asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether all ratings in His Majesty's Fleet are, except in cases of injury received in the performance of their duties, mulcted in a portion of their daily pay for each day they are under treatment in a naval hospital over thirty days and up to ninety-one days, at the end of which latter period their pay ceases altogether; whether any stoppages of pay are made in the case of officers under treatment in a naval hospital, irrespective of the duration of their illness; and, if not, would he state what reason there is why the men should not be placed on the same footing as the officers?

There is no deduction for men in the Fleet in hospital as a result of wounds or injuries received in the performance of their duties. There is no deduction if they are sick on board and not treated in hospital. There is no deduction under any circumstances if serving abroad. If in hospital at either of the home ports there is no deduction for thirty days. So far as continuous service men are concerned a scale of stoppages operates up to and including the ninety-first day from admission to hospital. After that, pay ceases altogether. For non-continuous service men's pay ceases altogether after the thirtieth day. Men treated at home by an Admiralty surgeon and agent are treated as though in hospital in the matter of deductions. As regards officers, no stoppages are made from pay whilst in hospital on full pay. Stoppages are made from officers in hospital on half or retired pay at rates varying according to rank and period of treatment. With reference to the last part of the question the treatment of officers and men in respect of pay is so entirely different in principle that no argument can be drawn from any comparison between the two.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why the men should be treated differently in hospital?

I can only repeat that the treatment of officers and men in respect of pay is so entirely different in principle that no argument can be drawn from any comparison between the two.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, as stated by the Prime Minister of Portugal, under the provisions of the Anglo-Portuguese treaty of alliance Great Britain is bound, in the event of attack being made on any Portuguese colony, to assist Portugal with troops or ships of war?

The alliance between Great Britain and Portugal rests on a number of treaties. The text of these is given in full in the Blue Book Miscellaneous No. 2 (1898) Command Paper 9088, to which I would accordingly refer the hon. Member.

Which is the latest treaty?

I think 1815; and the earliest 1376.

Has the hon. Gentleman's attention been called to the fact that the Premier of Portugal referred to a secret treaty between this country and Portugal?

I think I must ask my hon. Friend for notice of that question.

Can the hon. Gentleman not say whether, in these various treaties, there is a stipulation to the effect mentioned?

The treaties are many and complicated, and I would rather refer the hon. Member to the treaties themselves.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any information as to an agreement between the Italian and Russian Governments with reference to the future conduct of the Turco-Italian War?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any communication has been received from the Italian Government with regard to a proposed extension of the theatre of war into other provinces of the Ottoman Empire?

I have not had any communication from the Italian Government of an intention, to extend the theatre of war, and I am not in a position to say what their views are on this matter. When a nation is conducting war it must decide the operations on its own responsibility, and other nations who are neutral must reserve their freedom of action should their interests be affected.

Do I understand that no information at all has been received?

That is what my right hon. Friend says: not had any communication from the Italian Government.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that non-European British subjects in the Straits Settlements enjoyed a statutory right, to free competition for entry into the Civil Service of their own Colony up to 1867, and that since that date they continued to enjoy the same right, though not by Statute, till 1904; and whether he will state what conditions must be satisfied before he restores to British-born Chinese and Malays the rights of British citizenship of which they have been deprived?

I am not aware that any statutory right existed, but I would suggest that my hon. Friend should address the first part of his question to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for India, as the Colonial Office had no connection with the Straits Settlements before 1867. Certainly no right, statutory or otherwise, such as my hon. Friend mentioned, was recognised by the Colonial Office before 1881, when cadetships were first awarded on the results of a competitive examination. I have already informed by hon. Friend that I should be willing to consider the question of admitting British-born Chinese or Malays to the examination, if there were any chance of such candidates being successful, or if there were a local demand for the concession, which at present is not the case.

Arising out of the right hon. Gentleman's statement that he would admit native-born Chinese and Malays to the examinations if he was satisfied that there was any chance of their being successful, will he explain to a puzzled House how he can form any opinion as to the chances of the native- born Chinese and Malays passing examinations if he refuses to admit them to the examinations; and, if he is satisfied that they have no chance of passing, will he explain what harm would be done by allowing them to sit for examination?

I do not think I can admit the implication as to the rest of the House; as to the latter part of the question, I think it would be fair that I should have notice.

I will give notice.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state who were the past Governors of Hong Kong or the Straits Settlements or High Commissioners of the Federated Malay States who made representations that all British subjects who are not of pure European birth on both sides should be excluded from the Civil and Police Services of these Colonies and Protectorates, and who are the prominent members of the Chinese communities who have expressed decided views to the same effect and whom the Colonial Office regards as representing the views of their fellow-countrymen; whether the Chinese members of the Legislative Council of the Straits Settlements have even been consulted; and whether he will publish Papers on the matter?

The answer to the first and third parts of the question is in the negative. I am not aware whether the Chinese members of the Legislative Council have been formally consulted, but they have ample opportunities of representing their views to the Governor in Council or outside.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if the fundamental laws of the British Empire are to be reversed for reasons which are only given in secret minutes, and which the right hon. Gentleman, with his undoubted courage, is afraid to disclose to this House, and on the recommendation of alleged persons who are anonymous?

I think I shall have to look at the so-called "fundamental laws" before I answer that question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state the names of those candidates who passed the examination for Eastern cadetships held in August last, and who have been assigned to Hong Kong, the Straits Settlements, or the Federated Malay States; and what steps were taken to secure that they satisfied the new Regulation made by the Colonial Office that they should be of pure European descent on both sides?

The names have been published by the Civil Service Commissioners in their annual volume. As to the second part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave on the 13th November last to a question asked by the hon. and learned Member for North-East Cork.

May I ask whether these geneological investigations are conducted by the right hon. Gentleman himself or by the Civil Service Commissioners?

Yes, Sir; I assist at all these operations.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that these investigations would be more suited to the College of Heralds?

If I require their assistance I shall ask it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in view of the recent Regulations made by the Colonial Office excluding from the Civil and Police Services of Hong Kong, the Federated Malay States, and the Straits Settlements all British subjects who are not of pure European descent on both sides, and in order to prevent British subjects from spending time and money in preparing themselves for examination only to find themselves excluded by this far-reaching colour bar at the last moment, whether he will now frame rules showing how many generations an Asiatic or other non-European family must reside in Europe in order to obtain pure European descent on both sides?

No, Sir.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it is a matter meriting his attention that the rights of British subjects should be decided upon by some official guided by no set of rules, subject only to the prejudice or preference of some anonymous official; would he submit his own pedigree to the investigation of a committee that was bound by no rules?

No, Sir.

Why should others have to do it?

If it is desired I will submit my pedigree to the hon. Gentleman, who equally is bound by no rules.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider it relevant to the inquiry to consider the question of Plantagenet descent?

That would be an obvious recommendation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, having regard to his dispatch of 2nd January to the various West Indian Governments, he can now state how many wireless stations it is intended to set up in the West Indies, and where such stations will be located?

Wireless stations already exist in Jamaica, Trinidad, Tobago, and British Guiana, and the erection of such stations in Barbados, the Bahamas, and British Honduras is under discussion.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say when the decision is likely to be arrived at?

I hope very soon.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he will cause inquiry to be made into the increasing prevalence of the practice of letting cottages in conjunction with farms; and whether his attention has been called to the feeling aroused among agricultural labourers by this practice?

No information has reached me to the effect that the practice referred to is increasingly prevalent, and no representations have been made to me on the subject. The matter is not one in respect of which the Board have any authority to take action.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that an International Fisheries Congress is to be held at Copenhagen on 15th and 16th July; and whether it is proposed to send delegates?

No information has as yet been received by the Board as to the programme and constitution of the Fishery Congress which is to be held at Copenhagen in July next. It is described as-being the Fourth Scandinavian Fishery Congress. Any communication which the Board may receive on the subject, either from the Danish Government or the promoters of the Congress, will of course be fully considered.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that an International Fisheries Congress is to be held at Copenhagen on 15th and 16th July; and whether it is proposed to send delegates?

I am aware that there is a proposal of the character referred to and when information is received as to the objects and scope of the Conference I will consider my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will consider the case of men of forty-five years of age and upwards who are competent to discharge the duties of temporary employment during the Christmas season, and who are prevented from being engaged by the rule laid down limiting the age to forty-five years?

As intimated in my reply to the question asked by the hon. Member for the Brentford Division on the 8th November last, in view of the generally exacting nature of the Christmas work in the Post Office I do not think it would be advisable as a rule to admit men over forty-five years of age. I may add, however, that the cases of men over that age who have been previously employed in the Post Office and have given satisfaction receive special consideration.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman could grant the same special telephonic benefits in the way of reduced charges to the police throughout the country that he proposes to give to the farmers?

The telephone rural party line service will be open to all classes of subscribers whose requirements it will meet, but I imagine that the police authorities would usually be unwilling to share the use of their telephone lines with other subscribers, and it is even possible that the feeling might in some cases be reciprocal.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman will state the approximate number of persons in the employ of his Department to whom Section 4 of the Superannuation Act of 1887 is applicable; what percentage of this number per annum it is estimated will die while in the service; and what, would be the average annual cost of granting to the dependents of such persons so dying a gratuity on the scale provided by the section of the Act referred to for persons retiring on a medical certificate of infirmity?

I have no information which would enable me to answer the hon. Member's question with any approach to accuracy. But it may suffice if I inform him that during the five years ended on 31st December, 1911, 287 gratuities of the average value of £32 were awarded to male Post Office servants, and forty-three gratuities of the average value of £23 to females.

Out of what total number of persons?

Perhaps the hon. Member will give me notice of that question. The total number of the Post Office employés last year was 212,000 and this year it is 230,000.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he is able to state whether anything has yet been done to help to improve the mail and steamer service to the Islands of South Uist, Benbecula, and Barra, as requested by a Memorandum from the inhabitants of those islands presented to the late Secretary for Scotland on 5th December, 1911?

I am unable as yet to make any statement on the subject, but the Memorandum referred to has been under consideration, and I am in communication with the Postmaster-General.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Devon Sea Fisheries Committee have applied to the Development Commissioners for a loan of £10,000 for the purposes of advances to fishermen at 2½ per cent, to enable them to instal motor engines in their boats; and whether he proposes to make a similar application on behalf of Scottish fishermen?

I am aware that such an application has been made and that it is under the consideration of the Treasury. As regards Scotland, the whole subject is at present under the consideration of a Departmental Committee, and it would be premature, to make any statement.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the fact that the Irish Board of Agriculture has already devoted a sum of money to this purpose?

Is there anything in the terms of the Development Act which would preclude such a Grant being made?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether an application has been made to the Development Commissioners by the Devon Sea Fisheries Committee for a loan of £10,000 for the purpose of assisting fishermen to instal motor engines in their boats, interest being charged at 2½ per cent.; and whether loans for such a purpose are within the scope of the Development Act?

The application has reached the Treasury. I am causing a legal opinion to be obtained upon this question.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Bill dealing with the preservation of ancient monuments will secure from destruction and exportation all such buildings as are scheduled by the Royal Commission on Ancient Monuments as being worthy of preservation?

The First Commissioner hopes to introduce the Bill next week, when full details will be available for the information of the hon. Member.

Will the measure be introduced in this House or in the House of Lords?

I think the intention is to introduce it in the House of Lords.

asked whether the Government have appointed a trustee or trustees in connection with the proposal for providing a site in Bloomsbury for the headquarters of the University of London; and whether the senate of the university has been informed of the proposal and has expressed any opinion thereon.

The Government have not appointed a trustee or trustees for the purposes described. A body of trustees, is, however, being constituted, one of whom is a Member of the Government, to receive gifts offered in connection with the recommendations of the Fourth Report of the Royal Commission on University Education in London. A generous gift has been made on condition that a particular site is acquired. The question of its suitability is one affecting the future organisation of the university, a matter on which the senate has found itself unable to offer any evidence to the Royal Commission.

May I ask the Prime Minister if he can give an answer to the latter part of my question?

I did answer it. I said that "the senate has found itself unable to offer any evidence to the Royal Commission."

Then I take it that they have not been consulted?

The hon. Gentleman must draw his own conclusions.

asked whether it is the intention of the Government to proceed to pass into law a Home Rule Bill under the Parliament Act even though twice rejected by the Upper House, and even though by-elections may go against the Government during the two years necessary, and even though the people of the country generally have no opportunity of pronouncing upon it, and even though the loyalists in Ireland are as opposed to it as in 1888 and 1893?

So many hypotheses—at least four—are involved in this question that I do not feel called upon at present to answer it.

Is there anything hypothetical about South Manchester, St. Rollox, and other by-elections?

Is there anything hypothetical about the Unionists being Loyalists in Ireland?

Is there anything hypothetical about the fact that the Opposition have no faith in the Upper House, seeing that they consider—

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman which of the four hypotheses he rejects as incorrect?

I do not propose to answer those questions until all the four hypotheses have been realised.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give Ulster an opportunity of proving its loyalty?

By fighting the King's arms.

asked whether there is any precedent for the secretary of the Defence Committee of the Cabinet becoming, on retiring from the Civil Service, a director of a company making munitions of war for foreign countries; and whether, to prevent the recurrence of this and similar cases, he will attach to the grant of Civil Service pensions the condition that the holders shall only undertake business engagements of this character after obtaining the permission of the Treasury?

There are only two ex-secretaries of the Imperial Defence Committee, one of whom holds an appoint- ment under the Government of India. There is, therefore, no precedent. As regards the latter part of the question, I must refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave on Monday to the hon. Member for North Salford.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman has received any communication from the United States Government with reference to the intention of the Government of the United States of America to impose a toll on foreign bottoms using the Panama Canal?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the inadequacy of the punishment inflicted on trawlers found guilty of destroying the fishing grounds of Scottish fishermen, and the fact that the trawling companies suffer no punishment, he will consider the desirability of amending the law so as to get the person actually owning the offending trawler before the Courts?

The whole question is under consideration, but I would not be justified in promising legislation this Session.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman can state the causes which led to the disturbance at Blantyre on Saturday evening; and, in particular, whether it had any direct connection with, or in any way arose out of, anything connected with the miners' strike?

My information is that there was nothing which could properly be called a disturbance at Blantyre on Saturday night. There was a slight disturbance on Friday evening which arose from a young man being apprehended for having broken a window when under the influence of drink.

The important part of my question has not been answered. Did the disturbance arise out of anything connected with the coal strike?

I think it arose from drink.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us how many persons were arrested last night at Blantyre?

I have no information as to any persons being arrested last night, and I have had no notice of this question.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the School Board of Cambuslang is refusing to put the Clauses of the Education Act making provision for supplying food to necessitous school children in operation, despite the fact that destitution prevails in the district; and whether he will issue a circular to the education authorities in Scotland, calling their attention to the fact that they are under legal obligation to see that children attending schools are provided with adequate food, irrespective of the cause which renders such a course necessary?

I am not aware that the school board referred to has refused to put into operation any Clauses of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1908. The statement in the latter part of the question does not correctly represent the effect of the provisions of Sections 3 and 6 of that measure, to the terms of which I would refer the hon. Member.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether the present policy of the Office of Works is not to permit any subletting of contracts or parts of contracts unless good and sufficient reason is shown; whether, when tenders are being considered, it is considered to be a point in favour of a firm if it is in a position to execute the whole of the work itself, or whether the question of sub-letting is not raised at the time; and whether the Department will in the future restrict sub-letting as much as possible?

No sub-letting is allowed without the consent in writing of the Department, and that consent is only given when the Department is satisfied that the sub-letting is in accordance with the custom of the trade. In inviting tenders for building work, the Department informs tenderers that sub-letting is only allowed where unavoidable, and asks them to state on their tender which trades, if any, they would find it necessary to seek permission to sub-let. The Department will, as heretofore, restrict sub-letting as far as possible.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he can state when the Natural History Museum will be re-opened to the public; and why it has been considered necessary to keep the greater part of it closed after the Victoria and Albert Museum, the National Gallery, and the Tate Gallery have been re-opened?

A large part of the Natural History Museum is open to the general public every day (including Sunday). The re-opening of all the galleries is a matter within the discretion of the trustees, who will, I understand, consider it at their next meeting in a few days' time.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury (1) if he is aware that the London and Bristol preventive men of His Majesty's Customs when having done duty at Fishguard in the examination of passengers' luggage from New York get time off for any excess over eight hours a day; will he say why this allowance is not given to the Cardiff preventive men doing similar duty at Fishguard; and, if the reason be that the Cardiff men cannot be spared, will he say why they are not paid overtime for the excess over eight hours, in accordance with paragraph 100 of the Establishment Code; and (2) if he will state under what authority in the Establishment Code did the Accountant and Controller-General rule that travelling from Cardiff to Fishguard by Customs officials to meet the New York boat was not Crown time; and will he consider increasing the present allowance of 1s. 3d. subsistence for an absence of from twelve to nineteen hours in view of its inadequacy?

The practice with regard to time off necessarily depends on the requirements at particular ports and on the circumstances of particular cases. Under paragraph 100 of the Establishment Code overtime is payable for attendance in excess of forty-eight hours in the six weekdays, but under paragraph 95a no overtime payment is made in respect of time spent in travelling for which subsistence allowances are given. I may add that the question of these allowances has been brought by the staff before the Committee which is now inquiring into the Waterguard Service, and is under consideration.