asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the collier "Salvus" was ordered from Penarth to Lamlash; what is the date on which she was chartered and the date on which she left Penarth; whether, when chartered by the Government, she was loading for any other port and, if so, which, and at what extra cost was the new charter arranged; on what date did the "Salvus" leave Lamlash and what was the date of the order under which she left; and whether she has yet discharged her cargo, and where?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The "Salvus," when ordered to Lamlash, was about to leave Cardiff for Malta under a charter dated the 4th March. She sailed for Lamlaih on the 2Ist March, and left that place on the 24th March, it not having been found possible to intercept her earlier. She arrived at Malta on the 7th instant, and has presumably discharged the whole of her cargo at that yard. The extra cost involved was £235.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, during the past ten years there have been eight submarine disasters, involving a loss of eighty-nine lives; if not, will he state the number of disasters and lives lost, respectively, during that period; will he say whether in these cases few, if any, bodies were recovered under twenty-four hours' immersion; and whether in some cases five weeks elapsed between the occurrence and the recovery?

Including an explosion in Submarine C8 on 13th June, 1907, in which one officer lost his life, there have been in all nine disasters, involving the loss of ninety lives during the period mentioned. The answer to the second part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the last part of the question, the time that elapsed before recovery of the bodies was in one case forty-four days, in another thirty, and in a third five. As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, in three cases of the loss of submarines the bodies were not recovered. The three remaining cases were cases of explosion.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state whether the Board of Admiralty are in possession of any patented or other apparatus, and, in such case, what is the name of such apparatus and inventor respectively, for indicating the whereabouts of sunken submarines or other vessels; and was this or any apparatus of like character in use in the case of the loss of any, and which, of the submarines lost during the past ten years?

The Admiralty are not in possession of any patented apparatus of the kind referred to in the question, although during the last ten years a very great number of such devices—many of them patented—have been brought to their notice. An Admiralty design for a detachable buoy his been in existence for several years, but it has not been fitted in any completed submarine. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative. In connection with the general subject, I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given by my right hon. Friend to the hon. Member for Devonport on the 12th February last.

asked the Under-Secretary for War (1) whether the military qualification which solely decide the question of the promotion of an officer to command, are such as are prescribed by the Territorial Force Regulations alone; or, if not, by what other Regulations; (2) whether a commanding officer of a Territorial battalion is justified in calling upon an officer to resign upon whom he has reported adversely, but who is full qualified according to Regulations, and whom higher authorities have described as hardworking, zealous painstaking, and attentive to his duties; (3) whether he is aware that capable and meritorious officers in the Territorial Force, who are fully qualified in accordance with the Regulations and reported upon as zealous, hardworking, and attentive to duties, are being passed over for command on the confidential reports of the officer commanding that the officers had their limitations, without any indication or particulars as to what such phrase refers; and, if so, will he state what action ho proposes to take in the matter; and (4) whether it is in accordance with the Regulations that an officer who is prevented from attending annual training through ill-health (first absence during his services of twenty years) should be reported upon adversely and the report endorsed by the general officer commanding, who had never seen him during the time he had taken over the command, and who recommended a junior to succeed him, although the officer concerned was fully qualified according to the Regulations?

The hon. Member is apparently referring to the particular case of some officer. If he will kindly let me have particulars I will cause inquiries to be made.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Gunner Albert White, 27,632, of the 65th Company, Royal Garrison Artillery, Malta, was, on the 19th February, 1910, injured, after five years' service, whilst carrying out his duties as brigade signaller and obeying the order of his superior; whether he was taken direct to hospital and remained there seven months, during which time he underwent two unsuccessful operations and was finally removed to Netley Hospital, and, after three weeks' detention, was discharged as unfit for further service with a pension of Is. 6d. per diem; and, if so, will he ensure some suitable light employment being given to this man which will enable him to augment his pension, out of which he has to support his aged mother?

This man was injured on 15th February, 1911, after three years' service. I regret that I have no employment to offer him; but I will see that his name is brought to the notice of the Soldiers and Sailors Help Society.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he has received complaints regarding the conditions under which the fisher girls of Scotland engaged in the herring-curing industry carry on their occupation; whether complaints are made of the want of proper accommodation on the steamers by which they are sent to the Shetland fishing, and also of the exposure to which they are subject in fish-curing yards, especially at Lowestoft; whether the yards at the latter place belong to be corporation; and whether he has made representations regarding such complaints to the Board of Trade and Corporation of Lowestoft?

I have received complaints and other communications in regard to the subjects referred to by the hon. Baronet. I am not in a position to say whether the fish-curing yards at Lowestoft belong to the corporation, but I have forwarded copies of the communications which have reached me to the Secretary of State for the Home Department and the President of the Board of Trade, who indicated in replies given to the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland on the 6th instant the steps which are being taken in regard to the matter so far as their respective Departments are concerned.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he can state the number of houses which have been condemned as unfit for human habitation in the county of Lanark during the past five years, giving the names of the districts in which they were situated?

During the past five years 434 dwelling-houses in the landward area of the county of Lanark have been condemned under Statutory Orders as unfit for human habitation. Of these, one was in the Lower Ward District, 417 were in the Middle Ward District, and 16 were in the Upper Ward District. Of the above houses 207 have already been closed. 227 have not yet been closed—155 of them in the Middle Ward District, and 16 in the Upper Ward District on account of the time limit for closure not having expired, and 56 (also in the Middle Ward) as remedial measures are being effected with a view to a determination of the closing order.

asked the Prime Minister if the Government have definitely decided in favour of the Dissolution of Parliament in June; and if the General Election will take place in July?

There is no truth in the rumours which have appeared in the Press to this effect.

asked the Postmaster-General which of the existing telephone buildings in London have sufficient spare space available for the installation of additional telephone exchange equipment; and the amount of additional capacity available in each case in terms of subscriber's lines?

supplied the following list of London exchanges (with over 1,000 subscribers):—

Exchange.	Spare Capacity of Existing Equipment.		Working Lines
	Switch-boards Lines.	Subscribers' Lines.
Avenue	1,967	5,850	6,133
Bank	1,459	41	1,341
Battersea	374	1,395	1,826
Brixton	421	1,180	2,379
Central	4,903	*10,400	10,397
Chiswick	393	1,180	1,407
City	2,402	*Included in Central	8,398
Dalston	2,296	1,025	2,804
Ealing	823	1,485	1,477
East	576	1,810	2,824
Finchley	204	905	1,596
Gerrard	2,622	†3,260	6,958
Hammersmith	238	2,030	1,472
Hampstead	450	3,500	6,750
Holborn	1,025	116	4,575
Hop	2,171	5,110	3,829
Hornsey	493	1,395	2,207
Kensington	3,278	3,910	4,732
Lee Green	159	l,580	1,641
London Wall	1,411	6,050	8,089
Mayfair	959	4,720	6,121
New Cross	473	916	1,827
North	1,412	1,780	3,378
Paddington	2,275	6,230	5,423
Park	2,600	3,700	2,800
Putney	571	1,520	2,129
Regent	3,792	†Included in Gerrard	5,288
Streatham	249	1,000	1,831
Sydenham	244	1,180	1,956
Victoria	2,027	4,000	6,373
Western	1,272	1,705	5,288
Willesden	898	1,343	1,602
Wimbledon	136	985	1,464
Croydon	548	5,216	2,150
Sutton	115	2,106	1,090
Bromley	40	3,100	1,738
Richmond	427	1,343	1,733
Kingston	1,386	1,121	2,013

In some cases, owing to the increase of the number of calls made on the connected lines, it is not possible to use the whole of the existing equipment, as, for instance, at the Bank, Central, Gerrard, London Wall, and Holborn exchanges. There is also sufficient spare capacity at practically all the suburban exchanges to accommodate the subscribers' lines that are likely to be required for a considerable period. At some of the exchanges named in the above list spare equipment exists for more than the number of lines mentioned but cannot be used owing to the increase of traffic on the connected lines, as, for instance, at the Bank and Hop exchanges. The number given in each case represents the available balance of actual spare capacity.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will state for each of the large exchanges (i.e. over 1,000 lines) in the London telephone system which is the spare capacity in switchboard lines and in lines in subscribers' cables entering the exchanges; and will he state also the number of working switchboard lines and working lines in subscribers' cables in each exchange?

The following are the principal existing telephone exchanges in Central London where space exists for additional subscribers' lines with the number of additional subscribers' lines that can be accommodated in each case:—

Exchange.			Additional Lines which can be Accommodated.
Avenue	…	…	2,340
Bank	…	…	682
Central	…	…	1,750
City	…	…	736
Hop	…	…	1,707
Kensington	…	…	3,171
Mayfair	…	…	767
Museum *	…	…	9,540
North	…	…	840
Paddington	…	…	3,814
Park	…	…	6,666
Regent	…	…	2,638
Victoria	…	…	3,175
Western	…	…	957
* To be opened shortly.

asked the Postmaster-General the value of contracts at present by the Post Office for telephone exchange equipments, distinguishing between central battery, automatic, and magneto equipments, for London and for other telephone areas throughout the United Kingdom?

The particulars asked for are as follows:—

		London.		Province.
Central Battery	…	£239,465	…	£109,198
Automatic	…	4,379	…	149,131
	…	Nil.		Nil.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that delays extending to two months occur in Nottingham in moving telephones from one place of business to another at the request of the persons so moving; and whether he will take steps to expedite action in such cases?

There have been a few cases of considerable delay in removing telephone circuits at Nottingham during the past six months. The delay has been chiefly due to the fact that all the wires in the existing underground cables in certain parts of the town are in use. Additional underground plant is being provided on a comprehensive plan, but probably a month or six weeks must elapse before the work is sufficiently advanced to meet all requirements.

asked the Postmaster-General the value of contracts at present placed for the construction of underground conduits for telegraph cables and for telephone cables respectively, giving the length in miles of the underground ducts and cables contracted for, and distinguishing between the London telephone area and provincial telephone areas?

The particulars are as follows:—

	London	Provinces.
Contract value of underground conduits	£28,331	£404,800
Miles of single ducts	146	1,869
Contract value of cables	£186,700	£1,139,000
Miles of single wire	28,550	369,400

In addition to the foregoing, contracts have been placed for underground telephone cable of the length of about 76,000 miles of single wire and of the value of about £188,000. This cable is not earmarked for any specific work, but can be drawn upon as required by the Post Office Engineer-in-Chief.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is now able to announce the adoption of the system of accounting for surcharges to which his predecessor referred in his speech on the Post Office Estimates last year?

Yes. I have pleasure in announcing that on and after the 20th April all surcharges on letters, parcels and other postal packets posted unpaid or underpaid will be denoted by means of postage due labels to be affixed to the covers and date stamped before delivery. The labels will be of four values: ½d. (green), 1d. (red), 2d. (agate), and 5d. (brown).