asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he has yet received any reply from the Russian Government to his request for the immediate release of Miss Malecka, the British subject imprisoned at Warsaw, in the event of her trial not being held forthwith; and, if so, what is the nature of the reply?

The reply of the Russian Government reached His Majesty's Embassy at St. Petersburg on the 30th ultimo, and has just been received here. It states that both Miss Malecka and her father are to be considered Russian subjects in Russia under Articles 325 and 326 of the Russian criminal code, as they never obtained the imperial sanction to renounce Russian nationality. The necessity for obtaining this sanction was extended to the Polish provinces by an Imperial Ukase in 1850, so that it is immaterial whether Dr. Malecka was born in Poland or in Russia proper. The reply points out that the British naturalisation law of 1870 recognises that no person can be validly naturalised as a British subject in so far as that person's country of origin is concerned, if such naturalisation is contrary to the law of that country. The reply promises that the matter will be dealt with as quickly as possible, and adds that Miss Malecka's arrest was the outcome of her political relations with the Polish Socialist party. I cannot well give more of the reply, which is long, in answer to an oral question; but if the hon. Member will put down an unstarred question I will give the substance of the reply at greater length.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if the Russian Government have indicated the date on which the trial will take place?

No they have not indicated the date in the reply. They have only said that they will expedite it as much as possible.

May I ask whether, under the circumstances, the British Consul will be instructed to still watch the case as it proceeds on behalf of the Government?

The important part of the reply is that Miss Malecka is not a British subject, but I will instruct the British Consul to do everything consistent with the fact that Miss Malecka is not a British subject in Russia. More than that I cannot do.

Are we to understand that the Foreign Office abandon their claim that Miss Malecka is a British subject?

As I said in the answer in the reply which has only been just received here, it states the fact which is new to me, that the necessity for obtaining sanction to emigrate from Russia is extended to the Polish Provinces. Until I have had time to investigate I cannot say more.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain how Miss Malecka could obtain sanction considering that she was not born at the time?

The question is her father's nationality.

asked whether the Russian Government have yet communicated to him their intention of bringing Miss Malecka to trial; whether the date has yet been fixed; and whether our Government will be represented at the trial?

The answer to the first question is in the affirmative; that to the second in the negative; while as regards the third question, a Consular Officer shall be instructed to attend the trial if the Russian Government consents.

May I ask whether not merely the consul but English counsel will foe instructed to have a watching brief and to attend the trial?

I cannot instruct English counsel.

asked whether in the case of Miss Malecka, the Acte d'Accusation, giving particulars of the charge against the prisoner, has yet been received; whether he is aware that until this document has been served it is impossible for the prisoner to apply for bail or obtain any legal advice as to her defence; and whether, in view of the fact that Miss Malecka has already been imprisoned for over four months under these conditions, he will take immediate steps to urge upon the Russian Government either to produce such particulars or to release the prisoner without further delay?

The answer to the first question is in the negative. As regards the second, I have no authoritative information as to the law on the point in question. As regards the third, I have just replied to a question asked by the hon. Member for West Donegal, and the hon. Gentleman will have learnt from my answer what the state of the case is at present.

Are we to understand this lady has been in prison for eighteen weeks and the Russian Government is still unable or unwilling to produce particulars of the charge against her?

The hon. Member ought to understand from my first reply that the Russian Government have put forward a very strong case that she is a Russian subject.

Is it not the fact that the British Ambassador made a request for particulars on July 11th, and that no answer was given?

That is all based on the assumption that we had the right to claim Miss Malecka as a British subject in Russia. If that assumption cannot be sustained, of course we cannot press the request.

asked whether, in view of the fact that His Majesty's Ambassador at St. Petersburg had been instructed on 13th July to represent to the Russian Government that Miss Malecka should not be kept in prison without the particulars of the charge against her being furnished, and considering that no particulars of the charge, in spite of repeated requests, have yet been given, His Majesty's Government will take steps to press for Miss Malecka's immediate release?

I am unable to add anything to the replies returned to other hon. Members to-day.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he has any information that he can give the House in regard to the negotiations between this country and Turkey in respect of the construction of the southern section of the Baghdad Railway?

His Majesty's Government have lately put their views before the Turkish Government on this and other matters in connection with the proposed increase of customs dues, but I cannot make any detailed statement pending further negotiations.

asked if Major Stokes has accepted an office under the Persian Government; and, if so, has his appointment the approval of the British Government?

I understand that Major Stokes has been offered an appointment by the Persian Government. It cannot have the approval of His Majesty's Government unless the conditions of the appointment are consistent with the terms and the spirit of the Anglo-Russian Agreement of 1907.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the circumstances and conditions of Major Stokes's appointment are or are not contrary to the provisions of the Anglo-Russian Agreement of 1907?

The appointment, so far as I know it, is vague. It may apply to the whole of Persia, but if it applies to the North of Persia only, there would be a strong case for considering that it was not consistent with the spirit of the Agreement.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he would state by what method of procedure he proposes to make it a condition of the ratification of the Declaration of London that the general report of the grafting committee shall be treated by all the signatory Powers as an authoritative interpretation of the provisions of the Declaration, and that the word enemy (l'ennemi) in Article 34 of the Declaration shall be taken by all the signatory Powers to mean the enemy Government and not the enemy people; whether he intends to ask for the express consent of all the signatory Powers to such conditions; and, if not, by what means he proposes to make such conditions binding on the signatory Powers?

I propose to ask the signatory Powers to remove any doubt on these points by expressing an affirmative opinion.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he can give any explanation or definition of the meaning of the words, base of operations or of supply, which are used in the General Report of the Drafting Committee in connection with the interpretation of Article 34 of the Declaration of London; whether he proposes to ask the signatory Powers for any explanation or definition of these words; and whether he proposes to inform the signatory Powers of the meaning attached to these words by His Majesty's Government, and to ask thorn whether they agree with His Majesty's Government as to such meaning?

I cannot add to what was said in the Debate as to the definition of the words; nor can I make any further statement, as to the course which His Majesty's Government may take.

In view of the great difference of opinion expressed in the Debate as to the meaning of the words "base of operations or of supply," will the right hon. Gentleman ask foreign Governments as to their definition?

I am considering that point.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in order to illustrate the meaning of the words in Article 34 of the Declaration of London, a place serving as a base for the armed forces of the enemy, he would state what ports in Great Britain could not, in the view of His Majesty's Government, be regarded as places serving as bases for the armed forces of this country?

It is not possible to give a list of ports in advance; it would depend upon the facts at the time.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state any one or more ports which could not come within the definition at present?

No commercial ports which are not serving as bases of supply would come within the definition.

Is it not the case that in the event of war, under the Declaration of London, it will not be the British Government that will decide what is a base of supply, but it will be left to the enemy?

At present belligerents decide for themselves, without any definition, but under the Declaration of London there will be a definition by which those belligerents who have signed the Declaration will be bound. How they interpret that definition is of course a matter which rests with the belligerents themselves?

Will the right hon. Gentleman name one port in the United Kingdom which could not at present be regarded as a base of supply?

None of the great commercial food ports of the United Kingdom could be regarded as bases of supply, because they are not bases of supply.

May I ask for one by name?

It would be much more to the point if the hon. Member would ask what ports could come within the definition of base of supply. I could give an answer to that, and all others would be outside it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman really not answer my question and name one port in the United Kingdom which could not be regarded as a base of supply within the meaning of the Declaration?

There are a number of ports—Liverpool, Glasgow, Bristol, and any number of our great commercial ports.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he was now able to communicate to the House any further intelligence, received from His Majesty's Minister at Cettinje or from other sources, respecting the condition of the Albanian shepherds and their families now penned within the marshes south of Scutari; whether he was aware that the report that the sufferers had received permission to return to their homes in the mountains was not borne out by the testimony of the Austro-Hungarian Chargé d'Affaires at Cettinje in his report to the Vienna Foreign Office; and whether His Majesty's Government had received any information as to the arrival in Montenegro and at San Giovanni di Medua of Red Cross League representatives commissioned by branches in Europe to distribute food and clothing and medical aid to the women and children who had been driven from their homes by the Turkish troops; and, if not, whether he would state what steps the Foreign Office was taking to make itself acquainted with the state of affairs in these regions?

I have received no information on these points. In any case, the only remedy is the restoration of a happier condition of affairs in Albania. The latest news I have received is that the refugees are returning to Albania, which points to an improvement in the situation.

Are the people of the marshes included in the general pacification?

I assume they are, but I will ask the Vice-Consul at Scutari, the nearest Vice-Consul, to deal with these points in a report of the situation.

asked what are the international agreements made or proposed to which this country is, or is willing to become, a party relating to the suppression of the white slave traffic?

There are two international agreements having for their object the suppresion of the white slave traffic, to both of which this country is a party. The first, which relates more particularly to the administrative measures to be adopted by the States parties to it, was concluded in 1904, and published as a Parliamentary Paper in No. 24 of the Treaty Series of 1905. The second instrument was signed at Paris in. May of last year, and its object, stated shortly, is to secure legislative action with a view to bringing the laws of the contracting States into harmony. This Convention will be published when the ratification of the Powers parties to it have been deposited at Paris, which at present has not been done.

Will the last-named convention necessitate legislation in this country?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he could officially inform the House that a treaty of arbitration between Great Britain and the United States had been actually signed at Washington; whether he was able to say that a similar treaty between the United States and France had also been signed in Paris; and whether lie could encourage the hope that by further international agreements of a like nature the burden now imposed on the people for national defence would be greatly lightened?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I have no official information about the second part, but the hon. Member has no doubt seen that a treaty has been signed. The answer to the third part must depend upon public opinion not in this country alone. If in other countries there are found, as I trust may be the case, many persons of the disposition of the hon. Member himself, the hope that he entertains will be greatly encouraged.

With regard to the first part of the question, have not the House of Commons some right to expect that a momentous matter of this kind should be communicated directly to them, and that they should not be dependent on the Press for their information?

With regard to the Treaty with the United States, I have telegraphed to Washington to know how soon the Treaty may be published, and directly on agreement between the two Governments as to date of publication I will lay the Treaty before the House.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication as to the date when the Debate will take place?

No, I cannot say when the Debate will take place, but the promise which has been made with regard to that will be kept. All I can undertake is that as soon as possible the Treaty shall be laid before Parliament. The time at which it should be debated is a matter for the Prime Minister to decide.

Is it not the case that the Treaty has already been published in the Press?

I believe it has been published in the Press, but, of course, in regard to a treaty with another Government, one is obliged, as a matter of form, to get the consent of the other Government. I should certainly use the fact that it has already appeared in the Press as a reason for not evading publication.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he was aware that the High Court of Calcutta, in what was known as the Bogra Gang case, had recently acquitted twenty-nine men who had been all convicted by the sessions judge of Bogra of alleged dacoity, and sentenced to terms of imprisonment varying from five years to life sentences; that the trial lasted two months and 250 witnesses were called for the prosecution; and that the case against the accused depended mainly upon the evidence of a police informer which the High Court held to be unreliable; and whether the Secretary of State could say upon whose advice this prosecution was launched upon such evidence?

The Secretary of State has no information on this subject, but has telegraphed for a report.

asked the Undersecretary of State for India whether his attention had been called to the action of the Governor of Bombay in warning the Senate of the Bombay University against retaining English history as a compulsory subject for the examination for a B.A. degree; what were the grounds of this action; and had it the sanction of the Secretary of State?

I understand that, the Senate proposed to substitute "the History of England, political and constitutional," as an obligatory subject for the present group "history and political economy," which includes the History of England (political and constitutional), the History of India, and political economy. The Bombay Government think that the proposed change would encourage cramming, and have in the ordinary course put their opinion before the Senate of the University. There was no necessity for their consulting the Secretary of State before doing so.

Are we to understand that the Government of Bombay disapprove of the study of English history by Indians?

The hon. Member's question arises from a misapprehension of the circumstances. History of England is already an obligatory subject, but the Senate endeavoured to narrow the number of subjects that are to be compulsory, limiting it to the History of England, whereas now, in fact, the History of England and the History of India are compulsory subjects. The Government of Bombay made representations upon the subject, with a view, not to abandoning the History of England, but to maintaining a wider syllabus.

asked what number of recruits joined the London Division of the Territorial Force during the six months ended 30th June?

Two thousand five hundred and fifty-nine recruits joined the two London divisions during the six months ended 30th June, 1911.

asked what was the present strength of the Territorial Force, and how this compared with the strength of the force on the corresponding date of last year?

The figures are as follows:—

Things being as they are at present, is the right hon. Gentleman generally satisfied with the numbers and training of the Territorial Force?

I do not think I could make a statement on that subject at question time without wearying the House. I should be glad to make a full statement on the proper opportunity.

As the right hon. Gentleman is unable to reply are we to assume that he is not satisfied?

Certainly not.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War if he is aware that an increase of pay has been granted to Territorial officers who are acting as adjutants of Territorial units as from April of this year; and whether, in view of the fact that many of these officers have already performed the duties of adjutant for several years, he can see his way to make the increased grant of pay retrospective?

The consolidated allowance to Territorial officers appointed adjutants has been increased from £100 to £200 a year to take effect from 1st April, 1911. It is regretted that it is not possible to give further retrospective effect.

Arising out of that, may I ask, seeing that some of these adjutants have been, forced to do the work for two years for a much less figure than the present adjutants, would it not be more in accordance with Liberal principles to make this retrospective?

I do not think the facts stated by the Noble Lord are quite accurate. I regret I cannot add anything to the answer I have already given on the general question.

asked what was the number of men who had joined the London. Veteran Section of the Veteran Reserve during the six months ended 30th June, and what proportion of these were ex-soldiers of the Regular Forces?

The figures available show the present strength of the London Veteran Section to be 13,094, of which 617 are officers and 12,477 other ranks. Of this total the proportion of ex-Regular soldiers is approximately 61 per cent.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of these officers have served in the Regular forces?

In the case of the London Veteran Reserve they are mostly people who have already been officers; in the case of other counties, the matter is still not settled.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he can. see his way to place the women viewers in the Royal Army Clothing Department on the same footing as the men viewers with regard to annual leave, with pay, etc.?

As regards the viewers at Pimlico, leave with pay is only given to those who exercise supervision. The women referred to in the question do not exercise such supervision, but are themselves under the supervision of the men viewers. They receive the same benefits as the men viewers as regards paid public holidays, sick-pay, gratuity on discharge and medical attendance, but they are not entitled to leave with pay under the regulations.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War, whether he can state what arrangements have been made to sell old ammunition to rifle clubs at reduced rates varying with age?

I will let the hon. Member know as soon as the arrangements have been completed.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will state whether the representatives of detachments of Special Reserve and Territorial units who are to receive the Coronation medals are men who have been actually present at that ceremony or not?

I am informed that with the exception of the officer actually in command of the detachment which the unit sent to the Coronation, it is not necessary for the representation of the unit to have been actually present. A circular is being sent out this week to every unit of the Special Reserve and Territorial Force calling for the names of those qualified to receive the medal.

I do not quite understand. May we assume that the people who have not been at the Coronation are the ones who will receive medals?

No. Some who have not been at the Coronation may receive the medal, and some who have been at the Coronation will receive the medal.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state the proportion of those who were not at the Coronation who will receive the medal?

It will all be made plain in the circular that is being sent out this week. It will vary according to circumstances.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the last order on the subject did not lay down that the officer commanding the unit, and the senior private were to receive the medal? Is that order going to be rescinded?

No, Sir; but since it was issued His Majesty has been pleased to add to the number of medals which may be issued to each unit.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he will consider the advisability of raising the status of the Army Ordnance Department writers, and grant these clerks greater facilities to advance to higher posts in the department, having regard to the fact that most probably these men would be called upon to fill important positions and undertake additional responsibilities in a national emergency, as was exemplified in the late Boer War?

The status of the Army Ordnance Department writers has lately been reconsidered. They are eligible for promotion to the posts of foreman and storeholder and at Woolwich Arsenal to the post of civil clerk. It is difficult to increase their opportunities of advancement without interfering with the training of the Army Ordnance Corps, on whom primarily the additional duties and responsibilities must fall in time of war.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in the case of an employer paying the Income Tax chargeable on his employé's salary, the allowance in respect of the employé's chil- dren, provided by Section 68 (1) of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, is deducted by the assessors from the sum paid by the employer; and, if so, will he consider the advisability of giving instructions that claims for allowance in respect of children shall be made separately by those entitled to such allowance?

Section 68 (2) of the Act referred to provides that the relief in respect of children "shall be given either by way of reduction of the assessment, or repayment of the excess which has been paid, or by both these means as the case may require," and in these circumstances I am unable to issue instructions restricting claims for the allowance in the way suggested.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is his intention to have the amending Old Age Pensions Act carried into law this year?

I hope this measure may receive the Royal Assent before the House rises.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that James O'Rourke and his wife Margaret O'Rourke, of Conrea, Rossinver, county Leitrim, who had been in receipt of the old age pension for over twelve months have, on appeal, been deprived of the same, on the ground that their names could not be traced in the Census of 1841 or 1851; and whether, having regard to the fact that these people produced certificates of their ages from the parish priest and the medical doctor of the district, together with several certificates from old people, their applications would be reconsidered; and, if not, when would they become eligible, as they can procure no better or more reliable evidence?

The pension of James O'Rourke was discontinued in July, 1910, on the ground that he had failed to prove he had attained the statutory age. The Local Government Board did not decide the case until one of their inspectors had visited O'Rourke. Margaret O'Rourke's pension was disallowed in May, 1910. The certificates referred to did not, in the opinion of the Board, afford sufficient proof that the pensioners had reached the statutory age. It is not in the Board's power to reconsider their decisions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been directed to the proceedings at the last meeting of the Chelmsford Town Council, from which it appears that there is a house famine in the town, many tenants having received ejectment notices and being unable to secure other accommodation, while the town council are called upon to pay at the rate of £5.000 per acre for land required for public improvements; and whether, in view of the apparent inadequacy of the Budget taxes to check landlord monopoly in Chelmsford, he will consider the advisability of imposing a direct Budget tax of 1d. in the £ on the capital value of all land values, and will promote legislation authorising local authorities to make land values the basis of local rating, thus relieving buildings and improvements and encouraging the erection of houses for the accommodation of those who are being dispossessed by their present landlords?

I think it is premature to pass judgment on the economic effects of a system of taxation which has been in force little more than a year, and in respect of which the preliminary valuation is not even yet complete. With regard to local taxation, it would not be desirable for the Government to enter upon the consideration of so sweeping a change as that indicated by my hon. Friend in anticipation of the recommendations of the Committee now inquiring into the relations of local and Imperial finance.

Has the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer been drawn, to the special circumstances at Chelmsford, referred to in the first part of the question?

I am afraid they are not unique.

asked the President of the Board of Education when he proposes to transfer to the Welsh Department that portion of the Board's work in Wales that relates to technology and higher education in science and in art, including evening schools, as outlined in the Board's Report for the year 1906–7?

I hope to complete arrangements very soon for the transfer to the Welsh Department of the administration of those grants in respect of Wales which are at present administered by the Technical Branch of the Board of Education. The inspection of ordinary technical work, involving evening schools, in Wales is already carried out by the Welsh Department's Inspectors.

asked the President of the Board of Education what proportion of the grant of £325,000 advanced from the Development Fund to the Board of Education, in aid of the provision by county education authorities of agricultural education, he proposes to allocate to Wales?

No proportion of the Grant is allocated specifically to Wales, but applications received from local education authorities in England and Wales will be dealt with on precisely similar terms. I shall, of course, bear in mind the geographical peculiarities of Wales.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Admiralty have perfected the organisation of their scheme for conveying information to merchant vessels at sea on the outbreak of war; and whether they are satisfied that orders of the Admiralty conveyed through the admirals by His Majesty's ships to our merchant ships would be understood?

I am unable to make any statement upon the matters referred to in the question.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been directed to this matter?

Yes, but I think the hon. Gentleman will agree with me that it would be undesirable to go into particulars.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that when the question of the Fair-Wage Clause in Government contracts was discussed in this House in 1909 the President of the Board of Trade stated that it would, however, not be the practice of Government Departments to keep on their list of contractors firms who obeyed the letter of the clause by paying recognised rates on Government contracts, but who were proved to be notoriously bad employers in other directions; and whether, in view of this declaration made on behalf of the Government, he will have the Fair-Wage Clause administered by his Department in consonance with such declaration?

I am aware of the statement quoted by the hon. Member, and so far as practicable the Fair-Wages Clauses are administered by the Admiralty in accordance therewith. The question of the wages paid by a firm for private work can only come before the Admiralty for consideration when determining the suitability of a firm for admission to, or retention on, the list of contractors.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, in any case where inquiry is being made of a specified complaint against an employer, the inquiry extends to matters that would prove whether the employer was notoriously bad in other directions?

Oh, yes; we have not infrequently both refused to admit a firm to the list of Admiralty contractors and have on other occasions struck off firms because they had been notoriously bad employers.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether Mr. Dodson's farm, at Sprot-borough, near Doncaster, is still under swine-fever restrictions owing to an outbreak of swine fever that took place on 14th February; and what, if any, is the limit to such quarantine set by the Board in cases where no fresh outbreak has occurred?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the latter part, perhaps the hon. Member would allow me to refer him to the answer I gave last Wednesday to my hon. Friend the Member for the Don-caster Division.

What are the conditions which this man will have to fulfil before his farm can be got out of quarantine?

He undertook to refrain from further breeding and to feed off his swine for slaughter as quickly as possible.

How does the hon. Baronet possibly justify six months' quarantine in this case, when the chief veterinary officer of the Board admits that three months is the utmost period for the latency of this disease?

I do not follow the hon. Gentleman. I do not think that at all arises out of the question.

Is it a matter of whether or not a man will carry out his obligation, or is it a matter of common-sense?

The occupier of the farm is not allowed to break the agreement which he undertook to perform.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether any action has been or is being taken, and, if so, what, by the authority empowered to make inspection under the Housing and Town Planning Act for the parishes of Stow-on-the-Wold, Moreton-in-the-Marsh, Bourton-on-the-Water, and Tetbury, in the county of Gloucester?

I have made inquiries and am informed that, as regards Stow-on-the-Wold, the work of inspection is in hand in respect of certain areas, and a report by the medical officer of health is about to be submitted to the urban district council; as regards Moreton-in-the-Marsh, a systematic inspection is now in progress, thirty houses having been inspected under the Act; as regards Bourton-on-the-Water, no inspection has yet been made under the Act, as the local authority are at present dealing with other parts of their district; and as regards Tetbury, the work of inspection is proceeding, and considerable progress has been made.

asked whether the Board have received a copy of the resolution unanimously adopted at a meeting of the Tuberculosis (Animals) Committee on the 26th July last, respectfully urging the Board to bring into operation forthwith the Tuberculosis Order of 27th May, 1909, with the further provision that the compensation to be paid thereunder in the case of animals not visibly tuberculous, slaughtered in the interests of public health, should be provided either out of the Development Fund or from other Imperial sources, and not at the expense of the ratepayers; and, if so, what action is it proposed to take in the matter?

Yes, Sir; the resolution has been received. The matter will receive further consideration.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary whether he is now in a position to state the result of the inquiries which the Board have been making as to the manner in which the existing provisions of the Law relating to the sale of milk is at present administered by local authorities?

The inquiry is not yet sufficiently advanced to enable me to make any general statement upon the subject.

asked whether any official statistics are collected of the actual stocks of wheat and flour held in this country both at the ports and by farmers and millers at any given time in the year; and, if not, whether the Board will take steps to obtain them?

Official statistics as to stocks of wheat and flour are not at present regularly obtained. The possibility of making arrangements for their collection is under consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, seeing that a Sunday market has been in existence in the Broadway, London Fields, for about forty years, and that the district contains a large number of Jewish residents, he will consider the claims of the Broadway, London Fields, to be included in the area of exemption from the Sunday closing provisions of the Shops Bill?

I would point out to the hon. Member that under the Bill as amended by the Standing Committee the whole of the county of London is exempted up to two o'clock in the afternoon from the Sunday closing provisions of the Bill.

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the delay in the delivery of letters at Peppard, near Henley-on-Thames, owing to mis-sorting; and whether he will inquire into the conditions under which the sorting is carried out?

So far as I am aware only one person at Peppard has complained of any mis-sorting of letters, and steps have been taken which have, I think, prevented any further cause for complaint.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he can see his way to have telephonic communication established between Castlecomer and the trunk line at Kilkenny, so as to meet the convenience of the people of Castlecomer district, there being no public telephone in Castlecomer?

I have not received any application on this subject from the residents at Castlecomer, but I will inquire into the matter.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he can see his way to avail of the services of the day car between Kilkenny and Castlecomer to establish a postal service direct to and from Kilkenny from Castlecomer?

I am having inquiry made in the matter, and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that, in the report of the Development Commission recently issued, there is no mention that any action whatever has been taken in connection with the reclamation and drainage of land which is one of the principal objects for which the money under the Development Fund Act is applicable; whether he is aware that several Royal Commissions have reported on the urgent need of arterial drainage in Ireland, especially in the flooded area of the River Barrow; and whether instructions will be issued to the Commissioners to give immediate attention to this question in view of its urgency in Ireland?

I understand that certain schemes for land drainage are now before the Commission and will shortly be considered by them. An application for a grant for the drainage of the River Barrow area is being reported on, in accordance with Section 4 (1) of the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, by the Government Department concerned.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the fact that there is no repairing slip in Kingstown Harbour, county of Dublin; whether he is aware that, in consequence of the absence of a slip, yachts and other boats over a certain size cannot be repaired in Kingstown, to the loss alike of the owners of the boats and of the town; and, if so, whether he will take steps to provide a slip in Kingstown Harbour such as exists in every other Royal harbour in the United Kingdom?

There is no repairing slip at Kingstown Harbour, and I understand that it is not usual for the authorities of harbours such as Kingstown with limited foreshore to provide such a slip for yachts. There is, however, a hauling up slip which makes it possible for Kingstown yachts, with very few exceptions, to be placed in the store-yard, and for the exceptional cases there are ample facilities in the adjacent port of Dublin.

asked why an additional junior clerk has not been appointed to the Taxing Office. Four Courts, Dublin, in pursuance of the unanimous recommendation of the Registrar to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland and Court of Appeal, the President of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland, and the Treasury Remembrancer in Ireland, being the committee appointed by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland to inquire into the nature and extent of the duties of the staff of the taxing masters of the Supreme Court, in Ireland; and whether he is aware that the recommendation of the said committee, made as far back as November, 1909, had the entire approval of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, who recommended that the views in the Report should be given effect to as soon as possible?

The Treasury have received no recommendation from the Lord Chancellor of Ireland on this subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Secretary to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland on 4th November, 1909, wrote that:—

"His Lordship had carefully considered the Report"— (referred to in the question on the Paper)—"and he entirely agrees with the views and recommendations therein set out."

I can only convey to the House the information the Lord Chancellor of Ireland gives me.

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman's own representative, namely, the Treasury Remembrancer, was a member of this Commission which unanimously reported in favour of the additional clerk in the Department?

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

I submit it does arise, as the Treasury Remembrancer is referred to in the Report.

The right hon. Gentleman cannot have it in his mind for the moment. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman had better put it down on the Paper.

I do not wish to detain the House, but I have already put it down three times upon the Paper.

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been directed to the statement recently made by two of the High Court judges in Ireland that the arrears of cases in the courts are attributable to the undermanning of the Irish Bench; whether, in view of this statement, he will have prepared and published a Return setting forth the number of days each year during the past three years in which each of the Irish High Court judges attended in court, and the hours at which business commenced and terminated on each day; and whether he will give a list of the commissions and other public bodies of which any of these judges are members, or have been members during the past ten years?

The Lord Chancellor informs me that during the hearing of a recent case in the Court of Appeal, the absence of the two Lords Justices of Appeal on circuit was given as the reason why the postponement of the hearing of another branch of the same case became unavoidable. The judges have been in attendance in Dublin or on circuit for the discharge of business arising in their respective courts on all occasions as required, and have often sat much beyond the appointed time. It would not be possible to furnish, with any approach to accuracy, the further particulars asked for in the question. I must not, however, be taken as agreeing with the inference that the Irish Bench is at present undermanned.

Can the right hon Gentleman say whether the judges frequently rise long before the appointed time?

Sometimes, no doubt, they rise before the appointed time, but, then, they sometimes sit beyond the appointed time, and between the two justice is done.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question as to the Commissions?

Well, I really have no information as to the list of Commissions or other public bodies of which the judges are members.

Are they not fairly numerous?

I do not know. I should imagine that probably they neglect these duties.

asked whether the Dublin Commissioners under the Irish Universities Act, pursuant to a statute dated 15th May, 1909, set up a lectureship in Spanish and one in Italian at a stipend of £100 each, which were duly advertised in July and August, 1909, the Commissioners stating that the appointments-would be made in the October following; that two eminently distinguished ladies applied for the respective lectureships; that the Commissioners again met on 7th January, 1910, and appointed a Miss Degani to the combined lectureship in Spanish and Italian at a stipend of £300 per annum, although she had been passed over by the governing body for every position for which she had applied; whether the lady in question has any qualifications for the position; and what steps he proposes to take to prevent such waste of public money?

The Dublin Commissioners at first instituted separate lectureships in Italian and Spanish, with stipends of £100 a year each, and advertised for candidates. After full consideration of the applications received the Commissioners came to the conclusion that it was desirable to substitute for the two separate offices a single lectureship, with a stipend of £300 a year. This they accordingly did by a new statute, and they then appointed to the office the candidate whom they deemed to be the most learned and suitable. There is no ground whatever for the allegation that there has been a waste of public money. Miss Degani is a most competent person.

Does it not constitute a waste of public money that when two qualified persons apparently who were prepared to accept the posts at £100 each that the Commissioners should now institute a position of £300 a year. Is not that a waste of £100 per year?

I do not know what right the hon. and gallant Member has to speak upon the relative learning of these respective candidates. That is for a learned body, and they have decided that, upon the whole, this lady should hold the two appointments.

Is it not a fact that the two ladies who originally applied are fully qualified to teach Spanish and Italian respectively, and were prepared to do so at £100 a year each, and that the Commissioners have now combined the two positions in one at a salary of £300 in order to appoint a lady who had influence at Dublin Castle?

I am as incompetent as the hon. and gallant Gentleman to say who is competent for teaching Spanish and Italian. That was referred to a body of experts.

I beg to give notice, when the Statute is laid upon the Table, I shall move an address to the Crown against it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Commissioners referred the question of the filling of those posts to the governing bodies of the college, as they did in other cases?

I cannot say; I do not know.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the number of trade disputes in which the assistance of the Board of Trade has been employed under the Conciliation Act of 1896, and the number of workpeople directly concerned in such disputes; and if he will give the figures separately for each of the years since the Act came into force?

I will circulate with the Votes a statement giving in detail the information asked for by my hon. Friend so far as available. I may say that the total number of trade disputes in which the Board of Trade have taken action under the Conciliation Act, 1896, has been 467, of which 215 involved an actual stoppage of work. The number of workpeople affected in these 215 disputes were 555,000. This total is exclusive of a very large but unascertainable number of persons affected by disputes which were settled without any stoppage occurring.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Government will consider the advisability of introducing legislation to deal with labour disputes upon the lines of the Canadian statute which has been utilised successfully to settle disputes amicably without recourse to compulsion?

I am well aware of the Act referred to by my hon. Friend, but I do not think I can at present usefully add anything to the answers which have been given recently in the House by the Prime Minister and my right hon. Friend with regard to proposals for dealing with the prevention and settlement of trade disputes. The whole matter is receiving very careful consideration.

asked whether, in considering any plan which might tend to prevent or shorten industrial warfare, due weight would be given to the importance of any tribunal or office which may be set up being entirely free from political control?

In dealing with this very difficult matter due weight will be given to all relevant considerations.

asked whether the Congested Districts Board would ac- quire the townland of Cleragh, on the Corscadden estate, Glenade, county Leitrim, for the purpose of redistribution amongst the evicted tenants and uneconomic holders in the district, having regard to the fact that it is the only waste land in the vicinity and is much required for relief of congestion?

The solicitor for the owner of the estate referred to has informed the Congested Districts Board that the necessary maps and documents are being prepared to enable an inspection of the property to be made by the Board with a view to deciding whether they will make an offer for purchase. Pending an inspection the Board cannot say how they would deal with the lands if acquired by them.

asked if the Chief Secretary will say how many evicted tenants whose cases have been passed by the Estates Commissioners have yet to be provided for in county Limerick, and how many cases were rejected; will the names of those to be provided for be given, and also the property from which they were evicted; and will the names of those whose claims have been rejected be also given?

I would refer the hon. Member to my replies to the questions on this subject asked by the hon. Member for West Limerick on the 3rd and 7th August.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman can state the cause of the delay in reference to the building of cottages sanctioned by the urban council of Kilrush, West Clare, in accordance with the Housing of the Working Classes Act; and what is the condition of affairs in reference to the sworn inquiry concerning this matter?

There has been no delay in this case on the part of the Local Government Board. Difficulties arose with respect to the acquisition of a site, and it was subsequently found necessary to return the plans for amendment. The urban district council made formal application for a loan on the 17th April last, and when they have duly amended the plans and re-submitted them the Board will be in a position to make arrangements for holding a sworn inquiry.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Report of the Irish Land Commission for the year ending 31st March, 1911, is now overdue more than four months; and if he can say when the report will be issued?

The report referred to was presented to Parliament on 24th July, and will, I understand, be circulated within the next few days.

Is it not possible for us to have this report more promptly in the future?

I will endeavour to secure that that shall be done.

asked whether in the case of small minorities of tenants on estates now sold who have for special and reasonable reasons refused to sign purchase agreements and are being harassed by their landlords, the Congested Districts Board have power to intervene, with a view of bringing about the complete sale of those estates, and thus avert the destruction of many homes?

When portion of an estate situated in a congested districts county is being sold by direct sale through the Estates Commissioners, the Congested Districts Board are not prepared to intervene as regards unsold holdings until the sale through the Commissioners is completed.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland what is the total cost of the Irish Land Commission, and of the land purchase department of the Congested Districts Board now as compared with the cost when the Land Purchase Act of 1903 was introduced?

The estimate of the expenditure of the Irish Land Commission for the financial year 1903-4, which was prepared without reference to the Irish Land Act, 1903, amounted to £131,740 net. The amount of the estimate for the current financial year is £544,395 net. Since the passing of the Irish Land Acts of 1903 and 1909, however, a number of additional payments, amounting, in the whole to £365,000 for the current year, have had to be provided for annually, all of which are borne on the Vote for the Irish Land Commission.. These additional charges cover the dividends and Sinking Fund required for the stock set apart for the purposes of the Land Purchase Aid Fund, the dividends and Sinking Fund required to be provided in the case of the issue of stock at a discount, and provision for the improvement of estates. The total cost of the Land Purchase Department of the Congested Districts Board cannot be given, as some of the indoor and outdoor staff of the Board are engaged in work other than land purchase.