asked the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether he has received any petition from the coxswains and drivers employed in the torpedo range in Plymouth Sound; whether he is aware that these men's wages are below the wages of men doing similar work on dockyard duties; that the work of the torpedo range is dangerous and responsible; and whether, in view of the further facts that the cost of living has increased so much of late years that the purchasing power of wages has considerably diminished, and that these men have only received 1s. advance during the last eight years, he can see his way to place their wages on a level with men doing similar work on dockyard duties?

The men in question are rated as skilled labourers employed as coxswains and drivers on the steam launches, attending the torpedo range, and a petition on their behalf was received at the hearing of the Devonport petitions. I cannot admit the contention that their wages are below the wages of men doing similar work in the dockyards. As skilled labourers, the scale of wages for these men is as follows: Probationary minimum for one year 23s. a week, ordinary minimum thereafter 24s., ordinary maximum 28s. Beyond this there is, for skilled labourers, a special rate, the maximum of which is 31s. So far these men have not participated in this rate. I am considering the question of their eligibility.

When does the right hon. Gentleman hope to be in a position to answer the petitions?

The answers to the petitions will be communicated in due course, except where they have already been answered by concessions.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty if the Isca Foundry, Newport, is on the list of Admiralty contractors; if he is aware that the firm is unfair both as to hours and wages; and will he see that this firm conform to current labour conditions for Admiralty work and also that they conform to current labour conditions as a condition to getting further contracts?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; to the second, no information is available at present; and to the third part, I have received a complaint from my hon. Friend and inquiry will be made.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many merchant ships have now been supplied with guns by the Admiralty to defend them against their hypothetical enemies?

Two ships.

Have there been any naval engagements yet?

No, Sir.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will give the names of the firms which provide ships, guns, and gun-mountings for the Royal Navy; whether any, and, if so, which of these firms arc also interested as shareholders in foreign establishments for the equipment of foreign fleets; and whether such establishments in which British shareholders have substantial holdings would be able to supply foreign navies with equipment in the event of this country being involved in hostilities with such navies?

It is contrary to the practice of the Admiralty to make known the names of firms on its contractors' lists. There is no precise official information available, at any rate in the Admiralty, as to the second and third parts two and three of the question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to inquire, and give the House the information asked for in parts two and three of the question?

Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the decision not to make known the names of these firms?

The practice has been arrived at as the result of many years' Parliamentary supervision, and the reasons have on many occasions been given to the House. I shall be very glad to discuss this on a suitable occasion. So far as the second and third parts of the question are concerned, it is really going outside the regular work of the Admiralty, and is work for which we have not any special facilities to inquire into the dealings of particular firms, or the relations between the shareholders and the various companies.

In view of the revelations in this connection, both at home and abroad, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the whole question of the position of these firms?

I am not aware, so far as this country is concerned, of any revelations of a startling character; and I have not had put before me any accounts which would lead the Admiralty to embark on a new or a different policy in regard to the various contracting firms with which the Admiralty are dealing at the present time.

asked how many of the four battle cruisers of the "Invincible" type which he announced in July last would be sent to the Mediterranean during the last winter have been actually sent; and what is the present "Dreadnought" strength of the Triple Alliance in the Mediterranean?

Delays in the completion of the "Princess Royal" and the "Queen Mary," and the temporary absence of the "New Zealand," have somewhat retarded the formation of the Second Battle Cruiser Squadron in the Mediterranean. The "Inflexible" alone is there at present, the place of her consorts being temporarily filled, and more than filled, by five battleships of the "King Edward VII" class. There are three "Dreadnoughts" belonging to the Powers of the Triple Alliance now in the Mediterranean.

asked what battleships, cruisers, torpedo boats, and submarines belonging to this country are now in the Mediterranean, not including those stationed at Gibraltar?

The figures desired by the hon. Member are as follows:—Five battleships, one battle cruiser, three cruisers, six light cruisers, ten destroyers, three submarines.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that in the opinion of the Government the three Canadian "Dreadnoughts" are not additional to the whole- world requirements of the British Empire, it is proposed, in the event of any delay in laying down these ships, to introduce Supplementary Estimates providing for the commencement of three additional vessels in the current year?

The new situation which has arisen requires and will receive the attention of the Government.

If these three vessels are not commenced this year, will not the Navy fall below the requirements of the Empire?

Sir, I cannot add anything at present to the answer which I have given to the hon. Member.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us an idea when he is likely to be able to make his statement upon this very vital question?

I do not like to commit myself, but I should hope that during the present month the point which is raised in this question will be the subject of a statement from this bench.

Will the right hon. Gentleman produce Supplementary Estimates dealing with this question?

We cannot go into the method of carrying out a policy which, as I have said, has yet to receive the attention of the Government.

asked what aeroplanes or dirigible airships or hydroplanes are now stationed at Malta; and if any garages or hangars for the use of such craft have been erected there or are proposed to be erected there?

No aircraft or accommodation for aircraft have yet been provided at Malta; nor do I wish to make any statement as to what is proposed.

asked the Postmaster-General the terms of the licence granted by the Post Office to the Exchange Telegraph Company; and to what other companies a similar licence is granted?

The Exchange Telegraph Company is licensed to distribute news from specified distributing offices by means of their printing telegraphs over wires erected by the company under the licence or rented from the Post Office, subject to payment by the company of a head royalty and a royalty in respect of each distributing office and each tape instrument. The Central News, Column Printing Company, Press Association, and Reuter's Telegram Company hold similar licences.

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the fact that a fire raged for over half an hour in the premises of Messrs. M. Jacoby and Company, at Day-brook, because it was found impossible to establish telephonic communication with the exchange at Nottingham, three miles away, in order to summon the fire exchange; that a message was ultimately got through on a private wire, whereby the motor fire-engines were obtained and the fire brought under control; whether he is aware that complaints are constant in Nottingham of the inefficiency of the telephone service since the Government assumed its management; and what steps he proposes to take to ensure the provision of an efficient service?

My attention has been drawn to the facts in connection with the fire to which the hon. Member refers, and a searching investigation is now being made into the cause of the failure to effect communication. Apart from the disorganisation caused by the snowstorm in January, there is no indication of any diminution in the efficiency of the telephone service at Nottingham since the management was handed over to the Post Office.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the inefficiency of the service at Nottingham has reached such a pitch that a soft answer like that given in no degree turneth away wrath; and will the right hon. Gentleman improve that efficiency of the service in the interests of the business of a great city?

I believe that I have received no complaints from Nottingham except those from the hon. Member himself across the floor of the House.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in making the promotions coming into effect on the 1st proximo on the postal side of the Cork post office, he will take care that the claims of the senior qualified officers will receive the consideration due to them, and take care that no injustice is done to these officers; and whether the surveyor of the district will be instructed to make personal inquiry into the case of each officer concerned?

In this, as in all cases of promotion in the Post Office, the claims and qualifications of all the eligible officers will receive full consideration. The surveyor makes the recommendation for promotion after reviewing the Qualifications of all the officers concerned.

asked the Postmaster-General whether ex-Army men possessing a second-class Army certificate are exempt from the Civil Service examination necessary to secure a position in the Post Office service; whether the same privilege is given to ex-naval men possessing a petty officer's educational certificate; and, if not, will he consider so amending the regulations as to give equal recognition to the two certificates?

Candidates who possess second-class Army certificates of education may, at the discretion of the Civil Service Commissioners, be exempted from the educational examination for the situation of postman. A similar regulation does not exist in the case of ex-naval candidates possessing a petty officer's educational certificate, but I will consult the Admiralty and the Civil Service Commissioners as to the desirability of granting an exemption in these cases also.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the educational requirements are identical in both cases?

I have no doubt that is so.

asked the Postmaster-General whether it is proposed shortly to introduce a revision at the South Eastern District Office, London, by which work hitherto performed by sorters on a maximum of 62s. a week is to be transferred to postmen in receipt of a maximum wage of 38s. a week; and whether, in harmony with the recognition of associations, the matter was discussed between the department and the association of the men concerned before arriving at a decision?

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

asked the Postmaster-General if the rate of 20s. per week for adult men temporarily employed by the Post Office has been continued only because of the recommendation of the Select Committee of 1907; and if he or anybody else has put the case for a higher rate to the Committee now sitting?

The Select Committee of 1907 made no specific recommendation on the question of the payment of officers temporarily performing a full duty. The present practice of basing the payment on the nineteen year age pay settled by that Committee for the corresponding established class has been brought to the notice of the Committee now sitting by a representative of the Postmen's Federation.

Is there any probability of this wage being brought up to a decent living wage?

I must await the Report of the Select Committee.

When does the right hon. Gentleman expect that Report?

I believe the Committee are now engaged considering their Report, the evidence being concluded.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that 20s. a week for adults is a sufficient wage to be paid for the services rendered?

The whole question of Post Office wages is now before the Select Committee. It should be remembered that these are not wages paid in London, and that they are only for temporary and casual services.

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the fact that a more suitable site for the new post office at Wellington, Salop, could be bought opposite the Charlton Hotel, in Wellington; and, as this is a site central and suitable, will he take this site into consideration for the new post office?

The site in Walker Street for the proposed new post office at Wellington, Salop, was agreed to be purchased some months ago, and I regret it is too late to consider the question of acquiring any other site.

Has the right hon. Gentleman had any representations in regard to the great inconvenience to the rural dwellers?

The next question will deal with that.

asked the Postmaster-General what steps were taken to ascertain the wishes of the inhabitants of Wellington, Salop, before deciding to erect a new post office, and if he has received any representations that there is a desire to retain the use of the old office for telegraph or other purposes; and what he proposes to do in the matter?

The representations made by the urban district council were fully considered before the site in Walker Street, Wellington, Salop, was acquired. I have received a letter dated 29th May urging the retention of an office in the vicinity of the present site after the new premises have been occupied, and I will carefully consider the suggestion.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Petition of the St. Andrew's Societies of Edinburgh and Glasgow to His Majesty the King regarding the representation of the United Kingdom in matters of heraldry has been considered; and whether any action has been taken or will be taken to give Scotland and Ireland their due representation in all matters of heraldry?

I have received the Petition referred to. A number of points relating to the limits of the jurisdiction of the various Officers of Arms have been referred to the Law Officers of the Three Kingdoms, and until I receive their opinion, I am scarcely in a position to come to any final decision as to the prayer of the Petition.

asked the Secretary of State whether his attention has been drawn to the violence that took place in Victoria Park on the 25th ultimo in connection with a suffrage demonstration; whether he is aware that the police officers who attended the procession left the park and the meeting, with the result that the organisers of the meeting were practically unprotected; and whether he will give instructions for any such meeting in the future to be adequately protected?

Victoria Park is under the control of the London County Council, by which it is policed. Ample arrangements were made by the Metropolitan Police, who were held in readiness at the park gates, to intervene if their assistance were required.

Is it not a fact that on this occasion one of the vans used as a platform was wheeled right out of the park into the road, and will the right hon. Gentleman see that in the future proper protection is given to peaceful citizens the same as the right hon. Gentleman himself expects when addressing a meeting in Newport?

The policing of the park is a matter for the London County Council, and not the Home Office.

Is it not a fact that the London County Council have no control of the police at all?

The London County Council are responsible for the policing of the park; the Metropolitan Police are responsible outside the park, and they were in readiness.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the only power the London County Council have is to engage the park keepers?

I cannot agree with my hon. Friend.

When you call another question Mr. Speaker, is it in order for an hon. Member to continue asking supplementary questions in relation to the former question?

I have known irregularities to occur.

asked if the Committee appointed about three years ago to inquire into the management of reformatory and industrial schools is still sitting; and, if so, has it any intention of reporting; and when may the Report be expected?

I have received the Report of this Committee, which was appointed in March, 1911. The Report will be published this week.

asked for what reason Edward Buckton Cargill, who was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment last February for serious offences against girls, has been released from prison; if he has been temporarily released under the Prisoners Temporary Release Act; and, if he has been released on grounds of ill-health, will he say who certified that it was necessary that he should be removed from prison?

This prisoner was released on medical grounds. His condition was critical. In advising his release, I acted on the report of the medical officer of the prison and of a consultant called in by the Prison Commissioners at my request. His condition not being due wholly or in part to his own conduct in prison, the Prisoners (Temporary Discharge for Ill-health) Act did not apply.

That is to say the un-served part of the sentence has been abandoned altogether, or will he be called upon to serve it at any future time?

The course taken in this case is precisely the same as that in all similar cases. It was reported to me that the prisoner's condition was critical and that he was in imminent danger of death, and that in no circumstances could he live long, and following the ordinary practice in this case, as in other cases in similar circumstances, the prisoner was released.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what portion of the sentence was served, and has he any statement as to whether the prisoner is now restored to health?

I said the prisoner was suffering from a mortal disease. Ten weeks of the sentence of nine months was, I think, served.

asked (1) how many police were withdrawn from the Houses of Parliament during the Whitsuntide Recess; what duties did they perform during the Adjournment; whether any of the Sessional police were employed at the Houses of Parliament during that period; if so, whether 1s. per day was stopped in these cases, either for the eighteen days or any portion of that time; and (2) why the Sessional staff of police attached to the Houses of Parliament were stopped 1s. per day for eighteen days during the Whitsuntide Adjournment; whether the allowance has ever been stopped before, when the Easter and Whitsuntide Adjournment has been less than twenty-one days, and, if so, when; and upon whose recommendation it was stopped?

My hon. Friend appears to be under a misapprehension. The men belonging to the Sessional staff receive their full ordinary pay at all times; but while the House is actually sitting they receive an additional allowance of 1s. a day, which ceases automatically in ordinary course when the House is not sitting. An exception, however, has been made in the case of a short recess, but such an exception cannot properly be allowed when the recess is a long one. In 1910, for instance, the allowance was not continued during the long recess in May. During the recess the Sessional staff of police are employed on other police duties, and often act as substitutes for officers who may be on leave. Some of the staff who have been taking the place of officers entitled permanently to the special allowance of 1s. a day have themselves been receiving that allowance.

Can a definite answer be given to that part of the question which asks whether on any previous occasion when the recess was less than twenty-one days the 1s. per day extra was stopped, and whether the late inspector of police in this House promised on the occasion of the late King's death that it would never be stopped under twenty-one days?

I am not aware of that, and I do not think the inspector had any authority to make a promise of the kind. With regard to the other point, I am unable to say whether there is any record of any of the allowances being stopped under twenty-one days or eighteen days. I cannot trace that there was any recess of that precise period, the usual recess being for a much a shorter time, and, as I have already explained, during the short recess it is not stopped, but is always stopped when the recess is of any considerable length.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is always practically fourteen days, and on this occasion it was eighteen days?

No, Sir. I believe it is not usually fourteen days, but ten or twelve days. I do not remember a case of eighteen days except on this particular occasion.

asked whether Heinrich Grosse, who in February, 1912, was sentenced at Winchester to three years' penal servitude, is a German subject; and whether it is intended to release him before his sentence is completed?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second part, I can add nothing at present to the answer which I gave the hon. Member last Thursday.

Is it exercising the attention, immediately and at present, of the right hon. Gentleman?

Yes, it is exercising my attention and the attention of the Foreign Secretary immediately and at present.

asked whether a number of Finnish pilots have resigned their duties and their places have been filled by inexperienced men, many recruited from the Caspian Sea, and that in consequence there has been difficulty and delay in shipping reaching Finnish ports; whether he can give any explanation of this state of affairs; whether it is likely to continue; and whether he has approached the Russian Government on the subject?

The answer to the first part of the question is, generally speaking, in the affirmative, but no complaints as to the effects on shipping have been received for over a year. As to the last portion of the question I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which was returned on the 26th March, 1912, to the hon. Member for Stirling Burghs to the effect that there are no grounds which justify representations to the Russian Government.

asked the number of cans of British Columbia peaches imported into this country for 1912?

Imports of canned peaches into the United Kingdom are not separately distinguished in the official Returns from imports of other canned fruits, and consignments from British Columbia are not separately distinguished from consignments from other parts of the Dominion of Canada. The information desired by the hon. Member is not, therefore, available. The total imports from Canada in 1912 of canned and bottled fruit of all kinds amounted to 27,660 cwts.

asked what steps, if any, have been taken to ascertain the views of the officers and men who work the ships of the mercantile marine with regard to the question of load line; whether a Committee of experts has been appointed to inquire into the subject generally and, if so, will he give the names and qualifications of these experts; will he also say whether, if such a Committee has been appointed or is to be appointed, the Government intend the inquiry to be an open inquiry; and, if not, will he give the Government reasons for excluding the Press, seeing the public interest that is taken in the question and the national importance of the issue involved?

I have appointed a Committee of experts to advise on the question of load line, and full opportunity will be given for officers and seamen to put their views before it. I will send the hon. Member a copy of the terms of reference and the names and qualifications of the members. With regard to the points raised in the concluding sentences of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Southampton on the 28th May. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of that reply.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the necessity of putting a representative of Lloyd's upon that Committee?

Lloyd's Register will be represented.

asked the right hon. Gentleman if he will state whether the Clause in the Railways (No. 1) Bill of last Session which provided for a cheaper and less cumbrous tribunal for hearing traders' grievances than the Railway and Canal Commission was omitted from the Railways (No. 2) Bill owing to the opposition of the railway companies, or, if not, for what reason; and whether, seeing that an application to the Commission is, owing to its expense, a luxury of the rich, and that consequently farmers and the smaller traders have no remedy whatever against unfair treatment by the railway companies, the Government will forthwith introduce legislation for their adequate protection?

The sole reason for the omission of this and several other Clauses of the first Railways Bill of last. Session was that owing to want of time it was found necessary to confine the legislation of last Session to the single object of carrying out the Government pledge to the railway companies. No representations were made to me by the railway companies in respect of Clause 14 of the first Bill, which dealt with the cheapening of the procedure. I may add that there is no necessity for a farmer or small trader to take individual proceedings before the Railway and Canal Commission, as under Section 7 of the Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888, any association of traders or freighters or chamber of commerce or agriculture that may obtain a certificate from the Board of Trade that it is a proper body to make a complaint can institute such proceedings. I have already stated that time will not permit the reintroduction this Session of the first Bill of last year.

asked if the right hon. Gentleman will state on whose advice the recent appointment of a Second Secretary to the Board of Trade was made; if, in addition to the Secretaries to the Board, there is an Assistant-Secretary for each important branch; what are the circumstances which made the appointment of an additional secretary necessary; how long Mr. G. S. Barnes has been in the service of the Board; what position did he occupy before entering the service; on whose recommendation he was appointed originally; and whether such appointment was the result of competition of any kind?

The work of the Board of Trade has developed and increased so much of late years that it had become essential to relieve the Permanent Secretary of part of the work which now falls upon him by the appointment of a Second Secretary. The decision was reached after careful consideration of the whole question by the Permanent Secretary and myself in consultation with the Treasury. The Permanent Secretary in the ordinary course, as head of the Department, made his recommendation to me as to the most suitable person for the post; and, after considering all the circumstances of the case, I concurred in his recommendation. Mr. Barnes, whom I have appointed to the post, is senior, as head of the Department, by over four years to all the other heads of Departments in the Board of Trade, including the Assistant-Secretaries. He has been for twenty years in the service of the Board, and for nine years head of a Department, which ranks with an Assistant-Secretaryship. Mr. Barnes' original appointment in the Board of Trade service in 1893 was that of a Second Official Receiver, which was not a post filled by open competition. Previous to that he was a practising barrister of ten years' standing. He was appointed Second Official Receiver by Mr. Mundella, then President. He was subsequently appointed Senior Official Receiver in 1896 by Mr. Ritchie; and in 1904 Mr. Gerald Balfour appointed him head of the Companies Department. I may add that, while Mr. Barnes' responsibilities and work will be increased by his appointment as Second Secretary, his salary remains the same as before. As President, I am, of course, solely responsible for the appointment, and I do not think that anyone acquainted with the circumstances will doubt the expediency of the creation of the new post or the fitness of the officer appointed thereto.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state when he proposes to issue the forms of application for refund under Section 94 of the National Insurance Act; and whether he is aware that the delay in issue is causing inconvenience to large employers of labour?

An explanatory memorandum is about to be issued, stating the particulars that will be required from employers applying for refunds under Section 94. Copies of this memorandum and forms of application will shortly be obtainable at Labour Exchanges and other local offices of the Unemployment Fund. As these applications cannot be made before 15th July, I do not think that the inconvenience apprehended by the hon. Member will arise.

Does the hon. Member merely mean that they will be issued, and is he aware that the same answer has been given now for the past twelve months?

I do not see how the answer could have been given for the past twelve months under the Act.

Is the hon. Member aware that twelve months ago it was stated that this matter was under consideration?

That can scarcely so in regard to refund application forms.

asked whether the forthcoming National Insurance Act amending Bill will be a comprehensive measure dealing with Amendments that the working of the Act has shown to be advisable, or whether, it will merely be a Bill to enable the Government to tide over certain temporary financial difficulties?

I am not prepared to anticipate the terms of the Bill.

Is the Prime Minister aware that practically the whole friendly society world is expecting a comprehensive Bill?

I am afraid I do not know.

Will the right hon. Gentleman in this Bill reconsider the question of compulsion?

I am not prepared, as I have said, to anticipate the terms of the Bill. It is most unusual either for questions to be asked or answers to be given because the Bill has not yet been introduced.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will afford an opportunity to Members of this House of expressing their views on the English Regulations governing the appointment and election of county and county borough insurance committees under the National Insurance Act?

The Regulations, which were made after consultation with the Advisory Committee, and subsequently to the discussion in the House on the Scottish Regulations (which differ from them in some respects), were laid on 5th May, and discussion could have been taken on them on any Parliamentary day since then before or after the adjournment for the recess. The elections are now proceeding; the last day on which societies desiring to nominate candidates could lodge applications for nomination forms was 27th May (now past); societies entitled to direct appointments have already in some cases sent in their appointments (the last day for receiving which is 9th June).

asked whether, owing to delay on the part of the National Insurance Commissioners in providing the necessary information, the Consett Trades Council were unable to nominate any members for the district committee; and whether care will be taken in the forthcoming arrangements for the setting up of the committees to secure that bodies representative of the various interests will have sufficient time to make their nominations?

The Trades Council have no power to nominate members of the district committee. In reply to a letter received from the Trades Council, the Commissioners suggested that the council should communicate with the insurance committee. The reply to the second part of the question, which appears to relate to the election of representatives of insured persons on the insurance committees, is in the affirmative.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (1) when he intends to issue a Report on the working of the National Insurance Act; and whether there is to be a separate Report for Scotland; and (2) whether the Report on the working of the National Insurance Act which is being prepared will be ready prior to the introduction of any amending legislation?

I hope to present to Parliament the Reports of the Insurance Commissioners on the administration of the Act within a few days. The Report will be a single volume covering the operations of the Joint Committee and the several Commissions; but I am arranging for the Reports of each of the National Commissions to be available in separate volumes.

asked whether an unmarried mother who goes to a hospital for her confinement and who has to pay a fee for admission to the hospital can have the amount of that fee refunded to her out of the maternity benefit?

Yes, Sir. If the sum that would have been due as maternity benefit had the woman not entered a hospital is not applied for the relief or maintenance of the woman's dependants, or paid direct to the hospital under an agreement previously concluded to pay for her treatment, it is payable to the woman herself when she leaves the hospital, either in kind or in instalments, or in a lump sum as the society may determine, and such money may be available for repayment of the fee for admission.

asked if in the case of maternity benefit, if both parents are insured persons, 60s. is paid for each child born?

If both parents are insured persons 30s. is, under the ordinary conditions, payable as maternity benefit in respect of the husband's insurance, while his wife is ordinarily entitled to sickness benefit at the rate of 7s. 6d. a week from the fourth day of being rendered incapable of work.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the official candidate at the Newmarket election stated that in such cases 60s. would be paid? Did the right hon. Gentleman take the necessary steps to have that statement corrected before the day of polling?

I did not see the statement. I should think that it generally expressed what is true. As in ordinary cases the woman would be entitled to such benefit for weeks before she goes back to work, and in that case 60s. would be paid.

Is it not the fact that if the contribution is in arrear, the benefit may be reduced from 7s. 6d. to 5s.?

No one could be in arrear for a sufficient period at the present time.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the decision of the Berwickshire Insurance Committee to exclude the Press from its meetings; whether the Insurance Commissioners have considered the fact that the insurance committees consist of persons elected to represent various interests, and that if the Press is excluded from the meetings it will be impossible for the insured persons who elected the members of the committees to know whether their representatives are acting in accordance with their wishes or not; and whether, in view of the importance of publicity in this matter, the Commissioners will make regulations which will secure the admission of the Press to meetings of the committees?

:I have seen a newspaper report of the decision to which my hon. Friend refers. I am informed that the committee have made arrangements to supply an official report of their proceedings to the Press. The Scottish Commissioners have not issued any regulations on this subject. I may say, however, that the English Commissioners, in reply to questions on this subject, have suggested that the provisions of the Local Authorities (Admission of the Press to Meetings) Act, 1908, should be treated as applicable to meetings of insurance committees.

asked at what time sickness benefit terminates in favour of maternity benefit; whether, when an employed woman is approaching her confinement and is certified a month before confinement to be incapable of work, she is entitled to sickness benefit, and up to how long before confinement; and whether such a woman ceasing work one week only before her confinement would receive sickness benefit?

An employed married woman is entitled to sickness benefit under the ordinary conditions while she is incapable of work through illness resulting from pregnancy, in addition to the maternity benefit payable in respect of her own or her husband's insurance, and without regard to the date at which that benefit is due. Sickness benefit is payable from the fourth day of her being rendered incapable of work by illness, and is payable while she so remains incapable, both before and after confinement.

asked whether a woman engaged in home duties and fearing the approach of ill-health may do a day's work in a shop or laundry and so come under the National Insurance Act and secure medical and sanatorium benefit; whether there is, in practice, anything to stop her acting in this manner; and whether she could sign the usual form of application for membership of an approved society and, being accepted, receive in due course medical and sanatorium benefit, though in fact she may have designed this procedure in order to get such benefits by the payment of only one or two contributions?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As I stated, in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Derbyshire on the 27th March, a person whose normal occupation is not employment within the meaning of the National Insurance Act ceases to be insured, and to be entitled to benefits on ceasing to be employed. As regards the second part of the question, an applicant for membership of an approved society is required to give particulars of his occupation and the method of payment for it, and to sign a statement that he is qualified to be an insured person. A false statement in the form of application would justify the society in expelling a person who had been admitted to membership on the strength of it. A false statement knowingly made for the purpose of obtaining benefit would render the person liable to penalties.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the regulations contained in Memorandum 159/J.C., issued by the Insurance Commissioners, involve deductions from the amount guaranteed to medical practitioners for each insured person; and, if so, whether the consent of the doctors has been obtained to such deductions; and, if not, what steps does he propose to take for the purpose of providing the minimum capitation fee guaranteed to the doctors by Section 22 of the explanatory statement issued by the Commissioners in December, 1912?

As I stated, in reply to the hon. Member for Nottingham on the 8th May, a doctor is entitled under his contract with the insurance committee to be credited with a sum of 7s. in respect of each insured person for whose treatment he is responsible during the whole year. It follows that a deduction must be made from this sum in respect of every insured person for whom he ceases to be responsible during any portion of that year, in order to pay the doctor who is in fact responsible for his treatment during that period.

asked whether Irish seamen who are members of Irish societies are compulsorily insured at the higher English rates when serving on ships registered at English or Scotch ports; whether their own Irish societies get the benefits of the increased contributions; and whether they receive medical benefits at their homes?

The rate of contribution payable in respect of Irishmen serving in ships registered in the United Kingdom is unaffected by the country in which they are registered. An Irish seaman who has a permanent place of resi- dence in Ireland and is a member of a society approved for operation in Ireland, pays contributions at the lower rates applicable in Ireland, and is not entitled to medical benefit. Other Irishmen serving in the mercantile marine pay the same rates of contribution and are entitled to the same benefits as English, Scotch, or Welsh sailors.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the instructions of societies in Ireland are that men serving on ships registered at English or Scotch ports are to pay the higher rate?

No, I am not aware of it. If the hon. and gallant Member knows anything which he thinks is an infringement of the Act, I shall be very glad to look into it.

asked if there is any means by which an insured fisherman who has had to seek medical aid from a panel doctor when engaged in fishing round the coast, and who has had to pay the doctor's charges, can obtain repayment of such sums as he may have had to pay both for medical attendance and for drugs?

As I stated in answer to the hon. Member on the 29th ultimo, arrangements have been made whereby fishermen can obtain medical attendance and treatment free of cost at any port in the United Kingdom. There is no necessity therefore for them to pay doctors' fees themselves, and consequently there is no provision for repayment.

May I ask if some more simple method cannot be arranged by which these men can get medical aid at these ports without having to refer to their own port or to the doctor?

If the hon. Gentleman has any suggestion in his mind I shall be very glad to consider it.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether persons retiring from their employment on Pension after the age of sixty-five, after contributing regularly for twenty years, would be entitled, under the arrear regulations, to over twelve months' more insurance free; and, if so, seeing that it is impossible for societies at once to decide that such persons have permanently ceased to be employed, as they may do some little work at any time, he will take steps to secure that such persons shall receive sick or disablement benefits if their societies refuse to give them benefits?

I am advised that if persons retiring from their original employment on pension intend to seek other employment, they would be entitled to continue to be employed contributors. If, in fact, they remain unemployed beyond twelve months, they can continue as employed contributors if their society is satisfied that their unemployment is due to inability to obtain employment, and is not due to their ceasing permanently to be employed. In the meantime their benefits would be subject to the provisions of Section 10 of the Act as to arrears, but no arrears accrue in respect of employed contributors during the first year of the Act's operation, and they would in no case be completely suspended from all benefits for the year in question. I assume that the hon. Member refers to twenty years' contributions in respect of the pensions and not under the Act, as in the latter case the question would not become a practical one till 1932, that is subsequent to the extension of benefits which will follow the redemption of the reserve value.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether insurance committees have power to allocate members who have not selected a doctor to medical institutes; and whether such allocation is being made by the Wolverhampton Insurance Committee with the consent of the Insurance Commissioners?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, and no such proposals have been submitted to the Commissioners by the Wolverhampton Insurance Committee.

asked whether payments have been withheld from medical institutes for medical benefit till recently; whether only 1s. 3d. per head is being paid for the quarter as against 1s. 9d. to the committees for the panel doctors; whether many unnecessary forms have had to be signed by the patients at the institutes; and for what reason these difficulties are put in the way of the institutes?

Payments have been made in all cases in which the institute has been able to give the insurance committee and the Commissioners a reasonable assurance that it will be able to fulfil the conditions of medical benefit. The amount payable per member is not necessarily 1s. 9d. per quarter, but such sum, not exceeding 1s. 9d. per quarter, as is actually expended in providing medical attendance and treatment, and the amount of the advance payments must be limited accordingly pending evidence as to the expenses actually incurred. Where there is satisfactory evidence that more than 1s. 3d. has been expended, more than 1s. 3d. has been paid. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative, and the fourth part does not arise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these medical institutions are being bludgeoned out of existence by the regulations of the Insurance Commissions, and that when the Insurance Bill was passing through this House the Home Secretary promised equal treatment for medical institutions as for doctors on the panel which is not given at present?

I think if the hon. Gentleman looks into the matter he will see that that pledge has been fully carried out and that medical institutes are receiving for medical attention and treatment to insured persons exactly the same amount as doctors on the panels.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the delay in returning to the societies soldiers' cards in Class B is preventing them from completing their accounts; and whether it is possible to return immediately all the cards for the first quarter and expedite the return of the cards for the second quarter?

A large number of soldiers' cards have been received by the Commissioners, chiefly from foreign stations. Where sufficient information is given on the card to indicate the society to which the soldier belongs, the card is sent to the society. All such cards for the first quarter and most of those for the second quarter have already been disposed of. The Commissioners have also received a large number of cards for the first quarter and a smaller number for the second quarter not bearing the name of any society. There is reason to believe that many of these cards were surrendered by men who have subsequently joined societies within the prescribed time, which, for men serving abroad on 15th December, does not expire until 30th June next. A circular was therefore issued in November, 1912, inviting societies to apply for any soldiers' cards wanted by them which have been forwarded to the Corn-mission. The cards so applied for are being disposed of as applications are received. I am considering what further steps can be taken to ascertain which of these cards belong to soldiers who have joined societies, and to dispose of them accordingly.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what will happen if the stamps on the cards are not paid up by the societies?

I should like to have notice of that question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether any proposal has been put forward by insurance committees to distribute among doctors on the panels, for which such committees are responsible, the surplus funds for medical services; if such a course would be in compliance with the National Insurance Act or regulations made thereunder; if he can state the present total amount of such surpluses; and whether any proportion represents the contributions in respect of persons who have not chosen a panel doctor although they may have required medical attendance since booming contributors?

The hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. There is no surplus in the fund for medical benefit. The agreements entered into by the doctors on the panel of every insurance committee provide that the whole of the funds available for the medical treatment of insured persons under the arrangements made by the insurance committee shall be divided among the doctors who have entered into such agreements.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is said to be a sum of £30,000 or over unclaimed to the credit of the London Insurance Committee? What is going to be done with it?

If it is stated, it must be a considerable misstatement. No money can be unclaimed, because all the money has to go to the doctors on the panel.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury, whether, when substituted site value is asked for under Section 2 (3) of the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, the Inland Revenue, in all cases where a number of claims are involved, can arrange for the inspection of the deeds at the office or place of business of the person who makes the claim, instead of requiring that the deeds of the property should be carried about for inspection at the local district valuation offices of the Inland Revenue?

While every endeavour is made to meet the convenience of the public in the production of deeds, I regret that it is not possible to make a general arrangement of the nature indicated by the hon. Member.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that British armament companies doing work on contract for the Government have a total share capital of 31½ millions, and on more than half their share capital paid dividends of not less than 10 per cent.; that these companies have in several cases established works abroad where armaments are made for foreign Powers, and that many ships of war and armaments are made in this country for other countries that may become hostile to Great Britain; and whether, having regard to the financial interest which these companies have in making foreign Powers a more formidable menace, in certain events, to our national safety, he will institute an inquiry into the undertakings of these armament companies in order to determine whether the present system of contracting with them is in the national interest?

I am unable to verify the figures given in the first part of the question, in the absence of a list of the companies which my hon. Friend has included, but I dare say they may be accurate. I know of no sufficient reason for instituting such an inquiry as my hon. Friend suggests.

Has the right hon. Gentleman been noticing certain revelations which have been made during his absence abroad, and, if not, will he take an early opportunity of inquiring into this matter in the light of the Press disclosures?

I do not know at all what revelations the hon. Member refers to.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman has been informed by any past or present Members of the Government, and, if any, which, that they are or have been directly or indirectly interested in any oil companies or concerns which hold or have tendered for contracts for the supply of oil for the Navy?

It is no part of my duty to inform myself, or of the duty of my colleagues to inform me, of the private investments of Members of the Government. It is the duty of every Minister who has to advise or take action at any stage in regard to a contract affecting the public service, if he has any pecuniary interest direct or indirect in its subject matter, to disclose the fact spontaneously and at once. I have no reason to doubt that this duty has been and will be adequately discharged.

asked whether in view of the Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the scheme of London University, he is now in a position to state what effect, if any, will be given to the proposal to acquire for the purposes of a new building the site in Bloomsbury in possession of the Duke of Bedford for which a sum of £375,000 has been asked?

As I stated in reply to questions on the 24th July and the 19th November last, this is a matter as to which neither I nor the Government have any information.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman can see his way to grant facilities for the Right of Way Bill which has come down from the House of Lords and has more than once had the approval of this House; and if he will consider whether the Government could now take over the work of protecting the interests and property of the public, which has been voluntarily done for nearly fifty years by the Commons and Footpaths Preservation Society?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers my question may I explain that a mistake has been made in my question? The Right of Way Bill has not come down from the House of Lords this Session, but in a previous Session. Perhaps the Prime Minister will answer the second part of my question?

The Government are favourably disposed towards this Bill and will endeavour to help its passage if it has the general consent of the House. The suggestion made in the latter part of the question will be considered.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in connection with the Committee stage of the Government of Ireland Bill, the Government propose to allow the vote of the Committee to be taken on Amendments which, if carried, may limit or alter the operation of the Bill, or whether the Committee stage is for all practical purposes to be abandoned, and Members are not to have the opportunity of giving effect to changes of opinion which may have taken place since the Bill was last before the House?

asked whether, in view of the proposal to take the Second Readings of the Government of Ireland Bill, the Established Church (Wales) Bill, and the Temperance (Scotland) Bill successively without interruption because of the Committee stages of those Bills, the Government have now decided to give a substantial Committee stage to any of these Bills?

I must refer the hon. Members to what I said on the 7th ultimo, when the present intentions of the Government with regard to this stage of the Bill were clearly stated.

Will the Prime Minister state definitely what his intentions are in regard to the Committee stages?

I have stated them quite definitely.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the question of invasion is now under investigation by a Sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, he can see his way to preventing Members of the Government from prejudicing the question by making statements to the effect that the invasion of this country was an inconceivable possibility?

I am not aware of any such statements.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Colonial Secretary, in a speech he made on 3rd May, said that the invasion of this country was an inconceivable possibility, and, if he has not seen it, may I have the honour of sending it to the right hon. Gentleman, and may I be allowed to put my question down again when he has seen it?

Yes, I shall be glad if the hon. Gentleman will furnish me with it.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention has been called to the fact that, if the Government of Ireland Bill is forced into law without the people being given a chance of deciding whether they are in favour of it or not, it will mean not only civil war in. Ireland, but also the open hostility of many British officers and of men of all classes in this country; and can he say what he proposes to do to avert so serious a calamity and the consequent dangers of attack from abroad?

This question is based on hypotheses which the hon. Member cannot expect me to accept or within the limits of an answer to discuss.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is still certain of that full support of the people of the United Kingdom, without which he gave us to understand that no such legislation could pass?