asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in the case of any of the persons who have since the commencement of the War been shot in this country upon conviction by court-martial, any member of the Court dissented either from the verdict or the sentence; and, if so, how many such members so dissented?

I would draw my hon. Friend's attention to Section 52 (1) of the Army Act, though I can hardly think that it will have escaped his attention. The information is not available.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War how many persons subject to military law have, since the commencement of the War, been tried in the United Kingdom by district courts-martial and sentenced to imprisonment; and in how many of those cases the term of imprisonment imposed exceeded twelve months, exceeded three months, but did not exceed twelve months, and was three months or less?

The compilation of this information would take a considerable time and, as it is not in any case in the public interest to disclose it, I do not see my way to give any instructions in the matter.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War how many persons who applied for exemption from military service on conscientious grounds have been sentenced by courts-martial to imprisonment for offences against military law; and whether he will state in each case the name of the offender and the sentence passed upon him, and whether he was sentenced by a general or by a district court-martial?

Two cases have been reported in which men who made an unsuccessful appeal for exemption on grounds of conscientious objection to the tribunal constituted by law have subsequently, after joining the Colours, been tried by court-martial. In each case the sentence was of two years' imprisonment with hard labour, and was awarded by a district court-martial. The Army Council, on review of the proceedings, commuted the sentence to one of detention. It seems to me quite unnecessary to advertise the names of these offenders.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in view of the total of fire losses, any one of which exceeds the sum of £200, reported to the War Office to 17th April being about £50,000, he has now been able to accelerate the receipt of the outstanding Reports of such fire losses over £200 that have occurred during the financial year ending 31st March, 1916; and whether he can now give a more approximate total of the aggregate loss suffered by the War Office in respect to these larger fires in the Home Commands during the year in question?

I have not yet received any further information which would modify the figure of £50,000.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he has now obtained the approximate totals of the many small fire losses in the Home Commands for the financial year ending 31st March, 1916, resulting from fires the extent of any one of which was below the value of £200, which losses he has stated are dealt with at the respective Home Command headquarters; whether he will give these totals by commands; and whether, in giving these figures, he will state if the losses include all losses under £200, other than any loss incurred by air raid or bombardment, on premises owned, rented, or occupied by the War Department, and the value of stores, forage, and vehicles damaged or destroyed by fire?

No report is made to the War Office by the General Officers Commanding of Commands in regard to fires which involve a loss of under £200, except in special circumstances, as, for instance, in cases where arson is suspected. I hope that my hon. Friend will not press for this information, the collection of which would involve an amount of labour out of proportion, I think, to its usefulness.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will give the number of deaths that resulted from the fire and explosion on Sunday, 2nd April, in Kent, and the number of injured, and state how many of these deaths occurred among members of the police, fire brigades, and naval or military forces engaged in the execution of their respective duties or in rendering assistance on the occasion of this fire and explosion; how many deaths occurred among the members of the male staff of the works engaged in rendering assistance; whether the remaining fatalities were largely among men and women spectators not engaged upon the scene of the fire for any useful purpose; and whether he could state if there was ample time between the outbreak of the fire and the main explosion to have cleared the works of all persons not engaged upon useful operations arising out of the fire?

The number of casualties on this occasion, although large, was happily not so great as the first estimate. One hundred and six men were killed and sixty-six injured. No women were killed or injured. With the exception of five men belonging to the military guard, all the killed were employed in the works affected by the explosions. The majority of them were rendering assistance when they were killed, and the rest were present as spectators. No one was killed or injured while engaged in his ordinary work. Those who were present as spectators were warned to leave, and would have had ample time to do so

asked the Home Secretary whether, pending the completion and issue of any detailed Report arising out of the usual inquiry of the explosives inspectorate of the Home Department, some notice will be promptly issued to all works handling explosives embodying in simple terms the administrative and technical lessons that have been learnt from the disaster in Kent on the 2nd April, so that the necessary precautions to be taken with novel forms of chemicals or processes may be readily understood by the management and staff of such works, and so that the necessary measures may be taken to prevent unnecessary fatalities arising owing to ignorance, negligence, or mismanagement?

Steps will be taken as speedily as possible to bring the essential conclusions and recommendations resulting from the inquiry to the notice of all firms engaged in the manufacture of similar explosives.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider the hardship imposed in the specific case of a man with an income of £205, who comes under the unearned group of Income Tax payers, by the high rate of 3s. in the £ and the deduction at the source of tax at the rate of 5s.; is he aware that the deduction of tax much beyond the actual liability means, in this case, that the man will be deprived for a time of about £37 of an income which was barely adequate for the needs of himself and his dependants before the increase in the cost of living and will make it very difficult for him to pay his way; and, in view of the many others similarly placed, will he consider the restriction of the tax on all incomes under £300 to the unearned rate and the abandonment of the deduction at a rate far in excess of the actual liability, which must involve additional labour and unremuneratve cost in connection with claims for repayments, unless this is compensated for by the undesired retention of surplus deductions, and which will in any event prove an inconvenience and embarrassment to many taxpayers, or will he endeavour to find some means, other than the present system of dealing? with repayment claims involving delays, of mitigating the hardship which excess deduction at the source entails?

My hon. Friend's proposition involves the repeal of the main principle of the British Income Tax, namely, the taxation (at the source) of the profits where they are made. So far-reaching a problem is not one for settlement by way of question and answer, and indeed cannot be effectively considered until it has been investigated in all its bearings by the Committee of Inquiry into the Income Tax which is to be appointed after the termination of the War. The Board of Inland Revenue will do everything in their power to obviate inconvenience to taxpayers who may come within the scope of the relief.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if the Treasury are applying for an Order in Council for the purpose of imposing an eight-hour day upon Civil servants in the Departments under Treasury control; whether this constitutes a breach of agreement by the State with its servants; whether the majority of Civil servants are paid for work done overtime; and, if so, will the imposition of a eight-hour day be equivalent to the imposition of a heavy special tax upon a particular section of the community?

The answer to the first question is in the negative, and the others do not therefore arise.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will state the date of entry into the public service and present annual salary of each of the inspectors of audit in the National Insurance Audit Department; whether the present annual salary of each of these officials has been reached by normal course of increment within the scale of salary attached to their grade; whether this present annual salary is in most cases approximately two and even three times as much as the annual salary received by them prior to their recent entry into the public service; whether the majority of them are largely employed on duties which connote duplication of work; whether an outline can be given of the really effective work, if any, performed by the majority of them; and whether a suggestion will be made to the Retrenchment Committee that an independent and full inquiry might with advantage be instituted into this matter?

The dates of entry into the public service and present annual salary of each of the inspectors in the National Insurance Audit Department are set out below:—

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether the public vaccinator of the Salford Union has, during the months of February and March and the latter part of January, 1916, vaccinated any person, adult or child, who had been successfully vaccinated within the ten years preceding; and whether such revaccinations will be paid for out of public funds?

I am inquiring into the matter and will communicate with the hon. Member later.