HOUSE OF COMMONS, Monday, 5th June, 1882. Sir A. Clarke has not been absent from corps duties for about twenty-eight years, having been during that period on the seconded and supernumerary lists for civil employment; and, on what grounds the claims to the highest appointment in the Royal Engineers, of such distin MINUTES.] PRIVATE BILLS (by Order) Considered as amended-Forth Bridge Rail-guished officers as Major Generals Lenway; Ramsgate and Margate Tramways *. PUBLIC BILLS-Ordered-First Reading-Criminal Lunatics [192]. * Second Reading Costs) [188]. County Courts (Advocates' Committee-Prevention of Crime (Ireland) [157] (Artizans' and Labourers' Dwellings) [162]; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 3) Considered as amended - Judgments (Inferior PRIVATE BUSINESS. 19:0:com STANDING ORDERS. Standing Order 129 amended, in lines 9 and 10, by leaving out the words "the Report of the Examiner on such Bill," and inserting the words "the Examiner shall have given notice of the day on which the Bill will be examined" instead thereof. (The Chairman of Ways and Means.) QUESTIONS. nox, V.C., C.B.; Graham, V.C., C.B.; C. G. Gordon, C.B.; Cooke, C.B.; and Wray, C.M.G., are passed over in favour of an officer who has been practically a civilian, and has done so little corps duty during his career; also Gallwey, R.E., has been selected for the on what grounds Lieutenant General appointment of Governor of Bermuda, such appointment having become vacant Royal Engineers who had held the same by the death of a general officer of the is true that Colonel Ewart, R.E. is to for five years; and further, whether it succeed Sir Andrew Clarke as Commandant of the School of Military Engineering at Chatham; if so, whether, under Clause 79 I. of the Royal Warrant for Pay and Promotion, that officer should, on completing five years' service in his present rank of Regimental Colonel on the 21st October next, be placed upon the full-pay list of the Royal Engineers, unless he elects to retire from the Army; and, on what grounds such regulation is not to be followed in Colonel Ewart's case ? COLONEL ALEXANDER asked the right hon. Gentleman, Whether it is true that Colonel Sir Andrew Clarke, Royal Engineers, has been appointed Inspector General of Fortifications; if so, whether he will state the date when Sir Andrew Clarke ceased to perform any active Military duty prior to April 1st, 1881, and why he has been selected in preference to many distinguished officers of the Royal Engineers who have continuously performed Military duties ARMY-APPOINTMENTS IN THE ROYAL in connection with that corps? ENGINEERS. MR. STEWART MACLIVER asked the Secretary of State for War, If the report be correct that Colonel Sir Andrew Clarke, R.E. is to be promoted to the rank of Major General over the heads of several senior Colonels of the Royal Engineers, and appointed Inspector General of Fortifications; and, if so, whether such appointment has been hitherto held by one of the actual general officers of the corps; whether MR. CHILDERS: I will answer together the three Questions of my hon. Friend and that of the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for South Ayrshire, as they relate to cognate matters. General Gallwey has been appointed by Lord Kimberley Governor of Bermuda. I recommended him for that office, General Gallwey having been employed in several important duties under and at the War Office, his last appointment being that of Inspector General of For LAW AND JUSTICE-THE MAGISTRACY-LICENSING MAGISTRATES AT tifications. Sir Andrew Clarke has been appointed to succeed General Gallwey; but he has not, as the hon. Gentleman imagines, been promoted to the rank of major-general over any senior officer, nor was it ever proposed to promote him, although he will hold that rank locally and temporarily while Inspector General. His successor as commandant at Chatham has not been appointed; and I hope the House will support me in deprecating discussions as to the claims of supposed candidates. As to Sir Andrew Clarke, the Questions of both my hon. Friend and of the gallant Member evidence an entire misapprehension of the office for which he has been selected. If they will refer to The Army List, they will see that it is not an appointment in the Military Department under the Commander-in-Chief, but in the Ordnance Department under the Surveyor General. The Inspector General exercises, it is true, certain military functions, but they constitute a small portion of his duties; and Sir Andrew Clarke has been appointed because he is an engineer of great eminence, and has shown the highest quali ties as an administrator, and because, as at the present time proposals of great importance are expected from the Royal Commission on Colonial Defences and the Committee on the Defence of Mer PETERHEAD. DR. CAMERON asked the Lord Advocate, Whether it is a fact that, at a meeting of the Licensing Committee for the burgh of Peterhead on the 15th May, there being no quorum present, certain magistrates granted an illegal and invalid certificate of confirmation, purporting to authorise the applicants to sell excisable liquors at their own risk; whether the provost is correctly reported to have encouraged this infraction of the Law by saying, that "He did not think there was much fear of them, and if it were him he would take the risk, and give a fellow the drink he wanted; and, whether the persons whose certificates were in question have acted on the advice thus tendered? BALFOUR): I have made inquiry into THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. this matter, and my information is, that at a meeting of the Joint Committee for the confirmation of licences for the May, applications were presented for the burgh of Peterhead, held on the 15th of confirmation of three licences which had been unanimously granted by the magistrates; two of the applicants already held licences for the sale of porter and cantile Harbours, we require to be ad- ale, which expired on that day. There vised by an officer of the very highest was not a quorum of the Committee, engineering, administrative, and finan-only three members out of a total numcial capacity. ber of six being present. The following deliverance was pronounced: Sir Andrew Clarke was selected by the Duke of Somerset for duties under the Admiralty as Director of Works, analagous to those of Inspector General and Director of Works at the War Office. He held that appointment for nine years, and was promoted in it to the rank of colonel. He was subsequently selected by Lord Salisbury as Public Works Member of the Viceroy's Council in India, under the Act of 1874, and then for five years discharged duties similar to those he will now have. I am sorry that my hon. Friend should have mentioned the names of other officers, and advocated their claims on the grounds of seniority. This is eminently an office in the selection for which seniority should be far less regarded than comparative fitness, and I have no doubt whatever that the selection of Sir Andrew Clarke is a wise one. "The Joint Committee confirmed, so far as they had power (a quorum not being present), the above three certificates, subject to the parties taking the risk of the Court not being complete, and in respect of no one appearing to oppose the confirmation; and further, that the magistrates unanimously granted the certificates at the Licensing Court." The votes of the members of Committee present would have insured the confirmation of the licences if the whole Committee had attended. I am further informed that the report of the expression attributed to the Provost is substantially correct; but that the Provost, who is an experienced and highly respected magistrate, explains that he used these words in jest, and that they were so understood by the persons present. I am further informed that the applicants have been selling intoxicating liquor since the Confirmation Court was held, and that the Inland Revenue Department have accepted the duty on deposit till a Confirmation Court is held, which will take place as soon as possible. DR. CAMERON asked under what law these confirmations had been granted? shots from a revolver at Denis Connelly; if Lyne was indicted on a previous occasion for presenting a revolver; whether the revolver was detained by the police for some time; whether it was ultimately returned to him; and, whether the Government consider upon inquiry that Mr. Lyne is a person who fit to be entrusted with weapons of this kind? THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR) replied, that he did not ven-is ture to say whether they were legal or not. If anyone desired to test their legality, it was open to him to do so in the ordinary way. DEBTORS' (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1880— tained by the police. As the case is about to form the subject of investigathink it better not to pronounce any tion before a Bench of Magistrates, I opinion on the final Question of the hon. Member. MR. TREVELYAN: Mr. John Lyne has been charged, on sworn information, by Denis Connelly, with firing three shots at him from a revolver. The case stands adjourned until the 12th instant. He was not indicted on any previous DR. CAMERON asked the Lord Ad-revolver belonging to him has been deoccasion for presenting a revolver. No vocate, Whether his attention has been called to the deposition sworn to by John Herald, a bankrupt tweed merchant at Dundee, in which, referring to six pawn tickets produced, he stated that they represented goods pawned by him, although, with one exception, they were pawned in the name of another man, and one ticket, dated 1879, should have been dated 1881; whether, under "The Debtors' (Scotland) Act, 1880," it is a crime punishable by imprisonment, with or with hard labour, to "pawn, pledge, or dispose of, otherwise than in the ordinary way of trade," goods obtained on credit and not paid for, unless the bankrupt proves to the satisfaction of the court that he had no intent to defraud; and, whether it is intended THE MAGISTRACY (IRELAND)—MR. H. to prosecute John Herald under that statute? THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR), in reply, said, his attention had been directed to this case, and he had made very full and careful inquiry with regard to it. The second part of the Question he had to answer in the affirmative. As regarded the third part, he might say that he did not intend to give instructions for a prosecution, as, after careful consideration of the evidence, it appeared to him to be established that the goods were pawned with out intent to defraud. CRIME (IRELAND)-CASE OF JOHN MR. HEALY asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Mr. John Lyne, of Ardnetrush, Bantry, county Cork, was charged on sworn information with firing three The Lord Advocate MR. HEALY inquired whether Mr. of the Crown or at the expense of Denis Lyne would be prosecuted at the expense Connelly? THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON): The information will in due course come before the Attorney General for Ireland, who will decide whether upon the facts there is sufficient grounds for his inter ference. BLAKE, R.M. MR. HEALY asked the Chief Secre tary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Blake was promoted from being a police Upon whose recommendation Mr. Henry officer be a resident magistrate; and, records against him during his service whether there were any unfavourable in the constabulary? MR. TREVELYAN: Mr. Blake was appointed to a Resident Magistracy by the late Government in January, 1876, and there are no papers in my Office that show on whose recommendation he was appointed; but I have reason to believe that the appointment was made on the recommendation of the Inspector General of Police. I find that during a service of 17 years as a Constabulary officer he received several favourable records and one unfavourable record. MR. CALLAN: Was Mr. Blake ever returned for trial for taking forcible and unlawful possession of property in | Dublin. He thought that that was a Tipperary? MR. TREVELYAN: The unfavourable record was for a very much lighter offence than that. MR. HEALY: I should like to know upon what grounds the unfavourable record was made? MR. TREVELYAN: I think these reports are confidential; but I am perfectly ready to state on my own responsibility that the case was an extremely light one, and one of an almost technical and professional nature, and had not the least reference to his relations with the people of the country. PUBLIC WORKS (INDIA)-RETURN 259 OF 1859-CONSTRUCTION OF RAILWAYS. GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR asked the Secretary of State for India, If he will place before the House, a series of papers in connection with the construction of railways, and in continuation of Return 259 of 1859, so that an accurate record may exist to show the changes in the systems for providing India with railways, and showing the conditions on which the financial and engineering arrangements are based? THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON, in reply, said, that it would not be possible at present to lay on the Table a Return such as that to which his hon. and gallant Friend referred. More distinct information in connection with the Indian Public Works policy had been given in a Paper laid upon the Table of the House of Lords, and he had no objection, if his hon. and gallant Friend moved for it, to lay the same Paper on the Table of that House. He would furnish his hon. and gallant Friend with the form in which he should suggest that he should move for the Return. ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY- MR. HEALY asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, sufficient answer to the Question. MR. HEALY asked whether it was only since the date of the Phoenix Park tragedy that Captain Talbot had lived in Dublin? MR. TREVELYAN said, that Captain Talbot spent in Dublin the week in which the murders were committed, and that on the night of the murders he went to Shankhill with the express permission of Mr. Burke. Ever since that, however, Captain Talbot had been living in the Castle, and he had now given up his house at Shankhill. ENGLAND-EAST COAST-HARBOURS OF REFUGE-FILEY. SIR HARRY VERNEY asked the President of the Board of Trade, Whether the Government would carry out the recommendation of the Harbours of Refuge Commission of 1859, by establishing a harbour of refuge at Filey, on the coast of Yorkshire ? MR. CHAMBERLAIN: I would, in the first place, direct the attention of the hon. Baronet to the answer which I gave in this House on the 24th of April last to Questions which were asked by the hon. and gallant Member for East Aberdeenshire (Sir Alexander Gordon) and the hon. Member for East Kent (Mr. Pemberton). I then stated that the Government were not prepared to recommend Parliament to embark in any considerable scheme of harbour provision. All I can add, Sir, to the answer above referred to, is that at the present time a Departmental Committee is sitting to consider the best means of employing convict labour, and that I am aware that Filey has been suggested as a place at which such labour might be usefully directed to the formation of a harbour of refuge. But many other places have also been mentioned as suitable for this purpose, and although the question is under consideration, no decision has yet been arrived at. Whether the Government approve of PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PRO- MR. TREVELYAN, in reply, said, he understood that Captain Talbot had given up his residence at Shankhill, and that he was living at present in PERTY (IRELAND) ACT, 1881-W. FITZSIMONS AND T. TUITE. MR. JUSTIN M'CARTHY asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been called to the case of William Fitzsimons, of Culleenmore, and Thomas Tuite, of Cloonragh, in the county of Longford, who were arrested more than three months ago under the Protection of Person and Property (Ireland) Act, on the charge of intimidating others to prevent them paying their rents; whether they are still in prison; the one in Monaghan, the other in Enniskillen Gaol; whether it is the fact that no body of tenants, and no individual tenant in the whole parish in which these men lived, had refused to pay rent; and, whether, under these circumstances, he will recommend the release of Mr. Fitzsimons and Mr. Tuite? MR. TREVELYAN: His Excellency has just had the cases of Messrs. Fitz simons and Tuite under his consideration, and is happy to find that the state of their district will now admit of their release, which has been ordered accordingly. PRISONS (IRELAND) — CAPTAIN HILL. MR. LEAMY asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is the fact that Captain Hill, one of the Inspectors of Irish Prisons, a short time ago visited Derry Gaol, while a number of his tenants were undergoing imprisonment there in default of giving bail, and, in the presence of the gaol officials, abused his tenants for not having paid their rents, and denounced them for having taken part in the land agitation; and, if this statement is correct, whether the Irish Government will take any notice of such conduct on the part of Captain Hill? MR. TREVELYAN: Mr. Hill, the Inspector of the Prisons Board referred to, informs me that in July, 1881, he saw a few of his tenants in Londonderry Gaol, but that he neither abused nor denounced them in any way whatso ever. PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PROPERTY (IRELAND) ACT, 1881-MESSRS, DOLAN AND HANLY. MR. O'KELLY asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether there are any special reasons for the continued imprisonment of Messrs. Dolan and Hanly, Poor Law Guardians of the Roscommon Union, now that other gentlemen, arrested at the same time and under the same circumstances, have been released? Mr. Justin MCarthy MR. TREVELYAN: Messrs. Dolan and Hanly were released on the 31st of May. ARMY-SENIOR MAJORS. SIR HENRY FLETCHER asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he will extend the special and temporary allowance which the two senior majors of infantry battalions receive under Article 185-1 of the Royal Warrant of 25th of June 1881, to those majors of cavalry who were the senior captains of their regiments on 30th of June 1881? MR. CHILDERS: The hon. and gallant Baronet was probably not present when I answered this Question, put to Member for Leitrim (Colonel O'Beirne) me by my hon. and gallant Friend the on the 24th of April. My answer gave the reason why this extension could not be made. ARMY-COMPETITIVE EXAMINATIONS -WEST INDIAN REGIMENTS. MAJOR MASTER asked the Secretary of State for War, Why at the Civil Service Examination December 1881, were the three West India appointments given to the three unsuccessful candidates for the Line (Nos. 71, 72, 73) rather than to the three highest candidates for West India Regiments, in face of War Office Memorandum (extract dated December 1880), and applicable to November and December Examination 1881, saying "There will be 105 Cadetships to be competed for, of which five will be for candidates for West India Regiments ? " MR. CHILDERS: I have inquired into the subject of the hon. and gallant Gentleman's Question, and I find that the rule has been always observed of offering to the highest unsuccessful candidates on the list West Indian commissions if a sufficient number of West India candidates did not succeed in the competition. The wording of the Memorandum to which he has called my notice, and which is of old date, is a little obscure, and I will have it made clearer in future. PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PROPERTY (IRELAND) ACT, 1881-JOSEPH HUBAN AND OTHERS. MR. T. P. O'CONNOR asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant |