To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the postal and telegraph staffs at Dundee have been working overtime almost continuously during the present year, and that an assurance was given last year that overtime would be considerably reduced daring 1908; and whether he will inquire into the matter. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I regret to find that a considerable amount of overtime has been required of the postal and telegraph staff at Dundee during the present year. This has been chiefly attributable to the demand for officers to act as season and leave substitutes at other towns. I am glad to inform the hon. Member that proposals have now been framed with the view of obviating the necessity for so much overtime at Dundee.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that, during 1907, a number of postmen applied for transfers to various towns; that those transfers were granted, and forms were signed by the men accepting them upon the rates of wages shown therein; that many of these transfers were held over for departmental or other reasons until January and February of this year; that on the transfers being made the men were given rule-books setting out the wages of the offices to which they were transferred; and whether, in these circumstances, he will issue instructions that the circulars of February and July, reducing wages at various offices, shall not apply to those men who obtained sanction for their transfers under the higher rates. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) I have been considering the case of the postmen referred to by the hon. Member and I have arranged for all postmen transferred before 14th February, 1908, to have the choice of old or new scales at the office to which they have been transferred.

To ask the Secretary for Scotland with reference to the property of ten acres of land and four and three-quarter acres of foreshore near Greenock, which was recently purchased by the Admiralty for torpedo purposes for £27,225, and which at the time of that purchase formed part of a property of forty-eight acres of land (with foreshore not entered on the valuation roll) which was entered on the valuation roll as of the annual value of £75, if he can now say by how much that £75 valuation for rating of the larger property has been reduced by reason of the severance of the purchased portion. (Answered by Mr. Sinclair.) By £11 2s.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that at the Ventnor office the instructions in the recently issued circular dealing with minor irregularities have been disregarded, and that the local secretary of the Postal Telegraph Clerks' Association has been punished for drawing attention to the circular in question; and whether he proposes to take any, and, if any, what, action in this case. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) The officer in question has been guilty of repeated acts of negligence and has been punished for them in the ordinary course. The punishment had no connection either with the recent circular referred to (which has not been disregarded) or with the officer's membership of the Postal Telegraph Clerks' Association.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he can state the amount expended in the purchase of baskets for the Irish department of the Post Office and parcels post; whether he can state how much of this sum is expended in the purchase of baskets manufactured in Ireland; and whether any repairs are executed in Ireland. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) With the exception of two wicker tops for handcarts, the whole order for baskets for the Irish parcel post service will go to Irish firms. I am sorry to say the requirements this year are very small, and the cost will be under £11. I have also given to an Irish firm an order of about the same amount for baskets for use in England. Repairs are executed by Irish firms; they were paid £110 10s. 4d. on that account in 1907–8. The Board of Public Works inform me that baskets used for indoor work in the Dublin sorting office and other post offices in Ireland are obtained in Ireland at an annual cost of about £27.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has received recently further communications from Ballyshannon, in which complaint is made of the delay in the postal service and the great inconvenience and dislocation of business resulting therefrom, the letters of the first morning post not being delivered on some occasions during the last week till nearly mid-day; and whether he intends to take immediate steps to remedy this alleged grievance, which is one of long standing and the subject for years of repeated representations to the postal authorities. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton). An application for the improvement of the service to Ballyshannon reached me a few days ago, and I am having inquiry made.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give the particulars as at the end of the year 1907 set out in the two tables printed on page 28 of the Report of the Royal Commission on the Port of London. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) Lloyd's Register of British and Foreign Shipping,

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will furnish a list of the payments, if any, to be made to the Dublin and Belfast Commissioners respectively, appointed by Section 6 of the Irish Universities Act, or, if no sums have been fixed, the rate or scale according to which they are to be paid. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) No remuneration is payable to the Commissioners, but they will receive payment for expenses incurred by them according

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will state the names of the town lands, owners, and area gazetted in County Cavan for compulsory acquisition under the Evicted Tenants Act, 1907; what was the date of gazetting; and when is it expected that these lands will be available for the evicted tenants. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) The accompanying statement gives particulars of the lands in County Cavan which have

To ask the Chief-Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if there has been a continually increasing number of deaths from cancer in Ireland since calf lymph was used for vaccination.

To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the statement of Dr. Alexander James, F.R.C.P., Edinburgh, that compulsory notification and isolation of infectious ailments has acted injuriously; if his attention has been called to the statement of Dr. C. K. Millard, medical officer of health for Leicester, to the effect that hospital isolation has failed to reduce scarlet fever; and will he introduce legislation to make notification and removal to a hospital non-compulsory in Ireland. (Answered by Mr. Birrell.) My hon. friend has called my attention to the statements in question, but I understand that the great majority of the medical profession take the opposite view. I cannot undertake to introduce legislation for the purpose suggested.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if the Local Government Board has now made an 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 dissemination of poisonous matter to be put into the blood of healthy children. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) I have obtained a copy of the depositions taken at the inquest in this case. The child died from septic poisoning following on septic abscesses on the eyelids and behind one ear. It appears that the mother was suffering from an abscess of the breast, and the medical evidence at the inquest renders it practically certain that the abscesses in the child were the result of accidental inoculation of poison from the mother's abscess, and were not in any way caused by vaccination.

To ask the President of the Local Government Board if he has any figures to show that every year 10,000 babies are killed, 10,000 impregnated with the germs of tuberculosis, 10,000 impregnated with the germs of cancer, and 50,000 debilitated, as regards their teeth and eyes, by the illness caused by impregnating infants of tender years with poisonous matter. (Answered by Mr. John Burns.) No, Sir, I have no such figures; and, so far as I am aware, there are no such facts.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty apply direct to German firms for tenders for timber; and, if so, will he consider the advisability of restricting such applications to British firms for the future. (Answered by Dr. Macnamara.) Tenders for Dantzic fir are invited both from selected firms of German exporters and from British agents. This competitive method has advantages as compared with dealing exclusively with British firms.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, how many applications under the Small Holdings Act, 1907, have been applied for in the county of Kent; the amount of land asked for; the amount of land which has been obtained; the number of persons whose applications have been supplied; and in what parts of the county is the land situated. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The information for which my hon. friend asks is as follows: Number of applications received, 714 (53 of which have not yet been dealt with); acreage applied for, 9,648 (including 591 acres asked for by the 53 applicants referred to above); amount of land acquired, 495 acre 3 roods 12 poles; number of persons whose applications have been supplied, 31 by the council, 12 applicants have been supplied with 114 acres direct by private landowners; situation of land acquired, 34¾ acres at Capel, 69½ acres at Hawkhurst, 10¾ acres at Marden, 27½ acres at Sborne, 7 acres at Bilsington, 128¾ acres at Bredhurst, 133¾ acres at Applegore, 30¾ acres at Sandwich, 28¾ acres at Nettle-stead.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he can state the name of the late employer of David Nicholls, the Edenbridge labourer, to whose case his attention has been called, and what were the reasons assigned for the instant dismissal of Nicholls on Saturday last, immediately ensuing upon his eviction from his cottage by Mr. Churches, also the name of the owner of the land upon which Nicholls was recently employed, and the name of the landlord part of whose land Nicholls applied for as a small holding; and what steps he proposes to take.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he is aware that David Nicholls, the Edenbridge labourer to whose case his attention has been previouly directed, is desirous of being reinstated in Prettyman's Farm, Four Elms, from whence he was recently evicted and which is now vacant, and to acquire some adjoining land under the Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1907; and whether he proposes to take any steps to secure that the cottage and land shall be negotiated for with a view to providing Nicholls with a home and means of livelihood. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) Perhaps my hon. friend will allow me to reply to these two Questions at the same time. One of our inspectors has made a full inquiry into this case. Mr. Churches let part of the farmhouse on Prettyman's Farm, Edenbridge, which he rents from Colonel Streatfield, to Mr. Nicholls in November, 1906, at 5s. a week, the other part remaining empty. Early this year Mr. Churches received an offer of £30 a year for the whole house, and he thereupon told Mr. Nicholls he would have to leave. This occurred before he knew that Mr. Nicholls was applying for the house and part of the farm under the Small Holdings Act. Mr. Nicholls raised no objection at the time. Mr. Nicholls is not one of Mr. Churches' farm labourers, and, except for odd jobbs, he has not been employed on the land for the last three years. For the last five or six weeks he has been working as a bricklayer's labourer for Mr Joseph Winter, builder, of Four Elms, who told him last week that the work for which he was engaged would be completed in a few days, and that he should therefore look out for another job. The Board understand that Mr. Nicholls personally has no grievance against either Mr. Churches or Mr. Winter and that they have no animosity whatever against him.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Board are aware that the black scab of the potato has broken out in Germany; and whether they intend to take steps to prevent the importation of diseased potatoes into Great Britain by issuing an order in similar terms to the Irish Order of 1st October, which prohibits the importation of diseased potatoes into Ireland. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The Board understand that the disease in question has appeared in certain small holdings in Germany that are cropped year, after year with potatoes, but that fields under rotation are free. The Board do not propose to adopt, at any rate at present, the suggestion of the hon. Member.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Board will proceed against the outbreaks of black scab in potatoes in England and Scotland by adopting the same measures as are being carried out in Ireland, namely, the immediate destruction of the diseased tubers and the isolation of the infected area; and, if not, why this disease should be treated differently in this country. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The number of outbreaks of the disease in Great Britain is far greater than is believed to be the case in Ireland. In all case growers have been urged to destroy diseased tubers and to take other means for preventing the spread of the disease, but it would be impracticable to "isolate" all the diseased premises. Isolation to be effective would have to be enforced for more than five years.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether, in view of the fact that the Gooseberry Mildew Orders have been in force for more than a year, the Board will now present Returns showing the areas infected in each county, the number of outbreaks and the success or failure of the measures adopted by order of the Board to deal with the disease; and whether the Board will in future secure that the fungicides used in connection with their Orders should be approved as efficient by the Board, as is done in connection with sheep dips under the Sheep Scab Orders. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) A report on the administration and effect of the American Gooseberry Mildew Order Orders will be issued in due course. There seems no good reason for the adoption of the suggestion contained in the latter part of the Question, as the fungicide usually used is that specified in the Board's Orders, and in the rare cases in which other fungicides have been used the Board have been consulted as to their efficiency.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, whether the Board were advised, as long ago as 1st October, that an outbreak of gooseberry mildew had occurred in the county of Surrey; whether any order has been issued by the Board to deal with the disease in the county of Surrey; and whether, in view of the fact that during October and November most of the necessary sales of plants takes place he will say what precautions have been taken at this time to prevent the spread of so infectious a disease. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The reply to the first part of the Question is in the affirmative. An inspector visited the affected premises and explained the procedure and precautions to be adopted in dealing with the disease. The Board have no evidence to show that the disease is spreading in Surrey, and have not therefore considered it expedient to issue a special order for that county at present.

To ask the hon. Member for South Somerset, as representing the President of the Board of Agriculture, if he is aware that the Crockham Hill dairy farm has been advertised for sale at £50 an acre, though the owners now ask the Kent County Council £60 an acre for the land, and that the adjoining land has been recently sold at £14 an acre; whether he is aware that the agent for the county council also acts for the owners of Crockham Hill dairy farm, and has advised the latter to raise the price; and whether he will state what further action it is proposed to take in the matter. (Answered by Sir Edward Strachey.) The facts are substantially as stated. As I have already said, in answer to a previous Question, the county council are negotiating for the acquisition of the farm, and the Board have advised them to acquire it compulsorily if they are unable to do so by agreement on reasonable terms.

To ask Mr. Solicitor-General for Scotland whether his attention has been called to the conviction of two coopers in Edinburgh who were engaged in peaceful picketing in a dispute with sundry brewing firms, such men being charged under the Edinburgh Municipal Police Act, 1879, while under the Trade Dispute Acts, 1871 to 1906, they could do what they were convicted for doing; and does he propose to take any action to get such a conviction quashed. (Answered by Mr. Thomas Shaw.) I may be allowed to answer this Question. These men were not charged with any offence under the Edinburgh Municipal Act, but with the common law offences of breach of the peace and assault in the one case and breach of the peace with threats of violence in the other. They seem in every respect to have had a full and fair trial, and had legal assistance in their defence. I have no power to get the conviction quashed.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has now received sufficient information to enable him to hold out some prospect that aged persons of excellent character who, prior to the passing of the Old-Age Pensions Act, had been compelled to accept relief will be entitled to share the benefits of the Act with their more fortunate companions. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) I understand that the point is engaging my right hon. friend's careful attention, but that he is not yet in a position to make any definite announcement upon it.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if an income accruing to one person of a married couple is calculated as to half its amount to each of such persons, or as the sole property of the person to whom it accrues. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The means of a person, being one of a married couple living together in the same house, are calculated in precisely the same way as the means of a person who is not married, viz., at the amount received or enjoyed by him or her individually, except that, under the proviso contained in Section 4 (2) of the Act, the means of such a person cannot be taken as being less than half the joint means of the couple.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can state the number of applications for pensions received from aliens who have become naturalised in this country and have resided here for the qualifying number of years. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) My right hon. friend is unable to furnish the information desired by the hon. Member.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if applications for pensions have been received from more than half of the inhabitants in certain of the villages in the Highlands of Scotland; and if there is any certain means of ascertaining the age of these applicants. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) My right hon. friend has no means of knowing what proportion of the inhabitants of the villages in the Highlands have applied for pensions. Some difficulty has arisen in ascertaining the age of some of these applicants, but the Board of Inland Revenue are making arrangements to meet it.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that in Financial Instruction No. 8, for pension committees and sub-committees, issued by the Treasury on 29th August, 1908, the clerk of the county council is directed to review and check the accounts of pension committees and sub-committees and to submit a claim to the Treasury for the amount, he will say what authority the Treasury has for calling upon the clerk of the county council to perform duties in connection with the Old-Age Pensions Act; whether the Treasury propose to remunerate the clerk of the county council; who will defray the amount of such claim which the Treasury may, after audit, decide to disallow; and whether the instructions, as distinguished from regulations under the Act, have any validity or binding force. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The duty of making advances to provide for the immediate payment of the expenses of pension committees has been put upon the appointing council by No. 25 of the regulations under the Act, and the duty of accounting for expenditure out of such advances is a necessary condition of recovering the amount expended from the Treasury. Under Section 10 (4) of the Act the Treasury has power, independently of regulations, to determine the amount which shall be paid out of moneys provided by Parliament for the expenses of pension committees. As the hon. Member is aware, however, Regulation 25 is now under reconsideration, and arrangements will be made for relieving the appointing councils of the duties in question.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Leaflet No. 2, entitled Service in the Territorial Force, on page 5 stated that the Territorial soldier is entitled to pay at Army rates, including the extra emoluments paid in certain corps while in camp, and that the armourers of the 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th battalions Royal Warwick regiment were paid during their recent training 2s. 9d. per day; and whether, seeing that the Army rates of pay at this time were 4s. 6d. per day, he will order the balance due to be paid to these armourers. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) 4s. 6d. is the rate for an armourer sergeant of the Regular Army Ordnance Corps, a highly-skilled rating which does not exist in the Territorial Force; 2s. 9d was specially fixed as a suitable rate for Territorial infantry armourer sergeants, a rating which does not exist in the Regular Army, pending consideration of their position and duties.

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state the exact terms of the communication which the Mayor of Bradford recently addressed to the military authorities requesting troops to be held in readiness to assist the civil authorities. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The exact terms are as follows:—"The public authorities are apprehensive of there being a disturbance in the city to-morrow (Friday) evening on the occasion of a political meeting to be held in St, George's Hall. I trust that no disturbance will take place other than what the police will be able to cope with. I think, however, that it would be desirable that you should have as many of your men as can conveniently be spared in readiness, should the police authorities communicate with you and ask for your assistance." The hon. Member will notice that my reply to this Question on the 3rd instant gave substantially the terms of the communication.

To ask the Secretary of State for War if he has any record of the number of applicants to join the Special Reserve, and the percentage of applicants who have actually enlisted; and if he is aware that the majority of applicants to enlist have believed that the engagement in the Special Reserve is for six months only, and that, on learning that it is a six years engagement, in the majority of cases they retire. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) Returns of the numbers of men applying to enlist into the Special Reserve are not forwarded to the War Office. No information has been received at the War Office to bear out the allegation contained in the last part of the Question; and, in view of the fact that the term of six years service is clearly set forth on the recruiting poster, the statement is not understood.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether the number of pairs of boots and shoes required for the Army this year are equal to the number of pairs ordered in other years; whether any of the contractors are behind with their deliveries, and, if so, to what extent and for what reason; and whether he is aware that there is no dearth of labour in Northamptonshire but much unemployment. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) The figures given in reply to a Question put by my hon. friend on 15th October contain the information required in the first part of the Question. As regards the rest of the Question, speaking generally, the deliveries are in advance of those of any year in recent times, there are few arrears, and only of slight extent. I am informed that there are unemployed hands in Northamptonshire.

To ask the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the average price per pair paid for Army ankle boots during 1907 and 1908. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane.) It would be contrary to the practice of my Department to disclose the prices, and I regret, therefore, that I cannot furnish my hon. friend with the information for which he asks.

To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the new Act of the Government of the Cape of Good Hope relating to licences and stamps; whether there has been a very large increase in the fees payable by agents for foreign firms; whether British agents in the Cape of Good Hope would in consequence have to pay these higher fees; and, if so, whether he would make such representations as he may think advisable on behalf of these agents and British trade. (Answered by Colonel Seely.) Yes, Sir. The Cape Stamp and Licences Act imposes large increases in the fees payable by agents of foreign firms. As the expression "foreign firm" applies to all (even those in South Africa) which are not domiciled in the Cape Colony the higher fees are payable by agents of firms in this country. The Secretary of State has been in communication on the subject with the Cape Government who stated that it has been found necessary to revise the tariffs for all licences with a view to obtaining increased revenue. He will, however, communicate with the Governor again.

To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware of the growing practice amongst English traders (owing to the advantage of four per cent. in the postage) of sending to be posted on the Continent, with five centime stamps, certain of their circulars intended for delivery within the United Kingdom; and whether, to prevent the consequent loss to the Post Office due to the division of postage and to secure the like benefit to the trader, he will authorise postmasters to receive and stamp with ½d., such circulars posted in large quantities at the rate of 500 to the £1. (Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton.) There is no reason to think that the practice referred to in the Question is adopted to any appreciable extent; and I am inclined to doubt whether the slight saving in postage which could be effected would counter-balance the various items of expense involved in sending circulars abroad to be posted. I do not consider it advisable to reduce the rate of postage on inland circulars posted in large quantities.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the total number of police wheeled-litter ambulances in the metropolitan area in each year from 1891 to 1907; and the total number at the present time. (Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone.) The earlier figures cannot readily be given, but it may be assumed that previous to 1903 there was an ambulance at every police station. The total number of police ambulances on 31st December of the undermentioned years was: 1903, 190; 1904, 192; 1905, 198; 1906, 203; 1907, 263; 31st October, 1908, 278.

To ask the President of the Board of Trade who are the British delegates to the International Copyright Conference now sitting at Berlin; whether any of the British have had any legal training in English copyright law; and, if not, for what reasons have they been selected. (Answered by Mr. Churchill.) The principal delegate is Sir Henry Bergne, who attended the International Conference on Copyright in 1885, 1886. and 1896, and was a plenipotentiary for the signature of the Convention of 1886 and the Additional Act of 1896. The second delegate is Mr. Askwith, K.C., Assistant Secretary to the Board of Trade, who, I need hardly say, is a highly-trained lawyer, and who is at present in charge of the Department concerned with copyright. The third delegate is Count de Salis, Councillor of Embassy at Berlin. The first was selected owing to the important part which he has taken officially for the past thirty years in all negotiations connected with the subject; the second for his legal knowledge; and the third in accordance with the usual practice in the case of international conferences, which is that one of our delegates should be a diplomatist.

To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that, at the last County Quarter Sessions at Worcester, owing to the refusal of local shorthand writers to undertake the work of official note-taking at the fee allowed by the Treasury, the work of the Court had to be suspended until a shorthand writer from the county council offices was brought in, and that even then only one Court instead of two could be held; whether he is aware also that at Worcester City Sessions, three weeks earlier, there was a similar deadlock until, as the result of an appeal by the Recorder to the reporter of a Birmingham newspaper on public grounds to act and to his editor to allow him to act, this reporter consented to act and the business then proceeded in one Court instead of two; and whether, in view of these difficulties, and of the difficulties occurring at other Courts since The Criminal Appeal Act, 1907, came into force, and of the general dissatisfaction with the Treasury allowance expressed by shorthand writers, steps will be taken to raise the fee to an amount more commensurate with the exacting and responsible nature of the duties. (Answered by Mr. Hobhouse.) The two cases mentioned have been brought to my notice, but I am not aware that such difficulties have been in any way general. The remuneration offered is in practical accordance with the rate usually paid by the Government in legal and other cases, and I am not a prepared to raise it.

To ask the First Commissioner of Works if he will state when the ornamental lake in Regent's Park was last drained and cleaned; and whether he will consider the advisability of directing that such work be undertaken during the present winter. (Answered by Mr. Harcourt.) The lake in Regent's Park was last drained and cleaned as a whole in 1867. A portion of the lake at the north-east corner was drained and cleaned last winter, and a portion at the south-east corner is being drained and cleaned now by the "unemployed."

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Chartered Company of Rhodesia have requested His Majesty's Government to guarantee a loan for £10,000,000 in the interest of railway and other enterprises in Africa; and, if so, whether the Government has definitely declined to do so. (Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George.) The hon. Member is mistaken as to the form of the request made by the British South African Company. Through their solicitor they invited the Treasury to guarantee the interest on railway debenture issues in Rhodesia, but His Majesty's Government felt obliged to inform them that, while they were in sympathy with the good administrative work which is being done under the charter, they could not give the company a guarantee.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Admiralty are bound by any agreement or undertaking, or is otherwise under any obligation, to obtain a supply of any intoxicating liquor from any particular person or persons; if so, what are the names of the persons; and what breweries, distilleries, or licensed premises they represent.

Such liquors as are bought directly by the Admiralty are obtained in the open market by competition in the usual way. As regards canteens in naval shore estabments, the supply of liquor is not purchased by the Admiralty, but is provided by the general contractor for canteen supplies under arrangement with the naval officer in charge. The Admiralty policy is against anything in the nature of a tied system with any particular firm of brewers for wet canteens, and whore anything of that nature still exists, steps will be taken on the termination of the current local agreement to regulate any fresh arrangement in accordance with the policy referred to.

Arising out of that Answer, and seeing that the right hon. Gentleman has not answered my Questions, may I ask, Can he say definitely whether the Government are bound or not by any contract; and further, is there any contract with the proprietor or owner of a public-house known as the "Coach and Horses"; also, how many of these canteens are tied at the present time?

I have answered the Questions completely. The hon. Member asked whether the Admiralty are bound by any agreement or undertaking, or are otherwise under any obligation, to obtain a supply of any intoxicating liquor from any particular person or persons. My Answer is in the negative.

Is it not a fact that all the rum bought by the Admiralty at the present time, and for years past, has been bought under an agreement with a firm of brokers in the City?

I must ask for notice of that.

Perhaps I may be allowed to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his Answer did not deal with the Admiralty in its centralised capacity in London, or does it mean that there are no contracts with the Government at Portsmouth, for instance, or Devonport or any other place with individual suppliers of liquor?

There are contracts, but I have endeavoured as well as I could in my Answer to draw a distinction between wet naval canteens and Admiralty contracts. Under Admiralty contracts liquor is invariably bought in the open market by open competition, but the canteens are not Admiralty contracts. In this case there have been past contracts extending over a period of three years, but it is proposed in the future to bring all such contracts to an end and to insist upon the Admiralty policy being adopted in regard to canteens.

Arising out of that Answer and the cross-examination of my right hon. friend, may I ask whether the best way of overcoming the difficulties suggested in the various Questions would not be for the Admiralty to give up purchasing liquor?

Certainly not.

I do not want unduly to press the right hon. Gentleman, but we are anxious to know exactly what the system is. I understand that arrangements are made to buy in the open market, and of course we have nothing to say against that, but is the arrangement made with a firm of brewers for a week, a month, two months, six months, or for any period? For how long are these open market agreements made?

I have no knowledge on that point, but no doubt the contracts for delivery of beer which might be ordered would extend over a considerable period. But the contract with any particular brewer would be made in open competition with other brewers.

I asked the right hon. Gentleman if he could give us the names of persons, and I repeat it now, and can he tell us if there is any contract with the owner or proprietor of the "Coach and Horses"?

I have no knowledge at all of the "Coach and Horses."

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether firms located in Great Britain but employing German workmen have been entrusted with work in various dockyards in preference to firms employing only British labour; and whether the foreign workmen have had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the confidential arrangements of dockyards at home and in British Dependencies.

I have understood from a private communication from the hon. Member that he refers to a contract at Gibraltar, and I am telegraphing to the dockyard for information as to whether any foreign workmen have had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the confidential arrangements of the yard—or whether any foreign workmen have been employed at all.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the ten battleships and thirteen cruisers officially stated to have taken part in the recent cruise of the Home Fleet were fully manned; how many had nucleus crews; what were the names of the two battleships exercising independently; and were they fully manned ships.

Four battleships and six cruisers were fully manned; the remainder had nucleus crews. H.M. ships "Vengeance" and "Mars," the two battleships which were exercising independently had nucleus crews.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the strength of the Channel Fleet in battleships when it left Portland on the 23rd September. I beg also to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty what were the names of the battleships with the Channel Fleet when it left Portland on the 23rd September; and what were the names of the battleships withdrawn for repairs, and by whose order they were so withdrawn.

The following battleships were with the Channel Fleet when it left Portland:—"Africa," "Commonwealth," "Hibernia," "King Edward VII.," "London," and "Venerable." The following were withdrawn for alterations and repairs:—"Britannia," "Bulwark," "Dominion," "Hindustan," "New Zealand," "Triumph." The remaining two battleships, "Irresistible" and "Swiftsure," did not proceed on cruise on 23rd September, as they were due for refit soon after that date. The "Bulwark" was withdrawn by Admiralty Order; the other battleships undergoing refit were approved by the Admiralty to be taken in hand, the Commander-in-Chief of the Channel Fleet having submitted a programme of refits showing the desirability of such action.

The right hon. Gentleman says one battleship was withdrawn by Admiralty Order. Is it not the case that no battleship can be withdrawn unless by Admiralty Order, so that the whole of the eight must have been so withdrawn?

There were not eight, but six. I stated further that the other battleships were undergoing refit and that was approved by the Admiralty to be taken in hand, the Commander-in-Chief of the Channel Fleet having submitted a programme of refit showing the desirability of such action.

Does not the sole responsibility for ships being away rest with the Admiralty?

Yes, Sir; but the Admiralty issue their Order on the recommendations of the Commander-in-Chief, and in this case the recommendation was made by the Commander-in-Chief.

May I ask whether it was by the recommendation of the Commander-in-Chief that these six ships were absent at the same time?

It is only by taking one particular date that one arrives at the fact that these six ships were absent. If another date had been chosen it would have been found that fewer ships would have been absent.

I am sorry to press the right hon. Gentleman, but that is not an Answer to my Question. I did not attach any importance to any particular date, but I understand that at a particular period, and at the date given in the Question, a certain number of ships were absent in the Fleet. The right hon. Gentleman has told us that they were absent in consequence of a scheme submitted by the Commander-in-Chief. Was it in accordance with the Commander-in-Chief's recommendation that they were absent at that particular time?

Certainly; he had recommended a programme which involved the absence of the ships.

May I ask whether that recommendation applies not only to the ships themselves, but to the time for which the ships are to be withdrawn?

The recommendation covers both the particular ships and the period. The programme was particularly appropriate on this occasion, because two days after two of the ships had finished their refit.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Government of Bombay has issued a Resolution expressing regret that the advance of education in that presidency has been accompanied in recent years by a lowering of the standard of manners in schools and colleges, that this is due in some measure to the tendency of masters, boys, and students to associate themselves with political demonstrations, in which the way of anarchy is prepared; and, if the Answer be in the affirmative, whether he will place a copy of the said Resolution in the Library.

The Resolution referred to has been printed in the public Press, and the Secretary of State does not think that anything would be gained by placing a copy in the Library.

In view of this statement as to the result of the present system, will the Government consider the propriety of changing the system?

I hardly think that arises out of the Question.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is in a position to state when the measures of reform in India which are foreshadowed in His Majesty's gracious proclamation will be made known to the House.

The Secretary of State is not able to state when the measures of reform will be laid before Parliament. No time is being lost. The hon. Member will easily understand that a good deal of communication with the Government of India is necessary. An Act of no great length will be necessary for certain of the proposals, but the Bill cannot be introduced this session.

Does the hon. Gentleman apprehend that a statement will be made on the subject this session?

I have given the fullest answer I can to the Question.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether a Departmental Committee has been appointed to consider the measures of reform in India which are foreshadowed in His Majesty's gracious proclamation; and, if so, will he state the names of the members of the Committee.

On the 15th October in answer to a Question by the hon. Member I stated that the question of reform in Indian Administration was under the consideration of the Secretary of State in Council, and that he was not in a position to make any further statement. I have nothing at present to add to that reply.

Is it a fact that no Departmental Committee has been appointed?

I do not think it is quite reasonable to ask as to the methods by which the Secretary of State is endeavouring to form the best judgment and to get from a very wide circle advice on the very important matters involved.

Do the Government of India contemplate any reforms in the direction of strengthening its hands for the suppression of sedition and the punishment of crime?

There again I hardly think my hon. friend's Question arises out of the Question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he will grant a return of the number of prisoners, and the character of the offences committed by those prisoners, who have been released or whose sentences have been reduced under the terms of His Majesty's gracious proclamation to the princes and people of India.

The Secretary of State regrets that it is not practicable to comply with the hon. Member's request. The benefit of His Majesty's clemency under the proclamation will extend to the general mass of the prisoners in India in proportion to the length of their sentences and irrespective of the nature of the offences for which they were convicted. Sentences of a year and upwards are reduced by a month for every year of sentence. Similar reductions are made in sentences of under a year.

asked, if nothing special, nothing other than the ordinary gaol delivery was intended, why such exceptional prominence was given to the release of prisoners in His Majesty's gracious proclamation.

said there was something special, inasmuch as every man who was under sentence on 2nd November got a month off his sentence, if his sentence lasted more than a year, with a proportionate reduction if the sentence was less than a year.

asked whether that was any more than was customarily given to men who behaved themselves properly while they were in prison.

Prisoners will not forfeit any reduction of sentence which is consequent upon good behaviour in prison.

asked whether the Government would except from this benefit all those who have been convicted of spreading sedition amongst the people of India.

There is no distinction drawn with regard to offences.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India whether His Majesty's Government desire to make any public acknowledgement of the courageous and patriotic conduct of the Maharajah of Burdwan in helping to save the life of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal.

I am sure that His Majesty's Government and this House fully appreciate and admire the brave conduct of the Maharajah of Burdwan, and that the Maharajah himself will feel that heroic conduct and its public acknowledgement are its own best reward.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the number of new posts created in the Transvaal Civil Service since the assumption of responsible government; how many English and Dutch, respectively, have been appointed; and of these how many respectively have been transferred from other posts which have been abolished or otherwise.

The Transvaal Government do not classify their Civil servants as English and Dutch. It has never been the custom for self-governing Colonies to furnish returns of appointments to their Civil Service. The Transvaal and Orange River Colony Governments have recently furnished the Secretary of State with very full returns of reductions made in their Civil Services. These returns have cost the two Governments much time and labour, and the Secretary of State recognises that the preparation of these documents has been a special act of courtesy on their part. The Agent-General for the Transvaal has informed me that he has general information from his Government that new appointments to the Transvaal Civil Service have shown no preponderance in favour of either English or Dutch, but for the reasons given the Secretary of State cannot take the very unusual course of asking the Transvaal Government to go to further trouble and expense.

asked the hon. and gallant Gentleman whether he would give the House the information to which he had referred in his Answer; was it based on the Return sent by the Transvaal Government? He had clearly stated that there had been a greater number of English officials appointed to the Civil Service than of Dutch.

I do not know to what the hon. Gentleman refers. I have stated, what has been stated on more than one occasion, that no racial favouritism whatever is shown; and that, indeed, is the fact. And with regard to the refusal, which I now make, to ask the Transvaal Government to furnish this Return, I may say that there is every indication, as the hon. Gentleman will find if he refers to the Agent-General, who has furnished me with this information, that there is no racial antagonism of any kind shown in these appointments; but we cannot ask a self-governing Colony to go to great trouble and expense to prepare a Return, especially when the form of the Question implies a reflection on the Government.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can explain why the Colonial Office has not yet received a copy of the Bill to provide for the better administration of native affairs, which has been read a third time and passed by both Houses of the Natal Parliament, and was published in the Natal Government Gazette of 1st September ultimo.

The Natal Gazette of 1st September contains the Bill as read a third time and passed by the Legislative Assembly. There is nothing in the Gazette to indicate that the Bill was then in its final form, and I observe from the Natal Press that three weeks later the Prime Minister in the Legislative Council moved to retransmit the Bill to the Legislative Assembly certified correct as passed by the Legislative Council with certain Amendments made therein by the Legislative Council. I do not know what those Amendments were.

Does not the Bill transfer the duty of protecting the natives formerly imposed on the representative of the Crown to permanent officials of the Natal Government?

The Bill in its final form has not been received as yet.

I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will lay upon the Table the High Commissioner's Report of his inquiry into the allegations made against the Pacific Phosphate Company, and also a copy of the leases and licences obtained by the company on the guano phosphate island, Paanopa. The hon. Member also had the following Questions down on the same subject:— To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the Pacific Phosphate Company, of which Lord Stanmore, an ex-Commissioner of the Western Pacific, is chairman, holds on a nominal payment a valuable guano phosphate concession in the Gilbert Islands, Western Pacific; whether his attention has been called to the allegations that have been made that, by a system of unjust taxation, ill-treatment of natives, and general mal-administration, Colonial officials have assisted the interests of this company, and that these allegations have never been thoroughly and independently investigated; and whether he proposes to hold any inquiry into the matter. To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, with reference to the two inquiries into the allegations impugning the Pacific Phosphate Company and the connivance of the Colonial officials, whether he is aware that both were held after long delay; that, in the first inquiry, the complainants' witnesses were not present; that the second inquiry was made by the High Commissioner alone, and not on the spot; and will he explain why the Colonial Office has refused to publish the same. To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will explain why the Government have disclaimed responsibility for the Gilbert Island natives being deprived of their guano phosphate property on the ground that Paanopa was not then British territory, seeing that some years before the Pacific Islands Company obtained any lease of those phosphate beds Paanopa had come under British rule through a treaty with Germany, which divided that portion of the Pacific between the two Powers.

I will answer together the four Questions of my hon. friend on the subject. The Pacific Phosphate Company occupies Ocean Island (the native name of which is Paanopa) on a licence under which the company pays a royalty of 6d. per ton on the phosphates exported. This royalty, which now amounts to more than £3,000 a year, has hitherto been paid to the Imperial Exchequer, but arrangements have been made by which it will in future be paid to the Government of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands Protectorate. I shall be happy to communicate copies of the licences to my hon. friend, but the Secretary of State doubts whether they are of sufficient public interest to justify their being laid before Parliament. Ocean Island did not become part of His Majesty's Dominions under the Anglo-German agreement of 1886, but was annexed in 1900. A report concerning the only allegations against the company which have reached the Secretary of State is being laid on the Table. The earlier inquiry to which my hon. friend refers related to other islands in the Gilbert group, and had nothing to do with the Pacific Phosphate Company, or with Ocean Island.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this company get a lease from the natives practically under false pretences during the time the island was under the protection of the British Government, although the flag had not actually been hoisted, and that—

Order, order. The hon. Member had better put the Question on the Paper.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the bonding privileges which enable Great Britain and Canada to send goods to one another through United States territory in bond are the subject of treaty; and, if so, who are the parties of the treaty; is the treaty for a definite period, and what period; it is subject to termination by either party, and on what notice; and, if no such treaty exists, what are the arrangements under which those bonding privileges are in force.

The bonding privileges referred to in the Question of the hon. Member are based on Article 29 of the Treaty of Washington of 1871, and although the Fishery Articles of that Treaty were subsequently denounced, the article in question in the view of His Majesty's Government is still in force, though on this point a different view is entertained by the United States. Its provisions have, however, in practice been acted upon ever since.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the arrest of the British steam trawler "Taurus" by a German gunboat, on the 14th May last, and of the trial of Captain George Barker, at the Royal Provincial Court at Flensburg, on the 24th August, when he was fined 300 marks and the vessel's gear and voyage confiscated; whether he is aware that at the trial it was admitted that the commander took no cross-bearings or angles, that he stated he took soundings and that the vessel was in 9 feet of water, whereas the ship draws 13 feet; whether the Court refused to recognise the vessel's chart, and that the Court in giving judgment charged the captain with carrying an inaccurate chart of the waters on that coast; whether he is aware that the chart in question was one of Close's charts, which was prepared under the surveys of Commander Lindup of the British Admiralty, who has since seen the chart and guarantees its accuracy; and whether the Foreign Office are aware of any difference between the German and English charts as to the limit-line in these waters, or whether the Germans are entitled to fix the three-mile limit-line where they choose and arrest British vessels without notice.

Acting under my instructions, the British Vice-Consul at Finsburg was present in the Court at the trial of the master of the British steam trawler "Taurus." I am not aware of the admissions and statements attributed by the hon. Member to the commander of the Gorman gunboat. As regards the chart in use on the "Taurus," no authority was given to Mr. Lindup, a chief officer of coastguard, to assist Mr. Close in preparing the chart, and any assistance given by him to Mr. Close was unofficial. I understand that Mr. Close did consult him privately in the matter. I am in communication with the Admiralty as to any difference which may exist between the British and German charts. The German authorities are of course bound by the definition of the exclusive fishery limits contained in Article 2 of the North Sea Fisheries (Police) Convention of 1882, which runs as follows:—"The fishermen of each country shall enjoy the exclusive right of fishery within the distance of three miles from low-water mark along the whole extent of the coasts of their respective countries, as well as of the dependent islands and banks."

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Shah of Persia has announced his intention to promulgate a rescript abolishing the Constitution; whether the representations made by His Majesty's Government in concert with that of Russia to the Shah, having in view the summoning of a Parliament according to the Constitution, are being renewed; and whether it is proposed that any limitations should be placed on freedom of election and control by Parliament of the national Budget.

I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information that the Shah of Persia has abrogated the Persian Constitution, and refused to convoke the Parliament.

In reply to a petition presented on November 7th, the Shah promised to instruct the Grand Vizier in the sense desired by the petitioners, that is to say, that the Constitution should be abandoned; but he has not yet issued a rescript to this effect. Representations such as the hon. Member alludes to were renewed on 8th November, subsequent to the events described above, but were of a general character, and did not go into the constitutional details referred to in the last part of the Question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the evidence of ex-Constable George Reed before the Royal Commission of Metropolitan Police, and the statement made by the chairman in connection with his evidence; and whether he intends instituting proceedings against him for perjury.

My right hon. friend would refer the hon. Member to the reply which he returned to a similar Question on the 8th August, 1907. The Royal Commission have made no recommendation on the subject, and my right hon. friend does not propose to take any action in the matter.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can give the figures showing the number of new licences granted, the number of licences reduced, and the total number in existence on the 31st March in each year from 1900 to 1908 inclusive.

All available information on the points mentioned by the hon. Member is given in the Annual Volumes of Licensing Statistics, and the Secretary of State thinks he will find substantially what he wants there. He may refer him to the tables given on page 6 in regard to new on-licences and the annual decrease in existing on licences and to the table on page 3 in regard to the numbers of on-licences existing in each year.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can state the number of new licences granted under the Act of 1904, and how many of them are subject to a tie in respect of the purchase of liquors.

In the years 1905–6–7, 165 new on-licences and 601 now off-licences have been granted and confirmed in England and Wales. My right hon. friend has no information as to how many of these licences are tied; but he may say that under Section 4 of the Act of 1904, which empowers them to impose conditions on new on-licences, the justices have in three cases laid down that the licence is not to become tied.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the recent dispute in the Lancashire cotton-spinning trade, which resulted in an extensive stoppage of machinery before the contending parties could settle their differences, he will consider the advisability of taking steps, by legislation or otherwise, to secure the adoption of an automatic sliding-scale to regulate wages according to the state of trade, and so avoid strikes or lock-outs in the future in cases for which the Brooklands agreement has proved inadequate.

I am deeply impressed with the urgent importance of this matter. While I am of opinion that neither employers nor employed would desire the establishment by law of an automatic sliding-scale to regulate wages and that both would prefer that questions respecting the setting up of such machinery for avoiding disputes should be decided in the main by the interests directly concerned, I can assure my hon. friend that the Board of Trade would be prepared to lend their best assistance, if desired, in the furtherance of negotiations between those interests. I propose to communicate with the various parties in this sense.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will state for what reasons the Board of Trade have postponed the application to foreign vessels within British ports of the provisions of The Merchant Shipping Act, 1906, relating to load-line, defective equipment, the stowage of grain cargoes, and life saving appliances.

The Act of 1906 provides that the British rules as to load-line and life-saving appliances are to be applied to foreign ships in our ports on some date during 1909, to be prescribed, the intention being to allow as long a time as is reasonably required to enable foreign Governments to make any necessary alterations in their rules. Voluntary action on the part of foreign Governments is in every way preferable to the bare enforcement of our standard in United Kingdom ports. The negotiations with foreign Governments are progressing very favourably, and the date selected, 1st October next, will, I hope, admit of this voluntary action being completed in the case of the principal maritime Powers.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the practice of the English proof houses, both in Birmingham and in London, of proof-marking foreign-made barrels and firearms with the same proof marks as those put upon British made barrels and firearms, and to the fact that this practice is taken advantage of by importers and Continental makers to send their goods to the English proof houses instead of to the proof houses in the countries of origin for the purpose of obtaining English proof marks and thereby passing off the goods so marked as of British make; and, if so, what steps do His Majesty's Government propose to take to prevent the deception.

I understand that the views held by different sections of the English gun trade on this difficult matter are widely divergent, and that whilst all parties agree that imported barrels might with advantage be marked differently from British, the gunmakers are opposed to the desire of the barrel makers, that barrels made from tubes imported in the rough should also be marked as foreign. A conference on the subject between representatives of those interests was held at the Board of Trade in 1904, but without result. I am at any time prepared to consider proposals for a further conference which may be made to me on behalf of the parties interested, but while the trade is so divided in opinion it is not possible for me to take action in the sense desired by the right hon. Member.

Will my right hon. friend take steps to ascertain whether or not the so-called gunmakers who are opposed to this change are gunmakers at all, or simply importers of guns whom the present system—so bad for the workmen—suits?

I will submit the statement of my right hon. friend to my advisors at the Board of Trade.

Is it a fact, as suggested in this Question, that this unpatriotic system is practised in Birmingham?

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he has any materials from which he can give an estimate of the amount of British capital sent abroad during each of the years from 1900 to 1907.

I know of no satisfactory means of making such an estimate.

Have not the Board of Trade on several occasions made estimates based on income tax returns, showing the revenue derived from foreign investments?

That is not the information I have, nor do I think it would be satisfactory.

Is it not the fact that banks and houses using coupons or foreign bonds make a declaration with regard to them? Could not the returns be made up from them?

That seems to fall within the purview of the Treasury.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can say what steps are being taken, if any, by the Central London and other underground electric railway companies for the establishment of conciliation boards with their workmen.

As I have, informed my hon. friend the Member for Derby, the Board of Trade are now in correspondence with the Central London Company on this subject. As regards other underground electric lines, conciliation boards have already been established for the Great Northern and City Railway, and an election of the men's representatives is about to take place on the Metropolitan Railway. I do not know whether any steps are being taken for the formation of conciliation boards on the Metropolitan District Railway and the group of tube railways controlled by the Underground Electric Railways Company, but, as my hon. friend will be aware, the circumstances of these lines differ from those of most other lines.

asked if more than a year had not elapsed since the arrangement was made between the Board of Trade and the companies, did not these men apply to have a board formed more than six months ago, and would steps be taken to press the matter to a conclusion.

The Board of Trade are in constant communication with an increasing and substantial measure of success with the companies in order to bring these boards into existence, and if the Central London Company has lagged behind it has not been our fault.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that, in consequence of the central and various local distress committees not receiving the Circular withdrawing the two disqualifications, viz., poor law relief and two successive years work, a large number of men are being prevented from obtaining work; and if he can state when the Circular will be issued removing the two disqualifications mentioned.

An Order dealing with this matter was issued yesterday, and copies of it, together with an explanatory Circular, have been sent to the local bodies concerned.

What is the difference between the alteration and the old Orders?

Full discretion is given to the distress committees.

May I ask whether leaving to the discretion of the local committees the two points referred to in the Prime Minister's recent speech—the poor law disqualification and having one's name on the distress register for two years—is what the House were led to expect?

It is generally regarded by those responsible for the administration of the Act that this is by far the best and most effective way of giving expression to the Prime Minister's promise.

But may I ask whether it is not setting aside the intention of the Prime Minister's speech to leave it in the discretion of the authorities whether the disqualifications definitely promised to be removed have been allowed to remain?

That is not the view of the distress committees.

Will the modifications take place from the date of the Prime Minister's speech or that of the issue of the Local Government Board's Circular?

I presume they will take effect from yesterday, when the Circular was issued.

Are we to understand that these poor men who are now registered as disqualified will not be allowed to come in. I put that to the Prime Minister.

I should like to have notice of that Question.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the value of £241,000,000 set on the corporate property and undertakings of the councils of boroughs, other than Metropolitan boroughs, in England and Wales, according to the Return obtained in 1904, represented in whole or in part the original cost of the undertakings and works.

The value of the assets comprised in the total of £241,000,000 was estimated in different ways in different boroughs. In some cases the original cost was apparently taken as the estimated value. The remarks in column 12 of the Return contain further information on the point, and I will send a copy of the Return to the hon. Member.

Does that £241,000,000 represent the depreciated value?

The hon. Gentleman had better peruse the Return and draw his own inference.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the West Ham Distress Committee received any grant from the £300,000 granted by the Government to assist the unemployed for the year ending 1908–9.

It has not at present been necessary for a payment to be made to the distress committee out of the Grant for 1908–9, as they have in hand a considerable balance from the Grant for 1907–8. I have already authorised the appropriation of £1,520 from this balance towards works upon which men registered with the distress committee will be employed, and I hope to be able to assent to further appropriations very shortly.

I beg to ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the many difficulties of construction, and of law, which have arisen, and are likely to arise, in the discussion of the Housing and Town Planning Bill; and whether he will take steps to secure for the Standing Committee the presence of some legal assistance.

My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this Question. I have already made arrangements which will, I hope, give us the advantage of the presence of one of the law officers on the Committee next week.

Will he be present continuously or only for five minutes at a time as was the case to-day?

It is very difficult to guarantee the attendance of a law officer or indeed of any lawyer either in or outside this House.

I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether the receipt of poor relief by a husband during the present year disqualifies the wife, who is otherwise fully qualified to receive a pension, from receiving a pension.

At the same time may I ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the position under the Old-Age Pensions Act of an aged couple over the age of seventy years who have received out-relief from the Poor Law, which does not recognise the wife's claim to its assistance so long as the husband lives; and whether the wife can claim a pension under the Pensions Act.

I am taking the opinion of the law officers with respect to the point raised in this Question, so that at the moment a definite reply cannot be given to it.

I beg to ask the Post-master-General if he can state approximately the number of letters conveyed by the British India Steamship Company to Mombasa, and approximately the cost to the country of each letter; and whether, in view of the fact that there is practically no passenger traffic on the said line, he will consider the advisability in future arrangements of insisting that the service should be an adequate one.

The number of articles from the United Kingdom, excluding parcels, conveyed by the British India Steam Navigation Company on the mail service from Aden to Mombasa and Zanzibar is estimated at 145,000 per annum. The company also conveys about 380,000 articles per annum, originating in British possessions and foreign countries. The cost of conveying each letter cannot be stated, as the payment to the company is made in a lump sum covering the conveyance of all letter mails and parcel mails in both directions and between several ports. The question of revising this contract is under the consideration of His Majesty's Government.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General what number of extra men would be permanently employed by the Post Office if the present system of split duties worked by London postmen was abolished.

The information required by the hon. Member is not available. Unfortunately, as recognised by the Parliamentary Committee, split duties cannot be abolished.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether any instructions have been issued to postmasters in the provinces relating to the pay per hour to be given to the extra staff employed during the pressure of Christmas business; whether, according to this instruction, the maximum is now to be 6d., but may be as low as 4d. per hour; whether in any case the scale hitherto paid has been over 6d.; and upon what basis the alteration, if any, has been made.

It recently came to my notice that in certain cases the rates paid to the staff temporarily employed in the Post Office during the Christmas season were lower than those on which the wages of auxiliary postmen are based. I have therefore caused instructions to be issued that the rates of pay for the temporary force should, as far as possible, be based on the rates recommended by the Select Committee for auxiliary service. The lowest rates payable under these conditions will be 4½d, an hour, and this will be applicable only to Class 5—that is, the smallest offices. Higher rates than 6d. an hour will be paid where the auxiliary rates are not considered to be sufficient remuneration for the performance of certain duties which may be required. Besides the fixed wage the men receive special pay for night work, for Christmas Day and Boxing Day and got overtime when it has to be worked.

Will the wages paid hitherto be lowered in any case?

As I explained the other day in reference to the Leeds case, there is to be a reduction of the rate per hour, but in the end the aggregate amount received by the man will exceed that paid last year.

You are reducing the rate and making the man work twice the time in order to keep up his wages.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he would state the official time occupied by the longest of the mail services between the two capitals of London and Paris via Dover and Calais, and the quickest time occupied by the mail service between the same cities via Boulogne and Folkestone

The longest time occupied in any of the mail services between London and Paris via Dover and Calais is 8 hours 45 minutes, and the shortest time occupied in any of the services by way of Folkestone and Boulogne is 6 hours 45 minutes.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if his attention has been drawn to the shortest of all the routes between London and Paris, viz., via Hastings and Treport, a distance of 238 miles, as compared with 287 miles by the longest of all the routes, via Dover and Calais; and, in view of the increasing rapidity of modern mail steamers, would he consider, in conjunction with the French postal authorities, the possibility of securing an equally rapid and alternative service either via Newhaven and Dieppe with the existing service, or by the proposed service via Hastings and Tréport.

There is no regular service of steamships between Hastings and Tréport suitable for the transmission of mails; nor, so far as I am aware, are the harbour accommodation and railway facilities on either side by that route adequate for a mail service. I am considering the possibility of sending more of the mails for France by the route of Newhaven and Dieppe.

was understood to suggest that with electrification of the line to Tréport a considerable saving of time would be effected.

I am looking into the whole matter, and if my hon. friend can bring any facts before me I will consider them.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether, with regard to the mail service between the two capitals of London and Paris, and in view of the fact that there are from London to Paris twenty mail services per week carried by the longer route, via Dover and Calais, as compared with twelve by the shorter route, via Boulogne and Folkestone, and that in the service from Paris to London the weekly differences were greater, being twenty-one by the longer as compared to seven by the shorter route, and as this arrangement is solely in the interests of the railway companies to the detriment of the mail service and of the travelling public, he will endeavour, in conjunction with the French postal authorities, to obtain rectification so that the mails for or passing through Paris may be more often carried by the shorter than by the longer route.

I do not think it can be said that the arrangement to which the hon. Member refers is solely in the interests of the railway companies. The question of modifying the present service in the manner suggested is not by any means free from difficulties. The matter is being carefully considered.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can state whether the new early morning attendance of E.C. postmen resulted in the expected acceleration in the delivery of the first morning correspondence in the City of London.

The early morning attendance of the E.C. postmen has already resulted in a decided acceleration in the delivery of the first morning correspondence in the City of London and this acceleration may be still further increased in the future.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether he is able to make any further statement either in regard to the discharges by the National Telephone Company in consequence of the nearing of the termination of their lease, or in reference to any arrangements he may have agreed on with them in order to carry on uninterruptedly the construction work.

I beg also to ask the Postmaster General whether he can give any further information in regard to the discharges by the National Telephone Company in consequence of the nearing of the termination of their lease; and whether he has concluded any arrangements with them in order to carry on the construction work.

I am glad to say that, in view of the proposals of the Post Office now under consideration by the National Telephone Company, the company have arranged that, in order to avoid discharges which might otherwise take place consequent on the early termination of their lease, especially during the winter months, they have given instructions that as far as possible employment is to be found, and that if necessary new work proper for the company to undertake, having regard to the termination of its licence, may be put in hind earlier than would otherwise be the case. As regards the continuance of construction works, I have made a proposal for the co-operation of the Post Office with the company, which is now under their consideration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take precautions to prevent the company using old cables and other material in the laying of new lines?

If the hon. Member can give me any information I will look into the matter.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General what are the usual ordinary weekly hours for the clerical staff at the head offices at Worksop, Mansfield, Lincoln, Spilsby, Gainsborough, Grimsby, and Brigg; and what are the weekly hours worked during 1908.

As I informed the hon. Member in reply to a similar Question which he put down for Monday last, I am having inquiries made; but the information has not yet reached me.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade how many of the small holders recently announced by him as provided for in the county of Gloucester are ordinary tenants on privately-arranged holdings, and how many are tenants holding direct from the county council of Gloucestershire.

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer this Question. Out of the seventy applicants for whom holdings have been provided, thirty hold from private landowners and forty are tenants of the county council.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, at the trial of Mr. William McKinlay, a Clyde pilot, held at Glasgow on 15th May, 1907, for reckless navigation on the Clyde, there was any nautical assessor with pilotage knowledge assisting the sheriff who tried the case, and, if not, can he say whether, taking into account the highly technical nature of such cases, he will in future have such assessors appointed to assist in such trials; and can he say if this is the practice in the other parts of the United Kingdom.

I have nothing to add to the Answers given by my right hon. friends the Secretary for Scotland and the President of the Board of Trade on this subject. I have no power to appoint assessors. The practice appears to be the same in the three kingdoms. I may add that should the inquiry into pilotage referred to by the President of the Board of Trade in his Answer on 4th November take place I would be very glad if this question of assessors were included in the investigation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that in such cases in England a nautical assessor always assists the Judge?

According to the information furnished me by the Board of Trade that is not so.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire further on this point?

I shall be pleased to do so, but I would point out that this was a criminal and not a technical proceeding.