prove to be an injury rather than a benefit to the tenants, seeing that it might involve the actual eviction of tenants who, from some temporary cause, might be unable to pay their rents. MR. FLYNN: Has not the hon. Member for South Tyrone, who was largely concerned in the passing of this section, long since expressed regret at his action? MR. LUNDON: Are there not thousands of people in Ireland who do not know that they are evicted tenantswho were simply served with writs that allowed the redemption time to run out? [No Answer was audible.] Munster District Councils and the MR. FLYNN: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Local Government Board has kept itself informed as to recent proceedings at district councils in Cork, Kerry, and other parts of Munster, in connection with representations under the new Labourers Act; whether he is aware that at many of the council meetings numbers of labourers, naturally anxious to secure cottages and suitable plots of land, have attended and a certain amount of confusion has marked the proceedings; and whether the Board will communicate with the district councils suggesting that, where bodies of labourers have retained solicitors for the better presentation of their claims, the solicitors should be allowed to attend and plead, with a view to securing more regularity and greater despatch of business. MR. BIRRELL: The Local Government Board are aware of the circumstances mentioned in the Question. The Board do not consider it desirable to make any such communication to rural district councils as the hon. Member suggests. In the Board's opinion, it is for the councils themselves to determine whether labourers shall be allowed to attend in person when their applications for cottages are being considered. Disturbances at New Quay, County MR. MOORE: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ire land, if the district of New Quay, county Clare, has been, and still is, in a disturbed condition; if Constable O'Shea has been prominent in bringing offenders to justice; if the Rev. Mr. Newell, the parish priest and member of the local branch of the United Irish League, has stated publicly he will have Constable O'Shea transferred from the district; if com munications have been received by the authorities from the Rev. Mr. Newell complaining of this constable and requesting his removal; if the constable will be transferred without public inquiry; and what action he proposes to take. MR. BIRRELL: I am informed by the police authorities that a year ago the district of New Quay was somewhat disturbed, but is now in a very quiet condition. Constable O'Shea has not been particularly prominent in bringing offenders to justice. So far as the police are aware, the Rev. Mr. Newell has not publicly stated that he would have the constable transferred. It is not the case that the reverend gentleman has requested the constable's removal, but the man himself has asked to be transferred to another station, and the County Inspector intends to comply with his request. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND (Clare, E.) asked whether if a request was made for inquiry into the action of the police, the Chief Secretary would consider the advisability of granting it. MR. BIRRELL: I will consider it. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: On a point of order, I wish to ask whether it is in order for damaging statements, such as that the district of New Quay, county Clare, is in a disturbed condition, to be made in the Question, when that statement has no foundation in fact. MR. MOORE: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman *MR. SPEAKER: Order, order. I had better answer the Question put to me. Whether a district is disturbed or not in any county in Ireland is very much a matter of opinion. The only person who can settle it is the Chief Secretary, and these Questions elicit facts from him which it is most desirable, no doubt, that the House should have. I cannot take it aware that any of the Inspectors have upon myself to say that it is improper. MR. WILLIAM REDMOND: May I ask whether it is in order for an hon. Member to put on the notice Paper a question making an allegation of a discreditable character when there is no evidence for the statement whatever, according to the Chief Secretary. *MR. SPEAKER: I do not see any thing objectionable in the Question. The hon. Member might think the district is disturbed. MR. MOORE: May I ask the Chief Secretary whether it has not been declared by the Judge in his charge to the Grand Jury this week that the whole of the county of Clare is in a disturbed condition? *MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member should give notice of that Question. MR. MOORE (who rose amid loud NATIONALIST cries of "Order "): I should not have asked the Question had it not been for the statements of the hon. Member for East Clare. MR WILLIAM REDMOND: There is more disturbance in Armagh than in the whole of the rest of Ireland. Evening Schools in Ireland. MR. MURPHY (Kerry, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the LordLieutenant of Ireland what is the explanation given by the Commissioners of National Education for the decrease in the number of evening schools in Ireland during the last year; and if several inspectors have discountenanced such schools in their districts in every way possible. MR. BIRRELL: Prior to 1900, there were only twenty-one evening schools. In 1901 new rules were made giving increased remuneration for evening schools, and as a result the number increased to 1036 in 1902. The present number is 472. In the opinion of the Commissioners of National Education, the falling off is due to the fact that teachers generally found the strain of evening teaching too much for them after their day's work. The Commissioners are not discountenanced evening schools. If any specific complaint to that effect should be made to them, they would have it investigated. Revaluation of Dublin. MR. HARMOOD-BANNER (Liverpool, Everton): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether it is his intention to have a revision of the valuation of Dublin for the purpose of local taxation; and whether the present valuation is understated by a sum of £250,000. MR. BIRRELL: A revaluation of the city of Dublin is at present in progress, and until it has been completed it would not be possible to state whether the existing valuation is below the rateable valuation as defined by Statute. Belfast Police Inquiry. COLONEL MCCALMONT (Antrim, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Commission that was held in Belfast last June and July to inquire into certain alleged irregularities in connection with the Royal Irish Constabulary in that city, made any report to the Government; did they make any suggestions or recommendations for the increased efficiency of the Belfast police; if so, have such been carried out; did they inquire into the allegations as to corrupt practices on the part of the police, who were alleged to be in collusion with criminals; were these allegations substantiated or disproved; were the suggestions as to partiality and partisanship on the part of the police authorities in Belfast borne out by the finding of the Commission; and will the Report be laid upon the Table of the House. MR. BIRRELL: This Commission was appointed at the instance of my predecessor with the object of clearing up certain matters connected with the organisation and discipline of the Belfast police force. In reply to a Question last session, Mr. Bryce stated that the result of the inquiry was to show that there were no important or substantial grounds for dissatisfaction in connection with the organisation and discipline of the force. Mr. Bryce fully considered the question of laying the Report upon the Table of 809 the House, and decided that it was not necessary or desirable to present it. I do not propose to reopen the Question. COLONEL MCCALMONT: I wish to ask whether it is not most unfair and grossly unjust to the Royal Irish Constabulary that they should not have the same publicity given to the Report of the Commission as was given to the original allegation; and further is there any precedent for the Government's suppressing the Report of such a Commission ? MR. BIRRELL: I think the Govern ment must take into consideration the character of the Report and how far its publicity would benefit the public. I have said in answer to the Question that the Report finds there is no important or substantial grounds for dissatisfaction with the discipline and organisation of the police force. I do not think it is deserving of publicity. the MR. MOORE asked whether charge made against the police was that they had been guilty of undue favouritism, and whether the Report found there was no foundation for that statement. MR. CHARLES CRAIG: Will the right hon. Gentleman inform us whether it is not the unanimous desire of the police to have the Report published? MR. BIRRELL: The police not having seen the Report I do not know that I should consider their wishes in the matter. The Government having considered it, and desiring to be perfectly fair to the police, do not consider it in the public interests to publish it. MR. SLOAN: I should like to ask whether it is intended to make any change in regard to the Constabulary, and, if so, what, as the result of the Report. serious effort to investigate the material [No Answer was returned.] Out-Relief in the Clifden Union. MR. O'MALLEY (Galway, Connemara): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to a resolution of the Clifden Board of Guardians on the 20th February, in which the guardians refer to the increased number of applications for outdoor relief, and in which the guardians declare that, owing to the already excessively high rates pressing on a people universally poor, they are unable to grant all the deserving relief demanded; and whether under these circumstances, steps will at once be taken to construct the pier in Clifden Harbour promised four years ago under the Marine Works Act. MR. BIRRELL I have received the resolution referred to. The question of constructing a pier at Clifden under the Marine Works Act has, I find, been under consideration for some time past, and a plan of the proposed works has recently been sent to the Galway County Council for examination, in connection with the condition that they shall undertake certain ancillary works. Case of Mrs. Kate Scanlan. MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY (Limerick, W.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a widow lady, named Mrs. Kate Scanlan, tenant on the Blacker Douglas estate at Ballylongford, North Kerry, who was evicted from her farm, containing over 100 acres of land, owing to an administration suit brought against her by her brother-in-law, a Reverend MR. BIRRELL: The hon. Member Robert Scanlan, since deceased, and must give me notice of that. MR. J. MACVEAGH (Down, S.) asked whether this Commission consisted of three gentlemen-one who held a Government appointment, another who had just been given one, and a third who was looking for one; whether the Chief Secretary was aware that they made no whose case is in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice in Ireland, was taken to gaol on the 18th instant for retaking possession of her home, accompanied by four car loads of police and bailiffs; whether he is aware that it was done on the application of a solicitor in Dublin, named Figgis, who purchased, for a small sum of money, the plaintiff's (her to brother-in-law's) interest in the farm Commissioners have inquired into the 1 previous to his death; whether under question of reinstating Mrs. Scanlan, these circumstances, he will take steps to whose case certainly appears to be a very see, as the sale of the estate is nearly hard one, but they could not come to completed and Figgis recognised by the terms with Mr. Figgis who is in legal Estates Commissioners as the tenant, that occupation. They will, however, consider Mrs. Scanlan's interest is safeguarded; Mrs. Scanlan's application for a holding and whether he can say on whose should they acquire untenanted land in authority the police took part in taking the neighbourhood. The Commissioners Mrs. Scanlan to prison. understand that the tenant's interest was put up for sale in an administration suit, An and that Mr. Figgis bought it. agreement for the purchase by Mr. Figgis of the holding under the Land Acts has recently been lodged with the Commissioners, together with other purchase agreements connected with the same estate. The Commissioners will consider the application for advances when the estate comes before them in its order of priority, but this cannot be for a considerable time. The Commissioners obtained a full report on the case from one of their inspectors, but they do not think it desirable to publish the name of the inspector who acts in a particular case, or the contents of the report. The Commissioners themselves are responsible for the action which they may take upon their inspectors' reports. I beg also to ask the Chief Secretary the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether an inspector of the Estates Commissioners inquired into the case of Mrs. Kate Scanlan, of Tullahennell, Ballylongford, county Kerry, evicted tenant on the Blacker Douglas estate, which has been sold under the Land Act of 1903; if so, will he say who he was, and what are his qualifications for the position, and what was the nature of his Report to the Commissioners; and whether he was fully aware of the circumstances by which Mr. T. Frederick Figgis, solicitor, 67, Upper Sackville Street, Dublin, acquired the legal interest in the farm before he made it. I beg further to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether the Estates Commissioners, on the report of their inspector, have recognised Mr. T. Frederick Figgis, solicitor, 67, Sackville Street, Dublin, as the tenant entitled to purchase the farm on the Blacker Douglas estate, in North Kerry, over which he has been appointed receiver by the court in the administration suit pending in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice in Ireland, and from which he evicted Mrs. Kate Scanlan, who has been committed to prison for keeping possession of the same; and whether before the sale of this farm is completed, he will inquire fully into the matter, with the to safeguarding Mrs. Scanlan's view interest in it. MR. BIRRELL: The Inspector-General of the Royal Irish Constabulary informs me that, on the requisition of the SubSheriff for Kerry, four police, not four car loads of police, were supplied to protect him in executing a writ of the Court of Chancery for the committal of Mrs. Scanlan to gaol for contempt of court in taking illegal possession. The Estates Irish Land Finance. CAPTAIN CRAIG (Down, E.): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the LordLieutenant of Ireland whether, seeing that out of the applications for advances pending, amounting to £31,633,776, there are estates sufficiently advanced so far as title, etc., is concerned to absorb the £1,635,207 in the hands of the Estates Commissioners, he will say why this amount is not immediately paid out. MR. BIRRELL: The Estates Commissioners inform me that advances are being made with as much rapidity as possible. The cases are dealt with in their order of priority, and the Commissioners make advances according as their requisitions in regard to title, security, with by the vendors. survey, and such matters are complied CAPTAIN CRAIG: Seeing that the Commissioners have £1,635,000 in hand, cannot steps be taken to give priority to those estates which are ready for settlement? MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: How is the sum of £650 made up? MR. BIRRELL: I will place that! suggestion before the Estates Commissioners. I am as anxious as anybody to promote a settlement. MR. MOORE: Is the continued absence of Mr. Commissioner Bayley the cause of the delay. MR. BIRRELL said he did not think it was part of the duty of the Commissioners to go into that. MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: Was the inspector who inquired into this claim a *MR. SPEAKER: That does not arise competent man to deal with it? Will out of the Question on the Paper. Mr. Figgis' Claim Against the Scanlan MR. O'SHAUGHNESSY: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the LordLieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the Reverend Robert Scanlan, the administrator and one of the next-ofkin of the estate of Eugene Scanlan, deceased, assigned his interest in the estate shortly before his death, in the year 1902, to Mr. Figgis, of Dublin, his solicitor, for a sum of £50, and that Mr. Figgis continued the proceedings in the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice in Ireland, and was appointed receiver over the estate, there being no defence to the suit; whether he is aware that Mr. Figgis now wants £650 from Mrs. Scanlan for his interest before giving up his claim on the farm; and whether, as she did not defend the suit in court for want of means, he will ascertain in what way the sum of £650 is ascertained previous to the purchase by Mr. Figgis of the farm from the landlord under The Land Act, 1903. the right hon. Gentleman convince me of that? What were his qualifications? *MR. SPEAKER: The right hon. Gentleman cannot be expected to answer that to-day. Alleged Dynamite Outrage at Cloghroe. CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he has ascertained the particulars of the dynamite outrage perpetrated near Cloghroe, in the Parliamentary division of Mid Cork; and, if so, will he state whether the perpetrators have been brought to justice. MR. BIRRELL: The police authorities inform me that this case is still under investigation, and that being so, it is not desirable to make any public statement regarding it at present. The police have not made any arrest in connection with the matter. MR. FLYNN: Is there any foundation for the statement that this thing ever occurred? MR. BIRRELL: That is part of the inquiry. MR. BIRRELL: I am informed by the Registrar of the Chancery Division that the administration suit in question was instituted in 1899, and that on the Kilnamartyra Disturbances. death of the plaintiff in 1906, an order CAPTAIN CRAIG: I beg to ask the was made by the Court for the continu- Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant ance of the proceedings in the name of of Ireland whether he is aware that Mr. Figgis, who had acted as solicitor to shortly before daybreak on the 27th the plaintiff. The Court had no February last a body of men numbering cognisance of of the alleged dealings about 500 made a determined attack on between Mr. Figgis and the original the county sub-sheriff of Cork, a party of plaintiff. I am not aware that Mr. bailiffs, and Royal Irish Constabulary, on Figgis has made the demand referred to the estate at Kilnamartyra, between in the Question. If his conduct as a Macroom and Ballyvourney, county solicitor is impugned, the proper course would be to lodge a complaint with the Incorporated Law Society who would investigate it. The Estates Commissioners will consider all matters which they have power to deal with, when Mr. Figgis' application comes before them. Cork; and whether any persons have been brought to justice in connection with the outrage. MR. BIRRELL: I am informed that the facts are as stated, save that the attacking party consisted of about fifty, |