asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty the amount of the naval half-pay which the First Sea Lord receives in addition to a salary of £3,000 a year and a furnished house; and by how much the present total remuneration of this appointment, inclusive of half-pay, exceeds that payable in 1914?

The First Sea Lord is in receipt of the ordinary half-pay of his rank (Admiral of the Fleet), namely, £1,800 a year. The present total remuneration of the officer holding the appointment exceeds by £1,300 the amount pay able in 1914.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty purchased any socks during the year 1921, and, if so, whether they were purchased from the Disposal Board or from private firms?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, purchases of socks were made from the Disposal Board up to the number which they had to offer. The remainder were purchased from private firms.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state, in terms of modern designs and the Washington Conference limitations of 35,000 tons for a battleship and 27,000 tons for an aircraft carrier, what is their relative cost fully manned; and what is the number of aeroplanes the latter can carry, assuming equal protection against air-bomb attack?

With regard to the first part of the question, neither design is yet complete, and it is, therefore, not possible to state the relative cost of these vessels when manned. With regard to the second part of the question, it is not in the public interest to give these particulars.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether his attention has been drawn to the pension case of the late Private Charles Llewellyn Guttridge, Royal Army Service Corps, M/2/116,704, Ministry of Pensions No. 11/M/366,692, tribunal case No. 16/650; is he aware that Mr. Guttridge's claim to a pension in respect of nervous and mental breakdown was disallowed by the Pensions Appeal Tribunal on the 6th October, 1921, at a time when he was in an asylum, and when consequently the proper presentation of his case was impossible; whether he can consider a claim by his widow, Mrs. Guttridge, for a widow's pension; or whether he will assist Mrs. Guttridge in appealing to the tribunal for such a pension, in view of the circumstances of the tribunal's previous decision in the case of her husband?

The fact that the late soldier's claim has been rejected by the Pensions Appeal Tribunal does not affect Mrs. Guttridge's right to apply for a widow's pension and to appeal to the tribunal in the event of the Ministry being unable to admit a claim made by her. Up to the present Mrs. Guttridge does not appear to have made any application for pension, but should she desire to do so her Local War Pensions Committee will advise and assist her in the matter.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether ex-service men unsuccessful at the 1920 examinations for the Civil Service are allowed to compete again at the forthcoming examinations; and, if not, whether he will modify the Regulations so as to avoid this hardship, seeing that they came forward in response to an official appeal, and did not have the advantage of 18 months' extra study enjoyed by those now entering?

In accordance with the recommendations of the Third Interim Report of the Lytton Committee, ex-service men who were unsuccessful at the 1920 limited competitions for the clerical class will not be eligible to compete at the forthcoming examination. These examinations, in the case of ex-service men, are not competitive and are of a simple character, designed expressly to meet the case of ex-service men whose normal course of studies were interrupted or whose education was completed some years previously. Having regard to all the circumstances, I see no reason to modify the Committee's recommendations an this matter.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the total remuneration, inclusive of cost of living bonus, received at the present time by a civil servant holding an appointment as assistant director of contracts at the Admiralty, whose salary on a pre-War basis would be £800; whether £800 was the consolidated rate of staff pay drawn in 1914 by an infantry lieutenant-colonel serving as a general staff officer (first grade) at the War Office, and a junior naval captain holding an appointment as assistant director of naval equipment at the Admralty; what are the present emoluments of a general staff officer (first grade) at the War Office and a junior naval captain at the Admiralty; and by what percentages the maximum pensions payable to a civil servant on a pre-War salary of £800, an infantry lieutenant-colonel, and a naval captain retiring at the present time exceed the maximum pensions for which officers of these grades would, respectively, have been eligible on retirement in 1914?

The pre-War salary of a civil servant holding an appointment as Assistant Director of Contracts at the Admiralty was, in fact, £800 to £900 per annum. It is now £850-£1,000 plus bonus, which at present bonus rates is equivalent to a total salary of £1,157 to £1,307 per annum. The answer to the second part of the question is in the affirmative. The total emoluments of an infantry lieut.-colonel, serving as a General Staff Officer (first grade) at the War Office, are now £1,357 per annum if he is married and £1,290 if he is single. Those of a naval captain, with less than three years' service, serving at the Admiralty are £1,415 per annum.The maximum pension payable to a civil servant on a pre-War salary of £800 would have been in 1914 £523, including the annuity value of his additional allowance, assuming him to have retired at the age of 60, after 44 years' service, and to have been pensioned on his actual salary. The corresponding figure for 1922, on the same assumptions, would be £694 5s 4d., an increase of 32·74 per cent. If, however, the hon. Member desires to compare the pre-War and post-War pen-

sions of a civil servant holding the post of Assistant Director of Contracts, it might be assumed in each case that he was retiring on his maximum salary. In that case the figures would be:

The maximum retired pay of a lieut.-colonel was in 1914 £420, and is now £600, an increase of 42·86 per cent. The maximum pension of a naval captain was in 1914 £600, and is now £900, an increase of 50 per cent.

asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to the cases of J. A. Smith and W. Ming, temporary clerks in his Department, now under notice of dismissal; whether he is aware that the first-named is 57 years of age, with a wife in indifferent health, and that his two sons were killed in the War, and that the second-named is 66 years of age, with a wife to support and an ex-service son partly dependent upon him, and that another son was killed in the War; whether the records of these two men are satisfactory; and, if so, whether, in view of their position, he will withdraw their notices of dismissal?

I am fully aware of the circumstances of these two clerks, and while I have every sympathy with them, I regret that I cannot undertake to withdraw the notices. Their records are satisfactory, and the reason why their services are being dispensed with lies in the definite pledge given that temporary non-service men should not be retained while ex-service men are being dispensed with.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the manager of the Springburn Employment Exchange, Glasgow, has suspended the out-of-work donation to a number of people who have been working short time; whether the reason given for this suspension is the Amalgamated Engineering Union lock-out; and if this is a general instruction sent out to all Employment Exchanges in the country?

The claims of certain engineering workers, previously working short time, who lost their employment owing to the dispute, were disallowed by the insurance officer, in accordance with decisions given previously in similar cases by the Umpire. It is a general instruction to local officers to submit claims to the insurance officer for decision if they appear to be affected by any ground of disqualification.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that Employment Exchange officials are seeking to impose conditions of service for domestic servants; and whether this is being done under the authority of the Department?

I dealt very fully with this subject in my replies to questions during June, July and August of 1921, by the hon. Members for Finchley (Colonel Newman), Kensington (Sir W. Davison) and Dulwich (Sir F. Hall), and no change has taken place in the policy of the Department since that date I made it clear at that time that officials of Employment Exchanges did not lay down conditions of domestic service.

asked the Minister of Labour what are the most recent number of persons registered as unemployed in this country?

At the 27th March, 1922, the numbers of persons registered as wholly unemployed at the Employment Exchanges in Great Britain were: Men, 1,283,536; boys, 53,859; women, 260,726; girls, 39,255; total, 1,637,376. At the same date the estimated numbers of per sons working short time were: Men, 121,400; boys, 6,000; women, 70,200; girls, 7,800; total, 205,400.

asked the Minister of Health what will be the average annual loss per house to be defrayed out of Imperial or local funds in the case of all houses built, or building, under the Housing Acts of 1919 and 1921, and for which the figures are available?

The best estimate I have been able to make from contract figures indicates that the average annual loss will be approximately £59 per house, but I am hoping that recent falls in cost may reduce this average.

asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the overcrowding in the slum areas of London and the empty and scantily occupied houses in Mayfair, Belgravia, and elsewhere in the West End, he will introduce measures to ration the housing accom- modation until such time as His Majesty's Government is in a position to provide adequate houses?

No, Sir. I do not think that the proposal is a practicable one.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the Land Commission prior to 1914 reported that one-tenth of the population was living in habitations unfit for human beings, and that a further one-tenth was living in overcrowded slum dwellings, and that this state of affairs was made considerably worse by the lack of building operations during the War; and what does his Department now estimate to be the percentage of the population of England, Scotland, and Wales who are living in habitations unfit for human beings?

The figure referred to in the first part of the question was, of course, only an estimate by an unofficial committee. The surveys made by local authorities in 1919 indicated that the population in unfit houses and houses in unhealthy areas was about 3·7 per cent, of the total. Pending receipt of comparable figures as a result of the Census of 1921, I can make no statement as to the present position.