asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of all the circumstances in Mexico and especially the murder of Mr. Benton, he will request the Government of the United States of America to reconsider the expediency of recognising the Presidency of General Huerta as the only alternative to existing horrors?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the results of the non-recognition by the United States Government of the de facto government of General Huerta, he will suggest to the former Government that no greater degree of blood guiltiness attaches to one rather than to another Mexican politician, and that peaceful and orderly administration can only be attained by recognising General Huerta?

The Government of the United States are, of course, aware of all the circumstances in Mexico, but they have already made it clear that they do not themselves regard the recognition of the Presidency of General Huerta as the only alternative to the existing state of affairs, and are not prepared to receive such a request from other nations.

asked the Secretary of State for War if it is open to Great Britain to secure the reference to the Arbitration Tribunal of The Hague of the question of obtaining redress for the murder by General Villa, the Mexican revolutionary general, of Mr. Benton; or whether any questions which involve the application of the Monroe doctrine are excluded from consideration by that tribunal?

The answer to the first part of the question is technically and theoretically in the affirmative, but in practice there is at the present moment no satisfaction to Tae obtained by arbitration, and I am not prepared to admit that in this case arbitration will be the most fitting method of securing redress when there is an opportunity. As regards the last part of the question, I have never heard it suggested that there was anything in the policy of the United States adverse to the settlement by arbitration of disputes not involving the independence of Central or South American Republics.

asked whether arrangements have been made for the release of Mr. Bowskill?

A telegram was received last night from His Majesty's Consul at Loanda reporting that the Governor-General had just received a telegram from the Governor of the Congo in which he stated that he had arrived at San Salvador on the 24th of February, having been attacked three times on the way. On arrival he had found the head of the English Mission and three Catechist's prisoners. He had liberated the former immediately on parole pending inquiry. There were 600 refugees inside the fortress; the personnel of the English Mission alone had refused to enter. The insurgents had attacked the fortress on all sides on the 25th, as well as before the arrival of the Governor, but had been repulsed each time; on the second occasion with heavy loss. The Governor-General stated that he was very pleased to know that no British missionary had in any way suffered on account of the rebellion. The Acting British Consul at Boma, who, as stated in answer to a question yesterday, was prevented from going to San Salvador by the rebellion, has been instructed to proceed there as soon as he can safely do so, to see Mr. Bowskill, and to report fully on all the circumstances.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know at all the charge upon, which Mr. Bowskill was arrested?

No. I do not know the charge; that is what I want to find out. But I understand from this telegram that he is now liberated. I want to know all the circumstances—why he was arrested, the nature of the arrest, and so forth; we cannot be content until we know.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is very great anxiety on the part of the friends of this reverend gentleman at Nottingham and elsewhere as to his fate? Will he kindly intimate as early as possible any further information so as to relieve their anxiety?

Oh, yes; the Missionary Society themselves have got this information direct, and we shall certainly give all the information we can; and that is what I wish the House to understand from my answer to-day. According to, the latest information there is no anxiety at the present time about Mr. Bowskill personally. What we may have to demand in the way of reparation or compensation for what has taken place is a question we reserve; but we are not content.

Is there telegraphic communication between San Salvador and this country?

It would appear that the Governor-General of Loanda is in telegraphic communication with San Salvador.

asked whether His Majesty's Government propose publishing shortly a White Book on labour conditions. in Portuguese West Africa; and, if so, whether it is proposed to include the letter addressed by the Rev. J. S. Bowskill to His Majesty's Consul at Loanda, dated 23rd December last?

I hope that correspondence on the subject of contract labour in Portuguese West Africa will soon be laid before Parliament. I do not, however, propose to include correspondence received this year, as that would delay the publications, and any such correspondence can better be presented subsequently.

asked whether, according to the 1906 Convention, by which the New Hebrides Condominium was established, the age and height at which minors could be contracted was to be immediately fixed; and, if so, whether a standard age or height has yet been fixed?

The New Hebrides Convention did not prescribe any age below which minors could not be engaged, but provided that "children shall only be engaged if they are of a certain minimum height, to be fixed by the Resident Commissioners jointly." No definite minimum height, however, appears to have been fixed, but in the rules subsequently adopted for labourers engaged by British subjects it is laid down that no "native under the age of sixteen, or who is obviously physically unfit for plantation labour, shall be recruited for labour." The French Resident Commissioner was instructed to apply the Convention rule on the subject in such a way "as to prevent children from being recruited before the age at which their strength is fully developed, so as to fit them for their work—in fact, generally speaking, before the age of fifteen."

Have the Colonial Office given instructions to the British representatives to take steps to get the conditions fixed so as to prevent children being recruited during the eight years?

The instructions to British subjects are perfectly clear; if the hon. Member wants any further information as to how the instructions apply, I shall be glad to give it.

asked whether natives in the New Hebrides against whom charges have been made are frequently arrested, detained, and treated as convicts pending trial, the sentences being often of shorter duration than the time already served; and whether many natives so detained have died before being brought to trial?

My attention has been drawn to the fact that certain natives of the New Hebrides were arrested and detained for several months pending trial by the Joint Naval Commission in December last, and that in some cases the sentences were of shorter duration than the periods of previous detention. I have seen a statement that some natives have died while awaiting trial. His Majesty's Government are considering what steps can be taken to prevent the repetition of such occurrences.

asked the Undersecretary of State for India whether he can give the House any information regarding the blackening of the faces of the statues of the Royal Family at Kolhapur?

The Secretary of State is informed that the busts in question, which were guarded by a special police guard, were defaced with tar on the night of 14th February. The perpetrators of the offence have not yet been traced, but the case is being investigated by His Highness the Maharaja of Kolhapur, with the assistance of an officer lent by the Government of India.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether four additional regiments of Regular Cavalry are to be raised?

No, Sir

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, after allowing for carriage to destination, delivery charges, agents' expenses, and other concessions in the contract, any saving has been accomplished by the War Department through supplying the large depots of the British Army with frozen beef under a bulk contract; whether this method is as satisfactory as the one previously practised; whether he is aware that, owing to the large quantities of frozen beef which have been drawn from Liverpool for this contract, the shortage and consequent increase in price has been very adversely felt by retailers depending upon this market for supplies; and whether it is his intention to continue to supply frozen beef under similar contracts in the future, and thereby assist the meat combine to manipulate prices on the important markets in a manner which was impossible when the Army supplies were drawn from a large number of contractors in various parts of the country?

After making allowance for all outgoings, the new system shows a considerable saving, and in other respects is more satisfactory. I have no information as to any disturbance of the Liverpool market. As the sources from which frozen meat is imported remain the same, the suggestion in the last part of the: question does not appear to be well founded.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the placing of advertisements with the newspapers in Connection with the recent advertising of the Army has been entrusted to Mr. Hedley Le Bas, or the firm to which he belongs, or to Messrs. R. S. White and Sons, who have the standing contract for War Office advertising; whether he is aware that the person or firm who places the War Office advertisements with the newspapers receives from the newspapers a commission of 10 per cent., or a similar sum, and that payment of commission by the newspapers is the usual method by which advertising agents gain a livelihood; and whether Mr. Hedley Le Bas, or the firm to which he belongs, has entered into any arrangement with Messrs. R. S. White and Sons to share such commission, or what were the arrangements for placing the advertisements made between the War Office, Messrs. R. S. White and Sons, and Mr. Hedley Le Bas, or the firm to which he belongs?

With regard to the first two parts of the question, I would refer the hon. and gallant Gentleman to the reply to his question put on the 4th of March. With regard to the last part, as I have already stated, no payment in any form whatever was made to Mr. Le Baa or the firm to which he belongs.

Has Mr. Le Bas received any money from the newspapers, not necessarily from the War Office in this connection?

No, Sir. I am glad to make it quite clear that these gentlemen, together with the editor of the "Spectator" and the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mile End, gave me great assistance in this matter, and neither did they nor any member of their firms receive a single penny.

What did they do it for, then?

They were actuated by patriotic motives.

That is not understood in the city.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Army Council, or any official on its behalf, has to his knowledge and with his sanction stated that the construction of the Northern Junction Railway, the subject of the Bill now awaiting Second Reading, was a national necessity, and that the War Office would support it on that ground; and has he ever made such statement or any statement of a similar character?

I would refer the hon. Gentlemen to the answer I gave on the 3rd instant to a similar question put by the hon. Member for the Tottenham Division of Middlesex.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give a direct yes or no answer?

I do not think I can add anything to the answer I then gave. It seems to me to have been a very definite answer.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether promotion to the command of a battalion in the Territorial Force, providing the officer is fully qualified in accordance with the regulations, is by seniority or by selection; if the latter, upon what principle is it determined; (2) whether, in view of the difficulties in raising the Territorial Force to its proper strength, and particularly to supply the shortage of officers, he will take steps to prevent injustice to capable and meritorious officers caused by their being passed over for command solely by reason of questions of social status; and (3) whether there is any reason why an officer who is second in command to a Territorial Force battalion should be passed over for promotion to the command, providing he is fully qualified in accordance with the regulations, and who has been reported upon as zealous, hardworking, attentive to his duties, and nothing against him?

The promotion of an officer to command is decided solely on his military qualifications.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he will give the total number of actual employés at the Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield, as on 1st March?

The number is 1821.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that discharges of employés have been recently taking place at the Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield, where such employés were still within some years of reaching the age limit of sixty-five years, and were physically sound; and whether he will say what gratuity or pension can be claimed by a servant at the Royal Small Arms Factory on being dismissed in the circumstances above mentioned?

A few discharges have recently taken place. The men affected had been permitted to stay on beyond the age of sixty, at which age, and not at sixty-five, all men employed are liable for discharge. The amount of gratuity depends upon amount of service and rate of pay at time of discharge, and is not affected by the fact that a man has reached his age limit.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government have yet decided to accept the order of Mr. Justice Scrutton confirming the award of Mr. D. Watney in the case of the Commissioners of Inland Revenue v. Hunter, that unexhausted manures and tillages are included in agricultural value; and, if so, whether they will amend the provisional valuations that have been sent out accordingly?

My right hon. Friend fears for the moment he can add nothing to the reply which he gave the hon. Member on Thursday last.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that great inconvenience is imposed by this delay, as these two judgments are of very great importance, and the Government has given: notice of appeal in the one and not in the other, and can he give a reply at an early date, and can he say when?

I hope very shortly. The matter is engaging the attention of the Treasury. It is a very important question, as the hon. and gallant Gentleman will recognise.

Will I put it down this day week?

I will communicate with the hon. Member to-morrow.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer at the end of Question Time? In the meantime he can have a consultation with the Law Officers in the Lobby.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether correspondence has passed between the hon. Member for Wick Burghs, or the Lord Advocate, or the hon. Member for Dumfries Burghs, with regard to the Wick Harbour extension, and the Development Commissioners or Treasury; if so, upon what dates; upon what date did Mr. Cole cease to be the engineer to the Development Commissioners; how was it that he attended a meeting of the Wick Harbour Trust regarding Development Commission work in December if he was no longer in the latter service; and was it by the sanction of the Commissioners?

No official correspondence has passed between my right hon. Friend the Lord Advocate and the Treasury or the Development Commission on the subject of the Wick Harbour. My right hon. Friend before he became Lord Advocate interested himself as the Member for the Wick Burghs in the project, and some semi-official correspondence passed between him and the Secretary of the Development Commission in 1912 and 1913. This correspondence ended with a letter written by the Lord Advocate on the 6th May last—six months before he joined the Government. The only letter written by the Lord Advocate on the subject since that date is one to myself three weeks ago enclosing for my information a complaint received by him from a contractor who had been employed on the harbour works. There has been no correspondence on the subject, either official or semi-official, between the hon. Member for Dumfries and either of the Departments named in the question. As regards the remaining parts of the question, I would refer the Noble Lord to the full explanation which I gave him last week, and to which I have nothing to add.

With regard to the latter part of the reply, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that one of the members of the Harbour Trust said it was not at the suggestion of those members that Mr. Cole came down, but it was the Development Commissioners sent him down on the 3rd September, and may I ask at whose orders Mr. Cole went down?

If a member of the Harbour Trust said that, the member of the Harbour Trust was wrong. Mr. Cole was not sent at the suggestion of the Development Commissioners.

Is the hon. Member aware that Mr. Georgeson, secretary, said the same thing; and was he not the Radical agent for Caithness and also for Wick Burghs?

The Noble Lord is repeating certain allegations fully dealt with in the answer. That answer was accurate in every detail, and I have nothing to add to it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India what is the amount of gold (metallic) in the Government of India Reserves, in India, at the present time; does any of it belong to the Gold Standard Reserve, and, if so, how much; and is any of the gold in the form other than that of minted sovereigns and half-sovereigns?

The amount held in gold in the reserves in India at the end of February was £15,421,000, in addition to £610,000 in the Treasuries. The answer to the second and third parts of the question is in the negative.

Was there not a sum of £800,000 in the reserve some time last year?

There may have been at the end of last year, but there is none now.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether Mrs. C. R. Hoare, a laundress, of Highcliffe, Hants, who was an insured contributor in the Prudential Society from January till June, 1913, when her membership was cancelled on the ground that she was a married outworker, is entitled to a refund of the contributions paid by and for her for six months in error?

The person referred to was accepted as a member of the society under a misapprehension. It appeared on inquiry that she has not been employed within the meaning of the Act, and as she was married before the Act came into operation she is not entitled to be a voluntary contributor. She is not an outworker, as stated in the question. The question of a refund in respect of the contributions incorrectly paid will be considered as soon as it has been ascertained whether the society incurred any liabilities on account of her.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the evidence taken by the Departmental Committee on Excessive Sickness under the National Insurance Acts, which is already in type and extends to some thousands of questions, can be published for the information of approved societies and others who are interested in the subject and who may wish to offer rebutting evidence?

The publication of the evidence so far given before the Committee would create a misleading impression. I do not understand what the hon. Member intends to suggest as to the offering of rebutting evidence by approved societies and others. The Committee is not inquiring into allegations in respect of specific societies, but into the general question affecting the administration of sickness benefit.

Will the hon. Gentleman say whether the inquiry is confidential, or will the result be published with the evidence?

I cannot say until the evidence is completed what course will be pursued.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will furnish a Return of the number of assistant clerks who have been granted prolonged sick leave on account of tubercular disease since the 15th July, 1912?

I hope that my hon. Friend will not press for this return, since its value would not be proportionate to the amount of time and labour involved in its preparation.

asked the hon. Member for St. George's-in-the-East, as representing the Insurance Commission, whether his attention has been drawn to the issue of a circular to the panel doctors in Bolton, advising them that, on account of the drug fund being overspent, they should not prescribe extract of malt and oil, petroleum emulsion, etc., except to tuberculous patients; whether the Government propose to take any steps to see that the rights of insured persons are not thereby imperilled and their medical needs ignored; and whether they agree with restrictions of this kind being placed on doctors with regard to the medicine that panel patients can have?

The hon. Member is misinformed. The circular contains no allusion to the condition of the drug fund, and has no reference to financial considerations. It merely expresses the general views of the Committee arrived at in the course of administration as to the interpretation to be placed, in their opinion, upon the provisions of the Act regarding the supply of medicines in connection with medical benefit. The rights of insured persons cannot, of course, be restricted by any such general announcement as that referred to.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Hull Insurance Committee have delivered their medical tickets by hand instead of sending them by post; what is the total amount spent in 69 delivering the medical tickets; what is the total number of insured persons in the-area of this insurance committee; and how many, owing to change of address, have not yet been traced?

My right hon. Friend is informed that the Hull Insurance Committee have arranged for the delivery of medical cards by persons specially engaged for the purpose, instead of sending them by post; but as the issue is still in progress, no complete information is available in reply to the rest of the question.

asked how many medical tickets have been sent out by the Rochdale Insurance Committee; how many have been returned through the Dead Letter Office; and what steps are being taken by the Committee to trace those insured persons who have changed their address without notifying this change?

The number of medical cards issued by the insurance committee referred to is about 38,700, of which about 2,800 were returned undelivered owing to changes of address or for other reasons. A considerable number of these have already been reissued to their owners, and insured persons have been informed in the local press and otherwise that they should apply for cards if they have not received them. The committee is not however, responsible for the issue of cards to insured persons who have removed outside their committee's area.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that Mr. S. W. Ainsworth, residing at 121, Usher Road, Bow, who was working for Mr. Walter Gurr, builder and decorator, of 135, Brownlow Road, Willesden, was discharged in consequence of slackness of work, deposited on 26th January, 1914, his unemployment book, number 12/A 6538, with the manager of the Stepney Labour Exchange, who stated that the man was disqualified through a trade dispute; if he is aware that the contractor stated in a letter that he was discharged through slackness of work, and had nothing to do whatever with a trade dispute or lock-out, and that a copy of the employer's letter has been sent to the manager of the Stepney Labour Exchange; and whether, seeing that up till Thursday, 5th March, the man has been denied unemployment benefit, he intends taking any action in the matter?

I have made inquiries into this matter, and find that the claim of S. W. Ainsworth was received with the claims of other workmen discharged in consequence of the dispute in the building trade on the 26th January, and was disallowed under Section 87 (1) on the 28th of that month. The branch of his association appealed against this decision on the 14th February, and on the statement contained in the appeal the divisional officer reversed his decision and allowed the claim. I understand that the branch secretary was advised of this on the 5th March.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether several workmen, recently employed at Rosyth, have applied for unemployment benefit and have been refused it by the insurance officer on the ground that they have voluntarily left their employment without just cause, and that some of them on appeal have been able to show to the Court of Referees that the conditions of work at Rosyth, particularly in the matter of housing and messing, are so bad that they were justified in leaving; and, if so, whether he will take steps to inform other intending applicants for work there of the conditions there prevailing so that a similar state of affairs may in future be avoided?

I have not so far been able to trace any appeals of workmen recently employed at Rosyth as having been made at any Court of Referees in Scotland. If, however, the Noble Lord will supply me with particulars as to the claims to which he refers, giving the names of the workmen and the places and approximate dates at which they claimed, and the Court of Referees at which the cases are stated to have been heard, I will have further inquiries made.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the Insurance Commissioners are prepared to require the London Insurance Committee to distribute the money now in their hands and available for medical services, so as to implement the understanding upon which the doctors joined the panel?

The distribution of the funds available to the London Insurance Committee among the doctors on their panel, in accordance with the Regulations and the doctors' agreements, is in the first instance, at any rate, a matter for the committee themselves with whom those agreements have been made; and, as I have already stated, this distribution is engaging their attention.

Is there no means of bringing the insurance committee to book for default?

I think, their attention, having been called to the matter, they will deal with the question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether any steps have yet been taken to determine what societies in British Possessions are approved societies under Section 32 of the National Insurance Act, 1911, so that transference of members of approved societies in this country may be effected in the case of migrations of the members within the Empire?

No applications have been received for such approval as the hon. Member refers to. The Commissioners hope, however, at an early date to make an announcement with regard to the conditions upon which emigrating members may carry their transfer values to branches of approved societies in other countries.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he will state how many schemes, under Section 72 of the National Insurance Act, 1911, submitted by registered friendly societies and branches, have now been confirmed; and what is the total amount of the funds of friendly societies and branches thereby set free, either to provide increased benefits or reduced contributions, or to redeem deficiencies existing in the valuations of these societies and branches?

The total number of schemes confirmed to date is 2,647, consisting of 2,161 schemes for continuing the contributions and benefits specified in the Rules, and 486 providing for a reduction of contributions and benefits. In the case of the latter reserves amounting to £240,934 have been applied in reduction of existing deficiencies or the grant of additional benefits.

How many societies have not yet had their schemes confirmed?

I cannot say without notice. I will find out.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether the wishes of Scottish approved societies were ascertained before the Regulations forbidding their meeting on licensed premises were issued; and whether, pending the decision as regards Regulations for the place of meeting of English approved societies, he will instruct the Scottish Insurance Commissioners not to enforce the provisions of Insurance Regulations (No. 2) (Scotland)?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second part in the negative. The Regulations referred to were unanimously approved by the Scottish Advisory Committee, on which approved societies of all types are represented, and my right hon. Friend is not aware that any difficulty is arising from their operation.

Should not the Scottish approved societies have had the same chance of considering the Rules as the English societies?

Yes, Sir, and they are represented to the number of about thirty on the Advisory Committee. They raised no objection to the Rules.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Rules were adopted before they had an opportunity of understanding them?

No, Sir, the hon. and gallant Member is hopelessly wrong.

Were not the Rules made before the 15th July, 1912, before the Act was in operation? Were they not dated in June?

Yes, Sir, but there was such unanimity of opinion among the representatives of the approved societies that the Rules were made at once.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether his attention has been called to the Special Orders issued by the National Insurance Commissioners and the Joint Committee, Nos. 916 and 1,886, of 1912, which have the effect of excluding from compulsory insurance under the Act persons engaged in the subsidiary employments of hop-picker, fruit-picker, pea-picker, potato-picker, flower-puller, and onion-peeler, provided they were not insured persons immediately before such employment; and whether, in view of the fact that in many districts women are employed on farms in the subsidiary employments of clover-winning, haymaking, harvesting, and potato-gathering, in which they work on an average two or three days a week during the summer months, the Insurance Commissioners and the Joint Committee will be advised to issue, and will issue, a further Special Order excluding from compulsory insurance under the Act persons engaged in such subsidiary employments provided they are not insured already?

The employments referred to in the latter part of the question belong to a series of seasonal field employments which are the principal source of livelihood of the bulk of the "women engaged in them. If those women engage in hop-picking or fruit-picking they continue to be liable to insurance. The Special Orders referred to were intended to meet the case of those persons not otherwise insurable who engage for short periods in hop-picking or fruit-picking. The Commissioners are not prepared to make an Order which would put a premium on the employment of casual labour to the detriment of those persons who have to rely on these field employments for their living.

Is not the potato-gatherer exempt?

No, the potato-picker is exempt.

Would it not be possible to exempt the potato-gatherer under similar circumstances?

I am afraid, if an Order were made in their case, it would put a premium on casual labour.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he has received a petition from the supervisors of works under the Board of Agriculture in the Highlands; if so, whether he has considered it; and whether, in view of the increased work they have to perform under the Land Act, 1911, he can see his way to raise their salary proportionate to other officers in the same grade in the public service?

The reply to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. The Board of Agriculture for Scotland with my approval approached the Treasury last year on behalf of their supervisors of works and obtained some concessions in regard to pay, and the matter has again been under consideration with the view of obtaining further improvement in their salaries and allowances, but a decision has not yet been arrived at.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that those supervisors were receiving less per hour than those they were supervising?

No, Sir; I am not aware of that. If my hon. Friend will give me the facts I will look into them.

asked whether he can state the annual sum of money spent on offices, staff, printing, etc., in London on purely Scottish departmental work?

I am unable to give in any complete form the information desired by my hon. Friend, because expenditure of the kind to which he refers occurs upon the Votes for numerous Departments outside the Scottish Office, including, for example, the Home Office, Board of Trade, Office of Works, and the Treasury, and is, in many instances, included in general charges which cannot be divided in the manner he suggests. Taking, however, the two principal Scottish Departments with headquarters in London, the total Vote for the Office of the Secretary for Scotland in the current financial year is £18,776, of which approximately four-fifths is attributable to expenditure in London. The Vote for public education, Scotland, includes £28,203 in respect of salaries and other expenses in connection with the offices in London and Edinburgh, of which approximately two-thirds is spent in London, and £54,103 in respect of the inspectorate and the staff of the Royal Scottish Museum, the whole of which is spent in Scotland.

Before the Scottish Estimates are discussed, could the right hon. Gentleman get the facts for us?

No, Sir; I cannot add anything to the answer I have already given. I have given the reason why I cannot.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us a return of the stationery with regard to Scotland, and is he aware that in the Census Returns there was a ton of paper over owing to an error?

I do not see how that arises out of the present question.

asked whether 15 per cent. of the milk supply in Edinburgh contains living tubercle; whether this is twice the average of the large towns in the United Kingdom; and what steps are being taken to cope with this condition of affairs?

I am not aware on what authority my hon. Friend makes the statement contained in the first part of the question, as I am informed that the Medical Officer of Health for Edinburgh states that investigations carried on for several years show that only in exceptional cases was the presence of tubercle detected in samples of milk taken in the city. I see no reason to doubt that efficient measures of inspection and examination are in operation, and that as regards its milk supply Edinburgh will compare favourably with other large towns. I may add that Edinburgh occupies a good position when its statistics of mortality from all forms of tuberculosis are compared with the statistics for other large towns in Scotland.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this statement was made by a well-known professor?

I do not know what are the investigations on which he bases his statement.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman has seen the proposal made by the chief engineer to the Highland Railway Company regarding the use of the abundant supply of water power in the highlands of Scotland for agricultural and industrial purposes; and whether he will proceed to the immediate appointment of a committee to inquire into this question, as proposed by the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The subject of the supply of water power in the highlands has, I believe, been very fully investigated. It is now a question of industrial application, and I am not satisfied that the appointment of a committee would be of material assistance at the present time.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if applications have been received from the crofters of Annat, Ross-shire, for extension of their holdings; and, if so, what steps, if any, have been taken by the Board of Agriculture to deal with these applications?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Steps are being taken to interview the applicants very shortly.

asked whether, respectively, the amount of money actually expended on the establishment of the one small holding recently set up in the county of Perth, and on the negotiations for schemes of land settlement in that county which have fallen through or are still under consideration?

£188 is the amount actually expended on the holding in question, but the estimate of total expenditure thereon is £750. In reply to the second part of the question, it is not possible to allocate preliminary expenditure to particular areas.

asked (1) what sums, if any, have been applied by the Board of Agriculture for Scotland to the equipment of the 160 new small holdings which have been established under the Small Land holders (Scotland) Act, 1911; what sums have been applied to the equipment of the new enlargements; (2) whether, after making due reservation for questions of compensation and other matters not yet settled, he can state the amount spent since 1st April, 1912, to date on the establishment of the 160 new small holdings and 99 enlargements set up under the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911?

I must refer my hon. Friend to my previous replies to similar questions, and ask him to wait till the Report of the Board of Agriculture for Scotland, now in preparation, is published.

When is the Report likely to be issued?

It is in course of preparation, and it will be issued within a few weeks.

asked whether any or all of the 259 successful applicants for new holdings and enlargements under the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911, have been allowed to enter into occupation before claims for compensation by previous holders of the land, or by its owners, have been settled?

The majority have entered on occupation before claims of compensation by owners have been settled, but in a number of cases outgoing tenants' claims have been previously met.

asked what proportion of the 8,000 applicants for new small holdings and enlargements, under the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911, are possessed of the necessary capital to enable them to undertake the minimum responsibilities for the equipment and stocking of the holdings for which they have applied?

Apart from the special cases of difficulty in taking over the stock on Highland sheep farms, the majority of the applicants, so far interviewed, can be said to be possessed of sufficient capital.

asked whether, in view of the fact that shortage of funds had not, so far, hampered the land settlement policy of the Board of Agriculture for Scotland, he can state any or all of the reasons why, in a period of two years' working of the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911, only 259 applicants for new holdings or enlargements, out of a total of 8,000, have so far had their claims satisfied?

It would be impossible to deal with the matters referred to within the limits of question and answer, and I would remind my hon. Friend that there will probably be an early opportunity of discussing them in debate.

asked whether he has ascertained what will be the total amount of the reduction in fee Grants for the current financial year to the principal school boards concerned owing to the new interpretation which the Comptroller and Auditor-General has placed upon Article 20 (II.) ( a ) of the Scottish Education Code; and what will be the total increase in Grants for defective children to the same school boards for the forthcoming financial year as compared with the year 1912–13?

Figures submitted by the school boards concerned show that they estimate the loss of Grant for the current financial year which occurs under Article 129 of the Code (not Article 20 (II.) ( a )) at £3,764. The Scottish Education Department estimate the additional Grant to all school boards under the revised Article 20 (II.) ( a ) at approximately £10,000, which will mean an increase of £4,500 as compared with the total Grants for 1912–13.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the seven principal school boards in Scotland estimate the loss for the current year at £5,493, and only a gain in the future of £135 in Edinburgh and Glasgow?

I am not prepared to accept those figures as accurate.

Will the right hon. Gentleman guarantee to alter the new interpretation of the Code so that the school boards shall not suffer any loss during the forthcoming year, or will he guarantee that it will be made good in the coining years?

No, Sir, I am not prepared to say that.

Whose fault is it?

asked in how many cases the Court of Session has up to the present date been requested to appoint an arbiter under Section 7 of the Act of 1911?

The number is eight, but there are other cases in which an arbitrator has been agreed upon between the Board and the parties concerned.

asked the Lord Advocate if he is aware that a man named Collins, from whom the hospital authorities in Edinburgh purchased the dog for purposes of vivisection, was convicted in connection with a dog stealing case last year and fined £5; and, if so, will he say what action he proposes to take?

The individual referred to in the hon. and gallant Member's question, was convicted on 14th April, 1913, of reset of a stolen dog, and a penalty of £5, or in default thirty-days' imprisonment, was imposed, together with an obligation to find caution, or security for £5, or in default to undergo thirty days' imprisonment. The fact that Collins had been previously convicted was duly considered in relation to the present case. For the reason stated in my reply to the hon. and gallant Member on 3rd March, I do not propose to take any action in the matter.

Is it not the case that under the Dogs Act of 1906 any person finding a homeless dog is obliged to take it within twenty-four hours to the nearest police station?

That may quite well be, but I do not see what bearing it has on the present case, because here a full inquiry was made, and as a full explanation was given by Collins as to how he came by this dog, I fear I cannot take proceedings.

Can the right hon. Gentleman not secure that any dog that is operated upon by a vivisector is kept in confinement, and not allowed to run about disgusting people?

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the expediency of altering the law so that vivisection should not be allowed on dogs unless they are purchased from a recognised dog trainer?

That is not a question which ought to be addressed to me.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been directed to the conditions recently laid down by the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury with reference to the Grants of £9,000 to the Agricultural Organisation. Society in aid of its work during the financial year 1913–14; and whether, having regard to the undertaking given on behalf of the Government by the then Solicitor-General on 9th October, 1909 in the House of Commons, that Grants to promote the organisation of co-operation should not be applied to form a co-operative society for buying or selling, but only to encourage combination among farmers for purposes of securing better transit and marketing facilities for their produce, he will direct the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury to revise the conditions attaching to the Grants in accordance with this undertaking and lay them upon the Table of the House at an early date, or, in the alternative, will discontinue the Grants at the expiration of the present financial year?

The passage to which the hon. Member refers is incompletely quoted in the question. When read with the context and the two discussions of the 7th (not 9th) October, 1909, it does not appear to me to bear the interpretation which he places upon it. The object of the insertion of the words "organisation of" before "co-operation" in the Development and Road Improvement Funds Act, 1909, was to prohibit advances to co-operative societies for trading purposes. I understand, in point of fact, that the Agricultural Organisation Society carries on no trading business, directly or indirectly.

Were certain conditions not placed upon the Grants that were made to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society for the protection of traders' interests of which English and Scottish traders bitterly complain at the present time?

I should like notice of that question.

asked whether the Government has decided to ask Parliament for a Grant of £10,000 towards the cost of another Antarctic or trans-Antarctic expedition?

It is proposed to ask Parliament to vote £5,000 in 1914–15 in aid of Sir Ernest Shackleton's expedition, and a further £5,000 in the following year.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take the sense of the House on this question, or at any rate have the Vote so marked in the Estimates that it shall not escape the notice of hon. Members who may wish to express their opinions upon it?

That depends on the relative importance attached by hon. Members to the Vote.

Is this not a matter of importance—

The hon. Member can form his own opinion upon that.

asked whether the right hon. Gentleman's attention has been drawn to the fact that a loan out of the Treasury Chest Fund was advanced to the Persian Government in the year 1911–12, followed by two other loans from the same fund in 1912–13, and a further loan from the same fund in 1913–14; whether, seeing that advances of any sums out of public funds without previous authority from this House are irregular, he will say why proper authority for the foregoing advances was not sought?

I have no personal knowledge of this matter, but I understand that the advances referred to were made under the authority of the Treasury Trust Fund Act, 1877, which admits temporary advances for any public service to be repaid to the Treasury Chest Fund out of money appropriated by Parliament for the same service, or out of other money applicable thereto. No exception appears to have been taken to these payments by the Controller and Auditor-General.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question which I put as to whether he approves of money being advanced as a loan without the sanction of Parliament?

Of course I do not. This was apparently done under statutory authority.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that in the future it will be lawful for the Treasury to advance loans to foreign countries without the authority of Parliament?

That is a hypothetical question, and I will answer it when it arises.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in respect of the outrages recently committed in England and Scotland by militant suffragists, he will consider the propriety of extending the provisions of the Malicious Injuries (Ireland) Act to Great Britain?

I do not think it desirable that the provisions of the Acts referred to should be extended to Great Britain.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he does not think that those outrages are a war against society, and that some steps should be taken to protect innocent people from their consequences?

The question is not as to the propriety, but as to the expediency of the steps to be taken.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the Government might assist those who, both in London and elsewhere, are in charge of national possessions of importance, and not leave the expense of guarding them to fall entirely upon the churches or other places?

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the damage done to-day at the National Gallery to the Rokeby Velasquez amounts to malicious injury in the sense that these words are used in the Irish Act?

Yes, of course I do. The question is whether the provisions of an Act which at present applies to Ireland alone should be extended to Great Britain, and I am not satisfied that would have the effect desired.

Has the right hon. Gentleman no answer to make to my question, seeing that the place I have specially in view is the parish church of the House of Commons, which is now under a large expense in consequence of guarding against these outrages?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is doing all that he can, through the police and otherwise, to protect these places.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, if he does not think the Irish Act appropriate, whether he will regard the possibility of proposing some other legislation to meet this difficulty?

I regard it as a very serious matter.

I beg to ask the Hon Secretary a question, of which I have given him private notice, namely: What steps, if any, he proposes to take to protect the art treasures of the nation, in view of the outrage committed this morning at the National Gallery?

I regret to say that a picture, Velasquez's "Venus," was struck seven times with a hatchet and much injured. The police have communicated the fact of this wanton mutilation of one of our art treasures to the authorities responsible for the care and protection of our picture galleries and museums.

Has anyone been arrested?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the case has already been before the police court?

I am aware of the last fact, or, at least, that the case has been mentioned in court. The perpetrator of the deed was one Mary Richardson, who has already been brought before the courts upon another charge.

Is she a suffragette?

Yes.

asked the Prime Minister if his attention has been called by the Isle of Wight Law Society to the congestion of the contentious business in the Isle of Wight courts and the consequent delay and denial of justice to suitors by reason of their being unable to bear the expense of frequent adjournments, the difficulties being further increased by the number of special matters now referred, especially to the county court; and whether he will give consideration to this representation, with a view to ascertaining the causes of this states of things and remedying it?

I am informed that the Isle of Wight Law Society have recently made a representation in the sense of this question to the Lord Chancellor, who is by Statute the authority concerned with County Courts, and that the matter is under his consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to reply to the memorandum addressed to him by the committee of the National Defence Association on the 26th February, 1913?

Careful consideration has been given to the views expressed in the memorandum, which range over the whole field of national defence. I do not understand that the association expected from me a detailed reply. The matters in question can only adequately be treated in discussion in this House.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will, at an early date, put down the Vote for the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries, so that hon. Members may have an opportunity of criticising the administration of the President with regard to the embargo placed on the landing of Irish cattle?

I will bear the hon. Member's suggestion in mind.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Agriculture a question of which I have given him private notice, namely, whether he can state if the Birkenhead lairages, Wallassey and Woodside, have been disinfected, and all hay and straw burnt; if so, whether they will now be opened to the importation of Irish live-stock; whether the report of the inquiry respecting the spread of foot-and-mouth disease from that source has been issued; and whether it is intended to remove the embargo off doubly inspected healthy live-stock coming from uninfected areas in Ireland?

The disinfection of the lairages at Birkenhead has been completed, and all hay and straw will have been removed by to-morrow evening. In view of the new outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease just confirmed at Thurles in county Tipperary, I regret that it is im- possible at present to allow the importation of live-stock from Ireland into Great Britain to be resumed. I hope that the report of the inquiry at Birkenhead will be available before the end of this week; we are still waiting for the observations of the officers of the Irish Department, who are probably busily engaged at the moment in dealing with the outbreak of disease in Ireland.

Will the right hon. Gentleman allow live-stock to be imported from the areas in Ireland which are free from disease?

Our difficulty at the present time is not knowing how far the area of infection may have spread, but as soon as the position has become clearer my right hon. Friend the Vice-President of the Irish Department and I will arrange a boundary, if we can, north of which it will be possible for us to export and import stock over to the English ports.

Am I to understand that at the present time the right hon. Gentleman is not disposed to allow any Irish live-stock to be imported?

That is exactly what I said, in view of the uncertainty of the position in Ireland.

From where did the hay and straw which is to be burned tomorrow come?

I have answered two or three questions on that for some time past. The reason why the hay and straw is being destroyed is not that it has infected the animals, but that the animals have infected it.