asked the Secretary of State for War when the new rifle will be issued to the Regular Forces?

No pattern of new rifle can be finally approved until the result is known of the trial of the rifles which are about to be issued to the troops for that purpose. No date for the issue of a new rifle can, therefore, be stated at present.

asked whether the new Army rifle is to have a modified form of Mauser bolt; if so, who was the inventor of this bolt; and what is the cost of manufacturing the ordinary Mauser bolt and the new one?

There are features in the bolt of the experimental rifle which are similar to those in the Mauser pattern of bolt. The bolt was designed in the Royal Small Arms Factory. No information is available regarding the cost of the Mauser pattern bolt, and no comparison with the new bolt is, therefore, practicable.

asked if the Mark VII. pointed bullet ammunition has been issued to all the Regular Forces; and, if so, when it will be supplied to the Special Reserve and Territorial Forces?

All Regulars at home and Special Reserves have been equipped with Mark VII. ammunition. I am not at present in a position to make any statement as regards the Territorial Force.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the price of horses impressed for national service in time of war or emergency will be fixed by agreement between the owners and the Remount Department of the War Office or will be settled by the purchasing officers; and, if so settled, whether there will be any appellate tribunal competent to judge of the value of such animals?

The price will be fixed by each purchaser appointed on mobilisation, on behalf of the War Office, according to his opinion of the market value prevailing at that time. The owner, if dissatisfied, has a right of appeal under Section 115 (4) Army Act to the County Court Judge, who shall determine, after hearing evidence produced, the amount to be paid.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider the County Court Judge is an efficient tribunal to try such a question as this?

It has long been the law that he should be the person to fix the price, and I think on the whole that probably justice will be done.

May I ask, is there any maximum price?

There is none laid down in the actual contracts, but there will, of course, be a price beyond which we should not go.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that an adjutant of a Regular unit is provided with a soldier servant at a cost of 10s. a month and Government stabling and forage for his horse, but that an officer holding the appointment of adjutant of a Territorial unit, who is unable to obtain either a soldier servant or Government keep for his horse, is granted an allowance of Is. a day for a civilian servant and 19s. 3d. a week for the keep of his horse; and, as no civilian servant can be obtained for Is. a day and no horse can be put at livery under about 25s. a week, will he consider the question of increasing these allowances sufficiently to cover the cost entailed?

Soldier servants and Government stabling and forage are not provided for Territorial adjutants who are detached from their Regular units. These adjutants are treated in these respects in exactly the same way as other Regular officers similarly situated, and I regret that I cannot promise any increase in their allowances.

Why should those adjutants be out of pocket altogether to this' extent; and if they are given any allowance at all, why should not that allowance cover expenses?

You must consider their total emoluments, and then I do not think it will be found that it is inadequate.

Is the emolument of Territorial adjutant only half-a-crown extra per day for his adjutant's work?

asked how many additional light draft horses will be required for the Royal Artillery in the event of the Expeditionary Force being sent abroad; and how many of these are likely to be forthcoming as the result of the voluntary registration scheme recently-inaugurated.

As I informed the hon-and gallant Gentleman the Member for Bodmin on the 10th of last month, it is not considered expedient to publish statistics regarding mobilisation arrangements.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied, in view of the displacement of horses by motor traction, that he will have sufficient horses of the right kind for draft artillery purposes?

Yes, I am satisfied we shall have a sufficient number of horses to mobilise the Artillery. We made great advances in this respect in the last year, but, of course, more requires to be done in this and other countries.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has instructed the insurance committee not to allow people to make their own arrangements for medical treatment because the Government will not allow it; and, if so, by what authority he urges the insurance committee to contravene the provisions of the Act to which they they owe their existence?

I do not know to which of the 235 insurance committees the hon. Member refers, but in any case the answer to the first part of the question is in the negative; but I may again point out, with regard to the suggestion contained in the second part of the question, that an insurance committee is not required by the Act to allow insured persons to make their own arrangements for medical treatment.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he did not say they were so entitled?

I certainly did not. If I did the Act provides that they are not to be allowed.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has informed the secretaries of the National Insurance Medical Practitioners' Association that priority will be given to the doctors on the panels if whole-time appointments are necessary; and, if so, by what authority he offered this preference to doctors who accepted his views in preference to those who stood by the British Medical Association?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on the 1st January and to my letter, dated 18th December, 1912, which has been laid on the Table of the House.

Will this form a precedent for using public funds for breaking great industrial and other non-professional strikes?

It has nothing whatever to do with that. We simply propose this course because doctors refuse to place their services at the disposal of the State.

asked whether the Insurance Commissioners have approved of the action of the Middlesex Insurance Committee in agreeing that the sum pay able in respect of insured persons who have not before 31st March selected a practitioner on the panels will be divided amongst the practitioners on the panels; and if the Government has sanctioned offering those practitioners who accept its terms additions and emoluments at the expense of those who, maintaining their pledge, decline to accept such conditions?

Section 15 (2) (d) of the National Insurance Act and the regulations made by the Commissioners expressly provide for the distribution amongst the practitioners on the panel of insured persons who after due notice have failed to select a doctor and the distribution is to be carried out so far as practicable under arrangements made by the practitioners on the panel themselves. These practitioners are responsible for the medical treatment, if required, of such insured persons, and all money available to the Committee for the medical treatment of insured persons obtaining treatment from the panel will be distributed among these practitioners in accordance with the regulations.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether a doctor who has gone on the panel can refuse to take his quota of the distributed insured persons?

The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well there are special provisions in the Act dealing with cases of that kind.

Can a doctor, once he has gone on the panel, refuse to take persons distributed by the committee amongst the doctors on the panel?

As a matter of fact that has nothing to do with the question. The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well he can refuse, in the first instance, but there are provisions dealing with those who have not been already distributed among the doctors.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman, in answering my hon. Friend's question, say that those persons were to be distributed according to arrangements made with the doctors. I ask can a doctor refuse to treat those patients who are distributed—may I have an answer?

Are we to take it that although a doctor on a panel may refuse to attend a patient that same patient may be allotted to him by the committee?

No, I did not say that. If I did not make myself intelligible I will answer again. I said there were special provisions in the Act for distributing those who had been refused by all the doctors, but it is a very improbable contingency that every doctor on the panel will refuse the patient.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he organised or expressed his intention of organising a service of State-paid doctors ready to proceed to any area in order to break; down the opposition of the medical profession to working on the panel system?

In any area where the panel may be found to be inadequate the duty is laid upon the Commissioners of making alternative arrangements in conjunction with the insurance committee for the medical treatment of insured persons; and of such alternative arrangements that of a salaried service appears to be the one most acceptable to the insured persons themselves.

May I ask whether this forms a precedent for breaking down industrial and non-professional strikes?

The answer is a specific answer to the question, which is whether a State service is to be organised in those cases. I say that it is the duty of the Commissioners to see that adequate medical provision is made. There are two or three alternatives, and the one which is popular with insured persons is salaried service.

May I ask, where a State service is organised and put into force in a district, will insured persons have free choice of doctors?

Inasmuch as the insured person is fully represented upon the insurance committee which will be making the arrangements, I take it he would look after his own interest.

Has the right hon. Gentleman altered his mind since October last, when he stated that in such a case a person would be entitled to free choice of his own medical man?

I fail to see in what respect my answer differs from the answer I gave before.

If the doctors refuse to work under the Act, how can there be free choice?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will entertain a proposal for the 500,000 deposit contributors under the National Insurance Act to be united in the form of an insurance society with reduced fixed benefits, or with benefits contingent on the claims made, so that these persons who cannot obtain the ordinary benefits of an approved society may still have the benefits arising from the assurance of large numbers of persons in similar circumstances to themselves?

No such scheme would be possible under the present provisions of the Act. Section 42, which deals with the position of deposit contributors, does not remain in force after 1st January, 1915, and before that date I shall be happy to receive suggestions as to the best method of providing for this class of contributors. Further information as to the actual character and extent of the class and experience of the working of the present scheme of benefits will certainly be necessary before it can be stated what change will be desirable. I would point out, however, that a very large proportion of the present deposit contributors can at once transfer to approved societies, and so secure, if they desire to do so, a better form of insurance than would be possible under the scheme suggested by the hon. Member; and a considerable proportion have indeed become deposit contributors because they have deliberately chosen that form of insurance. May I add that although we estimated that there would be about 1,000,000 deposit contributors compulsorily, there are only half a million, and our estimate is that fully half of them become deposit contributors from choice.

Would it be possible to make some arrangement with one of the large societies so that these unfortunate people who are obliged to become deposit contributors—I am not referring to those who become deposit contributors voluntarily—could obtain some means of insurance through such a society?

I have not the faintest doubt that the large societies would be glad to take them over, because, as a rule, they are about the healthiest people in the country. But I think we had better wait a short time in order to see whether that is the best method of dealing with the problem.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether parish councils in Scotland, in granting outdoor relief to a person entitled to benefit under the National Insurance Act, should only take into consideration such benefit in so far as it exceeds 5s. a week, as boards of guardians in England are instructed to do under Clause 109 of the National Insurance Act?

I am advised that Section 109 of the National Insurance Act does not apply to Scotland. I am making further inquiry as to the views and practice of parish councils in regard to the matter.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15 (3) of the National Insurance Act, doctors' dispensers who are not registered under the Pharmacy Acts, 1852 to 1868, are afraid that difficulties may arise at some future time in establishing their right to dispense medicines supplied to insured persons; and will he take into consideration the question of arranging for the registration of doctors' dispensers either by the Insurance Commissioners or the Pharmaceutical Society, or the institution of some other effective means of safeguarding the position of doctors' dispensers and of those who have acted as dispensers to public institutions?

Section 15 (5) (6) (iii.) of the National Insurance Act clearly provides that in the case of insured persons medicines may be dispensed by a person who for three years immediately prior to the passing of the Act had acted as a dispenser to a doctor or a public institution, and I do not at present see the necessity for such action as the hon. Member suggests.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell me what is the position of a man who has been a dispenser for many years, and who for three years before the passing of the Act has been conducting a drug store dispensing prescriptions behind a counter in a chemist's shop? Would he be qualified or debarred?

The hon. Member must put that question down. A Minister can hardly be in a position to give an answer to a question of that kind without notice.

asked why the circulars, orders, forms, regulations, and memoranda issued by the Insurance Commissioners to Members of Parliament who have applied for them are not complete; and on what principle the supply of some is long delayed, while others are not supplied at all?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which the Financial Secretary to the Treasury gave to the hon. Member for Salisbury on the 9th instant.

asked in how many counties in Ireland have medical officers been appointed for the purpose of the tuberculosis sanatorium benefit under the National Insurance Act; in how many cases have such officers passed a special course in the sudy of tuberculosis or, where not specially qualified, if it is permissible for an officer so appointed to qualify by taking out his course in tuberculosis study subsequent to his appointment; and if the Irish Local Government Board will sanction such a proceeding?

The councils of twenty-two counties or county boroughs have appointed medical superintendents of tuberculosis dispensaries under the Tuberculosis Prevention (Ireland) Act, 1908. Two of these officers have qualifications as prescribed by Order of the Local Government Board of the 19th July last, which requires as a condition of appointment special experience in the diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis. In the other cases the officers are undergoing a special course of instruction. This represents the settled practice of the Board.

asked whether the National Insurance Commissioners have considered the case of the hundreds of snow-sweepers who are employed by the Metropolitan borough councils, often only for half a day, when there is a fall of snow; and what decision has been come to as to whether they must be insured?

Such persons, like other casual labourers, are employed within the meaning of the National Insurance Act, and the contributions are payable in respect of them by the employing authority, subject to the usual conditions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if any report has been received from the collector of Customs and Excise at Edinburgh or from the Procurator-fiscal on the case of the officer of Customs and Excise who committed suicide on 6th December; if a copy of a letter written by the officer just before his death, in which he said that he was being driven out of his mind by the overwhelming amount of work that he was expected to do, and for which he had neither training nor experience, has been sent to the Board; to what do such reports as have been received attribute his suicide; if there is in existence a letter written by the collector of Edinburgh to the deceased officer just before his death in which the collector admitted that the work was very difficult for a young and inexperienced officer, but begging him to stick to it as there had been eight changes of officers in nine months; if, since the suicide of this officer, two officers have been put in the station to do the work; and will he state why this important revenue station has been left without an established officer for nine months?

The circumstances attending the suicide of the officer in question have been fully reported to the Board of Customs and Excise by their collector at Edinburgh. No report has been received from the Procurator-fiscal. A copy of the letter written by the officer just before his death has been sent to the Board. It is impossible for the Board on the information before them to assign a definite cause for the officer's suicide, but they are satisfied from the reports received that the work of his station was not sufficient to account for it. The collector of Edinburgh states that no such letter as that referred to was written by him. It is not the case that two officers have since the suicide been put in the station to do the work. Assistance was given for four days in order to meet special work annually recurring towards the end of December, and such assistance would have been given to any officer in charge of the station. Owing to the great increase in the work of the Department, and the consequent increase in the number of stations, it was impossible to appoint fixed officers to all stations.

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that he is informed by the Board of Customs and Excise that the collector did not write the letter referred to in the question?

Yes. The collector states that no such letter as that referred to was written by him.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that a large proportion of the present Excise staff is now only in receipt of salaries sanctioned by the 1894 scale, whilst others are considerably below that scale; and whether he can hold out any hope that the scale will be revised soon, seeing that the volume and responsibilities of their duties have been materially increased by recent legislation and that the cost of living has advanced about 25 per cent, since 1894?

I am aware that if the 1894 scale were still in force certain officers might be now receiving under it as much or in some cases slightly more than they are actually receiving under the new Hobhouse scale. But this is only a temporary incident, as the new scale will bring them substantial improvements, both of annual increments and maximum salary. The new scale was fixed quite recently after long and careful consideration, and I see no reason to revise it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Excise officers are bringing frequent and forcible complaints before individual Members'? As they would appear to have some substantial grievance, may I ask whether this matter is really engaging the attention of the Department?

It has been engaging attention for some time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if any examination of surveyors of Excise origin for inspectors has been held since the amalgamation of the Customs and Excise; if not, will he state if any officers of Customs origin have been appointed to inspector ships which, if the amalgamation had not taken place, would have been filled by the appointment, after examination, of super visors of Excise; and when a chance of promotion to the inspectorate will be given to the surveyors of Excise origin?

The answer to the first paragraph of the question is in the negative. The old class of inspectors no longer exists, having been absorbed with other Excise and Customs classes in the new controlling grade under the Amalgamation Committee's recommendation. The answer to the second paragraph is in the negative. Nobody has been promoted to the new controlling grade since its constitution, except three officials of Excise origin who had previously passed the examination for the abolished post of Excise inspector. In reply to the third paragraph, I am unable to state when further promotions will take place.

asked whether Increment Duty would be charged in the case of a generous landlord who is anxious to forward the cause of education in his parish and is willing to sell land which has increased in value since 1909 to the educational authorities in his county at less than its real value?

On the assumption that the landlord sacrifices the whole of the increased value which may have accrued since 1909, the answer is in the negative.

Who will be the judge—the generous landowner or the Inland Revenue Department?

I do not think there will be any difficulty at all in that case. Of course, the valuer will be the judge.

Is he sufficiently protected?

I think so.

asked whether any decision has yet been come to as to the course to be pursued with reference to the decision of the High Court in the case of Bowles v. The Bank of England; what were the costs incurred by the Crown in this case; and whether any opinion was obtained that the Crown had a reasonable chance of success?

I would refer the hon. and learned Member to the reply which I gave him on the 6th November last on the matter raised in the first part of the question, and as regards the last part to the answers which were given to the hon. Member for Dudley by my right hon. Friend the Attorney-General on the 18th November last and by myself on the 19th of the same month. The total amount of costs incurred by the Crown (including those incurred by the Bank of England) cannot at present be precisely stated, but they will amount approximately to £572, exclusive of Mr. Bowles' costs, the amount of which has not yet been definitely ascertained.

Has any decision been come to as to the course to be taken in view of this decision?

I think I announced the decision of the Government on the date to which I have referred.

Is it not the case that the right hon. Gentleman then told me that he was not in a position to make any announcement?

I do not think so.

Is it in order to ask a Minister whether he has acted on the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown? I base that question on the fact that the Minister only is responsible, and that we have not been able to discuss the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown in Committee of Supply.

It is better to raise points of order at the conclusion of questions.

asked the Secretary for Scotland how many of the 5,352 applications for land under the Small Holders Act have been dealt with up to 31st December, 1912; and how they have been dealt with?

It is impossible to reply satisfactorily within the limits of an answer to a question, and I would ask my hon. Friend to wait for the Report of the Board of Agriculture, which is being made up to the end of last year.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say roughly how much capital is required by an applicant?

No, I could not say any definite amount without notice.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when this Report will be available?

Within a few weeks. I cannot say the exact date.

asked what methods are being taken to make the provisions of the Small Holders Act known in Scotland?

The number of applicants for holdings and enlargements of holdings is sufficient evidence that the general provisions of the Act are well known in Scotland. The Board of Agriculture have prepared leaflets dealing with the provisions of the Act; all existing small landholders, so far as they are known, have received a leaflet explaining their position; and the three Sub-Commissioners for Small Holdings have travelled over the greater part of Scotland interviewing applicants and other inquirers.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he proposes to adopt the suggested changes in administration in the Scottish Education Department contained in the evidence given by Sir John Struthers before the Royal Commission on the Civil Service?

The evidence referred to is still unpublished and confidential. The question, therefore, is premature.

Where did Hogge get it?

Does the right hon. Gentleman not recollect that he has already informed the House that he has never seen any of the evidence?

Yes, the hon. Member asked me some time ago whether I had seen any of the evidence before it was given to the Royal Commission, and my reply was that I had not. I thought that as the officials were asked to give evidence personally as officials, that it was not at all my duty to have anything to do with the preparation of the evidence.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether there is a considerable body of opinion in Scotland which considers that the courses of study laid down for non-university students in the training colleges are from many points of view unsatisfactory; and, if so, whether he will consider the advisability of appointing a Committee to inquire into the whole question of the training of Scottish teachers?

I am not aware that there is any considerable body of opinion of the nature indicated. But, as a matter of fact, the training of teachers is primarily in the hands of the various provincial committees which are composed essentially of representatives of school boards in all parts of the country, of universities, and central institutions, and of representatives of various grades of the teaching profession, and any proposals which these bodies may choose to submit for the modification of the system of training will be carefully considered. In view of the existence of committees so constituted, I consider the appointment of any special Committee of Inquiry unnecessary and inexpedient.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether the Educational Institute of Scotland, representing 14,000 teachers, has expressed strong disapproval of the present system of training teachers; that the Glasgow School Board has condemned the junior student system of training teachers and has ceased to nominate such students, and that other large school boards are contemplating the same course; and, if so, what steps he proposes to take to bring about a more satisfactory state of affairs?

I am not aware that the Educational Institute of Scotland has expressed disapproval of the present system of training teachers. I have certainly not heard of any such expression of opinion. The Glasgow School Board has adopted as an experiment the alternative method of the preliminary training of future teachers which is allowed by the Regulations and it is open to other school boards to do the same. I am not aware that the present system which allows these alternatives is unsatisfactory.

asked in how many cases the by-laws framed by town councils for regulating the hours during which places of refreshment in Scotland are to remain open under the provisions of the Burgh Police (Scotland) Amendment Act, 191], have been confirmed by the sheriff of the district in the form proposed by the town council; in how many cases confirmation has been refused by the sheriff; and in how many eases the sheriff has himself amended the by-laws before confirming the same, giving in each case the names of the burghs concerned?

The information in my possession does not enable me to answer my hon. Friend's question in detail, although I am aware that in certain cases by-laws have been amended in the proceedings before the sheriff.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will assist the volun- tary associations in approaching local authorities, public societies, and companies, etc., with the view of promoting the employment of ex-soldiers and ex-sailors of good character, by authorising the issue of a statement that could be used by the voluntary associations showing that the Postmaster-General and other Government Departments have adopted the principle of filling a moiety of all appointments, such as messengers, postmen, watchers, warders, park-keepers, attendants, porters, and similar situations, with ex-soldiers and sailors of good character, and that the extension of the principle throughout the country has his full sympathy, as an inducement to local authorities and public companies, etc., to imitate the action and policy of His Majesty's Government in this respect?

As the hon. and gallant Member is aware, both local authorities and private employers have full discretion in the choice of their employe, and His Majesty's Government would not feel justified in interfering with that discretion; but, as I informed him on the 11th December last, the movement for promoting the employment of ex-soldiers and ex-sailors in civil life has my full sympathy.

In any assistance that the right hon. Gentleman gives, will he take care that the interests of the soldiers of industry are not prejudiced?

I said I was not going to interfere with the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether any arrangements have been made with the joint stock banks to make advances to rural credit banks; if so, what interest will be charged on advances; and what conditions will be imposed on rural credit banks obtaining such advances?

I will circulate the answer, which is a long one, with the Votes and Proceedings. But I may add that twenty of the principal joint stock banks in the country have come into the scheme.—[see written Answers this date.]

May I ask whether, seeing that the same scheme has been tried in Ireland, and failed, and that a Departmental Committee of the Irish Board is now considering the matter, the right hon. Gentleman will defer the initiation of his scheme until that Committee has reported?

No, Sir, I could not think of deferring the initiation of our scheme. I think the sooner these co-operative societies can get cash advances the better.

Not on the wrong lines though.

When will the joint stock banks which come in be prepared to make advances, and when will the right hon. Gentleman circulate the information?

I will circulate the answer to-day. From to-day onwards any properly constituted co-operative society will be able to take advantage of the terms secured for them.

Does this scheme apply to Scotland also?

No, I am only responsible for English agricultural organisations.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, when he refused his consent to the enclosure of 368 square yards of the waste land of Sharlston Common for the purpose of extending the playground and conveniences of a public elementary school, he considered the educational needs of the case; whether he consulted the Board of Education or the local education authority of the West Riding; whether he is aware of the universal desire of the ratepayers of the parish, including those having commonable rights, that the school should be so extended; and whether his only objection was that the school in question happened to be a Church of England school?

I communicated to the Board of Education my decision in the case to which the hon. Member refers. I had no means of knowing whether the desire referred to in the latter part of the question was universal or not, but, even if it is held by the ratepayers and I was aware of it, I could not have allowed the present commoners to alienate common rights for the purposes proposed. My decision would have been the same no matter what denomination owned the school.

Is not the enlargement of a playground and the conveniences of a public elementary school a matter of public utility and public importance, and has not the enclosure of common land for public improvements been constantly sanctioned by the Board?

I cannot say what has been done in the past, but in this case I have published my decision, and I am not prepared to change it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer that part of the question which asks whether he has had any communication with the local education authorities of the West Riding?

That would not be my business. I communicated with the Board of Education, and the Board of Education have conducted any negotiations necessary.

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman is really taking a hand in the campaign of the West Biding Education Committee against Church schools? In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, I will raise the question on the adjournment.

I think it is a most unjustifiable statement that the hon. Gentleman has just made. I am acting, as President of the Board of Agriculture, in safeguarding common rights.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, at an early date, he contemplates taking steps to remove the embargo against Canadian cattle; and whether he will state what disease or diseases have occurred in Canada during the last two years which render such embargo justifiable?

There is nothing to prevent the importation of Canadian cattle into Great Britain at the present time, but under the provisions of the Diseases of Animals Acts they must be slaughtered at the port of landing. The Government do not contemplate legislation on the subject. According to information furnished by the Minister of Agriculture for the Dominion of Canada, the following diseases have occurred during the years 1911 and 1912: Glanders, dourine or maladie du coit, mange of horses and cattle, sheep scab, hog cholera, rabies, anthrax. Tuberculosis is general, and redwater prevails to some extent in British Columbia.

Does the Department of Agriculture consider that the diseases that the right hon. Gentleman has just quoted justify them in these restrictions?

The hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. The prohibition of the importation of Canadian store cattle is not the doing of the Board of Agriculture, it is the Act of this House.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think he would be justified in doing something by way of relief?

The prohibition is by Statute.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of purchasing an island off the West Coast of Scotland, and employing it as a permanent quarantine station for Canadian cattle?

Why is free trade not adopted in this matter?

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture if Sir Sydney Olivier will act also as Secretary of the Fisheries Branch of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries; and, if so, if he has had any previous acquaintance with the subject and the difficult problems now under investigation by a committee of the Fisheries Department of the Board?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I do not know how far Sir Sydney Olivier is acquainted with the problems to which the hon. Member refers, but I have no doubt that his administrative experience and ability will enable him to use the recommendations of the Board's expert advisers to the best advantage.

Are retired Colonial Governors of advanced age capable of pursuing the arduous study of the problems that arise at the Board?

There are two misstatements in the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. Sir Sydney Olivier is not a retired Colonial Governor—he is still in active service—and he is not of an advanced age.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether the late Secretary of the Fisheries Board, Sir Thomas Elliott, had any experience of fishery problems when he was appointed by a Unionist Ministry?

I would like to have notice of that; but my recollection is that Sir Thomas Elliott was private secretary to the right hon. Gentleman who is now a Member of this House before he took up his duties at the Board of Agriculture.

asked when Sir Sydney Olivier will take up his duties as Permanent Secretary of the Board; and whether, for a time after doing so, he will enjoy the benefit of the guidance and long experience of the present Secretary, Sir Thomas Elliott?

Sir Sydney Olivier will take up his duties as Permanent Secretary of the Board on 4th February next. From my knowledge of Sir Thomas Elliott I have no doubt that he will be glad at any time to give to his successor the benefit of his experience.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think Sir Sydney Olivier's knowledge of Socialism will be of any advantage to the Board of Agriculture?

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture if he has seen a resolution passed by the Wexford Committee of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, expresing an opinion that the twelve hours' detention period in the case of Irish cattle exported to England is ruinous to the Irish cattle trade; and what action does he propose to take in the matter?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I am convinced that there is no ground for the alarm expressed in the resolution to which the hon. Member refers, and I do not propose to take any action in regard to it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a similar resolution has been passed by almost every public body in Ireland that has any connection with the cattle trade?

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is now prepared to permit the resumption of hay and straw shipments from Ireland?

I propose to make a statement on this subject on Thursday next.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, as the result of the inquiries he has made of the harbour authorities and the railway company at Barrow-in-Furness, there is any prospect of that port being used in the future for the importation of cattle from Ireland?

Yes, Sir; plans have been approved by the Board, and I am informed that the work will be put in hand at once, with a view to the inclusion of Barrow-in-Furness at the earliest possible date in the list of British ports at which Irish stock may be landed.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture how long he intends to keep in force the present Order requiring a twelve hours' detention of Irish cattle at the port of debarkation; and whether, in view of the dislocation of trade thereby caused, with consequent expense to the English consumer, he can see his way to substitute a system of inspection of the cattle before shipment by veterinary surgeons appointed by his Board?

The temporary Orders now in operation regulating the importation of Irish cattle into Great Britain will be replaced at an early date by a permanent Order requiring that the animals shall be detained at the landing places for a period of twelve hours in order that they may be inspected, rested, fed, and watered before proceeding to their destinations. These objects, to which the Board attach great importance, could not be attained by the arrangement suggested by my hon. Friend.

How many Members of this House of any party have pressed the right hon. Gentleman in favour of this restriction?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the decision of the Glasgow Corporation in reference to the wharf, and has he heard that the profitable sale of cattle imported from Ireland is practically stopped owing to the regulation?

I am afraid I cannot accept the statement of my hon. Friend, and I should require to have notice.

May I ask what force of public opinion in this House the right hon. Gentleman claims is behind him in insisting upon these restrictions?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the names of any farmers or dealers in Ireland who have expressed an opinion in favour of twelve hours' detention?

No, Sir; but my duty-is to protect Great Britain from the risk of infection being brought into this country, and I must do that so long as I am in my present position.

Will the House have an opportunity of seeing the permanent Order before it is enforced?

The permanent Order has been fully described in this House at least a dozen times by myself, and I do not think it is necessary to have any further discussion upon it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the opposition to this Order is almost as strong in many counties in Scotland as it is universal throughout Ireland?

No, Sir. I am not aware of that. There is great variety of opinion I know, but I cannot accept every figure put forward as accurate.

It is accurate about certain counties in Scotland.

I desire to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture a question of which I have given him private notice, whether, in view of the serious complaints made by many persons on both sides of the Channel engaged in the live stock industry, more especially regarding store cattle and pigs, and as Ireland is now practically free from disease, he will relax and modify the existing Order so as to permit greater freedom of movement for the purposes of grazing and slaughter and enabling quicker sale and transit?