asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether a memorial to his address from an officer of the posts and telegraphs of India, which originated in an appeal to the Viceroy in October, 1921, has yet been disposed of; whether the papers on this case were seen by the Viceroy or any other officers of the Government of India other than those against whose orders the appeal was made; and will he undertake to have the procedure in India examined with a view to prevent the vitiation of the right of appeal by delay or any other cause and to ensure for the services in that country a prompt and fair hearing of appeals at all stages?

If the hon. Member will let me know the particular memorial which he has in mind, I will have the facts examined.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he will take into consideration the case of officers of the Indian Army who complete the term of the command of their regiment a short time before completing 29 years' service, and are thus compelled under the new pension rules to retire with less than the full Indian pension of their rank, and either permit those officers to be given an extension of command or else to be allowed to proceed on furlough till they have completed their 29 years' service?

My Noble Friend has had under his consideration the case of the officers referred to, and is communicating with the Government of India on the subject.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India whether, in reviewing the question of the Indianisation of the Indian Civil Service, consideration will be given to the resolution passed at a public meeting of leaders of the Hindu and Mahommedan communities of Multan, after the recent riots there, requesting the Government to depute a European magistrate to try the cases arising out of the conflict between these two peoples, the Hindus having no con fidence in the impartiality of a Mahommedan magistrate or the Mahommedans in that of a Hindu magistrate; and if he can state what steps are being taken to secure a proper percentage of British magistrates being always available for duties of this nature, and what that percentage is to be?

My hon. and gallant Friend will realise that the question of providing British magistrates to try eases arising out of sectarian riots in India is merely one aspect, though an important one, of the general question of the composition of the Indian Services, which, as he knows, is being carefully examined.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Secretary of State will consider the question of making the taking of an oath of allegiance to His Majesty the King-Emperor a condition of service in all the various Civil Services of India, including the members and servants of municipal authorities?

This question has been considered, as far as actual servants of the Crown in India are concerned, but the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868, prevents the administration of any such oath to officials recruited in England for service in India, while the Indian Oaths Act, 1873, imposes a similar difficulty.

Will the Noble Lord consider bringing in legislation to repeal those difficulties?

I do not think it would be useful to repeal one Act without repealing both, and a very big question of policy is involved in imposing on the officials of all municipalities in this country a similar oath.

Will the Noble Lord consider an omnibus Act of Parliament that will impose it? Is he aware that it has been done recently in Northern Ireland?

I think, perhaps, if my hon. Friend would put a question to the Leader of the House on that subject, it would be better.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War what was the underlying principle on which was based the decision to refuse to pay the full losses of those officers,who left their moneys in McGrigor's, the bank in which the Government had placed their pay; and why, after recognising the moral claim of these officers and agreeing to pay 10s. in the £, he refuses to pay the comparatively small extra sum required to cover the whole loss, and thereby causes dissatisfaction among the officers concerned?

The principle on which the Government have based their decision is that, while no liability rests upon the Exchequer for the banking business of Army agents, they are prepared to recognise some degree of moral responsibility in the circumstances, which they consider to be met by the proposed grant.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any consideration has been given to the position of the staff of McGrigor's Bank; whether he is aware that, although some of the staff have been transferred to other banks, there are a few elderly men who have worked for the firm for very many years and have now lost everything; and whether, in view of the fact that the Government were able to save a good deal in the distribution of pay and pensions for which otherwise a large staff of officials would have been required, and that the staff of McGrigor's were requested to continue at their work as doing good service to the country, he will consider the possibility of rendering some assistance to these men either by way of providing employment or otherwise?

It is regretted that it is impossible to take any steps in the direction indicated.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the Paymaster-General made payments to McGrigor's Bank on his own volition or under instructions from the War Office; whether the War Office informed the Paymaster-General that the bank was in difficulties; and whether any disciplinary action has been taken for negligence?

The Paymaster-General, who is charged with the payment of the non-effective pay of officers and pensions of officers' widows, made payments to McGrigor's Bank as holders of powers of attorney from those entitled to receive payment. With regard to the latter part of the question, I would refer the right hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Holborn (Sir J. Remnant) on Tuesday-last.