asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why is there not included in the Second Peace Conference (Conventions) Bill a schedule setting forth the various unnamed conventions to which it refers; and why has a different course been pursued in this Bill from that pursued in the Naval Prize Bill, in which the Convention to which it refers was included as a schedule?

It would not be convenient to the House to annex in a schedule to a Bill of six Clauses Conventions which would probably occupy fifty pages of print, and which have already been laid before the House in Cd. 4175 (Miscellaneous, No. 6, 1908). The titles of the Conventions to which the preamble of the Bill relates are the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes, the Convention respecting the rights and duties of Neutral Powers and persons in war on land, the Convention for the adaptation of the principles of the Geneva Convention to maritime war, the Convention relative to the establishment of an International Prize Court, and the Convention respecting the rights and duties of Neutral Powers in maritime war. Legislation is required only in respect of some of the Articles of these various Conventions, and those not the most important; but it would not be feasible to schedule isolated Articles, because they would not be intelligible without the context. There was no inconvenience in scheduling the Prize Court Convention to the Naval Prize Bill, and it was therefore thought desirable to do so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has his attention been called to the fact that Sir Edward Fry, G.C.B., Extraordinary Ambassador, Member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, and Delegate Plenipotentiary for Great Britain to the second Peace Conference at The Hague, has published as his written opinion and conclusion regarding the effect of the Declaration of London on blockade, that it must be admitted that the rights of England as a belligerent suffer a limitation; and are His Majesty's Government prepared to postpone the ratification of the Declaration of London until they have further considered this question?

I have seen the statement referred to. There was no agreement about the right of blockade before the Declaration of London; and the agreement now made is not a limitation but an extension of rights, if by the term rights is meant rights recognised, as distinct from rights disputed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to communicate that opinion of Sir Edward Fry to the Admiralty, and get a report from them on the subject.

The question has been thoroughly considered by the Admiralty. I do not think there is anything in the opinion of Sir Edward Fry, who is not an expert in these matters, which has not been brought before the Admiralty.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs could he explain the apparent contradiction between Article 17 of the Declaration of London, which prescribes that neutral vessels may not be captured for breach of blockade except within the area of operations of the warships detailed to render the blockade effective, and Article 20, which prescribes that a vessel which has broken blockade outwards, or which has attempted to break blockade inwards is liable to capture so long as she is pursued by a ship of the blockading force; and does Article 20 in fact authorise the capture for breach of blockade of a neutral ship which has been pursued outside that area of operations to which article restricts such capture?

There is no inconsistency between Articles 17 and 20. Pursuit by a warship, detailed to render a blockade effective, of a vessel which had attempted to break blockade at a place within the zone which such warship was to watch, extends the area of operations within which the capture of such vessel is legitimate.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think Article 17 is very denfiite in its conclusion inasmuch as it states neutral vessels can only be captured within the area of operations of the warships and would it not be wise to alter the article so as to make that quite clear?

I have not the text of that article or of Article 20 before me, and I cannot supplement the answer I have given on the spur of the moment and without notice.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now give the House any information regarding the terms of the recently signed agreement relating to fur-sealing in the Pacific?

It is hoped to lay the treaty in question shortly before the House.

asked the Undersecretary of State for India the result of his inquiries into the rates of pay to workmen engaged in connection with the Government contract for rails, etc., at Dowlais ironworks; and what action he proposes to take to secure the proper observance of the Fair-Wages Clause attached to this contract?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to give a definite answer. We have made this progress; that, on the advice of the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee I am prepared to admit that the moulders and steel makers at Dowlais must be regarded as employed on our contract. The wages at Dowlais appear certainly to be low, but the Committee have not yet given me their advice whether the general rates paid there are within the terms of the Fair-Wages Resolution, and it is on this point that I regret very much there is still delay, which I hope will be of short duration. I may add that no new contract will be placed at Dowlais until the matter is decided.

I wish to thank the hon. Gentleman for his reply and to ask him whether there is any probability of the Advisory Committee being able to report by Thursday of this week?

I have communicated with the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee, and I have not the slightest doubt they will do all in their power to expedite a decision. It is a difficult matter of far-reaching consequences, and I am sure there will be no delay which is absolutely unnecessary.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the Fair-Wages Clause is being systematically and continuously violated by Messrs. Guest, Keen and Nettlefold whilst executing Colonial Office contracts at their Dowlais works; and what action he proposes taking to secure its enforcement?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to give a definite answer. We have made this progress: that, on the advice of the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee, I am prepared to admit that the moulders and steel makers at Dowlais must be regarded as employed on our contract. The wages at Dowlais appear certainly to be low, but the Committee have not yet given me their advice whether the general rates paid there are within the terms of the Fair-Wages Resolution, and it is on this point that I regret very much there is still delay, which I hope will be of short duration. I may add that no new contract will be placed at Dowlais until the matter is decided.

No more contracts are to be given to this firm by the Colonial Office until this matter is cleared up?

That is so.

If this is the conduct of a firm in cases where there is a Fair-Wages Clause, what would it be if there were no such Clause?

asked what decision has been arrived at by the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee concerning the wages of certain classes of labourers and of skilled workmen at Dowlais engaged on Government contracts?

I am informed that the conclusions arrived at by the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee on the matters in question have been communicated to the Departments concerned, with which the responsibility for any action taken will rest.

May I ask whether the Advisory Committee has given the Department any advice as to what constitutes a district within the meaning of the Fair-Wages Clause?

I think the reply given by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary for India covered the first point definitely. With regard to the second we have not had time to consider the matter, but we will do so as rapidly as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this matter has been before the Advisory Committee some ten days, and unless a decision be given immediately a very large addition to the strike area will follow? Can the right hon. Gentleman promise an answer by Thursday next?

I have no control over the Advisory Committee. The Chairman is an official of the Board of Trade, but otherwise it is a Departmental Committee representing various departments. I have no personal control over the matter, but I am sure my hon. Friend, as he has already informed the hon. Member, and his Committee will do their utmost to arrive at a conclusion as soon as possible on this very difficult point.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what action he proposes taking to secure the enforcement of the Fair-Wages Clause at Dowlais, where the moulders make various parts of the machinery employed in the plate-rolling process, and where the pattern-makers make the patterns for the moulders, and are thus in both cases directly employed in connection with the contracts now being executed by Messrs. Guest, Keen, and Nettlefold on behalf of the Admiralty?

The doubt whether the Wages Clauses in the Admiralty contracts, mentioned in my hon. Friend's question, can be held to apply to wages paid in making the appliances used for the firm's general business, as well as for the Admiralty contracts, is, I regret to say, not yet elucidated by the report of the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee. As regards the further question as to the rates of wages paid at Dowlais, I must refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to-day by my hon. Friend the Under Secretary for India.

May I ask whether the Admiralty will adopt the policy of the India Office and consider that these men, if indirectly employed in connection with the contracts, come within the terms of the Fair-Wages Clause?.

As I have stated, the opinion expressed by the Advisory Committee does not exactly cover the Admiralty case. It is not the same as the India Office case. We will have further inquiry made on the point. My hon. Friend will understand that in the case of the Admiralty contracts the steel used in the manufacture of steel plates is made at Cardiff and not at Dowlais, and the plant used by the Cardiff firm is of a different class.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the same point exactly arose in regard to the moulders who make the machinery for rolling the plates, and whether the rules of the India Office on this point cannot also be accepted by the Admiralty?

The hon. Member may be right, but I am advised that the case of the moulders used in the manufacture of plates is not the same as the case of the moulders engaged in the manufacture of steel rails. So far as the cases are the same, I adopt the answer of the Undersecretary for India, but where they are not the same I must fall back on the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay before the Advisory Committee the fact that the machinery for making the moulds for the shipbuilding plates at Cardiff is made at Dowlais by the moulders now on strike there, and therefore the case is analogous to that of the India Office; the only difference being that in one case it is for rails and in the other for plates.

I am informed that the cases are not the same, inasmuch as the plant used for the manufacture of steel rails at Cardiff is only used to a small extent for Admiralty contracts. Therefore the opinion of the Advisory Committee does not apply.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the rail-making machinery is only applied part of the time to Government contracts, and, in spite of that, the India Office have ruled that the Fair-Wages Clause must apply?

According to the advice given by the Fair-Wages Advisory Committee, the answer depends on the proportion in which the plant is used for Government contracts and for outside contracts. We have constantly to refer to this particular point in regard to Admiralty contracts.

Does the Admiralty interpret the Fair-Wages Clause to mean that fair wages are only to be paid during the time that the men are employed direct on the Government contract, and that the firm may sweat its workers all the rest of the time except those few hours?

That is, I regret to say, the only construction which can be put upon the Fair-Wages Clause.

May I ask whether, under the Fair-Wages Clause a certain proportion of sweating can be permitted to continue?

No, under the Fair-Wages Clause there can be no sweating in the manufacture of the article which is governed by the contract, but it must be a question of law whether the contract is or is not complied with, and the fact that the firm may pay less than the proper rate of wages would not invalidate the particular contract, though it would be a good reason for not giving another contract to the same firm.

How does that apply to firms in foreign countries?

It does not apply at all.

asked the Undersecretary of State for India whether the office of Sanitary Commissioner to the Government of India was established on the recommendation of the Plague Commission; whether that office is now vacant; and whether, in view of the prevalence of plague, cholera, malaria, and small-pox he will see that this office be not abolished, and that an appointment be made to it at once?

The vacancy in the office of Sanitary Commissioner with the Government of India caused by the death of the late incumbent has not yet been filled, and the duties of the post are at present discharged by the Director-General of the Indian Medical Depart- ment. The Government of India are disposed to think that the creation of a separate Sanitary Commissioner in 1904 has not fulfilled expectations, and are inclined to revert to the arrangement previously existing. The Secretary of State must reserve his decision until the full statement of the views which the Government of India have promised is before him. The Sanitary Commissioner is merely an advising officer to the Government of India. The responsibility for sanitation in the several provinces rests with the Local Governments. The office was not created in 1904 on the recommendation of the Plague Commission of 1898. The Plague Commission's scheme was not accepted.

asked whether the judgment just delivered in Calcutta in the Midnapur damage suit was adverse to the same magistrates and the same police officers as those who were censured by the High Court in the Midnapur conspiracy, 1909; whether the judgment of Mr. Justice Fletcher confirms the view taken by the High Court of the conduct of those officers in their treatment of the accused in the conspiracy case; and what course the Secretary of State proposes to take in regard to their position in the Government service, and the titles conferred last year upon the police officers?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given by me to the hon. Member for Salford on Thursday last.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War what number of recruits joined the two London divisions of the Territorial Force during the six months ending 30th June, 1910, as compared with the 2,559 who joined in the corresponding period of 1911?

The number of recruits for the six months ending 30th June, 1910, amounted to 3,130.

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken any steps to try and get more recruits for the Territorial Force?

Yes, we are doing all we can, and we shall be glad of any help the hon. Gentleman can give us.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what steps are being taken?

It would take too long at question time to mention the numerous steps which Lord Haldane and the authorities are taking to get more recruits for the Territorial Force. I hope these efforts will be successful.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say the number of recruits necessary to get the force up to its full strength?

There are over a quarter of a million of men now in the Territorial Force, and, for a new force, I think that is satisfactory. Of course, it would be better if the force were up to its full strength; but, after all, it is satisfactory that a quarter of a million of men are found to give up some of their time and money for the service of the State.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say the number required to bring up the Territorial Force to full strength?

Of course, I can give that information at once if the hon. Gentleman will put down a question, but I cannot, from memory, give from day to day the exact number of men short of the establishment of the Territorial Force.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say anywhere about the number?

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware there is nothing new about the Territorial Force except the title?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the deduction of value of licence from the Inhabited House Duty prior to the payment of the former applies both to on and off-licence holders?

I assume that the hon. Member refers to the provisions of Section 8 of the Revenue Act, 1911. These provisions relate to all Excise licences, the duty on which is charged by reference to the annual value of the premises.

asked whether it is competent for an owner of minerals which were not comprised in a mining lease in April, 1909, to supply one figure as his value of his whole mineral property under Clause 22 of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910; and, if not, to what extent are separate and independent valuations required?

The question raised by the hon. Member is one on which the Commissioners are taking legal advice.

Might I ask whether the advice of the Law Officers of the Crown has been given, because the matter is of considerable importance?

I agree the question is of considerable importance. It has been referred to the Law Officers for their opinions, and I will do my very best to get their answer as soon as possible.

asked whether an owner of minerals, when making a valuation under Clause 22 of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, of minerals not comprised in a mining lease in April, 1909, is to assume that such minerals can be worked without regard to the support for the surface, or whether this point of valuation is to be considered when the valuation of the surface is made?

It is open to a person who is the owner of land and also of the subjacent minerals to assume such reasonable restrictions either for the benefit of the surface or of the minerals as he may think best, and the Commissioners, are prepared to deal with estimates of the value of minerals made on this basis, provided that any restrictions so assumed are notified to the Department.

asked upon what statutory authority the Income Tax Commissioners base their claim to tax married women?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the provisions of Section 45 of the Income Tax Act of 1842, 5 and 6 Vic, c. 35.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if about fourteen weeks ago he received a communication from a number of cocoa and chocolate manufacturers expressing an opinion that the proposed change in the Cocoa Duty would operate to the disadvantage of their industry and the labour employed in it, and requesting him to receive a deputation from them to lay their views before him; and, if so, what steps does he propose to take in the matter?

I have made arrangements to see the deputation to which the hon. Member refers, this afternoon.

Was the right hon. Gentleman under a misapprehension when he said he had received no complaints by letter from the manufacturers?

I received an application for a deputation, whom I propose to meet this afternoon. I shall not know what their complaints are until I hear them.

Has not the cocoa and chocolate manufacturers repeatedly demanded the repeal of the Sugar Duty?

It is very likely.

asked the Secretary for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the efforts made by one Richard Arthur, M.D., acting with a firm of shipping agents, to secure the employment in Australia of clerks, shopmen, and boys about to leave school; whether the. Work and employment set out in this letter is guaranteed by the High Commissioner for Australia or by the Agents-General for the several Australian States; whether he can say the amount of commission which those shipping agents receive from the passage money; and, further, whether he is aware of Dr. Richard Arthur's position with regard to the Immigration League of Australasia?

My attention has been called to a letter signed by Dr. Arthur, the president of the Immigration League of Australasia which has recently appeared in the Press. I am not aware whether the employment referred to in the letter is guaranteed by the Commonwealth or State authorities, and I have no knowledge of any arrangements which may have been made with shipping agents.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Dr. Arthur is president, secretary and everything else of this Immigration League; is he aware too that boys are being trapped into going out to Australia and that no provision is made for them when they get there? Is it not the right hon. Gentleman's duty to inquire into these matters?

I shall be glad to inquire into any complaints that may be sent me.

Is it not the right hon. Gentleman's duty? What he is paid for?

I am paid for many things, but not, I think, to inquire into the proceedings of Dr. Arthur.

asked when a reply will be made to the representations that have been made regarding the condition of service of labour exchange clerks?

As I have already stated, the representations which have been made to me on this subject are receiving my careful consideration. I am not yet in a position to give any reply.

asked why a clerk, named Branscombe, until recently employed in the Central Labour Exchange Offices, Caxton House, has been refused a testimonial as to his character, although there is nothing against it or his capabilities as a clerk; and whether there is any proposal to discharge senior clerks in the labour exchanges and substitute boy clerks at lower wages?

The typist in question has not been refused a reference, and, in fact, one has been given to a prospective employer. There is no proposal to substitute boy clerks for senior clerks in the Labour Exchanges.

Did not this clerk consider she was entitled to have the reference personally?

I have no information on that point.

asked whether mechanic writers employed since before 13th April, 1907, retain their eligibility for establishment in accordance with the assurance given by Admiralty letter, dated 30th May, 1907, A.4671, which stated that no alteration except as regards increment has been made in the conditions of employment of mechanic writers?

I should be glad if my hon. Friend will allow me to inquire further into this matter, which is one of some difficulty, and not affecting my Department alone, before I give a reply.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he has yet come to a decision as to what further alterations are advisable with respect to the hours and duties of the staff at St. Anne's-on-Sea post office?

I have made further enquiry in this matter and it does not appear that any further alterations are called for.

What alterations have been made already?

I am not in a position to say exactly.

Do the enquiries referred to apply to those who were affected?

The matter has been investigated by the surveyor of the district.

asked, in view of the fact that correspondence is despatched without examination to the head district offices after 7.30 p.m. in consequence of the inadequacy of the staff, why this practice is adhered to; and, having regard to the fact that a large amount of correspondence was delayed in the Eastern Central section, General Post Office, last June, through insufficient staff to meet the half-yearly pressure, whether the proposed revision and increase of staff for this section will be effected in time to be utilised at the forthcoming Michaelmas pressure?

I would refer the hon. Member to the last paragraph of my reply to his question of the 13th ultimo, in which I stated that the practice of despatching correspondence to the head district offices unexamined, between the hours of 7.30 p.m. and 6.30 a.m., has no reference to inadequacy of staff. No delay results from the present practice, which from a departmental point of view is advantageous, and I do not propose to alter it. The proposed revision of the force of the Eastern Central section will be dealt with as expeditiously as possible.

asked whether, during the absence of the supervising staff at Walsall on annual leave, their duties are to be made up by the employment of a postman on the duties of the sorting clerks and telegraphists and replacing of the former by temporary labour; whether there is any undue pressure existing, or likely to exist, that would prevent the duties being made up by the staff of sorting clerks and telegraphists; and whether it is usual during the absence of a postmaster and his officials that their duties should be made up by the employment of temporary labour?

At offices not sufficiently large to possess established leave substitutes borne on Supervising classes, of which Walsall is one, it is the practice to provide, as far as possible, for the leave of supervising officers by the employment of established leave substitutes borne on the class of sorting clerks and telegraphists. If this provision is insufficient it is necessary to have recourse either to extra duty or to temporary force, or to both; and the circumstances of each case must determine the action to be taken. At Walsall there has recently been an amount of extra duty performed large enough to make it undesirable to increase it by refraining from adopting the process of devolution, which I endeavoured to explain in my reply to the question asked me by the hon. Member on 11th May last. Excessive extra duty is not in the best interests of the staff, and in attempting to avoid it at Walsall the local officials have acted in accordance with the expressed distaste of the staff for this form of labour.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been directed to the low salaries of assistant masters in secondary schools; and, if so, what steps is he prepared to take to improve their position in this respect?

The question has been engaging my attention for some time. I am not at present prepared to make any statement. I may refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave on the 1st August and the 12th April to the hon. Member for the Exchange Division of Liverpool and to my hon. Friend the Member for North Salford, respectively.

Does the right hon. Gentleman assent to the statement in the first part of the question that these salaries are low?

I cannot say that all schoolmasters' salaries are low, but there is a large number—too large a number.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been drawn to the dissatisfaction aroused by the recent issue of Circular No. 776 abolishing examinations in all stages of natural science and in Stage I. of elementary science; whether he is aware that the issue without notice of a circular of this kind must have a disastrous effect on the teaching of science in technical schools throughout the country; and whether he can see his way to reconsider the matter?

The changes of examinations referred to are not being made without notice, as implied in the second part of the question. Nearly a year's notice of the changes is given. I have no reason to suppose that the changes themselves have been received otherwise than with satisfaction by those best acquainted with the needs of scientific education as given in evening and technical schools, although, as might be expected, a few isolated protests have been received with regard to particular details in the complicated scheme of reorganisation set out in the circular. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Was not the circular issued in July to come in force in January?

No; nearly a year ago.

asked the Lord Advocate whether his attention has been called to a resolution passed at a meeting of Scottish fishermen, held at Fraserburgh on 29th July, in which it is pointed out that, owing to the introduction of steam drifters and motor boats, which are driving sailing boats out of the market, and which are too costly for fishermen to purchase without help, serious consequences to the Scottish fishing industry are anticipated unless Government assistance is given, and in which the Government are called upon to afford to Scottish fishermen the same facilities as are granted to Irish fishermen by granting loans to enable Scottish fishermen to purchase steam drifters and motor boats; and whether he proposes to take any action with a view to giving effect to the reiterated desires of Scottish fishermen in these matters?

My attention has been called to the Resolution referred to by my hon. Friend, but I have nothing to add to the answers which I gave on 2nd March, 9th March, and 3rd April of this year.

asked how many Labour Exchange offices are now established in London and its suburbs; and what is the number of the officials in these offices and their remuneration?

There are twenty-eight labour exchanges open in London and suburbs at the present time with a total staff, including the divisional office, of 239 officers. The annual amount paid in wages and salaries in respect of these officers is about £21,000.

Does the Government consider that the result justifies the expenditure?

Yes, certainly.

asked whether at the labour exchanges there are separate lists made of temporary and permanent situations found by these offices for the thousands of people who are reported to call at them in search of employment; and do the officials offer employment for less than the trade union rates of pay?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second portion, I would refer the hon. Member to Section 4 of the general regulations made in pursuance of the Labour Exchanges Act which governs the procedure of labour exchange officers in this matter. I am sending him a copy of these regulations.

Could the right hon. Gentleman answer the last question, as to whether the official trade union rates of pay are paid by the Government or not?

That is exactly what I have answered. I will send the hon. Member a copy of the regulations.

The right hon. Gentleman could surely answer the question straight whether the Government do or do not pay trade union rates of wages?

It is a very simple matter. If the hon. Member will study the regulations and wishes to ask any further questions I shall be glad to answer them.

What is the difficulty in answering the question?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the strain recently im- posed upon members of the Metropolitan police force both in London and elsewhere, he will recognise the efficient manner in which they have performed their duties by recommending the Government to grant a week's extra pay to all members?

A grant of three days' pay and three days' extra leave has been recently granted, and it is not proposed to supplement this.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury in which other departments of the public service men are employed under conditions of service similar to those of dockyard writers; and what proposals of the Admiralty based on the Macnamara Report the Treasury did not feel able to sanction'?

Persons under conditions of service similar to those of dockyard writers are employed in the War Office and Army Ordnance Department in considerable numbers, and any suggestions for change in their conditions of service have also to be considered in relation to employés of the Board of Education, Probate Registry, and many other Departments. It would not be possible to answer the last part of the question without the publication of the correspondence, a course to which I am not prepared to agree.

asked whether, with reference to the Macnamara Report on the writing staff of the royal dockyards, further communications have been received; and can a date be now given when the Treasury concurrence with the Admiralty proposals will be announced?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative.

A question arises on the Motion for the payment of Members passed yesterday. There is an exemption from the receipt of the payment of the £400 of those who are in receipt of salaries as Ministers. I wish to ask whether, according to the usages of this House, the Patronage Secretary, and the Financial Secretary to the Treasury and the Under-Secretaries are regarded as Ministers of the Crown, and whether they come within the scope of this Resolution?

They are certainly not Ministers of the Crown. Whether they are Ministers or not I would not like to say. Better take legal advice, I think.

asked whether the International Agreement for the Suppression of the White Slave Traffic recently entered into by this and other countries will necessitate the introduction of legislation?

The reply is in the negative so far as this country is concerned.

asked on what grounds the pension of Mrs. Elizabeth Smith, who resided until 24th April last at 8, Springfield Street, Heaton, Bradford, was stopped when she left that address and became a resident in St. Catherine's Home, Bradford?

The pension was stopped because on entering the home she became in receipt of a benefit of a yearly value exceeding £31 10s.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the unrest in labour circles in this country is largely due to the fact that their net wages earned have remained about stationary the last ten years, while the cost of living has largely increased; and will His Majesty's Government consider the necessity of appointing a Royal Commission to inquire into the matter?

I cannot say more than that this matter in all its aspects is receiving the careful consideration of the Government.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to a Resolution put on the Paper to-day in the name of the hon. Member (Baron de Forest), and is he aware that it has behind it a large amount of support?

My attention has not yet been called to it, but I will look into it.

Is the Government considering the introduction of a Bill establishing a 30s. minimum wage as the only effective method of allaying the unrest?

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the Government will bear in mind the facts stated in the first part of the question in any action they may take with regard to the current labour trouble?

I have no doubt my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has taken all these facts into consideration. I know that he is considering the matter carefully now.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is a fact that in the period of ten years' Income Tax shows that the incomes of the employing classes have enormously increased?

May I ask if the Government will make a general statement as to the action they may take before Parliament adjourns?

It would take some time to consider all the material that is essential before a conclusion can be come to. I doubt whether my right hon. Friend will be in a position to make a statement. I know that he is in conference now on the subject.

May I ask whether the Government will give the House an opportunity of discussing the present position of affairs before the House adjourns—I mean the use of the military in Liverpool and other places?

I do not like to express any opinion on the question of Order. I do not know to what extent it can be discussed on the Appropriation Bill or the Motion for the Adjournment.

Having regard to the terrible state of affairs in Liverpool, I gave notice to the President of the Board of Trade and the Secretary of State for the Home Department to ask each of these two right hon. Gentlemen whether he will be prepared to take active steps in regard to the labour disputes in Liverpool, and whether he will appoint a special commission to hold an inquiry. May I be allowed to add a few words? I am sure the House will appreciate the terrible state of affairs, and if anything can be done to put an end to it, I feel that the House will be glad to do it. May I say that I believe if the true merits of the dis- putes were more generally known in Liverpool, it would do a great deal towards putting an end to the difficulty? That is the reason why I suggest that a special commission should go down there at once and hold an official inquiry. I am personally—[Interruption]—I hope the House will allow me——

The hon. Member will see that if he makes a statement, every hon. Member who does not agree with him will also desire to make a statement.

I feel so strongly on the matter——

We all feel strongly.

I am not in a position at present to make a statement with regard to the matter.

I wish to ask the Home Secretary a question of which I have given him private notice, namely, whether it is a fact, as reported, that the troops fired on the crowd at Liverpool early this morning?

I am able to inform the House that the information I have received this morning shows that the situation in London has improved. At the docks, I am informed, all sections of the men are returning to work, though not in full numbers. Men are also working at the wharves; and the employés of the Great Western Railway have come back. There are thus grounds for believing that all classes of transport workers are now beginning to realise the advantages which they have secured by the recent settlement and the folly of jeopardising them by any ill-considered action. If no untoward event should occur the Commissioner of Police hopes to continue to maintain order without the necessity of calling in military aid.

Can the Home Secretary say what was the name of this bloodthirsty magistrate who wanted the troops to fire?

I certainly did not intend by my remarks to throw the slightest reflection on the magistrate, who, I am sure, was only doing his duty when he wanted the troops to be ordered to fire.

Can the right hon. Gentleman make any statement in regard to the tramway strike in Glasgow?

I would like to know from the Secretary to the Home Department whether he has received any complaints from householders in Liverpool that the action of the police was the cause of the first rioting on Sunday?

No, I have not

What does the right hon. Gentleman think of the remark of the Chief Constable, that you need not think seriously of the rioting, which requires soldiers to shoot down unarmed people?

Everything is relative. Of course any injury that may take place is a very serious matter indeed; but the important point is that the riot is not one which originated with the strikers, but that disorder and riots sometimes occur in those parts of Liverpool where sectarian difficulties exist.

As regards the railway companies, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the first cause of the dispute is the refusal of the employers to leave their men free to appoint their own representatives, and has he taken steps to inform the railway companies of the necessity of the workmen having freedom of choice in the matter?

That is not a question which comes under the scope of the Home Office. It should be addressed either to the Board of Trade or to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is immediately concerned in those matters.

May I ask the President of the Board of Trade the same question: whether the first cause of the disputes with the railway companies was not the refusal of those companies to leave the men free to appoint their own representatives, and if he will try to secure for these men that freedom of choice in regard to delegates which is necessary?

Is it a fact that the directors of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company refused to receive the delegates of the men, and that that is considered to be at present one of the principal causes of the fight in Liverpool?

I am sure that the House will agree that it would not do for me to express any opinion in regard to the merits of matters which are in-dispute at present.

I simply ask for the facts.

I have asked the representatives of the men and of the railway companies to meet me on Thursday, and I hope that we may at all events do something to get over the difficulties that at present exist.

I wish to ask whether there will be an opportunity or whether it will be in order on the business to-morrow or on the Motion for Adjournment to discuss certain labour troubles that have taken place?

Certain aspects of them will clearly be in order. The words "certain labour troubles" cover a very wide ground, and I would not like to commit myself without knowing exactly what ground the hon. Member wishes to occupy; but with reference to the disputes which are going on and the action of the Metropolitan police, and also the action of the military, I think that those three matters certainly come within the scope of the Appropriation Bill.