asked under what obligation a doctor on a panel lies to accept as a non-paying patient a person who chooses him as his or her medical adviser; and what redress has a person who, having chosen a particular doctor, is rejected by such doctor, or perhaps by a succession of doctors chosen by him or her?

One of the advantages enjoyed by a doctor who accepts insured persons on his list is that none of them are non-paying patients, and no obligation rests on any doctor on the panel to accept a non-paying patient. The Regulations provide for the distribution among the doctors on the panel of any insured persons who have been refused by the doctor whom they have selected, and so far as is practicable under arrangements made by the doctors on the panel.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether prosecutions of middlewomen for not stamping the contribution cards of outworkers in the Nottingham lace trade are imminent; whether he is aware that such omissions are due to the fact that the collection of this tax oppresses poor people; and whether the Government proposes to prosecute for such omissions in Nottingham?

Such steps will be taken as may be necessary to secure compliance with the National Insurance Act in the case of outworkers employed by middlewomen in Nottingham and elsewhere. The middlewoman will presumably look to the manufacturer for assistance towards the payment of the contributions, and from evidence given at the recent inquiry it appeared that the increase in prices of 2½ per cent. which the Manufacturers' Association in Nottingham agreed some time ago to allow for this purpose would be regarded by the middlewoman as sufficient.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he has seen the report of the inquest on the body of a domestic servant named Wear, who recently died at Enfield, at which the coroner said that, owing to clerical work under the National Insurance Act, the doctor had not been able to give proper medical attendance; and what steps the Government propose to take?

I have seen the report referred to. My hon. Friend the Member for Stepney gave a complete refutation in this House on Friday last of the suggestion that the doctor in this area was precluded from giving proper medical attendance through clerical or other work under the Act. The doctor called on the patient on Monday, 20th January, when he was unable to diagnose the disease from which she was suffering, and said he would call again on Wednesday, the 22nd. He was informed on Tuesday, the 21st, that she was worse, and sent some medicine. At 9.50 on Wednesday morning he heard she was dead. So far as insured persons were concerned, on the 21st instant the doctor signed eighty-two medical tickets, made one visit to a patient's home in addition to seven calls at his surgery; on the 22nd he signed forty-four medical tickets, paid two visits, and received six calls at his surgery. Whatever was the reason therefore for the patient not having her illness diagnosed, or not receiving further attendance, it was certainly not the doctor's work under the Act.

asked how many panel doctors there are in the island of Harris; where are they resident; and what is the population of the island?

The population of the island of Harris is 5,449; the insured population is estimated to be between 100 and 150, for whom two panel doctors are available, one being resident at Obbe, and the other on Berneray Island.

How are people several miles distant to be looked after, and why is there no panel for them?

A population of 100 cannot support a panel doctor, nor have they ever had a doctor resident in the island. What has happened is that the doctors who have been attending the people up till now have gone on the panel

Are all doctors on the island on the panel, and will the right hon. Gentleman tell us the size of the island?

As far as I know all the doctors on the island are on the panel.

Is not this the very question dealt with in the report of the hon. Member for Inverness-shire, and will it not depend on the action of the Government?

This House has already passed through Committee a Vote for a special sum to deal with these matters. Everyone recognises the special difficulties of the Highlands and Islands of Scotland.

asked how, in stormy weather, it is possible to get the panel doctor from Eigg to Canna; and, if impossible, can a doctor be got from the mainland if required urgently?

According to the last Census the island referred to contained twenty-nine inhabitants, of whom probably less than ten would be insured persons. It would, of course, be impossible to provide a special doctor resident in the island for this number of persons. A contingency of the kind suggested by the Noble Lord might arise, not through any defect in the Act or its administration, but through inherent difficulties of the situation. The whole question of the special circumstances of the Highlands and Islands is under consideration.

What are these men on the island going to do in the meanwhile, as they have to pay, they cannot get a doctor, and the Postmaster-General is going to cut the wires?

They will have the same right to a doctor and the same possibility of a doctor as they have ever had, with the additional advantage that they will now have money to pay for a doctor, which some of them did not have before.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he has now received any communications on the subject of the reported decision by the Perth Burgh Insurance Committee to fix an income limit for the purposes of medical benefit; whether he is aware that due public intimation of the intention of the committee was not given to those concerned; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

I understand that public notice of the proposal to fix an income limit was given by the insurance committee by means of advertisement in the public Press, and that a public meeting was held on Saturday last at which representatives of approved societies as welt as medical practitioners discussed the question. The insurance committee are further considering the question early in this week.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been drawn to the way in which the medical benefit is being conducted in the case of the men employed on the Admiralty works, Crombie, Fife; whether he has received any protests from medical men in the district; and, if so, what action he has taken in the matter?

I am informed that no complaint has been received by the Scottish Insurance Commissioners as to the administration of the medical benefit of the men referred to. They are, however, making investigations.

asked whether, in the case of employed insured persons who were over sixty-five years of age at the time of joining an approved society, it is open to such approved society, with the consent of its members and the doctors on the panel, to provide medical benefit and drugs for such insured persons out if the society's own funds?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he proposes to take any steps to deal with the case of men over sixty-five years of age who have contributed forty years to the funds of a society and are debarred from claiming medical benefits under the National Insurance Act; and, if so, in what way will those men be recouped for their loss?

Persons insured under Section 49 of the Act receive such benefits as their societies may determine; and a circular (of which I am sending a copy to the hon. Members) has been issued to societies giving a scheme of benefits for these insured persons, including the provision of medical attendance and treatment up to the age of seventy and reduced sick pay. Persons over sixty-five who are not insured under the Act are not affected by it unless their societies choose to take advantage of the option given to them by the arrangements made under Section 15 (2) (e) for securing attendance for them on the same terms as for insured persons.

Will this circular be sent to all Members of the House?

I will either have it placed in the Vote Office, if it is a Parliamentary Paper, or send it to all those who desire it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman call the special attention of societies to this third alternative form of benefit for those over sixty-five, and in the case of societies which have adopted either one of the previous alternatives, will they be allowed to change and adopt this third alternative?

I will answer both questions in the affirmative so far as the Commissioners are concerned. I will gladly call the attention of societies to the special circular because I think it is largely desired, and in so far as societies can change under the conditions of their rules, we shall offer no objection.

Will the right hon. Gentleman send the circular to the societies saying he will not object, and that he will give facilities? This is very important.

I quite agree. I will do everything I can to let them see they can do this.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that in Liverpool and elsewhere the accounts and registers of approved societies have, during the second quarter of the health insurance year, been placed in the hands of the auditors at their request; that after several weeks' delay and inconvenience, owing to the second quarter's cards coming in in their absence, they were returned without their having yet been checked for the first quarter; and whether the machinery of audit can be accelerated and improved so as to prevent a recurrence of this experience?

I have made inquiries into the matter, and I find that in two cases in the neighbourhood of Liverpool the return of registers was asked for by societies before the audit was completed. These requests were in both cases immediately complied with. I cannot find that in the case of accounts other than registers any difficulties of the kind referred to in the question have arisen. Instructions are being given to the auditors with a view to preventing such inconvenience as is referred to in the question from arising.

asked under what Section of the National Insurance Act the Commissioners hold that seamen on British-owned ships engaged in the Australian coastal trade and: registered in Australian ports only come within the scope of the Act when the owner or, if there were more than one owner, the managing owner or manager resided or had his principal place or business in the United Kingdom?

The relevant portions of the Act are Sections 48 (3) and Part I. (b) of the First Schedule.

May I ask whether the men do not pay any contribution, because they would not get any benefits under the Act?

I do not think that arises out of the question. The hon. Member has asked me to refer to Sections of the Act which lay down certain conditions.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the position of the fishermen on the Fife coast has been brought to his notice; whether he is aware of the desire on the part of those who are practically shareholders in fishing vessels to be exempt from the compulsory provisions of the National Insurance Act; and, if so, what steps he proposes to take to meet the desires of this industrious community, seeing that they are wholly dependent on a precarious livelihood?

I am informed by the Scottish Commissioners that applications have been received from the fishermen referred to, and that their claim is now being investigated. I will inform the hon. Member of the result.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he is aware that for the purposes of the National Insurance Act, Part II., about one-half of the firms of coppersmiths in Bradford are being trated as insured trades and the other half as uninsured trades, and, having regard to the fact that there is no essential difference between the class of work done at these firms, and workmen are therefore liable to be treated first as insured persons under Part II. at one firm, and then as uninsured persons at another, if he will take steps to have all these firms classed alike for the purposes of the Act; and, in the meantime, if he will explain the position fully regarding unemployment insurance of persons who work first for a firm which is treated as coming under Part II., and then at a firm which is not so treated?

Coppersmiths are only insurable under Part II. of the National Insurance Act when they are engaged in one of the trades to which that part of the Act applies, and the decision of the question whether contributions are payable in respect of any workman or class of workmen rests with the Umpire, and not with the Board of Trade. I am sending my hon. Friend copies of certain decisions of the the Umpire with respect to the class of workmen referred to in the question, and I would also point out that application may at any time be made to the Umpire for a revision of decisions previously given by him. As regards the second part of the question, the position of a workman who is employed at one time in an insured trade and at another in an uninsured trade is that he is liable to pay contributions only While employed in an insured trade, but is eligible for unemployment benefit (subject to the usual statutory conditions) if he loses his employment, whether in an insured or in an uninsured trade. As my hon. Friend will be aware, the amount of a workmen's claim to benefit depends among other things on the number of contributions standing to his credit.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that a patient in an advanced state of consumption recommended to, and receiving treatment in, a sanatorium in Stirlingshire under the National Insurance Act has left before the expiry of the period of treatment prescribed for him and has returned to his home and family; whether he is aware that the purpose of sanatoria is largely the isola- tion of infectious cases of tuberculosis; and whether, if compulsory isolation in a sanatorium over the period of active infectivity is impossible, he will supplement these institutions by health missionaries who will visit regularly the homes of tuberculous persons which are likely to be centres of infection in order to see that sanatorium conditions as nearly as possible prevail?

I am informed by the Stirlingshire Insurance Committee that the patient in question left the sanatorium without the knowledge of the Committee, and that no communication or application has since been received from him or any one acting on his behalf. Sanatorium benefit under the Insurance Act is, of course, optional and not obligatory upon the patient. Persons in receipt of domiciliary treatment are instructed as to the conditions likely to impair either their own health or that of their households, and insurance committees have powers under Section 60 (1) (b) to disseminate information of this kind in their several districts.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether a doctor has been provided for insured persons employed on the Alwyn reservoir, North Wales; whether he is aware that an insured workman recently lay ill at No. 3 hut from the Tuesday to the Friday without medical attendance; and whether he will inquire from the Denbighshire Insurance Committee as to their arrangements in this district?

I am making inquiries as to this case and will inform the hon. Member of the result.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury in what part of the tariff for drugs and appliances set up by the National Insurance Act are splints other than arm splints mentioned; under what Section of the Regulations can other splints be obtained without the patient having to pay for them; and in what part of the tariff is medicated wool mentioned?

The Second Schedule to the medical benefit Regulations issued by the Insurance Commission has provided that any kind of splints and of cotton and wood wools properly required as part of medical benefit can be claimed. The Regulations have laid down no such limitation as is suggested in the question.

May I ask why the tariff published only mentions cotton wool, and whether if this is a mistake, he will publish that medicated wool is probably the thing most wanted?

I think medicated wool is a variety of cotton wool which is allowed by the tariff in the Schedule. I am not aware of any limitation.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that a certain committee has already written to say that medicated wool is not on the tariff, and that therefore a patient will have to pay for it?

I am not aware of it, but I will be very glad to look into the matter if the Noble Lord will furnish information.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if a person holding the Apothecaries Society's certificate for dispensing, who has passed the Apothecaries Hall examination, has duly served his apprenticeship, passed the preliminary examination of the Pharmaceutical Society, compounded and dispensed medicines for thirty-six years, is now eligible to dispense under the National Insurance Act; and, if not, will he explain why?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to similar questions on the 5th instant. Section 15 (5) (iv.) of the National Insurance Act provides that nothing in the Act shall interfere with the rights and privileges conferred by the Apothecaries Act, 1815, upon any person qualified under that Act to act as an assistant to any apothecary in compounding and dispensing medicines.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he will kindly say "Yes" or "No" whether this person is eligible to dispense? It is a most important matter.

I think I shall require more information as to the exact position this person occupies. I have referred the hon. Member to the Section of the Act which deals with the matter.

I think the question gives the whole of the information, and I should like to have a direct answer.

There are many questions to which you cannot answer "Yes" or "No." The hon. Member has had a full statement, and he can refer to any questions which have already been answered.

I beg to give notice that on the Motion for the Adjournment I will raise this question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether quantity and price are mentioned in the arrangements with chemists for the supply of drugs and dressings but no mention of quality is made; and, seeing that the result is quantity and price and deterioration of quality known as the "insurance quality," will he state what action he proposes to take?

The Noble Lord is under a misapprehension. The agreements with the chemists stipulate explicitly that all drugs and appliances shall be of good quality.

asked what is the reason why the paper boxes in which the volumes of the Reports are sent by post are manufactured in Holland; if they are supplied to His Majesty's Stationery Office; and if no suitable cardboard boxes can be obtained of British manufacture?

The strawboard of which these cases are made is imported from Holland, as no strawboard is manufactured in this country. The boxes are made in London.

How is it possible for cardboard boxmakers to pay wages to their men—

That is not relevant to this question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the watchers of Customs and Excise are paid far less wages than those paid to dock labourers in the Port of London, and that the watchers' rate for overtime is only 6d. per hour; and whether, seeing that the Report of the Departmental Committee of inquiry into the conditions of work and wages of the Customs and Excise watchers has been received with dissatisfaction, it is contemplated by the Treasury to grant the watchers a living wage, which should recognise extended and approved service of more than ten years' duration, besides an overtime rate of pay commensurate with the difficulties of attendance on duty in the Customs and Excise service in the Port of London?

I am not aware how far the precise conditions of employment of dock labourers are comparable with Customs watchers. I would invite the hon. Member's attention to Subsection (3) of Section 16 of the Report of the recent Waterguard Committee, and remind him that, in accordance with the recommendations of that Committee, watchers have been granted two good conduct allowances of 1s. a week each after five and ten years' service respectively, and a time allowance for night duty under which six hours' duty counts as seven. The question of the rate of overtime is engaging attention.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that certain Customs officials, holding the rank of assistant and second officer, performed duties superior to that of assistants, and that for the performance of such superior duties they were promised an annual allowance of £10; and will he say why the allowance was not paid from 1st April, 1909, to 1st December, 1912, and why they were paid in the aggregate only the same amounts as if they had served as ordinary assistants?

I must refer the hon. Member to my answer to a question put to me by the hon. Member for Barrow on the 20th May last on this subject.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether in the Customs branch of the Customs and Excise service it was formerly usual, when the state of public business permitted, to grant a weekly half-holiday, either on Saturday or some other day of the week, to members of the outdoor staff; why was this privilege discontinued; and, in view of the trend of recent legislation, will he cause the practice of granting a weekly half-holiday to be introduced or reintroduced by express authority, subject, if necessary, to the same conditions?

It has been the general practice to grant a fortnightly half-holiday on alternate Saturdays to members of the outdoor staff when the state of business permits. At particular stations, where there is ordinarily no business on Saturday afternoon, the officers might often get a half-holiday every week, but there never has been any general practice of granting a weekly half-holiday. I am not aware that there has been any change in this matter. The question of a weekly half-holiday in relation to the Civil Service is under consideration by the Treasury.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether representations have been made by the officers of Customs complaining of the state of office accommodation in bonded vaults and warehouses; whether he is aware that in many cases the provisions in regard to space, light, lavatory, etc., are far below the requirements of the Factory and Workshops Act; and, in view of the fact that the present system of approving offices has resulted in dissatisfaction, will he consider whether it would be advisable to transfer the responsibility of fixing and maintaining the standard of office accommodation in the Customs and Excise to His Majesty's Office of Works?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I am aware that in some of the older bonded vaults and warehouses the office accommodation provided for the revenue officers falls short of modern standards; but I am assured by the Board of Customs and Excise that they are taking every opportunity of securing an improvement, and that the grant of new bonding privileges is always made conditional on the provision of proper accommodation for the officers. The whole matter, including the point mentioned in the last paragraph of the question, is receiving the careful consideration of the Board.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the delay which has occurred in the publication of the correspondence between the Treasury and the Scottish universities on the subject of the system of inclusive fees, he will consent to waive for this year the Treasury's caim to insist on the full adoption of the system before the increased Grant is paid; and whether, in these circumstances, he will pay to the universities the full amount of the increased Grant for the year?

The correspondence will appear almost immediately. I propose to defer further action until after its publication.

In view of the delay in publication, will the right hon. Gentleman consent to meet the universities by paying the whole Grant this year, seeing that they have shown their willingness to adopt not only the principle but also the active operation of the scheme so far as possible, though they require further time before they can arrive at a conclusion?

I will not commit myself to that policy at the moment. No immediate action is necessary. The whole correspondence will probably be published to-morrow, and perhaps I will be able to make a fuller statement before the Adjournment for the holidays.

In view of their need of money, were they not forced to accept the tight hon. Gentleman's terms by their poverty?

No one was forced by poverty to accept any terms. I want to find out what is the best for the Scottish universities.

asked the hon. Member for the Doncaster Division, as representing the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, whether he is aware that information as to the endowments of the four Welsh bishoprics, based on facts which the Ecclesiastical Commissioners refused to disclose to the Royal Commission on the Welsh Church, was furnished privately to certain hon. Members of the House for the purposes of debate arising on 28th January; and what steps is he prepared to take to secure that information in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners shall be fairly accessible to all Members requiring it?

I am not aware that any information refused to the Royal Commission on the Welsh Church by or on behalf of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners has been furnished privately to Members of the House for the purpose of debate. The Ecclesiatical Commissioners have in answer to questions readily furnished to all hon. Members asking for it such information as they could properly give with due regard to the interests under their charge, and I know of nothing more that they can fairly be asked to do.

asked the hon. Member for the Doncaster Division, as representing the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, if he will state how far it is the practice of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to let farms with cottages for labourers to tenant-farmers; and whether, having regard to possible hardships falling on farm labourers living in tied houses, and the difficulties of securing proper sanitation and repairs in the case of sub-let houses, assurances will be given that in future lettings cottages attached to farms will be retained and let independently to tenants of the labouring class?

The course adopted by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners necessarily differs with the circumstances of their farms, but it is an ordinary practice for the labourers' cottages to be in-eluded in the letting to the tenant-fanner; cottages are regarded as a necessary part of the equipment of a farm, and where deficient are provided by the Commissioners. The maintenance of the cottages in sanitary condition and repair is not left to the tenant-farmer, but is supervised by the Commissioners through their agents. Having regard to the necessity that cottages attached to farms should be available for the labourers on those farms, the Commissioners are unable to give the assurance for which the hon. Member asks that farm cottages should be let independently of the farms.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will consider the question of giving the name "Torbay" to one of the new battleships or cruisers?

No, Sir. Names have already been assigned to the battleships and cruisers of the present programme, and for the reasons which I have explained to the House in connection with the name "Plymouth," it is not the intention of the present Board of Admiralty to give names to His, Majesty's ships which might lead to confusion with harbours or naval bases.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can state how many battleships are in full commission in home waters instantly ready at the present moment, giving their names; how many battle cruisers are in full commission in home waters instantly ready at the present moment, giving their names; how many fully commissioned battleships and battle cruisers in home waters are in dockyard hands at the present moment giving their names; how many German battleships in home waters are in full commission instantly ready at the present moment, giving their names; how many German battle cruisers in home waters are in full commission instantly ready at the present moment, giving their names; and how many fully commissioned German battleships and battle cruisers in home waters are in dockyard hands at the present moment, giving their names?

I shall be quite willing if the Noble Lord will repeat his question in three months' time to state the position as it is to-day, but it is not desirable to make comparisons of current strength. I may observe, however, that meanwhile there is no ground for apprehension.

asked how it was that the ship's book of His Majesty's ship "Torch" showed no record of any survey of plating, as ordered by Article 1071 of the King's Regulations, of later date than 1900; why was no entry made of the surveys claimed to have been held in 1905 and 1909; and what evidence is there that these surveys were held?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether at various times before His Majesty's ship "Torch" was sent to sea in May, 1911, the steel upper deck had rusted through in many places and had been patched by thin plates of steel; whether one of these sheets had rusted through and had itself been patched by another sheet; and whether all these patches were secured solely by wood screws to the wood covering of the deck; (2) whether he is aware that a hole was scraped through the bottom plating while His Majesty's ship "Torch" was at sea, and that the commanding officer postponed further examination of the ship below the water-line rather than run the chance of developing leaks; whether he made a note of this and other defects in the ship's log, and a copy of this log is forwarded to the Admiralty monthly; and, if so, what action was taken; and (3) whether he will state why, if a completion cer- tificate was not required by Regulations on completion of the refit of His Majesty's ship "Torch" in May, 1911, was a certificate surreptitiously posted into the ship's book early in 1912 while the book was in the hands of the dockyard; why did the dockyard officers certify therein that all known defects affecting the fighting and seagoing efficiency of the ship had been made good; and why was the customary proviso, Being in all respects ready for sea, omitted from the sailing orders issued by the Commander-in-Chief?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether, when His Majesty's ship "Torch" was completing her refit in July, 1912, an attempt was made to undock her, but owing to the ship filling with water the dock was pumped out; whether, after some endeavours to stop the leaks, a second attempt was made with like result; whether, after further leak-stopping, a third attempt was made and the ship was floated, but shortly afterwards developed serious leaks and was docked for the fourth time; whether it was then found that some bolts or rivets had been omitted from holes in the bottom; whether any properly constituted court of inquiry was held into these incidents, and, if so, what was the result; whether this ship still has a leak in her fore shell-room; and when it is proposed to remedy this; and (2) whether he is aware that the loss of His Majesty's ship "Torch's" screw was reported by the commanding officer, who made an investigation at the time, to be due to a crack in the shaft at the point of fracture, which extended for two-thirds of the circumference and had a maximum depth of five-eighths of an inch filled with rust, while the diameter of the propeller shaft was only eight inches; and whether this fact proves that it was a longstanding defect which should have been remedied before the ship sailed?

I have given at Question Time and in debate full replies, on the subject of this vessel. Disciplinary action has been taken where necessary, and the case is now closed so far as the. Admiralty is concerned. In these circumstances I do not see any public advantage in pursuing the matter further in detail. The Estimates will be presented next month and will afford the usual opportunities for criticism, or, if necessary, for taking the sense of the House by a Division.

As the right hon. Gentleman in his statement has accused myself, among others, of having made exaggerated statements, cannot he answer these statements so that we may discover what is truth and what is not?

I think it much better to state these matters on the Estimates.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the Naval Estimates will be taken?

In the course of next month.

Does the statement which the right hon. Gentleman has just made refer as well to the personal attack which he made upon the character of an officer, as to which I have given notice of four questions to-morrow?

There is nothing about that in any of these questions.

asked whether Great Britain will have a 60 per cent. superiority over Germany in completed ships of the "Dreadnough" type on the 31st March, 1913; and, if not, how much short Great Britain will be of that percentage?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can see his way, in Section 2, Vote 8, of the Navy Estimates for 1913–14, to place the sum of money required for oil fuel, freight, and expenses of hired vessels in a separate category, and not combine these items with coal, patent fuel, etc., as at present?

I regret that I am unable to comply with the request of the Noble Lord, as it would not be in the public interest to publish the information in the detailed form suggested.

asked the names of the contractors for supplying the Navy with oil fuel; the locality from which the fuel is obtained; what is the present price of oil fuel paid by the Admiralty; and what is the present rate of freight paid by the Admiralty for oil fuel?

It would not be in the interests of the public service or in accordance with Admiralty practice to give details of contracts or charges. I may state, however, that the Admiralty invites tenders for oil fuel from all the large producers, and the bulk of the contracts have usually fallen to American and Roumanian contractors.

asked whether any Report has yet been issued by the Royal Commission on Oil Fuel; and, if so, whether he will lay it upon the Table of the House?

No, Sir; the inquiry throughout is strictly confidential.

asked the date that Rosyth will be a properly equipped naval base?

The contract date for completion of the engineering works now in hand is 30th September, 1916. The contractor is entitled to extension of time due to various strikes. This has not yet been adjusted. On the other hand, the contractor hopes to gain some acceleration on the extended contract date, as the Admiralty are offering a large bonus for earlier completion. It is not, however, possible to say at present how much acceleration will be achieved.

Have they discovered a bank of mud that was not in the original contract?

I cannot answer that without notice.

You cannot answer it! I thought you were a slinger of mud. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]

Is it in order for one hon. Member to say that another hon. Member is a slinger of mud?

The hon. Member is very fond of making very offensive observations. I have repeatedly called his attention to it, and I call his attention to it again, and that of the House, and ask him to behave as the other Members do.

Perhaps I may be allowed to make an apology to the right hon. Gentleman for what I said just now, which I beg him to accept.

I am very glad to accept it.

asked the terms of the arrangement between the Department and the contractors relating to the granting of permission to obtain a licence for the canteen proposed to be erected in connection with the temporary housing of the workmen at Rosyth, for enforcing good order and management, and especially as regards the police and the prevention of inducements for excessive drinking?

The terms of the arrangements proposed have not yet been settled, but Messrs. Easton, Gibb have promised to submit them for Admiralty information. As I stated, in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for West Fife on the 3rd instant, the Admiralty will not oppose the licence for the canteen provided it is run on certain lines, and the points raised by my hon. Friend as to the enforcing of good order and management will no doubt be borne in mind by the contractors in making their arrangements.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say why the Government, or one of its Departments, should grant a disinterested management licence to this canteen, when it refused to accept the Lords disinterested management Licence Amendment to the Scottish Temperance Bill?

We are not granting it; we are raising no objection to the granting of this licence to the canteen.

Why did the Government refuse the Lords Amendment then?

The Admiralty have no control over that matter.

asked whether the First Lord of the Admiralty can see his way to place men employed in the works department of the Royal dockyards on the establishment list; and, if not, will he explain the reason the Government advance for refusing to one set of men employed in His Majesty's dockyards the privileges as to pension given to another set of men?

Whilst the amount of work in the shipbuilding departments of the dockyards may be regarded as fairly constant, subject, of course, to the variations in shipbuilding programmes, the demands for building and engineering work are liable to fluctuations from time to time. These considerations have militated against the granting of establishment to men employed in the works department. The question has been frequently placed before me at the hearing of petitions, and is at present under review.

asked if the new overcoat is to be issued free to all ranks or, if not, then at what price is it to be issued; and if the old overcoats now in use are to be worn out or to be replaced at once by the new?

The overcoat is an optional article of kit and is not included in the free issue. The prices at which it is issued are: £1 1s. 9d. for petty officers and men, £1 4s. 5d. for chief petty officers. As is usual on change of pattern, the men will wear out the coats they have now.

Arising out of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, can he say whether the figures he has quoted represent the actual cost price to the Admarilty of the articles in question?

I think I can certainly say that the Admiralty make no profit on them.

asked whether, in view of the fact that we shall have twenty-nine ships of the "Dreadnought" type on the 1st April, 1914, and that Germany will have twenty-one, and that two or three of our-ships will or may be away in Colonial or foreign oceans, and in view of the fact that, in addition to these, four of our ships will be in the Mediterranean and one at Gibraltar, and that as, according to his own statement, 25 to 30 per cent. of our ships would not be available for immediate war at our average moment, the First Lord of the Admiralty can say what would be the number of our ships ready for immediate war in Home waters at our average moment, and what would be the number of German ships ready for immediate war at Germany's selected moment, on the 1st April, 1914?

These discussions can be more satisfactorily conducted when the Estimates are being debated by the House.

Is it the fact that according to the right hon. Gentleman's own statement we shall have a smaller number of "Dreadnoughts" ready for immediate war for the defence of the country against invasion than the Germans will have for attack on 1st April, 1914?

No; it is not the fact, nor anything approaching the fact, but I prefer to defer a general discussion of the Navy until we have a proper debate.

In view of that answer, I beg to give notice that I will raise this question on the Motion for the Adjournment on Tuesday.

asked what, according to their present programme, will be the completed strength of the German Navy in ships of the "Dreadnought" type in April, 1916; and what number of British ships will then be required to maintain the standard of superiority outlined on 18th March last?

The total number of German "Dreadnoughts" (including battle cruisers) on the date mentioned is computed at twenty-six. The British total, including the "New Zealand," the "Australia," and the two "Lord Nelsons," but excluding the "Malaya" and any vessels provided by Canada, will then be forty-three. Thus the standard of superiority referred to by the hon. Member will be maintained if the programmes announced to Parliament last year are carried out.

Will it not be necessary for the right hon. Gentleman to lay down eight battleships this year in order to maintain a 60 per cent. margin?

No, not on the basis I have stated. The figures indicated by me last year will suffice.

asked the total number of completed destroyers in the British and German Fleets, respectively; and how many in each case have been launched fifteen years or more?

Great Britain has 183 completed destroyers, of which forty-nine have been launched fifteen years and upwards. Germany has 124 completed destroyers, of which one has been launched fifteen years.

asked whether, when a man serving in the Navy has the misfortune to lose his reason and is sent to Yarmouth Naval Asylum, the whole of the pension he may have earned is appropriated for his keep, that his private property is sold by auction, without reference to his wife, and the proceeds held at Yarmouth until he is discharged or dies, and that his wife and family are meanwhile left penniless; and whether the First Lord of the Admiralty can see his way to recommend some modification of this Regulation?

Under existing arrangements the cost of maintenance of men sent to Yarmouth Hospital is borne by Navy Votes, the whole of their Naval pensions being surrendered. In cases of exceptional need, allowances from the funds of Greenwich Hospital, varying in amount from 4s. to 6s. a week, may be granted to the wives of such men, or to persons having charge of their children. Private cash, valuables, and other articles of a personal value which are not likely to deteriorate, accompany men discharged to Yarmouth, and are retained at the hospital pending the patient's recovery or decease. Other effects are sold at the port of invaliding and the proceeds of the sale are dealt with in a similar manner. As regards the moneys retained, the Admiralty are advised that there is no legal authority under which these can be paid away unless a committee or person with like powers is appointed under the provisions of the Lunacy Act of 1890. Any balance of wages due on invaliding is payable to dependent relatives under the provisions of the same Act. With regard to the last part of the question, I may say that we are considering the question of modifying the existing regulations with regard to total surrender of pension in the case of men whose pension exceeds 1s. a day.

asked whether, in view of the fact that the "Triumph" and "Swiftsure" have been transferred from the eighth battle squadron to the eighth cruiser squadron, he will state what arrangements, if any, have been made for the replacement of these ships in our list of effective battleships?

It is difficult to see why the transference of these vessels from one squadron to another in the same standard of commission should lead to any alteration in fleet strength.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention has been called to the death of Lead- ing-seaman Charles Anderson, who served in the Royal Navy for twenty-three and a half years with a first-rate character; whether his widow has any claim to a compassionate allowance; and, if not, whether, in consideration of the destitute condition of his family owing to his being out of employment, any such allowance can be made?

The late Charles Anderson had a total length of service of twenty-three years two hundred and fifty-four days, of which twenty years sixty-nine days counted for pension. He was discharged from the service on completion of time for pension with the rating of A.B., and was in receipt at the time of his death of a pension of £16 15s. a year. His widow has no claim to any compassionate allowance, and I regret that there are no funds at the disposal of the Admiralty from which she can be given assistance. If, however, there are any children between the ages of eight and fourteen in the ease of boys, and nine and twelve in the case of girls, application for their admission to orphanages or schools at the expense of Greenwich Hospital, could be considered. I will hand my hon. Friend the forms of application, but it must be understood that I can give no undertaking in the matter.

asked whether the Dock No. 14, now being contemplated or constructed at Portsmouth, has the last Fair-Wage Clause as passed by the House of Commons, as part of the contract; and, if so, can the right hon. Gentleman state why the trade union rates of wages for navvies and labourers are not being paid?

The Fair-Wages Resolution of the House of Commons, dated 10th March, 1909, is embodied in the contract for enlarging Dock 14, Portsmouth. As regards the rates of wages that are being paid, I am making inquiries and will communicate the result to my hon. Friend as early as possible.

asked the number of engine-room artificers who have entered the Royal Naval Reserve from, the mercantile marine for the last three years, respectively?

The numbers of engine-room artificers, Royal Naval Reserve, who entered from the mercantile marine during the last three years are:—

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any information as to why the number of these artificers has gone down for the Royal Naval Reserve?

I should say it is owing to the continued employment to be obtained outside and the high level of wages for the time being that the men are not so ready to go for three months training.

Has the right hon. Gentleman made any inquiries in regard to this matter?

I have not done so yet.

asked if the Secretary to the Admiralty's attention has been called to the case of Messrs. Frank Mills and Company, Limited, Sheffield, who are manufacturing marine flush bolster knives (No. 30), for which the trade price is 10s. per gross, and are only paying 8s. 6d. per gross; whether he can give any explanation why letters on this matter sent by the secretary of the Sheffield Trades Council, on 1st September, 1911, and on 26th June. 1912, have received no reply beyond a bare acknowledgment; and if he will inquire into the circumstances?

My attention has been called to the case in question. The firm state that they pay the agreed rate. There are, however, certain details of the matter still under investigation, hut 1 hope that our inquiries will be complete in a few days. With regard to the second part of the question, the letter of the 1st of September, 1911, was replied to by Admiralty letter of the 30th November, 1911, which intimated that the two firms then complained of had agreed to pay the rates claimed. The letter of the 1st of September, 1911, stated that Messrs. Mills were then paying the agreed rate, and as a letter addressed by the Admiralty to them confirmed that information, no action was then necessary in regard to this particular firm. The complaint against Messrs. Mills was contained in the later letter of June, 1912, in regard to which, as I have stated, I hope that our inquiries will shortly be complete.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that dissatisfaction exists in shipping circles because, while the Nippon Yusen Kaisha Company is able to undercut British rates between Hong Kong, Singapore, Rangoon, and Calcutta, owing to the liberal grant of State aid by the Imperial Japanese Government, no British ships may carry passengers or cargo from one Japanese port to another under the law of 17th July, 1911, which will be operative until 16th July, 1923, while Japanese steamers have, free access to the Indian coasting trade; and what immediate action the Government propose to take?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As to the last part, if by immediate action, the hon. Member means that the Japanese Government should be approached with the view to securing a satisfactory arrangement, the answer is that proposals with this object have been made already, and are under consideration. If, on the other hand, he means that retaliatory action should be taken immediately to exclude Japanese steamers from the Indian coasting trade, the answer is that, in view of these negotiations, this step is not contemplated.

asked if it is intended to introduce legislation, and, if so, when, to give effect to such recommendations of the Royal Commission on Divorce as are unanimous?

I must refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave on 19th December last to the hon. Member for Blackburn, to which I can at present add nothing.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of the recommendations such, for instance, as those dealing with the granting of separation orders by magistrates are now in consequence in daily operation?

I am not aware of that. The whole ground is very contentious.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the offer made by Mr. George Drummond in 1911, on behalf of Drummond's Bank, for enabling the completion of the approach to the Mall, to consent to an alteration of the bank premises, and to surrender the land liberated, free of cost, provided the county council would make the alteration and set back the buildings on the opposite side, he will endeavour to bring about a conference with the authorities concerned and other parties interested, with the object of carrying out the improvement in a manner worthy of the capital of the Empire?

While I should welcome such a, conference, I fear that I do not see that the Government could usefully at this moment take any steps in the matter.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen two letters in the "Times" from Sir John Benn and Mr. Hayes Fisher, in which, as representing the two parties in the London County Council, they practically agree that the final completion of this national movement should not be treated as a party question?

The hon. Member had better hand in his question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to consider the allocation of the £60,000 surplus in hand from the Memorial Grant in order that the road may be completed?

The hon. Member had better give notice. This has nothing to do with the question on the Paper.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, with his usual courtesy, permit me to see him for about five minutes?

Nothing would give me greater pleasure.

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether a comprehensive Bill dealing with every grade of education in England and Wales will be the chief Government measure of next Session; and, if so, whether, before the introduction of such Bill, he will state in outline the nature of the Government's education policy; and (2) whether the proposed Education Bill of the Government promised for next Session will deal with education only or will include provisions relating to interdenominational religious controversy?

As I have already said, it would at present be premature to make any statement with regard to the business of next Session.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give some opportunity to the local education authorities to consider the Government's education proposals in outline before they are crystallised in the form of a Bill?

Ample notice will be given of any proposals which the Government have to make.

asked when the House will have an opportunity of discussing the report of Mr. Pope on married women outworkers?

The report referred to is the result of an inquiry into the objections raised against the draft special Order including married women outworkers within the provisions of Part I. of the National Insurance Act. It is a report to the Commissioners, who do not propose to modify or withdraw the Order, which was liable to challenge when it was first issued.

Was it possible to challenge it, seeing that the Government had taken all the time of the House?

I believe it could have been challenged at the time, and I am not sure that it could not have been challenged after eleven o'clock at night.

asked whether the impossibility of obtaining free and unfettered evidence as regards the conditions of rural life was considered by the Government as a reason against the appointment of a Commission or Select Committee to take any further evidence on which to found legislation; and whether such alleged reluctance to give evidence is the sole reason for the appointment of an unofficial and informal Committee to ascertain the particulars desired?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave on 5th November last to the hon. and gallant Member for the Hornscastle Division in reply to a question on this subject.