asked the first Lord of the Admiralty (1) whether the Admiralty will give equal opportunities to the writer branch to gain commissioned rank as is now given to the military and engineering branches of the Navy and thus bring into effect his promise that merit on the lower deck will be rewarded; (2) whether the procedure followed in promoting artificer engineers and warrant telegraphists after five years' service to commissioned warrant rank may be extended to warrant writers, seeing the advanced age at which they are promoted; and (3) whether he will consider the advisability of promoting a number of experienced and qualified writers to warrant and commissioned rank; whether he is aware that the system now adopted for filling the posts of accountant officers, Royal Navy, by the entry of pursers and assistant pursers from the mercantile marine and civilian clerks has caused dissatisfaction amongst the writers whose qualifications for naval accountant duties have constantly been brought before the Admiralty; and whether these officers who by virtue of their commission should be capable of supervising the duties of an office are in most cases instructed by the writers?

As I stated in reply to the Noble Lord on 25th November last, the question of providing the necessary number of officers for the Accountant Branch was under consideration of the Admiralty when the War broke out; but this question, in common with others, had to be deferred. As the Noble Lord is aware, twelve chief writers have since been promoted to warrant rank. Whilst I can give no undertaking as to further promotion, and whilst particular questions of this kind cannot be dissociated from consideration of the general question, for dealing with which the present juncture is scarcely opportune, the matter will not be lost sight of.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that several of the twelve warrant writers promoted in December last are now receiving 1s. 6d. a day less in pay and allowances than they received as chief writers prior to promotion; what steps it is proposed to take to remedy this state of affairs; and why, in view of the shortage of accountant officers, as shown by the number of entries of assistant paymasters, Royal Naval Reserve, warrant writers, are not appointed to and utilised in the Fleet as officers instead of being reappointed to the same duties as they carried out prior to their promotion?

As regards the first and second parts of the question, I presume that the Noble Lord alludes to the loss of separation allowance, which ceased on promotion to warrant rank. This matter is under consideration, and I hope soon to make a definite statement about it. As regards the last part of the question: warrant officers are appointed to posts where, in the opinion of the Admiralty, they can be most usefully employed. It has not hitherto been the practice to appoint them to seagoing ships, and it is hardly the time at present to make this change, though the whole question of their employment will be thoroughly reconsidered in connection with the report on the conditions of employment of accountant officers.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether his attention has been called to the case of a man enlisting at the commencement of the War who, with his father, was responsible for the management of a business, and the father dying after his son's departure leaving the widow with young children, who is totally unable to manage the business, which without management must collapse and bring the family to poverty; and whether in such a case the son who enlisted and is serving in India could be released or transferred to some Home service where he could give occasional supervision to his late father's business?

If the hon. Member will furnish the particulars of the case he has in mind the matter will be sympathetically dealt with, and if the case is considered deserving, the Army Council may be able to authorise the man's transfer to Home service.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether he is aware that Private William Millan, of Falkirk, whilst in training at Troon with the Highland Light Infantry, was inoculated with anti-typhoid vaccine although he had not been well for some little time previously, and that he became very ill within twenty-four hours afterwards and in the course of a few days had to be removed to Kilmarnock hospital, where he died eight days later from typhoid fever; whether he is aware that the health of many soldiers has been seriously impaired by inoculation; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

Inquiry is being made.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether the Army Council will now cancel Army Order, No. 96, 1915, and grant proficiency pay to soldiers who entered from the National Reserve after previous service in the Navy; whether he is aware that large numbers of these men have served many years in the Navy and left that service as trained men and seamen gunners; and whether he is aware that a sense of injustice and irritation exists amongst them at the manner in which they have been treated with regard to proficiency pay?

The grant of proficiency pay has always depended on previous military service, and I regret that it was not possible to make an exception in the case of the men referred to by the Noble Lord.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether officers of the Cameroon Expeditionary Force receive 5s. a day field allowance and officers of the Gold Coast Regiment 10s. a day field allowance; and whether he will consider the advisability of raising the field allowance of the former officers?

The grant of a field allowance of 10s. a day to officers of the Gold Coast Regiment during the operations against Togo land was irregular and unauthorised, and although I decided that officers who had drawn it should not be asked to refund the amounts overdrawn, I am not prepared to increase the authorised rate of 5s. a day which, under the West African Frontier Force Regulations, is being paid to officers of all units of the West African Frontier Force employed in the Cameroons. They also receive free rations or an allowance in lien of 5s. a day.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is willing, inasmuch as the future of Great Britain has become identified with the interests of Russia and France, to request the French Government to communicate to him the terms of the Franco-Russian Alliance, so that the British people, may know the nature of the policy and liabilities to which they have been committed?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer returned to his practically identical question of 10th March. I have nothing to add thereto, as I then stated the Alliance of 5th September is sufficient for the purposes of the War.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in the case of a soldier who had made his allocation and the allowance to his wife or dependant had been duly paid being taken prisoner by the enemy, the allowance continues to be paid as before that event occurred; and whether he will state what happens to the pay of a soldier who has been taken prisoner but who had made no allocation previous to the occurrence of that event?

In the first case the allotment of pay made by the soldier is continued, unless and until it is proved before a Court of Inquiry that the soldier was taken prisoner through neglect or misconduct on his own part. In the second case, subject to the condition already stated, the soldier's pay is credited to his account and he has power to begin making an allotment after he has been taken prisoner.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can now supply any further details of the German exports to the United States in January last or in any recent months; the cause of the increase of these exports; the nature of them; and if they were shipped from German ports or through neutral countries?

submitted the following statement, showing the value of the Imports into the United States from (a) Germany, and (b) the United Kingdom for the periods August, 1913—February, 1914, and August, 1914—February, 1915, respectively:—

Month.	Value of Imports from Germany.		Value of Imports from United Kingdom.
	1913.	1914.	1913.	1914.
	Thousand Dollars.	Thousand Dollars.	Thousand Dollars.	Thousand Dollars.
August	15,626	9,400	20,719	17,872
September	18,810	2,732	25,388	32,146
October	14,816	6,168	20,244	25,058
November	14,257	11,921	21,611	20,647
December	18,272	8,681	28,597	14,833
	1914.	1915.	1914.	1915.
January	16,256	12,951	24,116	14,862
February	14,408	6,813	24,508	17,738
Total (seven months)	112,445	58,666	165,183	143,156
	(£23,426,000)	(£12,222,000)	(£34,413,000)	(£29,824,000)
Decrease	£11,204,000–48 per cent.		£4,589,000–13 per cent.

The increase in Imports from Germany in January, 1915, over preceding months, was due mainly to large imports of dye-stuffs and fine chemicals imported chiefly through Rotterdam.Complete statistics for the whole of the United States for the month of March are not yet available, but the following statement shows the value of the imports at New York from Germany and the United Kingdom, respectively, during that month and March, 1914:—

—				Imports from Germany.		Imports from United Kingdom.
				1914.	1915.	1914.	1915.
				£	£	£	£
March	…	…	…	2,292,000	1,270,000	2,774,000	2,714,000

asked the Undersecretary of State for India if he will explain why some important and interesting

Monday has been thought to be more suitable generally than Sunday for communiqués, when not of exceptional urgency. The communiqué in question was accordingly marked for publication in Monday's papers, but was issued by the Press Bureau on Saturday night, instead of Sunday, to meet the convenience of Monday's provincial Press. The Secretary of State has now decidedthat in future such communiqués will ordinarily be issued, if available, on Saturday, in time for publication in the Sunday papers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he proposes to take regarding the Report of the Coal Committee whereby the price of coal may be reduced, especially to those who are only able to purchase it in small quantities?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to-day to the questions on the same subject by my hon. Friends the Members for Attercliffe, Blackburn and North-East Lanarkshire.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the results of his interviews with coal owners and coal merchants with regard to the probable course of prices in the coming season?

The matters referred to by my hon. Friend are still under discussion, and I am not yet in a position to make a full statement. The representatives of the coal owners who met me at the Board of Trade on 22nd April subsequently passed the following resolution:

"This meeting of coal owners, having a desire to Moderate the prices of coal for home consumption, as far as may be practicable in the interest of the country, recommend that the question of the prices of such coal be considered by the coal owners in the various districts with this object in view."

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, for the purpose of a claim of repayment of Income Tax, the income to be declared and vouched is the income accrued due to the claimant within the fiscal year to which the claim relates or the amount actually received within that year?

I understand that my hon. Friend is referring to items of income from which Income Tax has been deducted at the source. Where such an item is wholly payable out of profits and gains brought into charge to Income Tax, the amount to be declared and vouched is the income accruing during the tax year. Where the item is not so payable, the amount to be declared is the income receivable in the Income Tax year.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture if he will state the annual value of the product of the sea fisheries of Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, respectively, and the sums expended or advanced by the State in connection therewith, in each case yearly, from 1900–1 to 1914–15?

The preparation of a statement such as is asked for in the question, to cover a period of fifteen years, would entail a great deal of labour. Perhaps, therefore, having regard to the pressure of work in the Department at the present time, my hon. Friend would be content at the moment with an answer, so far as it is possible to give it, with regard to one year. In Appendix XXV., on page 44 of the recent Report of the Inshore Fisheries Committee (Cd. 7373) there appears a statement with regard to expenditure in the year 1913 which was specially prepared for the Committee. From this statement it will be seen that the expenditure on fisheries in England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland, respectively, for the year ending 31st March, 1913, was as follows:—

Board of Agriculture and Fisheries	£23,019
Fishery Board for Scotland	37,234
Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland	33,872
Congested Districts Board for Ireland	34,125

I would remind my hon. Friend that, in the three countries concerned, there are different systems of administration conforming to different statutory conditions. The figures above quoted are not, therefore, strictly comparable. For notes explanatory of the statement I would refer my hon. Friend to the Report in question. The Welsh fisheries, as my hon. Friend is aware, are administered with those of England by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, and I have no means of distinguishing the expenditure incurred in respect of Wales from that incurred in respect of England. The total value of wet fish landed at the ports of England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales, respectively, in the year 1913, was as stated hereunder:—

England	…	…	…	£9,270,338
Ireland	…	…	…	294,625
Scotland	…	…	…	3,925,360
Wales	…	…	…	738,988

Of the total value of all landings of wet fish in Welsh ports, as stated above, all but £29,884 are to be attributed to the three ports of Milford Haven (with Neyland), Swansea, and Cardiff. The above statement does not include landings of shell-fish, as to which perhaps I may be allowed to refer my hon. Friend to the Reports annually published by the Board.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland what steps have been taken by the Congested Districts Board to have the representatives of the evicted tenant Thomas Neary restored to their former holding on the Mary Moran estate, at Carn, Kilmore, Erris, county Mayo; and what has been the result of the inquiries promised to be made into this case by the Board?

After inquiry and consultation with the Estates Commissioners, the Congested Districts Board do not propose to reinstate the representatives of Thomas Neary in the holding on the Mary Moran estate from which he was evicted.