the Examiners of Petitions for Private | Act, 1861, and The General Pier and Bills, read, and discharged. Ordered, That the Bill be withdrawn.-(Mr. Caldwell.) PETITIONS. LICENCES (RENEWAL). Petitions against alteration of Law: from Sheffield; Fenton; Egerton; Belfast; Southport (two); Garston; Uxbridge; Ardwick; Houghton; Handsworth; St. Asaph; Flint; Newmarket; Uckfield; Bradford; East Ham; Bath; Lampeter; Birmingham; Halesowen; Ormskirk; Barking; and Bristol; to lie upon the Table. MARRIAGE WITH A DECEASED WIFE'S SISTER BILL. Harbour Act (1861) Amendment Act, Session 1904 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 78.] WAR OFFICE (RE-CONSTITUTION) COMMITTEE. Copy presented, of Report of the War Office (Re-constitution) Committee, Part II. [by Command]; to lie upon the Table. PAPERS LAID UPON THE TABLE BY THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE. 1. Charitable Endowments (London). Further Return relative thereto [ordered 2nd August, 1894; Mr. Francis Stevenson]; to be printed. [No. 79.] 2. Bridlington Piers and Harbour. Copy of Abstract of the General Annual Petition from Tenbury, against; to lie Account for the year ending 26th July, 1903 [by Act]. npon the Table. RATING OF CHARITABLE INSTITUTIONS. WINES IMPORTED. Return ordered, "showing the quan Petition from Liverpool, for legislation; tity of wines at the various degrees of to lie upon the Table. strength which were imported into the United Kingdom in 1903 from Spain, Portugal, Madeira, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Australasia, and other countries (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 100, of Session 1903).”— (Sir Thomas Dewar.) QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS CIRCULATED WITH THE VOTES. Vaccination Exemption Certificates— Case of Mr. Bickham. MR. RUNCIMAN (Dewsbury): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that Mr. George Bickham, of Capstone Road, Bournemouth, has applied twice this year to the Bournemouth police magistrates for a certificate of exemption under Section 2 of The Vaccination Act, 1898, an that when he applied on 15th February, 1904, one of the magistrates declined to allow the certificate to be granted, although the applicant had satisfied two other justices, and announced that the whole of the Bench must be satisfied; and whether, under these and similar circumstances constantly occurring, he will circularise the {29 FEBRUARY 1904} exemption cannot be withheld where the applicant satisfies two justices as required by the Act. (Answered by Mr. Secretary AkersDouglas.) This is not a matter in which I have any authority to take action. But I have made inquiry, and am informed that, as a fact, the Court in this case consisted of four magistrates, two of whom were in favour of, and two opposed to, the grant of the certificate. Republic, calculated on the same principle as those given for certain other countries; in Memorandum No. XVI. of Cl. 1761 of 1903, would be about 18 and 16 per cent. respectively. These countries would consequently follow Germany in the list given on page 171 of the Bluebook, the percentage for the Argentine being about the same as for Canada. Imports of Linen Yarns from France and MR. KILBRIDE (Kildare, S.): To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the weight and value in sterling of flax line yarns and flax tow yarns imported into England, Scotland, and Ireland, respectively, during the last five years from France and Belgium. (Answered by Mr. Gerald Balfour.) No distinction is made in the import list between flax line yarns and flax tow yarns, both being classified as linen yarns. The following statement shows the imports of linen yarns from Belgium and France into England, Scotland, and Ireland, respectively, during the five years ended 31st December, 1903 : France. official trade statistics of these countries, | were as follow. Particulars for 1903 are in each of the years from 1897 to 1902 not yet available. MR. NANNETTI (Dublin, College whether he is aware that advertisements have been inserted in the Irish newspapers asking for tenders for boots for Post Offices, and that samples of such messengers in the service of the General boots have to be sent to a receiving whether, seeing that, if an Irish manudepôt in London to be passed; and facturer secures the contract, he has to pay carriage to London, he will arrange that boots for use in Ireland shall be passed at a depôt in that country. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) Tenders have been invited from a number of firms in Ireland for the supplies required during the forthcoming financial year. If any of these firms should receive the contract, arrangements will be made for boots for use in Ireland to be delivered in Ireland. Postmastership of Chirk. MR. FENWICK (Northumberland, Wansbeck): To ask the PostmasterGeneral whether he will explain why the postmastership of Chirk has been given to a person not previously employed in the postal service, and without knowledge of the duties to be performed; and will he state whether the vacancy was advertised in the usual way. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) When the occurred, several applications were received, and after due consideration of the qualifications of the several candidates, an appointment was made in the usual manner. The vacancy was not advertised, nor is it usual to do this in respect of offices of this class. Compensation for Loss occasioned by In correctly Transmitted Telegrams. MR. HENNIKER HEATON (Canterbury): To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to a recent case of a telegram which was addressed to General McCalmont on the message itself but to Colonel McCalmont on the envelope; and whether, in view of the delay in the delivery of the telegram and consequent loss to the addressee, he will state what action he proposes to take in the matter; and also what punishment was awarded in a case some time ago in which a clerk altered or changed a figure in a telegram from 74d. to 84d., in which case all compensation was refused to the sender for the loss incurred. (Answered by Lord Stanley.) The first case mentioned by the hon. Member has just been brought to my notice, and I am making inquiry. I fear that cannot be identified the second case Forestry in Scotland-State Aid. MR. MUNRO FERGUSON (Leith Burghs): To ask the hon. Member for North Huntingdonshire, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Board of Agriculture is in a position to offer State aid to the project for establishing an experimental area, or Forst-garten, in connection with the system of forestry instruction at Edinburgh, (Answered by Mr. Ailywn Fellowes.) We have been in communication with the Scottish Education Department on this subject and I am in a position to say that if any educational institution, such, for example, as the East of Scotland Agricultural College, were to lay itself out to provide education in forestry and to establish an experimental area or Forst-garten in connection therewith, the Department would take such an item of equipment into consideration in determining the amount of any grant that they might give. There would, in fact, be no more difficulty about supporting an institution with a Forst-garten attached than there would be in supporting an institution with a chemical laboratory or a botanic garden. Naval Expenditure. ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he SIR EDGAR VINCENT (Exeter): To will state the total estimated Naval Expenditure of this country in each of the financial years 1900, 1901, 1902, 1903, 1904-5, including Supplementary Votes and expenditure under Works Bills. The (Answered by Mr. Pretyman.) actual total Naval Expenditure, including Supplementary Votes and Naval Works Acts, during the years 1900-1901, 1901-2, and 1902-3, was as follows :— :-1900-1901: Navy Votes, £29,998,529 4s. 7d; Naval Works Acts, £9,132,533 2s. 8d.; Total £32,131,062 7s. 3d. 1901-2: Navy Votes, £30,981,315 2s. 8d. (a); Naval Works Acts, £2,745,176 88. 3d.; Total 1902-3 Navy £33,726,491 10s. 11. Votes, £31,003,977 9s. 11d. (b); Naval Works Acts, £3,198,016 14s. 9d.; Total £34,201,994 4s. 8d. The estimated Naval Expenditure during 1903-4 and 1904-5, is as follows:-1903-4, Navy Votes, £35,727,500 (c); Naval Works Acts, £3,493,500; Total £39,221,000. 1904-5: Navy Votes, £36,889,500 (d); Naval Works Acts £5,111,900; Total £42,001,400. The undermentioned Annuties in repayment of Advances in connection with the Naval Works Acts, 18951903, are included in the foregoing figures:-(a) £122,255; (b) £297,895; (c) £502,010; (d) £634,238. Naval Expenditure of Foreign SIR EDGAR VINCENT: To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will state the total naval expenditure of France, Russia, Germany, and America in the years 1900, 1901, 1902, 1903. MR. LAWRENCE (Liverpool, Abercromby): To ask the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will say whether the fort at Shankhaiwan, lately occupied by the Russians, was, on their vacation of it, occupied by the French and the tricolour hoisted; and whether he has any information as to what Power at present occupies the position. (Answered by Earl Percy.) The portion of the fort at Shankhaiwan, previously occupied by the Russians was, on its evacuation by them, for a time occupied by a French officer with a corporal's guard, and the French flag was hoisted. The French troops have, however, now left, and a party of Russian soldiers from Tientsin are at present in occupation. + Represents one-fifth of a sum of £11,500,000 which was a special grant sanctioned in 1897 for new construction, to be spread over a period of five years. The details of this ex Medical Officers and the Milk Supply. MR. SHARPE (Kensington, N.): To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that a clause in the Public Health (Prevention of Diseases) Bill, 1888, seeking to give the medical officer of health powers to demand a full list of a dairyman's customers whose milk supply might come under suspicion, was struck out of the Bill; and that an identical clause, introduced in the Infectious Diseases (Prevention) Bill, 1890, was eliminated from that Bill; and whether the Board will in the present session make their recommendation to the Police and Sanitary Committee that the clause in question be omitted from the various Bills dealing with the milk supply. (Answered by Mr. Walter Long.) I was not aware that the clause referred to was struck out of the Public Health (Prevention of Diseases) Bill, 1888. That Bill did not, I think, proceed beyond First Reading. The clause was, no doubt, eliminated from the Bill of 1890, and it was the practice of the Local Government Board for some years afterwards to draw attention to this circumstance in their Reports on Bills for local Acts. It was found, however, that, notwithstanding this, the clause was, in a large number of cases, allowed by Committees. Moreover, a similar provision was made for Scotland in The Public Health (Scotland) Act, 1897. In these circumstances the Board in 1899 discontinued the practice of drawing attention in their Reports to the action of Parliament in 1890, and I do |