To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether the cost of the removal of the old railings and the supply of new ones around the powder magazine in the Phœnix Park has been done at the expense of the War Office, or is to be a charge on the Vote for the Irish Board of Works; what is the cost of the work; what was the necessity for the expense; at whose request was the expense incurred; is it the fact that the only use to which the estate lately added to the Phœnix Park has been put is for War Office manœuvres; and when will the general public be allowed to participate in the enjoyment of the area added to the park. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) As regards the railings the work has been done at the expense of the War Office, and the cost is estimated to reach the sum of £560. The old wooden fence was worn out and required replacement by a better and unclimable fence. As regards the new estate, I am informed that only three acres of a total 200 acres have been let by the Board of Works to the War Office to facilitate bridging practice by the troops. The rest of the land, with some insignificant exception, is let on grazing tenancies or under agreements existing at the time of purchase. One of the tenants allows the War Office to use his land for signalling and a little horse training. The property was acquired to prevent its being built over and to preserve the amenities of the Phœnix Park. There is no intention at present to throw it open to the public, and a large expenditure would be necessary before doing so.

To ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he is aware that a firm of contractors named Matcham and Company are doing work at the Plymouth Post Office, and are only paying the bricklayers' labourers 4d. and 4½d. per hour instead of the recognised standard rate, viz., 5d.; and whether he intends taking any action in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) I have made careful inquiries, and find there is no foundation for the allegation in the Question.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the firm of Lester and Perkins, who have the contract for fitting up the steamship "Rohilla" for conveying troops to India, have sub-let a part of the work to Mr. G. Peacock, of Wandsworth Road, and that he is paying from 2½d. to 3½d. per hour less than the standard rate to his workmen; whether this work was sub-let with his sanction and approval; and whether he will take steps to enforce the terms of the Fair Wages Clause in connection with this sub-contract. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The work referred to was such as could scarcely be considered as involving a sub-letting of a portion of the contract, but the matter has been inquired into, and my information is that the rate paid to the workmen works out in excess of the standard rate accepted as current in the district.

To ask the Postmaster-General what are the respective units and cost of living at Welshpool, Newtown, Montgomery, Llanidloes, Lllanfyllin, and Machynlleth; and whether their classification is the same as that of other towns in Welsh counties. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The information asked for as regards Welshpool, Newtown, and Machynlleth, so far as it is available, will be found on Pages 62, 64, and 65 of the Parliamentary Paper, Post Office (Changes in Wages, etc.), issued on the 11th instant. Montgomery, Llanidloes, and Llanfyllin are sub-offices, and their classification has not yet been definitely decided. The principles governing the new classification are explained on Pages 54 et seq. of the Parliamentary Paper referred to, and the list on Pages 57 to 65 of the same paper contains the classification of all head offices throughout the kingdom.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether the Post Office Department obliges post office assistants to work on Sunday without remuneration; and, if so, when will the practice be discontinued and these officials placed on the same footing as those in other grades of the service. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) Assistants are not required to undertake Sunday duty without remuneration. Such duty is taken into account in fixing the weekly wages.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that Mr. C. Clarke, employed in the Statistical Office, Customs, was informed by Treasury letter, dated 4th June, 1907, that no application for his exceptional promotion would be considered until he had withdrawn certain charges which he had made; what was the date on which Mr. Clarke formally withdrew his charges, and how long after that date was he nominated for exceptional promotion; whether Mr. Clarke was induced to send in his withdrawal by promises made to him by his superior officers that if he took that course his name would be submitted for nomination for exceptional promotion; what was the nature of the charges made by Mr. Clarke and against whom were they directed; whether he is aware that Mr. Clarke has been unable to take up the superior post to which he has been nominated owing to the refusal of the Civil Service Commissioners to grant him the necessary certificate, and will he say how many times have they refused and on what grounds; whether it is intended to continue to present Mr. Clarke to the Commissioners until he succeeds in obtaining their certificate; to what class of officers in the Statistical Office does Mr. Clarke belong; is it the practice to select a number of specially meritorious men in that class for the discharge of superior duties, such as checking, for which certain monetary allowances are granted, and have all previous promotions from the class to superior appointments been made exclusively from the ranks of these selected men; and whether, in view of the distrust in the system of selection for promotion shared by all classes in the Statistical Office, he will cause an independent investigation to be made into the circumstances of the nomination of Mr. Clarke for promotion over the heads of officers who are his seniors and of whom a number are specially entrusted with duties recognised by grants of monetary allowances as being officially superior to those performed by Mr. Clarke. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The officer referred to is one of 121 assistant clerks who signed a Memorial addressed to the Treasury in which an unfounded allegation of breach of faith as regards promotion was made against His Majesty's Government. It is not the case that an intimation was made to this officer individually as is suggested, but a general reply was sent to the memorialists to the effect stated in the Question. Mr. Clarke withdrew his signature to the Memorial on 13th September last, but it is not true that he was induced to do so on any promise whatever. He was nominated for the position of port clerk on 3rd December following, and has been examined twice by the Civil Service Commissioners, but on both occasions has failed to qualify. It is the ordinary practice of the Civil Service Commissioners to allow two trials and it is not proposed to allow him a third. The monetary (i.e., checking) allowances in the Statistical Office are assigned in strict order of seniority to those assistant clerks who are certified to be efficient and of good character, but the possession of a checking allowance does not imply that the holder is of such exceptional merit as will justify the Board in recommending him for promotion to a superior appointment. No clerk with an allowance was qualified for such advancement when Mr. Clarke was nominated.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, seeing that the old system of recruiting the Colonial Audit Branch by nomination without any actual educational test examination has now broken down, he will explain why Volunteers for that branch were not heretofore called for, except in one or two cases, from amongst the trained auditors of the main establishment of the Exchequer and Audit Department.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether two chief examiners and a senior clerk in the Exchequer and Audit Department now serving in London, who owe their present superior position to the fact that they were members of the Old Colonial Audit Branch, are liable to further periods of service abroad, and, if so, will he explain why the Comptroller and Auditor-General has recently threatened to bring outsiders into the Department if Volunteers are not forthcoming for foreign service. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) These Questions relate to matters that, under Section 9 of 29 and 30 Vict., c. 39, are entirely within the discretion and authority of the Comptroller and Auditor General, and I have no power of interference.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether under Article 14 of the Code of Regulations for public elementary schools in England, the phrase—The number of scholars under the instruction of any one teacher—means the number of scholars on the class register who may be under the instruction of one teacher, or the number ordinarily present under instruction; and, if the latter, is this regarded as in effect a material enlargement of the average attendance for which under Article 12 a teacher is counted as sufficient. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) The number of scholars under this instruction of any one teacher means in this article the greatest number of scholars actually taught by that teacher at any one time. Article 12 supplies, subject to Article 10, a subordinate test of the sufficiency of the staff of a school or department as a whole. It is obviously necessary, in view of the difference in size of the various classes in a school, that some elasticity should be allowed in the number of children who may be taught by each individual teacher. Article 14 lays down the limits of that elasticity, and inasmuch as it imposes a limit upon the size of each class it is not an extension but a curtailment of the latitude allowed by Article 12, which is applicable only to the staff of the school as a whole.

To ask the President of the Board of Education if His Majesty's inspector of schools for the district has reported concerning the dismissal of several teachers at Aberdare who are married women, some of whom are nearing the pensionable age, and will, therefore, be unable to complete the maximum service entitling to a pension; whether he has been informed that some of the vacancies thus created are to be filled by the appointment of teachers who are related to a member of the Aberdare Education Committee; and if so, whether he proposes to take any action in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) I have not received a Report upon this Question; but, in view of Section 35 of the Elementary Education Act, 1870, it is within the power of a local education authority to terminate the engagements of teachers in their employment, and the Act gives the Board no power to intervene. I have no information as to the last part of the Question.

To ask the President of the Board of Education if he can state for what reason the Board of Education have abandoned the footnote to Article 10 in the Code of 1906, indicating that, after July, 1909, the Board may require the employment of a certain proportion of college-trained teachers upon the staff of the public elementary schools; and whether, in view of the number of qualified teachers unable to get appointments and the number of unqualified teachers at present employed, the Board will take steps to re-issue this notice, and to announce some definite provision to secure the reform indicated. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) The withdrawal of the footnote was due mainly to the fact that a deputation from the National Union of Teachers represented to my predecessor that the new provision would, in their view, inflict grave hardship on a large number of their colleagues unless all teachers certificated prior to 1908 were to be regarded as "trained," irrespective of whether or not they had in fact "completed a course of training in a training college."

To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what number of coastguards was mobilised for the Fleet during the recent manœuvres; if all the coastguard stations on the coasts of Great Britain and Ireland were fully manned at war strength during the manœuvres; and, if not, in what part of the coast was there a deficiency. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) 1,300 coastguard men were embarked for manœuvres, being about half the number that would embark in war time. The war complement of the coastguard was maintained complete during the manœuvres, the men embarking for manœuvres being taken only from those stations that would be vacated in war time.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state what amount of funds, if any, the Independent Order of Foresters, whose head office is at Toronto, has deposited with his Board as security for their liabilities in this country; and if he will take steps to prevent the withdrawal of such deposit from this country, lest, in the event of any of their member proceeding against them for a recovery of premiums paid, they should have no realisable assets here. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The Independent Older of Foresters (Toronto) in November, 1892, made the deposit of £20,000 with the Postmaster-General of the Supreme Court of Judicature, as required by Section 3 of the Life Assurance Companies Act, 1870. This deposit was withdrawn on 29th December, 1904, pursuant to an Order of Court dated 5th December, 1904. Under the provisions of Section 35 (1) of the Companies Act, 1907, this company is required to file with the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies the names and addresses of some one or more persons resident in the United Kingdom authorised to accept on behalf of the company service of process.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether an application has been received by the Estates Commissioners from Michael Felly, of Cragh, Tullaghan, County Leitrim, for reinstatement in the farm from which he has been evicted on the Folliott estate; and, if so, what steps, if any, they purpose taking to have him reinstated. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Commissioners proposed to allot Michael Feely, a holding on the estate of Miss Dickson, but they now find that they cannot acquire this land compulsorily. The applicant's name has been retained on the Commissioners' list, and it is intended to provide him with a farm if the Commissioners should acquire any untenanted land in the neighbourhood.

To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will say what is the number and percentage of the men composing the crews of the Altantic, Channel, Home (Nore Division), and Mediterranean Fleets respectively, who, during the past twelve months have been tried by court martial for offences against discipline. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The number of men tried by court martial n the various fleets is given in a quarterly Return, a copy of the latest issue of which I have sent to the hon. Member It is not clear from the Question on what basis the hon. Member desires the percentage calculation to be made, but on any basis they would involve an amount of labour out of proportion to any advantage which it would seem could be gained from the result.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the postmistress in charge of the Creech Grange Office near Ware-ham, has to work excessive hours, week days 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., Sundays 7 a.m. to 12 noon, without relief, unless she pays for help out of her own stipend; whether he is aware that such stipend is £24 a year, out of which she has also to provide lamp, oil, coal, and blotting paper for use in the office; if so, will steps be taken to staff and equip this office as the need requires, and to see that adequate wages are paid such staff. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The circumstances are approximately as stated, and, although the attendances are not quite so arduous as they may appear, I am inquiring into the question of reducing them. The remuneration will probably be somewhat increased as soon as the new scale of pay is brought in force. The sub-postmistress is remunerated on the usual basis applicable to small post offices maintained in connection with a private business, and of course she does not depend for her livelihood on her emoluments from Post Office work. The amount of business transacted falls far below the standard which would justify me in maintaining and staffing a salaried post office.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he is aware that in Sligo Post Office officers who perform a considerable amount of night duty, from 1.45 a.m. to 9 a.m., are required to return on overtime, on Mondays, from 2.30 p.m. to 4 p.m.; is he aware that for a considerable time past, even when the overtime attendance in this office was abnormal, the officers performing the night attendance were exempted from this overtime; and will he give instructions that this practice will be again introduced, or that a suffi- cient period for rest be given to officers on completion of their duty at 9 a.m. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I regret there should be any necessity for working overtime at Sligo, but it arises from the difficulty experienced at this time of the year, more especially in the North of Ireland, in providing substitutes for officers absent on leave. In the case of the particular officers in question the duty commences at 3.45 a.m., 1.45 a.m. on Mondays only, so that they enjoy an interval for rest of eleven and three-quarter hours after 4 p.m. No better alternative is feasible. The duties will be restored to their usual limits as soon as possible.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether any attempt was made by the Post Office to utilise the London County Council Steamboat Service for the purpose of the conveyance of mails, in accordance with Clause 36 of the Thames River Steamboat Service Act, 1904. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The steamboats on the Thames have not been used for the conveyance of mails, as it did not at any time appear that an improvement in the service could have been affected by their use.

To ask the Postmaster-General what was the number of cases of small, pox and the number of deaths, if any, from small-pox among the employees of the Post Office in each of the ten years ending with 1907. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. The following statement gives the number of cases in each year:—

To ask the Postmaster-General if his attention has been drawn to the renewed breakdown of the Shetland cable between Aberdeen and Lerwick which ceased working over a week ago; if he is aware that this cable was laid down by a private company over forty years ago; and whether, seeing that these constant breakdowns are inflicting losses on the herring-fishing industry in the North of Scotland, the business transactions of which are necessarily largely carried on through cablegrams and which is at its height at the present moment, he will see to the immediate repair of this cable, and also take steps to provide him with a little delay as possible for a new cable with a larger number of wires than the existing one. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) My attention has been drawn to this unfortunate occurrence. The cable was laid by the Post Office twenty-three years ago. A ship has been sent to repair the cable, and in the meantime I am glad to say that my engineers have been able to arrange for more rapid working on the remaining cable. The question of laying a new cable or of establishing a wireless service is under consideration.

To ask the Postmaster-General if his attention has been called to a notice posted on the new Post Office works at Bristol by the contractors to the Government, stating that any workman inquiring of another workman engaged on the works if he belonged to a trade organisation would be subject to summary dismissal; and whether he will ask the contractors to so modify their notice to their workmen as to bring it within the spirit of the fair wage and condition clause which they, the contractors, signed before receiving the contract. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) The hon. Member will find my Answer to a similar Question yesterday to the Postmaster-General which is circulated with Votes this morning.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that Willesden Education Committee have introduced an area scheme against the wishes of the parents, and also a scheme which imposes hardships upon the scholars, as, under the said scheme, children are being removed from the schools in which they have received all their education, and are being sent to other schools, in some instances further from their homes; and will steps be taken to see that the scheme is vetoed and the wishes of the parents recognised. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) It is understood that the Willesden Local Education Authority desire to assign a particular area to each of their council schools and to confine or give a preference in admission to each school to the children resident in that area. The arguments advanced by the local education authority in support of this arrangement are by no means trivial, and the Board agree with them in thinking that it offers substantial advantages from the point of view of organisation and would, on the whole and in the long run, be quite as convenient to the parents as to the local education authority. On general grounds, therefore, the Board are reluctant to interfere with the discretion of the local education authority. On the other hand, the introduction of such an arrangement may give rise to personal grievances in some cases, and although the local education authority are willing to make large exceptions to their rules and to allow the elder children (and the younger of the same family as elder children) to continue in attendance at the schools which they now attend, it is possible that still further provision should be made to meet the views of parents who object to their children's removal to a new school. The whole question is receiving careful consideration.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether he will state the names of the training colleges which fulfil the conditions set forth in Sections 7 (g), 7 (h), and 8 of the Training College Regulations, 1908; and also the names of those colleges which are known as certified training colleges, under Chapter 11 of the same Regulations. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) I will send the hon. Member a list of the training colleges recognised by the Board. As I have already stated, the Board have no reason to believe that any of those colleges fail to comply with the Regulations. No occasion has yet arisen for certifying a training college as efficient but not as recognised for grants.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the objections of farmers in North Wales to the double dipping of sheep enforced by the recent Sheep-scab Order have been considered; and whether he is in a position to make a statement with reference to any modifications which can be made in the said Order in response to the representations made by those concerned. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The reply to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. The Board are prepared to alter the dates of dipping provided by the Sheep-dipping Order to meet, so far as it is possible, local convenience; but, in view of the prevalence of sheep-scab in North Wales, they are unable to relax the requirement for two dippings until a very considerable diminution in the amount of disease has been effected.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether his attention has been directed to the case of Mr. David Nicholls, against whom an eviction warrant was made by a bench of magistrates sitting at Tonbridge on the 20th instant, upon the application of Nicholls' landlord, the reason alleged being that Nicholls has applied for land under the Small Holdings Act; and whether he proposes taking any action in the matter; and, if so, what. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The attention of the President of the Board has been drawn to the case to which my hon. friend refers. It is a matter of very great regret to him that he has no power to take any action in the matter.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, to whom the inspection and approval of stallions and mares in connection with the horse-breeding scheme is to be entrusted; and if any stops have yet been taken to organise the proposal. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The proposals put forward have not been approved, and it would be therefore premature for me to enter into the details of the scheme.

To ask the Lord-Advocate if his attention has been called to the fact that sheriffs and sheriffs' substitute in Scotland frequently act as ordinary directors of insurance companies, for which they receive remuneration, and that these companies are often engaged in litigation in the Law Courts, in many cases as defenders against workmen's compensation claims; and if, in future appointments to Sheriffships, he will make it a condition that active work in connection with trade shall not be entered on. (Answered by Mr. Thomas Shaw.) My attention has not been called to this, and there is no information to support the suggestion that sheriffs and sheriffs' substitute frequently act as described. The disqualifications and disabilities of sheriffs and sheriffs' substitute are set forth in Section 21 of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act, 1907, and to this I cannot doubt that they conform. As to the sheriffs' substitute, they are prohibited from inter alia engaging in "legal banking, or other private practice or business," and this would seem to include the directorships referred to. If any cases were found to exist in which directorships are hold by sheriffs which have produced, or are likely to produce, indirect relations with litigants or a conflict with judicial duty it would be for consideration whether the section mentioned should not be amended. As to future appointments there is, of course, no power to impose conditions not warranted by the law as it stands.

To ask the First Commissioner of Works why the building operations for the extension of the British Museum in Montague Place have been suspended for nearly a year, and when they are likely to be renewed. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) The delay has arisen in connection with the settlement of internal details and the preparation of the drawings for the superstructure. It is anticipated that the works will be recommenced early in October.

To ask the Paymaster-General if he can state by what authority a form has been issued to officers on retired pay demanding full particulars of their incomes from all sources, private and official, to be forwarded without delay to the Paymaster-General. (Answered by Mr. Causton.) Under the Finance Acts the officers of His Majesty's Paymaster-General are assessors of income-tax and act with regard to the collection of income-tax under the authority of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he proposes to make special arrangements to assist the pension officers in the East End of London, where large numbers of claims for pensions from naturalised foreigners are to be expected, and where the double difficulty will arise of proving not only the births of these claimants in foreign countries, but also the dates of their arrival in this country and of their naturalisation. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The arrangements necessary for meeting the requirements of the district referred to will be duly considered at the proper time.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners wrote to an evicted tenant named Edward Gillmore, of Brockagh, Dromard, County Sligo, on 17th January last, informing him that he had been noted as a person whom the Commissioners deemed suitable to be provided with a new holding in place of the holding, from which he had been evicted on the estate of Mrs. Ramsay, Ballintogher, County Sligo, and which is occupied by a planter; and can he state what steps have been taken to provide Gillmore with a holding, and with what result. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners wrote the letter of 17th January referred to in the Question, but they have since further considered the matter and have decided to take no action. The applicant lives with his mother on a holding of about twelve acres.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will ascertain from the Estates Commissioners whether they have at any time been in communication with Mr. Sanders, of Charleville, County Cork, agent to the Cooper estate in Knocklong, County Limerick, over the reinstatement to their evicted farms of John McGrath and Thomas Barry on the same estate, or are the Estate Commissioners aware that William Hatte, the alleged tenant on the farms of McGrath and Barry, is not even a planter nor a farmer, as he does not reside on the lands but in Blackrock, County Dublin, and has never farmed an acre of land, but has been chief clerk in Mr. Sanders' office, and latterly a partner in the firm; are the Estates Commissioners aware, or can they say, that the farms have been worked by a caretaker; and will the Estates Commissioners resume with Mr. Sanders negotiations for the reinstatement of those tenants. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have inquired into the cases of the evicted tenants in question, and intend to provide holdings for them if possible. The Commissioners have ascertained that the evicted holdings are occupied by Mr. Hatte, who lives at Blackrock, Dublin, and is partner of Mr. Sanders, the agent of the estate. Mr. Hatte has signed an agreement to purchase the holdings. The Commissioners will consider all the circumstances before making an advance to him. The case of the evicted tenants has been placed in the hands of an inspector with the object of procuring their restoration or of providing other holdings for them.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland can he ascertain from the Estates Commissioners whether negotiations have been carried on for sale to the tenants on the part of Lord Massey on his Galbally property in the County Limerick, Mr. Lowe and his tenants around Galbally in Lowestown, Earl Dunraven and his tenants around Croom, County Limerick, Mr. Duncan and his tenants around Ballylander, County Limerick and, if the rural tenants have signed the agreements for purchase, will the Estates Commissioners endeavour to effect arrangements for sale and purchase between those several landlords and their town tenants; and will the Estates Commissioners open negotations for sale and purchase as between landlord and town tenants on the estate of Lord Clonmel around Down, the representatives of the Reptons around Cappamore, the Earl of Limerick around Bruff, Mr. Brazier in Kilmallock, and the agent of the Erasmus Smith property in Pallasgrean, all in County Limerick. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) Proceedings have been instituted before the Estates Commissioners for the sale of the estates of Lord Massey, Mr. Lowe, the Earl of Clonmel, the Earl of Limerick, and Erasmus Smith, but no proceedings are pending before them in connection with the Earl of Dunraven's Croom property or the estates of Mr. Duncan, Mr. Repton, or Mr. Brazier. The Commissioners will consider any application which may be made to them in reference to any of these estates, but cannot undertake themselves to open negotiations between the landlords and tenants.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state whether the Lord-Lieutenant has yet considered the petition of the urban council of Fermoy respecting their right to hold meetings of the council in the Court-house, conferred by the Fermoy Act of 1808 and renewed by the Towns Improvement Act of 1854, and if this right, exercised and enjoyed for over 100 years, will be confirmed; whether he is aware that, while the memorial of the urban council was under the consideration of the Lord-Lieutenant, Mr. Carroll, Crown Solicitor, who had been duly notified thereof, proceeded to peremptorily demand from the council the surrender of their right, under threat of eviction; if he is cognisant of the fact that Mr. Carroll, who held the position of legal adviser to the urban council, was deprived of that office a month ago by the council acting within their discretion; and whether he will take any steps to restrain the action of the Crown Solicitor in this matter. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The petition referred to is still under the consideration of the Lord-Lieutenant, who will cause a reply to be sent to the Fermoy Urban District Council as soon as possible. As the hon. Member has already been informed, Mr. Carroll, is not acting in the matter as Crown Solicitor, but as the private solicitor of the High Sheriff, in whose custody and control the Courthouse is vested by statute. I am not aware that Mr. Carroll has been deprived of the office of legal adviser to the urban council. The Government cannot restrain Mr. Carroll from acting as solicitor to the High Sheriff.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the character of the salary and prospects of promotion of assistant teachers in Irish National Schools, provision will be made in the new grant for giving those teachers greater consideration for their services; what are the proposals of the Government for the future payment of those men; and is it proposed to enable them to enter the second grade. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I would refer the hon. Member to the revised Supplementary Estimate for Public Education, Ireland, which is now before the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for War what is the character of the estate of about 890 acres of foreshore at Shoeburyness, recently purchased by the War Office for £5,500; whether it is part of the Maplin Sands; what is its position; whether, and, if so, to what extent, it is covered at high water; what use, if any, has been made of it by the vendors; and whether the War Office has acquired it in order to acquire the right of firing over it, or for what, if any, other purpose. (Answered, by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) This estate is part of the Maplin Sands and lies almost three miles north-east of Shoeburyness. It is entirely covered at high water. So far as the War Department is aware, no use of this foreshore was made by the vendors, but the War Department fired over it and have acquired it for the purpose of firing over it.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that uniforms for the Territorial Reserve Forces are being made in the homes of employees in the East End of London, and that some of the contractors are working their employees in their factories seven days per week and whether, in view of the Fair Wages Resolution of this House, it is his intention to take any action in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) I am not aware of the matters alluded to in the Question. The attention of the associations has been drawn to the Fair Wages Clause, but, as I have already informed the hon. Member, it is not practicable to interfere with their discretion.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether any officer has been held responsible for the incompetency in connection with the Bermuda engineer stores; and, if so, what was his name and what notice has been taken of his incompetency. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) I must refer my hon. friend to the evidence taken before the Public Accounts Committee which will shortly be in the hands of hon. Members.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a Mr. Thomas Davies, whilst wearing the Territorial uniform, disturbed a public meeting at Brecon on 12th June, 1908, assisted by others also attired in uniform, this meeting being addressed by a Mr. Pattison, of Ruskin College, Oxford, and not by a lady, as the right hon. Gentleman has been informed; whether he is aware that a second meeting held on 16th June, with the Territorials absent, was conducted without any disturbance; whether he is aware that a third meeting was held on 19th June, 1908, and addressed by a Mrs. Keating Hill, of Cardiff, was again interrupted by Territorials led on by Mr. Thomas Davies as before-mentioned, and, although this gentleman was allowed five minutes, during which he addressed the meeting, he afterwards continued to upset the meeting; and what action does he intend to take in the matter. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) I have no information regarding the meetings of 12th and 16th June, and I am awaiting a full Report. The meeting of 19th June was dealt with in my previous Answer to the hon. Member, to which I have nothing to add.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the operations of keeping up-to-date the record of rights involved in the last resettlement of the temporarily settled districts of Orissa is being conducted without causing any vexatious interference to the parties concerned. (Answered by Mr. Buchanan.) It is presumed that the Question has reference to the operations set on foot by the Bengal Government for revising, as the first step in the scheme for their annual maintenance, the village records prepared some twelve years ago at the last land revenue settlement of Orissa. According to the latest Reports the operations are proceeding satisfactorily. The local Government has made the procedure as simple and expeditious as possible, and has confined the work to what is absolutely necessary for bringing the records up-to-date. The settlement officer reports that the revision is welcomed by the ryots and the better class of landlords, as it clears up disputes and gives effect to changes which have occurred since the records were first prepared.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is now able to state when the Report will be issued of the Royal Commission on the Registration of Titles in Scotland which was appointed on 23rd May, 1906.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland in view of the fact that the chief contributor to the rates in the island of Lewis has failed to meet the demand for payment made on him, and seeing that there is no pros- pect of the difficulty being overcome in the near future, will he state whether the local authority has applied to the Local Government Board for Scotland for guidance and assistance; and, if so, will he state the nature of the advice given by the Board. (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) I am informed by the Local Government Board that, in reply to communications from the parishes of Barvas, Lochs, and Uig, they telegraphed that the parish councils should take immediate proceedings to recover the outstanding rates.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland, in view of the statement contained on page 9 of the last Report of the Congested Districts Board, will he state on what ground settlers in Syre have expressed their desire to become tenants instead of purchasers. (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The grounds are financial; but, under the circumstances at Syre, I think the settlers are mistaken in their view.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether the subsistence allowance to surveyors of the Post Office when absent from head-quarters is intended as a source of profit; is he aware that the subsistence allowance of the head surveyor of the Southern District in Ireland, when absent from his head-quarters in Dublin, is not less than 21s. per diem, while his actual expenses do not exceed 50 per cent, of this amount; and, in these circumstances, will he explain why sorting clerks and telegraphists compelled to perform relief duties in country districts are expected to exist on a subsistence of 3s. per diem. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) It is a well-established Treasury principle that subsistence allowance is not intended as a source of profit, but rather as a repayment of necessary additional expenses involved by travelling. Obviously a different scale of expenses is warranted in the case of a high officer such as a surveyor and one occupying the position of a sorting clerk and telegraphist. I have no information as to the sums actually spent by surveyors. Their subsistence allowance is that commonly granted to all officers of similar standing in the Civil Service.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if, in view of the agitation being fomented on both sides of the Atlantic for the unrestricted importation of American cattle without any quarantine regulations, he will issue a leaflet specifying such diseases as are existent there. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The Board do not see their way to adopt my hon. friend's suggestion.

To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether Scotch smokeless coal was used by the Fleet on its last visit to the Forth; if not, will he say what was the freight per ton for bringing the coal used to the Forth; how does the original cost plus this carriage compare with the price of Scotch coal purchased on the spot; and will he use the cheaper coal on future prolonged visits to Scottish waters.

To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, on a survey of the paymaster's branch of the Navy, together with the few prospective retirements on account of age before 1920, and allowing a reasonable margin for deaths and voluntary retirements, there is reason to believe that the seniority of assistant paymasters will by 1920 have increased to a grave extent, thus arresting the equal and steady flow of pro motion which Mr. Childer's Order in Council of 22nd February, 1870, was designed to promote; and what steps the Board intends to take to improve the prospects of these officers. (Answered by Mr. McKenna.) The seniority of assistant paymasters on promotion is at the present time under nine years, which is less than it was a few years ago. It will be time enough to consider what steps should be taken when the necessity arises; but it may be remarked that the twelve officers at the top of the list did not obtain their promotion to paymaster's rank under about sixteen years seniority.

To ask the First Commissioner of Works whether his attention has been called to the defective condition of the paling separating a portion of the Regent's Park from the towing-path of the Regent's Canal, permitting an easy access of children from the park on to the towing-path; and whether, in view of the danger incurred by children thus trespassing on the tow-path, he will direct that the paling in question be kept in proper repair. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) The Regent's Canal Company is responsible for the repair of this fence, and this complaint as to its condition will be brought to the notice of the company.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the forms for claiming a reduction of income-tax from the 1s. rate to the 9d. rate in respect of earned income, there is any reference to the need for claiming such reduction before 30th September of the year for which the tax is charged; and, if not, whether he will consider the desirability of having such a reference inserted. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The necessity for claiming the relief granted by the Finance Act, 1907, within the period prescribed by the Act, is clearly indicated on the forms referred to.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Estates Commissioners will reinstate Gerald Daly, of Ballymahon, county Longford, in a farm from which he was evicted off, the property of W. Molyneux Shouldham, now in the possession of the Commissioners, or about to be purchased by them for the tenants of this estate, and if not, why will they not do so. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The reply is in the negative. The holding in which Gerald Daly claims reinstatement consisted of a house, yard, and out-offices, and was, therefore, not one to which the Land Law Acts applied. The applicant is not eligible for reinstatement under Section 2 (1) (d) of the Act of 1903.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the lands of Clonrellick, near Monte, county Westmeath, have been purchased by the Commissioners; and, if so, when they will be in a position to allot the same to intending purchasers. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners are unable to identify the estate referred to, but if furnished with the name of the owner or late owner they will be in a position to answer the Question.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will inquire if the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland are aware that in the recent local government elections in Ireland the Claremorris National School, which was built by the people of Claremorris, was placed at the disposal of one of the two parties nominating candidates for the county and district councils, and, as the result of the elections showed, placed at the disposal of the party supported by a minority of the electors; whether the Commissioners are aware that the great majority of the parents of the children attending the Claremorris school voted against the candidates to whom the school-house was lent for electioneering purposes; whether the Commissioners are aware that demonstrations were organised in the school by the supporters of the candidates of the minority, which led to regrettable scenes in the streets of Claremorris, culminating on one occasion in a baton charge which the constabulary were compelled to make in the interests of public order and tranquillity; whether any damage to school furniture, windows, maps, slates, or papers was done during these meetings, and, if so, by whom will the expense of making good the damage be borne; whether the Commissioners of Education will say if it is recognised as an essential principle in the management of Irish national schools that schools should not be made available for ore particular religious or political section in any district for the purpose of antagonising the views of another section in the same district; and whether the Commissioners propose to take any steps to prevent in future the use of school buildings for objects in connection with which differences of opinion exist amongst the parents whose children attend such schools. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Commissioners of National Education inform me that, under their rules, no political meeting can be held in any school-house, nor can any political business whatever be transacted therein, and further that school-houses are not permitted to be used for meetings called to support or discuss the claims of candidates for the office of district or county councillor. The Commissioners have no information that the Claremorris National School-house has been used in contravention of the rules in question, but they have directed inquiries to be made into the matter.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the attack made by the police upon the people of Rathdowney on 20th June last; whether he is aware that peaceable inhabitants were assaulted returning from their work, inside their own houses and the houses of their employers, and that amongst those assaulted by the police on the occasion was their own officer. District Inspector Irwin, acting county inspector, who was in coloured clothes; and will he say what steps he proposes taking in connection with this matter. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) As I informed the hon. Member yesterday, a charge of riot is pending against a number of urn in this case, and while the matter is subjudice it is undesirable that I should make any statement as to the details.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any decision has yet been arrived at by the Estates Commissioners on the claims of the three tenants excluded from the purchase on the estate of Sir George Colthurst, viz., Messrs. Forrest, Henderson, and Byrne, on the alleged ground that they were demesne tenants; have the Commissioners received a copy of a valuation made in the case of Mr. Henderson in 1890 by Mr. Richard Martin, valuer for the landlord; was this valuation at the instance of the landlord and on the assumption that Mr. Henderson's holding was a purely agricultural one; is it a fact that Mr. Henderson has been paying rent since 1890 on the basis of Mr. Martin's valuation; and, having regard to the fact that these three tenants and their predecessors have been paying rent for generations for the farms held by them and used by them as agricultural tenancies, will he urge upon the Estates Commissioners the desirability of having them admitted to purchase on the same terms as the other tenants. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have made inquiries into the cases of Messrs. Forrest, Henderson, and Byrne, who occupy, as yearly tenants, certain land in the Ardrum demesne of Sir George Colthurst. The vendor has intimated his intention of renovating the buildings and settling his eldest son in what was for many years the residence of the Colthurst family. He is, therefore, unwilling to sell to these three tenants, and the Commissioners do not propose to refuse to declare the other holdings, some hundreds in number, to be a separate estate because the vendor is unwilling, on what would appear to be reasonable grounds, to sell these three holdings in his demesne to yearly tenants. The Commissioners have received from the hon. Member a copy of the valuation of Mr. Martin referred to, but they have no information as to the circumstances in which it was made.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to complaints of teachers of national schools in Ireland of their treatment by the two chief inspectors of the National Education Board and to the fact that complaints of such ill-treatment are rarely brought before the Commissioners, or, if so brought, are seldom properly represented by the officials in question; and whether, as foreshadowed a year or so since, he will hold an inquiry into the general working of the office, in view of the dissatisfaction therewith that prevails throughout Ireland. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Commissioners of National Education inform me that they have received no complaint from teachers regarding their treatment by the chief inspectors, and the Commissioners have no reason to believe that there is any general dissatisfaction with the manner in which the chief inspectors discharge their duties.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will state the date when the sites of the camps for the military manœuvres in the New Forest were finally settled; whether, in accordance with his promise, instructions have been given to the military authorities to purchase supplies for the troops from persons residing in the immediate localities; and whether any contracts have been entered into with persons not residing in the New Forest previous to the date in question; and, if so, will he give instructions to cause his promise to be carried out. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Holmesley and Ashley Walk Camps were fixed on 17th June, and Rochford Common on 16th July. As regards the rest of the Question there appears to be some misunderstanding. I told my hon. friend on 1st June that I hoped the military would find it possible to obtain butter, eggs, and milk locally, but I gave no promise that all contracts should be placed locally or that I would give instructions to units to make their canteen purchases locally. Some of the contracts for bread and meat, forage and fuel, have been placed locally, Canteen purchases are always left entirely to the units to arrange.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether, seeing that special terms are now given by the Comptroller and Auditor-General to local auditors and assistant auditors in the Crown Colonies and Protectorates who have volunteered to come home from unhealthy climates, he will explain why it was necessary to give these special terms to these officials serving in such climates in addition to granting them the privilege of returning to the United Kingdom.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why the ex-Second Division clerks in the Exchequer and Audit Department, who have voluntarily accepted liability to serve abroad, and some of whom are serving abroad, are not put on the same scale of salary as the nominated members who entered the old Colonial Audit Branch without any actual educational test examination.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain how, seeing that members of the Colonial Audit Branch now serving abroad are offered special terms on coming home on condition that they remain liable for a further term of service abroad, this liability applies in the case of a man who returns on, account of a breakdown in health, and who under the old system would have returned under similar circumstances to a scale of salary only equal to that of the old Second Division clerks.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain, why, seeing that those members of the Colonial Audit Branch who, prior to amalgamation, returned to headquarters after service abroad, either on account of ill-health or unfitness, were placed on a scale of salary similar to that of the old Second Division and remained liable for service abroad, a salary based on an initial salary of £100 per annum is now offered to those who return under similar conditions, while it was denied to those former members of the Second Division who became examiners at the reorganisation in 1905.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why in the Exchequer and Audit Department two bodies of men are employed on identical work with identical periods of service to their credit, the one, however, receiving from £65 to £115 per annum more salary in consequence of service performed on petty accounts abroad for which they were liable on entry and had been already adequately recompensed financially.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why, seeing that members of the Colonial Audit Branch who entered by the system which has now broken down, and who were sent abroad in many cases with insufficient training, are offered with the sanction of the Treasury special terms if they elect to come home and enter the main office, a considerable body of men who entered under the Order in Council of 21st March, 1890, who became examiners at the reorganisation of 1905, and from whose ranks men have been chosen for the examination of accounts in the Colonial Audit Branch, and volunteers have been called for to serve abroad, are compelled to remain for periods varying from twelve to nineteen years at a considerable financial disadvantage as compared with contemporaries in other offices with inferior certificates who have benefited under the Order in Council of December, 1907.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why, seeing that members of the Colonial Audit Branch of the Exchequer and Audit Department who joined that branch before the amalgamation did so for the express purpose of a career abroad, and that the Department now finds great difficulty in filling vacancies which occur in the Colonies and Protectorates, it was considered necessary to offer them exceptional terms as an inducement to return home.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will explain why the six nominated members of the old Colonial Audit Branch of the Exchequer and Audit Department, who were serving at headquarters at the time of the amalgamation on a scale of salary, £70, £5, £100, being unfit for service abroad consequent on lack of training or health, were immediately advanced to a salary of £100 per annum, whereas certain Second Division clerks who were transferred to the Colonial Audit Branch, consequent on the breakdown of the system till then in force, were compelled to continue on the scale that the Colonial Audit Branch men had been receiving. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) I have nothing to add to the previous replies in connection with these points.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will make it a condition of the retention of firms upon the list of contractors to the Admiralty that they will undertake to insert in all contracts for the construction of ships of war for any foreign Power a provision that in the event of such Power desiring to sell any such warship it shall be first offered to His Majesty's Government.

It is not proposed to insist on the insertion of a condition in the terms suggested. As my hon. friend will observe, once a ship built in this country has been delivered to the foreign country to which it belongs, the contractor would have no means of enforcing against such foreign Power the provision which he suggests.

Would not His Majesty's Government be able to enforce it?

The contract would not be between the Government and a foreign Power. It would be between the contractor and a foreign Power, and the contractor would have no power to enforce it.

Might not the Government be given the right under the contract?

I do not think any contract made between a contractor and a foreign Government could give the British Government such a right.

Are the right hon. Gentleman's advisers unable to settle any form of contract which would give such a right?

I do not think it is conceivable that any form of contract between a contractor and a foreign Government would give it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give me an opportunity of submitting such a form of contract?

Might not the right hon. Gentleman insert a clause giving the right of pre-emption?

The British Government cannot impose on a contractor a condition that they shall have a right of pre-emption on his ship.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the firm of Messrs. Hawthorn and Leslie, Wallsend, have drafted a number of apprentices to Devonport to take the place of men withdrawn from work on H.M.S. "Temeraire" on account of a dispute as to wages; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.

The question as to what action I should propose to take in the circumstances alleged by the hon. Member does not arise, as there appears to be no foundation for the statements made.

From what source did the right hon. Gentleman get that information?

From the Dockyard at Devonport. I got it by telegraph this afternoon.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the Wallsend Slipway Company have compelled about a dozen draughtsmen, under threat of instant dismissal, to perform fitters' work on H.M.S. "Superb," at Elswick; and what action he proposes to take in the matter.

We have no knowledge of the circumstances set out in the hon. Member's Question; but assuming the facts to be as stated, there does not appear to be any ground for action by the Admiralty.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is a breach of the Fair Wages Clause?

I have examined the question and am unable to discover that the alleged circumstances constitute a breach of the clause. It does not deal with fair wages at all.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the firm of Leslie's have Government contracts overdue, and are asking for an extension of time on the ground of labour disputes?

I should like notice of that Question.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what sums have been paid by the Admiralty in each of the last five

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the Report of the Treasury Committee upon the subject of national insurance for merchant ships, and of its conclusion

While we do not commit ourselves to the accuracy of the statements made in the preamble to the Question, the reply is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, having regard to the fact that Germany has laid down thirty-six destroyers in the last three years, he will consider the advisability of increasing the number of those to be laid down during a similar period by this country from seven to a figure corresponding with that of Germany.

I am unable to verify the figures on which the hon. Member has based his statement that during the last three years seven British destroyers were laid down. As to the number to be laid down, the hon. Member will observe that in the present year it is proposed to lay down sixteen.

Is it not the fact that the German destroyers for this year are already laid down?

The German year differs from the British year, and that makes it impossible to draw a comparison.

Is it not a fact that the German destroyers for this year are already laid down?

It is impossible to make a comparison, as the year's programmes do not cover the same period.

Are we really to understand that the Government do not know what has been the German programme in regard to destroyers for the last three years?

The Admiralty are perfectly aware, but that does not arise out of the Question.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can now say why Messrs. Armstrong, Whitworth, and Company, Elswick, have not carried out the Fair Wage Clause in their contract on H.M.S. "Invincible," at the Elswick Works, with regard to the wages paid to the electrical wire-workers.

The contractors state that they pay the wages generally accepted as current for competent workmen in their trade, and the evidence which so far has been put before the Admiralty is not inconsistent with that statement.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question has been pending since March last, and as late as last week thirty-five of the men were paid at a figure below the standard rate which obtains in the district?

We have examined the evidence we have been able to obtain, and are not satisfied that wages below the current rate are being paid.

Will the right hon. Gentleman place himself in communication with the trade union of the electrical workers and obtain from them a statement as to the wages current in the district?

We have had a communication, but I am not sure if it came from the trade union. I rather think it did.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can state by how much the naval expenditure of Germany was above or below the Estimates in the years 1903 to 1907, inclusive; and whether any reports have been submitted to the Admiralty as to the assistance rendered to German naval administration and expenditure by the State ownership of canals and railways.

The difference between the naval expenditure of Germany and the money voted is as follows—In 1903–4 there was £149,162 more expenditure than was voted. In 1904–5 there was £464,600 loss; in 1905–6 there was £123,477 less; in 1906–7 there was £341,507 less; for 1907–8 the total naval expenditure is not yet available. We have no official information as regards the latter part of the Question.

What is the authority for these figures? They do not agree with the Berlin Imperial Gazette figures?

They are official figures. I will inquire as to the divergence.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the King's Regulations and Admiralty Instructions forbid naval officers holding any communications with the Press and so prevent them from contradicting statements of a defamatory character; and whether in the absence of any guidance in the King's Regulations and Admiralty Instructions, he can state if they are free to take proceedings for libel when a newspaper of repute submits them to malicious and defamatory attacks.

As regards the first part of the Question, the existing rule, as laid down in circular letter of 21st November last, is that all persons belonging to the Fleet are forbidden to write for publication or to publish or cause to be published, either directly or indirectly, any matter or information relating to the naval service unless the permission of the Admiralty has been first obtained. With regard to the second part of the Question, an officer on half-pay or on the retired list would be free to act, should he so elect, without formal reference to the Admiralty, subject to the paramount interests of the naval service. An officer on full pay or serving under the Admiralty on salary would, as a matter of discipline, apply to the Admiralty for sanction of his proposed proceedings.

In the event of its being against the paramount interest of the Navy for an officer on full pay to bring a libel action, do the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues recognise their special obligation to defend an officer whose reputation is assailed by falsehoods circulated in a paper of repute?

I have no case before me in which it is alleged that it is not in the interests of the service that any officer on full pay should bring an action for libel. I cannot consider the question unless I have a specific case before me.

Is any statement going to be made in regard to the alleged occurrence in the Channel Fleet under Lord Charles Beresford?

That is an entirely different question. It has nothing to do with the Question on the Paper.

Does the regulation quoted apply to naval officers employed at the Admiralty or on the staff of the Admiralty?

The regulations would apply universally through the service.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Government has extended the period of a contract for chain cables and mooring chains entered into with several firms of chain-makers, under which arrangement other employers have been debarred from tendering; if so, will he say on what grounds such preference is justified; and whether, in future, he will see that equal opportunity is given to all firms to tender for such contracts.

Pending the preparation of certain technical details for a new contract, the existing arrangements have been temporarily continued to meet current requirements. As soon as the necessary particulars are available the usual opportunity will be afforded to all firms.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the disturbed condition of Persia has adversely affected the traffic to and from India by the Quetta-Nushki route.

The figures of the land trade between Persia and British India via Sind and British Baluchistan, the bulk of which, presumably, went by the Nushki route, show an increase for 1907–8 as compared with the two preceding years. The value of the total trade by the Nushki route for 1907–8 was the biggest on record.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether a branch of the Manicktollah bomb factory has been discovered in Sylhet?

The Secretary of State has no official information on this subject, but he gathers from the newspapers that arrests have been made at a place in the Sylhet district of persons who admit being engaged in the manufacture of bombs for revolutionary purposes.

Was this information obtained through Reuter's agency?

I cannot say.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the India Office has information to the effect that another large caravan of arms is in transit through Persian Baluchistan to the Afghan frontier; and whether it is proposed, by strengthening our patrol in the Persian Gulf, or by representation to the Sultan of Muscat, to deal with a state of affairs which is a menace to the North-West frontier.

The Answer to the first Question is in the negative; the last caravan of which the Secretary of State has information must have reached its destination some weeks ago. Every possible means is taken by action on the coast and otherwise to stop the traffic, and, as was stated by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on the 30th June, the question of the traffic at Muscat is engaging the attention of the Conference now sitting at Brussels.

It seems there is a regular gun-running season for three months in the year.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say from what country the arms conveyed by this caravan came?

I am unable to say.

suggested that the Government should send the hon. Member for Montgomery Boroughs out to patrol the Persian Gulf, or to act as Minister Plenipotentiary to the Sultan of Muscat.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Muslim community of Madras, in public meeting assembled, has expressed its condemnation of the growing sedition of Northern India, and assured the Government of its own staunch loyalty to British rule.

I have seen in the Press a notice of the meeting referred to, and my hon friend is no doubt aware that meetings of a similar character have been held in other parts of India.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the local Governments and high judicial authorities consulted, condemned the proposed separation of executive and judicial functions in the Indian Civil Service; and, if so, whether the opinions of such Governments and authorities will be made public.

The opinions of the local Governments and other authorities consulted on this subject have not yet reached the Secretary of State: it is not possible, therefore, to say whether they are papers which could suitably be made public.

I bog to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the reply of the Government of India to the statement relative to Excise administration, submitted to him on the 17th October last and forwarded for consideration and report to the Government of India, has now been received; and whether he will lay Papers upon the Table before the end of the present session.

I regret to say that the reply has not yet been received.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Indian Excise Commission recommended that liquor shops in India should be closed at 9 p.m., and that this recommendation was approved-by the Government of India; and whether any special reasons exist for the extension of the hour of closing to 10 p.m. in the case of liquor shops situated in the neighbourhood of mills in Calcutta.

The Indian Excise Commission recommended that as a general rule the closing hour should be 9 o'clock, but that this limit should be relaxed in special cases, when a special fee should be levied. The Government of Bengal has been advised by the Calcutta Licensing Committee that extension is necessary in the case of particular shops in certain localities where owing to late shifts at mills, docks, etc., the workers do not leave work until a late hour. Such cases are dealt with on their merits by the Board of Revenue, under power given to it by the Excise Act.

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether the Indian Excise Commission recommended the entire separation of the country liquor and foreign liquor licences in Calcutta, with such a redistribution of facilities as would not increase the number of sites; whether this proposal was provisionally approved by the Government of India; and whether effect has been given to the proposal under the resolution of the Government of Bengal recently issued upon this subject.

The Answer to the first two Questions is in the affirmative. With regard to the last Question the Government of Bengal has not given complete effect to the recommendation, as separation cannot, in their opinion, be effected in Calcutta without an undesir- able increase in the number of liquor shops. But it has issued instructions which will reduce considerably the number of cases in which licences for the two classes of liquor are held conjointly

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Secretary of State for India will recommend His Majesty the King to extend his clemency to Mr. Tilak, in view of the position he holds in the Indian national movement, and remit a portion of his sentence, with a view to allaying to some extent the present unrest in India."

asked if the right hon. Gentleman thought that expressions of sympathy in the House with notorious enemies of British rule were likely to have the effect of "allaying to some extent the present unrest in India."

I think the Answer I have to make will cover both Questions. It is impossible for the Secretary of State to take the action suggested in the Question. My hon. friend hardly realises the nature of the charge on which Mr. Tilak was convicted and the circumstances of the trial. The trial lasted ten days before a judge of the Bombay High Court with a special jury. Mr. Tilak was convicted by seven out of nine jurymen of offences under Section 124a and 153a of the Indian Penal Code. At the beginning of the trial he exercised his full rights of challenge, objecting to six Europeans, one Jew, and one Hindu. He spoke for several days in his own defence. In passing sentence the judge said—"The articles are seething with sedition; they preach violence; they speak of murder with approval; and the Cowardly and atrocious act of committing murder with bombs not only seems to meet with the prisoner's approval, but he hails the advent of the bomb in India as if something had come to India for its good." I think the hon. Member will agree with me that writings of such a character cannot fairly be held to fall under the exception made by the Penal Code in favour of "comments expressing disapprobation of the measures or action of the Government with a view to obtaining their alteration by lawful means." The Government deliberately instituted these proceedings in a Court of Law, and in a case of this kind for them immediately to traverse the verdict of the Court or precipitately to set aside its sentence, would be to stultify themselves.

asked if the article could now be published as a Parliamentary Paper to give the House and the country the opportunity for learning what foundation there was for the language used by the Judge.

said he could make no promise of the kind.

Can a copy be placed in the Library?

I can give no pledge.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman was aware that copies could be obtained at the office of the paper called India.

asked if the substance of the article published in The Times was correct.

I cannot say.

asked if the proportion of seven Europeans to two natives was the usual proportion on special juries in Bombay.

I cannot say. Thore wore on the jury seven Europeans and two Parsees, and the Judge was a Parsee gentleman.

And then there was a division of opinion on the jury?

Yes; I have already stated so.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the sentence of six years' transportation recently passed upon Mr. Tilak can be made the subject of appeal; whether a sentence of transportation involves the removal of the prisoner to a penal settlement; and, if so, what is the nature of the punishment to which he is there subject.

No appeal lies to the High Court from any order or sentence passed by a Judge exercising the original jurisdiction of the Court, but points of law may be reserved for consideration. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council may give special leave to appeal in cases where grave and substantial injustice appears to have been done. The appeal, in such cases, lies to the Judicial Committee. A sentence of transportation may involve the removal of a prisoner to a penal settlement, but does not necessarily do so; the prisoner may be sent instead to a Central Jail appointed for the purpose. A prisoner sentenced to transportation is subject for a time to solitary confinement: he is then put to some form of work with the other prisoners, and may obtain various privileges by good conduct.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether there have been disturbances amongst the factory workers of Bombay; and, if so, whether he has any information showing that these are largely attributable to the excessive hours of work; and whether the Government proposes to take any steps in the matter.

The Secretary of State understands that the disturbances which have occurred in the factory quarter of Bombay are not exclusively connected with labour questions, although, as my hon. friend is aware, the subject of the hours of labour has recently been investigated by the Factory Commission, whose Report is now under consideration. He is informed that they are connected with political agitation, by which pressure has been exercised on the Hindu mill hands to come out on strike, and, in some cases, to attack Europeans. The Mahomedan factory workers have not joined in the rioting, and resent the enforced loss of wages.

Had the Factory Inspector to be afforded police protection?

I have seen a statement to that effect.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India if he can state what is the law in regard to transportation in India; and whether there is any authority or precedent for sending a convicted offender to the Andamans for a period of less than seven years.

The law in regard to transportation in India is contained in Sections 53, 55, 57–59 of the Indian Penal Code, and the sections of that code prescribing transportation as the penalty for particular offences. Section 124a enables the person convicted under that section to be "punished with transportation for life or any other shorter term." There is, therefore, no reason to doubt the legality of a sentence of transportation for less than seven years.

Is there not a statutory rule which limits transportation to cases of seven years punishment and does not permit it in the case of persons over forty-five years of age?

I am not aware of that, but I would refer my hon. friend to the various sections of the Penal Code which govern the law relating to transportation.

I beg to ask the "Under-Secretary of State for India whether he will grant a Return of prosecutions for seditious speeches and writings which have been instituted in India since 1st January, 1907, showing the names of the persons charged, the courts which tried them, the precise character of the charge, and the decision in each case.

If the hon. Member will move for a Return the Secretary of State will instruct the Government of India to prepare it.

I bog to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether Chidambaram Pillay and Subramania Siva, who were lately convicted of treason and were sentenced to transportation for life and for ten years respectively by the district judge of Tinnevelly, have appealed against the sentence; and, if so, what has been the result of the appeal.

The Secretary of State has no information as to whether an appeal has been filed.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the character of the sentences which are being passed in India on persons who are accused of seditious utterances; and whether the Government will consider the propriety of issuing instructions which will prohibit the herding of political offenders with common criminals.

The Secretary of State does not consider it necessary to take action in the manner suggested by the hon. Member. The punishment for offences under Section 124a Indian Penal Code varies over a wide range, from fine without any imprisonment through simple imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment up to transportation for life. As regards simple imprisonment, Inspectors-General of Gaols already have authority to order the provision of separate accommodation for prisoners in certain cases.

Is there anything in Indian legislation which makes incitement to murder a political offence?

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether it is proposed to lay before Parliament papers giving an account of the relief works recently carried out in India, particularly in the United Provinces, in continuation of Famine Commission Reports already issued.

On the conclusion of the present relief operations full reports regarding them will be submitted by the several local Governments, and the Secretary of State will then be glad to consider whether any, and, if any, what Papers might with advantage be presented.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the India Office has information that the factory workers in Bombay have deprecated interference with the system under which they work; and whether the Factory Commission has reported that the hours of work in Bombay factories are not excessive.

The Commission's Report, which will be presented shortly, will show the hon. Member that he is under a misapprehension in respect of both points of his Question.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what was the original cost of the Carib Canal in St. Vincent, and by whom was it borne.

I cannot supply the information, but the Governor will be asked to do so, if my hon. friend wishes.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the disuse of the Carib freshwater Canal in the island of St. Vincent has prejudicially affected the districts which it formerly served; and whether its reopening is stated by the Governor of the Colony to be an essential preliminary to their development.