asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the military representatives where civilian and their assistants acting in connection with appeals for postponement under Lord Derby's recruiting scheme are paid; and, if so, will he state the scales of payment?

They are unpaid.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether men attested and placed in groups not yet called up are subject to military law under Section 176 (5) of the Army Act, or under any other statutory provision?

Such men are not subject to military law.

asked why the first part of the Report, dated 20th December, 1915, was published with the unanimous assent of his colleagues, while the figures of the third part and the deductions from them were issued without that assent?

The first part of the Report dealt with matters connected with the canvass, and it was to conduct this canvass that the Committee was constituted. The Committee were not constituted for the purpose of reporting on the matters dealt with in the second part of the Report, and consequently confined themselves to dealing with the matters which are the subject of the first part of the Report.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether it is intended to inoculate with anti-typhoid serum all or any men who may be compulsorily attested under the operation of the Military Service (No. 2) Bill?

I think the men in question will be in the same position as men who undertake voluntary enlistment.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that men of Division III. of the National Reserve resent the order preventing the wearing of their badges until after the War; and whether it is intended to allow these men to wear the badges served out to them?

The badge in question was liable to be mistaken for a munition badge. There is no intention of altering the instructions issued.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he can see his way to recommend that soldiers engaged in military operations in the Dardanelles should, with due regard to military requirements, be granted sufficient leave to enable them to visit this country?

This privilege can only be granted by the General Officer Commanding the Forces in the Mediterranean, and must obviously depend upon the exigencies of the military situation. The troops removed from the Gallipoli Peninsula will be given rest, but to bring them to this country on leave would obviously be a large, difficult, and costly undertaking.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can supply any information concerning Michael Colclough, lance-corporal, No. 6,908, 2nd Battalion Irish Guards, wounded 29th September, and admitted to the 5th Field Ambulance in France?

Lance-corporal Michael Colclough died on the 1st of October, 1915, in the 24th Ambulance Train, from wounds received in action. He was buried at Etaples.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether letters, if any, passing through the Post Office from Ireland or Great Britain to France, Belgium or Italy are, or are liable to be, opened by the Censor; whether letters passing from one part of Ireland to another are, or are liable to be, opened by the Censor; and whether he will consider the advisability of issuing definite information to the public as to what letters or classes of letters are liable to be opened for censorship?

Detailed information on this point can hardly be given without detriment to the public interest. All letters are liable to be opened for censorship, but there is no discrimination between the various countries in the United Kingdom.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why separation allowance has not been paid to Mrs. M. C. M'Inerney, mother of Driver M'Inerney, B Sub-section, 25th Battery, R.D.A., Athlone, number of certificate D.U.U. 27 B, whose sole support he was?

I am not sure if the hon. Member refers to the mother of a driver of this name in the 5th Depot, Royal Field Artillery, as there are some discrepancies in the particulars, but in that case the mother's dependance has not been established.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why the allowance to Mrs. M. Donnelly, Navan, county Meath, widow of Private T. Donnelly, No. 4,622, 5th Leinster Regiment, was stopped?

Inquiry will be made, and the hon. Member informed of the result in due course.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether the recent regulations made in regard to platinum were meant to include the platinum which had already been used for mounting ornaments of jewellery?

The answer is in the affirmative. Arrangements are being made with the representatives of the trade whereby permission will be given to sell their existing stocks of jewellery provided that a guarantee is given that until further notice no platinum will be used for mounting or manufacturing jewellery.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government are prepared to remit to the Consolidation Committee the preparation of a Bill consolidating enactments relating to merchant shipping?

The Prime Minister has asked me to answer this question. I do not think the present is a suitable time for the consolidation of the law relating to merchant shipping

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the sum that is outstanding to the railway companies from merchants and traders who refuse to pay the extra 4 per cent. the railways have charged under the 1913 arrangement; and if he can say what sum this amounts to and if he proposes to enforce the payment of this sum?

Traders who have lodged complaints with the Railway and Canal Commission against the increases in rates referred to would appear to be entitled to withhold payment of the additional charges if they so desire, pending the decision of the Commissioner. One such complaint has recently been before the Commission, but judgment has not yet been given. I am not aware what the amount involved amounts to.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the cost of parcels to the front being almost prohibitory to the dependants of some soldiers and sailors, he will consider the possibility of supplying dependants with a franked parcel label periodically which would result in the number of parcels dispatched being kept within control and allow very poor dependants the privilege of sending their soldier and sailor friends a few comforts which the present postage rate prevents them doing?

My right hon. Friend regrets that it is impracticable to adopt this proposal. I would refer the hon. Member to the answers which my right hon. Friend gave on the 22nd ultimo to the hon. Members for South Tyrone and North-West Durham.

asked the Prime Minister whether any Bill for the consolidation of the Summary Jurisdiction (England) Acts is in preparation; and, if not, whether the Government will give instructions for the preparation of such a Bill?

No Bill is in preparation, and I am afraid that in present circumstances time could not be found for the consideration of such a measure.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will again introduce next Session the Bill for the consolidation of the Education Acts which was introduced in 1906 by the present Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with such additions and alterations as may be necessary to complete the consolidation?

No, Sir.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether the slaughter of ruminants entering the ports of Great Britain and Ireland is the established policy of His Majesty's Government; and, if not, what are the principles governing exemptions to favoured importers?

The policy of the Board in this matter is governed by the provisions of Sections 24 and 25 of the Diseases of Animals Act, 1894, as amended by the Diseases of Animals Act, 1896, which require all animals landed to be slaughtered at the port except such as the Board allow to be landed for exhibition or other exceptional purpose. When animals are allowed to be landed for exhibition the Board require them to be taken to and kept at the premises of a recognised public zoological society. When they are allowed to be landed for some other exceptional purpose permission would only be granted where some special and important benefit was likely to proceed from the landing.

also asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether, in August, 1914, he sanctioned the special importation of Holstein cattle; and whether the animals arrived at Tilbury Docks and were released on 31st October to the British Holstein Cattle Society?

The facts stated are correct, sanction being given by the then President of the Board.

next asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he sanctioned the importation of cattle belonging to His Highness the Rajah of Sarawak; if so, why these cattle were not slaughtered; and why the animals were interned in the Zoological Gardens on condition that they were transferred as a gift to the Royal Zoological Society?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The reason the cattle were not slaughtered on or before landing was that the agents of His Highness were able to arrange for their acceptance as a permanent addition to the Zoological Society's collection. There was no requirement by the Board that they should be presented to the society.

further asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he makes exceptions in the case of favoured importers of live ruminants; and, if so, why the cattle belonging to His Highness the Rajah of Sarawak were neither slaughtered nor delivered to the managers of his estate in Gloucestershire, in accordance with the precedent established in 1914 by the case of the Holstein cattle?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The special importation of Holstein cattle was permitted for the purpose of improving the breed of Holstein in this country, and did not establish a precedent for allowing Indian cattle to be placed on the private premises of their owner.