asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the position of a man earning 30s. a week who, when falling ill, receives half his pay, 15s., from his employer and, being insured also in a benefit society, receives a sickness benefit of 14s.?

Assuming that the 14s. benefit includes his benefit under the Insurance Bill, such a man, if he falls ill, will receive 29s. a week in all.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer with reference to the methods by which smaller societies can be grouped for the purpose of administering the National Insurance Bill, whether amalgamation may take place with a society of more than 5,000 members; and whether, in the event of any society preferring this method, the Registrar of Friendly Societies will avail himself of his powers to dispense with the conditions for amalgamation or transfer of engagements contained in Section 69, Subsection (3) (a) and (b), of the Friendly Societies Act, 1896, subject to the members having, by a majority of votes at a special general meeting duly summoned, agreed to such amalgamation or transfer of engagements, and to a certificate being produced from an actuary, authorised by the Treasury to certify annuity tables, showing that adequate provision is made for meeting the claims of all persons interested in the funds of the society?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; as regards the second part, the point is under consideration.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can see his way to introduce a Clause into the National Insurance Bill providing that insured persons who have lost faith in, or who have conscientious objections to, orthodox medical treatment, may be allowed to consult unregistered medical practitioners, such as herbalists, etc., if they so desire; and would such unregistered practitioner be allowed on the panel for a district?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the provisions of Clause 14 (3) of the Bill as amended in Committee. As regards the second question, the answer is in the negative.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is willing to meet the points with regard to the laundry trade as placed before him in the memorandum of the Federation of Laundry Associations of Great Britain and Ireland; and whether, in face of the burden placed upon this trade in proportion to other trades under the National Insurance Bill, he can give those engaged in it the advantage of reduced contributions?

I am unable to add anything to the reply that I gave to the hon. Member on nth July.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that under the existing rules of the Local Government Board for Ireland dispensary medical officers are prohibited from employing assistants; and whether, having regard to the additional work which will be thrown upon these officials under the provisions of the National Insurance Bill as applied to Ireland, he intends to make provision for removing the prohibition referred to?

I am aware that officers employed under the Poor Law are prohibited by the Local Government Board for Ireland from entrusting their duties to deputies, but I do not understand why the hon. Member apprehends so great an increase in their work as a result of the Insurance Bill.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the surgery of a country doctor required to dispense under the National Insurance Bill will become liable to inspection under the provisions of the Food and Drugs Act?

There is nothing in the Insurance Bill to alter the existing position of doctors' dispensaries in this respect.

asked the Chief Secretary whether any progress has been recently made with the settlement of the turbary dispute on the Douglas estate at Bann, Kilnashee, etc., county Longford; and if it is possible to receive a deputation from the tenants aggrieved by loss of turbary, will he consent to do so, having regard to the fact that forty-nine out of ninety-five of them have repudiated the sale and will not agree to the terms unless the bog is properly divided?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to his question on this subject on the 13th February last, to which I have nothing to add.

asked whether any complaints have reached the Estates Commissioners as to the division of bog on the Edgeworth (Drumderg and Corralinan) estate; and will an inspector be now sent to adjust these disputes to the satisfaction of all parties?

The Estate Commissioners received a communication from the hon. Member as to the arrangement of tenants' boundaries on the bog on this estate, and informed him that this estate is being sold direct to the tenants by the owner, and that the demarcation of the boundaries of the tenants' holdings is a matter for the owner. When the estate is reached in order of priority the matter referred to will be inquired into by the inspector.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that the Kilmallock rural district council have repeatedly appealed to the Local Government Board for loans under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts, to enable them to provide the additional half-acre allotment for the numerous labourers in the district who have not yet got it; can he explain the reason why the Local Government Board are withholding their sanction to these necessary loans; is he aware that the honourable Member for East Limerick has written to the district council stating that he got an assurance from the Chief Secretary at the time the Labourers Amendment Bill of this year was going through, that the million could be used for providing additional allotments; will he say if this assurance was given; and, if so, is it his intention, in the interests of the labourers, to have it carried out; and will he state what is the cause of the delay in holding the local inquiry asked for by the council and long overdue?

The facts in regard to the applications for a loan for additional allotments by the Kilmallock Rural District Council are as stated in the first part of the question. The reason why these loans have not yet been approved is that the Local Government Board feel bound to give priority to schemes for building cottages for labourers living in insanitary hovels over those schemes which are only required for the less urgent purpose of providing larger allotments for those who have already obtained good cottages and half-acre plots. I certainly gave no assurance which would prevent the Local Government Board deferring allotment schemes till the more urgent need of new cottages for the labourers who have not yet had the benefits of the Act have been met. If the council choose to borrow in the open market for the purpose of providing additional allotments they can do so even now.

asked whether the Lord Chancellor has considered the desirability of filling the vacancies which exist on the Edgeworthstown, Granard, and Ballinahe magisterial benches by reason of recent deaths of magistrates in these districts; whether the names of six Catholic gentlemen who have the highest qualifications for the offices, which were under the consideration of the late Chancellor before his death, have been considered by the new Lord Chancellor; and when any appointment may take place?

The Lord Chancellor informs me that he has under consideration certain names suggested for the magistracy in the districts mentioned, including the names submitted to the late Lord Chancellor. It is not possible, at present, to say when the appointments will be made.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that an application was duly lodged with the Estates Commissioners, under the Land Act of 1903, by Mr. John N. Wall, of Dungarvan, an evicted tenant, who was within the statutory time evicted for non-payment of rent from two substantial holdings at Knockmaun and Mount O'Dell, county Waterford; whether the Estates Commissioners have considered the application; and whether, as they cannot acquire the evicted holdings under the compulsory provisions of the Evicted Tenants Act of 1907, the same being tenanted or already sold under the Purchase Acts, they will provide Mr. Wall with a suitable holding elsewhere; and whether they have received a memorial requesting them to do so?

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to his similar question on the 1st instant.

asked when John Reilly, who was evicted from his holding in Creenagh, on the estate of Mrs. M. A. Moore, in county Cavan, will be reinstated; and has Gardner, who now occupies the old farm, agreed to surrender the same?

The Estates Commissioners inform me that Reilly's former holding is in the occupation of another tenant, with whom the Commissioners have been in negotiation with a view to effecting Reilly's reinstatement, but are unable to agree to his terms. The holding cannot be acquired compulsorily under the Evicted Tenants Act, and, as Reilly has refused to take a holding elsewhere, the Commissioners do not propose to take any further action in the matter.

asked the Under Secretary for War whether he is aware that the officer recently appointed to command the 2nd Dragoon Guards (Queen's Bays) sent in a confidential report describing an officer in that regiment as unfit for promotion to the rank of major; that the officer in question appealed to the War Office and showed that the commanding officer had only served with him for six weeks, during which time he had never been in command of a squadron for a day, and that on the military secretary asking the commanding officer his reasons for sending in the adverse report he replied that he had done so on the report of his second in command, who had been squadron leader of the officer in question; whether he is aware that on the commanding officer being asked for the report of the second in command he wrote to that officer, who was on leave, to forward a report on the officer, and that the second in command, knowing nothing of the adverse report, wrote, when on leave, not recommending the passing over and super-session of the officer in question; whether on the receipt of this report from the second in command the commanding officer reported to the War Office that, although the second in command had not reported unfavourably in writing he had given an unfavourable report of the officer verbally, and also reported that the second in command was unfit for his position; whether he is aware that, resulting from this report, the second in command was asked by the Army Council to resign, a copy of the commanding officer's report being then sent to him; whether the second in command then proved to the authorities that he could not have given an adverse report verbally owing to absence on leave; whether, as a consequence, the Army Council withdrew their letter to the second in command with an apology, as a mistake had been committed; whether the second in command insisted on resigning his commission, as did six other officers in that regiment; and whether the Secretary of State for War will exact that for the future, on any confidential report being issued to the detriment of an officer, a copy of that report shall be sent to the officer affected so that he may have an opportunity of defending himself?

The hon. Gentleman is in error in many important particulars of his statement of this case. As regards the last sentence the regulations concerning the action to be taken in regard to confidential reports were strictly observed.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether, having regard to the fact that the present conditions with regard to superannuation allowances and annuities for teachers in public elementary schools in England and Wales have been engaging his attention, he will inform the House when it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill to deal with this subject?

The subject matter of superannuation allowances and annuities for teachers is now under consideration, and it is impossible for me to add anything to the statement made by the Secretary to the Treasury in his answer yesterday to the hon. Member for the Wilton Division of Wiltshire.

asked the Home Secretary what was the total amount contributed by the Metropolitan boroughs towards the Metropolitan Police Rate in each of the last five years; and what is the Estimate for 1911–12?

The figures are as follows:—

asked the Under-Secretary for India are the orders still in force under which political officers are prohibited from crossing the Indian frontier without Government sanction; and, if so, did Mr. Williamson obtain permission to disregard these orders, either on his last visit or on his former visits to the Abor country?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The answer to the second part is in the negative. Neither the Local Government nor the Government of India were aware of Mr Williamson's previous visit to the Abor country in 1909, until after his return. In consequence of an invitation from a Gam of Kebong, whom he met accidentally, he visited Kebong village on 11th February, 1909. He refused invitations from the Abors to advance further, and left Kebong on 12th February, returning to the "Inner" Line on the 17th.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state what provisions there were in the treaty with Sweden negotiated by Oliver Cromwell in 1654 inconsistent with the modern conditions of international law and the rights and obligations of Sweden and Great Britain, respectively, which, in his judgment, made it inevitable that the question of the revision of our treaty system should come up; and whether our present relations with Sweden are governed not by this treaty of 1654 but by renewals coming up to modern times.

The treaty of 1654 with Sweden, in common with various others, is binding on the oversea dominions, who have not the right of separate withdrawal from it which they enjoy under the commercial treaties recently concluded. It is solely in order to remedy this defect that the revision of this treaty and of the similar treaties referred to is desired. The treaty of 1654 is still in force so far as its provisions are not in conflict with later treaties. It was renewed by the treaty of 18th July, 1812. Our commercial relations with Sweden are also governed by the treaty of 5th February, 1766, the declaration of 24th April, 1824, the treaty of 18th March, 1826, and the declaration of 13th October, 1883?

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to a resolution recently passed by the Enfield Medico-Ethical Society, making it compulsory for a midwife who calls in a doctor in any stage of a confinement to guarantee the doctor a fee of not less than one and a-half guineas and that the case be taken over entirely by the doctor; whether he is aware that this is harmful both to the patient and the midwife; and whether steps will be taken, by legislation or otherwise, to settle this matter by arranging that the doctor's fee should be paid by the State in those cases where the patient is too poor to pay a fair fee?

I have seen in the Press a copy of some correspondence relating to this matter. The society in question has not, so far as I am aware, any control over the midwife. I do not consider that the State should be called upon to make a payment in the cases referred to.

asked the President of the Local Government Board when a preliminary abstract showing the population of the parishes in the rural districts of England will be issued, similar details in urban districts having already been published?

Detail population statistics, giving the population of all parishes in England and Wales, rural and urban, will, it is hoped, be published in the course of next spring and early summer.

asked the President of the Local Government Board the total number of declarations of conscientious objection to vaccination made, or exemption certificates obtained, in the years 1907, 1908, 1909, and 1910, and, if possible, the percentage of these certificates to the births?

The particulars are as follows:—

asked the President of the Local Government Board if he can state when this year's Annual Report of the Local Government Board is likely to be published?

The part relating to Poor-law administration will be published this week, and it is hoped to issue the second part shortly after.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that the last Census of Production related to the year 1907, and that nearly four years have since elapsed, he will consider the advisability of making a further census on the same lines for the present year, in order to afford a comparison of two years of good trade?

As my hon. Friend will have observed, from the terms of the Order relating to the second and subsequent Censuses of Production, which was made on 28th October, and has been laid on the Table of the House, the second census is to be taken in the year 1913, that is to say, it will relate to the production of the year 1912. It would not be practicable to take a census of the production of the current year, as manufacturers have not had the requisite notice of the particulars required.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the rural postman who runs the mail car between Granard and Finea is compelled to remain absent from home on Christmas Days and Good Fridays, not being allowed to return to his home as rural postmen are without any restriction as to time; and whether he will arrange that this man, as well as any others in a similar position, will be granted these two days off duty in future?

I am having inquiry made on the subject, and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.