To ask the President of the Board of Trade if, in consequence of the discovery by Dr. Enrich that the fatal disease of anthrax is traceable to blood in a certain condition of decay, he will take all possible steps to prevent bloodstains and pieces of skin from being included in bales of wool and hair which are imported into this country for manufacturing purposes. (Answered by Mr. Churchill. In order to ascertain the presence or otherwise of bloodstains or pieces of skin in bales of wool or hair imported, it would be necessary to examine the whole of the contents of each bale, and I am not prepared to suggest to the Customs the adoption of such a course. I am, however, considering whether any other steps can usefully be taken with a view to diminishing the danger referred to.

To ask the Secretary of State for War why refusal has been given as to the payment of free travelling allowance, as promised, for officers' wives in the event of officers being moved from a station on permanent duty. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The promise of free conveyance, made in 1906, to which the hon. Member is apparently alluding, only applied to

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that officers who have been serving in the Territorial Forces of the South Midland District since January last have not yet been gazetted, and have not yet received the outfit allowance to which they are entitled; and whether he will take the steps necessary to have these points attended to without further delay. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) I am aware that a certain number of officers of the South Midland Division have not yet been gazetted; but as I have already explained to the House, the gazetting of officers of the Territorial Force, an intricate and tedious operation, is being pushed on as rapidly as possible. As regards the outfit allowance, this grant is made to officers when approved by the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief. Perhaps the hon. Member will inform me of the particular cases to which he refers.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether in the interpretation of paragraph 457 of the regulations for the Territorial Force, the allowance granted to non-commissioned officers and men in respect of injuries received in and through the performance of military duty and incapacitating temporarily for the ordinary trade or calling of the injured man, the phrase in and through military duty is held to include injuries arising from accident during the going to and coming from the place where the military duty is performed, on the ground that the going to or coming from the place is an essential condition of the performance of the military duty. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The general interpretation to be given to the regulations is that a Territorial soldier, to be entitled to the gratuity, must have joined, and be acting with, a military body. A man proceeding to or from the place where he joins his company, detachment, etc., is not entitled to it.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether, as the withdrawal of the full-dress headdress from units of the Territorial Force is producing a bad effect on recruiting for that force, the County Associations can be authorised to reissue the head-dress and to pay for the same. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Two suits of uniform can be provided by the associations out of public funds, one of which must be service dress, and the other may be a walking-out dress. It was not considered necessary that full-dress head-dress should be provided for wear with either description of uniform.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that, on Monday night last, a number of men who entered the Paddington Workhouse had to sleep on the floor in the old condemned casual ward with only two or three inches between each man, and the walls reeking with moisture, the consequence being that some of the men have lost the use of the voice, and others are in the hands of a doctor; and whether he proposes to take any, and what, action in the matter. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I have made inquiry on this subject and find that, at 9.15 in the evening of Monday the 19th October, ninety-throe able-bodied men presented themselves for admission to the Paddington Workhouse. Fifty-four of the men were accommodated in the receiving wards, and thirty-nine in the old casual wards. I am informed that the latter building is in a sound condition, and that it is not correct to say that the walls were reeking with moisture. Three rooms were placed at the disposal of the men, but, as one of them had been recently scrubbed, they elected to sleep in the other two. The floor space of one is 39 feet by 18, and the other 24 feet by 18. The rooms are stated to be lofty and they are lighted with gas. There was an abundant supply of hot and cold water and other sanitary conveniences. There were not enough bedsteads on the premises for all the men, but each of them was supplied with a hair mattress, two blankets and a flock pillow. It is not stated that any of the men suffered any ill effects, and, so far as I can judge, the master seems to have made the best arrangements he could to meet the emergency caused by so large an influx of men late in the evening.

To ask the Postmaster-General if he can explain why it is necessary to keep auxiliary postmen at Belfast from twelve to eighteen months without giving them permanent appointments, and thus enable them to come under the regulations for the supply of uniform and boots. To ask the Postmaster General if he is aware that there are about thirty ex-soldiers and sailors employed as auxiliary postmen at Belfast; that many of them have been acting as such for the past twelve or eighteen months, and have not yet received uniform or boot allowance; and whether, seeing that letter carriers employed for more than three hours daily are entitled to be supplied with uniform, and those employed for five hours daily or more are entitled to uniform and boot allowance, he can see his way to have the regulations in these cases carried out forthwith. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton). It will be convenient to answer both of the hon. Member's Questions together. A revision of the outdoor postal services at Belfast is under consideration, and, pending settlement of the details, it has been necessary to employ some temporary men for postmen's duties. These men are not necessarily eligible for permanent appointments, nor are they entitled to uniform or boot allowances.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state the number of arrests for drunkenness in Glasgow, Edinburgh, Swansea, Cardiff and London, respectively, on Sunday, 25th October instant. (Answered by Mr. Herbert Samuel.) My right hon. friend has asked for the figures for Swansea, Cardiff, and London, but has not yet obtained them. If the hon. Member wishes for the figures for Glasgow and Edinburgh he should apply to the Scottish Office.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the fact that no test for tuberculosis is possible for any of the chilled, frozen, or tinned beef and mutton imported into this country, he can see his way to compel butchers who sell foreign meat to have a notice to that effect plainly written over their shops and on their carts; and, if unable to do this, will he introduce legislation for this purpose to protect the general public of this country. To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether, in view of the fact that no test for tuberculosis is at present possible for any of the frozen, chilled, or tinned beef and mutton imported into this country, he could see his way to imposing such a test for the protection of the British public. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Perhaps I may be allowed to answer these Questions. I do not think it would be practicable to adopt the precise expedients which the hon. Member suggests; but the subject of the importation of foreign meat has received my consideration, and I have lately issued some regulations with regard to the matter which come into force on 1st January next, and a copy of which I will send to him.

To ask the Lord Advocate whether, in view of the injury to British commerce should foreign countries find that false colliery certificates are not hold to be fraudulent in Scotland, he will reconsider his decision not to permit criminal proceedings to be taken in the case complained of by Messrs. Coats. (Answered by Mr. Thomas Shaw.) The Question appears to be based on a misapprehension of the legal position, and I see no reason to depart from the decision as to criminal proceedings already announced.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what instructions have been given to the pension officers as to taking into account as means within the Old-Age Pensions Act any voluntary allowances made by employers to their old servants. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) It has not boon thought necessary to give any more specific instructions as regards the calculation of money income than are contained in Section 4 (1) (a) of the Act.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the present amount outstanding of the £30,000,000 2¾ percentum war loan; and what amount is expected to be paid off of that loan by the end of the current financial year, 1908–9. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The amount of war loan outstanding on the 30th September 1908 was £22,326,602, I can give no information in advance as to the intended application of sinking fund moneys to the purchase of a particular security.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been directed to the fact that, while the Revenue Estimates submitted to the House in the Budget of 1907 proved to be much too low, those of the present year have proved to be much too high; whether the attention of the permanent officials concerned has been directed to the miscalculations made upon both these occasions; and whether, seeing that at the time when the Budget was submitted to the House of Commons this year all available evidence indicated that the fall in revenue which has occurred was likely to occur, he can give any assurance that in future years those who prepare the Estimates of revenue will consult the Board of Trade as to the commercial outlook, in order that such incorrect figures may not again be submitted to this House. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd - George.) Whether the revenue of the current year has been over-estimated in the Budget or not is a question on which it would be premature to pronounce at present. But my hon. friend may rest assured that when Budget forecasts fail, as they sometimes do in one direction or the other, it is not for the want of attention to the indications, so far as they may be available, of the commercial outlook.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been directed to the fact that the Prussian Government, faced with the need of raising a largely-increased revenue, have made a further progressive graduation of the income-tax; and if he will consider this example in relation to the British financial situation. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) I am aware of the proposals which have recently been laid before the Prussian Diet.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what part of the sum of £300,000 available this year, under the Unemployed Workmen Act, will be allocated to Ireland. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The grant (of which only £200,000 has so far been voted) has not yet been allocated between the three countries. The allocation will be determined with reference to the requirements, when these have been ascertained. In the meantime, issues on account are made by the Treasury to the Local Government Board as necessity arises.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the surveyors of taxes demand income-tax on money that has already paid income tax in New South Wales; whether he will state if money coming here as capital from Australia is liable to income-tax when it reaches England; whether he is aware that double income-tax and exchange means £12 per £100; and will he take immediate steps to end this alleged grievance. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The fact that money remitted from abroad has been subjected to income-tax in a British Colony does not exempt it from liability to taxation in this country under the Income-Tax Acts, and, as at present advised, I do not see my way to propose any alteration of the law in this respect. As regards the other point raised by the hon. Member, remittances which are clearly shown to be remittances of capital are not taxable as income in this country.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what was the total expenditure in Ireland in each of the three years 1905–6, 1906–7, and 1907–8, out of the Parliamentary grant available under the Unemployed Workmen Act. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) There was no Parliamentary grant for the purposes of the Unemployed Workmen Act in the year 1905–6. The amount of the grant to Ireland in 1906–7 was £11,050, and 1907–8 £4,500.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to new rules recently and unexpectedly issued by the Intermediate Board of Education in Ireland prohibiting pupils who had passed in any grade from examination in the same grade again, no matter whether qualified by age or not; whether he is aware that if proper notice had been given to the Board's intention many pupils would have waited longer before attempting the examination in order to compete for scholarships; and whether, in view of the hardship inflicted by the introduction of the now rule at short notice, he will urge its postponement till after the examinations in 1909. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Board of Intermediate Education have decided to submit a new rule which will have the effect of suspending, until after next year's examinations, the operation of Rule 14b in all grades except the preparatory grade. The new rule will be laid upon the Table of the House in due course.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the firm of Messrs. Peacock, of Wandsworth, who are on the list of contractors to the War Office, employ a very large amount of boy labour, and do a great deal of their work piecework, which is contrary to the rules signed by the master carpenters and joiners of London and the operatives; that the firm absolutely refuse to comply with the said rules; whether he will take steps to induce this firm to conform with the rules signed by the employers and operatives; and, failing which, whether he will remove this firm from the list of contractors invited to tender for work in connection with his department. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Messrs. Peacock, although on the list of contractors, do not hold at present any contract. Should a contract be made with them at any future time it would contain the usual wages provisions, strict observance of which would be required.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state the names and tonnage of the British ships seized, delayed, and damaged by the Russian forces during the Russo Japanese War. (Answered by Secretary Sir Edward Grey.) The following table contains the names of the vessels falling in the category mentioned, and their gross and net tonnage taken from the Mercantile Navy Lists for 1904 and 1905:—

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the imposition at an early date of a tax on landed property at St. Lucia, and of the difficulty experienced by the smaller proprietors in raising money at a reasonable rate of interest to develop and work their holdings, whereby the development of the Colony is retarded, the Secretary of State for the Colonics would be willing to facilitate the establishment of an agricultural bank in St. Lucia, as recommended by Mr. Administrator Cork, by allowing a portion of the £25,000 surplus to be used as a nucleus of capital for such bank. (Answered by Colonel Seely.) It is true that the Administrator, Mr. Cork, submitted certain proposals in 1906 for the establishment in St. Lucia of a scheme for providing loans under an Agricultural Loan Ordinance. Those proposals were carefully considered at the time, but were not deemed suitable for application to the conditions obtaining in St. Lucia, and Mr. Cork was so informed. He has, no doubt, not lost sight of this important question, and the Secretary of State will ascertain from him whether he has any further proposals to make. He will also consult the Governor, who is at present on leave in this country. In the absence of definite proposals it seems premature to discuss the possible sources from which the capital for such an undertaking could be obtained.—

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that a number of assistant clerks (now class) in the Board's service are, at the age of twenty-one, in receipt of less than 23s. per week; whether several assistant clerks of over nine years service, about the age of twenty-eight years, are in receipt of £86 or less per annum; and whether the Board will make representations to the Treasury with a view of increasing those salaries. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) The Answer to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. I do not think it would be expedient or in accordance with practice to give information as to communications which are, or may be, made to the Treasury on such matters.

To ask the President of the Board of Education if he will state the number of public elementary schools in England and Wales, stating as far as possible the number in rural, semi-rural, and urban districts, respectively, and how many of such schools have school gardens or land attached to them. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) The information required for the classification adopted in the Question is not readily available, but I may say that on 1st August, 1907, there were 14,807 schools in county areas, exclusive of those boroughs and urban districts which are local education authorities for the purposes of Part III. of the Education Act, 1902; but a considerable proportion of those schools are, of course, situated in the smaller boroughs and urban districts. With regard to the last part of the Question, I may refer the right hon. Gentleman to the Answers which I gave to my hon. friend the Member for East Northants on the 17th March last, copies of which I am sending to him.

To ask the President of the Board of Education whether, in view of the fact that the footnote to Article 10 of the Code of Regulations for Public Elementary Schools in England, 1906, did not appear in the Codes of Regulations for Public Elementary Schools in England, 1907 and 1908, the policy of the Board of Education in regard to this matter has been varied; and whether, if the policy of the Board in this matter is as indicated in the Code of Regulations for Public Elementary Schools in England, 1906, the Board intend, as in paragraph 3 of the prefatory memorandum of that code, to insert in the Code for 1909 the requirement that there shall be on the staffs of public elementary schools a certain number of certificated teachers who have undergone a course of training in a training college. (Answered by Mr. Runciman.) With regard to the first part of the Question, I beg to refer my hon. friend to the Answer which I gave on this subject on the 29th July last. The question of re-enacting this or a similar requirement is now under consideration.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been drawn to the lecture delivered on 23rd May last by Mr. Dunscombe Vallance to the members of the Bucks Chamber of Agriculture, in which the lecturer advised farmers to sell tuberculous cows to the meat trader without disclosing their diseased conditions; and whether, having regard to the fact that the possession by a retailer of a tuberculous animal is regarded as a crime, measures will be adopted to make a compulsory veterinary examination of all animals entering live stock markets as food or otherwise to give a warranty as to their soundness to purchasers. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I have seen a report of the lecture referred to. The subject of the inspection of milch cows is receiving my consideration, but I cannot promise to give effect to the suggestion in the last part of the Question.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state the proportion of officials and employees to patients in the fever hospitals of the Metropolitan Asylumns Board on 1st January, 1908. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The returns of the staff at the Metropolitan Asylums Board are made up fortnightly, and the date nearest to 1st January last, for which there is a record, is 28th December, 1907. The total number of the officials and employees of all kinds at the hospitals was 3,850, and of the patients 6,244. The numbers include as regards the small-pox hospitals, (a) the staff held in readiness for any small pox cases that might occur; (b) the staff for fever purposes at the Joyce Green smallpox hospital, which was being used as an emergency fever hospital at the time; and (c) the Joyce Green farm staff.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can give information as to the cost of the maintenance of roads in each of the counties of England and Wales in each year from 1902 to 1907, both inclusive; and whether he can ascertain what part of the additional cost of the maintenance; of roads is, in the opinion of the high- way authorities of the various districts, attributable to motor traffic. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) Particulars of the expenditure on main roads and other highways by county councils and by the councils of boroughs and other urban districts and of rural districts are given in the annual Local Taxation Returns. The authorities other than county councils are grouped under the head of counties. The Returns for the years 1902 to 1906 (except one Part for 1906) have been published, and I shall be happy to send my hon. friend a set of them if he so desires. The Returns for 1907 are in preparation. I am unable to say what part of the cost of highway maintenance the highway authorities attribute to motor traffic.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he will state on what grounds five applications by local authorities for restriction of motor traffic on special roads have been refused by the Local Government Board, and for what reasons twelve applications were withdrawn or dropped. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) The particulars which my hon. friend requires will be found in the following statement:—Applications made to the Local Government Board under Section 8 of the Motor Car Act, 1903, for regulations prohibiting or restricting motor-car traffic on certain roads.

To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the firm of Messrs. Peacock, of Wandsworth, who are supplying joinery work to the Greenwich Hospital estate and who are contractors to the Admiralty, employ a very large amount of boy labour, do a great deal of their work by the piece, which is contrary to the rules signed by the master carpenters and joiners of London and the operatives, and that the firm absolutely refuses to conform to the said rules; whether he will take steps to induce this firm to comply with the rules agreed to and signed by employers and employees; and, failing which, whether he will remove this firm from the list of Admiralty contractors. (Answered by Mr. McKENNA.) The Admiralty have no information on the particular points mentioned in the hon. Member's Question. The contract with Messrs. Peacock contains the usual clause as to the payment of current wages, and no complaint of infringement has been made. If any specific complaint is made it will be investigated in the usual manner.

To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the recent purchase by the United States Government of the patent rights in that country of Dr. Churchward's steel and armour-plate making process; whether any inquiries have been made by the Admiralty into the merits of this process; and, if so, with what result. (Answered by Mr. McKENNA.) The Answer to both parts of the Question is in the negative. I shall be glad to have all such information on the subject as the hon. Member can afford me.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether Schedule A valuation of all licences on the border-line between one group and another have been raised into the next group, such as 49 under 50 into 51 under 100; whether these alterations have been made since the passing of the Finance Act introduced by the present Prime Minister; whether this has been done pursuant to a direction issued by the Inland Revenue Commissioners to the Surveyor of Taxes; and whether he will lay the instructions upon the Table of the House, together with a statement showing the increase in revenue that has accrued from such heightening of the Schedule A valuation both in respect of Licence Duty and in respect of Compensation Levy. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) I am not aware of any alterations in the Income-Tax Schedule A valuations of licensed premises, such as those indicated in my hon. friend's Question, since the passing of the Finance Act referred to. No directions have been issued to Surveyors of Taxes in the matter.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer in reference to the recent orders of the Boards of Customs and Inland Revenue reducing, from the 1st April next, the age-limit of retirement from these services to sixty-one in place of the present limits of sixty-five in the Customs and sixty-two in the Inland Revenue, if he will state the necessity for adopting this stop at the present time; and whether it is taken with the object of reducing the establishments concerned.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the number in each grade affected by the orders of the Boards of Customs and Inland Revenue reducing the age of retirement to sixty-one; whether he is aware that disappointment and feeling exist, especially in the Customs, because of the short notice given of this change, involving the hardships of several years reduced incomes and the dislocation of private arrangements and liabilities entered into on the faith of existing departmental regulations; and will he cause inquiry to be made with the view of modifying the feeling on the part of officials that the action taken implies a want of reasonable consideration for the interests of the men affected. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The general orders referred to give notice that after the close of the current financial year officers may be required to retire on attaining the ages mentioned. No decision can be reached at the present time as to the future needs of the public service with regard to the establishments in question.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer on what basis, and by what calculations, the Estate Duty Department of the Inland Revenue arrives at the market value of public-houses in calculating the duty payable upon the estates of deceased owners of large numbers of public-houses; does the Department institute a local inquiry into the market value of each particular public-house owned by a deceased brewer; or what is the method pursued. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The Department does not necessarily institute a local inquiry into the market value of each particular public-house owned by a deceased brewer; but adopts such methods of testing the values offered in each particular estate as seem to be required.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state whether any agreements to purchase their farms at Killasormagh, North Longford, from the representatives of the late Richard Davoren, have been lodged on behalf of the tenants with the Estates Commissioners; if so, what is the cause of the delay in having this estate inspected as promised; whether any offer has been made under the sixth section for the purchase of the untenanted portion, a promise to divide which was given to the tenants when signing their agreements; and, if nothing has yet been done, will an inspection be now ordered. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) No purchase agreements have been lodged with the Estates Commissioners in this case. The estate is pending for sale to the Commissioners under Section 6 of the Irish Land Act, 1903. It has been inspected, and the Estate Commissioners expect to be in a position to make an offer at an early date.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any reply has yet been received from Mr. J. H. Dopping, as to a sale to the tenants of the M. A. Kernan Estate, in the townland of Ballynulty, North Longford; and, if not, whether the Commissioners propose to communicate direct with the owner. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have no information as to any negotiations for the sale of this estate which may be pending between the landlord and his tenants, and they do not propose to communicate with the landlord.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any steps have yet been taken by the Estates Commissioners to reinstate Thomas Brady in his farm at Culleenmore, North Longford, on the White estate, portion of which is in the occupation of a planter named Bodell; will he state what was the report of the inspector who inquired into the case; and when action will be taken on that report. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have inquired into the application for reinstatement of Thomas Brady, who resides in New York. The holding at one time occupied by him has been purchased by the present occupier under the Land Purchase Acts, and the Commissioners cannot take any further action in the matter.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether any inquiry was ever made, as promised by the late Chief Secretary, into the complaint of Thomas Duffy of Legga, North Longford, into a complaint that he had been deprived of one acre of land, his turbary, and an annual payment of £3 1s. 10d., in respect of a passway, by the agreement he was induced to sign in connection with the sale of the Maconchy estate, thus leaving him paying an annuity of £12 6s. now instead of an old rent of £10 16s. 2d.; whether any inspection ever took place on this property; and, if not, will one be now ordered. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The case of Thomas Duffy was inquired into by the Estates Commissioners, his holding was visited, and the boundaries were found correct. The holding has been vested in Duffy. The Estates Commissioners can take no further steps in the matter.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state whether the Estates Commissioners will direct one of their inspectors to inquire into the case of Mrs. Helena Cunningham, who was evicted from her holding at Kilmacow, Curraglass, county Cork, on the Devonshire estate, in 1887. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The Estates Commissioners have not received any application for reinstatement in this case.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many out of the total number of local sanitary authorities in Ireland have adopted the Compulsory Notification of Infectious Diseases Act; and what proportion of the population such authorities represent. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) Two hundred and twenty-five out of 308 sanitary authorities in Ireland, representing 76·9 per cont. of the population, have adopted the Infectious Disease Notification Act.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state the terms of the bonus which is to be offered to the Rosyth contractor for the earlier completion of the work.

The bonus is £800 per week.

May I ask whether any limit has been placed upon the amount which the contractors can earn by expediting the work?

I do not think so, but I will look up the point.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the "Blake" and the "Blenheim," as now converted to mother-ships for destroyers, have had their armaments cut down from two 9·2-inch guns and ten 6-inch guns each to only four 6-inch guns, so that the weight of projectiles fired in one round from the whole of their guns is now only 400 lbs. as compared with 1,760 lbs. with the former armament, and the coal supply for ship use has been cut down from 1,500 tons to 670 tons; and whether he proposes to reclassify these ships which still appear in the only Annual Return furnished to Parliament and in the Navy List for the current month as first-class cruisers.

I have nothing to add to my previous statement, except that the question, of classification will be considered as usual when the Dilke Return for next year is prepared.

Was not the inclusion of these battleships in the Dilke Return the subject of a protest from both sides in this House last year?

I regret to say I am not aware of the circumstances.

Cannot a reclassification of the ships be carried out, so far as the Navy List is concerned?

I do not think the Navy List is so much the authority on that point as the Dilke Return.

Is the Navy List no authority?

Oh, yes; but on this point of comparison with other countries the Dilke Return is the authority. The point will be borne in mind when the Dilke Return comes up next year for reconsideration.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the work of converting the cruiser "St. George" into a mother-ship for destroyers has been commenced; whether her armament is being cut down from two 9·2-inch and ten 6-inch guns to only four 6-inch guns, so that the weight of projectiles fired in a single round is diminished from 1,760 lbs. to less than one-fourth, or 400 lbs.; and, if so, whether he will cease to allow this vessel to appear in official classifications as a first-class cruiser.

No work has been commenced on the "St. George."

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that in an official statement where no question of naval strength is involved the so-called first-class cruisers "Blake," "Blenheim," and "St. George," were classified under their proper designation as miscellaneous vessels and not in the list of first-class cruisers; and why, under these circumstances, in official statements of naval strength on which Parliament is bound to rely, these ships are classed as first-class cruisers.

I am unable to trace the official statement referred to; perhaps my hon. friend will inform me what it is?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the official statement referred to is the Memorandum issued by his predecessor this year?

I was unable to trace the document referred to in the Question in the Office.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the experience of the Board of Admiralty has been such as to demonstrate the inadequacy of nucleus crews for the proper maintenance of His Majesty's ships; and whether it is the general rule to supply vermin powder, etc., for the use of ships undergoing repair.

The Answer to both parts of the hon. Member's Question is in the negative. As a rule, the powder is only supplied when required.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that H.M.S. "Diadem," at present under repair in His Majesty's dockyard at Chatham, is in such a dirty, verminous, and generally insanitary condition as to be detrimental to the health of the workmen employed thereon; whether he is aware that a shipwright recently employed below decks on this ship has lately died from enteric fever contracted in the course of such employment; whether any application has been made by the widow for compensation for the loss of her husband; and whether any, and what, steps are being taken to prevent a recurrence of such cases.

The statement as to the condition of the "Diadem" has proved upon inquiry to be without foundation. A shipwright recently employed on this ship has lately died from enteric fever, but there is no evidence that the disease in question was contracted on duty. An application has been made by the widow for a compassionate allowance, and this is now receiving attention.

Was the inquiry made only after the Question had been handed in in this House?

The report on the matter is dated 29th October. It says no complaints had been received from any dockyard official or workman employed on board.

My Question was handed in on the 28th.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the super-session of the memoranda regulating the absence on repairs of battleships from the Channel Fleet applies also to the case of cruisers; and what is the numerical limit, if any, which in the opinion of the Admiralty should be set upon the absence simultaneously of cruisers from the Channel Fleet.

The reply to the first part of the hon. Member's Question is in the affirmative. No numerical limit has been fixed.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that the memoranda regulating the absence of battleships for repairs from the Channel Fleet are now announced to be superseded, the Admiralty propose to prescribe any limitation in the number of battleships which may be so absent simultaneously; and, if so, what is that numerical limitation.

The reply to the first part of the hon. Member's Question is in the negative.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that in the British Navy only one gun is held in reserve for every four guns afloat while in other navies two guns are held in reserve for every four afloat, the Government will take steps to give us a reserve of guns equal to that of other countries.

It is not considered desirable in the public interest to make any statement regarding the reserves of naval guns.

Does the right hon. Gentleman question the accuracy of the statements?

I neither question nor admit their accuracy. I must decline to make any statement.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what is the average total cost to the State of a Special Reservist from the date of his enlistment until the conclusion of his six months preliminary training.

The average total cost of an Infantry Special Reservist, from the date of his enlistment to the end of his six months recruit drill, is £27 19s. 6d., including his clothing outfit and the bounty of £1 10s. payable on the termination of six months drill.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is in his power, by administrative order and without fresh legislation, to revise the conditions of enlistment in the Special Reserve; and, if so, will he consider the advisability, in the interests of the State, of raising the purchase price of a discharge from £3 to a figure which would recoup the Exchequer for the expenditure uselessly incurred in training, clothing, and supporting for six months men who only join the Reserve in order to tide over a period of temporary unemployment, and with the intention of cancelling their liability to further service at the earliest opportunity.

There is at present no evidence that any appreciable number of men join with the intention which the hon. Member suggests. He may rest assured that if experience proves that the question arises, it will be fully considered. The figure of £3 is not statutory.

But did not the right hon. Gentleman hold out special inducements to the unemployed who wished to tide over the winter to join the Special Reserve?

Certainly not, unless they were fit men.

Did you not suggest that these men should take employment over the winter, and then have no further liability?

No, on the contrary, the further liability was carefully set out.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is instituting any inquires into the question of increasing the flatness of the trajectory of the service rifle.

Yes, Sir. These inquiries have been going on for some time.

Shall we have the result of the inquiries shortly?

I should not like to say that.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what number of rounds can be fired from the Lee-Enfield rifle before the bullets lose 100 feet in velocity.

The number varies with each barrel, but the average may be taken at 2,500 rounds. In some barrels as many as 5,000 rounds have been fired before the velocity dropped 100 feet, and in others it dropped after 2,000 rounds.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can furnish the House with a detailed analysis of the relative merits of the service rifle and the Ross rifle.

The merits and demerits of these rifles are matters of opinion, and I cannot undertake to discuss them within the limits of a reply to a Question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay on the Table the results of the inquiry into this matter?

I think I had better not. We have had to consider the merits of many rifles, including the Ross rifle, and I do not think it would be in the public interest to enter into details with regard to any individual rifle.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War how many men will be returning from abroad during the coming trooping season for discharge or transfer to the Army Reserve; what steps will be taken to assist these men in finding employment; and whether he will consider the advisability of giving them the option of being attached to their home battalions till they find employment or till the close of the winter.

It is not possible to give the figures asked for without reference to all the record offices, and the compilation would involve considerable clerical labour. A number of those brought home from abroad do not complete their colour service for periods of three, four, or five months. All who are within two months of the expiration of their colour service are given furloughs on full pay with ration allowance, and thus are enabled to look for work. The remainder, as a matter of course, are allotted to home units. The suggestion of the hon. Member to allow men who had completed their service to remain with the colours would involve an increase of the British Establishment.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will undertake that the promotion of officers in Regular battalions shall not be blocked by the temporary appointment of officers from the Special Reserve.

It is only proposed to make such appointments on a small scale, and it is not anticipated that they will have any appreciable effect on promotion.

But will not that involve the blocking of promotion? How can it be avoided?

We have satisfied ourselves that it will not lead to the difficulty the hon. Member fears.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any, and, if so, what portion of the Territorial Force has been told off for the defence of the landward forts which formerly protected the dockyards at Portsmouth, Devonport, and Chatham; whether the troop so detailed comprise a force of Garrison. Artillery and what is the strength of the Garrison Artillery to be employed; and whether he can state in what way the troops assigned to the defence of the forts are to perform their duty, now that the whole of the guns and ammunition have been removed from the forts.

I am unable to furnish this information; the right hon. Gentleman must be aware that it is neither customary nor to the public interest to publish detailed information in regard to the works, armaments and garrisons of defended ports or fortresses at home or abroad.

Is there any force of Garrison Artillery told off for the defence of those forts which possess no artillery?

I have said it is inexpedient to answer such a Question.

But are not all the units warned beforehand what is expected of them?

Certainly.

Then why refuse the information to the House?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War if a plan of campaign for ending the Boer War, upon which Lord Roberts practically acted, was received from the German Emperor; and, if so, whether he will lay the document upon the Table of the House.

The War Office archives do not contain any such document as the hon. Member refers to, nor is there any record of its having come into the possession of anyone connected with the War Office; I am, therefore, unable to comply with the request of the hon. Member to lay the document upon the Table.

In view of the great interest taken in this question will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to inquire whether such a document is in the country and in any other charge than that of the War Office?

I have enough responsibility at the War Office, and I should be sorry to go outside my own Department.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state whether there is such a document in existence within his knowledge; in view of what has occurred, will he suggest to the Prime Minister that it would be easier, and, indeed, more regular, to offer the Kaiser a seat in the Cabinet?

Order, order.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War why the Special Reservists of the 3rd Battalion Suffolk Regiment were only trained for twenty days, from Monday, 11th May, to Saturday, 30th May; why they were only given twenty days' pay, although they had been engaged for twenty-one days' training; and whether the Special Reservists of other battalions were treated in the same way.

The training of a certain number of Special Reserve units was arranged this year from a Monday to the following Saturday fortnight in order to avoid the necessity of dismissing the men on a Sunday. As this involved only twenty days' training it was not possible to allow more than twenty days' pay. I cannot find that any guarantee of twenty-one days' pay was given. There were other cases similar to that of the unit referred to by the hon. Member. He will notice that no diminution of the number of week days actually devoted to training is involved, but I will consider whether it will not be possible to arrange in future that the full twenty-one days' training and pay shall be given.

Seeing that this is a very small matter, will not the right hon. Gentleman consider the case of these men?

I have said I will consider the question.

But will these men get the extra day's pay?

was understood to reply in the negative.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether any steps are being taken to provide better accommodation in barracks or outside for the 150 married couples living in single-room married quarters in Ireland.

Steps are being taken to improve the accommodation for married soldiers in Ireland. New quarters are being built to replace the existing single-room quarters.

How long is the present disgraceful condition of affairs, which involves a married man and his family living in one room, to be allowed by the State to continue?

I am sorry to say it has continued for a very long time, but I am doing everything I can to abolish it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman do the same thing for Londonderry?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he hopes to be able to abolish the present system?

I am doing it as quickly as I can.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether in view of the fact that only twelve subalterns not already serving in the Militia six months ago have been appointed to the Special Reserve of officers during the last six months, he will state what steps he propoes to take to remedy the shortage which exists.

The Regulations for the Special Reserve of officers have only just been approved and will shortly be published. It is hoped that when they are circulated and the terms of service are thereby made known that the vacancies will gradually be filled.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman was aware of the difficulty of going into training at the period when these gentlemen were going up for their Oxford or Cambridge examinations?

replied in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider the expediency of doing away with the practice of gazetting officers on probation to the Special Reserve, in view of the shortage of 1,595 subalterns in that force.

As I have already explained to the House, the conditions of entry into the Special Reserve of officers are already as low as the General Staff, having regard to efficiency, consider expedient. It is hoped that the publication of the Regulations will have the desired effect of gradually filling up the vancancies.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, during the two years the small arms committee have been endeavouring to find a suitable high velocity bullet for the present service rifle, they have experimented with any of the 303 high velocity bullets and cartridges already in existence.

The reply is in the affirmative.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether, in the opinion of the Army Council, a hostile landing in the neighbourhood of Chatham, Portsmouth, or Devonport is a contingency which must be contemplated and provided against; whether, in the opinion of the Army Council, the danger to our great dockyards likely to result from such a landing has been diminished or increased by the removal of the whole of the guns and ammunition from the land defences of the ports in question; and whether any other Power which contemplates the landing of troops upon its shores has added to the strength of its defences by removing their armaments.

The present policy in regard to the landward defences of our naval ports was deliberately adopted after full consideration by the Government in power in 1900. The present Government does not propose in this respect to depart from the decision of its predecessors. It concurs in the policy adopted in 1900 and followed by every Secretary of State since then. The defence of our principal naval ports has been greatly strengthened by the substitution of modern movable armament for the obsolete guns which were dis- carded as a result of the Report of Sir Robert Grant's Committee in 1900.

May I infer that no question of invasion is anticipated by the present Government?

Nothing of the sort.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War at what date the agricultural tenants of the land on Salisbury Plain which the War Office intends to purchase for artillery ranges will be required to quit their holdings; and whether the two years' notice to quit which is customary in this district has been given.

The land will be required for military purposes for the training season of 1910, i.e., early in June of that year. The War Office has no information as to the alleged custom mentioned, but, of course, custom having legal validity will be observed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these tenants will not be able to gather in their 1910 crops?

asked how it was proposed to arrange for the tenants on these lands to gather their crops and to deal with their holdings, 29th September being passed, and no notice having been given?

said the tenants knew the land would be required. It would not be required till 1910, and he presumed they would make their arrangements accordingly.

wished to know if there would be no range available for the Territorial Artillery in the South of England until 1910.

replied that no such inference could be drawn from what he had said.

Will not these people be given a full year's notice?

The land is not required till 1910.

Was notice given before Michaelmas this year?

The hon. Member overlooks the fact the land is not required till 1910.

But tenancies run from Michaelmas to Michaelmas, and as the land is required in June, 1910, notice should have been given before last Michaelmas.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, in view of his decision to give no compensation for disturbance to the tenant farmers about to be disturbed on Salisbury Plain, and of the fact that the simultaneous disturbance of so large a number in the same locality will render it impossible for them to dispose profitably of their produce and live or dead stock, whether the War Office will take over at valuation the produce and live or dead stock of any such tenant who desires to dispose of it in this way.

We hope that the arrangements which have been made for leaving the tenants in occupation until the beginning of June, 1910, will give them ample time to dispose of their stock. I cannot give any such general and far-reaching undertaking as that suggested by the hon. Member.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think it right that the War Office should treat these tenants less favourably than the Government compels private owners to treat their tenants?

Negotiations are going on with the tenants.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether the proposed purchase of land on Salisbury Plain will involve the division of any properties; and, if so, whether the War Office will undertake to purchase the whole of any such property, if the owner desires, or will pay compensation for the loss of amenities and dimunition of value which the division of such properties involves.

It is probable that the purchase will involve the division of some properties. In cases, such as the present, when the purchase is by agreement the owners may be trusted to look after themselves. An owner in agreeing a price always takes into consideration matters such as damage by severance, loss of amenity, etc. When the purchase is by compulsion these items are included in the compensation.

Are we to understand there is no compulsion in this case?

I hope there will be none.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War on what grounds the Commandant of the School of Musketry prohibited the use of pointed bullets by the School of Musketry shooting team which represented Great Britain in the recent international Olympic competition at 300 metres.

By the King's Regulations only ammunition of Government pattern, and provided by Government, is allowed to be used in Government rifles. As the pointed bullet has not yet been adopted there is no Government supply of ammunition with such bullet which could be used.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the British team that took part in the other international competition did use pointed ammunition in the Service rifle with safety and success?

It may be so.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is his intention to bring in Supplementary Estimates to meet the expense caused by training those unemployed in the Special Reserve.

I do not anticipate that any necessity for a Supplementary Estimate will arise.

Then can the right hon. Gentleman inform the House what: special help the unemployed will get?

That is an argumentative Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War what steps, if any, he is taking to increase the numbers of horses in the United Kingdom suitable for Army purposes.

As I explained to the hon. Member last Monday, I am not in a position to give him any further information in regard to the provision of suitable horses for the Army. The matter is engaging my close attention.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether a large order for the supply of cordite has been placed with the outside trade, notwithstanding the fact that the ordnance factory's price was estimated at 1s. 3½d. per pound as compared to 1s. 9¼d. per pound of the outside trade; and will he give the House the quantity so ordered at this price.

Th only order placed by the War Office with the trade was a very small one at the beginning of the year.

Can we have the exact amount?

I cannot say at this moment, but I think about 30,000 lbs.

The right hon. Gentleman, I understand, refuses to disclose contract prices, but does he agree with the figures given in the Question? Are they not quite inaccurate?

I cannot disclose contract prices.

But the figures have been published in the Press.

I am speaking of War Office Orders. I think the hon. Member is alluding to Admiralty Orders.

If the right hon. Gentleman lays down the principle that contracts should be given to the ordnance factory if its price is lower than that of the outside tenderer, will he carry that principle still further and give work to the trade, which tendered for 4-inch guns at over 50 per cent. lower than the cost at Woolwich?

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether an order in the Royal Laboratory has been suspended to enable the transfer of men to the Royal Carriage and Gun Factory; and will he, having regard to the state of unemployment, arrange for men to be taken on to complete the orders within the specified time, or does he intend to place the Royal Laboratory Order with the outside trade.

The men who were temporarily transferred from the Royal Gun and Carriage Factory to the Royal Laboratory are being sent back to the former factory as work can be found for them there. The Royal Laboratory is above the approved establishment, and must therefore be gradually reduced by wastage. Any work that cannot be done by the existing staff must be placed with the trade, which has had a very small proportion of the work for the Army this year.

Is it a fact that there are 4,000,000 rounds of ammunition less in store this year?

I have no knowledge of it.

I will put the Question down.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received Reports of an attempt to burn Fort Carlisle at the entrance to Cork Harbour; and whether any investigation has taken place into the occurrence and with what result.

No Report has so far been received in the War Office.

Does any suspicion attach to any civilian or any person outside the fort?

I have no knowledge of the facts.

I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government will recommend His Majesty the King to declare an amnesty for political prisoners in India, with a view to allaying the widespread and growing discontent and of affording any reform scheme a better chance of success.

As the hon. Member will see from His Majesty's gracious message which the Viceroy has delivered to-day, remissions and reductions of sentences have been ordered. Political prisoners will not be treated in any way as a special class.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state what was the percentage of mortality among prisoners in Ceylon prisons during the year 1907.

The percentage per annum was 3·6.

Nearly double the rate in Indian prisons, I think?

It is not at all satisfactory, I admit.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that, in the year 1907, fifty-nine men were sentenced to death in Ceylon and forty-four were hanged, and that this number exceeds that in the neighbouring province of Madras, in India, where the population is twelve times as great; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made into the prevalence of capital punishment in Ceylon.

The subject to which my hon. friend refers is engaging the attention of the Secretary of State.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that in the year 1907 corporal punishment was inflicted on prisoners in Ceylon in 128 cases for breach of prison discipline and generally for working short task; and whether, having regard to the general diminution of corporal punishment in prisons in India, and in the United Kingdom, with the best results, he will cause inquiry to be made into the excessive prevalence of flogging in the Ceylon gaols.

The number of cases of corporal punishment inflicted in Ceylon in 1907 for breaches of prison discipline was well below the average of the last five years. The increase over the figures for 1906 appears to be due to changes in the tasks required, and the figures for the second half of the year were more favourable than for the first half. The question of corporal punishment in Ceylon prisons was carefully inquired into less than three years ago, and the Colonial Government are fully aware of the desirability of limiting such punishment as far as is compatible with proper discipline. However, the Governor's attention will be called to the matter.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to a Ceylon case of one Kaitan, a boy of twelve years of age, who was sentenced to death in 1907, but whoso sentence was commuted to one of twenty years rigorous imprisonment, and who has since been transferred to a reformatory with orders that his case is to be brought up for further consideration when he attains his eighteenth year; and whether he can see his way by legislation, or otherwise, to prohibit in future any sentence of capital punishment on a child of such tender years.

I am aware of the case to which my hon. friend refers, and the question of altering the law is being considered.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the at mention of the Secretary of State has been called to the statement of Lord Plunket, at Wellington, on 26th September, that the New Zealand Government hoped yet to receive a favourable response to their request that the Home Government would co-operate to enable New Zealand to acquire a vessel for the purpose of giving young New Zealanders a naval training; and whether any steps are being taken by the Colonial Office to satisfy the desire of the Dominion Government.

The Secretary of State has seen the statement referred to, which was made, I understand, by the Prime Minister of New Zealand, and not by the Governor as at first reported. The Secretary of State is most anxious to facilitate the scheme proposed by the New Zealand Government, and is in communication with the Admiralty on the subject, but I regret that I cannot at present add anything to the Answer given by my right hon. friend the First Lord of the Admiralty in reply to similar Questions put by the hon. Gentleman on the 15th and 22nd of last month.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if his attention has been called to a case at the Old Street Police Court last week, when a person asked assistance from the poor- box alleging that he, with his wife and seven children, had been deported from Canada without any form of trial, that he had emigrated to Canada at considerable cost, and had found work there for two years; and will he take steps to bring the case under the consideration of the Canadian Government with the view of ascertaining the law relating to emigration to Canada.

I understand that the family in question were deported from Canada under the law which provides that whenever an immigrant has, within two years of his landing in Canada become a public charge, he may be deported. The Secretary of State is in communication with the Dominion Government on the question of this law, with a view to the prevention of hard cases arising under it, and inquiry will be made as regards the particular case referred to. I may add that the High Commissioner has been good enough to interest himself in this and other cases, and is in personal communication with me on the subject.

Under whose auspices was this family sent out to Canada?

I should like notice of that Question.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if, in view of the fact that a heavy export duty was imposed about three years ago upon exports from the Island of Montserrat because the finances then showed a deficiency, he will favourably consider the removal of this impost in view of the large surplus which now exists.

The Governor has reported that nothing would give him greater pleasure than to recommend a reduction of taxation in Montserrat, but that the time for such a recommendation has not yet arrived. The surplus funds of the Presidency do not greatly exceed £5,000, and a reserve fund of £10,000 is aimed at as a measure of obvious prudence. I can only promise that the matter will not be lost sight of when a sufficient reserve has been built up.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any reform in the composition of the Legislative Council of Malta is contemplated by His Majesty's Government; and, if so, can he state the nature of the reform.

The matter is receiving the careful consideration of His Majesty's Government, but I am not in a position to make any statement at present.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the proposal submitted to the last Colonial Conference by the Prime Minister of New Zealand, to the effect that British cargo vessels shall receive preferential treatment in the Suez Canal, or some remission of dues from the Government, has been further considered; and what action, if any, it is proposed to take.

The matter is still being considered by His Majesty's Government, but I fear that there is no immediate probability of any special reduction being made in the dues.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information as to the convocation of the Persian Parliament.