asked the Secretary for Foreign Affairs what law now obtains in respect of contraband and blockade; what effect, if any, is to be given to the Declaration of London; whether the action of Italy and Turkey in the recent war is to be regarded as a precedent; whether other States are strengthening, or contemplate strengthening, their legislation against breaches of neutrality; and whether, since Great Britain is more adversely affected than any other Power by a stiffening of the standard of neutrality, the Government proposes to persist in efforts to obtain the ratification of the Declaration of London?

The rules now governing questions of contraband and blockade are those based on the view of international law prevailing in the several belligerent countries. The Declaration of London, not having been ratified, is not, as such, binding on any country, although, in several instances, belligerents have declared their acceptance of the provisions of the Declaration, so far as they do not conflict with their national law. I do not know what action on the part of Italy and Turkey the hon. Member refers to as raising the question of precedent. I have no information respecting the intentions of other Governments in the matter of legislation directed against breaches of neutrality. I am not prepared to accept the view of the hon. Member as regards the effects on this country of a raising of the standard of neutrality, nor to admit that this would be the general effect of the Declaration of London. The circumstance which does adversely affect Great Britain is the uncertainty as to what is at present accepted by foreign Powers as the correct rule of international law on these matters. This would be removed by the ratification of the Declaration of London and it is therefore desirable to effect it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the Chinese have formed a new province of Eastern Tibet to the west of Szechuan; whether such province includes a portion of South-Eastern Tibet: and, if so, whether any objection has been raised on behalf of Great Britain.

Proposals have been put forward by the Governor-General of Szechuan for the formation of a new province, with the object of asserting more effectively the authority of the Chinese Government over the Tibetan Marches and portions of Eastern Tibet. His Majesty's Government are watching developments with a due regard for British interests and Treaty rights.

May I ask whether Papers will be laid on the Table on this question?

No, Sir, I do not think there will be any advantage in laying Papers at the present stage.

asked whether, Russia having now taken that control in Chinese Mongolia hitherto sought through the six-Power financial group and to obtain which was the reason for admitting her to that group, Russia will now be excluded from that group and its future negotiations in China?

The statement made in the hon. Member's question is not true, and the answer is therefore in the negative.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say in what respect it is not true, and if that is not the present position what is the present position?

The statements are not true. Russia has not taken control in Chinese Mongolia and the six-Power group has not obtained control of Chinese Mongolia, and that is not the reason for permitting Russia to resign.

asked whether, in the event of a general European Conference being convened to discuss the situation arising out of the war in the Balkans, the status of Cyprus will be liable to come under review?

It would be premature to make any statement as to the subjects which might or might not come within the purview of a Conference. Discussion of a programme, before it has been decided whether the moment is opportune for a Conference at all, is hardly possible.

May I ask whether the Committee of Imperial Defence will be consulted before any decision is arrived at by the Conference?

I should think it was probable that the Committee of Defence would be consulted if we contemplate raising the question of Cyprus, but we have not yet contemplated that.

May I ask whether, at all events, it would not be possible to rule out certain matters like Cyprus out of the Conference?

I have no doubt it would be possible when the programme comes to be discussed to decide that certain subjects should be included and that certain subjects should be excluded, but until you have arrived at the moment at which you have agreed that a Conference is opportune you cannot possibly go into that.

asked whether Mr. Brown, who is acting Vice-Consul (unpaid) at Iquitos, the nearest seat of a British Consulate to the Putumayo, is himself in any way connected with the rubber traffic in the Amazon forest or Putumayo regions, or connected directly or indirectly with the transport of rubber from those regions, having regard to the fact that great efforts were exerted to obtain this position of acting Vice-Consul (unpaid) at Iquitos for the agent of a company which ships the rubber from those rivers to Liverpool?

Mr. David Brown is the Resident Agent of the Booth Steamship Company at Iquitos. He is Vice-Consul, not Acting Vice-Consul. We were advised that Mr. Brown, who is also in charge of the United States interest, might properly be left in charge during the absence of His Majesty's Consul on leave, and I have no reason to doubt the propriety of this decision. So far as I am aware, no efforts were made to secure the appointment of Vice-Consul for Mr. Brown.

Is this Mr. Brown agent of this Shipping Company which transferred rubber from those regions to England?

He is the agent of the Booth Steamship Company. I do not know more about him.

Will the right hon Gentleman inquire whether the Booth Steamship Company is the company that transfers the rubber from Putumayo where all these horrors and outrages occurred to England?

I had to decide whether Mr. Brown is a fit person to act temporarily for the British Consul while he is away. I took the best advice I could on that subject and I was informed he was a fit person, and I see no reason to reconsider the appointment.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he is aware that on 19th March, 1886, a Resolution was all but carried, being defeated by a majority of four only, in the House of Commons desiring all treaties to be laid before Parliament for its approval before being finally concluded; and whether, having regard to the almost unlimited discretion of the Executive in this country in foreign affairs and its power to commit the country to the greatest international obligations without consulting Parliament, any treaties which may be made with foreign Powers resulting from the present crisis in the East will be laid before Parliament before being finally concluded, according to the practice which obtains in the United States of America under its Constitution and according to the constitutional laws of the French Republic in reference to treaties of peace and commercial treaties?

The subject raised by the hon. and learned Member is one of a grave constitutional character, and could not appropriately be dealt with by the process of question and answer. The hon. and learned Member raised the same issue in Debate on 12th April of last year, and I then explained at some length the considerations by which the Government must be guided in the matter. I would also recall to the hon. and learned Member's attention that, in answer to his question on 16th May, 1911, I pointed out more particularly that the question whether Parliament should or should not be given an opportunity of discussing a given treaty before His Majesty was advised to ratify it was one of constitutional practice and expediency rather than of principle. I cannot at this moment usefully add anything to what I said on those occasions, nor make any promise about hypothetical treaties.

May I ask, does the assurance which he has given to the House many, many times still remain, namely, that he will take, as far as he can, the House into his confidence in all matters of international complications?

May I ask whether, from a constitutional point of view, it is worse to commit the country without consulting Parliament or to commit Parliament without consulting the country?

Those things appear to me to be questions on which the answer may vary according to the particular occasion. I adhere to any statement I made. I do not recall the particular one the hon. Member quoted, but if it was to the effect that we desired to take the House of Commons into our confidence, as far as possible in foreign policy, it is perfectly true.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether his attention had been drawn to speeches delivered at demonstrations held in Cork, Enniscorthy, and other places in Ireland and England, on Saturday, 23rd November, in honour of three Fenian leaders who were executed for the murder of a police-constable in Manchester in 1867; whether he has read the statement made by Mr. Bulmer Hob-son to a gathering in Cork to the effect that nothing would satisfy the Irish people but the absolute and complete independence of Ireland and the establishment of an Irish Republic, and that the Irish Nationalists should arm themselves to secure this independence; whether he has seen a report of a speech delivered at Enniscorthy by Major M'Bride, an employé of the Dublin Corporation, in which he said it was the duty of the Irishmen of to-day to bring about absolute independence; whether he is aware that meetings in honour of these Manchester criminals were held at Manchester, Tipperary, and elsewhere; whether any policemen were present at the meetings in Cork and Enniscorthy; and, if so, whether notes were taken of the speeches delivered with a view to prosecutions for treasonable language?

My right hon. Friend, who is unavoidably absent, has asked me to reply. My right hon. Friend has seen newspaper reports of the speeches referred to. The Enniscorthy meeting was held indoors and no police were, therefore, present. The meeting at Cork was small and unimportant, and it was not considered necessary, to take a shorthand note of the proceedings. A prosecution in such a case, even if evidence were available, could only have the effect of giving notoriety to an obscure individual.

Why is it apparently the policy of the Government to quash these statements as much as possible by not taking any action in the matter?

I do not know, but I think there are eases where it is better to ignore statements.

asked the Chief Secretary in how many cases have the Estates Commissioners instituted legal proceedings against reinstated evicted tenants for non-compliance with the rules as to the working of their lands, and the results of such proceedings; in how many cases are proceedings pending; in how many cases have tenants carried out their undertakings to comply with the Commissioners' requirements; and the results to date of the investigation which has been directed in regard to other cases of reinstated evicted tenants who are apparently not residing on or working their holdings in a proper manner?

By the direction of the Estates Commissioners, notices were served on ten reinstated evicted tenants to deliver up to the Commissioners the possession of holdings which had been allotted to them as evicted tenants, and also to refund the amounts of the Grants made to them. In six of these cases writs in Chancery have been issued to recover possession of the lands and the refund of the Grants, and in the four remaining cases the Commissioners are of opinion that the parties are now endeavouring to comply with their requirements, and do not propose to issue writs at present. As regards other cases under consideration, the Commissioners are not in a position at present to make any statement.

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been called to a resolution unanimously adopted by the members of the County Cork Joint Hospital Board, asking the Local Government Board to assist the rural districts of the county in their endeavour to build proper houses for the labourers, as they believed that the bad housing and bad sanitary surroundings of the poor were responsible to a large degree for the existence of and spread of consumption, and to facilitate loans for the small farmer; and, if so, what steps he will take to carry the resolution into effect?

The resolution referred to has not been received by the Local Government Board. With regard to the remainder of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the question asked on this subject by the hon. Member for Mid-Cork on 17th October, from which it will be seen that up to 31st March last nearly 5,000 cottages were authorised in the county of Cork.

asked whether the trustees of the Achill Mission estate, county Mayo, have yet entered into negotiations with the Congested Districts Board for the sale of the estate, or have expressed their willingness to do so; and, if not, whether, having regard to the congested condition of the tenants and their wretched housing accommodation, steps will be taken at an early date to acquire the estate compulsorily?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to his question on this subject on the 15th October, to which there is nothing to add at present.

asked whether steps have been taken to carry out the improve- ments on the Jermyn estate, Caherdaniel, promised by the Congested Districts Board; and, if so, how many men are employed and when is it estimated that the work will be completed?

There are twenty-five men at present employed in carrying out improvements on this estate, and the Congested Districts Board arc unable to say when the works will be completed.

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been cabled to the evidence given by District-Inspector Davis and Acting-Sergeant Beegan at the hearing of a case at Ennis on the 28th November, when the district inspector stated that, in the district of Corofin alone since January, 1910, 104 serious outrages have occurred, of which forty-two were committed by the use of firearms; whether Acting-Sergeant Beegan swore that twelve outrages had been committed on one family alone; whether there are at present two persons under constant police protection and sixteen protected by patrols in the Corofin district; and whether, in view of these statements, he proposes to take steps to supplement the ordinary law for the protection of law-abiding people in this part of county Clare?

My right hon. Friend's attention has been called to the evidence referred to in the question. The number of persons under police protction in Corofin district is as stated. All possible precautions are being taken by the police to prevent the commission of outrages, and for that purpose the stations in the district have been augmented where necessary. The answer to the last paragraph of the question is in the negative.

What will be the protection of these people under Home Rule if you cannot protect them under the present Government?

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that on 22nd March, 1912, John Alexander Graham was admitted to the Monaghan union hospital as a patient from the Blind Institute, Dublin, and that at that date he was in receipt of an old age pension which was continued to be paid him till the 14th June, when, in common with the pensions paid to other inmates in the union hospital, payment was discontinued by the pensions authority, but, on appeal to the Local Government Board, all the pensions were restored except Graham's; and will he now direct the payment of the pension to be made from that date, and state under what circumstances payment was discontinued?

Graham's pension was disallowed by the Local Government Board on the ground that he was in receipt of disqualifying Poor Law relief. The Board have no power to reopen consideration of this case or to direct that payment of the pension may be resumed. The Board have no means from the statement in the question of identifying the other cases referred to by the hon. Member.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is the law in Ireland that a blind man, an invalid, over seventy years of age, who goes into a union hospital, is disqualified for the pension?

I am not prepared to give any opinion as to the state of the law on the subject. My hon. Friend had better consult the Chief Secretary.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is not the law in England?

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether his Department is in receipt of any annual Grant from the Treasury in respect of forestry work, and, if so, will he state the amount of any such Grant and what steps have been taken in prosecuting the work whether any profits hare been made; and what sum in accumulated profits is now in existence for the general purpose of forestry transactions?

An annual sum of £6,000 has been provided, since the financial year 1909–10 inclusive, for the purchase, under the Irish Land Acts, and development of woodlands and lands suitable for forestry. Nine such areas, comprising about 7,000 acres, have been acquired, and are being worked as forestry centres. The receipts from the working of these centres are, in accordance with the usual practice, surrendered to the Treasury at the close of each year. These receipts up to the end of the last financial year were as follows:—

Were not the sums realised by the sale of timber taken by the Treasury? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think they ought to be accumulated under the Department?

The usual course has been followed. All such sums are surrendered to the Treasury. These are not profits; they are receipts.

How does this £6,000 Grant compare with the £1,000 additional Grant to Scotland?

asked the Secretary for the Colonies whether it was with the sanction of His Majesty's Government that an offer of satisfactory settlement was made by the defendants in the case now pending between Aird and Company v. the Tanjong-Pagar Docks Board of Singapore, on condition that the charge of fraud made by the plaintiffs was withdrawn; whether this offer is now the subject of negotiation between those parties; what is the total amount of public money spent and contracted by and through those defendants; whether the Colonial Office has any control over them; and whether an independent inquiry will be held into this expenditure and into the present proposal to compound fraud, irrespective of the result of the negotiations between the parties?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. This matter is now before the Courts, and the Secretary of State must decline to make any statement in regard to it, further than that the hon. Member may rest assured that there will be no compounding of fraud.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer that part of the question not connected with the proceedings in Court: "The total amount of public money spent and contracted by and through the defendants; whether the Colonial Office has any control over them: and whether an independent inquiry will be held"?

I think it would be undesirable to make any statement while the matter is before the Court.

asked when the Papers relating to the Grants under the Gold Coast Ordinance will be in the hands of Members?

The draft Palm Oil Ordinance, to which I assume the right hon. Gentleman refers, should be in the hands of Members this evening. I hope to be able to lay correspondence on the subject shortly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the correspondence that took place with the Chamber of Commerce, the Secretary of State promised to lay Papers. It must have been three weeks ago that I asked a question. Will the right hon. Gentleman expedite the matter?

I will certainly at once report the matter to my right hon. Friend, with a view to seeing that it is dealt with without further delay.

Has Sir William Lever yet been placed in possession of his new territory under this Ordinance?

I am afraid I know nothing of that.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) the date upon which his Department withdrew the Grant from the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society; what was then the amount of the Grant; whether its withdrawal was approved of by the Council of Agriculture; and what were the grounds put forward by that body for taking this step?

The Department's Grant to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society ceased on 31st December, 1908, in consonance with a minute of the Agricultural Board passed at a meeting held on 28th January in that year. The Minute pointed out that it was of primary importance that the Department should not be involved, directly or indirectly, in attacks upon any political party, in or out of Parliament, or upon any legitimate trading interest. The amount paid by the Department to the society in the calendar year 1908 was £3,450. The Council of Agriculture, at their meeting on 19th November, 1907, had approved of the gradual withdrawal and cessation of the subsidy on the following, among other, grounds, as mentioned in the Debate: (1) that it was not expedient that the funds of the Department should be expended through a nonrepresentative body over which the Department had no adequate supervision and control; (2) that the Organisation Society were encouraging co-operative trading in competition with shopkeepers, and that it was inequitable that State aid should be given to assist such trading, even indirectly; and (3) that, owing to the controversy that had arisen in the country in regard to the matter, the continuance of relations between the Department and the society would seriously impair and hamper the Department's work.

Is it not the fact that this withdrawal was also approved of by every gombeen man in the country?

I have no knowledge of gombeen men, Nationalist or Unionist.

Will the right hon. Gentleman send a copy of his answer to the Development Commissioners?

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether he is aware that since the latest inquiry was held in connection with steam trawling in Bantry Bay two additional steam trawl boats are constantly fishing there; whether the local trammel and line fishermen allege that this system of steam trawling is destructive of the spawn and militates against their interests; whether he is aware that boxes of small fry, captured by the steam trawl boats, are sold at the Bantry fish market; and whether he will cause inquiry to be held in connection with steam trawling in the said bay?

The Department are not aware that two additional steam trawl boats have come to fish in Bantry Bay since the date of the last inquiry. The Department have received statements from fishermen, who are not trawlers, that the fishing in the bay is injuriously affected by that mode of fishing, and that the refuse fish are sold in the local market. During the last fourteen years four public inquiries have been held into the matter and by-laws made restricting trawling. In these circumstances the Department see no necessity for holding another inquiry.

Will the right hon. Gentleman further inquire whether there are not three trawlers in Bantry Bay—I know there are?

I did make inquiry when in Dublin last week, and the information I had was that only one local trawler was in Bantry Bay.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether the new plan for encouraging tobacco growing in Ireland on the lines recommended by the Development Commissioners has yet been commenced; and if he can state briefly what the main provisions of this new plan are?

Arrangements for carrying out the further experiments in tobacco growing, for which an advance from the Development Fund has been sanctioned by the Treasury, are now almost complete, but the experiments have not yet been commenced. The main provisions of the new plan are as follows: (1) That the approved experimenter shall arrange for the cropping of an area not exceeding 150 acres, at least three-fourths of which shall be on the land of working farmers; (2) that the experimenter shall undertake to provide the growers with all necessary instruction and equipment; (3) that the experimenter shall purchase the growers' crop at a price fixed on a commercial basis as soon as the tobacco is in a position to be delivered to him; (4) that the experimenter shall establish a rehandling station equipped with approved machinery for re-handling all the tobacco in accordance with American methods adapted to Irish conditions; (5) that the experimenter shall manufacture a considerable portion of the crop in a factory under his control in such a way as to ascertain the best possibilities of Irish tobacco; (6) that all the operations shall be open to inspection by the Department and that full reports, including statements of accounts, shall be furnished by the experimenter in respect of each portion of the work; (7) that, subject to compliance with the prescribed conditions, a Grant at the rate of £25 per acre cropped will be payable to the experimenter; (8) that the experiment shall be continued ever a period of ten years.

Will the right hon. Gentleman grant a Return showing the names of the persons who have been selected for this Grant of Government money?

At the present moment they have not been selected—

No, when they are?

So far as the Department is concerned, the rehandler will be Sir Nugent Everard, the only one possible in the country; and, so far as possible, the original growers in Wexford, Louth, and other counties will be brought into business with him.

If the Department are going to provide these people with equipment and a money Grant, surely we may have a Return of the names of the persons who are expected to get these State Grants?

Certainly, and if the hon. and learned Gentleman will move for a Return when the matter is complete I shall have great pleasure in giving it.

May I ask whether it is not the fact that the Development Commissioners have made provision for two experiments by two experimenters; whether it is true that only one scheme has yet been agreed to by the Departments; and is it not a fact that the names of the tobacco growers in Ireland are quite well known?

That is so. It is quite true that the Development Commissioners were willing to make a larger grant of £70,000 instead of £35,000, but there was the condition attached to it that there should be a second rehandler or experimenter—as he is called in the answer—and he has not yet been selected.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) when the last case of foot-and-mouth disease occurred in Ireland; whether he is now prepared to make a statement as to the removal of restrictions from or contraction of the restricted area in the county of Westmeath; and if, in the opinion of the experts of his Department, Ireland is now entirely free from all trace of disease?

This matter is now under the consideration of the Department, and a proposal has been submitted to the Board of Agriculture for their concurrence.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether, having regard to the fact that the last outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease at Mullingar occurred on 7th November, and that twenty-eight days have now elapsed since that case was discovered and no further case has occurred, he will now issue an Order restricting the operations of the Westmeath and District Removal of Animals Order to seven miles, so as to entirely clear county Longford, in which there has been no outbreak at all from that disease, and allow fairs to be held freely in all parts of that county?

I beg to refer the hon. Member to the answer given to-day in my reply to the hon. Member for South Westmeath.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that the fair in connection with which this question is asked is to be held on the 16th, and there is no time to make other arrangements, and does he not see his way to alter his mind?

The only answer I can give to the hon. Member is that a good many things have happened since he asked his question. The Department has to proceed with extreme caution in this matter, and I should have thought I would have had the assistance of the hon. Gentleman.

May I take it that the right hon. Gentleman is not going to remove the embargo on this district?

No, the hon. Member must take what I say in reply to the hon. Member for South Westmeath.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether complaints have been made that preferential treatment with regard to available quarantine space in Great Britain has been received by large consignors of cattle from Ireland; whether, having regard to the fact that his Department is the only authority that can secure fair play to small shippers by withholding licences for shipment and regulating their issue in such a way that every applicant will have his case considered, and, if at any time refused, his next application will have priority over those previously granted; and whether, in all cases, the tenant fanners who feed cattle will receive special consideration?

I am having inquiries made upon this subject. Perhaps the hon. Member will repeat his question on Tuesday next.

I beg to ask the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) a question of which I have given him private notice: Whether he can state the circumstances regarding the suspected cases of foot-and-mouth disease reported to have occurred at Dublin and Newry?

There are three cases to which I wish to refer in answer to my hon. Friend. First, there is the case of an animal, one of a large cargo which it was proposed to ship to Dundee. One animal was found by the inspector of the Department to be suffering from some ailment, and was challenged and not allowed to go on board. It was examined, and three of our principal inspectors saw the animal. The lesion in the tongue was an old lesion, said by the chief veterinary inspector of the Board of Agriculture in England to be a month or two old. Our three inspectors in Dublin were unable to pronounce it foot-and-mouth disease, and they were confirmed in their action by the fact that the animal had been for eight months in a field near Kells, in the county of Meath, with eighty other animals, which were also on board the ship, and none of them had ever shown the slightest symptoms of disease. They belong to a Scotchman who has an eleven months' taking, and they had been very carefully watched. The three inspectors, each of them a most competent man, declined to pronounce it foot-and-mouth disease, and the Secretary called upon to decide whether the cargo should be stopped or not, held that on these two grounds he was warranted in dispatching the cargo to Dundee, which he did. I am glad to say, although they have been a week there, we have received no intelligence of anything wrong there. The second was a case almost similar, only the lesions were pronounced to be three weeks old. That animal was from near Dunshaughlin, in the county of Meath. The inspectors were unable to pronounce it foot-and-mouth disease, and Professor Wettam, president of the Royal Veterinary Society for the United Kingdom, an authority who will not be questioned by anyone in this House or in the country, said that the lesions were imperceptible from those of foot-and-mouth disease, but the infection had not been conveyed by either of them, although they had been alongside other cattle. It appeared to him to be a case of what the Germans call pseudo-foot-and-mouth disease, that is foot-and-mouth disease that is not infectious. We held that cargo up and did not allow it to proceed. It is now at South. Wall, Dublin, and nothing has happened to any animal. These are the two Dublin cases which have caused us very great anxiety. I should also add that with regard to these cases I dispatched officers on Sunday last to Kells and Dunshaughlin and for many miles all round those places to examine the animals in the neighbourhood, and we could find no trace of the disease at all. As regards the Birkenhead outbreak, that, I regret to say, is a much more certain and serious case. There can be no doubt that an animal shipped from Newry developed foot-and-mouth disease. I have seen our own inspector in town today. He has seen the tongue, and he admits it is foot-and-mouth disease, and I am sorry to add that other animals in that cargo have developed the same disease, so that is a very serious matter. I think we did absolutely right with regard to the two others, that we were justified in dispatching the one cargo to Dundee and in holding up the other; but the case of Birkenhead is certainly a most serious thing, which will require very great attention on the part of the Department to find out where the animals came from and to deal with the district. That we are now doing.

May I ask whether information has reached the right hon. Gentleman to the effect that a large number of cattle and pigs are now held up at the port of Waterford; that these came from a district in the country where there is no outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease, and whether he will have them inspected and allow them to proceed to their destination?

Cattle of all kinds are being held up in every quarter. The condition is extremely serious, and I hope my hon. Friend will see that it is necessary, and I have no power to alter the circumstances unless it can be proved to the Board of Agriculture that the outbreak is local, and not general.

Will the right hon. Gentleman represent to the Minister of Agriculture that there is a difference between holding up cattle from an infected area and holding up cattle from a neighbourhood in which there has been no outbreak of disease for many years?

I have been representing that for a long time.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how, in the first case, to which he referred—the case where the animals were clearly suffering from foot-and-mouth disease, three or four weeks ago, they entirely escaped detection, although the disease is so easily diagnosed; and can he say also why the English Board of Agriculture do not recognise the existence of non-infectious foot-and-mouth disease?

I am bound to follow the advice of the inspectors of my Department, and they are of opinion that this was not a true case of foot-and-mouth disease. As to why the cases were undetected while the animals were in Meath, I do not know whether the hon. Member understands the enormous task which the Board is called upon to perform. We have had an enormous number of cattle to deal with and to trace, as I am sure the hon. Gentleman will realise, and my point is that on these two farms, neither then nor since, nor now, could we find any trace of disease.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that 36,000 pigs are lying beside the docks in Dublin waiting for shipment; and that there are 5,000 more in different ports: Dundalk, Waterford, Belfast, and Derry. Will these animals be allowed to be shipped for slaughter at Birkenhead or Liverpool, as the case may be, and will the right hon. Gentleman give instructions to his officers at Dublin to permit these pigs to be shipped to their destination?

I am aware of all the hon. Member has said and a good deal more. But a moment's consideration will show him that I have no power to do as he wishes. Even if they were shipped from the ports he mentions, there is the question of landing them at the English ports. That is the real difficulty, and over it I have no power.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say where the animals undoubtedly infected which were shipped from Newry came from?

We are carrying out investigations as to that at this moment. Our inspectors are busy making inquiries and I hope before night closes they will have been able to trace the fifteen animals.

May I ask whether there is any instance, either in England or in Ireland, or in any Continental country, where animals suffering from true foot-and-mouth disease have not conveyed the contagion to other animals on the same farm or in their immediate vicinity?

My opinion on that subject is not worth anything. But I have made strict inquiry from the veterinary officers of the Board and they maintain it is almost impossible for an animal sniveling from foot-and-mouth disease to be with eighty others in a field and not convey the disease to any of them.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) if he is aware that a list of fishing boats was made out by the secretary to the Fethard fishermen and the coxswain of the lifeboat and laid before the Development Commissioners, and if that list was discounted and contradicted without any evidence to the contrary; is he aware that the people of Fethard and the surrounding district are not only handicapped in the fishing industry, but, being so far from market, are also handicapped in getting in their supplies of coal, artificial manures, etc., and in the exportation of farm produce; and will the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) grant an inquiry into the necessity for improving Fethard Harbour and give the fishermen, traders, and farmers a chance to prove their case for a Grant from the Development Commissioners?

The Department have no information regarding the list of fishing boats referred to, but are aware that better harbour accommodation at Fethard would prove of benefit to the district. The suggestion of the Department to the Development Commissioners that a sum of £6,000 should be granted for the improvement of Fethard Harbour, on condition that a local contribution of £1,000 was forthcoming, did not meet with the approval of the Commissioners. Under the circumstances it does not seem necessary to hold an inquiry for the purpose indicated in the question.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether the front of the old General Post Office will be offered to any municipal or public authority outside London, if such authority is willing to re-erect it in connection with a public building; and, if so, whether he will communicate to a few of the larger municipalities the conditions on which this noble facade may be acquired for re-erection?

The First Commissioner is willing to consider any reasonable offer from any municipal or public authority in connection with the re-erection of the portico of the old Post Office, and he is making this known as widely as possible by advertisement in the public newspapers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Wexford Traders' Association passed a resolution calling the attention of the Government to the inequality of the Shops Act in localities where a closing order has been made in allowing licensed traders to retail merchandise other than liquor, whilst unlicensed traders, carrying on the same business, are compelled to close-their premises; and, seeing that both classes of traders do not get the same facilities under the Act, can he promise its amendment in the direction indicated in the resolution?

The attention of my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has been called to the proceedings of the Wexford Traders' Association referred to by the hon. Member, but at present there is no prospect of any further legislation on the subject.

asked whether the Taff Vale Railway Company have not yet begun to carry out the undertaking to put their station at Mountain Ash into a decent condition, an undertaking to do so having been given to this House by him on their behalf many months ago; and what action he proposes taking to secure compliance with the promise on an early date?

I think my hon. Friend is under a misapprehension. The undertaking given on behalf of the Taff Vale Railway Company referred to Aberdare Station. I have no recollection of any undertaking-having been given on the part of the Board of Trade relating to Mountain Ash Station. I have, however, invited the company's observations on my hon. Friend's question and will communicate with him when I receive their reply.

asked whether, in view of the fact that notice has only been given to the fishermen of the Thames regarding the prohibition of stow-boat fishing on the eve of the season after the fishermen have undergone considerable expense in the renewal of their gear, the prohibition will be suspended at least for this year, and so prevent hardship from falling upon a class of working man who earns a meagre living?

This question should have been addressed to the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. The notice to which the hon. Member refers was issued by the Port of London Authority for the purpose of drawing the attention of fishermen to a by-law which has been in force since the year 1895, and could only be altered by the making of a new by-law. The Board have no authority to intervene in the matter, but they will be glad to consider any representations which the fishermen may make to them with respect to it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the action of the Midland Railway Company in their repeated intimidation of trade unionists, especially in the Sheffield district; and, having regard to the fact that this is contrary to the signed agreement of both sides following the railway strike of August, 1911, and is calculated to not only destroy the conciliation and arbitration scheme but involve companies which are acting honourably in a serious railway dispute, whether he is prepared to have a complete investigation made into the discontent and intimidation practised on this railway with a view to avoiding a recurrence of last year's dispute?

My right hon. Friend has received particulars of certain cases in which it is alleged that employés of the Midland Railway Company have been penalised because they came out on strike in August, 1911; and he is enquiring into these cases.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that an unknown airship of Foreign nationality passed over Sheerness on 14th October last, he will state what steps, if any, are being taken to protect our naval establishments against aerial observation or attack?

All necessary precautions are being taken.

To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that last Saturday the First Lord of the Admiralty entertained to luncheon and tea in the Royal Naval Barracks, Portsmouth, a party of 130 friends, who arrived by special train from London, and that during the afternoon the party in various groups was conducted round the naval establishment by naval officers; and whether he will state if either the special train, the luncheon, or the tea was paid for out of public funds?

As this question is personal to myself, and as the Noble Lord has it on the Paper, I shall be glad to answer it.

May I, on behalf of my Noble Friend, put the question?

One hundred and thirty officers and men from the Henley and Woodstock squadrons of the Oxfordshire Yeomanry, one of which I command, were entertained, as stated in the question, at the Royal Naval Barracks, Portsmouth, on Saturday last, and were shown round the dockyard. The expense of their entertainment was defrayed by me, with the exception of the special train. This was subscribed for by the men themselves. No charge of any kind fell upon public funds; and I am surprised that the Noble Lord should have made such a suggestion.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware of the inconvenience caused to business men residing at Keyham Barton owing to the absence of a telegraph and telephone office connecting with the General Post Office at Devonport; that the population of Keyham Barton ranges from 8,000 to 9,000, and that the nearest telegraph and telephone office is at Devon-port, a walk of twenty minutes from Key-ham Barton; and whether he will consider the advisability of meeting the present deficiency by establishing a telegraph and telephone office at Keyham Barton?

I am inquiring whether the circumstances have changed since the matter was last under review. I will communicate with the hon. Member.

asked whether letters for the Cape mail have to be posted on Saturdays and are only received from the Cape on Saturdays; and whether he can do anything to obviate the consequent inconvenience to the public?

I am fully aware of the inconvenience of the present arrangement under which there is no adequate interval in this country for replies between the delivery of correspondence received from South Africa and the departure of the next outgoing mail steamer. The presence in England of the Postmaster-General of the Union of South Africa has enabled me recently to discuss with him the many difficult questions which any alteration in the dates of sailings presents. I am glad to be able to say that I hope that, with his concurrence, a rearrangement will shortly be effected so as to give a sufficient interval for reply to correspondents in this country.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will obtain and communicate to the House information from the French Government regarding the recent conviction in France of certain Syndicalists for insulting the Army, preaching anti-militarism, and inciting soldiers to refuse to carry out repressive measures at times of public disorder when orders to this effect are given by their superior officers?

It would be unusual to ask a foreign Government for information of this kind, and I am unable to comply with the hon. Member's request.

asked whether the policy of Great Britain in respect of the war in the Balkans is still one of strict neutrality, or whether her policy is to promote as far as she can the permanent happiness of the Bulgarian and Hellenic peoples?

The policy with regard to the war continues to be one of strict neutrality. The war will, I trust, not last for ever, and we shall be very glad if it is then in our power to promote the permanent happiness of the Bulgarians and Hellenic peoples, but this will not be exclusive of a desire to promote the happiness of other States also.

Have the Government seen the speech of the First Lord of the Admiralty which exhibited a complete indifference to the happiness of the Turks? May I ask if words to that effect were not used?

The hon. Member must give notice. The right hon. Gentleman cannot carry all the speeches of all his colleagues in his head.

asked the Prime Minister if his attention has been called to the last paragraph in the White Paper issued last week on the distribution of the property of the Church in Wales under the terms of the Established Church (Wales) Bill, in which it is stated that the present beneficiaries will retain their intersets in this property during their tenure of office in the Church in Wales; it has been estimated to be the equivalent of £62,000 a year in perpetuity; whether he can state who is responsible for this estimate; and whether it implies that the existing beneficiaries are not to be permitted to have the use of the money during the remainder of their lives?

The Prime Minister has asked to reply to this question. The estimate which I gave on the First Reading of the Bill is an actuarial one made by a Treasury official. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

May I ask if the existing incumbents are to be allowed to use up all the money during the remainder of the time they are in office; how can there still be £62,000 endowment in perpetuity?

It is only an actuarial estimate of the value of the life interest.

Was not this estimate made and given to the House again and again months ago, and has it ever been questioned before to-day?

My hon. Friend is quite right.

If it is only an actuarial estimate, why is it stated to be £62,000 in perpetuity?

It is estimated to be equivalent to £62,000 a year in perpetuity.

What is the real value?

Will the right hon. Gentleman send a Treasury expert to explain?

asked what is the number of livings in the presentation of the Crown affected by the Established Church (Wales) Bill?

The number of Crown livings in Wales and Monmouthshire to which the Prime Minister presents in full right is six; the number to which he presents alternately with the bishop is ten. The number of livings in Wales and Monmouthshire in the presentation of the Lord Chancellor is sixty-seven.

asked the Prime Minister whether the South Wales mine-owners have this week advanced the price of house coal by 2s. per ton, thereby bringing the price up to 26s. and 27s. per ton for best qualities; whether he can state the reasons for this increase in price; and whether, as the price of coal is inflicting hardship upon the poor and on the working class generally during the severity of the wintry weather, he proposes to introduce legislation to end this state of affairs, preferably by nationalising the mines and by empowering municipal authorities to undertake the supply of coal to their citizens?

The Prime Minister has asked the President of the Board of Trade to reply to this question. My right hon. Friend cannot hold out any prospect of legislation for the purpose of regulating the price of coal.

Are we to understand that the public of South Wales and elsewhere are not to be protected against this form of robbery?

I am afraid I am unable to suggest a remedy.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware of the existence of a general desire for a uniform system of weights and measures; and if he is able to appoint a Committee to inquire into the best method to be adopted to secure it?

Under Section 19 of the Weights and Measures Act, 1878, all contracts, bargains, sales, or dealings involving weight or measure have to be made according to the Imperial weights or measures defined by that Act, and the use of local or customary measures is unlawful. The only departure from the uniformity thus laid down has been that the use of the Metric system of weights and measures has been made permissive. My right hon. Friend is not aware of any general demand for an alteration of the present arrangements in the direction of greater uniformity, and he does not on the information before him see any occasion to appoint a Committee.

Would the hon. Gentleman consider the question of appointing a Committee if it can be brought to his knowledge that there is a great sense of difficulty about the situation at the present time and confusion caused by the different scales?

The question would then be reconsidered.

Is the hon. Member aware that there have been over thirty resolutions sent to the Government upon this subject from the Central Chamber of Agriculture asking them if they could not appoint a Committee to go into these matters?

I presume they have been before my right hon. Friend, but that would scarcely amount to the general desire which the hon. Member expressed.

If there was a large number of resolutions brought forward, would the right hon. Gentleman go into the matter?

If there is any general desire, the matter will certainly be reconsidered.

asked the President of the Board of Education what is the number of contributors to the Teachers' Annuity Fund under the Superannuation Act of 1898 who have not been awarded the annuity to which they were entitled on the expiration of their certificate, after having attained the age of sixty-five years; and what is the total amount of the contributions which they have paid?

The Board are not always informed as to deaths of teachers, and I cannot therefore say whether any contributors to the Deferred Annuity Fund have attained the age of sixty five years and have not claimed their annuities. In every case in which the annuity has been claimed, the amount due in respect of the contributions made has been paid.

Is it not the case that some time ago the right hon. Gentleman stated that a considerable number of contributions had been paid in respect of which no annuity was ever paid?

I would like notice of that question.

Would it not be possible to get the statistics?

No, because we have no knowledge of the dates when these teachers died. If they died before attaining the age of sixty years, they were not entitled to any share of their superannuation.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the Midland Leather Trades Federation applied for representation on the education committee about to be established by the Walsall Borough Council, and that, on a resolution drafted by the town clerk, the federation's request was refused; and whether, in view of the fact that the Midland Leather Trades Federation is the chief body of organised workpeople in the district, whose help is necessary for the success of the borough council's scheme, steps will be taken by the Board of Education so that no scheme will be sanctioned that does not provide for the representa- tion of such bodies as the Midland Leather Trades Federation?

The federation referred to in the question wrote to the Board on 23rd September last with reference to representation on the Walsall Education Committee. Their communication was forwarded to the Walsall Borough Council, who, however, declined to make any amendment in the scheme. The Board were not prepared to interfere with the discretion of the council with regard to the constitution of their education committee and the new scheme, which satisfies the requirements of Section 17 of the Education Act, 1902, was approved by the Board on the 16th October last.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury why those responsible for the supply of writing materials in the Library and elsewhere have been forbidden to issue further supplies of rough writing-paper and envelopes; why Members are to be in this way deprived of the opportunity of using any but very smooth writing-paper of an inferior quality; and whether he is aware that dissatisfaction has been very generally expressed by hon. Members in this connection?

I think there has been some misunderstanding on this matter, but I understand that rough writing-paper and envelopes are now available for the use of hon. Members.

Will the smooth writing-paper continue to be provided?

Yes.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the propriety of improving the quality of the smooth writing-paper?

My attention has not been called to this matter, but I will inquire into it.

The Publications Committee found that the most expensive paper used in the House was only used elsewhere in Buckingham Palace.