hope had been held out of changes beneficial to the commerce of this country? SIR CHARLES W. DILKE said, that such hopes had been held out, and that he hoped the French Government woul be prepared to make such changes. MR. GLADSTONE, in rising to move the following Resolution: "That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that Her Majesty will give directions that a Monument be erected in the Collegiate Church of Saint Peter, Westminster, to the Memory of the late Right Hon. the Earl of Beaconsfield, with an Inscription expressive of the high sense entertained by the House of labours in Parliament and in great Offices of his rare and splendid gifts, and of his devoted State; and to assure Her Majesty that this House will make good the expenses attending the same," said: Sir, considering the Notice that appears, in conjunction with my own, upon the Paper, I should, perhaps, be too sanguine were I to express even the faintest hope that this Motion might receive the unanimous assent of the Committee. But, Sir, while I do not venture to press that hope, I do entertain the very earnest hope-I would even say I offer the most earnest entreaty-that it may not be made a subject of lengthened or contentious debate. I say that, Sir, in the position of one especially bound |