asked the First Lord of the Admiralty at what date flogging was abolished as a method of disciplinary correction in the Navy; whether any demands have since been received from admirals, captains, or others asking for its reintroduction; and whether, since the abolition of flogging, there has been observable any deterioration or improvement in the morale and discipline of the Navy?

Corporal punishment was finally suspended as regards the Navy in 1881. Without an exhaustive search it cannot be stated whether any demands have since been received for its reintroduction, but it is highly improbable that any officers who entertained such views would represent them officially to the Admiralty. There has been a gradual and very satisfactory improvement in the morale and discipline of the Navy during recent years, but it cannot be stated that this is due to the suspension of corporal punishment.

Is not it most likely that it is due to that caused?

asked if the question of an increase in the pay of the Coastguard can be considered in the case of those men who have no gardens with their cottages, but who have cottages only in cities and towns where the cost of provisions has increased in recent years, so that they are worse off now than they were ten years ago, and considerably worse off than they were forty years ago when the rate of pay was last settled?

I do not think that the wages of the Coastguard are insufficient, or that they have difficulty in paying their way, although some stations may be slightly better off than others. As indicated in previous replies, it is not proposed to increase the pay of the Coastguard. It is, perhaps, worth noting that a man, as a rule, does not serve for more than five years at the same station.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that the firm of. Owen and Sons, Limited, of Liverpool, who supply capstan bars, black boards, and other articles to the Navy, are paying the workmen who make them from 4s. 6d. to 8s. per week less than the standard rate of wage, and that, although the firm were parties to an agreement entered into by the employers and workmen of the district, they refuse to comply with the terms of the agreement; and whether he will strike this firm off the list of those who are invited to supply articles of the kind mentioned to the Admiralty?

No complaint as to the rate of wages paid by Messrs. Owen has previously been received. I am making inquiry into the matter.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that, although thirty-eight skilled labourers at Bull Point have been granted the maximum pay of 28s. during the last seven years, they were all placed on the progressive list previous to that period, and that during these last seven years no skilled labourer has been placed on the progressive list; whether he can explain this; and whether he is aware that, in consequence of this action, an ordinary labourer with twelve months' service is eligible to receive 1s. a week more than a skilled labourer with thirteen or fourteen years' service?

The statement made in the first part of the hon. and gallant Gentleman's question is correct, and the reasons why no skilled labourers have been placed on the progressive scale of pay during the last seven years are, in the first place, that from 1904 onward, reductions in the number of men employed in naval ordnance depots generally were being effected, and in the second, that from the 17th February, 1910, a system of working to the mean of the scale of pay was substituted for the previous method of a progressive scale. Since that date fifty-seven men have been advanced to the skilled grade. All skilled labourers on the minimum of the scale received an advance in pay of 1s. per week from the 1st August last. I have already explained in previous answers to the hon. and gallant Member how it arises that labourers in certain cases receive more than skilled men on the minimum of the scale.

Is it not the fact that the result of the action taken is that unskilled labourers are now able to get a shilling a week more than skilled labourers?

I have explained before that the flat rate for unskilled labourers is 22s., but people doing responsible work may for a short time get 1s. or 2s. a week more for that work, and therefore in some cases they would get 24s. The minimum for a skilled labourer is 23s. Therefore in that case the unskilled labourer is getting more than the skilled labourer for the time being, but the skilled labourer can go up to 28., and in special cases to 31s.

Is it not a fact that practically anybody can do the work which is performed by the unskilled labourer at the rates referred to, whereas it takes a skilled man to do the other work?

No. For the time being the unskilled labourer is doing responsible work.

Are we to understand from the right hon. Gentleman that it is the policy of the Government to put unskilled labourers to do skilled work?

No. The labourers who were doing the special work for this short time are, in many cases, men who will be promoted to the rank of skilled labourers.

asked (1) whether the temporary naval hospital accommodation at Harwich, which has been admitted to be unsuitable, is now closed; and (2) whether two cases of enteric fever in the Fleet at Harwich have recently had to be sent to Chatham owing to insufficient hospital accommodation on the spot; and whether a beginning has been made of making good this deficiency?

Harwich is one of those places on the East Coast which have only in recent years acquired a naval importance. The following arrangements are made for the treatment of sickness among the increasing numbers of sailors stationed there: All ordinary cases occurring in the flotillas are taken on board the parent ships, where there is the usual Service accommodation for sick, and are transferred to Chatham Naval Hospital at convenient opportunities; urgent and serious cases are accommodated at Shotley, opposite to Harwich and half a mile away, where there is a well-appointed naval hospital belonging to the Shotley training establishment. In ordinary times there is room in this hospital for treating such naval cases, but if there were to be an unusual amount of sickness among the boys at Shotley difficulties in providing accommodation might arise. My right hon. Friend is therefore making provision in the forthcoming Estimates for certain extensions at Shotley Hospital which will effectually provide against such a contingency. My right hon. Friend is not prepared, as at present advised, to ask Parliament to build a separate naval hospital on the Harwich side of the water, as that would involve duplication of services and heavy expenditure. A case of enteric fever was recently sent from Harwich to Chatham for treatment because the patient himself elected to be sent to Chatham Hospital, and his condition at the time is stated to have warranted that course.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Board adheres to the policy which provided for the maintenance of a 60 per cent, superiority over Germany in "Dreadnoughts" and for an increase in that margin as pre "Dreadnoughts" decline in relative fighting value; and, if so, what will be our percentage superiority over Germany in completed "Dreadnoughts" on 1st April, 1914?

These argumentative questions are very suitable for discussion when Navy Estimates are presented.

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to decline to answer that question?

My hon. Friend must see that it is quite impossible to deal adequately with it within the time at the disposal of the House and by way of question and answer.

asked whether, in view of the fact that it is the stated policy of the Board to maintain a greater superiority than 60 per cent, in armoured ships, cruisers, and destroyers over the next naval Power, the necessary steps will be taken to ensure that we maintain a greater superiority than 60 per cent, in the active list personnel?

The manning requirements of the Navy depend upon the fleets which it is necessary to maintain in commission, and no standard based on the numbers of a foreign navy would be applicable. As a matter of fact, however the margin of superiority in personnel which the hon. Member recommends has been, and continues to be, more than fully maintained.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if we are to maintain this superiority of trained men we shall require 23,500 men added to the personnel in 1915?

Is the right hon. Gentleman sure that he will be able to secure the necessary addition to the personnel after his action towards the shipwrights?

I really do not think that that arises out of the question.

It arises later on.

asked on what date the battleship "Conqueror" was due for delivery from the contractors; whether she is shown in the Navy List as having been commissioned on 23rd November for service in the Second Battle Squadron; whether, as a matter of fact, 16th January was the date arranged for placing the ship in full commission; whether her commissioning has been again postponed and, if so, for what reason; and when it is expected that the vessel will be ready to join the Fleet?

The contract date for completion was the 31st March last. The reply to the second, third, and fourth-parts of the question is in the affirmative, the postponement being due to certain defects in connection with the turret gun machinery, which are being rectified. The vessel is expected to be ready to join the Fleet in three weeks' time.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his decision with regard to the exclusion of naval traders from His Majesty's ships is final, and, if so, is he aware that, owing to the exclusion of these traders, distress exists amongst the persons directly and indirectly affected thereby; whether, since the exclusion of these traders, the canteens are selling uniform clothing; will he explain why officers are allowed to have their own tradesmen visit them on board ship and the men refused a similar advantage; and will he cause notices to be posted up in the ships informing the men that orders previously given to naval traders can be completed ashore?

This is a matter to which great care and attention have been given, and the decision to exclude traders from His Majesty's ships must be regarded as final. There has been no representation from the Fleet that any inconvenience has been experienced in consequence of these orders, and presumably the only effect, so far as purchases are concerned, is that the men may have transferred their custom to other traders. Any inconvenience or, as the hon. Gentleman puts it, distress, which may have been caused will therefore only be of a temporary nature until matters have adjusted themselves to the new conditions. No tailor-made clothing is allowed to be sold in the canteens, and the articles of clothing which may be sold there are strictly limited. The object of the excluding Order is to put an end to the touting for orders, which has been a feature of the past. If there is any reason to apprehend that the visits of tradesmen to officers are accompanied by anything in the nature of touting for orders, then we shall certainly consider the further extension of the excluding Order.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that what he is pleased to call "touting" has been continued for years as part of the Admiralty machinery, and that the abrupt cessation of this touting, as he calls it, is causing great distress amongst women engaged in naval trading?

Both the statements of the hon. Gentleman are incorrect. It may have been the practice, but it was no part of the Admiralty regime, and there was no abrupt cessation of the practice. We gave due notice, and the men have leave at present to go ashore. We thought it better that the bluejackets should go ashore for their purchases.

asked whether seamen under fifty-five years of age, if called upon by the Admiralty for service, by proclamation or otherwise, are entitled to receive their travelling expenses, and, on re-entry, the same good conduct pay as when pensioned; whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that men having the rating of chief carpenter's mate were called up last year to attend the naval manœuvres for a month, that they were not given travelling expenses, and did not receive their badge money, being only paid 4s. 9d. as chief carpenter's mate, when they should have received 5s.; and whether he will cause inquiries to be made into the matter so that the men in question may be duly compensated?

Good conduct pay is payable to all pensioners when called out for service in the Fleet, but not when voluntarily serving, as at manœuvres, unless specially sanctioned. On the occasion of the last manœuvres certain pensioner artisan ratings were asked to volunteer for temporary service under conditions which were stated at the time, and did not include good conduct pay. The question of allowing good conduct pay on future occasions is under consideration. Travelling expenses are repayable under the Regulations to all seamen when called out for service in the Fleet or attendance at naval manœuvres. I am not aware of the particular cases referred to by the hon. Gentleman in which travelling expenses were disallowed, but if details are furnished I will cause the matter to be investigated.

asked how many men have been discharged from the Royal dockyards since 1st December, 1912; how many of these men had served five, seven, ten, and over ten years, respectively; what steps, if any, were taken to absorb the redundant men in any vacancies existing in other departments; and how many men were by this means: saved from discharge from the Works Department?

The number of men discharged from the Royal dockyards as being in excess of requirements—i.e.,excluding the discharges on account of age, invaliding, or at the men's own request —during the period referred to is 167. This figure includes forty-six men who were entered temporarily for a short period for specific work. Of those discharged, sixteen had served for five years, five for seven years, one for ten years, and eleven for over ten years. Inquiries were made locally at the time of the discharges to ascertain which of the redundant men could be absorbed in other departments, and twelve men were by this means saved from discharge from the Works Department. In addition to the twelve transferred, three men discharged have since been re-entered in other departments, and six are now being employed as casual workmen. I may remind the hon. Gentleman that as regards the discharges in question from the Devon-port Works Department, he has already been informed that these discharges were rendered necessary by the completion of the works in hand. I may also tell him, further, that as an act of consideration, we continued the engagement of a number of these men over the Christmas season.

Are we to understand that these long service men will be taken on again as soon as vacancies occur?

We discharged 167 men out of about 50,000 because there was not work. For those who have got over seven years' service there is a gratuity. As soon as there is work for them they shall certainly be considered. I do not know whether the hon. Member would keep them when there is no work to do.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman contemplates a new and revised edition of the pamphlet entitled "How to Join the Royal Navy," and, if so, when that edition will be available for distribution?

A new edition is now in the press, and a supply is expected very shortly.

asked whether the First Lord of the Admiralty has selected a number of sites round the coast for hydroplane stations; and whether he is contemplaing any large extension of the Naval Wing of the Royal Flying Corps?

asked if several stations and garages for aeroplanes and dirigibles are to be established on the East Coast of England to accommodate the aircraft which may be employed by the Admiralty in the North Sea?

The establishment of aircraft bases on the East and South Coasts, as well as the general development of the Naval Wing of the Royal Flying Corps, are both questions that are receiving the close attention that their importance demands.

Will another statement be made as to these stations?

I am afraid I cannot go beyond the answer I have given today.

asked whether the Department has received any protest from the naval shipwrights relative to the new conditions of pay and service; whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that these new conditions deprive naval shipwrights of certain advantages promised to them on joining unless they are prepared to give up the right of reverting to the dockyards after completing twelve years' service; whether he is aware that a boy entering the Navy as a shipwright from the dockyard under the new agreement is practically in a worse position than a man joining from outside, seeing that on entering the outside man immediately becomes a petty officer, while it takes a naval apprentice from the age of eighteen one or two years in the yard and twelve months in the Navy as leading seaman, making two or three years altogether, before he can get first-class petty officer rating; and whether, in the circumstances, he will reconsider the recent changes in the naval shipwright ratings so as to bring them more into line with the traditions governing service in His Majesty's Navy?

No protest has been received since the issue of the circular letter giving the conditions in detail, of which I sent the hon. Gentleman a copy, though I received a telegram alluding to one aspect of the question on the day of the issue of the circular. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative. As regards the third part, a man who enters the Navy as shipwright from outside will do so as petty officer. He must be over twenty-one. Boys who are trained for shipwrights in the dockyards enter between fourteen and sixteen, would be rated leading seaman between nineteen and twenty-one, and petty officer between twenty and twenty-two. The age for attaining petty officer rating averages the same in each case. The answer to the fourth part is in the negative. The changes made are very favourable to the men who accept them, as I have already explained. In fact, I may say that the amount spent on the shipwrights is proportionately greater than on any other class.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the alternative offered by the Admiralty to the shipwrights is to their disadvantage?

No; I do not know that I could accept that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept from me a statement showing the incorrectness of his reply?

The reply I gave the hon. Gentleman on the 13th of this month was a detailed statement of the new pay, and I repeat that the changes made were very favourable to the men, and certainly of the money spent, this class, having regard to its numbers, received a greater proportion than any other class.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the shipwrights regard the arrangement as very unfair, and that they were forced to sign a paper damaging to their future prospects, and, as they consider, against their original contract?

They were asked to choose the new scale and give up the right to go back to the yard or stick to the old scale. We have taken care to secure that if they do go back to the yard the establishment shall be open to them, over and above the existing establishment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that only about forty-six out of 600 shipwrights have been got to sign the paper, and will the right hon. Gentleman kindly deal with that question? I have carefully looked into the matter, and it looks as if it was really unfair to the men who are asked to sign against their original contract?

My expectation is that the circular letter which was issued will deal with all these matters of detail, and will remove all those misapprehensions. I certainly give an undertaking to look into the matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman allow a certain specified time to elapse before captains of vessels force the men to sign the paper?

Captains of vessels do not force the men at any time. It is at the men's option to sign or not to sign.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will say how many European and native doctors, respectively, are employed in the British Colonies of West Africa?

The numbers (including those employed in the British Protectorates) but exclusive of doctors not in the Government service, as to whose numbers I have no information, are respectively 214 and 7.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to say how many cadres of Horse and Field Artillery are to be abolished, and how many batteries of either are to be absorbed?

Having regard to the fact that it is extremely difficult to form a cadre once it has been abolished, will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to guarantee that this House shall have an opportunity to discuss the matter before Parliament rises?

I do not think it reasonable to suggest that the rearrangement of the Artillery rendered necessary by the return of the Artillery from South Africa, should be fully discussed here before the whole of the rearrangements are yet completed. I will give the fullest information on the point, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman may be assured that no steps will be taken which will in any way weaken the Artillery. The steps taken will be with a view to increasing the striking force.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that to abolish the cadres is to decrease the efficiency of the Artillery?

That is another question.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is yet in a position to say by what date approximately a complete complement of Cavalry remounts will be available for the 15th Hussars?

I am not yet in a position to give the required information.

How does the right hon. Gentleman propose to mobilise in a few weeks if he cannot mount one regiment?

The Army as a whole and this regiment in particular will be ready for mobilisation at once.

Without any horses?

No; with horses, and with a greater complement of horses than the Cavalry has ever had before in the history of the country.

May I ask how it is he is obliged to take the Mounted Infantry cobs from one regiment to another?

It is very inconvenient to discuss this by question and answer, but it would have been a most ridiculous and extravagant proceeding to attempt to get rid of all these excellent horses, for the purposes of war as well as of peace, all at once in a hurry, just because we had a regiment returning home; the arrange- ment that has been made by the military authorities has been the best possible, and an excellent arrangement.

What are the Mounted Infantry doing now?

I have mentioned the Mounted Infantry are being reduced in number and that the cobs available are excellent cobs, and I can imagine no commander in the field would be otherwise than delighted to have them at his disposal.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether it has been decided that the majority of future orders to be given to independent aeroplane constructors shall be for machines to the B design; and, if so, whether, in fairness to the industry, he will take steps to announce this decision?

The reply is in the negative.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether it is intended that any civilian aviator accepting a commission in the Reserve of the Royal Flying Corps can in no case be given a commission in that section of the Regular Forces comprised in the Military Wing; whether the nearest approach to permanent service is that he may volunteer for four years' continuous service with the Military Wing and remain during that period in the Reserve; and, if so, whether, in view of the pledges given, he will explain why these civilian aviators are so treated?

An officer of the Special Reserve Royal Flying Corps can compete for a commission in the Regular Forces subject to the usual conditions. If he is not a candidate for the Regular Army, his term of service in the Royal Flying Corps is four years, subject to extension.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the motor vehicles, said to be capable of transporting the squadrons of the Royal Flying Corps by road, are designed to transport aeroplanes or merely the personnel of the squadrons; and, if so, whether there are sufficient wagons to act as transport for more than a single squadron on a war footing?

The answer to the first part of the question is that the motor vehicles mentioned are designed to carry aeroplanes, equipment, and stores, as well as personnel. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative. Arrangements have already been completed for transport for the Military Wing of the Royal Flying Corps on mobilisation.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of these motor transport vehicles are now ready?

I could not give the numbers without notice.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether the fact that a number of different officers of the Royal Flying Corps habitually fly the same machine is due to the exercise of the discretion of the officer commanding the Military Wing and of the officers commanding squadrons, or whether it is due chiefly to the scarcity of machines; whether in time of war it would be necessary to have a number of aeroplanes for each officer's use instead of a number of officers for each aeroplane; and whether he has considered the advisability of establishing an aeroplane remount department?

I cannot at present add anything to previous answers on this subject.

asked whether, of the thirteen monoplanes classed as being in flying order, in spite of possible alterations which may be considered necessary, eleven of them, namely, six Deperdussins, four Flanders, and one Bleriot, have ever been flown by Regular officers of the Royal Flying Corps, and, if so, how many of these have been so flown; whether, under these circumstances, there are at the moment more than fifteen aeroplanes, including monoplanes and biplanes, belonging to the Military Wing of the Royal Flying Corps immediately available for use in time of war; and whether this number is adequate?

Of the thirteen monoplanes mentioned only three have not been flown by officers of the Royal Flying Corps, namely, two Howard Flanders and one Martin Handasyde. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the danger caused to other parts of the Metropolitan area by the concentration of large bodies of the police force for the protection of individuals occupying this building and the additional work thereby thrown on members of the force, he will authorise, if applied for, the services of such units of the Territorial Force as may volunteer for picket or sentry duty in the precincts of Westminster?

The reply is in the negative.

asked what are the names of the officers now serving in AA and BB batteries of the Royal Horse Artillery?

At the present time Captain Curling and Lieutenant Lanyon are serving with AA battery, which is ordered home from India; and Major Monkhouse and Lieutenants Ward and Gifford with BB battery, which is ordered home from South Africa.

What has happened to other officers who were serving in this regiment?

If the hon. Gentleman will put down a question I will tell him, as I have not got the whole destinations in my head at the moment.

How is it there are only two officers?

I have been asked a definite question as to the names of the officers in two batteries, and I have given a reply.

How is it there are not more?

I would prefer a specific question on that point.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman should really take the trouble to put down the question. If he thinks it is of sufficient importance to ask it is of sufficient importance to be put down.

asked whether the cost of providing horse rugs for the horses of their units is still borne by the officers of the mounted units of the Regular Army; whether there is any immediate prospect of the Army Council removing this charge from the officers; and how many mounted units have adopted the suggestion of the Army Council that horses standing in stables during the winter do not require rugs at all?

The question of making an allowance for the provision of horse rugs is now under consideration.

How long do the War Office and Army Council intend to consider this question, which I asked a year ago, and to which I got the same answer?

We shall consider it until we have come to a conclusion. We shall come to a conclusion very soon in a sense which the hon. Gentleman will probably be pleased to see.

In considering this question, will the right hon. Gentleman make investigation to discover if there is any other Army in the world in which the officers have to do this instead of the State?

The question is not so simple as the Noble Lord seems to think. I will send him a memorandum about it.

Will the question be settled before next year's Estimates?

I hope so.

asked 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 though there is nothing in the Regulations to prevent a regiment from making an arrangement with a military outfitter regarding the supply of uniform and equipment, still little can be done in this respect when the supply required is only for one regiment, the War Office will undertake to make a general arrangement with some firm or firms to enable officers of all branches of the Service to purchase uniform, and equipment at a more reasonable rate than they can at present; and, if not, what steps the War Office propose to take in the matter?

Some few years ago an experiment was tried of supplying officers on appointment with lists of tailors willing to provide uniforms at certain cash prices; the experiment did not meet with success or with general approval in this House, and the practice was discontinued. The question of finding some other means of enabling officers to purchase uniforms at a less cost than that now prevailing is being considered.

Will that be considered in time for inclusion in next year's Estimates?

I shall certainly keep on considering this difficult question. If the hon. and gallant Member can make me any suggestion I shall be glad to have it. Every proposal on this question has been found not to work well.

Will the War Office try something to cheapen the cost of the uniforms of officers?

It is not very easy to arrive at that desirable result, and if, as I say, the hon. Gentleman has any suggestion I would be glad to have it.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that his predecessor gave a promise to the men at the Royal Arsenal that there should not be a reduction of piece rates unless an improved method of manufacture was introduced and that, notwithstanding this promise, young men of between eighteen and twenty years of age have been employed in the metal case factory, Royal Laboratory Department, Woolwich, at rates 33 per cent, less than the rates paid to the men; and if he will arrange that all work be paid at the same rate whether performed by old or new hands?

I cannot agree that boys should be paid the full wages of men; and I cannot admit that the promise referred to contemplated anything of the kind.

May I ask whether the promise mentioned in the question was actually given?

Yes, the promise was given, but it does not cover this case, but the case of the men only.

Has that promise been carried out?

Yes, it will be observed.

Can the hon. Gentleman say why it is there should be any alteration made seeing that it is piece rates that are under consideration?

I explained before that this work was very suitable for boys. We have often been pressed by hon. Members from the benches below the Gangway to retain boys, and having suitable work we thought it better to retain them.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can indicate the nature of the taxation it is proposed to introduce to take the place of the present heavy taxes on food which the Government proposes to remove?

I am at present unable to make any statement with regard to the Budget proposals for the coming year.

May I ask whether the House is to understand that notwithstanding statements that have been made, the present taxes on comestibles used on the breakfast-table are still to be continued?

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the fact that a tax of a penny in the pound on the capital value of land would result in a sufficient sum to meet all the revenue at present derived from food taxes and give a handsome surplus, and will he keep that fact before him?

We cannot settle the Budget in a question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the grounds on which the Commissioners of Inland Revenue claim payment of Increment Value Duty on fortuitous windfalls and other profits when there has been no rise in the value of the site since 30th April, 1909?

Where there has been a fortuitous windfall, and a price has been obtained in excess of the market value, the Commissioners of Inland Revenue can claim Increment Value Duty under Sub-section (2) of Section 2 of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, as interpreted by the recent judgment of the High Court.

Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that on the first Budget debates any statement was made by a Member of the Government that it was intended to tax fortuitous windfalls and other profits of the builder's business?

That question has been asked and answered repeatedly, and has been the subject of debate repeatedly, and I have no doubt it will be again, and we cannot discuss it by question and answer.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think it will encourage building enterprise?

asked whether the increase in the number of cottages and small houses in the year 1910–11, namely, 10,651, is the lowest on record for the past fifteen years?

In the year 1910–11, which was a year of revised assessments, the increase in the number of cottages and small houses exempted from Inhabited House Duty was less than in the preceding fifteen years, but the figures are not the lowest on record, those for the last year of new assessment prior to the period selected by the hon. Member having shown a decrease. As I have previously stated, the figures for 1911–12 so far as they are available point to an increase for that year as large as in any of the four years prior to 1910–11, so that there is no evidence from these statistics of any general decline in the erection of cottages and small houses.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in view of the misapprehension as to the Government's intentions with regard to free choice of doctors by insured persons, he will, in order to prevent a similar misunderstanding in future, give some kind of official form to the pledge given by him on the 2nd January to deal with any grievances which may arise as regards the working of medical benefit?

The answer is in the negative.

asked which, if any, insurance committees have permitted doctors to join the panel and limit, by their agreements, the number of insured persons to be treated by them to those whom they agree to treat without having others assigned to them?

The conditions under which insured persons in each area may be allotted to the doctors on the panel are laid down in Section 15 (2) (d) of the National Insurance Act, and the Regulations of the Commissioners. It is within the discretion of the insurance committee, subject to those conditions, to make such arrangements as will limit the number of insured persons for whose treatment any particular doctor will be responsible. I am not aware which insurance committee have made arrangements with doctors on the panel granting such limitations.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire whether any insurance committees have made these arrangements? Will he also notify insurance committees that they can act in this way?

I think my answer will be quite sufficient notification. I have no knowledge that they are in ignorance on the subject.

asked whether local insurance committees are entitled to fix a limit of five days in which insured persons desirous of making their own arrangements for medical benefit have to apply for the form, thus excluding a large number of persons who had not received the medical benefit ticket, which in certain cases it has been stated must be brought when application is made, from availing themselves of the provisions of Section 16 (3) of the Act?

I am not aware of any case in 'which such a time limit has been fixed. If the hon. Member has any case in mind, and will supply me with the particulars, I will make inquiries.

I will send the right hon. Gentleman particulars.

asked where Messrs. Morgan and Dimmock practised as doctors prior to their appointment under the National Insurance Act?

Dr. Morgan practised in London. Dr. Dimmock has held important hospital appointments in London and the provinces.

Has either of these doctors practised in the district in which he now resides?

In the districts in which they have now taken up residence? I do not think that either of them has.

asked (1) upon what terms Messrs. Morgan and Dimmock have been engaged as doctors for the purpose of the National Insurance Act to work in the Isle of Ely, and whether they have been assured that they shall have a monopoly of practice among insured persons in that district; and (2) whether the insurance committee having jurisdiction in the Isle of Ely have allowed insured persons to make their own arrangements with doctors not on the panel in that district, or is the right of free choice of doctor limited to Messrs. Morgan and Dimmock?

The Insurance Commissioners, upon the application of the Isle of Ely insurance committee, and after inquiry, have satisfied themselves that the number of doctors on the list in two districts was not such as to secure an adequate medical service, and have, therefore, authorised the committee to make special arrangements for the attendance of insured persons in these districts. Under these arrangements one doctor in Chatteris and three in Wisbech have undertaken complete responsibility for all the insured persons in these districts.

Has the panel system been superseded in this district? If so, was it by the insurance committee or by the Insurance Commissioners?

The ordinary system—the list system, if I may so describe it—under Section 15 of the Act, has been suspended, and a scheme suggested by the insurance committee has been accepted by the Commissioners.

Has the panel been closed? If so, for how long? Is it true that it is closed for two years?

I cannot tell for how long the special arrangements are entered into.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question on the Paper—

Will the hon. Gentleman look at the clock?

I was asking for an answer to the question on the Paper. I submit that it has not been answered.

The hon. Gentleman has already asked four supplementary questions.

I have not yet got the answer.

I really think that that is enough, considering the number of other Members who have questions on the Paper.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the interests of insured persons, he will arrange that the names of all doctors willing to serve on the panels shall be placed on the public lists immediately on receipt of the knowledge of their willingness to serve?

Names of additional doctors joining the panels are kept at the offices of the insurance committees. Revised lists are published by the insurance committees at convenient intervals, but it would not be practicable for each committee to print and distribute a new list upon the receipt of each additional name.

Would it not be possible, without much trouble, to put the names of the additional doctors down in handwriting?

The list goes round to many hundreds of places, and it would be difficult to arrange that.

asked if the Insurance Commissioners have received complaints from doctors on the panels that an excessive and unnecessary amount of their time is taken up in filling up forms and returns and doing other clerical work to the detriment of their useful medical work; and if steps will be taken to diminish this clerical work and arrange for it to be carried out in some other manner?

The Insurance Commissioners are anxious to receive any suggestions from doctors on the panel for simplification or improvement of the methods of keeping records and returns which their experience may show to be desirable and inquiries are being made by officials of the Commission from doctors on the panel in various districts as to their experience of work under the Act. Such suggestions as are being obtained, either by inquiry or correspondence, are receiving the careful consideration of the Commissioners.

Why was this work which was formerly carried out by club secretaries ever put upon the doctors at all?

The work of keeping the records of illnesses when the Bill was being passed through this House was regarded by both sides as being a most important piece of work.

Is there any necessity for the doctors to take three copies of the record of illnesses?

I think there is, as at present advised, but that may be a point for consideration.

asked the Prime Minister how long a period is likely to elapse before the National Health Insurance Commissioners will be in a position as regards departmental matters to act independently and to come to decisions on their own initiative and without oversight by and on instructions from Ministers?

The relation of the Commissioners to Ministers is as explained more than once by my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and defined in a Treasury minute of which I will send a copy to the hon. Gentleman. It will be impossible for the Commissioners or any other Government Department at any time to act without oversight or instructions of Ministers, who are responsible to Parliament for the expenditure by those Departments of money which Parliament votes for the purpose.

Are not the Insurance Commissioners, who have this matter particularly under their care, more conversant than Ministers with what is most for the benefit of the insured persons?

The hon. Member must know that the constitutional responsibility of Ministers means the responsibility of Parliament. If you allowed anybody else to act instead of Ministers, you would infringe the authority of Parliament.

asked what are the numbers of insured persons under the National Insurance Act who are members of approved societies and deposit contributors, respectively, and the proportion in each case of single and married women?

The approximate numbers of members of approved societies and of deposit contributors are 13 ¼ millions and 480,000, respectively. The numbers of men and women are about 10 millions and 3 ¾ millions, respectively. The numbers of single and married women are not available at present, as the distinction is not required for immediate administrative purposes.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take the necessary steps to see if it is possible to obtain the numbers both of single and married women?

I think as soon as I have the full particulars I shall be able to get at that.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know that the doctors themselves attribute importance to this information as regard the two different sections?

I do not understand that.

May I put it this way—

Will the hon. Member put a question on the Paper.

asked (1) whether the bricklayers and joiners employed at the Vine Works, Orr's Zinc White Paint Works, Widnes, are insured under Part II. of the National Insurance Act; and, if not, whether the Umpire has given any decisions in these cases; what is the name of the firm or company employ- ing these men; and have any letters or communications passed between the Board of Trade and the employers concerning the inclusion or exclusion of these men; and (2) whether the boilermakers, blacksmiths, bricklayers, and stonemasons employed at Deacon's Works, Widnes, are insured under Part II. of the National Insurance Act; and, if not, whether the Umpire has given decisions in the cases of these men and what is the name of the firm or company employing these men; and have any letters or communications passed between the Board of Trade and the employers concerning the inclusion or exclusion of these men?

I am making inquiries into the points raised in the hon. Member's two questions, and will communicate the results to him as soon as they are available.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether any communications have taken place between the employers and the Board of Trade already, and what are the names of the employers?

I cannot answer that without further inquiry.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will give facilities for persons insured under the National Insurance Act to return their cards through the post without a stamp, as is the case in Income Tax matters?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to questions on this subject asked by the hon. Member for Tewkesbury on 31st October last and by the hon. Member for Stratford-on-Avon on 6th December last.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture (1) what is the average yield per acre in the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, the United States, Canada, and any other country having official Returns, of hay, cereal corn, and root crops, respectively; and (2) what is the average number of horses, bovine cattle, sheep, and pigs per acre in the United Kingdom; and what is the average number of the same live stock in France, Germany, Holland, Belgium, the United States, Canada, and any other countries making official Returns?

The information for which the hon. Member asks in these two questions is contained in Part V. of the Board's Agricultural Statistics, which is now in the press. I shall be pleased to send him an advance copy.

asked whether any county councils, other than the Cheshire County Council, have constituted small holdings on the colony system; whether this system is developing; and whether the Board, through the Small Holdings Commissioners, advise its adoption by county councils wherever practicable?

Several county councils besides Cheshire have acquired large estates for the purpose of small holdings and may therefore be said to have established small holdings on the colony system. The Board are certainly in favour of the purchase of land in large blocks whenever possible, and county councils are usually of the same opinion. But, owing to the fact that applicants for small holdings are often not in a position to move from their present homes, it is not possible to satisfy the whole of the demand by means of the establishment of colonies.

Could the right hon. Gentleman give in a written answer the county councils other than the Cheshire County Council which have adopted the system?

Yes. If the hon. Gentleman will put down an unstarred question I will arrange to have full information circulated with the Votes.

asked whether, in consequence of the bad harvest season and floods of last year, any applications have, to the knowledge of the Board, been made to county councils by statutory small holders for remissions of rent; and whether, in conformity with the practice of private landowners in the locality, such applications have been acceded to in any and, if any, which counties, and at whose expense have such remissions been made?

No official communications on the subject have been made to the Board, but I understand that in some cases county councils have received applications from small holders for remission of rents in consequence of the losses caused by floods last year. If a remission is made, the deficiency falls upon the small holdings account of the council, and, if that account cannot meet the deficiency, the Board may pay one-half of the loss in accordance with the conditions laid down in the Treasury Minute of the 31st December, 1907, a copy of which I shall be pleased to send to the hon. Member.

Have any applications been made for half to be paid out of the small holdings accounts of the Board?

I do not think that any applications have actually been received, but I understand that one or two are coming forward.

Is not the difficulty of the small holders more due to high rents and rates?

No. The difficulty is entirely due to a flood which destroyed the whole of their produce.

asked whether it is intended to remove on 1st February the restrictions that have been imposed on the importation of hay and straw from Ireland; and, if so, what steps will be taken to prevent hay and straw coming from districts still affected by disease?

An Order has been issued, and will come into operation tomorrow, removing the restrictions at present imposed upon the importation of Irish hay and straw into Great Britain. I have no reason to believe that any part of Ireland is now affected with foot-and-mouth disease.

In view of the very grave danger that, at such a short distance of time, infection may still be lurking in hay and straw from infected districts, would it not be far wiser to put off the removal of restrictions for a considerably longer period?

The last confirmed case in Ireland was on 2nd November. I am advised that there is no risk of the conveyance of infection by hay and straw, considering the long lapse of time, and particularly the fact that no hay or straw is coming forward or is likely to come forward from that particular district.

Will this arrangement include hay and straw which has been used for packing abroad, and subsequently transhipped from Ireland to this country?

There are no restrictions on hay and straw used for packing, as the hon. Member, having been a Member of the Departmental Committee which considered the matter, knows.

asked whether any measure for the redistribution of electoral areas in the forthcoming Session of Parliament will be consequent to and depending on the Government of Ireland Bill being made operative?

I can add nothing to the replies given by my right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister, on this subject on the 16th and 20th instant.

Does the so-called right of Ireland to have a hundred Members terminate when the Government of Ireland Bill becomes a Statute?

That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

asked whether, in view of the fact that a Bill may be introduced next Session which, if placed on the Statute Book, may add to the roll of electors over eleven million names, it is the intention of the Government in any franchise, registration, or electoral reform which they may introduce to deal with the expenses of registration and election now thrown on candidates for a seat in Parliament, and which will be increased with any addition to the present electorate?

I must refer the hon. Member to the reply given on this subject by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to a question on 23rd January by the hon. Member for East Edinburgh.

asked whether the promise of facilities for a Women Suffrage Bill next Session will be given to a Bill for adult female suffrage, or to a Bill for female suffrage on the Norwegian system, or to a Bill to enfranchise female house holders?

As was explained on Monday, this is a matter for the supporters of the movement to decide amongst themselves.

asked the hon. Member for St. George' s-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether his Department is responsible for the unsightly condition of the Charing Cross approach to the Admiralty Arch; and, if not, whether he can take steps to induce the responsible authorities speedily to amend what is at present a disfigurement of one of the finest sites in London?

This is a matter outside the jurisdiction of the Office of Works, and one for the London County Council to deal with.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether, with a view to diminishing the existing congestion of London streets, his Department has at any time discussed with the London County Council the possibility of allowing underground tramways to be made under thoroughfares and land within the jurisdiction of the Office of Works in such a manner as not to interfere with the amenities of any street or path beneath whose surface such tramways might be run?