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.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the number of officers now employed at the War Office exceeds the number employed before the War; if so, will he state the additional number now employed; and whether he will take steps to immediately reduce the number to the pre-War level at least in the interests of economy and efficiency.

Before the War there were 174 officers employed at the War Office. At present the number is 325, and it will be reduced by 1st April, 1923, to 297. The number is fixed with a view to the efficient performance of the work of the War Office and is subject to frequent and careful review in the interests of economy and efficiency. The present volume of business in the War Office, as measured by the average weekly influx of correspondence, is more than twice what it was before the War, and a staff no larger than the pre-War staff would not suffice to discharge it.

Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman indicate a further reduction after the 1st April?

I have said that the matter is continually receiving attention, and as the liabilities left to us in liquidation of War claims are met, the staff is gradually reduced.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman consider the reorganisation of the times of work at the War Office? Is he aware that there is very little work done there after half past four?

The conditions of work in the War Office are the same as the conditions in the Civil Service generally.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that it is now usual to arrest and bring to trial by court-martial men who deserted from the Army during the War; and if he will take action in the matter?

I am aware that, under the Army Act, men who deserted during the War are liable to arrest and trial by court-martial, but the normal practice when a case comes to notice is to discharge the soldier without resorting to trial and without withdrawing him from his civil employment. Trial is reserved for serious and special cases. If the hon. Member has any cases in mind which do not appear to be covered by this policy, the particulars—if he will supply them—will receive sympathetic consideration.

Has the hon. and gallant Gentleman had any talk with the Secretary of State about giving the men in question a free pardon, and, if so, will he tell the House what is the result of that conversation?

The Army-Council have considered this matter, and although they do not wish to proceed against the great majority of cases, they conceive it to be not in the public interest to give up the right of bringing men to court-martial in exceptional cases.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the War Office, through the Press, some time ago asked the men who were deserters to give their names and addresses for the purpose of completing the Army Records of men who served but who were deserters, and at the same time the War Office practically gave its word that if these men came forward they would not be dealt with, and will ho give a guarantee that that appeal will not be used against men for the purpose of arresting them?

That only bears out what I say, that in the vast majority of cases no legal proceedings are taken whatever.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that steps are being taken to alter the present method of employing a cartage contractor to deal with the transport of Army clothing; and whether he will take the necessary steps to prevent the passing to military units work at present done by civil labour?

I do not know what case the hon. Member has in mind, but I could not instruct any military authority to incur unnecessary expense in hiring civil transport when Army transport is available.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any decision has been made as to the issue of medals to the troops engaged in suppressing the Arab rebellion in Iraq in 1920; and is he aware that General Haldane, addressing the troops on the termination of hostilities, told them that they would receive medals for the campaign?

The matter is still under consideration, and no decision has been reached. In regard to the last part of the question, I understand from Sir Aylmer Haldane that he gave no such promise as is suggested.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a number of widows of ex-officers and men who died whilst serving His Majesty's forces during the War erected on war graves at their own expense memorial stones, prior to the Imperial War Graves Commission undertaking the supply and erection of such memorials; and whether any provision has been made whereby an equivalent refund or grant, including the cost of erection, may be authorised, after investigation, towards the cost of any memorial in lieu of the memorial since offered in such cases by the Commission?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of the circumstances. The Imperial War Graves Commission have given consideration to the matter, but have not seen their way to make such a grant.

Would the hon. and gallant Gentleman be prepared to accept any special case for consideration?

I am afraid that, once you make exceptions, it is impossible to draw the line, and notice was given as early as possible in the War, in 1916, that tombstones could not be put up in France. It has been very thoroughly considered, and I can hold out no promise of any change of policy.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office what is the total amount of money spent, respectively, on completed and uncompleted locomotives at Woolwich; when the 50 completed locomotives were handed over to the Disposal Board for sale; what prospects are there of such sale; whether railway companies at home and abroad have been notified; and what is to happen to the 50 locomotives which are 70 per cent, completed?

I have been asked to reply. With regard to the first part of the question, I am advised that the 50 completed locomotives have involved an expenditure of £780,000 and the 50 uncompleted, £551,000. The date on which they were reported as available to the Disposal Board for sale is 6th September, 1921. The prospects of sale at present are not good. The answer to the fourth part of the question is in the affirmative. It is not intended to complete the remaining 50 locomotives and the parts will be sold as they lie.

Do we understand that the 50 completed have not yet been sold?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any idea why it is impossible to sell these locomotives? Is there any cardinal defect in the Design?

I should be only too glad if the Noble Lord could sell them for us. There is not a very good market at present.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can give any information as to the present number of schemes agreed upon with the Dominion Governments or private organisations under the Empire Settlement Act?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the statement which I made on this subject in the written answer printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT of 30th November.

Are the Colonial Office making every effort to get schemes submitted to them, and accelerating investigation?

I may inform my hon. Friend that I took the chair for the first time this morning at a meeting of the Overseas Settlement Committee, and I will certainly do all in my power to accelerate these schemes.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the existing conditions of unemployment in this country, the Government has under consideration any schemes for facilitating emigration to the Colonies; and whether the subject of emigration will be discussed at the forthcoming Imperial Economic Conference?

The policy embodied in the Empire Settlement Act of this year should be regarded as a constructive plan for developing the resources of the Empire and for developing trade within the Empire, rather than as a means of dealing with the present abnormal unemployment in this country. Under this Act the Government are empowered to co-operate with the Governments of other parts of the Empire in schemes for granting State aid to suitable land settlers. Schemes for assisting passages under the Act have already been agreed upon with the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia and the Government of New Zealand. Schemes are also under negotiation for land settlement in several Australian States and in Ontario. It would be premature for me to make any statement at present upon the second part of my hon. and gallant Friend's question.

Does not the hon. Gentleman consider, in view of the shortage of man-power in the Colonies, that facilitating emigration should be the central feature in developing the resources of the Empire?

I entirely agree with my hon. and gallant Friend both in regard to the emigration of women and juveniles. The matter will be pressed, in every way possible, before the attention of the Imperial Economic Conference.

Has the attention of the hon. Gentleman been directed to the speech of Earl Haig last Friday, and before any further emigration is recommended, will the matter there spoken of be looked into?

My attention has been called to the speech this morning, and a letter on the subject has been addressed to the High Commissioner for Australia. But I would point out that the remarks referred to emigration prior to the operations of the Empire Land Settlement Committee.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Overseas Settlement Committee has been re-appointed; whether the recent election has necessitated any changes in its personnel; and, if so, what changes have been or will be made?

The Overseas Settlement Committee is still performing the duties with which it was entrusted by the late Government. The only changes in personnel resulting from the recent election are those referred to in my reply of the 30th November.

Will the hon. Gentleman continue to have the assistance and co-operation of his predecessor who is now the First Lord of the Admiralty?

I hope so: on every possible occasion.

Is Labour likely to have further representation on this Committee?

The hon. Member for the Forest of Dean (Mr. Wignall) is the only Labour Member of the House on the Committee; if the party desires a further representative I shall be happy to consider it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, under the Overseas Settlement Act, immediate provision can be made to advance outfit money and arrange for the payment of the passage money for families now in this country who may be desirous of joining their husbands residing overseas within the British Empire, on similar lines to the work carried on in 1911, 1912, and 1913 by the Imperial Home Reunion Association of Canada?

Under the Empire Settlement Act, 1922, the Secretary of State would be prepared to co-operate with the Overseas Governments concerned in agreed schemes for assistance with passages, initial allowances or otherwise, whether by grant or by loan as may be deemed expedient, to the families referred to, provided that the contribution of the Secretary of State did not exceed half the expenses of the scheme. At present, assistance towards passages only can be given under the Act to suitable persons in this country who intend to settle in Australia and New Zealand, but assisted passage agreements have not as yet been entered into with the other Dominions.

Will the hon. Gentleman simplify the machinery? Many wives are waiting to join their husbands; can they have immediate facilities for doing so?

I shall certainly look into that.

Can the families apply direct to the Overseas Department or have they to go to an organization?

They can apply direct.

How is it possible for families to go out?

Women and children are going out.

Is it possible that we who are members of boards of guardians in various parts of the country should have the opportunity of getting husbands repatriated from the Colonies, so that they may come and keep their families?

Why?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the 11 territorially elected members of the Ceylon Legislative Council have resigned in a body as a protest against the action of the Ceylon Government in forcing through the Council the scheme for increasing the salaries of officials by means of the officials' votes; that this salaries scheme will involve heavy additional taxation upon the people of Ceylon, and that the scheme was carried in council by 19 official votes against 18 unofficial; and whether he will reconsider the whole question?

I am aware that certain of the unofficial members of the Ceylon Legislative Council have resigned. The scheme for increasing the salaries of all grades of the Government service was carried in the Council by 19 votes to 18, the majority consisting of three elected and two nominated unofficial members and 14 official members. The additional taxation involved is, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, by no means heavy, and the burden of taxation in Ceylon is very light in comparison with that in colonies of similar importance. The increase of official salaries was considered by the late Secretary of State to be essential, in view of the widespread discontent in all grades of the Government service; the Secretary of State has concurred in this view, and sees no reason to reconsider the matter.

Does this not make rather a farce of representative government in Ceylon; and may I ask whether the Secretary of State took into account the present acute depression in Ceylon?

I think that was taken into account; The decision was made before my Noble Friend assumed office. It would be quite impossible to go back upon it now.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can yet make a statement as to the franchise question in Kenya Colony? Or as to segregation of Indians in both Kenya and Uganda?

My predecessor has had a series of conferences with my Noble Friend the Under-Secretary of State for India on the more important questions affecting the problem of the Indians in Kenya Colony. On taking over, I have already had a further consultation with my Noble Friend at the India Office, and, as a result, further communications are being sent to the Government of Kenya forthwith. Until a reply has been received from the latter, I regret that I cannot make any further statement on the progress of the negotiations. I can assure the hon. and gallant Member that the Secretary of State for the Colonies will endeavour to arrive at an early solution of this difficult problem. With regard to segregation in Uganda, I may add, with reference to the reply given to the hon. Member's question on the 24th May, that it has been decided to suspend the Kampala town planning scheme, as well as the other schemes of the kind, until a decision is reached on the general question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Proclamation has yet been issued in Hong Kong emancipating the mui tsai; and by what date it is anticipated that this system will be finally abolished?

A Proclamation has been recently issued by the Governor on the lines indicated in the statement made in the House by Mr. Churchill on the 21st March. It is expected that the local legislation necessary to secure the abolition of the mui tsai system will be enacted in the near future, and that the administrative machinery to implement it will be completed early in 1923.

Are not homes for these mui tsai who are emancipated being provided in Hong Kong, or what is being done to get them away from their servitude?

I am afraid I do not know that off-hand, but I will look into the matter.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can announce the decision of the Government in regard to enlarged representative government in the British West Indies following upon the Report of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ripon (Mr. E. Wood)?

The observations of the Colonial Governments of Jamaica, Trinidad and the Windward Islands were asked for in regard to the Constitutional reforms proposed in the Report of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Education. No reply has as yet been received from the Government of Jamaica, but, in the case of Trinidad and the Windward Islands, replies have been received, which are now under consideration, or form the subject of further discussion with the Governors, and in regard to the three Windward Islands are nearing completion.

asked the Under-Secretary of Stale for the Colonies (1) what number of Chinese indentured labourers are already on the island of Nauru; what is the period of indenture; and how many women are accompanying the Chinese;

(2) whether the hon. Gentleman's attention has been drawn to the comments made by the British representative on the Permanent Mandates Commission at Geneva in August last as to the conditions in Nauru; and whether Chinese indentured labourers in Nauru ire kept in compounds?

I am informed that approximately 80 Chinese mechanics and 490 Chinese labourers are employed in Nauru. They are not indentured, but after arrival invariably ask for agreements, though this is in no way compulsory. They usually engage for two years. There is a defined Chinese settlement but no compound, and Chinese are only restricted to their settlement at night. They are not accompanied by women.

I gather that the remarks which the hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary made on the Commission are not fully substantiated?

I do not know exactly to what remarks my hon. Friend refers. If the hon. Gentleman will look into the Official Report of the Permanent Mandates Commission, and the explanation given by the High Commissioner of the Commonwealth of Australia, I think the matter is very fully dealt with.

Is it a fact that these labourers were in compounds?

I understand that there are no compounds.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us what is the difference between a confined area and a, compound?

The object of the confined area is that the Chinese shall live apart. They are confined in their settlement for social reasons at night. In the daytime they can go anywhere they like throughout the island.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what steps, if any, are being taken to provide labour, other than Chinese, for the phosphate industry of Nauru?

Labour from the native races of the Pacific has always been employed in addition to Chinese at Nauru as far as possible. At present about 360 are employed. Recruiting in the Caroline Islands has ceased, but it has recently been possible to obtain Papuans.

Is there any supervision at all over the provision of this labour?

I understand supervision is in charge of the administrator of the island who is under the Commonwealth Government of Australia.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether British Colonial officials in Hong Kong have made arrangements for the supply of Chinese indentured labour in Nauru and Samoa?

No, Sir; but the Government of Hong Kong has afforded the Government of New Zealand certain facilities as mentioned on pages 6 and 7 of Cmd. 919, and I would refer the hon. Member to the Report of the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League of Nations in regard to the arrangements effected by the Government of New Zealand.

Is not the working of the industry of the whole island in the exclusive control of a commercial and private company?

No, I believe not. I believe the greater part of these plantations are still under the control I have named.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies under what Vote and heading or sub-heading was the sum of £167,000 for the new residency for the High Commissioner in Bagdad shown in the 1919 and/or later Estimates?

No specific provision for this service was made in Estimates prior to the 1922–23 passed last Session. The expenditure by the Iraq Government prior to 31st March, 1921, of about £60,000 on the residency was in effect refunded to them in the general Grant-in-Aid on account of the civil deficit in Iraq to 31st March, 1921, under sub-head J1 of the Middle Eastern Services Vote (Supplementary) for 1921–22. The sum of £91,656 0s. 11d. in respect of military expenditure in 1920–21 and 1921–22 has been repaid to the War Office, and will be found charged in the Appropriation Account of the Middle Eastern Services Vote for 1921–22. The balance of approximately £15,000 was expended by the Iraq Government in 1921, but no refund in cash to that Government is contemplated. The amount will be set off against sums due by the Iraq Government to His Majesty's Government.

Was this expenditure not sanctioned by the Government in 1919? How then was it that no specific provision was made in the 1919 Estimates for it?

I am afraid I do not know the answer to that question, but I am perfectly certain that in this case the Iraq accounts were divided between the India Office and the War Office, and until the Middle Eastern Services were set up, there was a great deal of confusion in these matters.

Was it actually hidden away in the War Office Estimates by the late Secretary of State for War?

Is it not a fact that when these Estimates were before this House in the last Parliament, we were told that the money was required for soldiers' barracks, and was it not in fact devoted to building this residence?

Evidently, as I informed the House the other day, £167,000 has been spent on this residence.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any money raised from British taxpayers is being used to pay the soldiers of the Provisional Government in Ireland either directly or indirectly?

No, Sir.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Report has yet been given to the Government of the Commission of Inquiry into the events at Cushendall some months ago; and, if so, when will the Report be published?

The Report has been received, and has been placed before the Government of Northern Ireland for their consideration. I am not at present in a position to give any further information regarding the Report.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a Chairman of the Shaw Commission has yet been appointed; and is he aware of the feeling that the new Chairman should be, like his predecessor, a gentleman of the highest judicial ability and standing and himself unconnected with Ireland?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. In considering the question of a successor to Lord Shaw, I have no doubt that the two Governments will have in mind the desirability that whoever is asked to accept the appointment should be duly qualified to discharge the duties and responsibilities thereof.

Is the Shaw Commission still functioning with only two members?

Yes.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will say how many assessors to assist the Shaw Commission in the rehearing of pre-truce undefended awards have been appointed; by whom have these gentlemen been appointed; are they British subjects or citizens of the Free State; what qualifications is it necessary for them to possess; what is their salary: and do they sit as a sub-commission of the Shaw Commission, or do they merely endeavour to arrange with the holder of the award what sum he should accept to obtain early settlement of the amount due to him?

Twenty-seven investigators have been appointed by the Compensation (Ireland) Commission, 17 of whom lived in Ireland at the time of their appointment, the remaining 10 living in Great Britain. Thirteen of them are permanent civil servants who have been seconded for service with the Commission. All except four possess recognised professional or technical qualifications as lawyers, valuers, architects or engineers, and include representatives of the Bar, the Surveyors' Institution, the Royal Institute of Architects and the Institute of Civil Engineers. They have all had practical experience which qualifies them for the position which they hold. Their salaries are at various personal rates. Their duty is to investigate claims and to report thereon to the Commission. In a substantial number of cases they have been able to report cases as agreed with the claimant subject to confirmation by the Commission.

Is it not the fact that they appointed a Sub-Committee to make judicial inquiry, but that they did not hear evidence?

I believe it is their first duty to try and arrive at agreed facts for settlement and payment; failing that the matter goes before the Commission.

Do these assessors hear evidence from the claimants that will enable them to arrive at their decision?

I will look that up.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will inquire into the payments and recommendations for payment;, made by the Shaw Commission and the assessors assisting it in the Granard district of county Longford; whether he is aware that an hotel keeper, whose hotel was burned by forces of the Crown, was awarded by the Commission more than £25,000 of an original decree of £28,000, while in the same district assessors are endeavouring to force those who hold decrees for damage done by republican forces to accept about one-half of the original decree; and will he say by whom were the assessors in question appointed, and are they British or Irish?

The Compensation (Ireland) Commission are engaged in circumstances of great difficulty on a responsible and delicate task, and the reports which I have received afford no reason to suppose that they are performing it otherwise than in a judicial manner. Their duty, as laid down in their Warrant of Appointment, is to determine and report what compensation ought in reason and in fairness to be awarded on the merits of each case referred to them, and it would be surprising if in the execution of this duty the variation between their awards and the original decrees were constant. The statements in the second part of the question do not, therefore, seem to me to afford any justification whatever for the insinuation which they appear to convey, namely, that the Commission discriminates between classes of claimants; but if the hon. and gallant Member is dissatisfied on this point, it is of course open to him to bring the facts to my notice in greater detail. In reply to the third part, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my reply to his previous question.

Does the hon. Gentleman admit the facts there put as to the money awarded?

No. I have said that I do not admit the insinuations.

But does the hon. Gentleman admit the facts? If so, will he say what Minister it was that permitted destruction of property valued at £25,000 for which we have to pay?

I will look into the matter. If hon. Members can bring me further facts I shall be glad to look into them.

Will the hon. Gentleman look into this case? That is all I want.

I will.

Will the hon. Gentleman agree to give the victims of the Silvertown explosion similar opportunities?

That is not within my Department.

No, of course not!

asked the Prime Minister whether a final Report was received from Lord Shaw, regarding compensation for malicious injuries in Ireland, before his resignation of the chairmanship of the Commission; and, if so, whether it will be laid upon the Table?

I have been asked to answer this question. The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In reply to the second part, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the last part of the reply which I gave on 27th November to a question addressed to me by the hon. and gallant Member for Finchley (Colonel Newman).

Did Lord Shaw give any reasons for his resignation? Is the House not entitled to know his reasons for resignation, and what were his recommendations?

Is it not the desire of Lord Shaw's Commission to have this Report published?

I am not aware of the latter fact, but I think that in view of Lord Shaw's services on this Commission it would be rather hard to ask him, unless he wishes to do so, to make a statement as to why he resigned.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the actuarial Report on the Constabulary Force Fund (Relief Branch), which was promised and ordered by the late Chief Secretary for Ireland as long ago as May last, is now completed; and whether he will direct that a copy of such Report shall be deposited in the Library of the House?

Yes, Sir. I have now received the Government Actuary's Report, a copy of which I propose to place in the Library for use by hon. Members. In view of the terms of that Report it is proposed in the interests of subscribers to allow the fund to work itself out, and not to take any steps at the present time to wind it up.

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any information as to Band-boy J. Cooper, of the 1st battalion of the Manchester Regiment, who was kidnapped in Southern Ireland some months ago and has since been reported as an absentee; and what action the British Government have taken to ascertain the fate of this boy serving in a British regiment?

I regret to state that the inquiries which have been made into this case leave no room for doubt that this youth was shot by members of the Irish Republican Army a few days before the conclusion of the Truce on 11th July, 1921.

Has anyone been brought to justice for this dastardly act?

No, Sir.

What about the murders in Northern Ireland: there have been hundreds of them?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will, at the earliest convenient opportunity, embody in a Statute the verbal guarantee given by the former Leader of the House on 19th December, 1921, and repeated by the former Colonial Secretary on 13th March, 1922, that His Majesty's Government will be the guarantor of the pensions or compensation to be granted to public servants under Article 10 of the Treaty?

As I have already stated, provision is made under statutory arrangements for the payment to Irish public servants of compensation by the Free State in accordance with Article 10 of the Treaty. I do not consider that any further legislation is necessary or desirable at the present time for the purpose suggested.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give reasons why the situation should not be regularised by having a statutory guarantee instead of a verbal one as at present?

That matter was discussed during the- passage of the Bill last week, and I am afraid if my hon. and learned Friend was not satisfied with what took place, then I cannot help him.

If I put down a question, will the right hon. Gentleman give reasons for the decision?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether there have been any claims for compensation made as a result of the recent ordinance abolishing slavery in Tanganyika; and has he considered the possibility of applying a similar ordinance to Zanzibar, so that there may finally be no more involuntary servitude under the British flag?

No claims for compensation consequent on the enactment of the Tangansika Territory Involuntary Servitude (Abolition) Ordinance have been reported. The legal status of slavery was abolished in Zanzibar and Pemba by Decrees of the 7th April, 1897, and the 9th June. 1909.

asked the Secretary of State for the Homo Department if he is aware that there is grave dissatisfaction amongst the retired police constables in this country owing to the inadequate provisions of the Pensions Increase Act, 1920, and the Pensions Act, 1921; that it is suggested in many quarters that the provision of granting pensions to widows of pensioners retiring after 1018 should be extended to all who were, or may become, widows of pensioners at the time of the inauguration: that it is felt that pensions should be more equalised, and that revision should be extended to include pre-War pensioners; and what action he is prepared to take to improve the conditions at present obtaining?

I am aware that these suggestions have been put forward. They raise questions which cannot be decided with regard to police pensions alone, and to give effect to them would require legislation of which I regret I can hold out no prospect.

Is the hon. Gentleman looking into this question at all, and can he promise a little more sympathy than his predecessor to these old police pensioners?

That is a question that is familiar to almost everybody. I think everybody would be glad if something could be done. It is not a question of sympathy, but of money.

In view of the admitted dissatisfaction in all the police forces, would the hon. Gentleman now consider it an opportune time to reappoint the Desborough Committee, at whose disposal most of the information is, the members of which are easily accessible, can be got together at a moment's notice, and will be glad to help him further?

I cannot quite admit the general dissatisfaction to which my hon. Friend refers, and I am not sure whether it would be practicable to re-appoint the Desborough Committee. I will consider whether it is.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the expenditure of Parliamentary time involved in the swearing-in of Members after a General Election, he will consider, in the interests of both public economy and Members' time, the possibility of making the necessary alterations; before the next General Election whereby the successful candidates at the polls might in each case take the oath of allegiance before their returning officers?

I do not think that the hon. Member's proposal is desirable or practicable. The arrangements made for the swearing-in of Members this time worked admirably, I understand, and enabled Members to be sworn in easily during the period of two afternoon sittings and with the minimum of inconvenience to Members themselves.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the burden of rates thrown on certain industrial areas owing to the prolonged period of abnormal unemployment, he will consent-to receive a deputation of Members representing those districts, seeing that the assistance they desire requires the sanction of not only the Treasury but also of both the Minister of Labour and the-Minister of Health?

A deputation of this nature was received by the late Prime Minister in June last, and the proposals then made have not been lost sight of. In those circumstances I do not think any useful purpose would be served by adopting the suggestion contained in this question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the position in necessitous districts is infinitely worse than it was in June last, and that many of the proposals then submitted have not yet received final consideration?

We are quite aware of the evil, and we are dealing with it and considering it in all its aspects.

Is the right hon, Gentleman aware that the result of the last deputation to the Prime Minister gave us no assistance in any direction, and we are in a worse position than we were before?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that through the closing down of collieries in the neighbourhood of Brynmawr (South Wales) hundreds of men have been out of employment from one and a-half to two years, with the result that very acute distress prevails; and, in such cases, when large bodies of men -are thrown out of work through circumstances over which they have no control, will he consider the desirability and necessity of making the burden of relief a national charge and not a charge on the local authorities?

Even if the serious administrative difficulties in the way of the hon. Member's proposal could be surmounted, I do not see how the State could possibly undertake this local charge in the existing state of the national finances.

(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Labour, as representing the Minister of Health, if his attention has been called to the fact that certain Metropolitan boards of guardians have given a number of unemployed men resident in workhouses and other institutions under their charge notice to leave, these notices to expire almost immediately; and whether he is aware that at least 90 per cent, of these men form part of the living wall which divided the British people from their enemies during the late War; that their presence in London is entirely due to their desire to lay their grievances before the Prime Minister and the House of Commons; also that all of them are homeless and penniless, and in many cases are very badly clothed and without boots, except such as are badly in need of repair; and whether, in order to avoid the inevitable hardship and suffering and possible disorder which may follow this action of the guardians, the Minister of Health will exercise the authority vested in him by statute and issue an Order instructing the guardians concerned to relieve these men according to law until such time as their place of settlement is determined and their removal to such place of settlement has either been agreed upon or ordered by a Court of law?

(for the Minister of Health): My right hon. Friend has made inquiries as to the facts. He is informed that the guardians who have given relief to the marchers have ordinarily received them in the workhouse, and have even waived in their favour the restrictions usually imposed on persons so relieved. He is aware of cases in which the guardians have said that they must in future require the observance of the ordinary regulations, and in which the men have then left the workhouse without making any further application. He does not, however, know of any case in which further relief has been asked for or refused to any of these men who are destitute.

As regards the legal position, the duty of relieving the poor is statutorily assigned to the Guardians of the Poor (Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834). That duty is, by Section 15 of the Act, to be carried out subject to the direction and control of the central authority (now the Minister of Health), who, for the purpose of executing his powers, is authorised and required to make Rules, Orders and Regulations. But it is expressly provided, as I stated yesterday, that nothing in the Act shall be construed as enabling the central authority to interfere in any individual case for the purpose of ordering relief. The Minister cannot, therefore, interfere with the discretion of the guardians.

The question of the guardians assisting those men to return to their homes was raised in the course of the supplementary questions put yesterday. My right hon. Friend is advised that the guardians can only remove these men, or contribute to the cost of their removal, if a justice's order has been obtained, or if the guardians of the union in which the men live give their consent.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has not answered the question I specifically put to him yesterday and to-day, namely, that certain boards of guardians had given the men notice, and he told me a lot of other thing which do not arise at all?

Of course I am subject to the hon. Member's correction, but I have done my best to answer all the points in the question, and I thought I had done so. What must be clear—and this is a point to which I think the House will attach importance—is that no case is known in which further relief has been asked for or refused to any of these men who are destitute.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the notices of which I complained, and which the Minister has not contradicted, expire tomorrow night in at least two unions and that no question of new applications arises until after the expiration of these notices? The unions are Edmonton and Stepney.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the guardians are responsible for the maintenance of these men until their settlement is fixed?

The guardians have, as I have repeated so often, discretion in the matter, and by Statute that discretion cannot be interfered with by the central authority.

A destitute person has to be maintained. There is no discretion at all.

Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that when the notices have expired these men could make another application for relief, and is he aware that the boards of guardians who have delivered notices are refusing, and intend to refuse, to accommodate these men or to take them back?

It is within the discretion of the guardians. If a fresh application is made, the guardians can consider the matter again.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that there is absolutely no discretion in the boards of guardians? The 43rd of Elizabeth gives every poor person an absolute right. There is no discretion about it. These guardians are exercising a discretion. They have given the men notice. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these guardians have told the men that they are to go out and are not to come in again, and that is the whole point that has not been answered?

If thousands of men under the leadership of misguided men march on London—

That is raising a debatable question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that, by the Act, of Settlement, the boards of guardians are absolutely compelled to provide these people with food, and, as a matter of fact, the guardians can pay their fares, home and charge the union they come from?

There is an obligation the guardians, with certain Sir restrictions, and always has been since' the time of the Act of Elizabeth, but that obligation has to be administered by the guardians themselves. What the hon. Member is always asking me to do is that the Central Authority should takeover the guardians' obligation.

(later): I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, "the action of certain boards of guardians in refusing to continue public assistance to a large-number of unemployed men who are at present chargeable to the Poor Law according to Act of Parliament and the refusal of the Minister of Health to take such action as would prevent the hardship and suffering and possible public disorder which this action of boards of guardians may involve."

Since yesterday I have careully looked into this matter, with the result that I am confirmed in the ruling which I then gave. In fact, the hon. Member's own motion shows it, because he again calls attention to the-action of certain boards of guardians in refusing to continue public assistance. These are local bodies appointed by Statutes of Parliament, and their action within those Statutes has never been held to be a matter which could be raised' under Standing Order No. 10. Their case is just the same as that of municipal authorities who are given certain duties to carry out.

May I respectfully point out that, in the last part of my Motion, I call attention to the fact that the Minister of Health is not carrying out his part of the duty imposed upon him under Statute, namely, to see that these authorities carry out their duty. The Minister of Health has tremendous powers, one of which is to see that the Poor Law is administered, and that is why I want to raise the matter on the Motion for the Adjournment.

The hon. Member then would be bringing two different points into one Resolution, and it would cease to be definite. I am not, however, taking that point, but only the point that Parliament has delegated certain duties to these bodies, and it is not therefore a matter which can be raised under Standing Order No. 10.

(by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that unemployment benefit has been refused the unemployed marchers; that all these men register each day at the Employment Exchange of the district in which they find themselves; that on all occasions the men are willing to undertake any work which can be provided; and is the Minister aware that the exchange authorities at Glasgow and Barrow have refused to issue travelling cards to the marchers, and whether this action is in accordance with the law?

In accordance with the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920, the final decision on the question whether unemployment benefit was payable to the unemployed marchers rested with the Umpire, who is an independent authority appointed by the Crown. Test cases relating to the unemployed marchers were heard by the Umpire, who decided that benefit was not payable. As regards the last part of the question, the travelling cards referred to are provided in the case of workpeople travelling with the object of seeking work, and it was therefore decided that "they could not be made use of in the circumstances referred to.

What are the grounds on which the Umpire gave this ruling?

I am not quite certain whether the decision has been made public or not. I believe it has not.

If these men are cut away from the Unemployment Bill, does it follow that their wives and children will also lose unemployment benefit?

I believe that is so. I will look into it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when persons ask at the Employment Exchange for travelling tickets, the clerk asks if they are on pleasure?

I have explained the object for which these tickets are given. They are given to men seeking for work. Presumably if they were going on pleasure they would not be seeking work.

asked the Prime Minister if, having regard to the desirability of equalising national liabilities, he will reconsider the advisability of funding the war pensions obligations of the nation; if he has considered the extent of the annual saving by commutation of our liabilities; and whether he can see his way to introduce legislation in the next Session to deal with this matter?

Such a scheme as my hon. Friend suggests would not in any way diminish the amount which the State has in fact to pay in the year for War pensions. Whether the State's obligations should be met from revenue or by borrowing is a matter which can hardly be discussed within the limits of a Parliamentary question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman keep that point in view?

I am keeping everything in view?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will bring in legislation extending the life of Secton 1 of the Local Authorities (Financial Provisions) Act, 1921?

I have been asked to reply. As was stated in reply to a previous question, this matter is receiving careful consideration. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Health has thought it advisable to ascertain the views of the boards of guardians and municipal authorities in the metropolis in regard to the proposal, and a copy of the circular letter which has been issued for this purpose is being sent to the hon. Member.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the Act under discussion lapses on 31st December, and that unless it is renewed very considerable hardship will be inflicted upon the ratepayers of the poorest boroughs in London, and it is no use sending me a copy of a circular which I have already received?

That is exactly what my right hon. Friend has had in mind in determining the point, and he will come to a decision which, if not Satisfactory to my hon. Friend, I hope will satisfy the Members of this House.

Whether the statement is satisfactory to me or not, will it be presented to this House and acted upon before the end of the Session?

My hon. Friend must know that that is quite an impossible question to answer because we are within a few days of the end of the Session.

Is the hon. And gallant Gentleman aware that almost on the first day of the Session the same question was put to the Prime Minister, and day after day we have been fobbed off in this manner? I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he can give an answer to this question?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make it a condition to Ministers on accepting office in his Government that they will not, after ceasing to hold office, permit themselves to be associated with private companies and firms who may profit by the knowledge or information gained by Ministers in the course of their public duties, especially when such firms or companies are competitors of State undertakings?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave yesterday in reply to a similar question by my hon. Friend the Member for Frome (Mr. Hurd).

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in this question a much wider issue is raised than in the question which was put yesterday?

Does my right hon. Friend not think that such a rule laid down for Ministers would be very valuable applied to permanent civil servants after they have been carrying on public work for some years, because it is most undesirable that they should accept such appointments?

That is a new question.

asked the Prime Minister if it is the intention of the Government, at an early date, to present a Bill to this House to legalise the 49-hours working week on the lines of the Washington Conference?

I have been asked to reply. As the hon. Member is probably aware, the practicability of applying the provisions of the Hours Convention in the various countries which took part in the Washington Conference was the subject of discussion at the recent International Labour Conference. Pending further consideration, it is not proposed to introduce legislation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that most European countries, in face of the keenest competition, have already legalised the eight hours day?

I am not aware of it. As a matter of fact, the Convention has only been ratified in a very small number of countries, such as Greece, India, Czecho-Slovakia, Bulgaria and Rumania.

What is meant by "pending consideration by him"? Consideration by whom?

The matter has been fully considered at Genoa, and the Director of the International Labour Office has been instructed to report, after consideration, as to the action being taken in various countries.

Is it not the case that, with regard to seamen, the action of the British Government representative prevented the application of the 48-hour week?

He has got to do what he is told.

asked the Prime Minister, in view of the death of Sir Julian Corbett, whether the issue of the official Naval History of the War under the auspices of tbe Committee of Imperial Defence will now be discontinued except in so far as the expenditure that has already been incurred?

The whole question of the official histories is at present under consideration.