asked the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the remarks made recently by the Commanding Officer of the Honourable Artillery Company as to the inadequate facilities provided for gun practice; whether in any case during the past year any Territorial regiment has been unable to carry out the prescribed amount of practice to render the men thoroughly efficient owing to the overcrowded conditions of the ranges placed at their disposal; and if he will state what amount is proposed to be expended this year in increasing the accommodation for Territorial training?

In no case during the past year has any unit of the Territorial Artillery been unable to carry out the prescribed amount of gun practice. Full use was made of the ranges which were not in any way congested. While the range at Ad Fines is closed this year for drainage and other purposes, arrangements are being made for the hire of a range in South Wales. My attention, however, has just been drawn to a case at Braunton, in North Devon, where, on a range which has been used by Territorial Artillery for the last two years, the Saunton Golf Club has constructed two holes in such a way as to make it impossible for firing to be carried out while play is in progress. The club has been asked to permit firing over the holes during two periods of only five days each in the year, but has, I am informed, not yet seen its way to agree to this request. There was a certain amount of opposition from other local interests, but this has been withdrawn.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the commanding officer referred to in the question stated that the Artillery had obsolete arms and was allowed to practice only once in two years? Is that statement correct or not?

The first part does not arise out of this question. With regard to the second part, I have given the answer that full use was made of the ranges, that they were not congested, and that there has been no case during the past year of any unit of the Territorial Artillery being unable to carry out its gun practice. I regret the particular case mentioned in the second part of the question, and I hope the House will support me in any necessary measures that may be taken, not in regard to this particular golf club, but in similar cases, to prevent the training of the troops being interfered with for reasons of this kind.

Are we to understand that every Territorial Horse and Artillery Battery practised during the past year?

I cannot go further than report the answer furnished to me by my responsible authorities. If there is a particular case in regard to which that reply is not correct, I shall be glad if the hon. and gallant Member will tell me of it.

When the right hon. Gentleman says that the batteries carried out the prescribed practice, is it not a fact that batteries are only required to practice every alternate year?

That is a matter for another question. I was asked whether they carried out the amount prescribed.

asked the Secretary of State for War, whether, in view of the First Lord's offer to the Leader of the Opposition to name two hon. Gentlemen to verify certain facts as to the shortage of men in the Navy, he will extend the same invitation to the right hon. Gentlemen with respect to military aeroplanes?

I have already in formed the House of the number of aeroplanes in the possession of the Army. The question of whether this number is adequate has already been discussed, and there will be further opportunities of debate on this point later on this year.

asked the Prime Minister whether any French company approached either the Admiralty or the War Office, or both, with a view to establishing a factory in this country, using British material and British labour, for the manufacture of aeroplanes and engines for His Majesty's Government?

The Prime Minister has asked me to answer this question. The answer is in the affirmative. The matter is under consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the statement of Captain von Pustau, the German naval aeronautical expert, to the effect that any of the German airships could sail to Ireland to-morrow without a stop, crossing Portsmouth and Plymouth on the way, and return by way of the Orkneys and Edinburgh; and that a fleet of airships under cover of night might not even have been sighted until after it had accomplished the task set it in time of war; and what steps the Government propose to take to guard against this danger?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. The statements in question have been noticed, but do not appear to call for any special remark.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say why the Government allow our dockyards and shipyard towns to be exposed to a bombardment from the air without any power of retaliation?

No; not in answer to a question, Sir.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman believe in retaliation then?

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state the number of Territorial Force Associations which have passed resolutions in favour of some form of compulsory training being introduced for Home defence?

Resolutions have been received from nine out of the ninety-four associations.

If the majority of the associations decide in favour of compulsion, will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Prime Minister to make it a non-party question?

That is a hypothetical question. As to its being imminent, nine out of ninety-four is not very near a majority.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many of the other associations are only waiting for a few months before deciding to follow on the same lines?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will reconsider the question of extending the grant of increased allowances for the removal of furniture, etc., on change of quarters, now given to married quartermasters, to married officers holding similar rank to the quartermasters?

As I informed the hon. and gallant Gentleman on the 2nd instant, the matter has been fully considered, and I am not prepared to reopen the question at the present time.

Is there any reason why one class of lieutenant should have the allowance and not another?

I will consult the Secretary of State about the matter.

asked if any extra protection has been made to our magazines in our Eastern defences, in view of the possibility of high explosives being dropped on them from above in time of war?

It is not considered desirable to state what precautions are being taken to defend our magazines from attack of any kind.

asked what number of men the Territorial Forces were below established strength on 1st April, 1913?

I am not yet in a position to give any figure for the date mentioned as the returns are not yet complete. I will send a statement to the hon. and gallant Gentleman as soon as the Return is received.

asked if circular memoranda are still sent out by the Quartermaster-General to Indian cantonments ordering the provision for our soldiers there of young and attractive women?

No, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the British Portland Cement Manufacturers and the Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers have any contract with the War Office; if so, whether he is aware that the wages paid to labourers by these firms in the cement trade on the Thames and Medway are from 1½d. to 2½d. less than the wages current in the district, that they pay no recognised rate for overtime or Sunday work, and employ a good deal of cheap boy labour in the machine shops; and whether he will make inquiry into the matter in order to secure strict observance of the Fair-Wages Clause?

The second company mentioned holds a War Office contract. If the hon. Member will be good enough to furnish me with details as to the particular class of workpeople in question and the rates claimed as recog- nised or prevailing for such employment, including payments for overtime and Sunday work, I shall be happy to have inquiries made.

Do any of the Government contracts necessitate the excessive amount of Sunday labour now done on the Thames and the Medway?

I could not answer that without notice.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the valuation of agricultural land, it is the practice to take into consideration, for the purpose of arriving at gross and total values, the value of growing crops and tenant rights?

The custom in regard to growing crops and tenant right varies so widely in different parts of the country that it is not possible to give a general answer to the hon. Baronet's question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that valuers are in the habit of declining to say whether or not these matters are included? How is it possible for any owner to check the valuation unless he is told distinctly whether or not this is the case?

As the hon. Baronet knows, the question is being considered before the Referee, and I do not wish to say anything to prejudice the matter one way or the other.

All I am asking is whether the right hon. Gentleman will give instructions to the valuers to answer the question: Whether these matters are included or excluded?

I will consider that.

If the practice varies in different counties, how is the right hon. Gentleman going to have a uniform valuation?

That depends entirely upon the custom, which varies in different counties, as the hon. Gentleman knows. It is quite impossible to have a uniform valuation where the elements are entirely different in the different counties.

asked whether, in valuations of agricultural land on which glass houses, trade fixtures, or buildings the property of the tenant stand, it is the practice to take into consideration the value of such glass houses, trade fixtures, and buildings for the purpose of arriving at gross and total values?

It is the practice of the Commissioners in arriving at the gross and total value of land to take account of such of the subjects mentioned by the hon. Baronet as would under a conveyance of the fee simple of the land pass, without express mention, to a purchaser.

Under these circumstances is it not possible that Increment Value Duty may be levied on property which does not belong to the man who has to pay?

I could not answer that in reply to a question.

But if you include the tenant's glasshouses, surely that is so?

The hon. Baronet is putting a matter of argument which I could not possibly answer in reply to a question.

asked how many objections have been made against assessments for Undeveloped Land Duty and Increment Value Duty, respectively; and how many appeals have been lodged against such assessments?

I am unable to state the number of objections received, which have in a large number of cases been disposed of without the necessity for an appeal. One thousand two hundred and seventy-two appeals have been lodged against Undeveloped Land Duty assessments and 123 against Increment Value Duty assessments.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether for each claim for Increment Value Duty substantiated 500 occasional valuations are being made, entailing trouble and expense to the State and each owner of land and house property affected; and, if so, whether he will consider the desirability of introducing legislation to remedy this state of affairs?

The proportion indicated by the hon. Member in the first part of the question is approximately correct, and he will doubtless realise that the smallness of the proportion is in a great measure due to the short interval of time which has elapsed since 30th April, 1909. I do not propose to introduce amending legislation.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the site value on the occasion has no relation whatever to the value of the site?

That is a matter to which the hon. Gentleman has devoted columns of the OFFICIAL REPORT, and I have devoted just as many columns in replying to him. I do not think I could answer him further in reply to a question.

asked the Prime Minister if he can now say whether the Irish Land Purchase Bill will he introduced before Whitsuntide?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to make any statement on the subject.

asked the Prime Minister (1) if any communications have passed in recent years between the French and British Governments with regard to the construction of the Channel Tunnel; if the French Government still view the project favourably; and (2) if the question of the construction of the Channel Tunnel has been before the Imperial Defence Committee recently; and if the matter is still under consideration?

No such communications as are referred to have passed in recent years. I am not in possession of the views of the French Government on this subject. No detailed examination of the Channel Tunnel project has been carried out by the Committee of Imperial Defence since February, 1907.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether our Government is favourable?

No, Sir, I cannot say either "Yes" or "No."

asked whether the Temperance (Scotland) Bill will be reintroduced before Whitsuntide?

I can make no statement on the subject at present.

asked the Prime Minister if it is intended to reintroduce the Industrial and Provident Societies (Amendment) Bill this Session with a view to securing its early passage into law; and, if so, can he state the probable date of such reintroduction?

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury hopes to rentroduce this Bill at an early date.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a recent speech of the Finance Member of the Legislative Council of India on the subject of Imperial preference; and whether this indicates any change in the views of His Majesty's Government on this subject?

I have seen the report in the Press of the speech referred to. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative.

May it be taken, then, that the speech substantially represents the views of His Majesty's Government?

No, Sir; I have answered the second part of the question in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether he intends to create an efficient Second Chamber within the lifetime of the present Parliament; and whether, with a view to securing a lasting constitutional settlement, he will revive the conference between the parties, so that the remodelling of the Constitution may be something more than a partisan measure?

I have stated repeatedly that it is our hope and intention to submit our proposals on this subject to the present Parliament. In regard to the second part of the question I cannot say more than that I should be very glad if we could proceed in the matter on lines of general agreement.

Arising out of that answer, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not, in reply to a question on the Paper, give me an absolute promise that he would introduce the proposals in this Session?

No, Sir; no!

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department the number of prosecutions and the amount of fines inflicted upon tradesmen in London for non-compliance with the provisions of the Shops Act by not closing their shops on the day appointed in the several districts?

The London County Council inform me that up to 31st December last, in the county of London outside the City, proceedings had been instituted against shopkeepers in seventy-two cases for failure to comply with the requirement of the Act as to closing for a weekly half-holiday. Convictions were obtained in fifty-two cases, and fines amounting in all to £38 19s. 6d. were imposed. The Act came into force on 1st May last. No proceedings were taken in the City during that period.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Estimate of £630,000 for the expenses of the Land Valuation Office for the year 1913–14 includes expenses of printing and of all the legal and other expenses of appeals to Referees and the Courts and incidental thereto; and, if not, what is the estimated cost of these, and under which Vote do they come?

The Estimate of £630,080 includes the expenses of appeals to Referees and to the Courts and any expenses incidental thereto, the necessary provision being made under Sub-heads DD and EE. The cost of printing falls upon the Vote for Stationery and Printing (Class II., 24). The amount attributable to the Land Valuation Office cannot be exactly stated, but it is estimated to be about £15,000.

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether His Majesty's Government propose to pay in full, as between client and solicitor, the costs of Mr. Gibson Bowles incurred in the case of Bowles v. the Bank of England, in which judgment was given in his favour with costs; and, if not, on what ground a distinction is made in this respect between the Bank of England and Mr. Bowles; and (2) whether in the case of Bowles v. the Bank of England, in which judgment was given against the bank with costs, His Majesty's Government have paid the costs of the Bank; whether they have paid these costs in full as between client and solicitor, or whether they have paid only the taxed costs, and what the amount thereof was; and on what ground His Majesty's Government have paid the costs of the Bank of England in defending their unlawful practice in levying Income Tax by deduction without the authority of an Act of Parliament?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this and the following question. Payment was made to Mr. Bowles in accordance with the order of Court, which directed, as is usual, that the defendants (the Bank of England) should pay to the plaintiff his costs of the action, such costs to be taxed by the Taxing Master. The costs of the Bank of England, amounting to £238 5s. 4d., have been paid by the Crown in full as between client and solicitor, because under the Income Tax Acts Governors of the Bank are constituted Commissioners for executing the Acts, and as such they were acting on behalf of the Crown in defending a long-established practice.

Seeing that Mr. Bowles was held to be right, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that he might not be left out of pocket?

Mr. Bowles has got exactly the same treatment as every successful litigant—he has got his taxed costs.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Commissioners of Inland Revenue have recently made a demand on the trustees of the Finchley Charities for payment of Undeveloped Land Duty amounting to £48 14s., assessed on land belong to the charities, the greater part of which was let in allotments in pursuance of the scheme under which the trust was regulated and whereby the trustees were not permitted to use the land for any other purpose except with the consent of the Charity Commissioners; and whether, the income of the charities being chiefly devoted to the maintenance of almshouses and for payment of pensions and gifts of coal to the aged poor, such payments would have to be diminished pro rata in order to provide funds for the tax in question?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I understand that the land is not occupied and used by the charity in question, and accordingly does not fall within the scope of the exemption contained in Section 37 of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910. With regard to the second part of the question. I have no information as to the manner in which the funds of the charity are applied.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what cash was received on account of Sinking Fund since the first issue of Guaranteed Land Stock under the Act of 1891, from all sources, and from each head of the land purchase account, including tenants' annuities, sales of, holdings, guaranteed deposits exchange or surrender of stock, county percentage or payment in lieu thereof, dividends and interests on investments, or any other source; what cash was paid for the £588,351 of Guaranteed Land Stock (1891) and the £292,889 of Guaranteed Stock (1903) held on the 31st March, 1912, on account of Sinking Fund; why was such stock under the Act of 1903 purchased on account of Sinking Fund, and why was the whole of the sums available not invested in the Guaranteed Land Stock of 1891, in view of the fact that the price of that stock is considerably below its redeemable par value; what is the total amount of 1891 stock cancelled, and why is the whole amount of such stock purchased on account of Sinking Fund not cancelled as soon as purchased; must the 5s. per cent. of the advances payable under the Act of 1891, known as the county percentage, be applied since the Land Law Act, 1896, Section 27, towards repayment of capital, and whether the payment to the Sinking Fund is now at the rate of 1¼ per cent. of the nominal amount of the capital, under the combined effect of Section 27 and Sections 1, 4, and 15 of the Act of 1891; are these provisions as to Sinking Fund still operative; whether the stock issued before and after the Act of 1896 was accepted by the vendors and dealt with by the public on the faith thereof; are all the issues of the stock now consolidated, and is any and what distinction made by the Treasury as to the rate and application of Sinking Fund in respect of the several issues of such stock; what sum in cash has been applied in redeeming the £2,164,028 of Guaranteed Two and Three-quarter per Cent. Land Stock, stated to have been redeemed on the 31st March, 1912, and to what extent was such redemption effected by purchases thereof under par, if so, at what price, and how otherwise was such redemption effected: whether under the Act of 1891, Sections 1 and 4, payments to the Sinking Fund have been made out of the whole land purchase account or, in case of deficiency, out of the Guarantee Fund and the Consolidated Fund; whether deficiencies in the tenants' annuities, as originally provided for, owing to the alteration in the mode of payment, under Section 25 of the Act of 1896, has to be made good out of all these funds; whether the National Debt Commissioners are bound to redeem at par outstanding stock issued under the Act of 1891, so soon as the Sinking Fund held by them, either in cash or securities, equals the par value of stock held by the public; and whether for this purpose stock held by various Government Departments is on the same footing, and if the stock has in any event to be redeemed under the Act of 1891, Section 1, Sub-section (2), at or before forty-nine years from the time of the issue of such stock?

With the permission of the hon. and learned Member, I will circulate a detailed answer with the Votes. [See Written. Answers this date.]

Has the right hon. Gentleman observed that the Treasury have stopped nearly half a million of money from the Irish Taxation Account in the last few years, and that, while we have no means whatsoever of discussing matters with the Treasury, they seem to exercise a paramount right to make the deduction without question?

I cannot accept the fact stated by the hon. Member.

asked when the right hon. Gentleman will be in a position to announce that the Estates Commissioners have come into possession of the lands of Bordwell, Owens estate, Queen's County; whether he is aware that negotiations for the acquisition of this property have been going on for the past three years, and that an inspector has been down in the locality making arrangements for the distribution of the land; will he say who the inspector having charge of the scheme is; and whether the local representatives of the people will be consulted before the scheme for distribution is approved by the Commissioners?

The Estates Commissioners have had a preliminary inspection made of the lands and have intimated to the owner the price they are prepared to advance if formal proceedings for sale are instituted under the Land Purchase Acts, and title is shown in accordance with their requirements. Until this has been done, and they acquire the lands the Commissioners will not be in a position to consider the question of their allotment.

asked whether the necessary steps are yet near completion for the acquirement of the untenanted lands of Clonfin; and when the distribution of these lands will take place?

The Estates Commissioners hope to issue their offer for the purchase of these lands at an early date.

asked whether the scheme for the untenanted lands of Rhyne, county Longford, the property of Mr. J. W. Bond, D.L., has yet been prepared; and, if not, when it is expected to be ready?

The reply to the first paragraph of the question is in the negative. The owner has accepted the Estates Commissioners' proposal to purchase these lands, and they hope to be in a position to take over possession of them and distribute them during the present year.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to Increment Value Duty, what is the number of transactions of which particulars have been presented under Section 4 (2) of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, up to the 31st March, 1913; what is the number of assessments which have been made upon these transactions; and what is the amount of duty assessed thereon?

The answer to the first part of the question is 497,148; to the second, 1,706; and to the third, £31,393.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that, as a result of the amalgamation of the Customs and Excise services somewhere about twenty late senior Excise clerks are suffering a loss of £60 a year or thereabouts, and stand to lose sums varying from £780 to about £500 during the remainder of their service, in spite of the fact that they are still allowed to proceed to £400 a year; and whether there is any provision under the amalgamation scheme to ensure that these officers will be saved this loss?

It is impracticable to enter into calculations based on the assumption that, if amalgamation had not taken place, particular individuals would have received one step in promotion on the old classification by this time, and a further step at a particular time in the future. As to the position of these officers I must refer the hon. Member to the answer of my right hon. Friend, the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, on the 27th ultimo, in reply to his previous question on this subject.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider some of these facts if I send them to him?

Certainly.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that 5 per cent. is the statutory rate of interest charged to an officer commuting his pension under the Commutation Act, he will state the rate of interest at which the money of savings bank depositors is lent to the Treasury for this purpose under the sixth and eighth Sections of the Pensions Commutation Act, 1871?

The amounts paid by the National Debt Commissioners for the commutation of pensions are repaid to them by terminable annuities calculated at 3½ per cent. per annum, the minimum rate authorised by Section 8 of the Pensions Commutation Act, 1871.