asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will lay the Report of the Court of Inquiry which was held at Hong Kong to investigate the circumstances attending the breakdown of His Majesty's ship "Prometheus" whilst on passage to that port in March, 1912; in view of the fact that she was fit for service on the Australasian station, why was it necessary to spend a large sum of money on her repair, as she had been in dockyard hands at Sydney for some time within the previous twelve months; and whether he is aware that while scraping the ship's bottom holes were made showing that some of the bottom plates had seriously deteriorated?

I am advised that proceedings of Courts of Inquiry are confidential and cannot be made public. But I may say that the disciplinary, action taken by the Board of Admiralty, as a result of the Court of Inquiry referred to, involved the supersession of one officer and the censure of another. On the passage from Sydney to Hong Kong considerable trouble with the distillers was experienced, and in consequence these had to be taken in hand on arrival at Hong Kong. The bottom plating was found, on examination, to require considerable repairs, which were also carried out at Hong Kong.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when he will make a statement with reference to the condition in which His Majesty's ship "Torch" and His Majesty's ship "Prometheus" were sent to sea whilst in commission on the Australian station in the year 1911?

I hope to be able to make a statement to-morrow if the hon. Gentleman will postpone his question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the following Sea Lords left the Admiralty in November, 1911, namely, Admiral of the Fleet Sir Arthur Wilson, Vice-Admiral Sir George Egerton, Rear-Admiral Charles Madden; whether Rear-Admiral Charles Briggs left the Admiralty in 1912; whether these officers were dismissed or resigned, and if he will state the reason; whether, on the 28th November, 1912, he wrote a letter to Admiral Sir Francis Bridgeman which left him no alternative but to resign; whether he is aware that actions of this character provoke uneasiness throughout the naval service in that they form a dangerous precedent showing that, in the event of the Sea Lords differing from him on technical matters connected with expert opinion, they are liable to instant dismissal?

The statement contained in the last two lines of the Noble Lord's question is untrue. The rest of the question has been fully answered by me on previous occasions.

Is it in order for the right hon. Gentleman sitting opposite when answering a question to state in regard to a statement in the question that it is untrue?

What particular epithet does the hon. Member wish to substitute?

If Mr. Speaker asks me, I should say incorrect.

Would the right hon. Gentleman inform the House whether Sir Francis Bridgeman ever threatened to resign on questions of difference of opinion between himself and the First Lord connected with technical matters requiring expert opinion which Sir Francis considered vital to the efficiency of the Fleet?

That is obviously a question of which notice should be given.

had on the Paper the following question: To ask the First Lord of the Admiralty whether Admiral Francis Bridgeman remained at the Admiralty during August, September, and October, 1912, whilst other Lords were away, having arranged that he should take his leave later in the autumn?

This question is postponed.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any communication was made to Admiral Sir Francis Bridgeman as to resignation before he went on leave; what was the date of the first official communication from him suggesting resignation; and whether at the time of the suggestion of resignation he had arranged that Admiral Sir Francis Bridgeman should be required to retire, and had received the necessary sanction?

My answer covers both questions of the hon. Member, and there is no advantage in postponing either of them. There is no advantage to be gained by attempting to argue this matter by question and answer, and I do not propose to go into details, which are fully covered by my statement to the House on Thursday last. If the hon. Member wishes to pursue the subject in Debate, the usual opportunities are at his disposal.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the answer which he gave on the subject stated that Sir Francis Bridgeman voluntarily sent in his resignation on the plea of ill-health? Is it a fact that the right hon. Gentleman intentionally wished to mislead the House as to the true state of the case?

That is not a proper question. It is not competent for the Noble Lord to suggest that a Minister intentionally misleads the House. I certainly should not have allowed that to appear on the Paper.

Would the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question as to whether the necessary sanction had been obtained?

Before I wrote the letter of 28th November I consulted the Prime Minister. In that sense the necessary sanction had been obtained.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay on the Table of the House a copy of the correspondence between himself and Sir Francis Bridgeman?

I certainly have no reason to shrink from laying correspondence on the subject, but I do not propose to do so, as it is private correspondence.

In view of the unsatisfactory answer of the First Lord of the Admiralty, I beg to give notice that I will raise the question on the Motion for Adjournment of the House on Friday.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can promise any assistance to the men of the Fleet, in cash or travelling allowances, to help them to their homes for the very short leave granted them after Christmas?

I regret I am unable to promise any assistance to the men of the Fleet for the purpose stated. So far as the service admits ships are being brought to their home ports for the purpose of reducing the travelling expenses of the men going on Christmas leave.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can give any information as to the outbreak of scarlet fever at Osborne; if he can give the date of the first case and give any reason why the notification of the disease to the parents was so long delayed; if he is aware that on the far side of the River Medina, opposite the College, there is a large and offensive refuse heap; that there are also several sewers emptying into the river, and that the consequent healthiness and amenities of the neighbourhood are seriously affected thereby; and if he will have these evils remedied?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers the question, may I ask if there is the slightest foundation for the allegations contained in the question as regards the River Medina, seeing that the Isle of Wight is one of the healthiest of islands?

I am afraid I cannot go into that. I will answer the question on the Paper. As I stated yesterday, there has been a recent outbreak of scarlet fever at Osborne, seven cases in all, the first occurring on the 1st November and the last on the 10th December. The disease was introduced into the college by a cadet. Notification of the disease was sent to the parents on 10th and 11th December, so as to prepare them for the holidays. Any earlier notification would have been useless since the incubation period for scarlet fever is about seven days. The drainage of Newport goes into the River Medina. Inquiries are being made as to the existence of the refuse heap mentioned.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that ordinary labourers employed in the stores department at Bull Point are able under existing Regulations to draw 1s. a day more than skilled workmen of ten, or even thirteen, years' service employed in more difficult and dangerous work; and, if so, whether steps could be taken to rectify, this apparent inequality of treatment?

It is possible for a labourer to receive 1s. a week (not 1s. a day) more than a skilled labourer when the latter is first appointed. The labourer, however, only draws the allowance when employed on special duties superior to fetching and carrying, whereas the appointment to the skilled rating is permanent and leads to higher rates of pay.

May I ask: whether a labourer now is able to get more wages than a skilled workman?

That is possible on certain occasions. The minimum rate is 22s., and a labourer might for a period get a 2s. allowance for special duties. That would make 24s., whereas the wages of the skilled workman is 23s., but he can go up to 28s.

May I ask whether ten to thirteen years is not rather a long time to wait for extra pay?

Would the right hon. Gentleman be surprised if it was stated that the unskilled workman in many cases gets higher pay than the skilled workman?

Yes, Sir, I should be greatly surprised

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether any steps are being taken to secure additional housing accommodation for the workmen at Rosyth?

I have already stated to the House that, though the Admiralty are under no contract obligation in the matter, of housing the workmen at Rosyth, I should not feel myself debarred from making friendly representations to the contractors respecting the matter. In pursuance of this undertaking, I have been in communication with Messrs. Eastern, Gibb and Son, and I am glad to say that they have met me very fairly. They propose to erect on the works, in the first instance, about fifty-four huts, which will accommodate in all about 726 workmen. The huts will generally be of wood framing, covered externally with galvanised corrugated steel sheeting, and lined internally with closed jointed boarding, after the style of bongalows. The firm also intend to provide a workmen's hall, a canteen and stores, etc. They assure me that everything will be done to make the accommodation as attractive and healthful as possible. I am glad to make this statement, because I am sure the proposals now put forward by the firm will make for the greater comfort of the men, and greater expedition in the progress of the works.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why this has been so long delayed, seeing that the works are supposed to be more than half completed?

It appeared, in the first instance, that the local housing accommodation would meet the needs of the men, but thereafter the firm increased the number of men, and now they are making the provisions which I have indicated.

Is it not a fact that they want two shifts, that there is not accommodation, and never has been, for the men, and that therefore they are obliged to provide this accommodation?

I have been in communication with them, and I say that we have gone very carefully into the matter.

After five years.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can give figures showing the shortage of men in the Royal Navy for the years 1906–7, 1907–8, 1908–9, 1909–10, 1910–11, and 1911–12?

The answer will be circulated with the Votes. [See Written Answers this date.]

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the figures for the last-named year 1911–12?

The figures are rather long, and it would not be convenient to the House. I am afraid I have not got the figures in my head.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can give any reasons why coopers' crews (Royal Navy) were not included in the recent increases in pay to the men of the lower deck; whether he is aware that a large proportion of these men have six years' service and could and have passed for higher ratings; and whether he can see his way to accelerate promotion in the coopers' crew rating, seeing that the coopers' crew is the poorest paid mechanic on the lower deck?

It is considered that their pay (2s. 6d. a day) is sufficient. Promotion has latterly been slow, but is expected to improve very shortly, and there will be very few who serve six years before promotion to second cooper. After four years' service in this rating they are promoted automatically to cooper, and in I this respect have an advantage over the other artisan ratings who are promoted in vacancies. It is not proposed to take any special steps to accelerate promotion.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have been for two and a half years asking questions with regard to the promotion of the coopers' crews, and when will something be done?

I have said that We have considered the matter. I am aware that the hon. Member suggested a Royal Commission to inquire into the whole question of pay. We have settled it long before a Royal Commission could report.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that a considerable number of coopers are married men and have to provide and keep up a complete set of tools without extra pay; that coopers' crews are now being sent to ships by themselves, thus having the same duties and responsibilities that until recently devolved only on coopers; and whether he can see his way to advance the pay of coopers and coopers' crews to correspond with the advances given to blacksmiths and armourers?

Tool money of 2d. a day was merged with the pay of coopers in 1889, the rate of pay of each grade being correspondingly increased. Certain ships are allowed one cooper's crew only in complement; the duties and responsibilities being such as this rating can be expected to undertake. The rates of pay were very carefully considered and it is not proposed to vary them.

asked whether, before this country is committed to acceptance of the naval proposals of Canada, the House of Commons will have an effective opportunity of discussing the matter?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether any records exist showing approximate wastage in horses during the Franco-German war; and whether he would state the losses on either side?

No statistics of the French losses are available. On the German side the loss of horses in action, killed, wounded, and missing amounted to 14,595. No returns are given of losses from disease, but these losses have been estimated to amount to about 26,000.

asked what was the wastage in horses during the first twelve months of the Boer war; and what was the proportion of remounts sent during that period to South Africa from the United Kingdom and abroad, respectively?

There are no figures available to show the actual wastage for the first year of the war or the number of remounts sent to South Africa during that period. Figures showing the numbers of horses sent to South Africa during the war will be found in Appendices 38 and 38a to the Report of the Commission on that war, Cd. 1789 of 1903; but it must be remembered that these numbers do not represent wastage only, but include horses required for newly raised corps of Irregulars and Mounted Infantry.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us the numbers?

No. There are no figures available at the War Office for the period asked for. The full numbers will be found in the Blue Book.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give me the numbers in the Blue Book?

I have not got the numbers. If I had I would give them.

How can I find out the numbers in the Blue Book?

Does the wastage of horses spoken of as occurring during the South African war include the mares in foal that were sent from Austria-Hungary?

asked whether there are any aeroplanes attached to the Indian Army; if so, how many; and, if not, how it is proposed, having regard to modern requirements, to conduct the Indian manœuvres without them?

There are no aeroplanes attached to the Army in India at present as the proposals of the Government of India on this subject have not yet reached the Secretary of State. Meanwhile manœuvres in India will be conducted as heretofore.

Will the hon. Gentleman ascertain from the Indian Government what steps they propose to take to equip our Army in India with aeroplanes?

asked how many men France maintains in her oversea Dominions by means of voluntary enlistment; and how many divisions she maintains in France by means of conscription?

In time of peace France maintains a Colonial army of 55,000 Europeans for service in her oversea Dominions, by means of voluntary enlistment. She has, in addition, a native Colonial army of 64,000 men, the majority of whom are voluntarily enlisted. Including Algeria, eight Cavalry divisions and forty-four Infantry divisions are maintained by conscription.

Is compulsory service in France in any way affected by voluntary enlistment?

That is a very large question. I think there can be no doubt that if we look at European countries, including France, it will be found that the system of conscription does not favour the enlistment of large oversea forces for service in time of peace.

Why is it that the French can keep 65,000 men abroad?

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

asked what is the exact present composition in effective machines and in personnel of the one airship squadron and three aeroplane squadrons which are now ready to take the field?

The mobilisation arrangements of the Royal Flying Corps are subject to constant revision as more men and machines become available, and it would therefore be inexpedient to state our resources for war at any particular moment.

If particular squadrons are ready to take the field now, does not the right hon. Gentleman know the number of aeroplanes and men there are now?

I did not say ready to take the field, and I do not think it is desirable to state—no other country does so—what are our precise arrangements at the present time.

asked why the training of the Artillery units of the Expeditionary Force is permitted to be seriously interfered with during the winter months owing to the fact that these units are compelled to train and mount Infantry in connection with transport duties?

In order that the full complement of trained men for the regimental transport of an Infantry battalion may be maintained, arrangements are made for the instruction of the men with a unit of Royal Artillery or Army Service Corps in the command. It is not considered that the training of the Artillery unit concerned is interfered with thereby.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of these Artillery units are employing more than half their present horse strength for the training of these Infantry?

We consider it very desirable that the units should be trained in this way. The Artillery train them very well, and we do not think that the Artillery service suffers thereby.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that the Artillery also have to be trained, and that they should not be handicapped by this training of the Infantry?

I repeat for the third time that the training of the Artillery units concerned is not interfered with thereby.

asked the Secretary for War if he can state approximately the total sum spent annually on the land forces of the British Empire and the total sum spent annually by France on her home and overseas forces; and what is the net result produced an the two countries as regards their striking forces, calculated in divisions?

The total sum spent annually on the land forces of the British Empire, including India, Dominions, and Protectorates, amounts to about £54,000,000, and that spent by France on her home and overseas armies amounts to about £41,000,000. As regards the second part of the question, no comparison can be drawn between the striking force of a country whose army is, to a great extent, concentrated at home and that of an Empire whose fighting forces are necessarily spread over the world for the maintenance, of that Empire.

If, as appears from the answer, we spend over £10,000,000 more than the French, and we have sixty-nine divisions less than they have, does the right hon. Gentleman think that a business proposition on our part?

I am surprised to hear the hon. Gentleman urge that we are spending too much money on the Army; that is not my view.

asked if the Secretary for War will circulate an Instruction from the War Office to all general officers commanding districts to take such steps as may be necessary to issue an order to officers commanding regiments, or other units in their command, enabling them to offer facilities for all officers and men (other than those undergoing detention or punishment) to obtain Christmas or New Year's leave for the same period as that granted by the Government to Members of this House; if this is impracticable, then for at least one week for officers and four days for non-commissioned officers and men; and if at the same time he will cause simultaneous instructions to be issued that no compulsory inspections or church parades shall be ordered either on Christmas Day or on the Sunday following?

Officers' leave and men's furlough are granted under the King's Regulations, the duration being published in Command Orders at the beginning of the leave season. In addition it is customary to spare as many officers and men as the exigencies of the Service allow at Christmas and the New Year. The holding of inspection or parades on Sundays is limited by paragraph 113, King's Regulations. Christmas Day, and in Scotch regiments New Year's Day, are treated as Sundays. It is not therefore practicable to treat these days differently from Sundays in respect of church parades.

Is not Hogmanay in Scotland a holiday?

I have not heard of that.

If New Year's Day is to be regarded as a Sunday in the Army, will the right hon. Gentleman convey that suggestion to the Prime Minister.

It is only so regarded in the Army, but not in Parliament.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India, whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that vacancies in the commissioned ranks (British) of Indian regiments are frequently left unfilled for several months, sometimes over a year; that inconvenience and loss of efficiency is thereby caused to the regiments concerned; and that commanding officers have been forbidden to make application for vacancies to be filled; and whether he would inquire into the cause of this action on the part of the authorities?

The Secretary of State has no information on the subject, but he will inquire.

asked whether the case of the young blacksmith, quoted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his speech at the Music Hall, Aberdeen, on 29th November, is that of an out-patient of the London Hospital, admitted on 16th October, on the recommendation of Dr. Smith; whether he was suffering from tuberculous disease of the spine; whether the house surgeon suggested to him that he should claim his benefit under the National Insurance Act, and a form was duly filled in and sent to the Middlesex Insurance Committee on 29th October; whether the committee professed itself unable to deal with the case, and asked the hospital to retain the case for three weeks; if, when he made the statement, the Middlesex Committee had done and stated it could do nothing for this tuberculous case or any surgical case of tuberculosis; whether the hospital, at the request of the hon. Member for Hoxton, kept the man for a period of forty-eight hours, and then until 7th December, and afterwards sent him to its own convalescent home at Felixstowe as a matter of charity; how, under these circumstances, this patient can be said to have received any benefit under the National Insurance Act; and whether any provision is being or has been made for him except the voluntary relief afforded by the London Hospital for a short period of time?

The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. The patient applied to the Middlesex Insurance Committee for sanatorium benefit on 5th November. I have no information as to whether his application was made at the suggestion of the house surgeon of the London Hospital or of any other person. The insurance committee did not state that it could not deal with this tuberculous case or other surgical cases of tuberculosis; but informed the hospital that they were endeavouring to make arrangements for him to be transferred to a suitable institution. They accepted the treatment of his case, although informed that the disease might require two years' treatment for complete cure, and he was sent to a convalescent home at Felixstowe on 7th December. The statement that his treatment there is a matter of charity is untrue; the insurance committee is paying for it from the funds available under the National Insurance Act.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the rate which is being paid is a charity rate arranged for the nurses of the London Hospital, and that the cost of the upkeep of the patient at the Felixstowe Home, which is the Convalescent Home for the London Hospital, would be at least the 35s. allowed by the Insurance Commissioners, according to their last memorandum?

The insurance committee are paying the fees asked for. If 35s. had been demanded, 35s. would have been paid. As a matter of fact 35s. is being paid for every other patient, and, if necessary, even more than that would have been paid.

Am I to understand that the London Hospital would be entitled to the 35s., and not the charity rate which is now being paid?

Certainly; if the hospital say they require a higher fee, I have not the slightest doubt that the committee will pay whatever fee is fair in the circumstances. Of course, if they discriminated against insurance patients, that would be another element in the case.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the statement made in this question so far as they concern myself are entirely inaccurate, the fact being that on the 6th December I was asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Stepney (Mr. Glyn-Jones)——

The hon. Member is not now asking a question, but making a series of statements.

In view of the fact that a statement is made in a question, subjected to a second edition, and both entirely inaccurate, in respect of myself, may I be afforded the opportunity of making a statement?

At the end of questions, if the hon. Member wishes to make any personal explanation, I am sure the House will be glad to hear him.

Was this patient on the 29th November being attended to by the Insurance Committee?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, on the 19th November, the Middlesex Insurance Committee did approve of this case for sanatorium benefit, and accepted the responsibility, and asked the London Hospital whether they could find a suitable institution; and whether the amount fixed was suggested by the London Hospital themselves?

The hon. Member must really give himself the trouble of putting on the Paper a series of questions like that.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the fact that the difficulty in coming to a settlement with the doctors under the National Insurance Act has been their lack of confidence in the intentions of those with whom they have negotiated; if, in view of the deadlock which now exists, he will have a statement issued containing the notes of the various conferences which have taken place on the matter, and of all the corespondence; and will he give an indication of the Government's proposals to meet adequately the first claims of insured persons on 15th January?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part, I would refer the hon. Member to the various statements which have been made to the House and the documents which have been laid on the Table, especially Cd. Papers 6305, 6328, and 6520. These contain, I think, all matters of importance referred to in the question, except perhaps a further explanatory statement which has since been sent to every medical practitioner in Great Britain, and-a copy of which is being laid on the Table to-day. With regard to the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the hon. Member for St, Albans Division on the 16th December.

How is it possible for this measure to come into operation by 15th January if arrangements have not been made in the meantime with the doctors?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider as to providing a further sum, beyond the amount already promised to meet the case of doctors whose patients reside in sparsely populated districts, to cover mileage in all country districts; and whether, in the event of no additional sum being at present available to meet such mileage charges, he will consider as to the allocation of 1d. of the amount per head payable in respect of medical attendance for each insured contributor under the National Insurance Act for that purpose?

The exact amount allocated for this purpose cannot be definitely stated until estimates have been received from the insurance committees in these particular districts. Full details are given in the Memorandum laid on the Table on the 5th instant (Cd. 6520), and if, as there stated, they are not sufficiently clear, I shall be glad to discuss the matter further with the representatives of the districts concerned. As regards the second part of the question, as pointed out in the above-mentioned Memorandum, there is no reason why arrangements should not be made in any area whereby a special fund for mileage could be formed from the general amount available for medical remuneration in the area.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Insurance Commissioners have issued a Memorandum, dated 6th December, to local insurance committees requiring them to issue on 12th December letters of invitation to medical practitioners asking them to enter into provisional arrangements for providing medical benefit to insured persons, and requiring the answer of the medical practitioners to be returned by 31st December; what reason is there for supposing that local insurance committees will complete in nineteen days negotiations which he himself has failed to carry out in nineteen months or more, and what powers the insurance committees have for granting better terms to the doctors than have already been offered by the Treasury?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The negotiations which have already taken place have so narrowed the issue that, as pointed out in the Memorandum referred to, there is now no need for protracted negotiations between the doctors and the insurance committees.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the latter part of the question?

The alternatives have been very fully set forth in the memorandum. I could not enter fully into them now, but there will be an opportunity to raise the question on the Motion for Adjournment on Friday. I understand that the question will probably be raised then, and I shall be able to state more fully what the proposals are.

Is it the intention of the Government that insurance committees should partially pay for these medical benefits out of the rates?

I am not sure that they could pay for them out of the rates. In any event, there is no suggestion of the kind. And it would be quite unnecessary, because the money provided by the Government is ample.

Is it the fact that insurance committees are empowered to offer better terms than the right hon. Gentleman has already offered?

They can only offer within the money placed at their disposal by the Government.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that threats are being issued against medical men who are asserting their right to go on the panels established under the National Insurance Act; and whether the^* Government is prepared to give their support to such practitioners who are declining to participate in a boycott of the medical service required under the Act?

I have received a number of communications asserting that threats are being used, and I am inquiring into the matter. The Government will feel bound to use all means at their disposal for the protection of any practitioners who may be molested from any quarter merely because they are engaged in discharging duties connected with the public health, undertaken by them under the provisions of an Act of Parliament.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see there is no peaceful picketing carried on?

asked the estimated amount to be paid out of moneys provided by Parliament for the payment of contributions of insured persons whose rate of remuneration does not exceed 2s. a working day?

The estimated sum for the payment of such contributions out of moneys provided by Parliament in the year 1912–13 is £87,300.

asked how, in the case of insured persons whose rate of remuneration does not exceed 2s. a working day, and where a contribution of 1d. per week is payable out of moneys provided by Parliament, the Government contribution of 1d. is being or is going to be paid; and whether, in the case of such persons, their insurance cards are at present only being stamped for 6d. a week in the case of men and 5d. a week in the case of women?

The Government contribution will be paid in accordance with the Regulations upon evidence that the conditions imposed by Parliament are fulfilled; that is to say, that the rate of remuneration of the insured person did not exceed 2s. per working day, that it did not include the provision of board and lodging by the employer, and that he was of the age of twenty-one or upwards. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the Government contribution of a penny is going to be paid, and whether it is going to be paid into the friendly society, and whether the insured person's card is going to be stamped by the Government?

The cards are already received for the first quarter, and contributions with the stamp for the Government penny, where it is required, will be paid to the National Insurance Fund.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the regulations to which he referred have already been made, or when they are going to be made?

I think I would like notice of that question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what is the population of the county of Derbyshire; and what is the yearly number of deaths from consumption in that county?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. The population of the administrative county of Derbyshire at the recent Census was 560,013. According to the figures supplied to me from the office of the County Medical Officer of Health, for the last five years the average number of deaths from tuberculosis has been 665 a year.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, on the basis recommended by the Circular of the Local Government Board dated the 14th May, 1912, 228 beds in sanatoria and other institutions are required in Derbyshire, and not sixty-eight, and that the cost of such beds at 35s. per week per bed is £20,748, and not £6,188?

If the hon. Member will refer to the answer which I gave on the 4th December he will see that the sum of £6,000 there mentioned relates to the cost of sanatorium and hospital treatment for insured persons only, whereas the Circular of the Local Government Board relates to schemes for the whole population.

In reference to the whole of the population——

I believe the county is considering a scheme for dealing with the whole of the population.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what number of beds in sanatoria is provided for in the scheme of the Derbyshire County Committee; what would be their cost at 35s. per week per bed; whether that committee has recently decided not to proceed with that scheme; and, if so, what course was decided upon?

The scheme proposed to provide 163 sanatorium beds and fifty hospital beds for the whole county at an annual cost of 28s. per week in the case of sanatorium beds, and 20s. per week in the case of hospital beds; it was proposed that three of the suggested sanatoria should serve also as sorting stations and dispensaries. The estimated total annual cost of these institutions is £12,189. Taking the insured population to be a little over one-third of the whole population the full proportion, or rather more than £4,000, might be derived according to this scheme from the Insurance Committee, and this would still leave rather more than £6,000, derived from the contributions of insured persons only, for other dispensaries and for dispensary and domiciliary treatment generally. The scheme proposed allowed only £800 for the services of general practitioners, and it will therefore require reconsideration in this respect.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he has received a draft of certain proposals for dealing with casual labour under the National Insurance Act from the hon. Member for Limehouse; whether this has been considered by the Insurance Commissioners; and whether the Government will undertake to make some alteration in the working of the Act on the lines proposed?

The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. No system of paying contributions upon a daily basis would be possible under the present provisions of the Act. At the same time, successful schemes have been already established in different parts of the country for dealing with casual labour under very varied conditions, and they are probably capable of considerable extension. I should be glad to discuss the situation with hon. Members, but until further experience of the working of the present schemes has been obtained, it must not be assumed that any change in the basis of payment by legislation will be required.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if a person claiming sick benefit under the National Insurance Act will have to produce a medical certificate; if so, who will pay for the cost of the same; and what arrangements will be made for these to be obtained in the event of an agreement not being arrived at with the medical profession?

A medical certificate is not required by the Act as a condition of receiving sickness or disablement benefit. It rests with the approved society to determine whether such a certificate should be required, or what other evidence they will accept?

Will the right hon. Gentleman give a reply to the last part of the question?

asked the Prime Minister if there will be an opportunity given on the Report stage of the Government of Ireland Bill of moving the Amendment to withdraw from the Irish Parliament the Joint Stock Companies Acts, under which so much of the business of the United Kingdom is now carried on?

The hon. Member's suggestion will be borne in mind when the question of the allocation of time for the Report stage of the Bill is before the House.

asked whether, under the Government of Ireland Bill, the subsidy of £500,000 will be paid entire to the Irish Exchequer in any one of the first three years after the passing of the Act, however small the portion of the year may be during which an Irish Exchequer has been in existence?

The sum of £500,000 will be paid in each period of twelve months dating from the day which is appointed under the Act for the commencement of the provision.

I beg to ask the Postmaster-General a question, of which I have given him private notice: Whether his attention has been called to a circular headed "Caution," sent from Birmingham to a farm labourer in South Kildare, who is a small depositor in the Post Office Savings Bank, to this effect: If the Home Rule Bill is passed into law the Irish Government will have the appointment of Post Office officials at once, and the Post Office officials, who would in that event have to handle all the deposits in the Post Office Savings Bank, would be appointed from political organisations. It urges these depositors to withdraw their deposits and place them somewhere else. Will the right hon. Gentleman have an inquiry made as to the means by which the names and addresses of the depositors have been obtained by some outside agency?

Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, I would like to ask him if ho is aware that this is not an isolated case? I know of my own knowledge that this circular has been posted from Birmingham broadcast all over Ireland?

My attention has been called to the circular in question. I find no reason whatever to suppose that the circular has been sent out by a Post Office servant, or that the names and addresses of Savings Bank depositors have been communicated to the sender. In fact, from a letter shown to me, the circular would appear to have been distributed broadcast, as stated by the hon. and learned Gentleman.

When the right hon. Gentleman is making the inquiry as to how this circular came to be circulated at all and how the addresses were obtained, will he ascertain whether they were sent out by a gentleman of the name of Patrick Michael Rosenbaum?

The hon. Gentleman showed the question which he desired to ask, but he did not show me that question.

Is there any way, Mr. Speaker, in which the circulation through the post of lying circulars of this kind may be stopped?

I am not aware of any powers entrusted to me which would justify me in stopping the circulation of such circulars, offensive and mischevious as these appear to be.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman the Postmaster-General——

The whole of this is really quite disorderly. An hon. Member asked a particular question, and on that there have been put a series of other questions not of an urgent character: it is quite improper.