asked the President of the Board of Agriculture, concerning land purchased by certain county councils, which of the councils of the counties named have purchased complete farms; how many of such farms in each of the counties have been purchased; and what is the acreage of each farm?

The Board have no record showing the number of complete farms purchased by county councils, and in order to obtain the information for which the hon. Member asks it would be necessary for me to address a special inquiry to every council which has purchased land for the purpose of small holdings. I scarcely think that the value of the information would be commensurate with the amount of work which would be thrown upon the officers of the Board and the county councils concerned.

Is it not clear that if it were done once there would be very little difficulty in doing it again in the future, and are there not a great many people interested in the question of small holdings who would be very grateful for the information?

I am afraid that if we had to keep the return up to date we should have to get a lot of information from time to time. As a matter of fact, when big farms are bought by county councils they are nearly all bought with the object of breaking them up into small holdings.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether his attention has been called to the bad condition of the oil paintings in the Palace at Kew; and whether he will take steps at an early date to call in expert advice, and, if necessary, to remedy the defects?

The paintings and works of art in the Palace of Kew, as in other Royal Palaces, are now in the care of the Lord Chamberlain, and are maintained out of the Civil List. They ceased to be maintained out of Voted Moneys under an arrangement made some time ago with His Majesty's Office of Works. The Lord Chamberlain informs me that he has already had the matter referred to in the question under his consideration.

Is it the fact that it is 35 years since expert advice was sought?

As I explained in my answer, these paintings are under the care of the Lord Chamberlain and are attended to out of moneys provided from the Civil List. When the hon. and gallant Gentleman put down his question the Lord Chamberlain was communicated with, and the answer I have read out, was the result of a communication from him this morning.

asked whether the contractors for some marble work in connection with the British Museum have been granted permission to sub-let part of the contract abroad; if so, what are the reasons which induced the Department to give permission; and whether other points of view besides those of the employers were taken into consideration, in view of the fact that competent workmen can be obtained in this country, and, if they were employed, the Fair-Wages Clause would operate?

The contractors for the marble work in connection with the British Museum have been granted permission, in accordance with the custom in the trade, to sub-let a part of the contract abroad. This is in conformity with the Fair-Wages Resolution.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in reference to Ireland only, he would state the total amount due by the Post Office to depositors; the average amount to the credit of each active account; the number of active accounts; and the proportion of active accounts to population; whether the amount received from depositors is invested in Government securities; and, whether, in view of the high rate of interest now obtainable on these owing to their low price, he will increase the rate of interest payable to new depositors?

The total amount due to depositors on the 31st December, 1911, in accounts opened in Ireland was £12,480,482; the average amount to the credit of each active account was £28 1s. 6d.; the number of active accounts was 443,916; and the proportion of active accounts to population was 1 in 9.86. The amount received from depositors is invested in Government securities. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Is the bulk of it invested in Consols?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman will find in the Appendix to the Postmaster-General's Report a table setting out the investments of the fund.

asked the Postmaster-General if he could give any satisfactory explanation of the fact that the telephone system has not been extended from Canterbury to the larger villages in the Elham Valley; if he can say when the telephone system is likely to be so extended; and whether he has refused any offers to bear a part of the cost of such an extension?

The Elham Valley is in a district which up to the 1st January last was served by the National Telephone Company. I understand that the company considered the question of extending their system in that direction, but were unable to secure sufficient support. I propose to have the principal villages canvassed, and if an adequate number of subscribers is forthcoming I shall be happy to open Exchanges. If the hon. Member has any particular places in mind, perhaps he will let me know their names. I am not aware of any offer having been made to share the cost of any extension in the neighbourhood.

asked the Postmaster General if he would ascertain whether any telephone poles and wires had been carried across private property within the county of Canterbury and in the adjoining county of Kent, without the consent of the owner or tenant having been asked; if he would ascertain if wires had been so-carried; how many wires would have to be removed; and how soon such removals may be expected to take place after notice has been given of objection and remonstrance?

So far as I am aware no Post Office wires have been attached to private property without the consent of the owner or tenant in Canterbury, or Kent, or elsewhere. The Telegraph Acts give the Postmaster-General certain limited powers of flying wires over private property without the consent of the owners or tenants, but it would be impracticable to obtain a return of the cases in which such powers have been used. If the hon. Member will give me particulars of any wires he may have in mind, I shall be happy to give him information as to the circumstances in which they have been erected.

asked what was the nature of the misunderstanding in 1911 which saddled Metropolitan rate payers with the pay of 500 members of the Metropolitan Police force whilst engaged in Hull in aid of the local police; and whether any, and, if so, what steps have been taken by the Home Office, and with what result, to transfer the obligation to the local authority in relief of the Metropolitan rates?

The arrangement to send the men to Hull was made verbally by telephone at a critical moment, and in these circumstances my predecessor gave a promise that if all extra charges were paid no claim would be made for reimbursement of the men's pay. This was not in accordance with the ordinary practice, but it was a binding arrangement, which had to be maintained. No extra charge has been thrown on the Metropolitan ratepayers: they merely lost for a few days the services of the 500 men—less than a fortieth of the whole force.

:Have the Metropolitan ratepayers to pay their pay?

Yes, the actual pay falls upon them.

They gave their services then?

For a very short time. The arrangement was not made that pay as well as the additional cost should be borne by Hull.

Did the critical period arise from the fact that there was a by-election?

No, the whole circumstance occurred a long while ago and had nothing to do with a by-election. The question is really impertinent—I am not using the word in an offensive sense.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his predecessor in office told me in answer to a question that no burden ought to be thrown on the Metropolitan ratepayers?

That is so. The ordinary pay of the police was paid by the Metropolitan ratepayers, but all the extra charge, cost of the journey and extra allowances were paid by the people of Hull.

:Is it not a fact that in a similar case where the Metropolitan Police were taken away from the Metropolis the cost of the pay was borne by the Treasury?

In only one case has the cost been paid by the Treasury—the case of Glamorgan. That, I trust, will not be a final payment by the Treasury, but the money will be subsequently recovered from the county council.

In that case no part of the cost will fall on London?

:In order to prevent any such charge falling on the ratepayers of London, the cost will be primarily borne by the Imperial Treasury. We have not so far been able to recover the amount from the Glamorgan County Council, but we have not abandoned our efforts.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will say what provision is made to enable members of the Metropolitan Police force on point duty on Sundays at busy centres of traffic to take food and refreshment during continuous hours of duty; what is the average length of time of continuous point duty on Sundays; whether relief is afforded on Sundays to enable food and refreshment to be taken; and, if not, whether he will take steps to enable such relief to be given?

:Mainly to meet the wishes of the men, they are permitted to perform their Sunday duty in one tour of the average length of about eight hours, thereby securing more leisure on that day. It has been, and is, the practice to allow as large a number of men as possible to avail themselves of leave due to them on Sunday, and so many men being on leave, it is not practicable to provide temporary relief for those who are on Sunday duty, and they therefore are instructed to take their food as opportunity presents itself. Any alteration in this practice would, I believe, be unpopular with the great majority of the men.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered that this concession only applies to men on fixed point duty who cannot get away, and not to men on beat who can get away?

I am advised by the Commissioner of Police that the circumstances are as I have stated to the House.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the reasons which induced him to reduce from four to two months the sentence passed on Frederick Crowsley for distributing a pamphlet advising soldiers not to shoot?

It is not the practice for the Home Secretary to state the grounds on which he advises His Majesty in the exercise of the prerogative of mercy, and in this case it would be impossible for me in answer to a question to enter into all the considerations which have led me to advise a reduction of sentence as an act of clemency.

Do not the reasons appear chiefly to be based on the support that this man gets below the Gangway? If matters have that appearance, is it not right that the right hon. Gentleman should state such reasons as prove that it is not the case?

No, these appearances exist only in the imagination of the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Attorney - General whether his attention has been called to the case of Henry Richardson in the Sheffield Bankruptcy Court on the 25th April last, and to the comments of the registrar as to the methods of a certain company disclosed therein; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter by introducing legislation or otherwise?

I have been asked by my right hon. Friend the Attorney-General to answer this question. I have read the comments of the registrar of the County Court at Sheffield which are referred to, and I am informed that certain house purchase certificates which were taken up by Mr. Richardson, and mortgaged by him as collateral security for a loan, became liable to forfeiture owing to the premium being more than twelve months in arrear. Last April the company offered to reinstate the certificates on payment of the loan, subscriptions in arrear, and interest, and I understand that they have now offered to allow two-thirds of the premiums credited to the certificates as a surrender value. As at present advised, I do not propose to take any action.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the general question of the misleading agreements which were a prominent feature in this case, and how they can be prevented in future?

That is another matter not applying to one case alone. I will consider that.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that residents in Tufnell Park Road and Brecknock Road, in North London, complain that they have recently been deprived of all peaceable enjoyment of their premises owing to the din and clatter caused by the introduction of motor omnibuses into these thoroughfares; and, having regard to the constantly growing nuisance and annoyance caused by the extension of motor omnibus routes in London, many of them over roads with adjoining properties which were never intended to bear the strain now imposed on them, to the injury caused by vibration, dust, and mud-splashing, and to the apparent lack of any effective power of interference by the Home Office or the Commissioner of Police, will he consider the advisability of asking for legislation so as to enable the authorities to exercise control over a nuisance which had not been contemplated when the present powers were conferred?

Complaints of the annoyance caused by the recently introduced motor omnibus service have been received from persons living in these thoroughfares. The police will at once intervene if there be infringement of the law, but neither the Home Secretary nor the Commissioner has any power to control the routes followed by stage carriages. I am not prepared to introduce legislation giving to local authorities a veto on the use of particular roads.

Is there any reason why a local authority in London should not have the same power as is possessed by local authorities in the provinces?

That is a very large question. I cannot answer it without notice.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state the number of motor omnibuses and electric tramcars running in the Metropolitan Police area for the first six months of this year; and how many deaths were caused by each type of vehicle during the same period?

The number of motor omnibuses was 2,461, and of electric tram-cars 2,661. During the six months ending 30th June, 1912, 81 fatal accidents and 1,605 accidents involving personal injury were caused by these vehicles. Sixty-nine deaths were caused by omnibuses, and twelve by tramcars; personal injury was done in 783 cases by omnibuses, and in 822 cases by tramcars.

May I inquire whether any steps are being taken to compel the owners of motor omnibuses to have guards on the vehicles as in the case of tramcars?

I have frequently answered questions on the subject.

Nothing was done.

There is no suitable guard in existence.

Will my right hon. Friend say what the mechanical difficulty is?

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that between 1907 and 1911 the number of persons killed by motor omnibuses in London increased from 35 to 95 per annum, a percentage of increase nearly three times as great as the increase in the number of such vehicles; that during the present year the deaths caused by these omnibuses have been at the rate of 150 per annum; that the fatal accidents caused by electric trams show no such disproportionate increase; that during the present year the motor omnibuses have killed six persons for every one killed by trams; whether he knows of any reason why motor omnibuses should be so much more destructive of life than electric trams; and whether he will consider the desirability of refusing to license any more motor omnibuses until the companies have taken some practical steps to make their vehicles reasonably safe?

There has been a steady increase in the number of persons killed by motor omnibuses in London, the increase in the number of vehicles being only one factor in the case. The number of deaths during the half-year ended 30th June was sixty-nine. The question raised by my hon. Friend has been receiving anxious consideration. There are four reasons which may account to some extent for the apparent disproportion: (1) Motor omnibuses ply through the more congested streets from which tramcars are excluded. (2) Tramway lines are laid in the centre of the roadway, which is the safest portion; but this construction to a. considerable extent forces other traffic to the sides of roads, and therefore congests the more dangerous portion. (3) Passengers by tramcar have to cross the danger zone to get to or from the car. Others often step off crowded footways in front of vehicles coming up behind them. (4) The mileage of omnibuses is substantially greater than that of tramcars. The actual number of vehicles licensed, therefore, does not in itself afford a fair means of comparison.

asked the right hon. Gentleman if his attention has been called to the intention of the London General Omnibus Company to have 4,000 omnibuses on the London streets before the end of next summer, the number at the present time being about 1,750, of which about 1,600 are on the streets, and to the allegation that Scotland Yard takes the view that the company have not enough running; whether this accurately describes the attitude of Scotland Yard, and, if so, on what that attitude is based; and whether, seeing that this year the motor omnibuses at present on the streets have killed sixty-eight persons in about five months, and that the number killed have so far increased out of all proportion to the increase in the number of omnibuses, he will at once take steps to protect the people of London from this threatened addition to the dangers of their streets?

I have no knowledge of the intentions of the London General Omnibus Company, though I have seen a statement in the Press. The Commissioner of Police has expressed no such view as that suggested. Sixty-nine persons have been killed by motor omnibuses during the first six months of this year; but, so far as I am aware, the driver was in every instance exonerated from blame.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with this state of things?

No. I do not think that anybody could be satisfied with sixty-nine deaths occurring by accident in the streets.

Is nothing to be done to stop this terrible slaughter going on?

Yes. Every effort will be made to diminish the number of accidents in the streets.

asked the Home Secretary whether there is any reason for the delay which has taken place in the publication of the Return of Experiments upon Living Animals for the year 1911; and whether he is aware that the effect of such delay is to protect licensees under the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876, from the possibility of proceedings being taken against them for any breaches of the law, inasmuch as Section 14 of that Act renders it necessary that such proceedings should be taken within six months of the offence?

The Return was moved for last Thursday, and will soon be in the hands of Members. The date is not later than last year, and, owing to the labour involved, I do not think it can be accelerated. As regards the latter part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to a similar question by him on the 3rd July, 1911.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if it is not possible to arrange that these Returns should be published earlier in the year? Is there any reason why they should not be?

Owing to the labour involved I do not see how the publication can be accelerated, but I will inquire.

asked the Home Secretary how many naval picket boats and seamen were utilised for protective service during the dock strike of 1911; and how many naval picket boats and seamen are being utilised for similar duty during the present dock strike?

The number of naval vessels employed on patrol duty in the Thames during the strike last year was two torpedo boats and six picket boats, with total crews amounting to fifteen officers and 104 men. The number which have been similarly employed this year are one torpedo and two picket boats, with total crews of seven officers and forty-six men. This year the use of the naval vessels has been confined to the portion of the river below that ordinarily patrolled by the Metropolitan Police. Within the Metropolitan Police area, the Thames Police, having been provided with additional launches and strengthened by contingents from other divisions, has been sufficient to meet all demands.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that one of the reasons for the continuance of the strike is the fact that the men believe that if they go back to work the employers will almost immediately reduce their wages below the amount paid before the strike; whether he can ascertain that this is not the case; and, if so, whether he will take steps to let this be generally known?

I do not see that I can usefully take any action in the matter.

Does the right hon. Gentleman admit that the facts are correctly stated in the question, and, if not, will he go down to the East End and find out for himself?

If the hon. Gentleman has any practical suggestion to make, I am perfectly willing to consider it.

:May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether I have not made a practical suggestion when I request him to go down to the East End and find out as I did?

I do not know how many hundreds of employers it would be necessary to consult.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is the men's interests I ask him to look after? I went to see the men.

That is not the point.

asked the Home Secretary if he will state how many cases of assault by strikers have been reported to the police, how many arrests have been made, and how many convictions have been obtained since the commencement of the dock strike in the Metropolitan and outside areas, respectively; and whether he can furnish statistics as to the numbers that have been treated in hospital?

Up to and including the 2nd instant 402 persons had been arrested in the Metropolitan Police district for offences in connection with the strike, and there were in all 360 convictions; but the number of arrests for assault cannot at present be given separately. The number of cases treated in hospital will be shown in the Return moved for by the hon. Member for East Nottingham. In Essex there have been fourteen cases connected with the strike, nine of them assaults, eleven were convicted. In Kent there have been six cases, and one conviction.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state how many have been reported to the police?

I have stated that 402 persons had been arrested.

I asked how many had been reported to the police?

I regret that part of the question appears to have escaped notice. I will inquire further.

In view of the fact that there have been 372 convictions, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is still of opinion that it is idle to suggest that there has been any intimidation?

I never suggested that there has been no intimidation. There have been 360 convictions in the Metropolitan Police district in no less than thirty-six days. That amounts to an average of ten a day. That, as compared with the general average in London, shows no material increase on the ordinary number.

May I ask whether there are 65,000 men in this dispute, and whether, in the circumstances, 360 convictions can be regarded as an abnormal number?

May I ask if there has been no intimidation?

Nobody has ever disputed that there has been intimidation. The only question ever at issue has been the amount of intimidation.

asked the Home Secretary if his attention has been called to the case in which a non-union worker was thrown into the water at Mill-wall docks and nearly drowned, a stevedore named William Walters being charged with attempted murder in connection with the occurrence; and what further steps he proposes to take to secure the safety of men wishing to work?

My attention has been drawn to the case in question. The prisoner has been committed for trial. All possible measures have been and are being taken by the police to secure the safety of men wishing to work, and generally they have been successful.

Is it not a fact that the judge stopped the case in one charge for want of evidence, and that in another case a man was convicted and sentenced?

That is another question.

asked the Home Secretary whether he has received a communication from certain employers at Tilbury Dock asking that more adequate protection might be afforded to their workmen from intimidation and violence from the transport strikers, and, if so, what answer, if any, he has sent thereto; and if he has taken any further steps to meet the situation shown to exist?

As I stated, in reply to a question on Monday last, I sent the communication to which the hon. Member alludes to the Chief Constable of Essex, who is responsible for the maintenance of law and order at Tilbury, and asked him to make thorough inquiry. I have received his Report, and it shows that he has taken statements from nearly half of the forty-four men who signed the paper saying that they were deterred from working by intimidation, and it now appears that most of them deny that they have been intimidated, and assert that they were reluctant to resume work because they did not wish to associate with "blacklegs," and feared that after the strike is over, they would themselves be regarded by their fellow workmen as "blacklegs." It further appears that most of them are now actually working. I may add that the Essex police report that during the week ending 29th June, there was only one case of assault at Tilbury or Grays, and none last week. No doubt there has been some intimidation; but what the men on strike chiefly fear is the loss of status and reputation among their fellows, which would result from their returning singly to work: and from this no force, however great, of police or of soldiers could protect them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to state whether he acknowledges that the expression "blacklegs" is a proper one to be used with reference to men who are unable to work in consequence of intimidation, and also whether the Government accept the definition?

I am quite unable to understand the point of the hon. Gentleman's question. In my report of what the men said I did state that they used the term "blacklegs." If I had used any other term, I should have been misrepresenting them.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he personally accepts the definition?

asked the right hon. Gentleman if he has asked the Lightermen's Society to allow the refuse barges of the Shoreditch Borough Council to be unloaded; and whether any action was taken on the ground that the society was entitled to endanger the public health by their attitude, or whether the forces at his disposal were insufficient to preserve order if an attempt were made to unload the refuse without the consent of the society?

The matter referred to occurred about a month ago. The Shore-ditch authorities wrote me saying that their contractors could not supply men to move the refuse barges and asking for my assistance. I could not, of course, provide the labour; but as the Strike Committee had a few days before expressed to me their willingness to carry on the necessary public services during the strike, I asked the Lightermen's Society, through Mr. Gosling, to supply the men. He at first undertook to do this, but afterwards found that he could not get his men to move. I then made arrangements for special police protection, and the council's officers found bargemen who removed the barges. The difficulty of the case was to find men willing to work; the police force available to protect them, when they were found, was ample.

Is it not a fact that the refuse was kept in the barges for ten to fourteen days, to the detriment of public health; and does the Government accept the position that the strike committee have a right to define what public services shall be used and what shall not be used?

They have no right either to define or not to define. There is no question of legal right one way or the other. With regard to barges, I have no doubt that these barges were kept unloaded for about ten days, and that it was not advantageous to public health.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he has received a communication from the Mayor of Bermondsey as to the intimidation which is being employed in that borough towards men wishing to work at the docks; and, if so, will he inform the House of the terms of such communication and the reply sent by him thereto?

I received a letter from the Mayor, but my recollection is that it referred to riotous proceedings as well as to intimidation. I acknowledged the letter and handed it to Mr. Chester Jones, the magistrate who is holding an inquiry into the disturbances which occurred in Bermondsey, and I see from the Press that the letter was read at the inquiry.

asked the Prime Minister, in view of the fact that the Port of London Authority have failed to carry out their obligations, under the Port of London Authority Act, to administer, preserve, and improve the port and to take such steps as they think best calculated to diminish the evils of casual employment, have issued a circular informing their employés now out on strike that they can only return on condition that they ask for employment as extra casual hands, and that they have also ignored the Resolution of the House of the 1st July last, he will state what steps the Government propose to take to compel the Authority to fulfil their statutory obligations?

My hon. Friend's question has been communicated to the Port Authority for their observation.

Is there no power remaining in this House at all which can be applied? We can deal with the House of Lords as a whole, but we cannot deal with one Member. Can Lord Devonport not be called upon to resign by this House?

My hon. Friend could not have heard my answer. I said I had communicated the question to the Port Authority.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in the case of a man growing fruit on his own land near the town, whilst his wife and daughter attend in the shop without wages, his wife and daughter will come under the Insurance Act; and, if not, whether the man will have to pay the employers' contribution; and whether, in this case, the shop where fruit and flowers are sold would come under the Shops Act?

As regards the first part of this question, I must refer the hon. Member to my right hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury. As regards the last part of the question, a shop in which fruit and flowers are sold comes under the Act, but it is exempt from the obligation to close for a half-holiday on one weekday in each week, unless an order is expressly made by the local authority for that class of trade with the consent of the occupiers of two-thirds of the shops in the trade.

asked if the Prime Minister will say in what manner the Irish Government is to administer the National Insurance Act, 1911, in the event of it taking over the administration of that Act, as provided in Clause 5 (2) ( b ), without having also taken over the administration of the services in connection with friendly societies; and whether, having regard to the provision that the public services in connection with friendly societies cannot be transferred to the Irish Government until the expiration of ten years from the appointed day, the public services in connection with the National Insurance Act, 1911, can be effectively undertaken by the Irish Government until the expiration of a similar period?

There is nothing to prevent the Irish Government administering the National Insurance Act, 1911, without taking over the administration of the reserved services in connection with friendly societies, which are matters distinct from national insurance.

Is that desirable.

That is a matter for discussion, not for question and answer.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that non-unionist members of the tailoring trade have been intimidated and roughly handled in the East End, and stand in need of police protection; whether representations have been made to him in this behalf; and, if so, what action has been taken on such representations?

No organised intimidation connected with this strike has been brought to the notice of the police, and there have been no disturbances of a serious nature. Police protection has been afforded in individual cases where it has been required.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that no representations at all have been made to him?

I said that no organised intimidation has been brought to the notice of the police.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state the number of completed battleships of 8,000tons or over possessed by Italy and Austria in January of the years 1902, 1907, and 1912; and how many such vessels were retained in the Mediterranean by Great Britain in that month of those years?

:Omitting ships over twenty years old, the figures are as follows:—

Are the Government going to retrace their steps before it is too late?

asked how many battleships and battle cruisers belonging respectively to Great Britain and Germany have been delayed in construction; and how many were commissioned for service with the Fleets in advance of the anticipated period of construction?

I assume that the question is intended to refer only to ships of the "Dreadnought" type. The only official information with regard to German vessels which has been received concerned the anticipated dates of delivery from the shipyards of certain ships. These were given by the late First Lord in replies to questions on 6th March and 12th July, 1911. We have no official information as to the dates on which it was anticipated that any of these ships would commission for service with the Fleet. With regard to British ships of the "Dreadnought" type, there are now eighteen in commission. Twelve of these were delayed in construction, five were commissioned in advance of the anticipated time, and one was commissioned on the anticipated date.

asked the final total strength of the German fleet in battleships, battle cruisers, armoured cruisers, protected cruisers, destroyers, submarines, and personnel as arranged under the German Naval Acts first of the year 1900, and secondly of the year 1912?

The terms battle-cruisers, armoured cruisers, and protected cruisers do not occur in the Fleet Laws. Also, I should add, the number of destroyers arranged for in 1900 was stated in a Memorandum attached to the Fleet Bill of 1900. The number of destroyers and submarines arranged for in 1912 was stated in an Appendix to the Amendment Bill of 1912.

Fleet Law of 1900:—

38 Battleships.

14 Large Cruisers.

38 Small Cruisers.

96 Destroyers.

No mention of Submarines.

Fleet Law of 1912:—

41 Battleships.

20 Large Cruisers.

41 Small Cruisers.

144 Destroyers.

72 Submarines.

Information regarding personnel was given in a Memorandum attached to the Fleet Law of 1900, but this information is incomplete, the future established strength referring to certain branches only. The increase in certain branches caused by the Law of 1912 was detailed in an Appendix attached to that Law, but the final figures to be reached are not given. A translation of the Amending Law of 1912, together with the Appendices thereto, was issued as a Parliamentary Paper, Command No. 6117.

asked what was the strength of the active service personnel of the German navy in 1906, and what was then the strength of the reserves of that navy, and what is now the strength of the German active service personnel, and what is now the strength of the German naval reserve?

The German Navy Estimates provided for the following active service personnel:—

asked whether tenders have been invited for any vessels of the 1912–13 programme other than destroyers; and, if so, for what ships, and when is it anticipated orders may be placed to permit the collection of material for construction?

The answer is in the negative. Tenders for the light-armoured cruisers will be called for within the next few days. As I have already stated, of the four armoured ships of the 1912–13 new programme, two will be laid down in the dockyards in November.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether the abnormal delays, whatever the cause, in recent new construction will be taken into consideration in allotting the contracts for the vessels of the current programme; and whether he will obtain some reliable guarantee that our naval position will not be jeopardised in the future by similar failure to complete to time?

The delay in recent new construction will be taken into account both as regards date of order and selection of firms when allotting contracts of present programme. The orders for the destroyers have already been allotted. Everything possible will be done to minimise the effect of causes tending to delay, but it is not admitted that anything has arisen to justify the use of the word jeopardise."

asked how many ships taking part in the Naval Review will have their full complement of crew?

The number of ships will be 223. They will all have full crews, with a partial exception in the case of six training ships. As I stated in reply to the Noble Lord the Member for Portsmouth on 1st July, the Training Squadron will retain their boys and the cadet ships their cadets, and consequently the deck complements of these ships will differ from what they would be in war.

Have these 223 ships a complement sufficient simply to take up their position in a review or have they a complement sufficient to enable them to go into action to-morrow?

They have all a full complement.

That means that they are ready to go into action?

Yes.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will provide a sufficient number of lifeboats and other appliances for the safety of hon. Members who visit the Fleet on Tuesday.

Yes, Sir.

Have the Admiralty determined upon the priority with which Members will be allowed to take their places in the boats?

How many Members have to be provided for?

Up to the present time 461 Members of both Houses have accepted our invitation, but if any Members are desirous of having invitations and let me know during the day I will make arrangements. I may say the company have made all arrangements for the safety of Members in the gloomy contingency mentioned by my hon. Friend. There will be 223 men-of-war and a hospital ship.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether, in laying before the House the Supplementary Naval Estimates which he has promised, he will take into full account the fact that the one million pounds, allocated to the Navy out of the surplus of six millions and a-half, is less by over £600,000 than the amount which though included in the Naval Estimates of 1911–12, remained unspent, owing to delayed construction, at the end of the financial year, and therefore went back into the Treasury?

The reply is in the affirmative.

asked the annual cost to the nation of the Admiralty yacht "Enchantress"; the number of guests the yacht can carry; and the number of officers and men taken from the national service for the service of the yacht?

The annual cost of the "Enchantress," including the charges for maintenance, provisioning, and coal, is about £10,800. The number of cabins available permits of the accommodation of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty and the Secretaries to the Board. The sea-going complement of the vessel is 199 officers and men, whose services would be available in war.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can give any account of the accident on H.M.S. "Thunderer," when a shell fell into the magazine; if he can say what kind of fuse was in the shell; and where the fuse was manufactured?

I am glad to have this opportunity of giving an emphatic contradiction to the alarmist reports that have appeared in the Press, and constitute a gross slander upon the conduct and bearing of the personnel of the Royal Navy. I will read to the House the official account of the accident that has been forwarded to the Admiralty by the Commander-in-Chief, Devonport:—

"The last shell, except one, was being lowered to 'Y' shell room in the Service pattern sling, the point of the shell being upwards. It was about half-way down, when owing to a kink in the wire whip a turn came off the drum of the electric winch, and the projectile took charge and fell to the deck of the shell room. It struck an iron ladder on the way down, damaging the rungs and knocking off the cap of the fuse, The shell had been fused on the upper deck. It was immediately hoisted up again and the fuse examined by the lieutenant (G) and found correct, a cap was put on and the shell returned to its bay where it now is quite serviceable. No one was hurt, and the ladder will be repaired by the ship's staff. The work of taking in ammunition was not stopped, no one left his station, and there was no consternation."

In reply to the last part of the question, I may add, that the fuse is a percussion fuse and was fully protected for transport by means of a cap as well as by its own safety arrangements.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is now in a position to give any information to the House regarding the provision of full pay for all dockyard apprentices on closed days; and will he say whether any instructions have been issued to the Royal dockyards on the matter, and, if so, in what manner and at what date?

Apprentices have generally been paid full pay for closed days, and in respect to the recent stoppage of pay in the cases of apprentices who were not at work on the day before or the day after a closed day instructions were issued as follows on the 27th ultimo: "It has been decided that all apprentices are to be granted full pay for closed days, except when they are absent without leave before or after the closed day." The instructions quoted were intended to be retrospective.

Were the instructions issued after the reply to my question in the House of Commons on the subject?

I dare say that may be so.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is circularising naval pensioners to come up for one month; and, if so, what is the special service these men are required to perform; whether he is aware that some of these pensioners are employed as shipwrights in His Majesty's dockyards, and will he say how it is proposed to fill their places while they are away on other duties; and will he say whether all the naval pensioners circularised are Reserve men?

Volunteers were called for from pensioners as from other classes of Reserve men for a month's service with the Fleet during manœuvres. No shipwright pensioners were embarked from Portsmouth and Chatham. I have put the questions as regards shipwrights to Devonport, but have not received the answer. All pensioners are liable for service in war up to the age of fifty-five.

asked the Prime Minister whether, if the Government of Ireland Bill becomes law, the Imperial Parliament will cease thereupon to have control over all borrowing powers of Irish local authorities; whether the Irish Parliament will have power to repeal any Clause of any Statute or Order which now limits the, borrowing powers of a local authority in Ireland; and whether the Irish Parliament will be able to alter the duties and powers of trustees which now exist in relation to investments in the stocks of local authorities in Ireland?

The control over the borrowing powers of Irish local authorities will primarily be in the hands of the Irish Parliament. The answer to the second paragraph of the question is in the affirmative. The Irish Parliament will not be able to alter the powers of trustees generally with respect to investments in stocks of Irish local authorities.

asked what steps the Prime Minister proposes to take in furthering the progress of the Merchant Shipping (Certificates) Bill; whether he can state when this Bill is likely to be brought forward for Second Reading; and whether the Government intend to provide the necessary facilities in order that the Bill may be passed during the present Parliamentary Session?

I hope that it will be found possible to proceed with the Merchant Shipping (Certificates) Bill at an early date and to pass it into law during the present Session.

asked (47) whether the Prime Minister will state whether the railway companies of Great Britain have refused to accept the re-draft of Clause 2 of the Railways Bill as submitted to them; and, if so, what steps he proposes to take in the matter; (48) whether he proposes to take the Second Reading of the Bill this Session?

The form of Clause 2 of the Railways Bill is still under consideration. I hope it may be possible to proceed with the Bill this Session, but I cannot yet fix a date for the Second Reading.

The whole Bill?

The whole Bill.

asked whether the Prime Minister can now fix a day on which it will be possible to take the discussion on the question of the adhesion of this country to the Brussels Sugar Contention after September, 1913?

I am afraid I cannot at present name a day for the discussion of this question.

asked whether, in regard to Parliamentary Returns and Reports of a voluminous character, which, though interesting, may be often virtually inaccessible to busy Members, on account of their bulk and complexity, instructions will be given that, wherever practicable, there shall accompany each such document a summary giving a lucid account of the main lines and conclusions, and written with a certain literary attractiveness?

I fear that the suggestion, though attractive at first sight, is hardly practicable.

asked (52) whether there are any, and, if so, what precedents since 1861 and before the present Government came into office for postponing the Second Reading and Committee stage of the Finance Bill of the year until after August, or for passing the Finance Act of the year later than August; (53) whether his attention has been called to proceedings now pending in the High Court to restrain the Bank of England from deducting Income Tax from interest payable on Irish Land Stock; and whether, in view of the inconvenience caused by delay, he can now state that the Second Reading and remaining stages of the Finance Bill will be taken before the Adjournment in August?

I am not aware of any precedent. My attention has been called to the proceedings referred to. The Government propose in any case to complete the remaining stages of the Finance Bill before the August Adjournment.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the question of allowing adequate time, as there are a number of Amendments as to the Land Duties?

Ample time will be allowed.

asked whether the Prime Minister can say when it is pro-posed to take the Report stage of the Temperance (Scotland) Bill?

I fear I cannot at present give the hon. Member the information he desires.

Will it be before the Recess or afterwards?

I will make a statement later on in the week about business.

asked whether the fact that certain hon. Member and ex-Members of this House have been requested by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to serve on a Committee dealing with the policy of land reform has been brought to his notice; whether the formation of the said Committee has his sanction and approval; and whether, within the lifetime of the present Parliament, it is the intention of the Government to deal with the question of the further taxation of land values on the lines advocated by the late Mr. Henry George?

asked if the inquiry arranged by the Chancellor of the Exchequer with reference to certain matters connected with land tenure in this country is the result of decisions arrived at by the Cabinet; and, as the Committee to investigate is a private one appointed by an individual Minister of the Crown, will the Prime Minister say what guarantee will exist, if the views of the Committee are officially adopted, that the facts and information on which any Report they may make is based are reliable and complete; and if the services of any section of the Civil Service in any capacity or any public information or statistics will be utilised?

My right hon. Friend has, with my approval, approached certain gentlemen, among whom are Members and ex-Members of the House, with a view to securing their services on an unofficial Committee which has been formed for the purpose of investigating the question of land reform. The Government and not the Committee will be responsible for any proposals that may ultimately be made, and will naturally obtain all such information as they consider necessary before coming to any conclusion on the subject. I am not prepared to make any statement as to the intentions of the Government.

May I ask whether public money will be spent on the operations of this Committee?

So far as I know, none.

Will the Report be published?

I cannot say.

May we take it that the statement that the Government are pledged to a single tax is quite untrue?

Yes; it is quite untrue; there is no pledge.

Why are by-elections being fought on the subject, is it part of the Government policy?

That does not rest with me.

asked whether the Prime Minister's attention has been called to a speech delivered by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at Woodford, Essex, on the 29th June, and whether the views enunciated in that speech on the land system of this country have received the sanction of His Majesty's Government; and, if so, whether it is intended to embody these views in legislation?

asked whether the Prime Minister has perused a speech delivered by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at Woodford on the 29th ultimo; and whether that speech is to be regarded as an utterance for which His Majesty's Government is responsible?

The views expressed by my hon. Friend in his speech at Woodford as to the necessity for land reform are shared by his colleagues. With regard to the last part of the question I must refer the hon. Member to the reply I have just given.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is his view that at this very hour the land is "shackled with the chains of feudalism"?

It seems tome to be a picturesque and not inaccurate description.

Where is the land situated which the Chancellor of the Exchequer intends, with God's help intends, to release from feudal shackles? [Interruption.] Where is the land situated—[Interruption.]

It is of no good repeating the question.

Is there any precedent for an individual Minister of the Crown appointing a Committee to deal with a subject like this?

Certainly. I said in my answer that the Committee was appointed with my sanction.

asked whether the Prime Minister is aware that the law of this country in respect of marriage with a deceased wife's sister is in conflict with the canons and table of prohibited degrees of the Church of England; and whether, with a view to enabling persons to be at once loyal citizens and faithful members of the national church, he will cause Letters of Business to issue or take other measures to correct the existing disagreement?

I am aware of the facts stated by the hon. Member, but I am not at present prepared to take any action in the matter. Certain aspects of the subject are now under consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that a number of hon. Members have signified an intention of, under certain eventualities, ceasing to attend the sittings of the House for an indefinite period; whether he is aware of the feeling existing in the country relative to the absence from their duties of Members owing to reasons other than ill-health; and whether he will grant a day for the discussion of the conditions under which Members are entitled to draw their salaries from the public funds?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that question, may I ask whether he is aware that the hon. Member for Enfield (Mr. Newman) was absent from fifty-eight divisions out of ninety taken up to Whitsuntide?

I am not aware that there is any foundation in fact for the allegations in the first and second paragraphs of the question, nor in the supplementary question. The subject can be discussed when the Vote is taken in Supply.

Does the Prime Minister consider the fact that we are now being paid makes no difference to our attendance here?

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of reviving the old rule that a Member must not be absent without leave from this House?