asked the Secretary of State for War whether, considering that it has not been found practicable to create a special branch of the Army Clothing Department to deal with officers' uniforms and that commanding officers are for bidden to exercise any pressure upon officers to deal with any particular firm, he will either withdraw that prohibition, and thus enable commanding officers to make arrangements regimentally for a supply of officers' uniforms at a less cost than at present, or else instruct the War Office to make the best arrangements they can, either with outside tailors or otherwise, to enable officers of all branches of the Service to purchase uniforms at a reasonable rate?

There is nothing in the Regulations to prevent a regiment from making an arrangement with a military outfitter regarding the supply of uniform or equipment, provided that no pressure Should be brought to bear upon any individual officer in this respect.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if what the hon. Member for Aberdeen desires is not done in effect by every sensible commanding officer now?

I should be sorry to say "Yes" or "No" to that question as to the sensibleness of commanding officers. What we are all desirous of securing is that there should be as little expense as possible thrown on officers in every regiment in procuring their uniforms.

Does not that show all the more necessity for making the Regulation universal, as all commanding officers are not as sensible as the Noble Lord suggests?

I have many complaints made to me that we do not reach the end of questions, but if hon. Members will insist in asking supplementary questions in the nature of arguments, I can hardly be blamed because we do not do so.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman—

Ask the question on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, considering the fact that the Government of India have decided that the proportion up to which pensions may be commuted should not be allowed to exceed a quarter of the pension, he will state the proportion up to which officers of the British Service are permitted to commute their pensions; if exceeding more than one-quarter of the pension, whether similar conditions to those applied in India might be advantageously applied in England; whether, while the Government of India permit their pensioners to commute on a 31 per cent, basis, officers of the British Army are only permitted to commute on a 5 per cent, basis; and what difference this makes to the British Service officer?

Officers of the British Service are allowed to commute one-half of their pension, but not less than £80 must be left uncommitted. It appears that the Indian conditions mentioned in the question refer to Indian natives, and that, as far as British officers are concerned, the Indian conditions are the same as those of the British Service, except that the limit for commutation is one-third. It is a matter of opinion how, far it is to an officer's advantage to commute his pension, but experience has shown that the limit of one-half has prevented cases of destitution from arising without unduly interfering with the officer's discretion as to his financial arrangements. The rate of interest chargeable is fixed by the Pensions Commutation Act.

asked whether, in view of the fact that Lord Haldane stared that men trained for from four to six months, as proposed by the National Service League, would not be fit to meet Regular Continental troops trained for two or three years, the fourth battalions of the Special Reserve, trained only for three months, could be sent at once to meet Regular troops on the Continent or be able to meet them in case of invasion?

If the hon. Gentleman will read the words following those of the authority which he quotes, he will find the answer to his question regarding invasion; and as regards war on the Continent, I would point out that the fourth battalions mentioned do not form part of the Expeditionary Force.

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that Lord Haldane when Secretary of Stale for War said that the twenty-seven fourth battalions of the Special Reserve would be available for foreign service just as much as any others and that they were organised and enlisted for that purpose?

The hon. Member can hardly expect the Secretary of State to carry in his head all the speeches made by Lord Haldane.

asked how many Scottish regiments there are at present in Ulster, and how many in the rest of Ireland; and what will be the distribution of Scottish units in Ireland in May?

There are no Scottish battalions in Ulster, and there are two quartered in the rest of Ireland. As fat as is known at present there will be no alteration in this distribution of the troops in May.

asked (1) whether the Territorial adjutant detailed to take the horse census in No. 5 area in Cheshire is to classify and report on all the horses in the following districts: All the districts embraced in the Parliamentary divisions of Hyde, Stalybridge, and Stockport, and in addition half of the districts embraced by the Altrincham and Knutsford divisions; whether this adjutant can satisfactorily make his horse census without neglecting his other duties; (2) whether any complaints have been received from commanding officers of Territorial battalions pointing out the in convenience of having their adjutants detailed to take the present horse census; (3) the number of adjutants who have been and are being employed in the pre sent horse census which is being taken, distinguishing between mounted and foot adjutants and between Regular, Special Reserve, and Territorial in each case; (4> whether the adjutants who have been and are at present being employed in the pre sent horse census are expected to under take this census in addition to their ordinary duties; and what would be the position of an adjutant who refused to take the census on the plea that his ordinary duties took up all his time?

I am not aware of the particular ease mentioned, but I will make inquiries. No complaints from commanding officers have reached the War Office. There are no statistics at the War Office to show the 'exact numbers of officers employed on the horse classification, but, as I have already informed the House, there are a large number of Regular officers so employed, in addition to the Territorial Force adjutants. As regards the other points raised, I have nothing to add to the replies which I have already given to the hon. and gallant Gentleman on this subject.

If the right hon. Gentleman says no complaints have reached the War Office, may I ask him if there was not trouble with two adjutants last year on the subject, and that both of them had to leave an account of the War Office action?

I am not aware of that. I have said no complaint has reached the War Office from commanding officers, which is the question on the Paper.

Could the right hon. Gentleman reply to the latter part of question No. 22: "What would be the position of an adjutant who refused to take the census on the plea that his ordinary duties took up all his time?"

I have deliberately refrained from answering the question, because I think it ought not to have been put, but if it is persisted in the answer would be the same as the answer given by Stephenson with regard to the cow.

asked what was the number of officers wanting to complete the establishment of the Territorial Force on last New Year's Day?

The number was 1,959 out of an establishment of 11,242.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the difficulty of recruiting a sufficient number of officers for the Territorial Force, he will consider the propriety of raising the present amount of £20 given as outfit allowance so as to cover the expenses outside the service kit made compulsory by the Regulations, such as mess uniform, patrol dress, and other charges imposed by custom in battalions?

I have this question under consideration.

asked whether the Army Council have decided to amend the Regulations for the Territorial Army, so that elementary Infantry drill shall be taught in a drill hall instead of in an open field; and, if so, how it is proposed to teach recruits advancing and retiring in open order, methods of taking cover, outpost and patrolling, and advance and rear guards, and other movements which are the foundation of a soldier's training?

A circular memorandum has recently been issued concerning the hire of drill fields, which states that it is considered that as a general rule elementary Infantry drill can be taught in a drill hall, so that where an adequate drill hall exists, a small drill field is not considered a necessity. There is no objection, however, to county associations having drill fields where considered necessary, subject to the sanction of the general officer commanding, and within certain financial limits. The training referred to in the second part of the question requires a larger area than that described as a drill field.

Are we to understand that the War Office is not going to supply the money for these fields, and is it the right hon. Gentleman's opinion that they can learn just as well in a hall as in a field?

With regard to elementary drill, it can be taught in a hall, as everybody knows and no better than the hon. Member; but if there is a field available at no great cost it can be hired. That is what the memorandum says. With regard to the larger measures of training referred to in the question, we do not define them as field drill. They require a larger area than that described as a drill field.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the continuing decrease in the amounts granted by the Road Board to the county of Gloucester; whether such amount in 1911–12 was £7,500, in 1912–13 was £7,300, and for 1913–14 a sum of only between £6,000 and £7,000 has been promised; whether he is aware that Gloucestershire has an exceptionally large road mileage and that the motor traffic thereon has increased during the past few years and is still increasing, although the Road Hoard's Grant is decreasing; and what he proposes to do for this and other rural counties in the matter?

I am informed by the Road Board that the total amount of the Grants to works of road improvement in the county of Gloucestershire to be carried out during the next financial year cannot be settled until the applications of the Gloucestershire Highway Authorities giving particulars and estimates of the works of improvement with which they desire to proceed are before the Board. In the absence of applications containing this information the county council were informed provisionally in reply to an inquiry in November last that they may anticipate a Grant of between £6,000 and £7,000 towards approved works of improvement. All available information as to traffic, mileage and expenditure, as well as other relevant facts, are taken into account in dealing with applications. In making comparisons as to previous Grants it must be borne in mind that in the Grants made in 1911–12 the Board were dealing with practically two years' revenue of the Road Improvement Fund.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, considering that the majority of the junior officers of Customs and Excise have not yet received any benefit from the concessions to the Department authorised by the Report of the Amalgamation Committee or payment for insurance duties, he will authorise the acceptance of the recommendation made to the Amalgamation Committee by the Board of Customs and Excise that officers shall be lifted to the salary they would have been receiving had the service scale been in force when they entered the service?

I must refer the hon. Member to my reply to a question put to me by the hon. Member for Tyrone on the 14th instant on this subject.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, considering the pledge given by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to this House on 18th June, 1908, in connection with the amalgamation of the Customs and Excise Departments, that the rights of no class and, as far as possible, of no individual would be prejudicially affected by the contemplated change, he will explain why surveyors, formerly supervisors of Excise, find all promotion from their grade to the controlling grade stopped; and why this stoppage, which to eligible men means a stoppage at £320 per annum as compared with £500, the minimum salary of the controlling grade, has been permitted.

As regards promotions to the new controlling grade, I must refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Blackburn on the 14th instant, and I may add that further promotions will be made when the process of amalgamation permits. Meanwhile the eligible men instead of being temporarily stopped at £320, as they would have been, under the former conditions of service, have, under the amalgamation scheme, been placed on a scale rising to £450, and when promoted will be placed on a scale of £500 rising to £650, instead of £450 fixed.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the proposed Grant of £50,000 to Ireland for the provision of health insurance benefits will be subject to the approval of Parliament; if it is intended to be an annual allowance, supplementary to the funds already provided by the United Kingdom for the working of the National Insurance Act in Ireland; and if he will state the sum per insured person in Ireland to be contributed out of moneys provided by Parliament for similar benefits compared with the amount so provided as regards insured persons in England?

The answer to the first two questions is in the affirmative, except that, as regards the second, the Grant would, in the event of the extension of medical benefit to Ireland, be merged in the Grant for that benefit. The object of this special Grant, as I explained in my reply to the hon. Member for Waterford on the 9th instant, is to provide a contribution towards certain expenses arising in Ireland in connection with national insurance owing to the absence of medical benefit in that country. There is therefore no corresponding Grant in Great Britain where medical benefit exists.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that the approval of the House is asked before the agreement is made with the doctors?

Of course, no payment will be made by the Treasury until the approval of the House has been obtained.

Will the House be allowed to see the agreement before it is concluded?

No agreement beyond a provisional agreement will be concluded before the House is in possession of it.

Will the House have an opportunity of discussing it this Session?

That I cannot say.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what error has been discovered in his calculations as regards medical benefit under the National Insurance Act which allows him to pay 8s. 6d. a head, while his actuarial calculations were based on taxation sufficient to 'allow of the payment of 6s. per head; and, since it is not possible to pay the larger amount out of the smaller collection, will he inform the House from what source the 'Government proposes to make good the deficiency?

No error has been discovered in the calculations, in regard to medical benefit under the National Insurance Act. As regards the remainder of the question the position has already been fully explained to the House in the answers given to the hon. Member for St. Pancras on the 1st and 9th instant.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it has been found that the 1,956 names printed and published as those of members of panels in London are reduced to 738 when names entered more than once are excluded, that names are entered without any regard to the place of residence of the owners of such names, and that in some cases they are repeated as often as ten times; and, if so, whether such proceedings have his sanction?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for North Islington yesterday. The list published by the London Insurance Committee on 13th January shows 759 doctors on the London panel. These are shown in lists for the different boroughs for the convenience of insured persons making their choice, each doctor being named in the list of any borough in which he has stated that he desired to attend insured persons. The number of doctors on the London panel is now 930.

Is there any difficulty in filling the panel when doctors' names are inserted without their permission, and repeated in various quarters?

No name is entered without the doctor's permission, and no doctor's name is put as serving on any panel except at his specific request.

May I supply the right hon. Gentleman with cases of that nature, not in London, but in Middlesex?

I shall be glad to investigate any such allegations.

asked if an insured person wires for a doctor, and is unable to get medical assistance owing to the roads being blocked with snow, the amount of premium due for medical benefit for that period will be refunded?

The answer is in the negative.

But is it not unfair to ask an insured person who may be snowed up for weeks to pay contributions for which he can receive no benefit?

The man is in the same position in respect to a doctor as he is at present. The doctor takes the same liability as a doctor does at present in attending a patient.

But is it not the fact that in former days he had not to pay 4d. for taking the chance and now he has got to do it?

If he was under a contract system he paid so much a year. A doctor took no account of such acts of God as a snowstorm.

In how many cases throughout the Highlands did the contract system prevail, and did the doctors charge fees when they did not pay a visit?

It is not a question about the Highlands at all. It is a general question as to snowstorms blocking the attendance of a doctor.

But may I ask if Providence in the old days extracted 4d. from the people in the same way as it's modern prototype the Chancellor of the Exchequer does now?

asked the total amount of money representing the sale of insurance stamps at the present time, and in what securities have such moneys been invested?

The sums received into the National Health Insurance Fund from the sale of stamps, etc., up to 18th January, amounted to £9,225,369 17s. 9d. The amounts available for investment are being invested partly in Treasury Bills and Exchequer Bonds, and partly in Government Stock in anticipation of transfer to the Permanent Investment Account. A Return will in due course be presented to Parliament by the National Debt Commissioners as required under Section 54 of the Act, and I am unable to anticipate the details which will be included in that Return.

asked whether a doctor meeting with an accident or injury while attending to or going to or from attending a case under the National Insurance Act receives compensation for such injury?

The answer is in the negative. I am advised that a doctor on the panel is not in the position of an employé of an insurance committee, and has no more title to compensation from that committee in case of accident than a doctor attending a private patient has from that patient.

Under the Local Government Board cannot a doctor get compensation for looking after a pauper?

I suppose in that case he is an employé of the Local Government Board. No doctor on a panel is an employé of the insurance committee.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the approved societies are only accepting sickness benefit certificates of insured persons if signed by panel doctors; and, if so, whether this furl her effort to force all medical practitioners on to the panels has the sanction of the Government?

I do not know to what authorities the hon. Member is referring, but as regards the question of medical certificates presented in connection with claims for sickness benefit I have nothing to add to my answer of Wednesday last.

Is it understood that insured persons who do not go to doctors on the panel are liable to lose all the benefits, including sickness benefit, which are open to them?

I am afraid I do not know what the hon. Gentleman means by "Is it understood?" My answer is quite categorical and specific. The question of whether a person is really ill or not is one for the approved societies and not for the insurance committees.

Is it understood that all benefits under the Insurance Act depend upon whether the insured person goes to a doctor on the panel?

Once more I cannot give an answer unless the hon. Gentleman interprets to me what he means by the question, "Is it understood?"

Is it a fact, then?

asked how many persons are insured under Part II. of the National Insurance Act; and how many of these have sent in claims for unemployment benefits to the latest date available?

The total number of unemployment books issued up to the 16th January, 1913, was 2,273,589, and the number of claims to benefit received up to the same date was 100,170.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he has now considered the Report of the Committee appointed to consider the position of the Highlands and Islands under the National Insurance Act; and if he can state if the Government propose at an early date to give effect to the recommendations contained therein?

Was this Committee held under the National Insurance Act?

Yes, I think it was a general Committee—a Treasury Committee—investigating general conditions. I fear I cannot at present add anything to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Perth on this subject yesterday.

In view of the grave anxiety cannot some temporary arrangement be made?

I think all or the great majority of doctors in the Highlands are at present on the panels and are attending sick persons. This Report goes much further than the question of these doctors. It is a very large subject, and I think we must have a few days to consider it.

asked the Home Secretary whether the doctors engaged to proceed to any area to work the National Insurance Act when panels are inadequate will be entitled to the same police protection as was given to the dockers introduced in the "Lady Jocelyn" to the Port of London in the late dock strike?

The protection of members of the public from violence is a matter for the local Police authorities. I do not think any special measures will be necessary for persons within the class to which the hon. Member refers.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman if it is not the case that special protection was given, or, at all events, that the Home Secretary claimed it was given, in the case of dockers, and, if so, is there any difference in principle in the two cases?

If a case arises, no doubt attention will be paid to it.

May I ask if any of the doctors claim protection?

Not yet.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has seen a resolution passed by the New Ross technical instruction committee pointing out the necessity for a building Grant for technical schools and urging the Government to make provisions for this purpose; and will he say what action he proposes to take in the matter?

I have seen the resolution referred to. The matter is not one which at present calls for any action on my part.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in June, 1909, a field known as Chattenden meadow, belonging to Mr. H. Gough, was acquired by the War Office, under the Defence Act, at the price of £500; whether, on 2nd December, 1912, Mr. Gough was served with a provisional valuation of the same land, placing its value, as on 30th April, 1909, at £845, and its assessable site value as £812; and whether this was an overvaluation for the purposes of Undeveloped Land Duty, or whether Mr. Gough received an insufficient price from the War Office?

The Valuation branch of the Inland Revenue Department, who had nothing to do with the purchase by the War Office, adhere to the values quoted in the second part of the hon. Member's question, but it is still open to the owner to object to these values should ho think them excessive. The amount of Undeveloped Land Duty involved is something under a sovereign. On the facts as stated in the question, the War Office would appear to have made a good bargain.

Are not purchases under the Defence Act compulsory? Has the right hon. Gentleman looked into the matter? Is he aware that a compulsory notice was served upon this owner; that he stated that he did not wish to sell, and that the highest price the War Office would agree to give him without going to actual arbitration was £500?

I understand that the transaction was not compulsory, but voluntary.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Defence Act is a compulsory Act, and that this purchase was to all intents and purposes compulsory; only it did not go to arbitration?

My right hon. Friend tells me—I cannot myself be supposed to know—that the purchase was not under the Defence Act.

If it was under the Defence Act—

It is obvious that the Chancellor of the Exchequer cannot know about the operations of the War Office—

With all respect, that was not the point I was going to raise. I wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, as his Departmental valuers have fixed the value at £845, he will see that this Gentleman receives that price from the War Office?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in the view of the statement made on the 27th November last that, so far as then ascertained, the total costs incurred in the case of Bowles v. the Bank of England were £838 9s. 5d., and the statement made on the 14th January that the total amount of costs incurred by the Crown, including those incurred by the Bank of England will amount approximately to £572, exclusive of Mr. Bowles's costs, he will say which of these two sums or whether either of them represents the fact; and do His Majesty's Government propose to pay the costs of the Bank of England and also those of Mr. Bowles as between solicitor and client?

The estimate which I gave on the 14th instant differed from that given on the 27th November last, mainly because on the earlier occasion an estimate of Mr. Bowles' costs was included, the question having been so worded as to require this estimate. I am still unable to give the total costs actually incurred. Those of the Bank of England have been paid by the Crown, and amounted to £258 5s. 4d. It is presumed that an account of those incurred by Mr. Bowles will be received in due course, and will be taxed in the usual way.

asked the Prime Minister, having regard to the judgment of the High Court in Bowles v. The Bank of England that the levy of Income Tax before the passing of the Act of Parliament imposing that tax is unlawful, do His Majesty's Government intend this year to introduce the Bill imposing that tax at such an early period as will ensure its passing by 5th April, 1913, when, except as to arrears and returns, the present Act and the present tax expire?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. I can at present add nothing to the reply which I gave to the hon. and learned Member for West St. Pancras on 6th November last.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that the Act imposing the Income Tax was passed by Sir Robert Peel on the 5th April, 1845; by Lord Palmerston on 3rd April, 1860; and by Mr. Gladstone on 24th March, 1880?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put the question down so that I may be able to understand it.

asked the Secretary for Scotland, as representing the Local Government Board of Scot land, whether he can state the number of old age pensioners in the burgh of Perth, together with the cost of their pensions in the year 1911–12; whether he can state the number of persons receiving indoor and outdoor relief from the parish council on 15th January and 15th September in the years 1908 and 1912, respectively; and whether he can estimate the saving to the parish council of Perth which has been effected by the operation of the Old Age Pensions Act?

As the answer to this question contains a number of figures, I propose to circulate it with the Votes.— [See Written Answers this date.]

Will the right hon. Gentleman also calculate, at the same time, the amount of the increase of taxation and rating?

No, Sir, that is not included in the figures asked for.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the fact that 22,000 rural cottages have been built in Ireland since 1906 under the Labourers' Cottages Act of that year; and, if so, will he say when he proposes to introduce similar legislation for Scot land in view of the emigration figures to that country?

As my hon. Friend is aware, a Royal Commission on Housing in Scotland has been appointed, which will doubtless be ready to consider any suggestions based upon the Irish legislation to which he refers.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know that Scotland has equal needs in that respect?

I am not prepared to admit that.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any approximate date when the Commission may be expected to report?

No, Sir; it 'has not yet had time to take evidence.

asked whether the Government scheme of educational reform, announced by the Lord Chancellor, includes any provisions affecting Scotland?

asked also the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the Lord Chancellor's Manchester speech, if he will say what steps he proposes to take to ensure that when an advance is made in English educational reform an equal if not greater advance shall be made in Scottish education so that the unquestioned pre-eminence of Scotland may be maintained?

In reply to this question and to question No. 41, I would refer my hon. Friends to the answer given by the Prime Minister on 15th January to a series of questions on the subject of the Lord Chancellor's speech.

When this scheme is being prepared will the whole position be recast so that the education provided may be more relative to the needs of the time?

That is a matter of opinion.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he will say, as regards the Lady Yester Mortification, ad ministered by the Jedburgh School Board, and the demand made by the auditor under Section 30 of the Scottish Education Act, 1908, that a part of the revenue shall be paid over to the secondary education committee of the district to be applied to the granting of bursaries, leaving the rest to be adminisered by the school board in pro viding books and stationery, on what ground the auditor or the Department has taken the amount expended in an abnormal year of change, namely, 1889, on books and stationery as an ordinary fair and average yearly amount, especially as the Department's minute of 26th August, 1889, did not come into operation until 1st Octo- ber, 1889; whether, as the Jedburgh School Board has represented, under the second proviso of Section 30, that the selection of the calendar year 1889 is inapplicable and leads to unfair allocation of the revenue, he can see his way to allocating the parts for bursaries and books, etc., on an average of years of expenditure; and whether the rule stated in the Department Circular 441 of 10th May, 1911, about the normal measure of fairness, which the auditor relies on in the discussion with the Jedburgh School Board, has any support from Statute or is to be applied in all cases as a rule of law, or whether it is only an indication of the spirit in which the Department will be disposed to interpret Section 30 in normal cases?

I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of Circular 441, which will, I think, give him the explanation asked for in the first part of his question, and will also make it clear that the second of the two alternatives suggested in the last part corresponds most closely to the facts. In the particular case he mentions no formal reference has yet been made to the Department, but in reply to an inquiry the auditor states that the amount which he thinks it would be reasonable and fair for him to allow is not only larger than the sum spent by the Governors in the year 1889, but also larger than the average annual expenditure of any five continuous years prior to 1902. In these circumstances, I can hold out no hope that it would be possible to grant terms more favourable to the board should it be necessary for the Department to make a statutory determination.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been directed to the fact that there are nearly 100 vacancies in the pulpits of the Free Church of Scotland; and whether, in view of the failure to administer trust funds in this case, he proposes to take steps, by legislation or otherwise, to secure that the intentions of the Commission under the Churches (Scotland) Act, 1905, shall be carried out?

I am informed that the statements of fact alleged by the hon. Member are disputed by the authorities of the Free Church. The question of Government action does not therefore at present arise, and I hope it never will.

Is it not the case that seven years have elapsed since this Commission originally delimited the boundaries of the Free Church in Scotland, and is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that in towns like Aberdeen congregations have not got ministers, and does he not think that the time has now arrived when the Commission should again delimit the boundaries of this Church in Scotland?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister when the Committee on Land Tenure appointed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with his approval, is likely to issue its Report; and if he will then be in a position to make an announcement as to the Government's policy, or if the object of this Committee is to collect information in support of a policy already decided upon?

I understand that a Report is likely to be issued within a comparatively short time. The answer to the last branch of the question is in the negative.

Can the continued reticence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer now be attributed to affairs in the Balkans, or to differences in the Cabinet on this subject?

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to newspaper statements to the effect that the policy of land reform has been sub-milted to the Cabinet by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and rejected by them; and is there any foundation for such statements which are persistently circulated?

No, Sir; none whatever.

Will you answer my question?

asked the number of separate Government offices in Edinburgh, giving their location and title; the number of head offices, branch offices, overflow offices, and temporary offices, with their location; how many of the premises are owned, leased, or rented; the rates and taxes, or their equivalents, on those offices; the number of telephones in use; the number of messengers employed; the number of housekeepers; the number of separate lifts; the number of Departments set up within the last five years; their relation to the centre of the city and the railway stations; and how many of them are on the tramway service?

The information asked for by my hon. Friend can only be obtained by a large amount of research involving great labour and some delay. The First Commissioner would be willing, should my hon. Friend desire it, to prepare and furnish a list of the Government offices in Edinburgh.

Will the hon. Gentleman supply us with that list in view of the site for these buildings?

I have already stated that the First Commissioner will be glad to supply the list.

Has the hon. Member found out whether the First Commissioner has ever been in Edinburgh and examined the site?

That question does not arise.

asked whether the desirability of having an open or selected competition as to dealing with the Calton Hill site, Edinburgh, has yet been considered; and, if not, in view of the importance of the matter, will the First Commissioner have the proposal considered?

The question of having a competition for the buildings on the Calton Hill site has been considered. The First Commissioner has invited Sir Robert Lorimer to express his views on the scheme which has been prepared. When the report has been received the First Commissioner will lay it before the Committee which has been considering this question.

What is the use of this if they have not yet got the site on which these buildings are to be put, and if the site, as they assume, belongs to someone else who has never yet been paid for it?

Difficulties as to the title of the site have nothing Lo do with the Office of Works.

Ought the Department to be put to the expense, and Scottish Members to the trouble, of looking into the matter if the site is not available for the buildings of which they have actually a model in the Board of Works Office now?

The Office of Works has no evidence to show that the site will not be available, and are proceeding on the assumption that it will be.

Is it the fact that before any building operation can be undertaken the matter must come before the House on the Estimates?

Oh, yes. No new work will be undertaken until a Vote is passed in Committee of Supply.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he will give the reason for his refusal to grant the Return under the Small Land Holders Act asked for on the 13th instant?—Lord NISIAN CRICHTOX-STUAKT—Small Holdings (England and Wales)—Return showing, for each county in England and Wales, particulars of the land acquired under the Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1908, and let in Small Holdings on the 29th day of September, 1912, in the following form:—

I am obliged to the Noble Lord for giving me this opportunity to remove a misconception which has been caused by my refusal to grant the Return to which he refers. I am not only willing to grant a Return giving all possible information with regard to the progress made under the Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1908, but, as I have already informed the Noble Lord, I think that such a Return would be a most useful document. My refusal to grant the Return on the 13th January was due to the fact that the particulars asked for in column 13 of the form appended to the Notice of Motion are in some cases unobtainable, and, even if they were obtained, would obviously be misleading.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman give a Return

As I have already said, I cannot grant the Return for the reason that some of the information is unobtainable, and such as is obtainable would be misleading. If column 13 is omitted, I can grant the Return at once.

I will raise this question on the Motion for Adjournment to-night.

asked the right hon. Gentleman, as representing the Scottish Board of Agriculture, whether any steps have recently been taken to establish or develop the system of co-operation in the agricultural commerce of Scotland; whether anything has been done to place cheap and easy credit within reach of the whole farming and crofting community; and, if not, whether he proposes to follow the example of the English Board in this matter?

The Board cordially support the efforts of the Scottish Agricultural Organisation Society to promote the formation and organisation of co-operative agricultural societies, and have been making inquiries as to the best means of bringing credit within the reach of small holders, but, as negotiations are still proceeding, I am not in a position to make any more definite statement. The position in Scotland is a little different from what it is in England.

Will this be done direct through the agency of the State, without the aid of private banks?

No, Sir, I am not prepared to make any statement in that direction.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he has made any Order to discontinue the Calton Gaol?

The answer is in the negative.

asked whether the Prison Commissioners for Scotland have secured a site for the proposed new prison; if not, when they are likely to do so; and whether he can say how long it would probably be before the new prison was ready for use?

It would not be in the public interest to enter into any details in regard to the question of a new site at present.

May I have an answer to the question whether the Prison Commissioners have secured a site?

I have answered that question. It would not be in the public interest to make any statement on the subject.

asked in whom the legal estate in the site of the Calton Gaol is at present vested; to whom it is to be transferred; and what is the consideration for such transfer?

In reply to the first part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply he received yesterday from the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East. The proposal at present under consideration is for an ultimate transfer to the First Commissioner of Works; as to how and on what conditions such a transfer can be arranged I am not prepared to make any intimation at this stage.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that plans have already been drawn and models set up for buildings on this site, which has not even yet been transferred to the Prison Commissioners?

I am quite aware of that.

What are these buildings for?

They are for the site in question.

Before this transfer to the Prison Commissioners takes place, will Members of Parliament have any chance of discussing this question?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the land has never been paid for?

asked how many applications for small holdings, under the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911, have been received from the county of Lanark; and how many of these applications have been already dealt with?

As I stated in the general statistics for the various counties in Scotland, given in reply to a question on 7th January, the number of applicants for small holdings in Lanarkshire up to and including 31st December, 1912, was 108. With reference to the second part of the question, I would ask my hon. Friend to wait for the Report of the Board of Agriculture, which is being made up to the end of last year.