were excessive. The period for the repay- | discretion in adopting 75 years in this ment of money for public improvements in this case should not exceed 50 years from the date of borrowing, and he would move a clause to that effect. After the clause inserted in Committee moved to insert the following words:— ("Nothing contained in the Order hereby confirmed relating to the Borough of Birmingham shall entitle the urban authority to extend the time for the repayment of the money borrowed under the security of the Street Improvement Rate in the Act of 1851, or under the powers of the Parks Act, 1854, beyond the period of fifty years after the same have been respectively borrowed.")-(The Lord Redesdale.) instance, and he trusted the House would not accept the Amendment. THE DUKE OF SOMERSET objected to the Local Government Board practically legislating absolutely on these matters. LORD REDESDALE said, he must his Amendment. press LORD COTTESLOE said, he was glad that his noble Friend (Lord Redesdale) had pressed this subject on the attention of the House. Large sums were being advanced for local objects throughout the country. The President of the Local Government Board brought forward his Budget the other day, which showed that the sums already advanced and likely still to be advanced in that way were very considerable; but the House of Commons was hardly aware of the extended period for which those loans were made. Happening himself to be a Member of the Public Works Loan Commission, he could state that, instead of those loans being made, as they formerly used to be, for 20 or 30 years, 50 years was now the ordinary period for their repayment. It appeared to him that those periods were much too long. On Question? Their Lordships divided: -Contents 34; Not-Contents 18: Majority 16. Resolved in the Affirmative. An Amendment made; and Bill to be THE LORD CHANCELLOR said, he could not agree in the view taken by his noble Friend of these Provisional Orders. He must also point out that the Local Government Board had no power to alter Private Acts of Parliament except by the authority of Parliament. They possessed merely the power of making communications in the form of Provisional Orders to Parliament, as to what they considered right to be done; and their Lordships, unless there were imperious reasons for taking a contrary course, always acted upon the recommendations contained in the Reports of their own Committees. He thought therefore that, on finding that the Local Government Board had adopted this Provisional Order after full deliberation and inquiry, their Lordships would be slow to come to a different conclusion and upset the whole of the local arrangements which the De-read 3a To-morrow. partment had recommended. The powers which it was now proposed to confer on the Local Government Board were not greater than those contained in Private Bills. Last Session two Acts, passed with regard to water and gas in Birmingham, authorized the repayment of borrowed money to be extended over a period of either 75, 85, or 95 years-he did not recollect which; and the arguments which then satisfied the noble Chairman of Committees of the propriety of granting such a long period of repayment applied with redoubled force now, when Birmingham was saddled with the additional burden of the improvements under the Artizans and Labourers Dwellings Acts to the extent, he believed, of half or three-quarters of a million. He believed the Local Government Board had exercised a wise Lord Redesdale House adjourned at Six o'clock, till HOUSE OF COMMONS, Thursday, 20th July, 1876. MINUTES.]-PUBLIC BILLS Ordered-First First Reading-Local Government Board's Pro- * * duties require him to be mounted. Majors of the Royal Artillery and Royal Engineers frequently do not need to be mounted. When they do they receive forage or allowance in lieu, the same as &c.) [255]; Local Government Provisional | not an emolument of the officer; it is Orders (Chelmsford, &c.) * [256]; Parliamen-issued to him only when the officer's tary Electors Registration* [169]. Select Committee-Report-Ardglass Harbour* [200]; Erne Lough and River [187]. * Committee-Elementary Education [155] -R.P. Committee-Report - Cattle Disease (Ireland) [94]; Juries Procedure (Ireland) (re-comm.)* [176-261]; Exhausted Parish Lands * [252]. Considered as amended-Metropolis (Whitechapel and Limehouse) Improvement Scheme Confirmation [241]. * Brevet field officers. JERSEY-ORDERS IN COUNCIL. QUESTIONS. MR. LOCKE asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whe Third Reading-Metropolitan Commons (Barnes)* CHANNEL ISLANDS-ROYAL COURT OF [234]; General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Provisional Order Confirmation (Paisley [235] — (Perth)* [236]; Public Health (Scotland) Provisional Order (Irvine and Dundonald) [237]: Elementary Education Provisional Order Confirmation (Tolleshunt Major) * [238]; Local Government Pro-ther another Order in Council was previsional Orders (Carnarvon, &c.) * [239]; sented to the Royal Court of Jersey on Provisional Orders (Ireland) Confirmation the 4th day of July 1876 for registration; (Coleraine, &c.) [240]; General Police and and, whether the Bailiff of the Island Improvement (Scotland) Provisional Order refused to register the same, and his (Lerwick) [242], and passed. Withdrawn-Arklow Harbour Improvement* reasons for so doing? Also, Whether it [199]; Linen and Hempen and other Manu- is the intention of Her Majesty's Gofactures (Ireland) * [216]; Agricultural Hold-vernment to accept the resignation or ings (Scotland) [159]; Poor Law Guardians Elections (Ireland) * [88]. # ARMY-AUXILIARY FORCES-MILITIA ADJUTANTS.-QUESTION. COLONEL NAGHTEN asked the Secretary of State for War, When the Adjutants of Militia who have done duty as acting Paymasters will receive the allowances promised them in May last? MR. GATHORNE HARDY: I am afraid I cannot say exactly when these allowances will be issued to the officers in question, as the subject is now under the consideration of the Militia Committee. Some allowance for the duties performed will, however, undoubtedly be granted. ARMY-FORAGE ALLOWANCE. QUESTION. MR. J. HOLMS asked the Secretary of State for War, Whether forage allowance is not granted to all substantive field officers except Majors of the Royal Artillery and Royal Engineers; and, why Artillery Majors should not be placed on the same footing as Infantry Majors in that respect? MR. GATHORNE HARDY: I must answer the first Question in the affirmative; but forage allowance is not granted to other officers holding the relative rank of field officers, unless their duties require them to be mounted. Forage is confirm the appointment of any Jurat of the Royal Court of Jersey so long as the Court refuse to register Orders in Council or Acts of Parliament ? MR. ASSHETON CROSS, in reply, said, he had received a telegram from the Lieutenant Governor of Jersey respecting the Order in Council of which it was alleged that registration had been refused by the Bailiff. The Lieutenant Governor was of opinion that the Bailiff's act could not be construed into a refusal to register, and therefore the Lieutenant Governor did not see why the Government should interfere with the appointment of any Jurat. It was probable that the Order in Council would be registered at the next meeting of the States, which would be held next week. JAMAICA-MR. P. A. SMITH, DISTRICT JUDGE.-QUESTION. MR. RICHARD asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether a number of Custodes of Hanover and Saint James, in the island of Jamaica, and also of the Magistrates, have signed and presented a Memorial to the Governor, praying for the removal of Mr. P. A. Smith, District Judge of Montego Bay; and, what has been the course adopted by the Governor or by the Secretary of State for the Colonies in consequence? MR. J. LOWTHER, in reply, said, it was true that such a Memorial had been presented; but the gentleman in | ing in the most distinct terms that I question was believed to be a most effi- am not satisfied with the accommocient official, and information had since dation referred to for the reception been received that the Memorial had been withdrawn by the persons who originally presented it. Mr. Smith had been appointed to another post, which was higher than that which he had viously held. pre SHERIFF COURTS (SCOTLAND) BILL. QUESTION. MR. M'LAREN asked the Lord Advocate, What course he intends to pursue with respect to the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Bill? THE LORD ADVOCATE, in reply, said, the Bill consisted of two partsthe one extending the jurisdiction of the Sheriffs; the other amending the procedure in the Sheriff Courts. So far as he could gather, the opposition to the Bill was limited to its jurisdiction clauses, and there was no opposition to the procedure clauses, the importance of which was admitted by all the professional bodies in Scotland, as well as by the public. Although he regretted the necessity, he proposed for the present to withdraw the jurisdiction clauses of the Bill, and to ask the House to pass the procedure clauses. If opposition was continued after this explanation, he must allow to rest upon those who occasioned it the responsibility for delaying important improvements in judicial procedure in the Sheriff Courts of Scotland. THE HOME OFFICE-DEPUTATIONS. QUESTION. MR. MITCHELL HENRY asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he is satisfied with the accommodation provided for the reception of deputations at the Home Office; and, whether it is contemplated to make further provision for that purpose? He asked the Question because, having gone to the Home Office with a large and important deputation, they found only a room of very moderate size in which they could be received, not very well lighted, and which could seat at most only about a dozen persons. MR. ASSHETON CROSS: I have no hesitation in at once answering the hon. Gentleman's Question by say Mr. J. Lowther of deputations at the Home Office; nor do I think that the deputations which come there can be called upon to be satisfied with such accommodation. At the same time, it is not often that they come in such numbers as that on the occasion to which the hon. Member has referred. The only proposition yet made by the Department which has charge of public buildings is to change the room in which deputations are received from the waiting-room to the Library. This, however, I think, would be like jumping from the frying-pan into the fire. I hope, however, that some improvement will be made to remove what I think is a very scandalous state of things. TOLL BRIDGES (RIVER THAMES). QUESTION. SIR HENRY PEEK asked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, in view of the fact that after six inquiries before Select Committees of this House, the Bill for abolishing Tolls on the Thames. Bridges in the Metropolis has been carefully considered, amended, and reported to this House by another Select Committee, that the plan for providing the funds is accepted by the Metropolitan Board of Works and approved by all the representatives of the counties of Middlesex and Surrey, he will be prepared to give such facilities to the final stages of the Bill as will enable the Bill to pass in the present Session ? MR. DISRAELI: It is quite impossible for me, with the number of arrangements I have to make at present for the progress of Public Business, to enter into any engagement with my hon. Friend, but I will bear his reasonable request in mind. EPPING FOREST-THE FOREST COMMISSIONERS' SCHEME.-QUESTION. MR. COWPER-TEMPLE asked the Secretary to the Treasury, When the Report of the Commissioners on Epping Forest will be laid upon the Table of the House? MR.W. H. SMITH: The draft scheme of the Epping Forest Commissioners will be published to-morrow, the 21st in stant, for public inspection. The Commissioners will receive any objections or suggestions which may be made to them in writing respecting the said scheme pursuant to Act of Parliament, and afterwards will consider objections, holding such public meetings as may be necessary or desirable, and will then finally settle the scheme, and also their final Report. The Commissioners entertain no doubt that the matter will be ready for legislation in the next Session of Parliament. BOW STREET POLICE COURT (SITE) BILL.-QUESTION. MR. WHITWELL asked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he can inform the House what is the estimated outlay of money expected to be incurred under the Bow Street Police Court (Site) Bill? MR. W. H. SMITH: There will be payable to the Duke of Bedford a ground rental of £1,100 per annum for a lease of 99 years. There will be also a sum payable to the present tenants in respect of their interest, which will be ascertained in case of difference under the general Act. It is undesirable at the present moment to state at what sum those interests have been valued. The above-mentioned expenditure will be incurred for the site both for police court and police station. The proportion which will be payable in respect of the site of each of these buildings cannot be stated at present, and it will have hereafter to be determined accordingly what portion shall be borne by the Board of Works and what by the police rates. The cost of the buildings is estimated at £12,000 for the court and £8,000 for the police station, which will be charged to the separate heads of Public Works and police rates. These estimates for buildings are approximate. METROPOLITAN FIRE BRIGADE-FIRE AT CHELSEA.-QUESTION. MR. BASS asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he is aware that a destructive fire was raging at Chelsea on Tuesday night for forty minutes before any fire engine arrived, though the fire was seen for many miles around? MR. ASSHETON CROSS: In answer to the first Question, I have to say that as Secretary of State I have no control over the Metropolitan Fire Brigade. That is entirely under the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Board of Works; but I have made inquiries, and I am told that the information of the fire was received at the station at 11.23. The first engine arrived at the place of the fire at half-past 11. That is, the engine arrived at one side of the fire. I am told that an engine was not sent round to the other side for some considerable time. THE ARMY LIST-HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN.-QUESTION. SIR ALEXANDER GORDON asked the Secretary of State for War, If he the Queen has been inserted in the List will inform the House why the name of of the Officers of the Army published in the Monthly Army List on the 8th of July; whether such insertion indicates any change in the relations hitherto maintained by the Sovereign with respect to the Army; and, whether it is consistent with the Preamble of the be included in the List of the Officers of Mutiny Act that the Sovereign should the Army, for whose control that Act was annually passed by Her Majesty and Parliament ? MR. GATHORNE HARDY: In re ply to the Question of the hon. and gallant Member, I have to say that the Queen's name is not inserted in the list of the officers of the Army. It has long been placed at the head of Hart's unofficial "Army List "— with the names of her aides-de-camp following. I regarded that as the suitable position in which it should be placed, in consideration of the relations which Her Majesty bears to the Army. With respect to the second Question, the insertion indicates no change in the relations hitherto maintained by the Sovereign with respect to the Army, but is, on the contrary, a confirmation of those relations that have always existed. With respect to the Preamble of the Mutiny Act and the Mutiny Act itself, they have no influence on Her Majesty whatever; for I am not aware that Her Majesty is in Her Majesty's military service. and, whether he is prepared, in view of the foregoing circumstances, to revoke the Proclamation placing the borough of Dundalk and the county of Louth under the provisions of the Peace Preservation Acts? TOLL BRIDGES (RIVER THAMES). QUESTION. MR. FAWCETT asked the right honourable the Lord Mayor, Whether, in view of the general desire which is felt by the people of the Metropolis and of the counties of Surrey and Middlesex, that the Toll Bridges (River Thames) Bill, already considered by a Select Committee, should pass this Session, he will withdraw the Notice of opposition which he has given to the Motion to go into Committee on the Bill, so that any objections to the Bill may be considered in Committee? THE LORD MAYOR (Mr. ALDERMAN COTTON), in reply, said, as the matter was the subject of an adjourned debate on the part of the Corporation, he was not prepared to withdraw his opposition to the Bill. POOR LAW (METROPOLIS)-CASE OF MR. J. G. TALBOT asked the Presi dent of the Local Government Board, Whether he can now state the result of the inquiry held by the Board in the case of Charlotte Hammond, whose death was said to have been caused by destitution; and, whether he will lay upon the Table the evidence taken at the inquiry? the Local Government Board to the Guardians of St. George's Union, and it was published in the newspapers today. The House would hardly wish him to read the paper; but the general result was to remove from the Guardians any imputation with respect to the The Report would be laid on the case. SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH: In reply to the Question of the hon. Member, I have to state that I believe that the Charge of Mr. Justice Fitzgerald MR. SCLATER-BOOTH, in reply, to the Grand Jury of the county of Louth said, that the result of the inquiry had at the Summer Assizes notices the satis-been exhibited in a letter addressed by factory condition of the county with regard to ordinary crime; but it must be remembered that the statements contained in the Question of the hon. Member do not exhaust the reasons for which proclamations under the Peace Preservation Act have been imposed, and which must not be forgotten in considering the propriety of maintaining them. However, last Spring the Irish Government caused inquiry to be made as to the necessity for continuing the Proclamation in county Louth, but the result did not, in the opinion of the Government, justify its withdrawal. I am quite ready to undertake that the matter shall again be considered, and I think it will be admitted that the Government have shown that they are not anxious to maintain these Proclamations where they can properly be revoked. Table. ARMY MOBILIZATION-ROMAN CATHOLIC MILITIAMEN. — QUESTION. MR. SULLIVAN asked the Secretary of State for War, If it is the fact that no provision was made for religious ministrations by clergymen of their own church to the officers and men of the Louth, Longford, and Monaghan Militia Regiments (almost exclusively Catholic Regiments) composing the First Brigade, Second Division, of the Fifth Army |