asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce with reference to the battery which was tested at Inchicore on the 21st August last, and in relation to which he subsequently issued a public statement, to state:— (a) the ampere-hour capacity of the battery when discharging at constant current at the half-hour, 1-hour, 3-hour, and 5-hour rates, respectively; (b) the cell-voltage at the beginning and end of discharge at each of the above-mentioned rates, and the mean cell voltage during discharge at each of those rates; (c) the normal and maximum practicable rates of charge, respectively; (d) the cell voltage at the beginning and end of charge at each of the above-mentioned rates, and the mean cell voltage during such charge; (e) whether he will cause to be published charge and discharge curves showing the characteristics of the battery under each of the charge and discharge conditions referred to in (a) and (c) above.

The Deputy's questions relate to matters which were not under test in the demonstration runs of the battery coach on the 21st and 27th August. This matter is covered by a reply to another question on this subject. I am prepared to publish information when I am advised that further improvement in any particular direction is unlikely and that our investigations will not be hampered by such publication. The Patents cover the battery generally, but the experimental work, so far, has been directed mainly towards perfecting a quickcharging type of battery with very low internal resistance. I, therefore, do not propose to give the information requested by the Deputy, as the publication of this information would not assist, in any way, the development of the battery along the lines recommended by the experts whom I have consulted. Information on such of these points as Celia Ltd. think likely to be of value for technical purposes will, no doubt, be released by Celia Ltd. when, in their opinion, the need for secrecy has passed, and when the present development has reached a stage which allows research staff to be diverted to the collection of data which is not of immediate importance.

Are those who are advising the Minister in this connection prepared to publish over their own signatures a statement that the facts asked for in this question are not those which should have been first ascertained in order to form an opinion as to whether the battery was of any practical value or not?

I can answer that question without consulting any experts. The information asked for is not necessary to find that out.

Will the Minister state for what purpose the statement issued on 22nd August was given to the public and for what purpose the figures contained therein were published?

The answer to the second question will answer that.

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce with reference to the test which took place on a battery at Inchicore on the 21st August last, and in relation to which he subsequently issued a public statement, to state whether electrical instruments of meters of the following kinds and of sub-standard accuracy were duly connected in the test circuits on that occasion, viz.:—(a) in the charge circuit: ammeter, voltmeter, integrating ampere-hour meter, integrating watt-hour meter; (b) in the discharge circuit: ammeter, voltmeter, integrating ampere-hour meter, integrating watt-hour meter; if no instruments of sub-standard accuracy were used, to state what instruments or meters were connected in the charge and discharge circuits, respectively, and with reference to each of these, to state the name of the manufacturer, the type of meter or instrument, and its grade, rating and maker's serial number.

The question seems to indicate a misunderstanding concerning the object of the demonstrations which took place on the 21st and 27th August. The object of these demonstrations was to show the practicability of the charging rates and discharging rates and the total output for the battery, and also the acceleration and speed and total mileage for the coach for the day's running. Accurate determination of efficiencies and output, etc., is made with precision instruments in the laboratory. Consequently, the various instruments of sub-standard accuracy, to which the Deputy refers, were not installed upon the coach. The instruments installed were:—

1 voltmeter on charging and discharging circuits.

1 ammeter on charging circuit.

1 ammeter on discharging circuit.

1 watt hour meter in the discharging circuit.

On the day's running, the following figures were established:—

Total distance travelled—173 miles.

Total output—193 kilowatt hours.

Output per pound weight of battery for one day's operation—32.2 watt hours per pound.

The instruments were supplied by the railway company. The figures may be taken as correct within a few per cent., which is the order of accuracy required. I may point out that meticulous accuracy in these matters is of no value, because the figures will almost always change within a few per cent., depending upon conditions of operation, temperature, charging rates and several other variables. For example, the energy efficiency varies between, say, 73 per cent. and 80 per cent., but under the general conditions of operation has been taken at a low average of 75 per cent. for the purpose of stating the claims of the battery. The Deputy stated here that the claim that the Drumm battery had a 50 per cent. higher voltage than existing alkaline batteries was not justifiable in view of his own observations. He stated that he had an alkaline cell which had a discharge voltage of 1.2 volts and that the Drumm cell appeared to have a discharge voltage of 1.57 volts, but he did not state the discharge rates in either case. At the average discharge rates used in the battery coach the voltage of the existing alkaline cell would be considerably less than 1.2 volts per cell. At high rates of discharge the Drumm cell would have voltages much more than 50 per cent. higher than existing alkaline batteries at similar discharge rates. At very low rates of discharge the difference in voltage would fall to about 40 per cent. The claim for 50 per cent. higher voltage is very conservative for the type of service for which the battery is designed.

I do not know whether that is an answer to my question or a reply to a speech I delivered here a week or so ago.

Ask an engineer as to whether it is or not!

I shall ask anybody you like, but I asked the Minister now whether these were instruments of sub-standard accuracy, and he tells me they were not. I ask the Minister what grade instruments they were? As far as my observation goes—I took just one glance at them—one glance was sufficient to show me that for the purpose of taking an accurate engineering test they were of no service whatever. I ask the Minister to answer the latter part of my question as to the grade of instruments used during this demonstration, as he now calls it.

I said they were supplied by the Railway Company.

They were ordinary commercial instruments.

No.

Can the Minister give us the grade?

No, I will not.

They were not sub-standard instruments?

I have not stated they were.

They were not likely to have an error of plus or minus five per cent.?

Not at all.

Can the Minister say what useful purpose can be served by question and answer in this way in the development of an invention for which this House has unanimously voted £25,000 for further tests?

None, except that it may give the Minister for Education some useful points as to a new type of educational system.

And bring the Minister for Industry and Commerce to attend the classes.

And explain the Minister's answer.