asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the names of destroyers are being changed; and, if so, to what extent and for what purpose?

Certain proposals are being considered, but I have no statement to make upon the subject at present.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will give the names of the ships transferred from the First to the Second Battle Fleet; if he will state to the House how many ships of the Second Battle Fleet have full complements and how many have nucleus crews; and whether the Board of Admiralty consider that nucleus-crew ships could be counted as instantly-ready ships in the event of a sudden attack being made by an enemy at the latter's selected moment?

A constant process of transfer of ships from the First to the Second Fleet is going on, as new ships join the First Fleet. If the Noble Lord will specify any particular period I could give him the names of the vessels so moved. There are twelve battleships at the present in the Second Fleet. None of these have full complements, nor are they intended to have full complements. The peace organisation of the Second Fleet has been fully explained on several occasions. In the opinion of the Board of Admiralty the Second Fleet ships form part of the immediately ready Fleet, because their balance crews are composed of active service ratings, who are available for immediate embarkation and who could be so embarked while steam is being raised.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty for the number of vessels of each class now stationed in the Mediterranean; and the number of vessels of corresponding classes in commission in the Mediterranean of the Austrian, Italian, and French navies?

The British vessels stationed in the Mediterranean are specified in the Navy List. The answer to the latter part of the question is as follows:—

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he did not state the last time that in July this year there would be at least four battle cruisers in the Mediterranean, and is it not a fact that only the "Inflexible" has reached Malta up to the present?

The "Inflexible" is the only battle cruiser in the Mediterranean at present. The other ships are concentrated here for the purpose of the manœuvres.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if the battleship "Reshad V.," built in this country to the order of the Turkish Government, is to be taken over by that country; if not, whether the Admiralty proposes to acquire the vessel; and whether, in that event, the ship will take the place of one of the additional slips rendered necessary under the Admiralty programme to meet the increase in the German Navy, or whether it will be regarded as taking the place of one of the Canadian ships?

As regards the first part of the question, I have no information to the contrary. With regard to the remaining part, I have nothing to add to my previous statements on the subject.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty under what Vote the money is to be found that is being spent on forts at Cromarty; when and how was the Admiralty authorised to build these forts; and the circumstances under which the work was transferred from the War Office to the Admiralty?

The expenditure on the works now in progress for the protection of the Fleet anchorage at Cromarty is provided for under Vote 10, Sub-head B, Part I. of the Navy Estimates. The decision that the works referred to should be constructed by the Admiralty was arrived at on the recommendation of the Committee of Imperial Defence. This decision was arrived at before the works were commenced, so that the suggestion that the work was transferred from the War Office to the Admiralty is incorrect.

Was it not due to the action of the right hon. Gentleman that the work was transferred from the War Office to the Admiralty after it had been commenced by the War Office?

The work was never begun by the War Office.

Is it not a fact that the work was originally begun by the War Office and changed at the right hon. Gentleman's request?

The War Office is the usual Department for dealing with coast defences, but in this case it was decided that it should be done under the. Admiralty.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the shortage of armourer ratings on 1st June; if the, difficulty in recruiting for the armourer class has been removed; and, if it has not, what steps he proposes to take in order to obtain the necessary number of high-class mechanics?

The number borne on 15th May (the latest date for which the figures are available) was about 100 short of the number which it is desired to reach at the end of this financial year. There is still difficulty in recruiting men for this rating, and, as stated in reply to the hon. Member for. Devonport on 4th June, the subject is receiving consideration.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether divisional commanders of coastguard stations have any right to employ, during official hours, for his own private purposes, the coastguards under his command; whether Divisional Commander Nash, R.N., had some eight coastguards from the stations at. Kinsale and Oysterhaven, county Cork, engaged in painting and other work at his private residence, Newborn, Ballinaclashet; and if, in view of the fact that the services of these men may be required at any moment, this system will be immediately put a stop to and divisional commanders be compelled to employ other men to do their private work?

Divisional officers have no right to employ coastguard ratings, except in their spare time, when they are permitted to do so for light work on the station if the men volunteer, and it is difficult to get other labour Lieutenant Nash has, I understand, employed two and sometimes four men at his residence in their spare time.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that wages in Malta have remained practically stationary for the last thirty years; whether he is aware that during this time house rent has increased as much as 50 per cent., and that the cost of living has made a marked progress during the last two years owing to stoppages of foodstuffs hitherto plentifully imported from the coast of Barbary, as well as from Sicily, before the outbreak of the Turco-Italian war; and whether the Board of Admiralty can see their way to increase the pay of the men employed in Malta dockyard?

I am not prepared to admit the contention put forward by the Noble Lord in the first part of the question, as the rates of wages paid to the various classes of workmen employed in the dockyard in Malta have in many cases been raised during the period mentioned. I am not in a position to say how far the statements made in regard to the increase in house rent and the cost of living may be true; nor have I any reason to suppose that the rates of wages paid to the dockyard workmen compare other than favourably with those generally current in the Island.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Admiralty have any information that an additional battleship has been laid down by Austria; and whether the Admiralty have any information that two more battleships will be laid down shortly by Austria, and that these three ships will be ready for sea some time in 1916?

asked if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the first unit of the second Austro-Hungarian "Dreadnought" division has been laid down at Trieste and that construction is being pushed forward rapidly; and if this is a new fact requiring prompt attention on the part of His Majesty's Government?

I am not yet in a position to make any definite statement to Parliament on this subject.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether there has been any development of dockyard facilities since Admiral Sir Reginald Henderson's Report was presented; and whether the dockyards are suited to the construction of cruisers and destroyers; if so, are cruisers and destroyers being built in these docks at the present time; (2) whether the Australian small-arms factory is in operation, and how many rifles were turned out in 1911 and 1912; whether the naval college is in full operation, and who is in charge; (3) whether the Australian Government has accepted Admiral Sir Reginald Henderson's naval defence scheme in its entirety or in part; and, in either case, what are the details of the scheme as to the construction of armoured protected cruisers, destroyers, and submarines; what period the construction will cover; what will be the extent of the personnel; what will be the annual cost of maintenance; and what construction has been already entered upon and what, if any, completed; and (4) whether the scheme, as was announced in 1911, for extensive naval works, including floating docks to be built by Vickers' Company at Montreal, has been carried out; and, if so, to what extent?

I regret that I cannot undertake to answer questions as to matters which are under the control of responsible Ministers of the Crown in the self-governing Dominions. General information as to the state of development of Dominion naval services is no doubt relevant to the naval policy of His Majesty's Government, and I have made and will continue to make statements on the subject when our own policy is under discussion in the House. The hon. Member will equally have an opportunity on such occasions of commenting on the Dominion naval services. If the hon. Member desires to make enquiry of, or convey suggestions to, the Dominion Governments on specific points the proper channel of communication is through my right hon. Friend the Colonial Secretary.

Are we to understand that the Government decline to ask for information from the Dominion Governments in reference to matters in which the whole Empire is interested?

I certainly desire to-secure all proper information for the House of Commons asks for, but as this is the first question of this kind during my tenure of office, I am bound to make it quite clear that we are not in a position to reply to questions in regard to the Dominion Navies as if they were our own Navies, and if we were to assume that position it might easily give offence.

Can the right hon. Gentleman inform me in what way, as a Member of the House of Commons, I can obtain information of this kind?

When the Dominion Navies are maintained entirely at the expense of the Dominions concerned the position of the Admiralty is one of indirect responsibility, and although we shall always try to obtain all information which we think can properly be given we must act with delicacy in the matter.

I fully recognise that. Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman will not ask the Commonwealth Government of Australia for information which this House desires?

I will bring the question to the notice of the Dominions through my right hon. Friend in the regular way. I think it is more suitable that I should ask them in what way they wish us to give information in this House oft the various matters connected with the development of their naval affairs, but it Is entirely a matter for the Colonial Office to deal with, and the Admiralty must be very careful to confine itself to natters within its own sphere.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the expenditure on the Navy in 1887; what was the personnel; what was the number of battleships and cruisers, respectively; and what was the tonnage of the largest battleship of that day?

The expenditure (net) on the Navy in the financial year 1887–88 was £12,348,895. The personnel in that year—numbers borne 31st March, 1888, Vote A—was 62,442. The battleships were thirty-seven, and cruisers, including all classes, fifty-three. The tonnage of the largest battleship was 11,880.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether eleven officers have been appointed to the War Staff without undergoing the qualifying course; and, if so, whether he can explain what is the object of the qualifying course.

Yes, Sir. It is a necessary feature of the inauguration of the War Staff system. These officers have all been occupying positions of responsibility upon the War Staff or in similar situations for which a War Staff qualification would be indispensable were officers of such training available in sufficient numbers. This was clearly foreshadowed in the original Memorandum on a Naval War Staff issued by me on the 1st January, 1912, which was appended to the statement explanatory of the Navy Estimates, 1912–13.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that Heinrich Grosse, a convict in Parkhurst Prison, was reported in April as suffering with symptoms of Bright's disease of recent development, and that in June he was reported as suffering from chronic kidney disease; and whether, in view of his declining state of health and the prospect that unless released shortly his health will be permanently injured, the consideration of a remission of sentence will be entertained?

I have received from time to time full reports from the medical officer of the prison as to Grosse's condition of health. The convict is suffering from kidney disease which originated prior to his conviction and has not, up to the present, been aggravated by his imprisonment. I do not find any sufficient ground to justify interference with the sentence. The convict's health will receive all necessary care and attention in prison.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether he can deal with this case under the Prisoners (Temporary Discharge) Ill-Health Act?

No. If my hon. Friend will read that Act he will see why it would not apply in the present case.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that Heinrich Grosse, a convict in Parkhurst Prison for espionage, has received a certificate of captain in the German merchant service so as to entitle him to the position of officer in the naval reserve, and that he holds the rank in Germany of councillor to His Highness Duke Borwin of Mecklenburg-Schwerin; whether these facts were communicated to the Foreign Office before a decision was taken as to his release; and whether, in view of all the circumstances as now known, this convict will obtain a remission of his sentence?

The statements mentioned in my hon. Friend's question are made in a letter from a friend of the prisoner, which I received on 30th June; but whether correct or incorrect, they do not affect the facts stated in my answer of 26th June, or the decision in the case.

Would the right hon. Gentleman like to have the evidence, which I have in my possession, proving that the statements are quite correct?

My hon. Friend has been good enough to speak to me on the subject, and I accept his statements, but, accepting them as I do, they do not, in my judgment., affect the decision I came to.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that the release of this man would be a gracious return for the recent release of two British prisoners by the German Emperor?

If we did think so we should certainly release the man, but we have reason to think that that is not the case.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that a marriage was celebrated at the church of St. Mary Major, Exeter, on Saturday, 28th of June, by the Bishop of Marlborough, that the ceremony commenced after three o'clock, and that there is no provision in the Marriage Acts to warrant such a proceeding; and whether a Provisional Order will be introduced to make this marriage legal and binding?

I have made inquiry, and am informed that the marriage ceremony in question was begun before 3 p.m. I have no authority to decide whether any marriage is valid or otherwise. In any case invalidity can be remedied, either by the remarriage of the parties or by a Provisional Order.

asked the Home Secretary if he is aware that the New Explosive Company, Stowmarket, who have a contract with the Government, are allowed to lodge knobsticks inside the works and to bring in beer and spirits; if he is aware that Rule 15 at the works states that no person shall bring any beer, spirits, or other intoxicating liquors into any part of the factory; if he is aware that these rules are sanctioned by the Secretary of State, signed by a full colonel His Majesty's Inspector of Explosives, and dated Home Office, Whitehall, 12th May, 1898; and if he intends taking any action in the matter?

I am informed on inquiry that four workmen are lodged in the factory owing to their having been threatened and intimidated outside. They take their meals in the mess-room and are supplied with beer with their supper; but no spirits have been brought in. It has been customary ever since the mess-room was built for men to bring in beer to drink with their meals. The mess-room, though within the boundary, is entirely separated from the factory; and if there be any breach of the Special Rule, it is merely technical. There is no ground upon which action by me could be founded.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that if any of the men have beer or spirits of any kind, they are liable to dismissal, and that on Friday afternoon, 27th January, the police took twenty-four bottles of beer, and whether this was not a breach of the Rules of 1898, under which the firm are liable to be prosecuted for allowing beer to be taken into the works?

I was not aware of the circumstances stated by my hon. Friend. I will inquire further.

If my information is correct, will the Home Secretary prosecute the firm for allowing beer to go into the danger zone?

I am not sure if my hon. Friend's information is accurate, that his law is equally right. I am not aware that I have any Dower to prosecute.

Is it not the fact that the Rules of 1898, issued by the Home Office and signed by a colonel, prevents anything of the kind going in?

I am not aware whether the remedy is such as my hon. Friend suggests.

What is the good of the rules unless they are enforced?

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the recent boxing contest for the Lonsdale belt in which one of the combatants had his jaw broken in the fourth of thirteen rounds, when he was counted out; and whether he proposes to take any steps to prevent a repetition of such an incident?

I have made inquiry and learn that the injury to the jaw did not become manifest until ten minutes after the conclusion of the contest, and that neither the combatant nor the medical men in attendance can say at what point in the contest the injury was done. As my hon. Friend is aware, I have no power to interfere in regard to any boxing match which is an exhibition of skill and is conducted in accordance with proper rules. So far as the police can ascertain, the contest referred to in the question was conducted strictly according to rule, and no irregularity took place.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that these contests are carried on without inflicting gross personal injuries of this sort?

I am unable to say as to this particular contest as to how the injury arose, but so long as the recognised rules are enforced I understand that I have no power at all.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make some representations to the National Sporting Club that this kind of thing should not be repeated?

I believe the National Sporting Club is as desirous as the hon. Member that accidents of this kind should not occur.

Are there not many other games in which men get injured such as football and games of that kind, and is there any more reason for him to approach the National Sporting Club than any other club?

I think I have sufficiently answered that question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if any steps have been taken to make regulations to compel all barges and lighters employed on the Thames to carry at least one lifebelt ready for use in case of any of the lighter-men falling overboard, and if the Port of London Authority has been communicated with on the subject?

I have been in communication with the Port of London Authority, who are the authority concerned. They inform me that they are aware of no statutory provision requiring these barges and lighters to carry lifebelts. They do not regard it as practicable to make regulations relating to removable fittings on such craft seeing that they would be constantly exposed to un-authorised removal.

Can nothing be done to save the lives of these men?

Perhaps the hon. Member will communicate with me, and I shall be glad to make further representations. I have no power in the matter myself.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that there is a feeling amongst members of friendly societies that circular A.S. 92, of the Health Insurance Commissioners, is so framed as to constitute a bias against transfer from one approved society to another, and therefore a check upon a process which many employed contributors desire in their own interest to effect; and whether the Commissioners will consider the advisability of simplifying the complicated procedure provided by such circular and revising the latter, so as to make clear the right of every member to change his or her society and the undesirability of permitting the society to which such member belongs to fetter the process in any way?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. It is essential that transfers should be so arranged as to prevent any interval between the termination of membership in the old society and the commencement of membership in the new one, and to secure that the conditions laid down in the Act as to transfer value and consent are complied with, and that the necessary information for this purpose is in the hands of the societies concerned and the Commissioners The procedure described in Circular A.S. 92 is the simplest which could be devised consistently with these conditions, and with the continuity of insurance provided by the Act. The Commissioners would be glad to receive any suggestions which would enable them to effect any further simplification, but with regard to the last part of the question, I would remind the hon. Member that Section 31 of the Act contemplates the possibility of circumstances in which consent may be reasonably withheld.

Would the right hon. Gentleman be prepared to receive a deputation of representatives of the leading friendly societies upon this matter?

I would if no better method could be found, but I am rather averse to adding to the number of deputations. I would be glad if the hon. Member would communicate with me himself.

asked what is the amount of the funds in the hands of the National Insurance Commissioners at the latest date available; if such funds have been invested in securities; and, if so, what are the securities?

The amount standing in the National Health Insurance Fund on 3rd July, 1913, was about. £14,000,000. For particulars of the securities in which moneys out of the National Health Insurance Fund have been invested, I would refer the hon. Member to the annual account presented to Parliament on the 27th May last in accordance with Subsection (6) of Section 54 of the Act, of which I will send him a copy.

Could the right hon. Gentleman give us any idea what the loss on this amount is owing to the depreciation of Consols?

The hon. Member had better give notice of that question.

asked what is the number of persons over sixty-five and over fifty, respectively, who had become insured persons by the 1st July, 1913, or the latest date for which the figures are available?

The number of insured persons who were over sixty-five years of age on the 15th July, 1912, as shown by the Return for the 12th January, 1913, which is the latest date for which figures are available, is approximately 106,000. The actual number of insured persons (excluding those mentioned above) who were over fifty at the date of entry into insurance is not at present known, but may be put at about 1,626,000, and this figure, which is based on the Census Returns, has been used for the purpose of the actuarial calculations.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the pressing needs of the Highlands and Islands for medical nursing and sanatorium treatment, and the recommendations of the Committee presided over by Sir John Dewar, and of the fact that these recommendations have been unanimously approved by the Scottish Liberal Members, he will state when he will introduce the Bill which he has promised, especially in view of the fact that it is stated the Bill will be non-controversial?

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware of the disappointment felt in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland that no practical effect has yet been given to, the recommendations of the Committee presided over by Sir John Dewar; and, seeing that the necessary money has been promised, will he say when the statutory authority to administer the Grant will be set up?

asked the Financial. Secretary to the Treasury whether, looking to the urgency of procuring money for medical service and nursing in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland and, to that end, of giving statutory effect to the Dewar Report at the earliest possible moment, he can now state when the Bill providing the money and setting up the authority to administer it will be introduced?

The Bill is already in an advanced state of preparation, and will be introduced as soon as the exigencies of Parliamentary time permit. The Estimates presented to Parliament include a sum of £10,000 only in respect of the proposed Special Grant for the purpose of providing for special charges in respect of insured persons pending the setting up of the new machinery. A Supplementary Vote for the balance of the Grant will be required when the Bill has received the Royal Assent.

May I ask, in view of the statement in Question No. 43, that the Bill will be non-controversial, whether the right hon. Gentleman has come to an agreement with the Secretary for Scotland on the full details of the Bill?

It is a Government Bill in every sense of the word, and is, I believe, non-controversial as between the two parties in the House.

May I say—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] May I inform the right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "NO."] May I direct the right hon. Gentleman's attention—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]

The hon. Member had better try it in writing.

asked what is the estimated total cost in the year 1915 of the Amendments proposed in the National Insurance Act (1911) Amendment Bill; how much thereof is to be met by postponement of the sinking fund to redeem the reserve values; how much by moneys provided by Parliament; and how much out of the funds of approved societies?

asked whether it appears from Mr. Watson's Report [Cd. 6898], that the annual value of the Amendments proposed in the National Insurance Act (1911) Amendment Bill is estimated at £787,000 or what other sum?

The estimated gross value of the benefits to be given in 1915 by the new Amending Bill, including partial payment of arrears, is £990,000, of which a sum of £242,000, which is a diminishing sum, will be provided by the State; £100,000 will be taken from the income of the sinking fund, thus extending the redemption period by six months, and £648,000 will be provided by additional reserve values, the redemption of which will involve a further extension of the sinking fund period by about one year. In addition to these sums, a charge estimated at a maximum of £20,000 may fall upon the Exchequer in respect of arrears, but this charge is contingent and depends partly upon the extent of unemployment and partly upon the amount of arrears paid by insured persons in respect of their periods of unemployment. Against the foregoing sums must be set off the amount of the benefits which would have been paid to persons between the ages of sixty-five and seventy, under the conditions of the resent Act, with the corresponding State Grant. The amount of these benefits cannot be definitely stated, because the allowances are within the discretion of approved societies, but may be estimated as at least £150,000. The State Grant under the present conditions is estimated at £35,000, and by deducting this from the total of £242,000 above stated the amount of the new State Grant, £207,000 results. No charge will fall upon the funds of approved societies except under Clause 6 of the Bill, and any charge here involved is not only quite unimportant in amount, but must be largely offset by the relief afforded to societies from the necessity of keeping elaborate records to enable them to comply with the present requirements of the Act.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us an estimate of the amount that will fall on the approved societies' funds under Clause 6?

My actuary says that it is quite negligible.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us some estimate?

Can he not give some simple statement to the House as to what the total cost of the Insurance Act Amendment Bill which will fall upon- all the parties concerned?

Such a simple statement has already been issued.

asked whether it is proposed to introduce, during the present Session of Parliament, a Supplemental Estimate for the additional moneys to be provided by Parliament pursuant to the National Insurance Act (1911) Amendment Bill?

The answer is in the negative.

asked whether, under the National Insurance Act (1911) Amendment Bill, a middle woman is regarded as an employer and in that character is expected to pay full tax for each person she employs; and, if so, whether a middle woman in the lace-finishing trade cannot pay such an impost, being wholly unable to calculate in advance how many workers she needs to employ or for how long a time; and whether the Government proposes to pass this amending Bill without regard to the fact that it increases the hardships already imposed on these women outworkers by the National Insurance Act?

There is no provision in the amending Bill which affects in any way the liability of middle women to insure the outworkers employed by them, and I am unable to understand to what the hon. Member refers or how the new proposals can increase any supposed existing hardships.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the estimated annual value of the margin between the anticipated loss to approved societies through arrears of contributions due to unemployment and the loss allowed for in the estimates of Messrs. Hardy and Wyatt?

In the financial estimates upon which the original Bill was based it was assumed that, in addition to non-payment during periods of sickness, contributions would not be paid for an average of 2.6 weeks a year. In preparing the reserve value tables the Actuarial Advisory Committee increased this period to three weeks, and societies were fully compensated for the difference in the reserve values granted. In both eases the calculations had reference to the average taken over the whole insured population. As the scheme proposed by the new Bill deals separately with each society it is impossible to say without experience to what extent the general average of arrears will be reduced by its operation, but as the Bill affords to insured persons an inducement to pay contributions in respect of periods of unemployment, there are grounds for expecting that the general average of arrears will be reduced to some- thing below the actuarial calculation, which rested upon the assumption that in respect of unemployment periods no contributions would be paid.

Wilt the right hon. Gentleman now answer the question on the Paper, and state what is-the estimated value of the margin?

I cannot answer it any more than I have answered it at present. It has occupied the minds of several of us, including the chief actuary, and this seems to be the only answer intelligible.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman and the chief actuary reduce that answer to pounds, shillings, and pence, and say how much money is involved?

I do not think so.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say upon what main items the Amendment Bill has been founded at all?

I have given the fullest account of what estimate has been made in the Paper issued by the chief actuary. If the hon. Gentleman wants any further reference to the estimates of unemployment in this country than appears in the memorandum of Messrs. Hardy and Wyatt I can give it.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury (1) what are the periods within which the reserve values are expected to be redeemed if the National Insurance Act (1911) Amendment Bill is passed in its present form, and if no Amendment is made to the National Insurance Act respectively; what is the annual value spread over the shorter period of postponing the redemption of reserve values by the difference between such periods; and (2) what is the annual sum released and made available for benefits under the National Insurance Act (1911) Amendment, Bill by postponing the redemption of reserve values by the aggregate of ten months, ten weeks, and six months?

If the Bill becomes law in its present form, the estimated period over which the redemption of reserve values will extend is between 19½ and 19¾ years. The corresponding period under the National Insurance Act is 18¼ years. The average annual amount made available for benefits by this extension of the period for the redemption of the reserve values is £320,000, but the actual charge is a diminishing sum which is at its maximum in the year 1915.

What is the annual sum released by postponing the redemption of the reserve values by the aggregate of ten months, ten weeks, and six months? Is it mentioned in the actuaries' Report?

£320,000.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that that is the equivalent to both dealings with the reserve?

Equivalent to both dealings with the redemption periods of reserve values.

asked what is the amount of the annual sum required to redeem the additional reserve values of £2,462,000 and £827,000 referred to in Mr. Watson's Report (Cd. 6898) within twenty years or within such other period as by that Report it is proposed to redeem such additional reserve values?

It is not proposed to assign any separate annual sum to the redemption of the additional reserve values required by the proposals of the Bill. The effect of increasing the reserve values by the sums named in the question will be, firstly, to increase the total amount to be paid off, and, secondly, to increase the annual charge on the income for the provision of interest on the reserve values outstanding. The combined effect of the increase of the debt and the diminution, after providing for interest, of the sums available for its redemption, will be to extend a period of redemption by a period estimated at approximately one year.

asked the Prime Minister whether he intends to make any appointment to the vacant office of Poet Laureate; what are the exact duties and emoluments Of the present office; and whether he will take into consideration enlarging the scope of the office by making is a laureateship of literature?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I explained what are the duties and emoluments of the office in reply to a question put on 12th June. I am afraid I cannot accept the suggestion in the concluding part of the question.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he has observed that where the genius has been patronised by authority the authority has remained but the genius has flown?

asked the Prime Minister whether he has now laid down any rule for or expressed any opinion to his colleagues so that it may in the future be impossible that Ministers of the Crown shall purchase shares in companies the directors of which are in negotiation for contracts with the Government?

I have nothing to add to what I said in my speech on 19th June, to which I must refer the hon. Member.

Are we to understand that there is nothing definite to be done to prevent Cabinet Ministers from gambling on outside tips, and are they still to be allowed to go about the country abusing people who are not Cabinet Ministers and who do not gamble?

I would refer the hon. Member to my speech.

asked the Prime Minister when he will be able to give time for the consideration of the Reports of the Committee of Public Accounts?

I am afraid I cannot yet say, but the hon. and gallant Member's suggestion will be kept in mind.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that on 8th April he gave me a definite promise that there would be an opportunity for consideration of the Reports of the Public Accounts Committee?

I have not said anything to the contrary.

asked the Prime Minister, if in Ireland there is general agreement with the Chief Secretary's statement that land purchase is more important than Home Rule; and when he intends to redeem the pledge given by the Chief Secretary on 16th October last and submit to Parliament proposals for completing land purchase in Ireland?

I cannot give an exact date, but as stated on Thursday last, the Government will very shortly introduce legislation on the subject.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to complete the legislation in the course of the present Session?

We shall see.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received a letter from the secondary education committee of the county of Fife showing the serious loss occasioned to the school boards of the county owing to the allocation of the Education (Scotland) Fund, which has fallen from 5s. 6d. to 1s. 1d. per pupil in the last three years; and whether he intends to take any steps in the matter?

I have received the letter, and have referred it to the Secretary for Scotland for his consideration.

asked if the Development Commissioners propose to retain the £2,000,000, being part of the Development Fund now invested in their names as a capital fund of which the income alone will be applicable for the purposes of Part I. of the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909, or whether this sum will be distributed in Grants like the rest of the fund?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative.

asked whether it is proposed to take steps by legislation or otherwise, to continue contributions from the Treasury into the Development Fund after the end of the current financial year, or whether the work of the Development Commissioners will cease when the funds now in their hands are exhausted as the result of Grants made in the early future?

The question can only be determined when the contingency arises.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether the Department have decided to allow the shipment of live stock from the port of Rosslare?

Whenever it is known that the carrying companies concerned, who are being communicated with in the matter, are willing to arrange for shipping live stock from Rosslare, the Department will be prepared to recommend the issue by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries of an Order adding Rosslare to the list of Irish ports from which animals may be received at landing places in Great Britain.

Have any increased facilities been given at Fishguard?

I cannot say.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland), whether that body has lately issued an Order prohibiting the use of any draught net for the capture of fish in Lough Gara, situate near Boyle, in the counties of Sligo and Roscommon; if so, whether that Order applies to the inhabitants of the district surrounding the lake who have riparian rights and who have been fishing there for thirty-eight years; whether he is aware that these people have petitioned the Lord Lieutenant praying to be protected in their rights; and whether, in view of all the circumstances, the Department will institute an inquiry with the view of seeing justice done to the aggrieved parties?

As the result of a public inquiry held at Boyle, in April last, the Department have posted notices relative to proposed by-laws prohibiting the use of any draught net or Seine net for the capture of fish in Lough Gara, which by-laws have no force unless and until approved of by His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant in Council and will, if so approved, be operative against all persons. Certain persons have lodged a petition against the confirmation of the by-laws, and will have the opportunity of being represented at the hearing of the appeal by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Pending the decision of the Committee it would not be proper for the Department to hold another inquiry into the matter, all the facts of which were before them at the inquiry held in April.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) whether, in advancing loans to fishermen for the purchase of motor boats, the Norwegian Government demands no interest for the first year; whether, as a result of this action, some 6,000 boats are already equipped and about 7,000 more waiting to be fitted with engines; and whether the Department of Agriculture in Ireland will, in advancing future loans for such purposes, give a like encouragement to Irish fishermen and thus enable them to start with a fair chance of success?

The Department are not aware that interest is not charged during the first year on loans issued in Norway for fishery purposes, but they understand that the repayment of loans, with interest, by instalments, does not begin until the second year. No such loans, however, cover the whole of boat and equipment, as is the case in loans for fishery purposes issued by the Department in Ireland. The interest charged on loans for fishery purposes issued in Ireland is only 2½ per cent., and the assistance given to fishermen in regard to instruction, repairs and insurance is, so far as the Department are aware, much greater than that given in Norway. The Department, therefore, see no reason to change the general arrangement for repayment of fishery loans and interest.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he will state the amount expended during each of the last three years in connection with the Local Government Board laboratory in London?

The amounts expended during the last three financial years are £1,455, £1,754, and £1,795, respectively.

asked whether the Local Government Board are expending upon scientific research any sum of money other than the £1,900 voted by Parliament for auxiliary scientific investigation, and the sums expended in connection with the Department's laboratory in London; and, if so, how much has been so spent during each of the last three years, and in connection with what laboratory or other similar institution?

In addition to the £1,900 to which the hon. Member refers, and the sums expended in connection with the Board's pathological laboratory, the amounts expended in the last three financial years on, what I am advised, may be regarded as scientific research were £142, £120, and £80, respectively. These sums were paid to investigators working privately.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether in consequence of a labour dispute at Fishguard about 200 strike-breakers are being housed on the harbour; whether, in the view of persons qualified to judge, the sanitary conditions are deplorable and that the fear exists that owing to the present weather there may be an outbreak of fever; and whether he will have the matter inquired into?

I making inquiries in the matter.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the diminution of the sum allocated to Fife under the Education (Scotland) Fund, owing to which the Grant to school boards has fallen in the last three years from 5s, 6d. per pupil to 1s. 1d. per pupil; whether he considers that this constitutes equitable treatment of the school boards in Fife; and what steps he proposes to take to prevent the Grant to school boards disappearing altogether?

This is too large and complicated a subject to be dealt with satisfactorily in answer to a question. To put it briefly, the reduction of the Grants under Section 17 (11) of the Education (Scotland) Act, 1908 (which affects other districts in Scotland equally with Fife), is due to the fact that one of the first charges on the Education (Scotland) Fund under the Act of 1908 is a contribution towards the superannuation of teachers. This contribution as a matter of fact was not called up till after 1st April, 1912, and till that date school boards had the benefit under Section 17 (11) of the money not so required.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Grant for Midlothian has disappeared altogether?

The Grant available for distribution?

We have not heard the:right hon. Gentleman's answer.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the Grant will not disappear altogether?

It cannot disappear. It may be ear-marked to another purpose.

Are we going to get more money in the future or less?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what were the numbers of persons in Australia between the inclusive ages of twelve and Fourteen, fourteen and eighteen, eighteen and twenty-five, and twenty-five and twenty-six, respectively, liable for military service in 1912 under the Defence Act, 1911; the percentage of persons so liable to the whole population of Australia; and the total cost involved in the year named in the maintenance of such force?

I am unable to answer the hon. Member's question as the annual report on the working of the Defence Act of Australia for 1912 has not yet reached me.

Has the result so far been satisfactory, notwithstanding that the service is of a compulsory nature?

I think I ought to have notice of that question.

As the right hon. Gentleman's only reason for not giving the information is that the report has not yet been received, will the right hon. Gentleman be able to answer my later question?

I do not know what question the hon. Member refers to.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any information as to the extent of the resistance, or how many Quakers have been imprisoned?

No, Sir.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why he has continued to allow to Members a uniform deduction at the rate of £100 per annum from their salaries for the purpose of assessing Income Tax after the Comptroller and Auditor-General has called in question the legality of this course, and before any authoritative decision has been obtained?

As has been previously stated, I have been waiting for the Report of the Public Accounts Committee. This Report was circulated on Saturday, and is now under consideration.

Has the right hon. Gentleman forgotten that the Prime Minister made a specific statement that this practice would not be repeated pending the consideration of the matter by the Public Accounts 'Committee; and if he has forgotten it, will he allow me to refresh his memory by referring him to the OFFICIAL, REPORT, 8th April, 1913, Vol. LI., column 802?

We are considering the Report of the Public Accounts Committee.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, notwithstanding the pledge of the Prime Minister, on the 1st July, when the warrants for the quarter's salaries were issued, this practice was repeated, before the Public Accounts Committee had made their Report?

I am perfectly certain that my right hon. Friend never said that the practice which had been established would be altered until the Report of the Public Accounts Committee was received.

Will the right hon. Gentleman allow me to hand him the volume?