asked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that since the Order he made giving 12½ per cent. increase to time-workers considerable labour disturbances have arisen; whether there has been any increase in the demand for extension of this bonus to other branches of munition makers, including those engaged on piece-work; whether, before issuing the Order giving the increase in wages, he consulted and acted in harmony with the Ministry of Labour; and, if not, whether he will take care to do so in future and thereby help to avoid difficulties in the engineering trades?

The present position so far as the 12½ per cent. bonus is concerned is set out in the official announcement sent to the Press in the course of last week, which states that

"The Cabinet have decided that the settlement of any claim arising from the recent Orders granting an advance of 12½ per cent. to plain time-workers in the shipbuilding and munitions trades shall be referred to the Ministry of Labour in place of the War Cabinet Labour Committee."

And adds that the Ministry of Labour propose to deal with applications on the lines of a resolution passed by the committee of trade unionists advising the Minister of Munitions to the effect that: (1) the bonus shall be extended to cover time-workers who have not yet received the advance in the shipbuilding and munitions trades, and (2) that so far as pieceworkers in these trades are concerned no 12½ per cent, shall be given, but that low piece prices shall be revised.

The Ministry of Labour and the other Departments concerned are actively engaged in settling the matter in accordance with this announcement. With regard to the latter part of the hon. Member's question, I have nothing to add to my previous statements, which were to the effect that not only was the Ministry of Labour consulted in this matter, but that the decision was given by the War Cabinet after prolonged consideration and consultation with officials of all Departments involved, including the Committee on Production.

Can my hon. Friend give any idea what is the total cost of this, increase?

I am afraid I cannot.

Can the hon. Gentleman present in some intelligible form what changes have been made since the first proposal was made, so that we can appreciate what this 12½ per cent. increase means?

I think the hon. Member will find if lie looks at the announcement made last week that it is perfectly intelligible.

Has the hon. Gentleman not noticed himself the various changes which are announced from day to day in the newspapers with regard to this, and cannot he give us a complete statement of what it really means?

I think the hon. Member must be satisfied with the public announcement which has been made.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that his own Department has calculated that the cost would be £120,000,000?

No, I am not so aware.

asked (1) the Minister of Munitions whether he can now state the result of the inquiry on the alleged case of bribery and blackmail in connection with the importation of agricultural tractors; and what action, if any, is being taken; and (2) the Attorney- General if he will produce the correspondence between himself and the Ministry of Munitions with reference to an alleged ease of bribery and blackmail in connection with the importation of agricultural implements; and on what date the papers were deposited with him by the Ministry of Munitions?

The allegations referred to by the hon. Member have now been fully investigated under the supervision of the Director of Public Prosecutions, with assistance. These allegations rest entirely upon two statutory declarations made by two gentlemen recording a conversation they had had on the same day with a Mr. E. B. Killen, a director of the company, which acted as the agent for the sale of "Moline" tractors in this country.

The statutory declarations were entirely based on this conversation, and the declarants did not purport to deal with the facts as being within their own knowledge, and their statements are not therefore in any sense evidence of such facts recorded in such conversation, but only of the fact that such a conversation took place.

Mr. Killen was examined by the Director of Public Prosecutions in regard to the conversation, but repudiated ever having made some of the most important statements attributed to him, and emphatically denied his having at any time, or to anyone, stated that any agreement or any document in writing was ever in existence, saying that he must have been completely misunderstood.

He did, however, repeat certain allegations based, not upon his own knowledge, but -upon facts which he alleged to have been communicated to him by two of his co-directors. These gentlemen have also been carefully examined, with the result that they, in turn, repudiate all the material statements attributed to them by Mr. Killen.

There is no reason to doubt that, the statutory declarations record with substantial accuracy the statements made by Mr. Killen in the conversation referred to, and I consider that the declarants acted properly in calling the attention of the Minister thereto.

But I am advised by the Director of Public Prosecutions that, as the result of the searching investigation to which the statements then, and subsequently, made by Mr. Killen have been subjected, not only is there no primâ facie case against any officer of the Ministry upon which any proceedings could be launched, but that the result of the investigation has been completely to exonerate the Agricultural Machinery Department of the Ministry and its officers, past and present, from any justifiable suspicion of corrupt practices or of improper conduct.

I regret that Mr. Killen cannot be held criminally responsible for making his slanderous and untrue statements, which, whether made wilfully or carelessly, were calculated to throw doubt upon the honour of patriotic public officials, but I am advised that the form in which his statements were made protects him from such proceedings.

Are we to understand that any statement of this kind can be made by any member of the public accusing a Department of bribery and blackmail, and that the Department can take no action against such civilian whatsoever?

I would remind the hon. Member that the gentlemen who made these statments did not give any publicity to them. It is the hon. Member himself who gave them publicity.

Are we to understand that this statement has been offered by two responsible citizens, requesting that action should be taken against tins wan for making these statements in their presence, and that the Minister refuses to take such action; and is the Minister prepared to publish the shorthand reports of all the inquiries that they have made or to lay them on the Table of the House?

The hon. Member has not correctly summarised the statements made. The statements alleged to have been made by Mr. Killen are denied by him.

Do Mr. Killen's co-directors or do they not admit the truth? Do they accuse him or does he accuse them, and in view of the importance of the charge, does the hon. Gentleman not think it advisable that a full inquiry should be made—a public inquiry?

The fullest possible inquiry has been made. If there was the least chance of success I should continue to proceed.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the doctrine still prevails in the Navy that requires that a battleship shall keep beyond 10,000 yards from the enemy to fight her guns; if so, whether the results of this cautious policy have justified the strategy of the Admiralty; and, if not, whether he will place in the position of First Sea Lord a man of greater enterprise and resourcefulness than the present holder?

Nothing is known at the Admiralty of the doctrine referred to, and the remainder of the question, therefore, does not arise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that doctrine is taken from the literal words of Admiral Jellicoe, and is it on a par with the administrative capacity of the Admiralty that they are not aware of the words of their own chief printed in all the public Press?

I have nothing to add to what I have already said.

If in place of the right hon. Gentleman covering ignorance by this method, will he endeavour to bring a little illumination into his own Department and into his own mind?