asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that certain societies have refused to pay sick allowance to insured persons unless the specific nature of the illness is stated in the medical certificate; what security such insured persons have against the publicity which may be given to confidential medical certificates by the travelling agents of the society; and whether the Commissioners could give some protection in such a case, especially to women. upon whose health such a specification of disease may have serious detrimental effects?

With regard to the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the Noble Lord the Member for Wigton on 24th June. With regard to the second and third parts, I have not the slightest doubt that a society would take the severest measures in any case in which one of their agents divulged confidential information of the character referred to, given to him by the insured person, and if any case is brought to their notice the Commissioners will at once communicate with the society concerned.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that doctors are often unwilling to give specific information even to patients?

I agree. We are trying to see if that can be met in these special cases.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state how the figure of £20 0s. 7d. has been arrived at in computing the costs and arrears of contributions under the National Insurance Act at the Somerton Petty Sessions on 26th May, as set forth in a letter from the Insurance Commissioners, O.S. 68?

When the letter in question was written it was believed that 6s. costs were granted on each summons in the Somerton case, and the figures were based on that assumption. I am now informed, however, by the clerk to the justices that this amount was intended to apply only to the first summons in each case, the costs on the remainder being 2s. 6d. each. I am obliged to the hon. and gallant Member for calling my attention to the matter; steps will at once be taken to correct the figure.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether it has come to the notice of the Insurance Commissioners that Mr. Curtis Bennett admitted on oath the offer he made to the Berkshire Farmers' League to refrain from prosecutions for the first two quarters, provided that benefits equal to those under the Act were paid by the employers; whether this offer was made on the 1st January, in consequence of which on the 13th January members were advised by their committee to work the Act forward from that date; whether the members of the league have been faithful to the agreement contained in the offer; and, if not, what action it is proposed to take in the matter?

No, Sir. The inspector in question made no such admission, nor did he ever make the offer stated in the hon. Member's question. The inspector on no occasion made any suggestion that an employer who paid any benefits that might accrue due in the third quarter would thereby obtain any relief from the obligation to stamp the cards of the first or second quarters. Whatever misunderstanding may have arisen on other points, the inspector made it clear from the outset that the Commissioners had no power in any circumstances to relieve employers of their liability to stamp the cards, and he made it plain that the Commissioners would feel bound to take legal proceedings in cases where complaints were made to them of refusal to pay contributions. As regards the latter part of the question, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply that I gave him on the 18th June, from which he will see that all possible steps were taken by the inspector to remove misunderstanding before the third quarter's contributions became payable, and also, I am informed, before the committee actually arrived at the decision referred to.

I will call attention to the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to cases in which the demand of doctors on the panel to engage a temporary assistant for times when panel work is especially heavy has led to friction and resulted in difficulty in working the National Insurance Act; whether the Insurance Commissioners have power to deal with the right of doctors to engage assistants; and, if so, what action will be taken?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. Under the Regulations an assistant who is not himself on the panel can only treat insured persons on behalf of his principal when the latter is precluded by urgency of other professional duties, absence from home or other reasonable cause, from giving personal attendance to the insured persons under his care.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that, in response to his request for their opinion, the Association of Chambers of Commerce, the most important representative commercial body in the country, has pronounced decidedly in favour of universal national training, he proposes to take any further action in the matter to meet the urgent necessity for adequate national defence?

The Association of Chambers of Commerce of the United Kingdom passed a resolution at their annual meeting in April last on the subject of the desirability of a Bill for the adoption of such a course of universal training in discipline and arms for the youth of the nation as would meet the urgent necessity for adequate national defence, and they asked me to receive a deputation on the subject. In reply, I requested the association to place their views in writing, in the first instance. A memorandum was then submitted by the association, which is receiving careful consideration. The question of national defence is receiving the most serious and continuous attention from the Government, and has been the subject of frequent discussion in Parliament.

Arising out of that reply could not the right hon. Gentleman now allow national training to be a non-party question, if the Leader of the Opposition will do the same? If not, could he say why: for what resaon? Is he afraid of the Labour party, or what is it?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will grant time to discuss the Motion standing on the Order Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Leicester with regard to certain statements of a partisan and political character made by Mr. Justice Darling in the course of a recent trial?

I do not see my way to give facilities from the time at the disposal of the Government for a discussion of the Motion referred to.

Arising out of that answer, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is aware that an appeal has been entered on account of the remarks to which I have drawn attention, and that therefore unnecessary expense has been caused to the clients? May I further ask him if he remembers the judgment delivered by Lord Macnaghten in the House of Lords in February, in which he states: "A judicial tribunal has nothing to do with the policy of any Act it may be called upon to interpret"; and whether some steps could not be taken to communicate that to Mr. Justice Darling to remind him that he is a judge and not a politician?

:If in the action referred to an appeal has been entered that is an additional reason for not expressing an opinion on that particular case. I am well aware of the judgment of Lord Macnaghten to which my hon. Friend has referred, and I can only say that it expresses very admirably and accurately the true character of the judicial function.

May I inquire when the time at the disposal of the Government comes to an end?

At the end of the Session.

When will that be?

asked the President of the Board of Education whether 144 scholars from Chorley elementary schools are receiving cookery instruction at the Chorley secondary school, and that this arrangement was made as a temporary provision many years ago; and whether it is intended to utilise the erection of the new council school at Chorley for the provision of a cookery centre?

The facts are substantially as stated in the first part of the hon. Member's question, except that no time limit has been fixed by the Board to their recognition of the arrangements referred to. As I stated in my answer on 5th May, the plans of the new council's school show no rooms for cookery instruction.

In view of that arrangement, which is quite contrary to the right hon. Gentleman's own Regulations, will he not impress upon the local authorities the necessity for a proper cookery centre in connect ion with the school?

I will look further into the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether a Church school at Towyn. Merionethshire, has applied as a new school for recognition as a public elementary school; whether, as a result of any such application, he has made inquiry as to the number of children attending the school during the past year; and whether he has carried out any inspection of any kind?

The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. No inquiry as to the number of children attending the school has been necessary, as the managers have supplied me with information on the point. I have not carried out any inspection of the school, since it is neither a public elementary school nor a certified efficient school.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether Towyn Church school is still being maintained as a school, and, if so, at whose expense; how many children are attending the school; whether he is satisfied with the education given in the school; and whether the premises are reported to be fit and proper for the purposes for which they are being used?

I understand that the school is still being maintained as a school, but I have no information as to the sources out of which it is maintained beyond the fact that it derives income from endowments. I am informed by the managers that the number of children on the books of the school is 63, and in average attendance 51.9. The managers have stated that the discipline in the school is excellent. I have no information as to the present condition of the premises.

In view of the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, does he not think he would be justified in now recognising this school?

In view of the facts I have mentioned, I am not prepared to depart from the policy of my predecessor in refusing to recognise the school.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say exactly why he refuses to recognise this large and flourishing school?

The facts are well known to the hon. Member. At one period the average attendance was only fifteen. At that period the school was not recognised, and authority was given to the local education authority to erect another school. That school has been erected, and is sufficient to accommodate all the children in the district. Therefore it does not seem to me, in view of the average attendance at the school, that I would be justified in reconsidering the decision of my predecessor.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman perfectly well aware that the temporary decline in the number of the children at the school was due to the presence of one teacher, and that immediately that teacher went there was, and has been since, a higher average attendance?

Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, may I ask if he will say whether the recognition of this school would not impose a considerable burden, that is totally unnecessary, upon the ratepayers?

That was one of the considerations—to which my hon. Friend (Mr. King) has referred—that influenced my views in connection with the decision at which I arrived. I am, of course, well aware that it was owing to the inefficiency—if I may use the term—of a particular schoolmaster that the average attendance at that school fell in the way it did; but I may also remind the hon. Member that since 1910 the number of scholars on the register, and the average attendance, have also fallen.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether the children attending Towyn Church school are eligible for scholarships and bursaries at the local county intermediate school; and whether Church children are debarred from benefiting by the Edward Morgan bequest at this intermediate school?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative as under the scheme governing the intermediate school only children from public elementary schools are eligible for entrance scholarships and bursaries. There is nothing in the scheme regulating the Edward Morgan Educational Foundation which debars Church of England children from benefiting by that bequest, but scholarships under that foundation are confined to children from public elementary schools.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether the children attending Towyn Church school are medically inspected; and whether the Church school can be compulsorily closed in the case of infectious disease among the children of the council school or of the Church school?

The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's question is in the negative. So far as I am aware there is no power to close this Church school compulsorily in the circumstances to which he refers.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider this a very unsatisfactory condition of affairs from the point of view of the public health?

I would rather like notice of that question; so that I might look further into that particular point.

asked the President of the Board of Education if there is any provided or non-provided school at Tynant, in the parish of Maenturog. Merionethshire; whether such schools are recognised as public elementary schools, and, if so, from what date; and how many children were attending such schools according to his latest information and at the time of recognition?

There is a non-provided school at Tynant which has been recognised as a public elementary school since 1876. The number of children in average attendance for the last school year was thirty. I am unable to give the figures at the time of recognition.

Can the right Gentleman say to which denomination this non-provided school belongs: is it a Church or a Methodist school?

I am afraid I do not know: I would like to have notice of that.

asked the President of the Board of Education if, in view of the increasing expenditure of local education authorities in respect of the salaries of teachers, and their present inability to meet their reasonable demands, in face of the opposition of the ratepayers, he will, after consultation with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, consider the advisability of providing in the forthcoming Government Education Bill for making the salaries of teachers in elementary and grant-receiving secondary schools a charge upon the national Exchequer, leaving it to the local education authorities to provide out of the local rates for the erection and repair of school premises and all other costs of maintenance?

I am, of course, considering all proposals which appear to be practicable. I may, however, point out that this proposal would, on the present figures and without any allowance for increase of salaries, involve a charge on the Exchequer of considerably over £17,000,000, and an increase of the existing Grants by more than £5,000,000. The proposal would also involve other administrative consequences, the importance of which the hon. Member with his experience of local government will, I am sure, appreciate.

:Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that it is only logical seeing that the Government call the tune as regards quality, that the Government should also pay the piper?

:May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not he better—as an alternative suggestion—to make a good building Grant to the local authorities?

:I am afraid I cannot deal with that question at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can now state the names of the new inspectors appointed by him under the Cruelty to Animals Act, 1876; whether such inspectors are appointed for life or how otherwise; what salaries do they receive; what are their duties; what instructions do they receive with regard to the efficient performance of such duties; and what are the conditions of their appointment?

I am not yet in a position to announce the appointment of the new inspectors. I have received a large number of applications and I have been in consultation in the matter with the new Advisory Committee, but I have not yet been able to come to a decision owing to the difficulty of obtaining candidates with the special scientific qualifications required for the work who are not at the same time disqualified by the holding of licences or otherwise.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether ho is aware that Minnie Gardiner was, on Saturday last, sentenced to death at Derby for the murder of her illegitimate child, and that the jury returned their verdict with a recommendation to mercy; and what action he proposes to take?

The sentence has already been respited in this case.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether a local inquiry has been held into the circumstances under which the employers at the Maypole Colliery, near Wigan, have deprived the workmen, paid according to the weight of the mineral gotten by them, of one of the places hitherto appointed for the weighing of the mineral; whether, if such local inquiry has not been held, he will see that both the workmen and the employers have a full opportunity of stating their case at any inquiry that may take place; whether, in default of such inquiry, he can state under what Section of the Coal Mines Regulation Acts the employers have power to abandon a place hitherto appointed for the weighing of the mineral so long as all the other conditions of the workmen remain unchanged; and, in view of the local feeling that the check-weighers appointed are being unfairly treated, will he cause a test case to be entered to decide the issues involved?

I have received a report from the inspector as to the arrangements at this mine, but I am quite willing before coming to any decision in the matter to give both parties a full opportunity of stating their views, and I am sending instructions to the inspector to visit the mine for this purpose at the earliest possible date.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he has received Mr. Redmayne's Report regarding the conditions under which colliery deputies are employed in Northumberland and Durham; whether the communication addressed to the Home Office upon this subject on the 2nd June last has yet been considered; and whether he can see his way to receive a deputation of representatives of the men in order that they may be given an opportunity to state their case?

Yes, Sir, I received from the chief inspector a report of his inquiry into the complaint made by the Northumberland and Durham deputies. The complaint had reference to a change introduced by the owners of some mines by which the work of timbering, that has hitherto in these two counties fallen on the deputies, is entrusted to another class of workmen. The old practice, under which the deputies did the timbering, differed from the practice generally adopted in the other coalfields; and the new Act, though it contains a saving Clause which would have permitted the continuance of the old practice in these two counties only, clearly recognises the opposite practice, by which the firemen or deputies give their whole time to inspection and safety duties as the best. I understand that the representatives of the Northumberland and Durham deputies put their case fully before Lord Mersey, who held the recent inquiry, but he declined to alter the Regulations so as to reimpose the old practice. In the circumstances, and as I am advised by the chief inspector that the new practice does not impair the safe working of the mines, but tends rather to increased safety by leaving deputies more time for their inspection and safety duties, I do not think it would be advisable for me to take any action in the matter. Several deputations have already been received by me and by the chief inspector, and the Department is thoroughly acquainted with the views of the deputies, and I am afraid a further deputation would not serve any useful purpose.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state when the Report of Mr. Wyatt on the Welsh Disestablishment commutation scheme, from which he quoted on the 30th June, will be laid upon the Table of the House?

I do not propose to lay the Report referred to on the Table. As I stated last Monday, I quoted Mr. Wyatt only for the figures which I gave to the House. On the question of policy Mr. Wyatt has not advised me, nor has he any responsibility for any conclusions which the Government may draw from his figures.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that it is a rule of the House that a document from which something is cited ought to be laid upon the Table?

I have refreshed my memory by looking up the practice, and I cannot find it would apply in this case.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the accidents and frequent deaths arising from cyclists hanging on to motor vehicles, he will give instructions to the police to stop this practice?

The Commissioner of Metropolitan Police reports that the police are alive to the dangers resulting from the practice referred to, and warnings to cyclists have been issued through the medium of cycling journals and otherwise. The powers of the police in this matter are, however, limited, being defined by Section 59 of the Metropolitan Police Act, 1839, and it is necessary that they should be exercised with the greatest care. lest accidents result from their intervention.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps have been taken to enforce in the Lanarkshire coalfield the Regulations made under Section 85 of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, for the provision of rescue and ambulance appliances and the formation and training of rescue brigades?

A circular was sent out, earlier in the year to the owners who had not complied with the Rescue Order. A reply was received from the Lanarkshire owners to the effect that immediate steps would be taken to comply with the provisions generally of the Order, but contending that the provision of smoke helmets fed with fresh air by a tube and bellows was a sufficient compliance with the requirement as to portable breathing apparatus. The Home Office cannot accept this view, and the steps to be taken for enforcing the. Home Office opinion are now under consideration. The matter has been unavoidably delayed by the work in connection with the settlement of the general regulations, but will now be pressed on as rapidly as possible.

asked the Postmaster-General if he is yet prepared to make a statement re temporary men's wages; and, if not, when he will be prepared to do so?

The matter is engaging my attention and will be expedited as far as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware he told me that the matter was settled about a month ago?

No, Sir, I do not think I said that. As the hon. Member is aware, these matters do not rest in the unfettered discretion of the Postmaster-General. The Treasury also has to be consulted.

asked the Postmaster-General whether a Petition has been received by his Department protesting against the inconvenience caused by the closing of the post office in Ferndale Road, Clapham; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

The Petition referred to by the hon. Member has been considered and I have given instructions for the opening of a sub-office in a suitable position in place of the office in Ferndale Road, which it was found necessary to close.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware of the feeling that exists in the borough of Smethwick in favour of a continuous telephone service, in view of the urgent necessity for some means of giving information in cases of sudden outbreaks of fire occurring at night or on Sundays; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

A continuous telephone service already exists at the Smethwick Exchange, and will be maintained.

asked the Postmaster-General for the total sum which it is now agreed shall be paid to the National Telephone Company in settlement of their claim under the purchase agreement?

The award of the Railway and Canal Commission assessed the value of the National Telephone Company's plant, property and assets purchased by the Post Office at £12,515,264. The company were also allowed their costs in the valuation proceedings. An appeal against two items of the valuation was lodged by the Post Office, and a cross appeal against the award generally by the company. Under an arrangement made between counsel, subject to Treasury approval, the appeal and cross appeal were withdrawn on condition that the purchase price of the plant and other property should be reduced by £45,000, and the company should waive the payment of their costs, for which a claim of £122,000 had been made. The total sum payable to the company was therefore reduced to £12,470,264, which compares with the original claim of the-company of £20,924,700 for plant, etc., and £122,000 for costs.

asked the right hon. Member for the Epping Division, as chairman of the Kitchen Committee, if he will state at what hour it is permissible to, smoke in the dining rooms?

There is a rule of some years standing laid down by the Kitchen Committee that smoking in the Members' dining room before dinner should not begin before 8.30 p.m. That rule still remains in force, and instructions have been given that the notice which has been removed should be replaced. As there is never smoke without flame, I confess I have received a good many complaints on the subject of smoking, and I trust that the smoking Members of the House of Commons will consult the convenience of the non-smoking Members as much as possible.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is the practice of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue to claim Undeveloped Land Duty from an incumbent being a corporation sole in respect of lands held by him by virtue of his office?

An incumbent holding glebe lands in virtue of his benefice is not liable to Undeveloped Land Duty in respect of such lands while they are actually occupied and used for Church purposes.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the liquidator of Barron's Cement Company, Limited, which, on the sale of its interest as a going concern, including freehold land at Rainham, Kent, in October, 1911, went into voluntary liquidation, cannot distribute the assets of the company owing to the delay of the Valuation Department of the Inland Revenue in issuing a certificate that no Increment Duty is payable; and if he will inquire into the cause of the delay?

The liquidator of the company was informed by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue on 24th April last, that no Increment Value Duty was payable on the occasion of the sale referred to. No further intimation on this subject is necessary to enable the liquidator to distribute the assets of the company.

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that a mere letter is sufficient authority for a liquidator to distribute the assets of the company?

That is the view taken by the Inland Revenue.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if Mrs. Eliza ilke, late matron of the Hibernian Military School, Dublin, after long years of faithful service, in which her zeal and efficiency was acknowledged by all, was retired by the Treasury on a pension of £40 16s. 8d., although her salary, with emoluments, was estimated at £99 9s. 8d.; on what basis was this pension arrived at; what would be the pension of a Civil servant other than a teacher who served as long as Mrs. Silke at such a salary; and did the War Office concur in the Treasury decision?

Mrs. Silke was awarded a pension of £40 16s. 8d calculated upon her service in an established capacity up to the age of sixty-five, and her pensionable emoluments of £87 10s. ld. in accordance with general Civil Service rules. I regret to be unable to make an exception to those rules in her case.

Would the right hon. Gentleman answer that portion of the question which asks what would be her pension if a Civil servant other than a teacher?

I am afraid I overlooked that; if the hon. and learned Member will put it down I will answer it.

It is down.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has stated that he will look into the question of reducing the rate of interest to be charged under the Pensions Commutation Act, 1871, he will take into consideration the modification of the rules for the commutation of pensions by officers of the Army on lines similar to those recently published by the Government of India, namely, on a 3½ per cent. basis instead of a 5 per cent., and the limitation of the amount to be commuted to a quarter or to, at any rate, not more than a third of the amount of the pension?

I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave the hon. and gallant Member on this subject on the 21st January last. An amendment of the Pensions Commutation Act would appear to be necessary to effect the change suggested, and so far as the Army Council is concerned I can hold out no hope of such legislation being undertaken.

Will the Army Council press the question upon the Treasury?

I think the hon. and gallant Member has already addressed a question to the Treasury.

Is the hon. Member aware the Treasury said that they would look into it? Will the Army Council now make their representations?

It is a question of time. I can hold out no hope that legislation will be introduced. I have consulted my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will issue a Return of the number of officers, non-commissioned officers and men in the Territorial Infantry who are expected from returns to be present on parade at the review to be held in Hyde Park, on the 5th July next, showing the number who have passed the standard test, the number who have not fired the standard test, and the number who have fired but failed to pass the standard test for musketry; if he will give the number of them who attended camp for the full period of training last year; and the number of non-commissioned officers and men of less than nineteen years of age?

This information could only be obtained by calling for special returns from every unit after the review has taken place.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether in the sale of the estate of Lord Holmpatrick, Coolagh, Clonaslee, Queen's County, to the tenants, which took place about two years ago, it was stipulated that 100 acres of land on the landlord's hands was to be divided between four small tenants on the property; whether an inspector from the Estates Commissioners, named Beckett, who visited the lands recently, stated that those 100 acres were going to be given to the herd heretofore employed by the landlord; and can he say what course the Commissioners propose to adopt in the case?

This estate is the subject of proceedings for sale to the Estates Commissioners, but the property has not yet been acquired by them. They are not aware of any such stipulation as that referred to in the question or of the statement attributed to their inspector. The Commissioners have not come to any decision as to the allotment of the untenanted land which appears to comprise mainly cutaway bog, but when they are dealing with the property the circumstances of the occupiers of small holdings will be considered.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state whether the Marquess of Sligo, in his offer to sell his estate, county Mayo, to the Congested Districts Board proposes to reserve any lands other than those comprising Westport demesne; and if so, can he specify such lands?

The Congested Districts Board are in negotiations with the Marquess of Sligo, regarding the purchase of his estate, and they are not in a position at present to give the information asked for.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a speech by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the 1st July, in which he suggested that the system of land purchase in Ireland operated unduly in favour of the landowner and involved a burden on the taxpayer appropriate to be borne by the landowner; whether the view so expressed was the considered opinion of the Cabinet or a merely personal expression by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and whether he proposes to introduce legislation to remedy the suggested wrong?

I understand my right hon. Friend to have referred to the Irish legislation merely by way of illustrating the economic effects of a low rate of interest. The Government are considering, and will very shortly introduce legislation to deal with the difficulties which have arisen in connection with land purchase in Ireland.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the Murphy estate at Castleplunkett, county Roscommon, has yet been acquired by the Congested Districts Board; and, if not, whether he can give an explanation of the delay in the negotiations connected with the sale of this estate, the acquisition of which is much needed by the occupiers of uneconomic holdings in the locality?

The Congested Districts Board have made an offer for the purchase of this estate and they are at present in correspondence with the owner regarding it. There has been no avoidable delay in the matter.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether assistant clerks who have been exempted from further examination on promotion to the second division are required to pay to the Civil Service Commissioners a fee representing the difference between the fee charged in respect of the assistant clerks' examination and that of the second division examination; whether assistant clerks who are examined in one subject only, e.g., copying manuscript, are required to pay a fee of 30s.; and, if so, whether the Commissioners regard this as being necessary to cover the expense to which they are put in holding such an examination?

An assistant clerk on promotion to the second division is not required to pay any further fee unless he is required to undergo a further literary examination. If he is examined in one or more subjects he is required to pay a fee of 30s., being the difference between the amount (£2) leviable in respect of appointment to a second division clerkship and the fee (10s.) which he has already paid in respect of his appointment of assistant clerk. The amount of the fee does not depend on the number of the subjects in which he is examined.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether there has been any change in the method of assessing agricultural lands in Scotland since the publication of the Report of the Royal Commission on Local Taxation; in how many parishes at the present time under what is known as the "classification system" are the occupiers of agricultural land, by consent of the ratepayers, assessed for the poor rate, education rate, burial rate, and registration rate at a lower rate than the occupiers of other properties; and by how many parochial boards in boroughs with populations exceeding 10,000 has the same system been voluntarily adopted?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. In reply to the second and third parts of the question, classifications allowing a lower assessment for agricultural land Han for other property in terms of Section 36 of the Poor Law (Scotland) Act, 1845, exist, according to the last Report of the Local Government Board for Scotland, in fifty-seven parishes, of which eight, namely, Dundee, Forfar, Greenock, Inverness, Kirkintilloch, Montrose, Paisley and Stirling, appear to be wholly or partly comprised within burghs with populations exceeding 10,000. The classifications have in all cases been adopted by the parochial board or parish council with the consent of the Local Government Board or its predecessor, the Board of Supervision.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what sums have been repaid or not claimed by Members on account of their salaries for each year, respectively, since the introduction of the system; and in what account such saving to the Treasury is shown?

I am informed that the amounts are as follows: 1911–12; £4,276; 1912–13 (approximate), £4,400. These savings are included in the Appropriation Account of the annual Vote.

I beg to move "That Sub-head A (Salaries, Wages, and Allowances) be reduced by £100."

The reason I have given notice of this reduction is to call attention to the present unsatisfactory system of clerical assistants in the offices of the surveyors of taxes. This is a matter of great importance, because it affects not only the taxpayer and the revenue of the country, but it also affects very seriously the surveyors of taxes to whom the collection of revenue is entrusted, and more particularly the clerks who are employed by those surveyors. I think that the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer might be more properly directed to looking after the administration of such an important Department than, as he has announced his intention of doing, giving up a certain amount of his time to hurling javelins at his political opponents. The present staffing of the offices of the surveyors of taxes has not been built up on any system at all. Originally the Income Tax was not looked upon as a permanent tax; it was for many years looked upon as merely a temporary expedient in order to raise money. When it was reimposed in 1842, it was then only on a temporary basis, and naturally the staff which was appointed to collect the Income Tax and administer it was restricted as much as possible. Up to the year 1868 the surveyors of taxes instead of having a regular staff, were allowed a certain sum for clerk hire in each year. I do not think that at the present time anyone will suggest that the Income Tax is only of a temporary nature. Indeed, the present Prime Minister, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, in introducing the Budget in April, 1907, said:—

"I start with this proposition, and a most important proposition it is that the Income Tax must now be regarded as an integral and permanent part of our financial system."

I would remind the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he himself, in his now famous Budget speech of 1909, said:—

"The Income Tax, imposed originally as a temporary expedient is now in reality the centre and sheet-anchor of our financial system."

I do not base my case merely on the fact that the Income Tax is now of a permanent nature as against that of a temporary nature as formerly; I claim that owing to the present Government, whether rightly or wrongly, the Income Tax is of a different and much more complicated character than previously. Owing to the Budgets of 1907 and 1909 a great deal of added responsibility has been cast upon the surveyors of taxes. The differentiation between earned and unearned incomes, the Super-tax, and such measures as those have added enormously to the complication and responsibility of the duties of those who are in charge of the Department under the Inland Revenue. The Prime Minister in 1907 said.—

"The Income Tax, as it is one of the most productive, so it is one of the most delicate parts of our fiscal' machinery. There is nothing like it to be found anywhere else in the world."

And from that time onwards the machinery has been made more complicated and more difficult. Sir Matthew Nathan, giving evidence before the Royal Commission last year, said:—

"The whole position as regards Income Tax has so enormously changed. Whereas in old clays the Income Tax had all the sweet simplicity of the Three Per Cents., there is no sweet simplicity left about it."

Surely if that is admittedly the case—and I do not think it is disputed that it is a complicated and difficult tax to collect— the House cannot be in favour of the present system by which the majority of the men to whom is entrusted this delicate task are not on the establishment, are not Civil Service officials, appointed by open competition, but are temporary employés in most cases on merely a weekly agreement, receiving undoubtedly low wages, if not underpaid. I would like to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he really seriously defends the present condition of affairs, if he thinks that it is going on indefinitely, if he does not admit that a great many duties have been added to the surveyors in recent years, and if he does not also admit that the rate of pay has not increased since 1990, although the duties have increased in volume and complexity? It must be apparent to anyone in this House—all of us have some experience of the Income Tax, although A are treated somewhat generously in regard to £100 out of the £400 we are given—that in the offices of the surveyors of taxes there are annually hundreds of thousands of returns of different peoples' incomes, the total income from all sources, the profit and loss accounts of large and small trading firms, the balance sheets, and, indeed, the most confidential information relating to every man's private income and every business undertaking, matters which are naturally always kept under lock and key in the rooms or offices of business firms. The information is obtained by the surveyors and is at the disposal and use of the clerks who are employed by them on a weekly agreement. This is a matter about which many complaints have been made. A resolution was passed unanimously by the Associated Chambers of Commerce in March last year protesting against this system by which people are bound under the Income Tax laws to disclose their private affairs to people who, at any rate, are not under the restrictions or responsibility as they should be and would be if they were placed on the establishment of the Civil Service. I would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he does not really think that men who have this information at their disposal, who have got this secret information, should at any rate be as well treated and as carefully guarded as officials in the Post Office—as postmen, telegraphists, or sorters? Surely, if it is necessary in the interests of the public and the Civil Service that postmen and sorters and others should be on the establishment, it is at least as important that these men should be! Possibly we may be told that the matter is under consideration, and that they have been considering it in the Department for some time. I say that this is not a matter for a Departmental Committee to inquire into. It is not a matter of pounds, shillings and pence; it is not a question whether the Treasury can afford it or not. It is a question of principle, and we ought not to tolerate this state of affairs any longer. The time has arrived when this thing should be done without any further delay or any further putting off—that is, front the point of view of the public and of the taxpayer.

But what as to the point of view of the clerks themselves? Under the present system what inducement is there for them to remain, or, indeed, in the first instance, what is there to attract the best class of men to enter this service and to seek appointments in these offices? Naturally the other Departments of the Civil Service, which offer better pay, to be followed by a pension, have the pick of the young men who wished to enter the Civil Service, and an important Department like this should be able to offer inducements greater than any railway company or private concern. It should be the aim of the Inland Revenue Department to draw around it for this important work men of the very best class and of the highest capabilities. Instead of that, the men who are in the first instance attracted there are given no security of tenure, and they are constantly, and very naturally, looking out for something better, something by which they may earn some reward or some provision for their old age. It is not as if the office of a surveyor of taxes can be said to be very popular in a district. It is not a very rosy thing to be a surveyor of taxes or to be employed in his office. It is not the most pleasant occupation. The Chancellor of the Exchequer the other day said that those who went in for politics must not expect to make money. But, at any rate, they have the hope of some other reward. They have the hope of gratifying their ambitions. But a man does not enter the office of a surveyor of taxes merely for the sake of satisfying his ambition. He does so to get a living, and he naturally wants a decent living. He expects a fair wage and proper security of tenure, and, unless you give those conditions, you will not get the best class of men around the surveyor.

This matter has been before the House for a long time. These complaints have been voiced for years past, and I want the Chancellor of the Exchequer to-day to give us some definite assurance that some steps should be taken in the direction I have indicated. I would remind him, in case his memory requires refreshing, that at the present time there are, roughly, about 400 districts in the United Kingdom from which taxes are collected. There are something like 399 or 400 surveyors; they have, I believe, 227 assistant surveyors, and, under those again, there are at the present time, 727 clerks, in addition to 313 boy clerks. Out of the 727 clerks, only 230 are established as Civil servants. The rest, over 500, are temporary men engaged on weekly terms. The 200 who are established were only placed on the establishment after an agitation lasting some time, in the course of which great pressure was put upon the department. For all these men, whether they are on the establishment or not, the highest salary at the present time attainable is £182 per year, and only about 11 per cent. of the 700 have reached that figure. Does the Chancellor of the Exchequer think that £182 per year is really an adequate living wage for these men—men who have to keep up a certain position, and sometimes have to work almost day and night? Further than that, it is not merely routine work. It is work of extreme complexity, and, certainly, it is anything but pleasant; yet, at the present time, that is the highest wage received by clerks to surveyors.

Just look at the other side of the question. What are these men asked to do? What is that they are called upon to collect? Last year, the total revenue raised by these men in taxes, of which they are entrusted with the collection, exceeded £40,000,000, for Income Tax only, and the gross assessments with which they have to deal are over £1,000,000,000. The repayment claims which were dealt with two years ago—I have not the figures for last year—came to over half a million. The surveyors themselves are directly responsible for all these duties. Yet they have to look to these clerks—these temporary weekly clerks—to carry out their responsible duties. They have the responsibility for the collection of £40,000,000 a year, and much of it falls upon these poorly paid temporary clerks under them. Let the Chancellor of the Exchequer take any one district he likes. Probably there would be one surveyor and one clerk, not on the establishment, with the addition of a boy clerk. It is only fair and reasonable to expect that the surveyor should, some time during the year, have a holiday. He will have to go away, at any rate, for some twenty or thirty days in the course of a year, to see the assessors and collectors in his district. While he is away he has to put entire trust and confidence in the man under him in his office. He has to entrust his whole correspondence—his private correspondence and the whole of his books and papers—to the clerk whom he leaves in charge. I say that that puts a strain upon the surveyor which is entirely unfair, for if there is a leakage or a mistake he has to bear the brunt of it. He is a Civil servant liable to lose his pension through irregularity or incompetence. Yet he has to go away and leave all these things in charge of a man employed only by the week. I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, I ask anyone in this House, if it is fair to place the surveyors in such a position. Again, speaking both from the clerk's point of view, and from the surveyor's point of view, it cannot be denied that the work is of a highly technical character. A man who has to examine into the profits or losses of a trade, to allow depreciation, to make detailed examination of the accounts of perhaps a large company or a small firm, must be a man of considerable ability. I may quote the words of one of the chief officials of the Inland Revenue Department, giving evidence in 1904 in regard to this question. He said:—

"The man requires to know the income Tax law and practice, and to have some experience as well as some technical knowledge before he can examine a claim."

4.0 P.M.

Yet the man who can do that is only given security of office for a week. He is paid at the most £182 a year, and a very small percentage of them reach that figure. It must be remembered, too, that the information he requires is not always given with readiness and eagerness. If a man gets a claim for Income Tax and is asked to prove how much money he makes, the chances are that he, or even the Chancellor of the Exchequer, faced with such a question, would say, "You must find out for yourself." You do not give information very readily to the first man who comes along, and far less readily to some official who may be gone the next day and be engaged by your rivals, and who will have an opportunity of telling them what takes place in your own business. That is most important from the point of view of the traders. Those men who have no security of office may easily be engaged by rival firms and give the whole of the confidential information they have seen through examining the books, which they have a right to do, if they so desire—I do not say they do it—to another firm. Added to that, there is at the present time a very small desire to let things pass. In the old days, when the Income Tax was not so high, when it was 7d. or 8d., people would often pay, even if they were assessed higher than their income, rather than have the fuss and annoyance of disclosing their books or making an appeal. Now that taxation has reached such a high point people will rather go through all the trouble and have their books examined than submit to taxation which is a great deal higher than they are legally bound to pay; therefore it is not only necessary that the surveyors and those under them should not only be diligent, but they have to give more information and they have more appeals, interviews, and correspondence than formerly. I could go into further details as to the position of the surveyors themselves, but I will not weary the Committee. I could state case after case where surveyors have broken down under the strain which has fallen upon them. The strain now is a growing strain, and the time has now come when no further delay should be brooked, and when the Chancellor of the Exchequer should make up his mind to face this difficulty and treat these men more fairly than is being done at present. The present system casts a strain on the surveyors. It is unfair to the public that they should have their books examined by men who have no inducement, as they should have, to treat as confidential this private information. It is unfair to the clerks themselves to ask men who are treated in this way to behave as if they were being treated well. I should like to bring the matter to a head to-day by putting before the Chancellor of the Exchequer definite proposals which are the outcome of a careful Report made by the surveyors themselves as to what we should do in this matter. I would suggest, first of all, that a rise in pay be given to the clerks, that the pay should be from £70 to £300 a year, that they should all be put on the establishment and all have an opportunity of sharing in the benefits of superannuation, and that they should all be chosen by open competition and not merely nominated, as at the present time. There should be some provision that those who have served their time as boy clerks should be given some service marks, which should count in the open competition so as to give them some chance of climbing up the ladder once they have started up it. The Chancellor of the Exchequer may say, "That is all very well, but where is the money coming from?" I do not think it is really a question of money when so large a principle is involved. Sir Matthew Nathan, in his evidence before the Royal Commission on the Civil Service, said that he estimated the cost of dealing with this service upon the lines I have indicated would be £147,000 a year, instead of, as at present, £91,000, or an increase of £56,000 a year. It may be a considerable sum, but it is a sum which would not be ill-spent. It would give greater efficiency and greater security and would meet a necessity which must be admitted by all fair-minded men. We should get a better class of men to apply for the posts in the first instance. We should get the pick, instead of the residue, of those who have passed for other Civil Service appointments and perhaps other more lucrative employment.

If this change is made, as I hope it will be made before long, the present clerks should be treated in a generous spirit. They should be placed on the establishment, those of them who are worthy, upon the new terms, and all of them should be treated fairly. I do not wish it to be thought from the remarks I have made that I desire in any way to cast discredit upon the present staff or to suggest that the present surveyors have not carried out their duties to the best of their ability. Considering the circumstances in which they have been placed it is extraordinary that there has not been more leakage and less efficiency than we have seen in the Revenue Department. That is no reason for letting the present state of things go on. I would urge that the time has now come when the Chancellor should not merely put us off by saying that the matter is being considered by a Royal Commission and is only one small part of a whole which must be dealt with in its tern. This is something which can be dealt with quite by itself and at the present time. The Royal Commission is not considering this matter; it is considering the question of Civil Service appointments, and these men are not in the Civil Service. In addition to which we all know the delay which accompanies the proceedings and eventually the Report of a Royal Commission. This is a matter in which I hope the Chancellor of the Exchequer will act with promptitude, and that he will give no mere promise to deal with it, but that before the Revenue Estimates come on next year he will remove this grievance, which I believe is a very real one, and is felt to be by hon. Members on both sides of the Committee.

I intend to take a very small part in the present discussion as one interested in the position of the tax surveyors' clerks. I do not wish to make anything like an elaborate statement; that has already been done by the last speaker, but I wish to put the case as definitely as possible before the Committee. Those who care to make the briefest study of the case must agree that these particular men have been in a kind of backwash. The Income Tax began in and these men were then employed in an indirect manner by the payment to the surveyor of an amount for clerk hire. After twenty-six years there was a slight alteration. The clerk hire was abolished, and the clerks were employed and paid direct by the Inland Revenue. That went on for another thirty-two years before any alteration was made in the position of these men. The right of dismissal or engagement was then taken away from the surveyors and put within the discretion of the Board. From 1842 until 1908 none of these clerks were on the establishment. There are now 727 of these men, 230 of whom are on the establishment and 500 are left unestablished. A strong case can be made out for the establishment of these men. There are some people who ask for establishment where it ought not to be given, but in this case one can lay down this rule, that where the employment of a certain set of men in a particular kind of work disqualifies them, if they were displaced from that employment, from fitting themselves into any other kind of employ- meat, there is a really good claim for establishment. Coupled with that where the work done by these men implies a certain amount of responsibility and secrecy in the details of the work confided to them, that gives added strength to the request of the men for establishment. When one considers the amount of work passing through the hands of these men, that no less than £40,000,000 of revenue is raised and practically passes through the hands of these men, and that in 1911–12 £1,000,000,000 of gross income was assessed for Income Tax, that over £500,000 was repaid, and that over 1,000 assessors and clerks are engaged in this service, it gives one an idea of the size of the problem to be faced.

The men concerned are handling Income Tax, Inhabited House Duty, Mineral Rights Duty, and to some extent the Land Taxes as well. One point put by the last speaker was that there is not a large number of these men, but that they are scattered over 352 districts in the country. We are dealing in this case with slightly under 1,500 persons, so that it must be obvious that there must be a small number of people employed in each office. It is obvious that where you have a large office with a large number of men you can afford to have some variation in the qualifications of the persons employed, but that where you have a large number of offices with a small number of people, it is pretty clear that it is essential that the qualifications of each of the men should be reasonably high. That is the case in regard to these men. From the inquiries which I have made it appears that there have been no improvements made in their rates of pay for thirteen years. That would take a good deal of justification at the hands of anybody in this Committee, and I am sure that neither the Chancellor of the Exchequer nor anybody else will attempt to justify, under existing conditions, the remuneration of any section of men standing still for thirteen years. It is an admitted fact to-day that the cost of living has very considerably increased. When one realises that up to 1908 the highest rate of pay among these men was only £2 a week, and that the highest rate of pay to-day is only £182 per year, or a trifle over £3 a week, it is obvious that the margin between that and the cost of living of these people cannot be very large, therefore the cost of living affects the men in these surveyors offices to a very considerable extent. For what are the men asking? It does not seem to me a very great demand. It is a demand which has been made and, I think, met in regard to the second-class officers in the Customs and Excise. They ask that the starting salary should be£70 a year, that it should increase by £7 10s. a year to £150, and that after £150 it should increase by annual increments to £300 a year, plus the establishment of those who are qualified and who are judged by the surveyors to be fit for establishment.

There is one point in this matter which is of great importance. Although there can be no doubt that this means an increase in the cost of the service in the first place, there is very little doubt in the mind of anyone who cares to understand the matter at all that if, by the increased salaries paid to these men, you get a better selection of men and a higher quality of clerks for these offices, inasmuch as these clerks and surveyors are handling assessments covering roughly £1,000,000,000 a year, there will have to be a very small improvement in the quality of the work they perform before the whole of the difference in the cost of the advance in salaries they are asking for will not only be made up but made up ten times over, and from that point of view it seems to me that there is indeed a very strong justification for some attention being given to the claims of these men. Of course, they are only a small section of the service, and it is obvious on the face of it, from the details that I have been able to glean, that these men seem to have been in a kind of backwash in the past—that is to say, that very little attention has been given to them. They have been allowed to drift, under an antiquated and out-of-date system, and naturally the movement to-day in all sections of business implies that men in all sections of life must expect to improve their condition of life as the business system of the country improves. Therefore, I think these men are thoroughly well justified in asking the Chancellor of the Exchequer for some little attention to this question, for, after all, to these men it is very largely a question of bread-and-butter. I hope, whatever the difficulties and the activities of the right hon. Gentleman may be—and he cannot have very much time to give to a small item like this—the matter will receive his best attention and the men may look forward with some hope to some betterment being made in their conditions of service.

I rise also to support the Motion, and also to endorse what the hon. Gentleman opposite has been saying. This question of the position of surveyors and suveyors' clerks has been brought before Parliament before. In 1898 a really exhaustive statement was prepared by the surveyors setting out the then existing position and asking for an inquiry. The inquiry was not ordered, but at the same time considerable improvements in the conditions of their service were then effected and additional surveyors were appointed, and although that was an advantage it was not adequate, and the position was not then fully dealt with. In 1905 another attempt was made by the Association of Tax Surveying Officers by means of a petition to the Board of Inland Revenue, but that petition was without result. Three years afterwards, in 1908, the same association made a representation to Members of Parliament direct, and, as a result of that, some steps were taken for the first time to put some of these temporary clerks upon the establishment, and about 170 clerks were then placed upon the Board, leaving about 500 still unestablished and still on weekly engagements. But even for them some improvment was effected, because those clerks instead, as hitherto, of being appointed by the various surveyors of taxes themselves, were brought into some sort of regularised system and were appointed by the Board of Inland Revenue. In 1910 a further effort was made by representation to the Board as to the conditions which were then prevailing as to overwork, due largely to the alteration in the Finance Acts by the differentiation of Income Tax and so on, but no alteration was then made. Their position has now, I think, almost come to a crisis, for the efficiency of their work is being affected by the want of organisation in their offices, for which they themselves are not responsible and for which the system under which the clerks are appointed clearly seems to be responsible.

Even at the risk of repeating some of the information which has already been given by my hon. Friend, I will ask the Committee to consider who these people are for whom we are now speaking and what their duties are. I knew nothing whatever about the internal organisation of an Income Tax surveyor's office until my attention was called to this particular thing. My only contact with an Income Tax surveyor's office did not lead me to any particularly pleasant recollections, and I did not seem to think I owed any particular duty to the courteous but very firm gentleman whom one is accustomed to meet on the occasion of one's visits. It appears that there are some 399 surveyors, whose scale of pay is from £200 to £700 a year, and they have 227 assistants. It is not with regard to their position that we are urging this upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but it is necessary to realise who they are and what their work is before you can appreciate what their office organisation is and what work is thrown upon the clerks. There are 750 men clerks and 314 boy clerks. Of the men clerks 230 are established. Of these 230 eighty-two have salaries equivalent to about £3 10s. a week—that is, 11 per cent of all the clerks. The highest position to which these clerks can rise when established is to receive an income of £3 10s. a week. Of the other established clerks 150 have an income up to about £3 a week. Under that group of 230 established clerks there are 520 non-established clerks, who are on weekly agreements, appointed by the Board of Inland Revenue, and their engagement is subject to one week's termination. Their general conditions are nothing like as favourable as the equivalent conditions of the Civil Service. They are entitled to twenty-four days of sick-pay on full remuneration if sick, and twenty-four days only of part remuneration if sick as against the corresponding six months' full pay if they are in the Civil Service and sick, followed by six months' half pay, if the illness lasted so long. It is not only in the actual weekly wage, but it is their whole term of service and the sole conditions of their employment. These 520 are paid from 20s. to 50s. a week, and the boy clerks are paid from 10s. to 20s., and they are obliged to leave unless they are absorbed into the position of man clerks when they have arrived at eighteen to twenty years of age, and as a fact, I believe it is true that relatively few of the really best of the boy clerks are absorbed into the position of men clerks, for the very simple reason that in that branch of the Civil Service they are enabled to get a much better position, and the consequence is that it is not the best but rather the second or third-rate boy clerk who becomes a man clerk in the surveyors' department.

My hon. Friend reminded the Committee of the duties that the surveyors and their clerks have to perform, and, in order to appreciate what the actual duty of the clerk is, one has to realise what the organisation of the surveyors' office is. The organisation of the surveyors' office is the surveyor himself, if in a large district an assistant surveyor, and perhaps two or three clerks and a boy. But if in a smaller district there may be only a surveyor with one clerk and a boy, and it is obvious that if that clerk is a competent clerk he can assist the surveyor in nearly all his duties, leaving the surveyor much freer to do just exactly the highest branch of the work which can alone be done by the surveyor. If, on the other hand, he is not a very competent clerk, it means that the surveyor, instead of being able to do his own work, has to spend a large portion of his time in doing work which could quite well be done by a clerk if the clerk were at all competent. I hope to show that it is in the interests of the Treasury itself that steps should be taken to improve the position of the clerk, so that the surveyors can be free to do the real directing work—the work which they are really intended to do—rather than have to spend a great deal of their time in doing clerical work. It is very obvious that you do not pay a man £200 to £700 a year to lick stamps on envelopes, but if the office boy was entirely incompetent and the surveyor's postage had to be done, he would have to, lick the stamps on the envelopes himself. That is not the thing that happens, but it illustrates what I mean. There is plenty of work for the surveyor to do, and he can do it so long as his time is not taken up by doing inferior work which ought to be done by the clerk, but for that purpose you have to get clerks who arc competent for that work. See what the clerks have to do. They have to deal first of all, in the aggregate, with half a million repayment claims for Income Tax. I do not know whether any hon. Gentleman has ever tried to make a claim for repayment of Income Tax. I have. It is a most amusing occupation if you have patience. It takes a very long time, and a large number of letters and any number of yellow forms have to be filled up. If you have only to do it in one or two cases it may amuse you, but I want you for a moment to think what goes on in a surveyor's office.

Consider that he himself cannot possibly, if he is going to do his other important work, devote time to consider the detailed claims of very small amounts for return of Income Tax. He ought to be able to leave that to his clerk merely helping him if he gets into a difficulty which the clerk cannot himself deal with. There are some 500,000 of these claims every year. In addition to that, besides having to analyse for the purpose of Schedules (d) and (e) of the Income Tax the statements of profits on trades and professions, the surveyors and their clerks have to consider large and important amounts of corporations and public bodies. It is quite true that the surveyor is himself responsible, but in the nature of things, he ought to be able to rely very largely upon his clerk, and if he is to have the assistance which would enable him to do that, that clerk must have a considerable knowledge of Income Tax law and of recent decisions, and if anyone has any connection with Income Tax law, he will know that it is not to be found in any one book in any clear fashion, but has to be hunted for in all sorts of directions and all sorts of decisions. In addition, he has to check the collector of Income Tax's accounts, and especially to reconcile the statement of uncollected Income Tax which these collectors are bound to return. Each of these separate offices of surveyors is surrounded by, and has attributed to it, a large number of collectors of Income Tax who have to account to them specially for the uncollected tax, and the surveyor has to check these collections or, rather, check the amount of the uncollected amounts with the collectors.

If there are any objections to the Property Tax or the House Duty Assessment, the clerk to the surveyor has got to deal with these, and for that purpose he has got to be able to understand a lease or agreement, and to have sufficient technical knowledge, at any rate, to consider the various objections that are made to the assessment. The office is a unit, the organisation of which depends not only on the ability of the surveyor, but on the ability of the clerk, and the surveyor's work itself depends upon his being able to rely upon his clerk to do completely the detailed work. The increase of work has been really considerable during the last few years. I will not deal with it in detail. There have been any number of cases of surveyors who have had their clerks breaking down from overwork. I have seen a memorandum which shows some serious cases of early breakdown, and they are attributed to overwork in the various offices. I have seen statements that it is no uncommon thing for a surveyor and his clerk to be working up to eight or nine o'clock in the evening for long periods at a time. If the Committee will consider the matter, they will realise with respect to Income Tax alone how much the work has increased. In the 1907 Budget there was a large differentiation in the tax, and in the 1909–10 Budget the differentiation was carried still further. There were earned incomes and unearned incomes to be distinguished between; claims for abatement on account of children were introduced, and each of these claims means not merely relief for the tax payer, but an immense amount of detailed work in the offices of the surveyors who have to consider the claims. In addition, the Mineral Rights Duty was imposed, and that amounts to £400,000 a year which has also to be handled by the surveyors and their clerks. The future is not very bright either, because Income Tax is now a permanent tax and on a higher scale. The claims for abatement and for the return of payments which have been made are much more insisted upon now than when the tax was lighter. Since the tax has been made higher, the tendency must be to have nicer adjustments of machinery to fit the burden on the various classes. The machinery has to be adjusted for dealing with claims for abatement, and that means new complications in the accounts, and the detailed work in connection with that is considerable. It is easy enough for us in this House to pass legislation imposing the taxes, but the detailed work which falls on the surveyors' offices in the 320 districts throughout the country involves a great deal of extra work.

There is another point which I wish to mention, namely, that the information which is now in the possession of the surveyors and their clerks is necessarily of a highly confidential nature, and it seems to me that it is of such a nature that it should only be dealt with by those who are employed on Civil Service conditions, and who have the feeling that their whole life depends upon their maintaining the traditions of the service in an atmosphere which prevents them being under any temptation, either for money or advancement in life, to make any misuse of the knowledge they have. I would ask the Committee to remember that a man who is subject to a week's notice is in a very different position from a man who is on the permanent established staff of the Civil Service, and who knows that when he becomes too old to work there is a pension at the end of his service. A man on the established staff has a feeling of responsibility quite different from that of a man who knows that he is liable to be turned off on a week's notice. There is no comparison between the position of the two men, and it seems to me that such important and confidential work as these men perform does require that it should be carried out by men with the high sense of responsibility which a position of permanency gives. I believe it is an economy from the State point of view to have men permanently employed. The efficiency of the surveyor largely depends on the efficiency of the man he employs. If a surveyor has an efficient man who can do the work without bothering him with the clerical work, it is better for the State, but the conditions of the work must be such as to attract the right sort of man.

The proposals put forward by this association seem to me quite reasonable and moderate. They say that the boy clerks should be given service marks in an open competition for appointments to the men clerkships. That seems to me to be a very good idea, because, without being an apprenticeship for the men clerkships, it does enable a boy who goes into an office to have some better chance of an appointment as a man clerk. If he is given a slight start on the way by an open competition for the position of a man clerkship he has an incentive to do his work well. If you do that, you are lessening the "blind-alley" occupation which exists so long as you turn off a boy at eighteen years of age. By doing that, you are likely to give a boy a permanent object in life, and he, on obtaining a man clerkship, will be able to utilise the experience gained during the few years he was a boy clerk. It is suggested that the men clerks should be on the established staff, and that the appointment should be made by open competition. At present they are appointed without examination at all. Starting at a salary of £70 a year, these clerks should be able to attain, after many years' service, a maximum of £300 a year. Then, in order that there should be no injustice done to those on the staff, the association suggests that the existing clerks should be established; but as they may not all be of the same class and character as those who will be brought into the service after the conditions have been improved, it is also suggested that there should be an efficiency bar at the £150 a year, which is nearly the maximum rate at present, and that unless a clerk can by examination meet the efficiency test he should stop at £150, while, on the other hand, if he can pass, he should go on as if he were a new clerk appointed under the new conditions. The association also says that past service should count for pensions. That appears to me to be an eminently justifiable claim. In regard to the comparison of the position in the Civil Service now with the proposals made by the association, I think the Chancellor of the Exchequer will see that if the proposals were adopted there would be given to these clerks a position equivalent to that of clerks in other branches of the Civil Service. I notice that Sir Matthew Nathan, referring to these proposals in his evidence before the Civil Service Commission, said:—

"They [a Departmental Committee] had made a proposal that the establishment should consist partly of clerks with the same scale of pay as the second division clerks, and partly of clerks with the same scale as assistant clerks, and, to a much smaller extent than at present, of boys; the numbers are 200 on the scale of the second division, 820 on the scale of assistant clerks, and 120 boys."

That roughly corresponds with what is suggested by the association. Apparently the cost to the Treasury, if these proposals were granted would ultimately amount to £56,000 a year. That is the ultimate but not the present cost, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has often shown his appreciation of the difference between the final cost and the cost that would fall on the present year, will be glad to hear that if these proposals were accepted the cost this year or next year would be only £2,500.

Can the hon. Gentleman state when the ultimate amount of the charge will be reached?

I cannot say whether Sir Matthew Nathan stated how many years it will take to get to the higher figure, but the actual cost now, as I understand, will be about £2,500 a year. The ultimate charge will only come about after, I think, about twenty years, when the salaries have risen from the starting point to midway, or the average figure. It would then come up to the sum I have mentioned.