asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will, without delay, publish a Report of the deputations that he has received with reference to the National Insurance Bill (Part II., Unemployment)?

In nearly all cases the proceedings at the interviews in question were of a private nature, and a report of the proceedings cannot, therefore, be published. I am, however, having printed with the Votes a list of the names of the principal associations' deputations from which were received at the Board of Trade on the subject of Part II. of the National Insurance Bill. This list does not include deputations which were received conjointly with the Treasury on the Bill in general. Besides these deputations there have been, of course, communications from and interviews with other bodies or persons interested in the Bill. [See Written Answers, this date.]

Deputations are received by the President of the Board of Trade with reference to Part II. of the Bill, while deputations are received by the Chancellor of the Exchequer with reference to Part I. May I ask why there is publication in the one case and not in the other?

The proceedings in connection with every one of these deputations were of a confidential character, and no report can now be given.

Is there any reason why the deputations in regard to Part II. should be private and those in regard to Part I. public?

I really do not know. I was not present at the deputations in regard to Part I. As to Part II. it was generally agreed that the deputations should be private on the ground that you can discuss the questions at issue in a much more free and practical way in private than in public.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a White Paper has been published with reference to the deputations received in regard to Part I., and, if so, is not that a reason why a similar Paper should be published in regard to Part II.?

No reports of the deputations on Part II. were published for the reason I have given.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether married women employed at piece-work in their own homes will come under the operation of the Insurance Bill as voluntary contributors or will be compulsorily insured; and, if in the latter way, how will their daily wages be calculated?

My right hon. Friend has this matter under consideration.

asked whether, in view of the grievance entertained by teachers in elementary schools owing to the inadequacy of their superannuation allowance provided for in 1898 and of their exemption from benefits under Schedule 1, Part 2 (c), of the National Insurance Bill, he will now state when and to what extent he proposes to improve such teachers' superannuation scheme in lieu of the benefits given to other classes of employed persons under the Bill.

I am unable to make a statement on this subject at present, but my right hon. Friend has undertaken to give the matter his careful consideration as soon as the Insurance Bill has become law.

Will some assurance be given to teachers before the National Insurance Bill is disposed of.

I cannot go beyond the answer I have given.

asked whether a branch or an amalgamation of branches in Scotland of an affiliated order whose headquarters are in England may become an approved society in Scotland instead of becoming a branch of the approved society of that order in England; and whether the funds under the control of the Insurance Commissioners relating to approved societies and branches of approved societies in Scotland will have separate treatment and application?

Under the proposals of the Bill the society, and not any of its separate branches, would become the approved society; but, under an Amendment tabled by my right hon. Friend on Saturday, branches of a society grouped geographically may be treated for the purposes of valuations, surpluses, and deficiencies, as if they formed a separate society, if the total number of members of the grouped branches exceeds 5,000. As regards the latter part of the question, I do not quite understand what sort of differentiation my hon. Friend has in mind. There will not be a separate fund for Scotland.

Does the figure of 5,000 apply to Scotland, or is that country to get a lower number, say 1,000, like Ireland?

The figure 5,000 does apply to Scotland.

asked if in view of the fact that the interests of several million women will be affected by the new insurance schemes, and in view of the powers granted to the Insurance Commissioners, he will give assurances that at least one woman Commissioner will be appointed?

Yes, Sir. It has always been my right hon. Friend's intention that a woman Commissioner should be appointed.

asked whether it is intended to omit from compulsory insurance under the National Insurance Bill all women home-workers not wholly or mainly dependent on their own earnings whose husbands are insured; and whether, seeing that the effect of such omission will be to encourage the employment of these women to the prejudice of others possibly more needy, he will suggest any provision to insure that the employment of such women will not be so encouraged?

My right hon. Friend has this question under consideration.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he can explain why, notwithstanding the fact that a special Memorandum has been published explanatory of the principal Amendments proposed to be incorporated in the National Insurance Bill, no reference is made there or on the Notice Paper to any Amendment to be proposed by him on Clause 59; have the Government Amendments to nearly all the other Clauses of the Bill been already published; and can he now announce his decision in reference to that Clause so that there may be time for consideration of the matter in Ireland before the allotted day for the discussion of the Clause?

I can assure the hon. Member that the case of Ireland is receiving careful consideration, and that any Amendments that may be necessary will be published in a few days' time.

May I ask is there not a special hardship that after six months' consideration we have not the slightest inkling of what is to be done in Ireland; and will he at least give us another day for Clause 59, so that there may be no danger that a mass of new Amendments put on the Paper at the last moment may choke discussion as to the two vital points in the Clause, namely, whether it is to apply to Ireland; and, if so, whether it is to recognise secret sectarian societies as approved societies?

It is, of course, outside my sphere to promise an extra day, but I do not think the hon. Gentleman need be afraid that these Amendments will not be tabled in due time.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what notice we shall get. The Irish Members have not intervened on this Bill, and we are entitled to reasonable notice as to laws that are going to be made for our country?

What are they?

As I have received no reply, I beg to give notice that to-night I will raise the question on the Motion for Adjournment.

asked whether, in view of the fact that in many places in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland it will be impossible for deposit contributors to obtain, medical benefits under the Insurance Bill, he will allow the Local Government Board for Scotland power to apportion that part of the Scottish money available for the Highlands and Islands for more general purposes than sanatoria, such as increase of medical service, Grants-in-Aid of travelling expenses of medical men attending insured persons, provision of hospital accommodation, and removal of insanitary conditions in places where the public health rate is at the legal maximum?

I trust it may prove to be possible to provide medical benefit for all deposit contributors, and some of the expenses which my hon. Friend specifies could under the Bill as it stands be properly incurred by the local health committees. I fear it would not be possible to provide for the application of funds contributed under the Bill directly to the removal of insanitary conditions.

May I ask whether he will consider the representations made by the authorities in Ross-shire and elsewhere showing that the present scheme, however applicable to the rest of Scotland, is certainly not applicable to the highland districts?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will provide in the Insurance Bill that deposit contributors only employed for a short period in the year may be allowed to continue their insurance as voluntary contributors?

My right hon. Friend accepted an Amendment to Clause 32 which will make this possible.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been drawn to the prices at which farmers disposed of their sheep and cattle at the recent auction fair at Weyhill, Hants, ewes 8s. 6d. and 4s. per head, and lambs 8s. and 7s. per head; and whether the Departmental Committee now inquiring into the cost of living in this country will also inquire as to the cause of the difference between wholesale prices at sales and retail prices in shops of the food of the working classes?

I understand that the prices quoted by my hon. Friend are extreme minima for a very small number sold in exceptional circumstances for feeding and not for the butcher. I may remind him that the Board of Trade Cost of Living Inquiry is not concerned with the determination of the cause of the difference between wholesale and retail prices, but with the amount and distribution of recent changes in the cost of commodities largely consumed by workmen.

Will it not be quite a fallacious report if the wholesale prices are not taken into account as well as the retail prices charged to the working classes?

I may remind the hon. Member that there was an inquiry in 1905, and that the present inquiry is for the purpose of comparison in order to ascertain whether there has or has not been an increase. I do not think from that point of view it would be of very much use to give information which was not given in 1905, and which therefore is not available for the purpose of comparison.

Would it not be possible for the right hon. Gentleman, now that he is inquiring into the subject again, to find out the prices, and that, if necessary to do so, he should extend the inquiry to wholesale prices?

I will bear that in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he will be in a position to announce the personnel of the proposed Departmental inquiry into the enhanced cost of living; what will be the terms of reference; will members of the public who are directly concerned be entitled to submit evidence; and will he arrange that the proceedings shall be open to the public?

The inquiry by the Board of Trade will, generally speaking, be on the lines of that made in 1905, and will be conducted by the officers of the Department in the same way as other of the Statistical Investigations made by the Board of Trade. The results of the 1905 inquiry were embodied in a Report on the Cost of Living of the Working Classes in certain towns (Cd. 3864).

Will the right hon. Gentleman not answer the question—what will the terms of reference be?

I think that the Prime Minister practically gave the terms. In the case of a Departmental Committee of this sort formal terms of reference are not usual, but I think that the Prime Minister gave the point.

Will this Departmental Committee in addition to ascertaining whether the cost of living has gone up ascertain what the causes are, and how they can be removed, for the benefit of the people?

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that the reference is so wide that the question of local rating shall not be confined to one year but shall be carried over a number of years?

Will the committee ascertain why the cost of living is more under a Radical Government than under a Unionist Government?

asked whether, in view of the fact that the increased cost of living is an international problem, and the fact that economists have previously suggested an inquiry on international lines, the Government would be prepared to appoint representatives on an international commission?

Any definite proposal for the purpose indicated in the question would have the careful consideration of His Majesty's Government.

asked whether, in view of the postponement of any rise in wages amongst postal and kindred employés until the Board of Trade has collected its information on the rise in the cost of living, the Government intends to lay it down as a general rule affecting all workers under its control that no variation in wages is to be granted in the interim period?

There is no intention of the kind.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the postponement of the consideration of the wages of Government employés until 1913 is causing grave discontent and may lead to serious public inconvenience?

The statement applies to Post Office servants, whose wages were dealt with by the Committee in 1906.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the silting up of the River Nene, to the detriment of trade, and whether he will take any steps by legislation or otherwise to render this river again navigable?

I shall be happy to consider any suggestion that the Commissioners of the Navigation or any of the local authorities concerned may desire to make with a view to the improvement of the navigation, but I cannot promise legislation on the subject.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his attention has been recently directed to the Report made by Major Marindin to the Board of Trade in February, 1892, on this subject, and the suggestions then made?

That will be borne in mind.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that, although the sale of newspapers is prohibited in Devonport dockyard, the distribution of newspapers is allowed before the time of commencement of work; and whether he will have the embargo on the distribution of "Labour Leaders" removed.

It is the fact that no newspapers are sold in the dockyard, i.e., newsvendors are not allowed in the yard for the purpose of selling newspapers or other literature. What is allowed, is the delivery to ships, offices, and residences, of newspapers which have been previously ordered. No discrimination whatever is made as to the newspapers so delivered.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether the Departmental Committee appointed by the Admiralty to investigate the conditions under which the naval shipwrights serve has yet reported; and, if so, in view of the promise made in answer to the petition presented by the naval shipwrights in November, 1910, he is now in a position to give the decision of the Admiralty in the matter?

An interim report has been received, but it is found that the question requires longer and more careful investigation than was anticipated, and the Admiralty will be unable to arrive at any definite decision for some time to come.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say any particular time?

No, I cannot.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is now in a position to make a further statement as to the views of the Admiralty in respect to pensions for hired workmen on retirement who have served fifteen years in, the Royal dockyards, in view of the fact that, when replying to the petition from Pembroke Dock asking that this concession might be granted, the reply given by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty was that a further communication would be made on the subject of the request made?

The question of whether or not it may be possible for the Admiralty to render any advice or assistance to hired workmen, not entitled to any pension, to establish for themselves a self-supporting superannuation scheme by means of weekly contributions is and has for some time past been under consideration. I do not think it will be possible to make any statement upon the matter for some time to come.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that men who have served their time in the Navy and who take their discharge do in many cases, when they have experienced the vicissitudes of the labour market, regret not having re-engaged; and, if so, will the Admiralty consider the possibility of saving such men for the service of the country by giving to every man who reaches that period of service at which he can claim his discharge a couple of months' leave, without pay, before taking his discharge, while allowing him at any time during such period to re-engage?

Every facility is given to deserving time-expired men to re-engage for a second period of service in the Navy and complete time for pension. If a man, however, persists in taking his discharge at the end of his first engagement he is still eligible to re-engage at any time within a period of five years; and if, thereafter, he serves the full period of re-engagement for pension, the same is not abated in respect of the period during which he was outside the Service. The present proposal to give a man two months' leave to look round for civil employment at the end of his first engagement is impracticable.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty why his Department had refused to submit the dispute as to what is a fair wage for navvies and labourers on the dock works at Rosyth to be decided by the Board of Trade?

The Board of Admiralty investigated this question on the spot in June, and is satisfied that there was no infringement of the Fair-Wages Clause in the cases of navvies and labourers at Rosyth.

The answer is not an answer to the question. The question is why the Admiralty have refused to submit the question to the Board of Trade for arbitration.

The Board of Admiralty are responsible and could not abrogate their responsibility in the matter.

Is not the Admiralty aware that the contractors employ all kinds of labour for all classes of work and that scarcely any of them come up to the standard rate?

The Admiralty are aware of all the material facts and do not consider that there has been any infringement of the Fair-Wages Clause.

Is not it usual to suppose that the persons who refuse arbitration show themselves to be in the wrong?

That does not apply to the Admiralty in the present case.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will consider the advisability of altering the King's Regulations (Addenda, 1911), Article 768, so that, if the circumstances of a conviction of a seaman or marine on shore are considered by a captain to be of a comparatively trivial nature, the forfeiture of a good-conduct badge may be remitted by him without having to bring the matter to the attention of the Commander-in-Chief and obtain his approval?

Except in so far as suggested in the questions of the hon. Member, I am not aware that the existing regulation has caused any hardship; but if it be found in practice to create difficulties, the question of revision will be considered. The intention is that only the more serious offences such as bring disgrace on the Naval uniform should be visit with naval penalties.

asked whether the weekly pay now made to sailors in the Royal Navy includes medical treatment?

Medical treatment is free to sailors, except as laid down in the King's Regulations, which provide for stoppages from pay for hospital treatment under prescribed conditions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the Bill before the House, proposes to charge the sailor for medical treatment, and if that is the case would he be prepared to see that the pay of the sailor is increased?

That is more a question for the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in accordance with the practice of most Governments, he will consider the question of granting free postal delivery to Members of Parliament on all letters relating to public matters?

Any Parliamentary privilege of sending or receiving letters by post free of postage was determined by a Statute of 1840. I do not contemplate introducing legislation to repeal or amend that Act.

asked the Postmaster General if he is aware that eleven workmen employed in the electric light and power department of the Post Office were not paid their wages for the two days' holiday they were compelled to take at His Majesty's Coronation; whether he is aware that workmen employed under similar conditions in other State Departments were paid their wages; and whether he will, under the circumstances, give instructions that these eleven men be paid their wages, so that there will not be any differential treatment of the workmen in connection with the Coronation holidays?

I am aware of the facts mentioned by the hon. Member. Under the Post Office practice, tradesmen employed under trade conditions do not come under the ordinary rules governing payment or other compensation for the usual annual public holidays, but I am considering whether, in view of the circumstances of the two days' holiday at His Majesty's Coronation, special treatment on that occasion would not have been justified. The matter, however, has to be referred to the Treasury, and I will communicate further by letter with the hon. Member.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the Tweedmouth Commission recommended that acting overseers in the Post Office during the absence of the regular overseers on annual or sick leave, and who prior to that Commission were in receipt of an extra allowance for such services, should cease to draw such allowance; if not, will he explain why the allowance was discontinued; and whether he can see his way to recommend the re-establishment of this extra pay?

I am not aware that officers acting as overseers received extra payment for such duty before the date of the Tweedmouth Committee's Report. It was the practice, however, before that date for supervising allowances to be paid to the substitute as well as, or instead of, to the regular holder according as the latter was absent on annual or sick leave, and it may be to this practice that the hon. Member refers. The Tweedmouth Committee recommended that these allowances should always be paid to the officers regularly receiving them and not to substitutes. This recommendation was generally acted upon until the date of the adoption of the Parliamentary Committee's recommendations, under which a supervising allowance is now paid to the substitute as well as to the regular holder during the absence of the latter as soon as the substitute has completed a qualifying period of fifty-six days in each year on the supervising duty. I see no sufficient reason for a modification of the present practice.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether a sum of £600 has been recently received as "conscience" money; and how much has been received as "conscience" money in each of the years ending 31st March, 1908, 1909, 1910, and 1911?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The total amount received by the Treasury in the financial year 1910–11 was £2,112 6s. 6d. The amounts for the preceding years referred to were given in the reply to a similar question by the hon. Member for East Renfrew on the 17th March last. Some further sums were also received direct by the Board of Inland Revenue.

asked why in the Return of Revenue and Expenditure (England, Scotland, and Ireland) (220†), the cost of old age pensions is treated as a local and not as a general charge; and whether, in connection with financial readjustments between Great Britain and Ireland, any change is in contemplation whereby the cost of old age pensions will be treated as a general charge?

The principles of classification adopted in the Return in question are explained in House of Commons Papers 329 of 1891 and 313 of 1894. I am not at present in a position to make any statement with regard to the latter part of the question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that a Labour Bureau Tent was erected on the fair ground at Weyhill on 10th October; how many officials were in charge of it and how many persons applied for employment; whether he is aware that a Labour Bureau Tent was erected on the fair ground at Devizes on 20th October and three officials from Salisbury were in charge of it, and how many persons applied for employment; and whether he can state the approximate cost incurred on each occasion?

Tents for Labour Exchange purposes were erected as an experiment at the Devizes and Weyhill Fairs. In each case the work was undertaken by the officers of the Salisbury Exchange, and there were six applicants for employment at Devizes and twelve at Weyhill. The experiment in question was made in view of the successful results obtained by similar means elsewhere in order to bring the advantages of the Labour Exchanges to the notice of the agricultural community. The cost cannot be separated from the general cost of the Labour Exchanges.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will reconsider the decision of his Department only to grant the Coronation medal to chief officers of each police force of ten years' service and over; whether he is aware that on the chief officers the heaviest amount of work and responsibility fell in connection with all the arrangements; and, in view of their small number, will he grant the distinction to all chief officers irrespective of length of service who were actually on the strength on the date in question?

I am well aware of the great amount of work and responsibility which fell upon the chief officers of each police force at the time of the Coronation. It is a fact, however, that the police have been more generously recognized as regards medals than any other branch of the public service, and I regret I cannot recommend any extension of the distribution of these medals beyond what has been already approved.

Is it not a fact that some of these chief officers had nine years' service, or were very nearly qualified for this medal, and, under the circumstances, would the right hon. Gentleman not grant the distinction to all of them?

I regret to say that for the reasons I have given I cannot go behind the rules that have already been accepted.

asked whether in many of the poorer districts the only large class of people who possess the property qualification to serve on a special jury are those connected with the licensed trade; that out of 132 persons on the special jury list for Bermondsey 111 were connected with the licensed trade; that in political libel actions the plaintiff frequently has a direct inducement to have the case tried before a special jury because of its political bias; and whether he can now state when an inquiry into the method of selecting juries will be instituted?

The figures for Bermondsey given by my hon. Friend are, I believe, substantially correct. I have no reason to doubt that the hon. Member's reflections on the existing jury system are to a considerable extent justified, and I am now considering the constitution of the Committee to which I propose to refer the question of the best way of amending it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman expect to be able to constitute the inquiry this Session?

Yes, Sir; certainly, I hope so—immediately almost.

Could not the difficulty be got over if all members of juries to try political libels in future were chosen from members of the Gladstone League?

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of introducing legislation to take away from plaintiffs in all cases the power to demand special juries as a right?

I have no doubt that is one of the questions which will be considered.

asked what are the sections of the Animals Protection Acts in Victoria and Queensland respectively which regulate the practice of vivisection; and what are the regulations made by the Governors in Council under those sections at present in force in those countries?

The Sections of the Animals Protection Acts of Victoria and Queensland which deal with vivisection are Nos. 12 and 13 in the former case and No. 12 in the latter. I regret that I am unable to give any information as to the Regulations which may be in force on the subject.

asked whether the Customs and Excise Returns for the year ended 31st March, 1911, disclose payment of Stamp Duties in respect of patent medicines of upwards of £325,000; if so, whether this represents an increase, and to what extent, on the amount of the duties paid under the same head during the previous financial year; what number of packages of patent medicines the above duties represent; and whether, in view of the amount of such medicines widely advertised and of no curative value consumed by poor persons, the Government contemplate introducing any legislation dealing with this question?

The yield of the duty on patent medicines in the year ended the 31st March last was £325,646, which was an increase of £12,532 on the receipt for the previous year, but is little more than £2,000 over the average receipts for the past ten years. No figures are available as to the number of packets of medicines represented by the figures for the year. The last part of the question appears to be one for the Home Office.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will reappoint the Select Committee on Procedure which was set up by Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman in 1906, in order that they may consider and report on the subject of the limitation of the length of speeches and other matters connected with the closuring of Debate?

I will consider my hon. Friend's suggestion, but can make no definite statement on the matter at present.

May I ask whether, in view of the fact that it has already been recommended by a Select Committee on Procedure that a Standing Order be passed for the purpose of enabling Bills which have been partly considered to be carried over to the succeeding Session, he will consider the advisability of passing such a Standing Order without the delay necessary to another Select Committee on the same subject?

I must ask for notice.

asked whether an advisory committee for magisterial appointments has been set up for Sussex; if so, can he furnish the names of the committee; if not, what reasons can be assigned for the delay; and is it intended to have one committee for West Sussex and another for East Sussex?

It is hoped that the advisory committee for Sussex, which there has been some trouble in arranging, will be set up before the end of this month. The division of the county will be duly considered.

Is it not yet decided whether there should be a committee for each part of the county?

I think not, I have given the answer the Lord Chancellor gave me, that it is hoped the Advisory Committee will be set up before the end of this month.

asked the Prime Minister if, and when, he is prepared to grant a day for the discussion of the appointment of justices of the peace?

I have already promised to give an opportunity for discussing the Motion on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Wisbech; a date will be announced later.

asked when the House will have an opportunity of discussing the use of the military in connection with the recent railway strikes?

I cannot promise more at present than to give a day for the discussion of the Report of the Railway Commission.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that on the only occasion when the subject was discussed or mentioned in the House he then said that the Government had no desire to burke the fullest and freest discussion, but that that was a moment when the fewer words said the better; and, under these circumstances, does he feel that a subject of this importance, in which the executive action of the Government have had such tragic consequences, has been adequately and fully discussed?

My appeal, I think, was not altogether responded to. There was a long debate on the subject. All I can say is that I cannot promise more than a day at present, but I will consider any general representations that may be made.

Is it fair to punish these Members who responded to the appeal for the offence of those who did not?

No, Sir; it is not.

Are we to be allowed, in discussing the Report of the Railway Commission, to discuss the use of the military in civil disturbances?

That will be a matter for the Chairman.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is now in a position to state the charge thrown upon the Exchequer by the use of the military in connection with the recent railway strike?

Returns of the extra expenditure involved have been called for, but it will be very difficult to determine accurately the extra cost caused by the use of the military.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to ask the railway companies to subscribe towards the expenses incurred?

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to say whether the Government paid to the railway companies any charges for carrying troops on their lines?

There is a question which was postponed until to-morrow in which the whole question is dealt with, addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (No. 57), and perhaps the hon. Member would wait until then.

If the information the Government have got is not of a kind to give an accurate idea of the total cost of the military, of what use is it going to be when it is given to-morrow?

The question which my hon. Friend asked was who is to pay, and the question he now asks is how much it is to cost. It is obviously difficult to estimate the cost of troops when, if not engaged on that duty, they would probably be otherwise engaged in training. The question as to who is to pay will be answered to-morrow by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Shall we have information giving any indication of what the use of the military cost the taxpayers of the country?

I said that we had asked for a return, and I have also told my hon. Friend that it is difficult to estimate the cost, because we have to take into account what a soldier costs when engaged on other duties.

Will the additional expense form the subject of a Supplementary Estimate?

I think it would be more suitable if that question also were put to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to-morrow.

asked how many persons were killed or injured by the military in connection with the recent railway strike?

Two persons were killed in Wales in connection with the railway strike. There were also two deaths at Liverpool, but those were not immediately connected with the railway strike. There is no information at the War Office to enable me to state the number of those injured in England and Wales. We have received no reports of casualties in Scotland, and from Ireland I have received official information that no collision of any kind occurred between the troops and the civil population.

Were the War Department officially represented at the inquest? Was a report taken of the evidence?

On what occasion?

At Llanelly and at Liverpool?

I cannot answer that off-hand.

I will put down a question.

asked whether the Prime Minister can now make any statement as to the introduction of legislation under which all local authorities responsible for the production of the Register of Voters in the United Kingdom shall bring the registers into force on the same date?

I cannot promise legislation on this subject during the course of the present Session.

asked whether, in view of the necessity to all classes of the community of the maintenance of the food and fuel supply of the country, to which the smooth running of the transport services is essential, the Prime Minister will substitute for the proposed measure of Home Rule for Ireland legislation designed to settle on an equitable basis the legitimate claims of wage-earners employed in those services, and to afford the protection to non-unionists of which they are deprived by Clause 2 (1) of the Trades Disputes Act of 1906?

The answer is in the negative.

asked if he is aware that an amalgamation of the London General Omnibus Company, the Metropolitan District Railway Company, and the Underground Electric Railways Company is being arranged; and whether he will introduce legislation similar to the Sherman Anti-Trust Law of the United States of America to protect the public against combinations intended to prevent competition in railway rates?

I have seen it stated in the Press that some such arrangement is under consideration. The recent Departmental Committee on Railway Amalgamations recommend, inter alia, that the Railway and Canal Traffic Act of 1894 with regard to increase of railway rates should be extended to cover passenger fares, and the Government hope to introduce a Bill next Session to deal with the matters covered by the recommendations of the Committee.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has had under consideration the results of recent actuarial investigations carried out in the Francis Galton Laboratory of the University of London into the falling death rate from phthisis and the length of life of sanatoria patients; and, if so, whether, before sanctioning the expenditure of many thousands of pounds on the erection of sanatoria, he will cause a fresh actuarial inquiry to be made as to the effectiveness of sanatorium treatment?

My right hon. Friend is satisfied that "sanatorium benefit" as defined in the Bill, which is capable of modification in accordance with the growth of medical experience, comprises the best known means of treating tuberculosis and of aiding in preventing its spread.

asked if other Gentlemen, in addition to Mr. Harper, were considered as competent to fill the post of chief valuer to the Board of Inland Revenue vacant in August last; and what were their qualifications and length of experience of valuation as compared with Mr. Harper's?

It would be a most undesirable precedent to make public statements as to the qualifications of gentlemen who may be considered but not selected for public appointments. It would be obviously unfair to such gentlemen.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the principal qualification of Mr. Harper did not lie in the fact that he is a relative of one of the Members of His Majesty's Government?

No, Sir; that had nothing whatever to do with the appointment.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to a pamphlet written by Mr. Wacha, the joint general secretary of the Indian National Congress, urging a reduction of military expenditure, on the lines recommended by the late Sir Charles Dilke; and whether, in view of the financial requirements of the Government of India in connection with sanitation, education, and other needs of the masses of India, the Government of India contemplates a reduction in Indian miltary expenditure?

I have seen the pamphlet to which my hon. Friend refers. As I stated in my Budget speech of this year, expenditure in all its branches, including military expenditure, is being strictly reviewed; and, as the Secretary of State has announced in another place, the subject is to be specially considered by a Committee presided over by Field-Marshal Sir William Nicholson.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether, in consequence of the prevalence of the practice by the Indian police of extorting confessions of guilt from suspected persons in their custody, it has been decided by the Government of India to extend to the whole of India an order from Bombay directing magistrates, to whom prisoners are brought by the police to have their confessions recorded, to invariably satisfy themselves by examination of the bodies of the accused, whenever feasible, that the confessions have not been extorted by physical torture; whether he is aware that in the majority of cases the torture has been inflicted upon the accused while in the private custody of the police; and whether, under the circumstances, the Government of India will put an end to the system by which, under the 167th Section of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prisoners are liable to be remitted to private police custody?