asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the statement made in the Report of the Poor Law Commissions that casual labour is the curse of modern industry, that it is deteriorating to a man and disastrous to his family, he can see his way to so arranging the taking on of labour in the Royal dockyards as to give a larger amount of permanent employment than is at present given?

As the hon. Member is aware, employment in the dockyards is to a large extent of a permanent character, and when discharges become necessary in one department every effort is made to absorb the redundant men in any vacancies which may exist in other departments. Of some 52,000 men in our employment, roughly 8,000 are established, and therefore cannot be dismissed save for misconduct; and of the remainder it is safe to say that three out of four are pretty certain of continuous employment. It is necessary from time to time to take on a comparatively small number of men to meet temporary requirements, for whom it is impossible to provide continuous employment, whilst in the case of coaling the work is necessarily of an intermittent character. Coaling labour is however, paid for at special rates, which are in excess of those paid for ordinary casual labour. I am fully aware of the disadvantages of casual employment, and would certainly desire to reduce it to a minimum; but I regret that T can give no undertaking in the sense indicated in the last part of the question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think he is reducing casual employment when the authorities at Devonport Dockyard at the present time are dismissing men with twelve, fourteen, and fifteen years' service? Is not that disastrous to these men and their families?

I said employment to a large extent was of a permanent character, and even of the hired men it was safe to say that three out of four were pretty sure to obtain employment.

May we understand these men who have such long service will be considered immediately there are opportunities of taking men on?

I have said if we have to turn men off for want of employment we make every effort to find them other employment, but I am sorry to say that is not always possible.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether certain Special Reserve officers of the Royal Flying Corps have graduated at the Central Flying School and been recommended for continuous service to the Naval Wing; whether, notwithstanding that, they are kept waiting without any remuneration, liable at any moment to be posted for service, and for that reason unable to take up any other work; and, if so, whether he will give instructions to remedy this state of affairs?

Only one gentleman who is a candidate for continuous service in the Naval Wing of the Royal Flying Corps has graduated at the Central Flying School, and he has been recommended for the Naval Wing. The gentleman in question, however, suffers from a physical disability which may prevent his being accepted, and the matter is now under consideration.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to a paragraph in the "Scots man" newspaper of 16th January, in which detailed information is given of the situation of the Admiralty oil tanks at Invergordon, the size of the field in which they are situated, their dimensions, capacity, the time at which the pipes leading from the tanks to the harbour will be ready to convey oil to ships, the number of tons of coal that can be stored on the site, the name of the Government boat now employed in laying down moorings, the extent those stretch up the Forth, etc.; whether he thinks that such information supplies all the details necessary for the purpose of espionage; how much information leaks out; and if any means can be taken to prevent newspapers publishing what ought to be secret and confidential information?

I have seen what is stated in the newspaper referred to. It is well known that much information relating to naval and military defensive measures has found its way, because its significance is not fully appreciated, into the Press to the detriment of the public interest; but it is believed that in cases where such information is recognised as secret and directly affecting the defence of the country, the Government may rely upon the cordial co-operation of the newspaper Press in preventing its publication.

May I ask whether there are any means at the disposal of the Admiralty whereby in the case of information being published which ought not to be published the Department can obtain from the editor or manager of the paper the source from which he got the information?

I do not think I have got any power of that sort.

Has the Admiralty directly asked various newspaper editors in the country not to publish this kind of information?

We are in consultation with some of the newspapers.

Not with all?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that on 1st April, 1915, we shall have only thirty-four completed ships of the "Dreadnought" type (excluding the battle-cruiser "New Zealand") to Germany's twenty-three, he will consider the advisability of placing orders for three armoured ships immediately, so that we have by the date named the margin of 60 per cent, over Germany in "Dreadnoughts," which the Board of Admiralty considers necessary?

It will be my duty to deal fully with the question of our margins of naval strength in introducing the Navy Estimates in March. I would only observe that, including the "New Zealand" and the two "Lord Nelsons," the figures should read thirty-seven to twenty-three, which is a superiority of 60 per cent.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will arrange so that ample time is afforded in March for the discussion of these matters?

Questions relating to business, as the hon. Member is aware, should be addressed to the Leader of the House.

I am asking the right hon. Gentleman if he will use his endeavours to arrange that we shall have ample time.

asked how many of the armoured ships, small cruisers, and destroyers provided for since and including the financial year 1906–7 by Great Britain and Germany, respectively, have been passed into service?

The figures asked for are as follows:—

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that, on 22nd July, it was officially stated that the organisation of the Fleet prior to the recent changes provided for the maintenance of sixteen battleships in Home waters and six at Gibraltar, where they were stated to be three and a-half days distant and a day for coaling, be will state the date and the grounds on which it was decided that Gibraltar is in Home waters?

Ever since Gibraltar was detached from the Mediterranean Command at the beginning of 1905 it has been recognised as occupying an intermediate position between the foreign stations and Home waters. For certain purposes it may be convenient to reckon Gibraltar in Home waters, but there is no intention of assuming that for strategical purposes its distance from home can be ignored.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he has received a complaint against the firm of Messrs. Forsyth and Son, sub-contractor, at the Rosyth naval base, for infraction of the Fair-Wages Clause in the employment of labourers doing painting work at 7d. per hour; and whether he is making inquiry into the matter?

A complaint of the nature referred to has been received. I am making inquiry into the matter.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the cost of the extra payments made to shipwrights and carpenters' crew, in virtue of the statement recently laid before Parliament showing the present and new rates of pay for the Royal Navy and Royal Marines, should be £24,000 and not £2,400 as therein stated; and, if so, will he take immediate steps to make the matter clear to the ratings in question so that the present misunderstanding may be cleared up without delay?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; by a printer's error the figure was shown as £2,400 instead of £24,000. The correct figure was, of course, included in the grand total. The correction has already been notified to the Fleet, and full instructions have been issued showing how the new rates will affect men no serving.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware this is the second great error which has occurred in the White Papers which have been issued by the Admiralty in the last six weeks?

No, I am not aware of that, and I will thank the hon. Member to call my attention to any grave errors.

asked the Secretary of State for War if the specifications for the electric installations at Tidworth and Bulford camps were prepared by a private firm; and, if so, will he mention the name of the firm and say why they were not prepared by the War Office electrical department?

The specifications in question were prepared by Messrs. Kennedy and Jenkins in conjunction with the War Office electrical staff. This staff, which is mainly employed on electric lighting for defence purposes, is not large enough completely to supervise extensive new installations such as the Tidworth and Bulford scheme.

Will the specifications for the further extensions be prepared in the same way or will they be prepared exclusively by War Office clerks?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked at what place the Armorduct cable, selected for the Army camps at Tidworth and Bulford, will be inspected by representatives of the War Office?

The firm of Kennedy and Jenkins, who are dealing with the installations in question, will inspect the cable at the works of Messrs. Lynen and Co., Eschweiler, near Aix-la-Chapelle.

asked the Secretary for War if his attention has been called to an advertisement circulated by the Armorduct Manufacturing Company, and setting forth that the Armorduct cable has been selected by the contractors to the War Office for the Army camps at Tidworth and Bulford, requiring approximately 300 miles; is this cable manufactured by Lynen and Company, Eschweiler, Germany; will he say who are the contractors who are providing the cable; and were all the competing contractors given an opportunity of quoting for German cable, or were they, or any of them, asked to tender for best quality English cable?

Nothing is known at the War Office of the advertisement mentioned. The cable is manufactured by the company referred to. The contractors are Messrs. G. E. Taylor and Co. All competing contractors were given the same opportunity to quote for any cable complying with the British Standards Committee Report No. 7 of 1910.

Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been drawn to an advertisement in the papers to this effect:—

"Is Armorduct cable good enough for you? It is good enough for His Majesty's War Office."

I have heard nothing of the advertisement. But I can assure the hon. Member the cable is fully up to our requirements.

asked the Secretary for War (1) whether the equipment of the Regular Infantry includes packs, while that of the Territorials does not; and, if so, what are the reasons for making this distinction in equipment; (2) whether, in equipment regulations of the Army, Territorial Force, he will include packs in the articles enumerated in Table 2, Accoutrements (V.), Infantry; and (3) whether he is aware that the military officer responsible reported, in the ease of the 6th battalion, Cheshire Regiment, that a pack is required to complete the equipment in possession of this unit, and that he made a similar report in the case of the 5th battalion of the Cheshire Regiment; and if he will explain how the commanding officers of these battalions are to obtain packs, in view of the fact that packs are not authorised by the equipment regulations?

The equipment of Regular Infantry includes packs. The type of pattern of accoutrements by Territorial Force units is left to the discretion of county associations provided that the equipment is suitable and can carry at least 100 rounds of ball ammunition. Some associations have provided similar equipment to that of the Regular Infantry. The pack is not considered essential and is not therefore included in the articles enumerated in the table of accoutrements mentioned. It is understood that certain inspecting officers recommended the use of the pack, but the question of adoption rests with the county association concerned.

If it is essential for the Regulars, is it not equally essential for the Territorials? Are not both forces prepared to go to war?

I should have thought the hon. Member would have seen the distinction between the two forces. The tasks required of them are different.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to say the Territorials do not need them?

The two forces are designed for different purposes. The Territorial Force is primarily designed for home defence, while the Regulars are designed for service abroad. Consequently, the equipment in each case is necessarily different.

But are not both—

The hon. Member cannot argue the question now.

asked the Secretary for War whether the Royal Flying Corps possesses at the moment any proper transport for aeroplane squadrons travelling by road; whether the Royal Flying Corps possesses a motor-driven travelling workshop; and whether proper trailers which can be attached to motor cars exist for the purpose of carrying aeroplanes by road?

The Military Wing has motor vehicles for transport of the squadrons by road; the full equipment is not yet complete. The supply of a motor-driven travelling workshop is now in hand, and trailers of the nature mentioned are now being manufactured.

asked whether the twenty-six aeroplanes belonging to the Military Wing of the Royal Flying Corps, which are said to be in flying order, include a number of monoplanes recently delivered; if so, whether alterations are to be made in these monoplanes; if so, whether they can be classed as being in flying order; and whether any officers of the Royal Flying Corps have had experience of flying these machines?

The twenty-six aeroplanes mentioned include thirteen monoplanes of which only three have been delivered during the last three months. The monoplanes are being examined and any improvement found to be necessary will be made; they are in flying order, though possibly some improvement may be desirable. The reply to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

Will these monoplanes come under the consideration of the Committee appointed to consider the general question?

Yes, Sir. All monoplanes must now be examined with a view to a full report from the Committee.

asked whether, in view of the fact that it is the general custom in the Royal Flying Corps for an officer to fly the same machine, the Secretary for War will consider the advisability, in the interests of the safety of such an officer, that others should be prevented from flying his machine; and whether the absence of any hard and fast rule on this subject is due to the fact that there are insufficient machines to provide a separate machine for each officer who flies?

It is usual for officers in the Royal Flying Corps to fly the same machine, but by no means invariable. Quite apart from the question of the number of machines, it is not considered advisable to limit the discretion of officers commanding squadrons in allotting machines.

asked the Secretary for War whether it is advisable that officers who are on probation with the Royal Flying Corps should do their course of training on machines belonging to the Military Wing in view of the fact that such officers are liable to damage these machines, which ought, in fact, to be in a fit condition to be used on active service at short notice; whether he will consider the advisability of buying a number of smaller, low-powered, cheaper machines on which such officers should practice without risk of damage to the materiel of the fighting squadrons; whether a new high-powered and high-priced aeroplane was recently broken up by such a learner on the day of its delivery to the Military Wing; and whether, in the public interest, he will prevent money being expended in this way when we admittedly have an insufficient supply of aeroplanes both for tuition and for active service purposes?

As regards the first part of the question, it is not proposed to interfere with the discretion of the officer commanding the Military Wing in this respect. As regards the second part of the question, the necessity of having aeroplanes for practice has been borne in mind in placing orders. The reply to the third part of the question is in the negative, and the fourth part of the question accordingly docs not arise.

asked the Secretary for War (1) whether, in view of the.good results of paying Army pensioners weekly instead of quarterly, he will consider the possibility of paying them weekly and leaving it to them to ask to be paid monthly or quarterly if they wish, instead of, as now, paying them quarterly and merely inviting voluntary agencies, who have not hitherto responded to the invitation, to undertake the distribution of the pensions weekly; (2) why Army pensions are distributed quarterly instead of weekly, when the latter method is admittedly better; and, if it is done for economy, will he state the amount of money saved annually?

Army pensioners are entitled by Regulation to have their pensions paid quarterly in advance, and a great number of them would object to any alteration of the system. Special arrangements can be made in individual cases for payment monthly or weekly. Up to the present time there have been very few cases in which such special arrangements have been asked for, but I am taking steps to give wider publicity to the fact that such arrangements can be made.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that those to whom the arrangement would be most beneficial are not the type of men likely to ask for it?

It is a difficult question, because these pensioners are entitled by the Regulation to receive their pensions in advance, and it is a great advantage to those who are steady men. In many cases it is desirable that a large sum should not be paid at once, and I am doing all I can to make it known that such an arrangement can be made. But I cannot proceed in the direction indicated in the question without great difficulty.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the serious results arising in the case of many men receiving comparatively large sums at long periods, and how much better it would be to pay them weekly?

That is the same question in other words.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of issuing Regulations to affect future pensioners so as to place them in a different position to existing pensioners?

I am not quite clear that in a great majority of cases it would be an advantage, as the bulk of the pensioners are steady, respectable men, who prefer to have their pensions quarterly in advance. There are, of course, a minority to whom it is not an advantage, and the matter is full of difficulty.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman revert to the system of weekly payments, unless special arrangements are made?

It is a difficult thing to arrange, even if it can be done without legislation. The men are entitled by the Regulations to have their pensions paid quarterly in advance.

asked the Secretary for War whether he has yet completed his inquiries as to the rates of wages at the Government Ordnance Factory near Selby; if so, what is the result of such inquiries; and, if such inquiries have not been completed, how soon he expects to complete them?

It has been decided to give an advance of 1s. 6d., and instructions are on the point of being issued.

Is the advance to be general, or does it only apply to this particular Department?

My answer applies to this particular case.

asked the Secretary for War whether, under the new horse registration scheme, the bounty of £4 proposed to be given to owners of horses suitable and available for draft Artillery purposes in times of national emergency is to be limited to those owning at least ten such horses; and, if so, how many of such owners are deemed to exist in the country, and how many horses of the right type are likely to be registered as the result of offering the above-mentioned bonus?

For the present remount officers are not visiting stables from which less than ten horses are tendered for the Artillery section of the horse reserve. Arrangements are being made for accepting a proportion of horses from small stables where the owners agree to produce their horses at one place for inspection. As regards the last part of the question, the Army Council is satisfied that the scheme will greatly facilitate mobilisation.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an opportunity to the ordinary farmer, who seldom has as many as ten horses of this type?

I will consider that. It is a little difficult to arrange in cases where a man may have but one horse.

asked the Secretary for War whether he will state the cost for 1912 and give the details of figures connected with expenditure on the post of Inspector-General of Overseas Forces and Commander of Forces in the Mediterranean; does the latter title still exist, and what staff is attached to the post; and what journeys of inspection have been undertaken during the year by the general officer holding the post, and what was the cost of each journey, respectively?

The cost for 1912 was approximately £7,000, of which £5,000 was for the Inspector-General and £2,000 for the staff. The title in question still exists. The staff consists of an assistant military secretary, an aide-de-camp, a staff officer to the Inspector-General, who is a brigadier-general, and a staff sergeant-major. Journeys were undertaken in the year in question to the Mediterranean, Singapore, Colombo, and Egypt, of which the first journey cost £300, and the remainder £920.

Is that £1,220 included in the £7,000?

I am not quite sure. I was wondering that when I looked at the question.

I am informed it is in addition to the £7,000.

In any case, the money has been well spent.

Is it necessary that the Inspector-General should travel by the "Mauretania" when going to the West Indies?

I think it is desirable he should travel in a British ship. But a question of this nature can hardly be dealt with in questions across the floor of the House. All I can say is that the inspections have been of very great value.

May I ask whether the inspection of the Legation Guard at Pekin could not be as efficiently carried out by a captain detailed from India as by an extravagantly expensive journey across Siberia by this general officer; if the inspection of the few troops at Singapore could not have been undertaken by a field officer and of those at Khartoum by a brigadier-general from Malta, instead of by this officer, whose journey up the Nile coincided with the height of the fashionable season in Egypt, and whether the sums so paid could not have helped to increase the pay of the poorly paid subaltern officer?

No, Sir, I do not think that the particular journeys to which my hon. Friend refers, could have been carried out so well by any other officer as this particular officer. His reports were, and will be, of exceptional value. With regard to future proposals for years to come, I have nothing to say now.

These matters would well occupy our attention later on.

asked the Under- Secretary of State for India whether he can give the House any information regarding the assassination of Dhebendra Kumar Ghose at Comilla, in Eastern Bengal?

The Secretary of State has received a report from the Government of India that the Indian referred to was killed by a revolver shot in Comilla Town on the evening of the 14th January. Two or three persons of apparently respectable class were concerned. Fuller particulars have not so far been received.

asked whether Mr. Arnold is still in prison; and what the India Office proposes to do in the matter?

Mr. Arnold is still in prison. The Secretary of State understands that; as yet application for special leave to appeal has not been nude to the Privy Council. At the present stage I can add nothing to the information already before the House.

Do the Indian Government propose to leave Mr. Arnold in prison, making no inquiry whatever into the conduct of the Civil servants concerned, and for how long?

Not at all. The moment the question is decided by Mr. Arnold as to whether he will apply for special leave to appeal, something will be done. If he applies for an appeal then the question of bail will arise, and if it is decided not to appeal the question of the severity of the sentence will be considered.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Mr. Arnold's law agent is now in this country arranging for the appeal to the Privy Council, and in these circumstances cannot he advise that Mr. Arnold be allowed out on bail until the appeal is taken?

Yes, Sir, I am well aware that Mr. Arnold's law agent is now in this country. The Secretary of State is only waiting until he takes some step, and then he will consider the matter.

Did not Mr. Arnold receive a trial on appeal by a full bench of the Chief Court of Burma, and is there any reason for showing any sympathy towards a man whose offence was so grievous and so desperately—

That is a matter of controversy.

Is not the real difficulty the very great cost of carrying an appeal to the Privy Council; is not the cost being met in Burma by subscriptions, and has not a very large sum been subscribed by poor people; and in these circumstances will not the India Office take action?

That is in the nature of a speech. I would remind hon. Members that there are over 100 questions on the Paper which are waiting their turn to be asked.

asked the hon. Gentleman if he will give the extract from the minutes of the Finance Committee of the India Council referring to the offer of Messrs. Samuel Montagu and Company to Sir Felix Schuster to purchase silver on behalf of the Government, and a copy of the resolution passed authorising the future purchases to be made through this firm?

As I informed the hon. Member on 7th January, 1913, the letter referred to was brought to the notice of the Committee on 10th January, but no recommendation was then made by them, and therefore no entry appears on their minutes. At various later dates recommendations for the purchase of silver were made by the Committee, the first of which was quoted in my reply of 5th November, 1912. These were in due course approved by the Secretary of State in Council. They are being circulated with the Votes. [See Written Answers this date.]

asked where, when, and by whom the arrangement was made between the India Office and Messrs. Samuel Montagu and Company that all purchases of silver should be subject to a brokerage of one-eighth per cent.?

The arrangement was a formal acceptance of the usual practice. It was made orally at the India Office on 1st March, 1912, between the Chairman of the Finance Committee, acting under authority given to him by the Secretary of State in Council, and Mr. E. L. Franklin, of Messrs. Samuel Montagu and Company, and confirmed in writing, as shown in the recently published White Paper. The Assistant Under-Secretary of State and the Financial Secretary at the India Office were present at the meeting on 1st March.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that nothing appears in writing as to the terms under which this contract was being carried on?

No. The question of brokerage is clearly described in the correspondence to which my answer refers.

Is it not a fact that the question of brokerage was not raised until after the first order had been given?

The question of brokerage was settled orally, and it was confirmed in writing as shown in the White Paper.

asked the hon. Gentleman whether the experience of the last nineteen years, since the closing of the mints in 1893, shows that the yearly coinage required to maintain the currency is 766 lakhs of rupees, of which a yearly average of 251 lakhs is supplied by the recoinage of worn and withdrawn coins, leaving 515 lakhs or nineteen million ounces to be provided by fresh silver purchases; whether on this basis the India Office during six months in 1912 made purchases equal to thirty-two months' requirements, or over fifty million ounces; whether this system of buying was arranged after consultation with, or on the recommendation of, the finance minister in India; and, if the above figures are inaccurate, will he give, as nearly as may be, accurate ones of a corresponding character?

During the last nineteen years coinage appears to have been at the rate of about 767 lakhs a year, of which about 559 lakhs a year have been provided from new purchases of silver. The India Office bought in eight months of 1912 about 50 million ounces, representing 28 months' requirements in new rupees from purchased silver. The decision not to buy until requirements could be clearly foreseen was in accordance with previous practice. In the present case it was reached after consultation with the Government of India, and was in accordance with their views.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer from what source the funds were provided for circularising the medical profession throughout the country in favour of working under the panel system and breaking the doctors' strike?

I do not know what circulars the hon. Member has in mind. The only document issued to the medical profession by the Commissioners was the explanatory statement sent out on 7th December to all registered medical practitioners in Great Britain describing the medical arrangements under the Act and Regulations, which has been laid on the Table of the House.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that a circular was sent round to all the doctors in the country on behalf of the strike-breaking association?

I have not seen anything of any circular, and I know nothing of any "strike-breaking association."

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether it is laid down by Section 18 (1) of the National Insurance Act that a mother is to have free choice of doctor and midwife for her confinement; and, if so, whether he will explain why the Commissioners have issued Circular A.S. No. 73, by paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), of which it is proposed that a limited list of doctors and midwives shall be provided with whom the society administering the benefit had previously made arrangements, and that the mother shall forfeit maternity benefit^*if she refuses to employ one of such listed practitioners or midwives; and whether this circular has the approval of the Government, seeing that it does limit the choice of doctor and midwife.

The provision in question is expressly recited in the second paragraph of the circular to which the hon. Member refers. The circular does not contain, explicitly or by implication, any such statement as that which the hon. Member attributes to it.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether in some districts, in London the nearest doctor on the panel is resident several miles distant from the insured persons; and whether he is prepared to remove this disability by allowing insured persons to be attended by doctors not on the panels who are willing to comply with the provisions of Section 15 (3) of Part I. of the National Insurance Act?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second part does not therefore arise.

If, as the right hon. Gentleman suggests, the answer is in the negative, will he allow me to bring to his notice something in the affirmative?

I shall be delighted to have any communications from the hon. Member.

asked the right hon. Gentleman whether the insurance committees in London and else where have any power to alter the policy stated by him when explaining the Government policy regarding the National Insurance Act at Whitefield Tabernacle on 14th October, 1911, that under that measure any insured person could have the doctor of their own choice?

I adhere to the statement which I made on 14th October, 1911. Providing the doctor is prepared to serve under the conditions of the Insurance Act, an insured person is entitled to his services under that Act.

Are we to understand that even if the doctors are prepared to serve under the Insurance Act the insured person is to have the choice of his own doctor?

Certainly. Any doctor has the right to go on the panel under the Insurance Act, and if he goes on the panel there is a free choice of doctors.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to imply that doctors who are not on the panel can come within the provisions of the Act, as he himself stated, and that the insured person shall have the benefit of the choice?

That is in the nature of a speech.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give his official confirmation in this House to the statement he made at Whitefield's Tabernacle that any insured person was allowed to have whatever doctor he required?

That is not the statement I made. I referred to the doctors on the panels. If doctors refuse to serve under the Insurance Act, there is, of course, no free choice of doctors.

These are really all matters for debate, which might keep the House sitting till next Session.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if list doctors are entitled to prescribe and limit the hours during which they will attend insured persons; is he aware that in some cases doctors have intimated that their services are only available for insured persons between the hours of 9 and 10 a.m., and 5 and 6 p.m.; and will he state what is the position of persons who cannot attend during such restricted hours?

The hon. Member is under a misapprehension. Each doctor on the panel is required to see patients at his own residence or surgery or other place appointed by him at stated hours, such hours being agreed upon between the doctor and the insurance committee. Any patient whose condition so requires must be visited by the doctor at the patient's own home.

Are not the times I have given the times at which some doctors on the panels have decided to see insured persons?

It is a perfectly normal practice amongst all doctors.

asked whether it is proposed to limit the number of patients which doctors on the panel are allowed to contract to attend; and whether such limit will exceed 3,000?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answers already given to similar questions by the hon. Members for Wolverhampton West, Enfield, Dulwich, and Eastbourne of 11th and 19th December, and 6th, 7th, and 9th January. No doctor ought to accept more insured persons upon his list than he considers he can properly be responsible for, and any insured person who has reason to believe that he is receiving inadequate attention from a doctor under the Act, can bring his case before the medical service sub-committee set up by the regulations.

Is there no limit?

No limit is laid down.

How is the insured person to know how many patients are on the doctor's list?

It is not a question of how many are on the list, but whether an insured person is receiving adequate treatment.

How can he find that out till he finds he has not got any?

Will he receive adequate treatment where each doctor on the panel has to attend 4,500 insured persons as in Marylebone?

asked if seamen on British-owned ships engaged in the Australian coastal trade and registered in Australian ports have to be insured under the National Insurance Act?

The seamen referred to would not be within the scope of the National Insurance Act unless the owner, or if there were more than one owner, the managing owner or manager resided or had his principal place of business in the United Kingdom, and even if this were the case only seamen who were domiciled or resident in the United Kingdom would have to be insured.

asked on what day the London Insurance Committee was fully constituted with representatives of all interests as provided for by Section 59 of the National Insurance Act?

The London Insurance Committee was constituted by an Order made by the Insurance Commissioners under Section 78 of the National Insurance Act, dated 10th July, 1912.

asked on what day the Insurance Commissioners were satisfied that the London Medical Committee was representative of the duly qualified medical practitioners resident in the county; and on what day the Insurance Commissioners recognised such medical committee, in accordance with Section 62 of the National Insurance Act?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to a similar question by the hon. Member for North Islington on Monday last.

asked what is the present cost of the National Health Insurance work which has been entrusted to the Customs and Excise Department?

I am not prepared to give any estimate at present.

If other officers are paid overtime why do not Excise officers get anything?

The hon. Member heard the right hon. Gentleman say he was not in a position to make any statement at present. It is no good asking for further information.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of Mr. Justice Horridge's recent decision in the case of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue v. Lumsden, whereby payment of Increment Value Duty was directed to be made on a builder's profit and where there had admittedly been no rise in the value of the site, he will introduce legislation to indemnify owners of houses and land against liability for payment of Increment Value Duty in cases where there has been no rise in the value of the site since 30th April, 1909?

Payment of Increment Value Duty was due on the case referred to in the question, because the builder realised a price considerably in excess of the combined market value of the land and the building erected by him. In estimating the increment value full allowance was made for the value of the house, including builder's profits; and the excess of price over value was in the nature of a fortuitous windfall, which under the Statute is liable to taxation. I do not propose to introduce amending legislation.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that these claims put forward by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue are in violation of the express and repeated assurances given by Members of the Government in the House, and under these circumstances is not some explanation due to this House?

That is not so. It is a grossly inaccurate statement.

I beg to give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment.

asked with respect to the estates of persons dying in the year ending 31st March, 1912, what proportion of the total value of such estates consisted of land and house property in the case of estates over £500 and under £1,000, and over £50,000 and under £70,000, respectively?

In the case of estates over £500 and under £1,000 of persons dying in the year ended 31st March, 1912, the proportion of the value of land and house property to the total value of the estate was 35 per cent., while in the case of estates over £50,000 and under £70,000 the proportion was 15 per cent.

asked how many officers of Customs and Excise, formerly officers of Inland Revenue, who entered the service in 1896, are in receipt of salaries less than those paid to their juniors who entered the service in 1898?

None.

asked whether the Customs and Excise services, which on 1st April, 1909, were placed under one Board of Commissioners, namely, the Commissioners of Customs and Excise, with a view to amalgamation, are yet amalgamated; and what number of officers, formerly Inland Revenue officers, have since the date they were transferred from the Inland Revenue Department been employed in the Customs branch of the service?

The amalgamation of the Customs and Excise services is proceeding, but the process is necessarily a gradual one. About ninety ex-Excise officers have since the date of the amalgamation been employed on duties which formerly fell to the Customs service.

Could the right hon. Gentleman, in view of the slow progress and difficulty of the amalgamation, see his way to abandon it and to work the service as formerly in two branches?

I do not think it would be desirable at all.

asked if the valuers of land and houses for the purposes of the Land Taxes have been instructed in their valuations to take into account the rise in the prices of all builders' materials, and the necessary increase in the cost of erection of houses at the present time, compared with the cost two or three years ago; and if this is taken into account in assessing the amount of the Increment Duty which may be claimed?

Valuers have been instructed that in estimating the site value on the occasion of a sale, lease, or death, the deduction to be allowed under Section 25 (4) (a) of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, is to be measured by the difference between the market value of the land in its then condition and its market value as a stripped site. The former of these valuations must necessarily take account of any rise or fall in the price of building materials which does in fact influence the market value of the composite property.

Has not a circular been sent out calling attention to the great rise in the value of materials?

asked the Prime Minister whether, if it is impossible this Session to afford facilities for the Factory and Workshop (No. 2) Bill, he can give any undertaking that facilities will be afforded to it in the next Session of Parliament?

asked whether the Government propose to pass the Milk and Dairies Bill through all its remaining stages in both Houses of Parliament this Session or whether it is proposed to defer its consideration until the beginning of next Session?

asked whether the Factory and Workshop (No. 2) Bill will be proceeded with this Session; and, if not, whether it is proposed to take any action in the matter next Session?

I fear it is not possible to afford facilities for proceeding with the Factory and Workshop (No. 2) Bill or with the Milk and Dairies Bill this Session. I can make no promise for next Session, but the claims of these Bills will certainly be considered.

asked (1) what is the maximum election expenses of candidates for election to the Irish Senate; (2) what will be the period between the issue of the writs and the day of poll in elections to the Irish Senate; (3) who will act as returning officers for the elections to the Irish Senate?

There cannot be an election for the Irish Senate for more than five years after the passing of the Act, and all the matters referred to in these questions will be regulated by Orders in Council under Clauses 9 and 45 of the Bill.

asked the Prime Minister if, in view of the fact that the offer of a gift of money for naval purposes from the Federated Malay States creates a new precedent, he will give this House an early opportunity of deciding whether such offer of money shall or shall not be accepted by this country?

There has been no departure from precedent. The course followed is identical with that taken when the New Zealand battle cruiser was offered to and accepted by His Majesty's Government. The usual opportunities for discussing such matters will be afforded when the Estimates are under discussion.

Is there any connection between a free State, such as New Zealand, and the Federated Malays, where the inhabitants have no voice in the acceptance or refusal of the offer?

If the hon. Member thinks it worth while to raise that question, he will have an opportunity of doing so.

asked, in view of the fact that the Franchise and Registration Bill is at the same time a Bill for the abolition of university representation, at what stage of the proceedings under the timetable Resolution Amendments to the title of the Bill can be considered?

The title of the Bill, if amendment should become necessary, can be amended at the conclusion either of the Committee or Report stage.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the magnitude of the constitutional change involved in the granting of woman's franchise, he could see his way to allowing the Amendments on the Franchise Bill on the question of votes for women to be freely debated without either closure or guillotine?

I fear I do not see my way to accede to the hon. Member's suggestion, but adequate time will, I hope, be allotted for the discussion of the subject.

May I ask whether, in view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman described the granting of votes to women—

The hon. Gentleman should not continue standing on his feet when I rise. It is a most disorderly proceeding.

On a point of Order—

There is no point of Order.

asked which Departments, if any, will present Supplementary Estimates for the financial year 1912–13?

I am not yet in a position to give the hon. Member the information he desires. Ample notice will, however, be given.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the fact that on the occasion of the periodical revaluation in 1903–4 increases of 41,549 in cottages and small houses and 85,797 in higher-class houses were shown as against increases in 1910–11 of 10,651 cottages and small houses and 25,506 higher-class houses, a difference of 91,189 houses, and having regard to the urgency of the housing problem, whether he will cause further inquiries to be made into the subject?

The hon. Member must know that the increases of 1903–4 were the highest on record. It is, therefore, not fair to cite them for purposes of comparison. So far as regards the provision of small houses and tenements—in regard to which the housing problem mainly exists—the figures for 1911–12, so far as they are available, point to the normal rate of increase being attained in that year, and I do not think therefore that any further inquiry is called for at present.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman now convinced that the short age of cottages and small houses is mainly attributable to the passing—

That does not arise upon this question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will furnish any official sources of information showing that unemployment in the building trade had considerably diminshed since the passing of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910?

The official statistics of unemployment are published monthly in the Board of Trade "Labour Gazette," and annually in the Abstract of Labour Statistics. From these sources it appears that the percentage unemployed among carpenters and plumbers, who are members of trade unions, was 11.5 in 1908, 11.7 in 1909, 8.6 in 1910, 5.0 in 1911, and 4.2 in 1912.

Is it not a fact that the figures which the right hon. Gentleman has quoted refer only to 72,000 men in the building trade, whereas 1,250,000 are employed in the building trade, and not more than 5 per cent, of those so employed belong to trade unions?

These figures have always been accepted as the test figures of unemployment in every trade. May I point out that whenever they tell against Free Trade they are always quoted.

rose.

May I point out that there are over 100 questions on the Paper.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, in view of the interesting but incomplete nature of the Report by the Departmental Committee on the duration of buildings, he will consider the desirability of re-appointing the same or a stronger Committee, with wider terms of reference, to collect all information regarding materials and methods of construction, and methods of increasing the durability of farm buildings and fencing?

The Committee to which the hon. Member refers was appointed for the specific purpose of inquiring and reporting as to the probable duration of buildings. I appointed at the same time a Committee with a much wider reference (a copy of which I shall be pleased to send to the hon. Member) to consider comprehensively and in detail other questions relating to the construction of farm buildings. The Report of this latter Committee, which I understand is expected shortly, will be complementary to the Report already published.

asked how many cases during the past three years arrears of Crown rents in Wales have been demanded of over five years' standing, and in how many cases of over fifteen years' standing, and who is responsible for the accrual of such arrears?

During the past three years there have been three cases in which demands have been made for arrears of Crown rents in Wales of over five years' and under fifteen years' standing; and twelve cases of demands for arrears of over fifteen years' standing. The responsibility for the accrual of such arrears rests partly upon the local collectors and partly upon the Office of Woods in London. Most of the rents did not exceed a few shillings a year, and the accrual of arrears occurred in consequence of changes of ownership and of difficulties in identifying the premises liable, which are in private ownership, and are rather vaguely described in the old records.

asked whether, in the case of arrears of Crown rents of long standing in Wales, the decision as to whether a claim shall be prosecuted rests with the Department of Woods and Forests in London or with the local collector of rents; whether the local collector of rents is paid a fixed salary or by commission on the amount recovered; in how many cases have erroneous or false claims been made; and in how many such cases has any expression of regret or apology been tendered by the Department to the persons concerned when the claim has been withdrawn?

The decision referred to in the question rests with the Office of Woods in London. The local collector is paid by commission on the amount recovered. Claims which turned out to be erroneous have been made in four cases within the last three years and withdrawn. It does not appear that in any of these four cases a formal expression of regret or apology was tendered by the Department, but mistakes of this sort are, of course, much regretted, and every endeavour will be made to avoid them in future.

asked whether negotiations are proceeding for the renewal of the leases of any of the lands in Regent's Park; and, if so, when it is proposed to give the House of Commons an opportunity of considering the whole question of renewals pursuant to his undertaking repeatedly given to the House?

As shown in the reply I gave to the question put by the hon. Member for St. Pancras North on the 21st instant, new leases have been arranged for three of the villas (including South Villa), negotiations are complete, subject to the issue of the Treasury Warrant, for a new lease of St. John's Lodge, and negotiations are pending for a new lease of St. Katharine's Lodge. In each case land, to which the public has not previously had access, has been or will be given up to the public on the grant of such leases, as I stated in the reply before referred to. The undertaking I gave was that land should not be alienated for the erection of public buildings without discussion in Parliament, and did not refer to relettings of existing houses as private residences.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that he will not give the House an opportunity of considering the question before the new leases are granted?

I did not say that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House an opportunity of considering the question?

It does not rest with me to regulate business in this House.

With whom does it rest?

asked what was the number, according to the Census figures of 1911, of persons of independent means not employed or engaged in any business, profession, or paid occupation?

The Registrar-General informs me that the figures required by the hon. Member will not be available for some time to come.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Miss Emily Edwards; whether he is aware that after having been taken ill on 20th July, 1912, she was certified on 22nd July as suffering from chronic lead poisoning; that on 3rd August she was told at Guy's Hospital that she had lead colic, and on 7th August received a certificate to that effect from the head doctor; that subsequently she obtained a certificate of lead poisoning from the certifying surgeon for her district and from a fourth doctor, by whom she was reexamined for greater certainty, but the medical referee on appeal pronounced against her claim; will he state whether the medical referee was qualified to give an opinion as a specialist in cases of lead poisoning; and whether he has any evidence besides that of the referee himself that the referee made any but a cursory and inadequate examination of the case?

A representation was made to me in November last with regard to this case, which was generally to the effect stated in the question, and said that the girl and her mother complained that the referee had made only a perfunctory examination. I made inquiries of the referee, who informed me that he very carefully examined the girl, and his detailed report on the case was such as to corroborate this statement. The medical referees are men of high standing in their profession and very carefully selected, and I do not think that there was any negligence on the part of the referee in this case in carrying out his duties. The referee was appointed, not as a specialist, but as one of the general referees possessing good general medical qualifications.