were charged was a long one, and he wished to know whether it would be in Order to discuss the salaries of the servants? SIR PATRICK O'BRIEN said, that a strong feeling existed in the county he represented upon the question of model schools. In King's County a very handsome building had been erected, upon which a sum of £5,000 or £6,000 had been expended. That expenditure would have been altogether unnecessary if the model schools had been satisfactory. Therefore, in that particular instance his constituents were affected, not only in regard to the question of principle, but also in reference to the actual money voted. It was a matter that excited great attention in all parts of Ireland, and he knew that it was creating much difference of opinion and very great annoyance. He did not imagine that his hon, and gallant Friend would carry his Motion; but as the Motion was in accordance with the strong feeling entertained in Ireland, he should support his hon, and gallant Friend if he went to a division. LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH would submit to the hon. and gallant Member for Galway that the item he proposed to strike out was mixed up with the question of Irish education, and that it was necessary, in order to keep the existing buildings in decent. order and repair. He thought that it would be better to raise the discussion on the Vote for Irish Education. SIR ANDREW LUSK said, that the hon. Member for Burnley (Mr. Rylands) and other Members had complained of the Metropolitan Police Courts. He asked why they did not raise similar objections to the sums that were proposed to be voted for the police stations in Dublin? He found no fault with the Vote himself; but he felt bound, as the Representative of a Metropolitan constituency, to draw attention to the incongruous conduct of hon. Members who disapproved of money being voted for certain purposes in London, but refrained from objecting to the voting of money for identical purposes in Dublin. MR. BIGGAR thought that the position taken up by the Government was altogether indefensible, because it was in favour of one particular religion at the expense of another. Personally, he was very much in favour of a good system of elementary education all over Ireland; but these model schools gave a special advantage to a particular class. THE CHAIRMAN: I must remind the hon. Member that the general subject of education cannot be discussed on this Vote. Question put. The Committee divided:-Ayes 15; Noes 130: Majority 115.-(Div. List, No. 232.) Original Question again proposed. MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR called attention to a charge for £700 in page MAJOR NOLAN said, the question was 49 of the Estimates, which was made up a very important one, and he thought it of the following items:-Cost of Laying was one on which the Committee should on Vartry Water to the Dundrum Crimipronounce an opinion. It was not a nal Lunatic Asylum, £400; increasing question of religious equality, but an Shelter Shed, Male Yard, £50; and attempt to force upon a large class of Building Cottage for Head Attendant, the population a system which they £250. He would remind the Committee totally disliked. They would rather see that over and over again there had been the whole of these houses pulled down remonstrances in the Commissioner's than that they should be conducted as Report addressed to the Executive with they were now. He should be very regard to the condition of the Dundrum sorry to see them pulled down; but he Criminal Lunatic Asylum, and that comshould prefer that to having them con- parisons had been frequently made in tinued on their present basis, which, in respect of that building with other Ineffect, was spoiling a large part of the stitutions, and with the arrangements education in Ireland, because the conse-made at the public expense at the Broadquence of the existing bad system of moor Criminal Lunatic Asylum. The training was that a great part of Ire-difference between the two Institutions land was without training at all. There fore, if he got any support from the Irish Members, he should certainly divide the Committee. was very remarkable; and with regard to the Asylum at Dundrum the last Roport was to the effect that the accommodation did not increase from year to year, pari passu, with the number of residents; that there were sometimes as many as 14 inmates beyond the normal accommodation of the building; that the dining room, which contained an area of only 800 square feet, was overcrowded to a most miserable degree; that there was no dining room for the female patients, who had always to take their meals in the rooms where they were habitually employed; and, finally, that if another dining room were erected for the females at the end of the kitchen good results would follow. The Commissioners went on to express their concurrence in the opinion that the Asylum was much overcrowded, and that increased dining room accommodation and water supply were necessary. That being the case, one would have supposed that the Government would at least have done something for the accommodation of the overcrowded staff and inmates of the Asylum; but absolutely nothing had been done except the building of a cottage for the head attendant, which the resident officer and the Commissioners never proposed at all. Under the circumstances, he asked whether it was intended to carry out any further works at the Asylum in question? LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH said, if the hon. Member for Queen's County would look at the Irish Votes he would see that a larger expenditure than usual had been made on Irish public buildings during the present year. He believed the rest of the work at Dundrum Asylum would soon be undertaken; but up to the present time the most urgent alterations only had been carried out. Any further sums that were required would be included in the Supplementary Estimates. MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR said, that no doubt a larger sum of money was asked for this year than last year for Ireland; but it did not at all follow that the money asked for would be spent. It was well known that money was often voted by Parliament for works which were not carried out; and if hon. Members would turn to page 48 of the Estimates they would find there three re-Votes for additions, alterations, and improvements at sundry stations. It was, therefore, no answer to his question to say that more money was asked for this year than for last Mr. Arthur O'Connor year. But supposing the statement to be correct, what had it to do with the works at Dundrum? The medical officer stated that there was no place for the inmates to take their meals in; that the men were overcrowded in the only dining room which existed in the building, and that the women had to take their meals in the rooms where they were habitually employed out of meal times. The consequence of this was a very unfair strain upon the staff of attendants-one of the greatest disadvantages being that to get the work done at all it was necessary to tax the energies of the staff far beyond what was right. The cottage that had been built for the head attendant had neither been asked for by the Commissioners nor the resident officer; it was a matter of secondary consideration, and had been left out of the scheme of alterations which were represented by the officials as of primary importance. He asked the noble Lord to give some assurance that he would inquire whether due consideration had been given to the representations which had been made over and over again with reference to the deficient accommodation at Dundrum. LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH said, if the hon. Member wished it, he would inquire the exact reason why the cottage for the head attendant had been built. The hon. Member had stated that money was frequently asked for that was not expended. It was true that this had sometimes necessarily been the case; but if he would look to the last Appropriation Accounts he would see that the Estimates were equalled by the amount actually expended. Upon examination he would also see that the estimated expenditure on work in Ireland was nearly £40,000 more this year than last. MR. BIGGAR said, it seemed to him that the noble Lord advanced an entirely new kind of argument in saying that a larger sum was asked for in the present Estimates than in those of the previous year for the purpose of buildings in Ireland. The contention of his hon. Friend, however, was not that the sum asked was too small, but that the money was wrongly spent. His hon. Friend asked for an assurance that the noble Lord would make inquiry as to whether or not the money was spent on a certain public building; and, in doing so, he pointed out that according to the Report | after year for this money, on the ground of the resident officer and the Commis- that it was wanted for the purpose of sioners, improvements were required making a port for fishing vessels to run which had not been made. He (Mr. into, and in order to give employment Biggar) also complained that there were to hundreds of men, who were nearly sums of money asked for in this Vote starving, in the neighbourhood. An which should not be there at all. Under assurance was given last year that the the Estimate for new stations, for in- works at Ardglass should be energetistance, there was something like an cally taken in hand. But the money increase of £1,000 over the Estimate of was never spent. What assurance, then, last year; and, again, on page 48, there had the Committee that the works would was a large item for converting build- be proceeded with and the money exings for the use of the Constabulary. pended now? He wished, also, to call He asked the noble Lord to afford an the attention of the noble Lord to the explanation as to how these charges had very substantial increase in the amount arison? If the replies of the noble Lord asked this year for the Dublin Castle were inadequate to the questions asked, residencies, not only for maintenance he might feel himself called upon to and repairs, but for furniture, fittings, move a reduction of the Vote. and utensils. LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH said, the main part of the expenditure referred to by the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) had been incurred in the conversion of bridewells, which were no longer required, into barracks. Another item of £3,000 was for improved accommodation in connection with Dublin Castle. He had himself carefully examined the expenditure in connection with this item, and it had been the subject of like examination on the part of the Board of Works. Small sums were also required for improvements at Queen's College. MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR pointed out that when money was voted two years ago for improvements at Ardglass Harbour, it was said that the money would be used as much as possible in giving employment to a number of poor people in the neighbourhood. Since that time, however, practically no work had been done at all. This was a case where money had been voted, and rovoted by the House, and where, the works not having been proceeded with, the money had been returned to the Treasury. In 1879-80, the House voted for repairs and improvements at Ardglass Harbour, £7,000, but only £3,900 of that sum was spent. In 1880-1, the sum of £10,000 was voted, and had that amount been expended the Committee would now only be asked for a further sum of £1,100. But as they were asked for £5,800, it was perfectly clear that £4,900 must have been returned to the Treasury. It appeared to him a perfect farce for the Government to apply to the House year LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH said, that the Board of Works in Ireland were most anxious to push on the works at Ardglass as quickly as possible. If the hon. Member had any experienco of harbour works, he would know that it was not always possible to calculate the exact time at which they would be completed. With respect to the furniture of Dublin Castle, it was only right that it should be re-placed from time to time when necessary, and it was for this purpose that the money was asked. MR. BIGGAR said, there were two items in this Estimate relating to works of which he had some personal knowledge-namely, Donaghadee Harbour, £685, and the Ulster Canal, £1,286. The harbour at Donaghadee was at one time a packet station for the Scotch mail running between Ireland and the North of Scotland. It had now become simply a harbour for coasting vessels, and had no connection with Government affairs, and any money which was spent upon it appeared to him to be thrown away. It was, moreover, of very small importance, either as a place for coasting or fishing vessels. The harbour was, no doubt, substantially built; but the annual sum asked for the purpose of repairs was much more than it ought to be. With regard to the item of £1,286 for the Ulster Canal, the money was simply a gift to the proprietors, who charged heavy tolls on the traffic. He was unable to see why the Committee should subsidize this Company. LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH was understood to say that the repairs. to the Donaghadee Canal were the result of a survey which had taken | any advantage from it, and thought he place, and which had been considered never should. With regard to this Vote by the Commissioners of the Board there was one very objectionable item, of Works. The hon. Member for Cavan and that was the increase for the Con(Mr. Biggar) was entirely mistaken in stabulary. There was an increase for the his opinion that the payment on account Constabulary depôt in Phoenix Park of the Ulster Canal was in the nature of of £501, and an increase for the Cona subsidy to the proprietors. A loan stabulary in Ireland of £1,090. That had been contracted, and as there was represented the total increase; but it no possibility of the Company being able did not, he supposed, represent the to repay either the loan or the interest whole sum the Government would proupon it, the Canal had been transferred pose. That was in addition to the large to the Board of Works. sum already referred to for making bridewells and Constabulary barracks, so that the increase for buildings was something enormous. He begged to move to reduce the Vote by the sums by which it was proposed to increase the Vote of last year-£501 in one case, and £1,090 in the other. MAJOR NOLAN wished to draw the attention of the noble Lord to the charge of £112 for the canteen at the Ordnance Survey Office, Mountjoy Barracks. He believed this was the first time the Vote had appeared on the Civil Service Estimates. As a general rule he thought canteens might be regarded as interfering very much with the trade of licensed victuallers, although they were, undoubtedly, at times, great conveniences. He objected to them in connection with the Civil Service on the ground not only that they interfered with the trade of persons who paid large sums of money for licences, but because, if the practice were allowed, all the Departments of the Civil Service would soon be having canteens kept up at the Government expense. Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £147,335, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of the several Public the Commissioners of Public Works in IreWorks and Buildings under the Department of land, and for the Erection of Fishery Piers, and the Maintenance of certain Parks, Harbours, and Navigations."-(Mr. Biggar.) MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR asked the hon. Member to withdraw the Motion to enable him to move an Amendment. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Original Question again proposed. MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR said, the item he proposed to reduce was that under Sub-head B, for Constabulary Buildings. He wished first, however, to say, with regard to the Ulster Canal and the Donaghadee Harbour, that he entirely agreed with the hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar). As to the latter, of the £770 voted, £400 went in pay; and, as a matter of fact, all that was done last year was to remove certain stones from the entrance to repair a portion of the sea wall, which probably did not cost more than £70 or £80 of the £770. With regard to the Ulster Canal, the total amount of the tolls last MR. BIGGAR mentioned that in the year 1861 a large further sum was spent on this place, the real fact being that there was great competition between the different localities and the Railway Companies as to which should carry the mails to England. After a great deal of public money had been spent in engineers' fees and on actual work, it was finally decided that Portpatrick was not a suitable place. He would advise the Government to cease making grants to Donaghadee, for it was only throwing money away. Donaghadee was a small place, and if it did not suit those who used it to keep it in repair, he did not see why the Government, who got no advantage from it, should advance money. The argument was that because a great quantity of money had been thrown away, more should be thrown away; but that was a very weak argument. He thought the system of lend-year was only £86, and the total in the ing money to public companies in Ireland a very bad one. Lending money was good in some cases; but so far as he could remember, he never derived Lord Frederick Cavendish previous year only £56; so that the Government were spending £1,200 or more to get back £50 or £60. Anything more ridiculous could not be imagined, and he thought the Government would be justified in bringing in a Bill to put an end to that expenditure. Then, with regard to the public buildings, there was first of all an item for building new cells at Tralee. Those cells, if intended for ordinary prisoners, ought to have been made a long time ago; but the reason why they were now wanted was that the Government had taken it into their heads to arrest on what they called reasonable suspicion some of the most high-minded and best conducted men in Kerry. There was an item of £98 which he proposed to knock out of the Vote on that account. Then there was another item for the conversion of certain bridewells into barracks for the Constabulary. The total was £6,413, of which it was proposed to take £2,413 now. Then there was an item of £3,000 for converting certain military barracks into Constabulary barracks. He proposed to reduce this Vote by £5,501 on account of Constabulary Buildings Question put. The Committee divided:-Ayes 6; Noes 149: Majority 143.-(Div. List, No. 233.) Original Question again proposed. MR. BIGGAR was glad to find that the attention of the noble Lord had been drawn to the Donaghadee Harbour and the Ulster Canal, and repeated his opinion that the money voted was thrown away. He had intended to move to reduce the Vote with regard to Constabulary buildings in different parts of Ireland, and in Phoenix Park; but, seeing that the same principle was involved in the item upon which a Division had just been taken, he would not move his Amendment. Original Question put, and agreed to. (16.) Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882, Motion made, and Question proposed, of the Museum of Science and Art in Dublin, for Expenses preparatory to and of the erection "That a sum, not exceeding £143,425, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1882, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of the several Public Works and Buildings under the Department of the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland, and for the Erection of Fishery Piers, and the Maintenance of certain Parks, Harbours, and Navigations."—(Mr. Arthur O'Connor.) and of additions to the School of Art in Dublin." In 1880 MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR asked the noble Lord the Secretary to the Treasury for some information as to the condition in which these buildings were, and the amount that had been advanced this year for this purpose? The noble Lord had said four times over that he was personally exceedingly anxious to LORD FREDERICK CAVENDISH push on these works; but the anxiety said, he should be obliged to any local of the noble Lord was not altogether authority that would take charge of satisfactory, because it was not fruitful. Donaghadee Harbour; and with regard There were £5,000 voted in 1879-80 for to the Ulster Canal, that had been found this purpose, but only £3,164 were exso unsatisfactory that a Royal Commis-pended, and £1,800, or more, were sion was appointed to inquire into it, returned to the Exchequer. and they were still pursuing their in- £20,000 were voted, and that, if exvestigation. As to the Constabulary ponded, would have made £23,000 out But that probarracks item, a very large portion of of the £25,000 voted. that was for the conversion of barracks | gress had not been made which might in lieu of barracks now existing; and reasonably have been expected. the conversion would give good accomMR. GORST wished to call attention modation for the Constabulary. With to what, he thought, was a most objecrespect to the Tralee cells, and their tionable practice in regard to this Vote. supposed object, he could assure the A Voto was taken for a new building, hon. Member that his explanation was the site and cost of which were still unnot correct. The expenditure on those certain. The Committee was asked to cells was decided upon long before vote £3,500 to commence a building, the Act referred to was passed, and when the Government had not ascerwas simply for an ordinary improve-tained either where the building was to |