To ask the President of the Board of Trade why he has sanctioned the erection of West Usk gas buoy on the offer of Newport port authority to contribute only one-third of the cost, seeing that it is an admitted principle that local lights should be paid for by the local authority, and it had previously been agreed by the Board of Trade, Trinity House, and the Advisory Committee that the light in question was a local one. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) Under the Merchant Shipping Acts the Trinity House are (subject to the powers or rights of local lighthouse authorities) responsible for the superintendence and management of all lights throughout England and Wales and the adjacent seas and islands. It is sometimes a matter of considerable difficulty to draw the line between expenditure on light that should properly fall on the General Lighthouse Fund and that which should fall on local lightning authorities. Both the Board of Trade and Trinity House objected to the proposal to defray the whole of the proposed expenditure on replacing the West Usk buoy by a lighted buoy out of the General Lighthouse Fund, on the ground that the buoy is within the limits of the jurisdiction of the Newport port authority and that the expenditure would be for the benefit only of ships trading to and from that port. As, however, the Trinity House already perform lighting duties within this district and maintain the West Usk unlighted buoy, which it is now proposed to replace, I considered that the General Lighthouse Fund and the port authority might properly share the expenditure, and eventually an arrangement was arrived at under which one-third of the cost is to be repaid by the port authority. The Advisory Committee consented to waive their objection to this arrangement, without prejudice to their views on the general principle.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether his attention has been drawn to the case of George Barton, of Tendring, Essex, who is required to give up possession of his cottage after a tenancy of fifteen years, although he is unable to obtain another suitable dwelling in the neighbourhood; and whether the Housing Bill will make provision for such cases so as to enable the labourers to remain in the villages. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) My hon. friend has asked me to reply to this Question. My attention has not been drawn to the case referred to, but as regards the last part of the Question I hope and believe, as I have said before, that the result of the Bill will be that cottages will be provided by local authorities where they are required, and that, consequently, in any such case as that mentioned the tenant will be able to obtain another suitable dwelling in the locality.

To ask the President of the Local; Government Board if he can make any statement as to progress with the Housing, Town Planning, &c, Bill, in view of the fact that during the past ten days summonses to Members to attend the Grand Committee have been twice issued and withdrawn. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I am sorry that it was necessary to postpone the meetings of the Committee, but circumstances arose which rendored this unavoidable. I am glad to say, however, that considerable progress has been made with the Bill, and I hope that the consideration of the part of it which relates to housing will shortly be concluded.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will give a list of the loans for works of public utility connected with the question of unemployment for which sanction has been given since August, specifying in each case the local authority and the amount of the loan; and if he has been furnished by local authorities with any approximate estimate of the numbers likely to be employed. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I will send my hon. friend a list of loans sanctioned since the 1st August in respect of works which the local authorities concerned have stated would afford work for the unemployed. My hon. friend will understand that the list is confined to those cases in which the statement referred to has been expressly made by the local authorities, and that many other loans have been sanctioned for works of public; utility during the period which will undoubtedly afford employment to persons who would otherwise be unemployed. The local authorities have not furnished sufficient particulars to enable me to give the estimate asked for in the last part of the Question.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board what is the estimated percentage of unemployed men in London compared with the adult male population. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) It is not practicable to estimate the number of unemployed men in London with any degree of accuracy; but I may state that the number of applications registered by the Distress Committee since the registers were opened last month, up to the 21st October, was 16,910. Some of these may have found work in the meantime. The number of men on the registers of the Metropolitan employment exchanges on the 21st of this month was 7,952. I am also informed that 6,178, or 9·3 per cent., of the members of trade unions in London, making returns to the Board of Trade, were out of employment at the end of September. I am not in a position to state how far the same persons are included in more than one of those numbers. The number of male persons of sixteen years of ago and upwards in London is estimated to be 1,505,000.

Te ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state how many applications made by local authorities since 1905 for the limitation of the speed of motor vehicles have been refused by the Local Government Board, and on what grounds they were refused. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) In some instances since 1905 where an order has been issued limiting the speed of motor cars, it has not extended to the whole of the roads included in the application, as on investigation this appeared to be unnecessary, but only two applications have been altogether refused. In one of these, the application related to the whole of an urban district. The district council subsequently made a further application confined to certain roads, and the order was issued. In the other case, the evidence at the local inquiry which I caused to be held on the subject was generally to the effect that there would be little or no advantage in the proposed limitation of speed.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he has received an application from the Keighley Corporation to form a distress committee; if such application was refused; and, if so, for what reasons (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The facts are as stated in the Question. It is not, I think, desirable to constitute a distress committee in the smaller districts unless the circumstances are such as to render it essential that a special body should be set up to cope with the distress. In this instance it does not appear to me to have been shown, at present, that this is the case.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board how many, and what, authorities asked to be allowed to create distress committees; and how many such applications were granted by his Board. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Under the Unemployed Workmen Act, 1905, distress committees were to be set up, outside London, in boroughs and urban districts, with populations exceeding 50,000. In boroughs and urban districts containing smaller populations distress committees could only be set -up on the application of the council, with the consent of the Local Government Board. Since the Act passed applications have been received from fifty-eight localities (thirty-two boroughs and twenty-six urban districts) for the establishment of distress committees. Orders setting up these committees have been issued in fourteen cases, in thirty-three cases they have been refused, and in the remaining eleven cases the application has been dropped or withdrawn by the local authority.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will circularise all distress committees advising them generally as to what description of work might be usefully put in hand for the relief of the unemployed. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I do not think I could usefully issue such a circular as is suggested. The work which can be undertaken in a case in which there is exceptional distress must be determined by the circumstances of the particular place. In any such case the better course usually is for the town or urban district council to set on foot useful work which is needed in the locality, and for the distress committee to arrange with them to supply unskilled labour from workmen on their register.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether a similar letter to the one sent by him to the London County Council on the 28th September last was also sent to all other local authorities; and, if not, whether it is his intention to do so. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The reply to the Question is in the negative. I have had many opportunities, of which I have availed myself, of impressing upon the local authorities of distressed districts the importance of expediting the provision of work, but I have not thought it necessary to issue a circular to all local authorities on the subject.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether a man who had been in receipt of out-door relief, if otherwise qualified, would be able to claim an old-age pension if he, his relations, friends, or a charitable institution refunded the total amount he had received from the guardians. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) This matter, with some others which have arisen under the recent Act and which involve legal considerations, is receiving attention, but I am not in a position at present to give a definite answer with regard to it.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will consider the advisability of simplifying and rendering less inquisitorial the questions put to applicants for work under the Unemployed Workmen Act. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I considered this matter shortly after I became President of the Local Government Board, and I caused the questions to be put to applicants for work to be modified. I do not think that any further modification is required. It is necessary that particulars should be supplied in some detail to the distress committees to enable them to discharge the duty imposed on them of discriminating between applications made to them.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether, in view of the fact that the removal of the restriction that no person must be found work under the Unemployed Workmen Act more than once in two years, and also of the disqualification attaching to the receipt of Poor Law relief, the number of eligible applicants will be largely increased, he is prepared to advise the Government to increase the proposed grant. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) As was stated by the Prime Minister on Wednesday last, the Government propose that the amount of the grant should be increased. The amount spent last year was about £150,000, and the Government propose in the first instance that a sum of £300,000 should be made available.

TO ask the President of the Local Government Board, whether he can say how many applications have been made at any time by local authorities under Section 8 of the Motor Car Act, 1903, for the prohibition or restriction of motor traffic on special roads; and in how many cases the applications have been refused. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Thirty-three applications have been received in all. Of those twelve have boon withdrawn or dropped and four are now under consideration. In twelve cases orders have been issued, and in five cases the application has been refused.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, if an Army or other public pensioner whose pension is paid quarterly and who receives from a board of guardians weekly relief between the receipt of his quarter's pension, such sums being deducted from the pension and handed to the guardians by the authorities, is thereby disqualified for an old-age pension on the ground of having received poor relief. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) My right hon. friend has asked me to answer this Question. The point involved is included amongst those upon which I am at present taking legal advice, so that I cannot at this moment give a definite reply.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, when the steamers "Marypark," "Ethelaida," "Aislaby," "Wilberforce" and "Gresham" were engaging a crew of Chinamen at the port of Barry, a number of Chinese seamen were rejected as they were unable to pass the language test; if he is aware that the same Chinamen were signed on the above-named ships at the port of Cardiff although rejected at Barry; and if he will cause inquiries to be made with regard to this case. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) I understand that five Chinese seamen who came up for engagement on the "Wilberforce" were rejected at Barry, but that no rejection of Chinese took place at that port in the case of the other vessels named. The only one of the five vessels for which Chinese seamen were engaged at Cardiff was the "Aislaby." In that case seven Chinese passed the language test and twelve were rejected. The information received by the Board of Trade does not show that any of the seven Chinamen who passed the test had been previously rejected at Barry.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that James Pinto, a Lascar, native of Karwar, India, was rejected at the Barry Mercantile Marine Office when about to sign on the steamer "Ethelreda" on the 25th July, 1908, on the grounds that he was unable to satisfy the superintendent that he had had sufficient sea service under Section 27 (2) of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1906, to sign on as cook; whether he is aware that on the same day Pinto was allowed by the superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office at Cardiff to sign in the same vessel as ship's cook; whether he is aware that the same James Pinto was discharged at Newport on the 14th September, 1908, being rated as ship's cook; and whether he will cause inquiries to be made as to why this man was allowed to sign on when unable to comply with Section 27 (2) of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1906.

To ask the Lord - Advocate whether his attention has been called to the fact that the decision in Gunning's case, 44 S. L. R., page 514, is being used in Scotland by the finance authorities, under the Finance Act of 1894, to the detriment of the people of Scotland as compared with the other countries of the United Kingdom; whether he is aware that the estates of widows which have been unrevoked donations between husband and wife are being called upon to pay double estate duty, whereas in England such estates would be called upon to pay only one estate duty under the Finauce Act; and whether he will take steps to advise the Exchequer to have this inequality removed. (Answered by Mr. Thomas Shaw.) The inequality to which the question refers is a natural and proper consequence of the fact that the law of Scotland, unlike the law of England, gives a husband power to revoke at any time a donation made by him to his wife. It is by reason of this power of revocation that in Scotland the donation forms part of the property of which the husband is at the time of his death competent to dispose within the meaning of the Finance Act, 1894, and is accordingly chargeable with estate duty on his death.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury who is now the steward of the Crown Lordship of the Hundred of Uchaf, in the county of Carnarvon, and what are his emoluments. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) Mr. William Henry More, Crown Receiver for Wales, is steward of the Crown Lordship of Uchaf. He receives an allowance of £2 12s. 6d. for each Court held, which includes refreshments for the juries.

TO ask the Secretary to the Treasury if he can state when the new scheme governing the future appointment of boy clerks in the Civil Service will come into force. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) I cannot state the exact date, but it is hoped that the new scheme will be brought into operation on the occasion of the next competition for boy clerkships.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the fact that the estimated cost of a harbour or breakwater at Fair Isle has been considered prohibitive, inquiry will be made if it would be possible, by arrangement with the Northern Lights Commissioners, to strengthen and extend the lighthouse jetty. (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) The islanders approached the Northern Lights Commissioners in December, 1907, and have been informed that on their furnishing plans, specifications, and estimates the question will be considered.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has issued, or proposes to issue, regulations or instructions which would assist claimants to pensions or trustees of charitable funds with respect to the cases in which, and the extent to which, the receipt of a pension from a charitable fund would disqualify for a pension under the Act; if not, how is it contemplated to deal with the difficulties arising in such cases. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George) No, Sir. The case of such allowances seems to me to be entirely governed by the provisions of Section 4 (1) (a) of the Act, and there would appear to be no reason for differentiating a pension received from such sources from other money income. The question whether any particular allowance is one which a claimant may "reasonably expect to receive during the succeeding year" is one to be determined upon the facts in each case by the pension committee.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, if a person dies who has paid the taxes due for carriages, dogs, etc., and those pass into the possession of a member of his family living in the house in which the deceased person had lived, it is the practice of the Board of Inland Revenue to exact payment of taxes from the new owner in the same year. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The general practice of the Board of Inland Revenue is in conformity with Section 26 of 32 and 33 Vic, cap. 14, whereunder establishment licences are transferable to the executors or widow of a deceased person, but to no one else.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer which departments would have to present the Supplementary Estimates made necessary by the proposals for dealing with the unemployed; and what would be the amount in each case. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) I am not at present aware that any Supple- mentary Estimate will be required in connection with those proposals, except the Estimate for the additional grant of £100,000 for expenses under the Unemployed Workmen Act, which in ordinary course will be presented by the Treasury early in next session.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether Dr. Haffkine has been reinstated in employment under the Government of India; and whether his duties are restricted exclusively to research work. (Answered by Mr. Buchanan.) The Answer to both parts of the Question is in the affirmative.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the observations of Lieutenant-Colonel A. Buchanan, I.M.S, on the propagation of plague in India by means of rats, and to his conclusion that the best way to prevent plague in India is the any this by keeping cats; and whether Government of India have formed opinion as to the soundness of conclusion. (Answered by Mr. Buchanan.) The Secretary of State is aware that Lieutenant-Colonol Buchanan, in letters appearing in the Indian newspapers, has recommended the public to set greater store on cats as the simplest way of keeping down rats. In urging this Colonel Buchanan is not opposed to other methods of prevention. The Secretary of State is not aware that the Government of India have formed any opinion on the subject.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will ascertain and state the total law costs incurred each year and in the whole period since 1883 by the boards of guardians and rural district councils, respectively, of Mullingar, Delvin, and Coole, showing the amount of this chargeable to the working of the Labourers Acts and the amount chargeable to other purposes. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) I have sent to the hon. Member the information for which he asks. This information is contained in tabular statements comprising several pages of figures, with which it does not seem desirable to encumber the Parliamentary records.

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he is making any provision for the urgent need of more artillery range accommodation; and if he has considered the suitability of Cannock Chase for an artillery range. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Cannock Chase has not been specially considered for an artillery range. As I explained to the House on Monday last, the question of obtaining artillery ranges has been and is still being fully considered.

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state how many subaltern officers have been got for the Special Reserve (old Militia), not already serving in the Militia six months ago, during the last six months and during the last throe months; and if he proposes to make it easier for young men who are going into a civilian profession to become officers of the Special Reserve. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Twelve subalterns have been appointed to the Special Reserve of officers during the last six months, of whom ten were appointed during the last three months. In reply to the latter part of the Question, I am advised that it would not be wise to lower the conditions of entry into the Special Reserve.

To ask the Secretary of State for War how many subaltern officers is the Special Reserve short of its establishment. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The shortage of subalterns amounts to a total of 1,595.

To ask the Prime Minister when he will announce the terms of the Amendments to the club clauses of the Licensing Bill, which he adumbrated some months ago in reply to a deputation when he was still Chancellor of the Exchequer. (Answered by Mr. Asquith.) I hope the Amendments will appear in the Paper in the course of a few days.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, considering the encouragement which the annual grant of £400 a year in annuities not exceeding £20, and the granting of the right to wear a medal known as the long and meritorious medal, under Article 1191 of the King's Regulations, gives to the Royal Marines for distinguished or meritorious services, their Lordships can see their way clear to set apart a similar sum for petty officers of the Royal Navy.

There is no such provision made for petty officers in the Royal Navy. This is one of many differences between the conditions of service and privileges in I the Army and the Navy, and it is not proposed to make any change.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty how many of the Channel Fleet battleships were in dockyard hands for repair on 21st October; and whether in withdrawing vessels from the fleets for repairs during the winter, he will take steps to secure, in compliance with Admiralty memoranda, that not more than two battleships from the Channel Fleet and one from each of the other fleets shall be withdrawn for repairs simultaneously.

The answer to the first part of the question is four. With regard to the second part, I desire to take this opportunity of stating that in August last, the Admiralty informed the Commander-in-Chief of the Channel Fleet that in view of the great strength of the naval forces always now in home waters, we attach less importance than previously to the limitation of the numbers of ships of the Channel Fleet which are under repair concurrently. The previous statement to the effect that not more than two battleships were to be undergoing refit at the same time, may therefore be regarded as superseded; but it is intended that refits of these vessels shall be distributed as evenly as possible throughout the year. The special repairs to be undertaken this winter in accordance with the Prime Minister's statement of 21st October will not increase the number of ships absent from the Channel Fleet.

Then are we to understand that during the winter four of the battleships of the Channel Fleet are to be absent on repair?

No, Sir; I said four were absent on 21st October, and added that the special repairs to be undertaken this winter would not increase the number of ships absent from the Channel Fleet.

If it is proposed to substitute another rule for the salutary one that only two ships shall be absent at one time, will care be taken to frame the new rule so that the public may understand it?

That shall be considered.

Is this supersession of the old rule to apply only to the Channel Fleet?

The communication was made only to the Commander-in-Chief of the Channel Fleet.

In view of that communication, of which today we hear for the first time, may I ask if the Commander-in-Chief will be given an opportunity of exercising all these ships in home waters?

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

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what speed could have been safely developed and maintained on or about 9th October by each of the two battleships at Malta which were ready to put to sea with defective machinery.

The "Ocean" could have safely developed and maintained on 9th October a speed of 15 knots, and the "Goliath" 13 knots.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that satisfactory for these two ships?

It would not be regarded so if it were their permanent condition.

Have the defects been made good?

They are being made good now.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the maximum speed developed when on trials by each of the three battleships which left Malta owing to the crisis in the Near East on or about 9th October; and what was the maximum speed which they developed or could have developed on the latter occasion.

The maximum speeds developed on contractors' trials by these three vessels were:—"Canopus," 18·5 knots; "Glory," 18.124 knots; "Prince of Wales," 17.8. A speed approximating to this could, if desired, have been obtained in each case on the occasion in question.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty where was each one of the eight cruisers mentioned in the Navy List as belonging to the Mediterranean Fleet on 9th October at the time of the crisis in the Near East.

The "Lancaster," "Suffolk," "Diana" and "Philomel," were at Malta; the "Minerva" was at sea, and arrived at Malta the next day; the "Aboukir" was at Venice; the "Barham" at Constantinople; and the "Bacchante" was between Gibraltar and England on her way home.

Then how could the eight cruisers have been at Malta within twelve hours as stated?

I said that seven were in the Mediterranean at the time. The eighth was on her way home.

Was not the "Minerva" paid off at Sheerness on 13th September, and therefore away from the station for a month.

I stated that the "Minerva" was at sea.

Which are we to accept as the official Answer—that given to-day, or the one given last week?

Both.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, with regard to the question now under consideration, of empowering His Majesty's dockyard authorities to make to employees who have attended recent camps as members of the Territorial Army such residual payments in respect of time spent in camp as will provide that they shall not suffer loss through their action, he will be able to come to an early decision, in view of the prejudicial effect upon recruiting for the Territorial Army in Devonport and Plymouth resulting from the uncertainty upon this point.

I hope that an early decision will be reached, but the hon. Member will understand that this is a question that does not concern my Department alone.

Have not such residual payments been made in the case of some army non-commissioned officers?

That question should be addressed to my right hon. friend the Secretary of State for War. I am not aware of what has taken place in his Department.

What is the reason for the delay in the settlement of this question?

My Answer is as full as I can make it.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state, approximately, the amount of under-expenditure upon new construction which has resulted, up to date, from the strikes in the shipbuilding trade or other unforeseen causes, during the current financial year.

I regret that the figures asked for are not yet available.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication when the figures will be available so that I may put down another Question?

Not immediately.

In a week's time?

I should not think so.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will give an approximate estimate of the extra amount of expenditure, beyond that originally estimated, that will be incurred during the current financial year by the earlier letting of tenders for the construction of nine destroyers and five unarmoured cruisers.

I regret that the figures asked for are not yet available.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman give an approximate estimate of the obligations he will have to meet in this respect during the current year?

I estimate that the contractors will expend, before 31st March, a total of £300,000. I am, therefore, perfectly sure the liability of the Admiralty will not exceed £200,000, and it will probably be considerably less.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty how he proposes to meet the extra expenditure that will be incurred during the current financial year by the earlier commencement of certain items in the programme of new construction and by the anticipation of repairs to the Fleet.

I propose to meet it out of the total sums voted for naval services this year.

On what items will the large savings be effected?

Large savings will be effected owing to the strike. I cannot, however, give an estimate, as the figures are coming in almost daily. I am confident that the additional expenditure for laying down ships earlier than arranged will be fully met out of these savings.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state on what date the tenders for the main contract at Rosyth were invited and by what date will they be returnable.

Invitations to tender, with full contract particulars, were issued on 23rd October. Tenders are to be sent in on 22nd December, 1908.

Will the bonus be of a substantial nature?

I cannot give the exact figure. Much depends on what the hon. Gentleman means by "substantial."

asked whether, in view of the bonus that was to be given, care would be taken to see that proper wages were paid to the workmen.

It is already a condition of the contract that fair wages shall be paid.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if he will lay upon the Table a statement showing the conditions under which ammunition will be supplied to rifle clubs at reduced rates.

As I stated yesterday the details are under consideration at this moment.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the sentence of transportation for life passed by the Additional Sessions Judge of Tinnevelly on Chidambaram Pillai, on 6th July last, for making seditious speeches, was appealed against; and, if so, whether the appeal is still pending before the High Court of Madras.

The appeal of Chidambaram Pillai to the Madras High Court was admitted on 31st July last. The translation of the vernacular record took several weeks, and a further postponement of a fortnight was given on the application of counsel. The hearing began on 6th October, and is being continued de die in diem. Meantime the prisoners are being treated as under trial pending the final order of the High Court.

. I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that a pleader named Ram Kanai Dutt, of Brahamanbaria, and his son have been arrested upon a charge of sedition for having written and printed a booklet entitled "Seintan Sikha"; and whether, in view of the fact that the booklet was written two years ago and has been in public use as a text-book in the lower classes of many national schools, he will order an inquiry into the matter, and, if the facts are as stated, make a request to the Government of India for the release of this man and his son.

The Secretary of State has no information on the subject, but he will inquire.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that, in the matter of the public instituting criminal proceedings against the police in India, the appellant has not only to take the risks of wrongful proceedings set out in Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code, but also to face the act that the financial resources of the Government are at the disposal of the police, and compensation paid though the charge be proven; and, if so, whether an assurance can be given that this matter will be inquired into, with a view of reverting to the previous position of the Government standing aloof and only compensating the police in the event of the proceedings against them not being successful.

The Secretary of State is not aware of any practice of paying compensation in the manner described in the Question, but if the hon. Member will give fuller and authentic particulars, he will at once consider the desirability of inquiring.

I will do so.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Punjab Government has sanctioned the institution of an exhibition of handlooms, with a school of weaving, to be managed by the Salvation Army at Ludhiana, Amrit- sar, or Sialkot; if so, has he any information as to the amount of money, if any, voted for the purpose; whether any of the money has been allocated to the Salvation Army for management; and, if so, on what grounds the Salvation Army were selected to superintend and manage the exhibition and school.

The Secretary of State has seen in the newspapers a statement to the effect set forth in the Question. He has no further information on the subject, but he will inquire.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Secretary of State has advised that assent be given to the ordinances establishing a Board of Agriculture in Trinidad; whether taxation is being collected for the purposes of such a Board; and, if so, whether he will take steps to see that the creation of the Board is not longer delayed.

The Secretary of State has agreed to assent being given to the Trinidad Board of Agriculture Ordinance, subject to an understanding on one point, as to which he awaits a reply from the officer administering the Government. The special tax referred to has been collected since 1st July, and is being carried to a suspense account in the local Treasury, pending a decision on the scheme of reorganisation, which has naturally required some time for consideration. The Secretary of State hopes that the Board will shortly be constituted.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what progress has been made towards effecting a reduction in the cable rates to Barbados, Trinidad, and Demerara.

The Secretary of State regrets that he sees no immediate prospect of effecting a reduction in the cable rates to these Colonies.

Will the Secretary of State continue to use his best efforts to secure a reduction?

Reductions of cable rates are always to be desired, but the present is not an opportune moment for pressing this matter.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the attention of His Majesty's Government has been called to the case of Sekgoma, a native of the Bechuanaland Protectorate, who was arrested at Kimberley and detained as a prisoner without any charge being laid against him, whose application that he may be brought to trial and afforded an opportunity of defending himself has been refused, and concerning whom it is alleged that the High Commissioner for South Africa declined to give reasons for his detention; and whether His Majesty's Government will call for a Report on the subject.

Yes, Sir, the case is well-known to the Secretary of State—Sekgoma, who claimed to be chief of the Batawana tribe, and who had for a considerable time acted in that capacity was removed from that position after an exhaustive inquiry on the spot by the Resident Commissioner of the Bechuanaland Protectorate in 1906. The Resident Commissioner found that Sekgoma was not entitled to the succession and that the majority of the tribe accepted the other claimant, Mathibi, as their lawful chief. The tribe was deeply divided on the question of the succession, and in the opinion of the Commissioner which was accepted by Lord Selborne and the Secretary of State, it was necessary in order to avoid the likelihood of bloodshed and tribal war to prevent Sekgoma's return. Sekgoma has, therefore, been detained in a different part of the Protectorate under the authority of a High Commissioner's Proclamation of December, 1906, which recited the reasons given above for the action taken

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that, between 1st May and 20th May, 1908, inclusive, eight Bahamian turtling vessels were seized by Cuban Revenue cutters, that these vessels were towed into Cuban ports and the owners heavily fined on a charge of alleged illegal fishing, and that the owners of each vessel were also fined 500 dollars for infringing the quarantine regulations, although the vessels were forcibly towed into the ports where the alleged contravention of those regulations took place; and whether, seeing that it is the practice for these turtling vessels, when returning from the Pedro Cay banks to Nassau, to approach the Island of Cuba in order to be sure of their whereabouts, the Government has taken steps, and, if so, what steps, to obtain the remission of the fines, compensation for the three months detention of the vessels and their crews, and generally to protect the interests of this industry.

The incident referred to by the hon. Member was fully reported by His Majesty's Minister at Havana at the time of its occurrence, and received the careful consideration of the Secretary of State for the Colonies and of myself. As regards seven of the vessels seized and fined on a charge of illegal fishing, His Majesty's Government were satisfied on investigation that there were no sufficient grounds for interference on their part, as there appeared to be no sufficient evidence to rebut the allegation that the vessels were fishing Cuban territorial waters within the three mile limit at the time of their arrest. As regards the eighth vessel, arrested and fined on an additional charge of illegally transporting turtles through Cuban waters during the close season, His Majesty's Government were not prepared to dispute the right of the Cuban Government to prohibit such transport of turtles. Owing, however, to the representations made by His Majesty's Minister at Havana, the Cuban Government remitted the fine on this vessel and reduced the fines on the seven other vessels to less than half their original amount; the fine of 500 dollars on each vessel (which according to the information received by His Majesty's Government, was on account of contravention of the Cuban Customs regulations and is presumably that to which the hon. Member refers), being entirely remitted. As it was not possible to refute the charge that seven of the vessels were engaged in illegal fisting at the time of their arrest His Majesty's Government do not consider the case to be one which calls for the payment of compensation to the owners of the vessels for the period of their detention. In the case of the eighth, no sufficient evidence has been brought before His Majesty's Government to justify a demand for compensation. After careful consideration, His Majesty's Government have come to the conclusion that the situation does not call for further action at present; but the hon. Member may rest assured that His Majesty's Government will always be ready to take such steps as may be necessary to protect the interests of this industry outside the limits of the territorial waters.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman why he has made no reference to the fact that it is the custom of these people to pass through these waters on their way to their own ports?

The only question is one of evidence as to whether they were or were not fishing inside the territorial waters. If the hon. Member has any evidence to produce on the subject I will consider it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman admit the justice of these people being fined for an infringement of the quarantine regulations?

I think I said in my Answer that the fine has been remitted.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what was the amount raised on licences for the sale of intoxicating liquor in the State of New York in each of the years 1906 and 1907.

The amount raised in the year 1907 was 18,544,321 dollars, 56 cents. The figures for 1906 have not been received.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that among the copies of telegrams seized by the general of the Nationalist forces after the capture of the telegraph office serving the Royalist troops at Tabriz, were two telegrams from the Royalist general to the Shah of Persia, the first requesting His Majesty to give instructions through the Russian Legation in Teheran for the supply of from 10,000 to. 20,000 cartridges through the Russian Consul-General at Tabriz, and the second acknowledging the receipt of this order for cartridges; and whether such interference by the Russian Legation in Teheran in the internal affairs of Persia is in accordance with the tenour of the Anglo-Russian Convention.

I have no information bearing out the accuracy of this allegation.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the strong point he made against Members on these benches, when they raised the question of the King's visit to Reval, and his objection to the interference by one country in the internal affairs of another, the Government will move—

Order, order. The hon. Member is simply raising a debate.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, with a view to Persians managing their own affairs, he will make friendly representations to the Government of Russia to recall the Russian officers serving in Persia.

The Russian officers in Persia are in the employment of the Shah, and have been so for several years past. It is a matter in which the Governments of Russia and Persia are alone concerned, but I am informed that no Russian officers have taken any part in the recent fighting between Persian forces.

Is there any truth in the Report that Russian troops have invaded Persia?

No, Sir; my information is that no Russian troops have crossed the Persian frontier. According to my information, what has happened is this. For some time there has been constant fighting between Royalist and Nationalist forces at Tabriz. Tabriz is very close to the Russian frontier. Russian trade has, of course, suffered. A Russian post was attacked, and one report is that lives of Russians were in danger. Russia then moved, I think, about 400 men to the frontier, but as the fighting had ceased, and it was stated that the danger to Russian lives had also ceased, the troops were ordered not to cross. I am informed that the Russian troops have orders not to cross the frontier unless Russian lives are in danger.

Have the British Government consented to the Russian troops crossing the frontier?

We have always claimed the right to take what measures we think fit when British lives are in danger, and we could not refuse the same liberty of action to others. But, inasmuch as the policy which has been pursued by both Governments is that of non-intervention, and as there has been considerable disturbance close to the Russian frontier, and the Russians have not sent troops across the frontier, I think I am justified in saying that they have acted in accordance with the spirit of the Convention.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will now lay upon the Table Papers on the affairs of Persia.

Papers will be prepared, and the question of future publication will be considered when the present crisis in Persia has passed.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, during the entire period of the recent critical events in Tabriz, the British Consul-General, acting under instructions from His Majesty's Government, was absent from his post, while the Russian Consul-General was present throughout the struggle; and whether steps can be taken to secure that in future there shall be equality of representation as between Great Britain and Russia in this capital of Northern Persia.

The answer to the first Question is in the affirmative: the presence of His Majesty's Consul-General being urgently required at Urumia in connection with the Turco-Persian frontier dispute. During the absence of the Consul-General, the Vice-Consul was in charge. As to the second Question, the British Consul-General has now returned to his post, and there is no intention of withdrawing him.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any official information showing that the Russian Council of Ministers has sanctioned the introduction of a Bill giving to inhabitants of villages the right to close existing public-houses, to prohibit the opening of new ones, and to limit the hours of sale, by resolution of the local council; and, if so, whether Sir A. Nicholson will be instructed to make representations as to the evil example likely to be set to moderate and reasonable temperance reformers in this country by these ultra-democratic and faddist proposals.

I have not received any information to this effect, though I have no reason or wish to discredit that on which my hon. friend has founded his Question. I should, however, deprecate any representations such as he suggests. We can always profit by the example of other countries in liquor legislation, though whether this can best be done by imitation or by avoidance my hon. friend must rely upon the wisdom of Parliament to decide in each particular case.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he adheres to the statement that the British and Russian Governments and their representatives in Persia have absolutely abstained from all interference in the internal affairs of Persia.

Both Governments have maintained a policy of general non-intervention in regard to Persia; but they have united in recommending to the Shah the grant of a Constitution, as it seemed to them the best means of promoting peace in the country.

Did they at the time they recommended the grant of a Constitution take any means of assuring the safety of the Persian delegates who might be elected?

It is quite obvious that to give guarantees to either one party or the other in Persia of that nature would lead to direct intervention in the internal administration of that country.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer in which of the Colonies and Dependencies of the British Empire and in which States in the United States of America is the system of high licence duties on the sale of intoxicating liquors in force; and what are the rates or scales of such duties in each case.

The information required by my hon. friend is too voluminous to be supplied in answer to a Parliamentary Question, but I shall be glad to supply him with any material in my possession if he will be good enough to confer with me upon the subject.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has issued, or intends to issue, instructions to the pension officers directing them not to take into consideration in their Reports the fact that an applicant for a pension, otherwise qualified, has passed a short period in a workhouse infirmary; and, if not, will he undertake to issue instructions to that effect.

I have not issued, and do not intend to issue instructions of the kind referred to by the noble Lord.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman the reasons which have led him to arrive at that conclusion?

I should hardly like to enter into them without notice, for the simple reason that every answer I have to give on a question of this sort may have the effect of embarrassing the decisions as they arise.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the depressed condition of the hop market, and in view of the fact that no beneficial result will be obtained from the abolition of hop-substitutes or from marking of foreign hops during this season unless legislation is proceeded with at once, he can now state on what day he will introduce Bills dealing with these subjects.

I cannot at present add anything to my Answer of the 15th instant to a similar Question by the hon. Member for the Rye division of Sussex.

Will the Bill cover both the abolition of hop-substitutes and the marking of foreign hops as recommended by the Select Committee?

The Bill will cover the whole of the ground.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has any official Reports showing that the Secretary of State for the Imperial German Treasury is about to introduce a Bill to impose a tax of 5 per cent. on the consumption price of electricity, whether for power or light, and the same tax on gas, also a tax on every gas or electrical burner sold, amounting to 50 or 60 per cent. of the present retail price, so that their cost for buyers would be increased in this proportion; and whether, in the event of the resources of free trade finance becoming exhausted, he will bear in mind this method of broadening the basis of taxation.

I believe that the German proposals for new Imperial taxation have not yet been officially promulgated.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will arrange to make a similar grant to Scotland as that given to Ireland, namely, £6,000 per annum for five years for the encouragement of the growth of tobacco in Scotland.

The removal of the restriction upon the cultivation of tobacco in Scotland is to take effect under the Tobacco Growing (Scotland) Act, 1908, "as from a date to be fixed by His Majesty by Order in Council as soon as Parliament has made provision for an excise duty on tobacco produced in Scotland." Parliament has not yet made this provision in the case of Scotland, and the restriction consequently is still in force. As regards the power conferred on the Commissioners of Inland Revenue under Section (2) of the Act enabling them to authorise the growth of tobacco for experimental purposes in Scotland, I understand that they have as yet received no application for the grant of such permission.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade how much is spent upon the Labour Gazette annually; and whether the particulars given therein of the condition of trade and the state of employment and unemployment in the different trades can be enlarged and improved upon at a moderate increase of outlay.

The preparation of the Board of Trade Labour Gazette is so much involved in the general work of the Labour Department of the Board of Trade that it is impossible to state its cost separately. Every opportunity is taken to extend the information given as regards employment and trade, so far as trustworthy data can be obtained, and the Board of Trade would welcome any practical suggestion for enlargement and improvement that the hon. Member is in a position to make, bearing in mind the voluntary basis of the returns and their confidential character to a large extent. I do not think that a moderate increase of outlay would stand in the way of a really useful and practicable extension.

Is not the amount about £2,000? Was the cost of the inquiries made in Germany by a Departmental Committee charged against the Labour Gazette?

I have said I cannot state the cost.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of appointing a Departmental Committee to inquire as to extending the usefulness of the Gazette?

I am prepared carefully to consider any suggestions that may be made to me with a view to improving the Gazette.

But will the right hon. Gentleman appoint a Committee from both sides of the House to consider whether the usefulness of the publication cannot be increased?

I do not think that at present such a Committee would produce more information than we already have.

Is not the cost about £2,000?

I cannot give the actual figures, but certainly the information published in the Gazette could not be obtained for anything like the price the printing and publishing entails.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board what proportion of the 1,514,300 trees planted in the Leeds afforestation scheme are alive or likely to thrive; whether their present condition is largely due to the want of familiarity of those employed in planting them with such work; and whether he can secure that in any future work of this kind better instruction and supervision can be given, and better results obtained.

It is estimated that 1,101,500 out of the 1,514,300 trees planted during the past three seasons' work are living and thriving at the present time. The plantations are carefully examined each season, dead trees are removed and the gaps planted, so that at present there are estimated to be 1,500,000 thriving trees. The failures are reported to be due to the lack of knowledge of the men doing the planting, but I am informed that in some cases they are caused by carelessness and want of interest on the part of the men. I may add that for the present season an experienced forester has been engaged to assist the foreman hitherto employed upon the work. Both of these, together with seven men on the permanent staff, will instruct the men and supervise the work. It is hoped that in this way much better results will be obtained.

Can the right hon. Gentleman furnish the House with full information regarding this and other similar experiments in afforestation?

The Leeds City Council have published a Report on this experiment, copies of which can be had on application to the town clerk.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay Papers on the Table?

This is not a subject on which I am instructed to secure information in the ordinary way to lay upon the Table of the House, but if there is any general desire that some information should be given in a summarised form of this experiment I shall be pleased to consider it.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board with reference to the three cases of injury resulting from vaccination performed by Dr. Cossham of Cirencester, on which the Local Government Board medical inspector reported, if the chancres produced by vaccination were those of simulating syphilis; and if the Local Government Board will send the Reports to Mr. Jonathan Hutchinson, F.R.C.S., for his opinion.

The three cases referred to were all vaccinated with calf lymph, and I am advised that it is impossible to communicate syphilis by means of calf lymph. The medical inspector who, however, saw the children some months after the vaccination, states that the scars of the sore places bore no resemblance to chancres, and, from the date of the origin of the complication, it is clear that it was caused by accidental contamination of the sore places which took place a considerable time after vaccination had been performed. I see no sufficient reason for adopting the course suggested in the last part of the Question.

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman will not submit the Reports to Dr. Hutchinson, who is a great authority on syphilis?

I have nothing to add to my Answer.

Has it not been shown that syphilis is produced by calf lymph?

I am otherwise advised.

Has the right hon. Gentleman not received information that the locality in which this child lived was in an extremely insanitary condition?

Yes, I stated that last week.

And has the right hon. Gentleman asked the vaccinator not to vaccinate cases in insanitary neighbourhoods or dwellings?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House any information as to the original source of Government calf lymph?

I have nothing to add to the interesting correspondence I had with my hon. friend last year on this subject.

That was rather negative.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if the Local Government Board has made any inquiry into the case of the nine weeks old female child of Mr. Edward Johnson, of 14, Albert Street, Runcorn, vaccinated on 29th September, inquest held on 16th October, death from septic poisoning; and if he will, in consequence, discontinue the wholesale dissemination of poisonous matter to be put into the blood of healthy children.

My attention has not previously been drawn to this case. I have, however, now written for a copy of the depositions taken at the inquest, and upon receiving them I will give consideration to the matter.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if, when he sends an inspector down to investigate a case, he will have him accompanied by a medical man who is an anti-vaccinator?

I attach no importance to the question whether a medical man is an anti-vaccinator or not. If he is in the service of the Local Government Board he is called upon to do his duty, and I hope he suppresses his personal views, as I have done on this subject.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware of the position in which the Warblington Urban District Council finds itself as a result on the one hand of the judgment obtained against it by Mr. Foster in connection with the pollution of his oyster-beds by the existing system of local drainage, and on the other hand by the refusal of the Local Government Board to sanction the new scheme of drainage which has been prepared by the expert advisers of the council on the ground that such scheme would be ineffective; whether he is further aware that the council is extremely anxious to proceed with a new scheme of drainage at the earliest possible moment and as soon as it can secure the consent of the Local Government Board to the necessary expenditure; and whether he can indicate to the council the points upon which the scheme submitted by it is defective.

I am aware of the position of the district council in, this matter, and that they are anxious to proceed with a new scheme of drainage. I have already indicated to the council the points upon which, as I am advised, the previous scheme was defective.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that further litigation-is threatened against this council for not proceeding with the drainage scheme? Cannot the Local Government Board give them some expert advice?

I am aware of the peculiar difficulties under which this local authority is labouring, and I am doing my best to help them out of their troubles.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can hold out any hopes of his being in a position to introduce a Bill dealing with the disposal of sewage at an early date.

The Reports of the Royal Commission on Sewage Disposal are receiving my consideration with a view to legislation, but I do not think it will be practicable to introduce a Bill on the subject during the present session.

Meanwhile, will the Local Government Board afford some protection to councils placed on the horns of a dilemma?

Yes, there are two or three councils in the same position as the one to which the hon. Member's previous Question refers, and I am doing my best to arrange some reasonable compromise or safeguard.

I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether a person otherwise qualified, who has been in receipt of poor relief within twelve months prior to 1st January, 1909, is eligible for receipt of a pension if the amount of the poor relief received by him has been refunded before that date.

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer this Question. It is one which, with some others involving legal considerations, is at present under consideration, so that I am not at the moment in a position to give a definite reply to it.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to a case of arbitration under Section 2 of The Savings Bank Society Act, 1876, heard on 19th June, 1908, by the Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies, with reference to the misappropriation of a sum of £270 belonging to the Lord Bagot Lodge of the Manchester Unity of the Independent Order of Oddfellows Friendly Society by the late Lewis Myatt, who committed, suicide in October, 1906, and who, while secretary of the Lord Bagot Lodge, was postmaster of Abbots Bromley in the sub-district of Rugeley, Staffordshire; whether he is aware that owing to his position as postmaster he was enabled to apply to his own use moneys entrusted to him by the lodge for deposit in the Post Office Savings Bank; and whether he or any of his staff consulted the Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies or either of his assistants in any way on the matter previously to the case being submitted to the Chief Registrar by the directors of the Manchester Unity for arbitration. I beg further to ask the Postmaster-General whether, as the Post Office authorities desire that the directors of the Manchester Unity should call the special attention of its 4,000 branches to the necessity for extra vigilance while one person holds a fiducial position in the society and is at the same time postmaster, he will issue instructions to his officers that they are not to accept money for deposit from societies for which they may be acting unless it is tendered by an officer of the society who is not connected with the Post Office and on the Post Office premises when they are open for public business, in order that all entries in depositors' Post Office Savings Bank books bearing the official stamp of the office shall be evidence of the receipt by the Postmaster-General of the amounts entered.

The position of sub-postmaster held by the late secretary of the Lord Bagot Lodge of Oddfellows, did not in itself enable him to apply to his own use moneys entrusted to him for deposit in the Post Office Savings Bank. Frauds have been committed, in a similar way by officers of friendly societies who were not Post Office servants; and in all such cases they have been rendered possible only by the negligence of other society officials. The Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies was asked in March, 1907, whether he could take steps to render more effective the audit of friendly society accounts; but apart from this, he has not been consulted in any way in connection with the case by any officer of the Post Office. I am considering at the present time what can be done to prevent as far as possible frauds of this kind, whether by Post Office servants or by others.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether the increase of 1,753 persons made in the female staff of the Post Office in 1908 was made in the interests of economy; and how the wages paid to the 1,753 women compare with the wages which would have been paid to men for similar work.

It has for years past been the practice of the Post Office to employ women upon certain classes of work which are considered to be suitable for them to perform, and it has been found that efficiency and economy result from that practice. I may point out that the respective increases in the female and male staff in 1908 were 1,753 and 2,666. In the Post Office, as elsewhere, women receive a lower scale of pay than men.

Are some of the girls paid as low as 16s or 17s. per week?

It depends on the class of work. We are raising the wages of the typists considerably.

But are some of the girls paid as low as 16s or 17s. a week?

The right hon. Gentleman cannot carry the wages list in his pocket. Notice must be given of the Question.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education what is the present position of the trust estate of the Cooper School, Marston Sicca, Gloucestershire; what is its annual net income, and to what purpose is that income now devoted.

A scheme has been drafted for this Foundation, but its publication has been postponed pending the receipt of the observations of the trustees thereon. They have been informed that the Board will proceed to publication unless their observations are received within a fortnight. The local education authority have expressed their approval of the draft scheme. So far as can be ascertained, the net income of the Foundation is about £100. As the school has been closed, the income must continue to accumulate until a scheme has been established.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether a scheme has been decided upon for the use of the trust funds of Northleach (Gloucestershire) Grammar School in educational work in that town and its neighbourhood; and, if not, how do the affairs of the trust now stand.

No scheme has yet been drafted for the administration of the Northleach Westwood Grammar School. A local inquiry was held by Officers of the Board on 22nd July as to a proposal to utilise the endowment for the establishment of a higher elementary school. On 7th September the Board addressed a letter to the local education authority with regard to the prospects which such a school, if established, might be expected to have, and to this letter they are now awaiting a reply.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education if he will give a Return showing the number of applications and decisions of the Board during the last six months in respect of applications for building grants from the £100,000 voted by Parliament, in continuation of the previous Parliamentary Paper.

I hope to lay a statement on the subject during the course of next month.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he will state how many applications for small holdings in the county of Gloucestershire have been made to date; how many of such applications have been approved; how many of such applicants have been granted such small holdings; whether the compulsory powers in the Small Holdings and Allotments Acts have been put in force; and, if so, in how may cases and in what districts.

548 applications for small holdings have been made in Gloucestershire, the great majority of which have been approved. The requirements of seventy of the applicants have been satisfied. Compulsory powers have not as yet been exercised in the county.

Of the applicants approved, how many are bona fide agricultural labourers?

Notice should be given of that Question. The hon. Gentleman could hardly be expected to answer it offhand.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Board has taken any steps to prevent the enclosure of the village green in the parish of Redenham, Hants, or whether the Board has any information upon the subject.

The Board have made inquiry locally, and have also been in communication with the Commons Preservation Society on this matter, but they have no power to take any action in regard to it.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the reasons for prohibiting the importation of foreign hay and straw have now disappeared; and, if so, whether it is proposed to revoke the order.

The object of the order to which my hon. friend refers is to safeguard this country from the risk of the introduction of foot-and-mouth disease by the importation of hay or straw imported from countries where that disease exists, or where the circumstances are such as to afford insufficient security against its introduction. The order must, therefore, be regarded as of a permanent character.

I beg to ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether, in view of the fact that foreign meat is fraudulently sold as home-grown and that the price of all beef bought and sold in this country is ruled and fixed by the American Beef Trust, he could see his way to introduce legislation to prevent this injury to our farmers and working people.

The provisions of the Merchandise Marks Acts, 1887 and 1891, and the Merchandise Marks (Prosecution) Act, 1894, already empower the Board to deal with cases in which false trade descriptions of meat are given. It is not proposed to initiate further legislation in the direction suggested.

Does the hon. Gentleman deny that it is a fact that foreign beef is continually sold as British?

My Answer did not deny that. It is a matter for the Board of Trade to deal with.

Does the hon. Gentleman intend to allow the American Beef Trust to go on robbing the people of this country?

That is not contained in the Question of the hon. Member.