asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state the quantity and value of the tea imported into the United Kingdom during each of the last three years, distinguishing the tea from India, Ceylon, China, Java, and other miscellaneous countries?

The following statement gives the particulars required by the hon. Member:—Statement showing the Quantity and Value of the Imports of Tea into the United Kingdom which were consigned from each of the undermentioned Countries in the years 1906, 1907, and 1908.

—			Imports of Tea Consigned from
			British India.	Ceylon and Dependencies.	China (exclusive of Hong Kong and Macao).	Java.	Other Countries.	All Sources.
			QUANTITY.
			lbs.	lbs.	lbs.	lbs.	lbs.	lbs.
1906	…	…	183,417,038	106,368,346	13,538,653	12,726,518	5,139,509	321,190,064
1907	…	…	171,592,930	107,409,770	19,113,963	11,936,373	7,074,022	317,127,058
1908	…	…	172,822,967	108,659,121	22,068,966	13,514,081	6,404,208	323,469,333
			VALUE.
			£	£	£	£	£	£
1906	…	…	5,709,842	3,208,096	505,401	328,349	152,397	9,904,085
1907	…	…	5,752,918	3,608,616	773,709	377,336	232,140	10,744,719
1908	…	…	5,752,364	3,586,329	775,837	417,767	202,118	10,734,115

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Board of Works have yet reported as to the result of the inspection of the proposed works of improvement and reclamation at Dungarvan and as to the proposed works of improvement in the navigable channels of the Rivers Blackwater, Bride, and Suir.

The Board of Works have not yet reported the result of inspection of the proposed works of improvement. It is understood that the consideration of the data and information obtained by the inspection will require some time.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what Departmental procedure is followed in regard to the determination as to recommendation or refusal of grants in aid for piers and harbours?

Applications for grants from the Vote for Harbours under the Board of Trade (Class I., Vote 11, Subhead C) are referred to a standing committee appointed by that Department. The Harbour Grants Committee make such inquiries as they deem necessary and re-port to the Board of Trade, who, if they approve the recommendation of the Committee, forward it to the Treasury for consideration.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is yet in a position to arrive at a decision relative to the resolution of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylums District asking for an inquiry to be made into the causes of scarlet fever and the further means which might be adopted for its prevention in view of the prevalence of the disease?

The medical officer of the Board is preparing a memorandum on the subject of scarlet fever, the sources of infection from this disease and the measures which can be taken for preventing its spread. I propose to postpone the further consideration of the question of an inquiry until I have received this memorandum.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the site of the Duke of York's School at Chelsea is national property; whether it is in contemplation to sell the site; and, if so, whether an opportunity will be given for the House to consider the wisdom of a sale before it is concluded?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the rest of the question the disposal of the site has not yet been settled. I may add that the question is not one with which the War Department is directly concerned. The property in the site is vested in the Office of Works.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can state what was the total amount paid in wages at the Royal Dockyard, Devonport, for each of the years ending 31st March, 1905, 1906, 1907, 1908, and 1909; and whether he can state what was the total amount of the increase in wages in 1906 which was awarded to workmen in that yard?

The total dockyard wages paid at Devonport during the financial years specified were as follows:—

1904–5	…	…	£647,244
1905–6	…	…	£527,858
1906–7	…	…	£526,328
1907–8	…	…	£600,734
1908–9	…	…	£556,178

The total amount of the increase in wages granted in 1906 to workmen in Devonport yard from 1st October, 1906, to 31st March, 1907 (25 weeks), was £6,625, i.e., a total annual cost of £13,780.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether he is aware that since the commencement of the dispute between the Creamery Managers' Association and the Department regarding the appointment of a Mr. Carroll as creamery instructor, the Department have endeavoured in several ways to boycott the creameries which have refused to send butter to the surprise competitions, namely, by refusing to supply specifications for buildings or machinery to creameries not participating in their scheme, by refusing to give any technical instruction whatever to creameries not entered for registration, and by not allowing creameries not entered for registration and inspection to take part in the butter exhibitions at grocers' and industrial shows; and whether he will say what action he proposes to take?

further asked the Vice-President of the Department whether his attention has been called to the fact that the Department refused to permit creameries not entered for their surprise competitions to exhibit at their stand at the recent exhibition of the Belfast Industrial Development Association; and,: considering that margarine, bacon, jam, and other manufacturers not receiving any technical advice from the Department were allowed to exhibit, and that butter-blending factories, egg merchants, and others have been canvassed from time to time by the Department to exhibit their goods at grocers' exhibitions in Great Britain under the auspices of the Department, will he state why the Department laid down conditions which debarred the vast majority of the creameries from exhibiting at the exhibition referred to?

I will answer both these questions together. It is incorrect to state that the Department have boycotted any creameries. The truth is that an association of some creamery managers have endeavoured to boycott the Department, presumably because of the appointment of an instructor who was not a member of their own body. The managers or proprietors of a certain number of creameries have been influenced by this association to refuse to send exhibits to the surprise butter competitions, which constitute a very important portion of the Department's scheme for the improvement of creameries. The Department could not accept any responsibility for the improve- ment of the produce or the management of creameries of which the proprietors or managers are not prepared to avail themselves of the advantages offered by the Department and to conform to the regulations under the scheme for the improvement of their industry. In these circumstances the Department have decided that it would not be advisable to exhibit at their produce shows butter from such creameries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can give a Return of the number of store cattle exported from Ireland in each of past 10 years?

The following are the figures required:—

Year.				Store cattle exported from Ireland.
1898	…	…	…	461,607
1899	…	…	…	443,456
1900	…	…	…	428,295
1901	…	…	…	345,278
1902	…	…	…	557,435
1903	…	…	…	557,254
1904	…	…	…	471,047
1905	…	…	…	456,361
1906	…	…	…	474,230
1907	…	…	…	493,555
1908	…	…	…	529,042

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will say in how many cases have the limits of advances under the Land Purchase (Ireland) Acts been applied for distinguishing between the Land Law Acts and other Acts; will he say in how many cases the advances so applied for have been granted; and further, will he say in how many of the latter cases do similar names and denominations appear in the Commissioners' books for advances over and above the respective limits as defined in the various Acts?

The Estates Commissioners are not in a position to say how many applications for advances in excess of £3,000 may have been lodged in connection with the sale of estates with which they have not yet dealt. Their annual Re- port, which will shortly be presented to Parliament, will contain particulars of the cases under the Irish Land Act, 1903, in which such advances have been made, and also of the cases in which the Commissioners have refused to advance the full amount applied for. I must ask the hon. Member to await the issue of that Report.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that no steps have been taken with a view to the restoration to his holding in Ardferran, Bundoran, in the electoral division of the Ballyshannon Union, of Patrick Fox, of Ardferran, whose case was stated in reply to a question addressed to him in July last year to be under the consideration of the Commissioners; what is the explanation of this delay; and what course do the Commissioners intend to adopt with respect to Patrick Fox so as to secure his reinstatement?

The Estates Commissioners inform me that Patrick Fox's case is still under consideration in connection with the sale of the estate under the Irish Land Act, 1903. They have not yet decided what action they will take in the matter.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he will grant a Return setting forth the Minutes of Proceedings of the Commissioners of National Education on the question of restoring to teachers their civil rights, together with the voting on the various resolutions on the subject?

I have referred this question to the Commissioners of National Education, who state that they cannot give the information asked for as the Minutes of their Proceedings are of a confidential character.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, with a view t0> elucidating the operation of the new valuation proposals in Clause 30, Subsection (2) of the Finance Bill, he will ascertain from the Commissioners referred to in that Clause what sum would be treated by them as the annual equivalent of the sum of £1,497 15s., adjudged by Mr. Justice Kennedy to be the sum payable as compensation under Sub-section (1) of Section 2 of The Licensing Act, 1904, in the case of the Crown, Cobham?

As the whole question of the annual compensation value will come up shortly for discussion in the House, I scarcely think it is necessary for me to enter into it beforehand in the manner suggested by the hon. Member.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the case where annual payments by the parents of a married couple are substituted by formal agreement for a marriage settlement, such payments will, on the death of the grantor, be liable to a retrospective Death Duty for the five years preceding death?

The answer is in the affirmative, except in the case of payments made before 30th April, 1908, which would not be chargeable.