asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many machine tools and processes have been removed from German factories by T-force; how many factories have thereby been affected outside the range of those recently listed for dismantling; how many more tools and processes remain to be removed by T-force; and how many further factories will be so affected.

Seven hundred and forty-one machine tools and processes have been removed by T-force; of these 363 were from 183 factories not among those recently listed for dismantling. Another eight have been requisitioned and await removal, but no additional factories are involved, and no further requisitioning will take place.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give a clear definition of buildings which, though at one time used for war purposes, are now not to be destroyed if they can be used for peaceful purposes, as stated in a recent declaration accompanying the list of factories to be dismantled for reparations in Germany; and whether this list of buildings to be spared includes the Rhine Metal Works at Dusseldorf, the office buildings of the Torpedo Factories at Eckenforde and some of the buildings at Krupps Works at Essen.

The recent declaration to which my hon. Friend refers covered only buildings in plants on the list which was published for reparations. Instructions have been issued that surface buildings in these plants may be retained, pending further agreement between the Allied Governments, even though they were specially built for armaments production or other war purposes. I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the actual instruction. There are also other buildings scheduled for destruction which are not part of these reparations plants but which form part of military installations of various kinds. Regional Commissioners have been given authority for some time past to suspend the destruction of such buildings if they are needed for the German economy. It has, however, been thought desirable to clarify the position still further in order to make it quite clear that air-raid shelters, and similar constructions, are not to be destroyed at present if they are needed for accommodation or storage purposes. I shall be glad to let my hon. Friend have a copy of these instructions as soon as they are issued.

While I thank my hon. Friend for his reply, may I ask if he can assure me that those buildings in Eckenforde are not to be destroyed?

We are considering that particular case and I will write to my hon. Friend on the matter.

Is the Minister not yet convinced that the hon. Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes) is a legatee of the late German regime?

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is futile to conclude that any sound factory cannot be used for peaceful purposes, particularly in a devastated country like Germany?

We are taking a liberal view on the question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the estimated value of patents, processes, designs, secrets and know how, etc., taken from Germany under T Force operations; and how far they correspond with the assessed value of £2,000,000,000 as claimed by Mr. Molotov.

It would be impossible to make a reliable estimate of this character, since the products of the investigations referred to have not been sold, but with few exceptions have been published and made freely available to the world. The figure mentioned by Mr. Molotov covered a wider field than that referred to in the Question and was, even so, a fantastic over-estimate.

That may very well be true, but may I ask how my hon. Friend proposes to assess the value of these various appropriations in arriving at the total amount paid in reparations?

I do not think an estimate can be made. In any case, I can see no purpose in offsetting it against some other hypothetical figure.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is satisfied that the waste of good timber in the British zone of Germany as domestic fuel has substantially ceased.

Every effort is being made to reduce the waste of timber in the British zone of Germany and there has been a substantial cut in the allocation for domestic fuel. The matter is, however, primarily one for the German authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the present domestic ration of coal and of fuel wood in the British zone of Germany.

The solid fuel ration for the average household for the year beginning 1st May, 1947, is the equivalent of cwts. of hard coal. The ration is made up of varying proportions of hard coal, brown coal briquettes, wood and peat according to local availabilities.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what the objective is of the visit to Eritrea by the Commission appointed by the Foreign Ministers; is he satisfied that the forty-eight hours allotted for the task is sufficient; and if the findings of the Commission will be submitted to this House before any final decision is made.

The Commission is obeying the procedure laid down in the Italian Peace Treaty, which provides that a Commission should visit the ex-Italian Colonies in order to supply the Deputies of the Foreign Ministers with information to assist their consideration of the disposal of these territories, and in order to discover the views of the local population. A period of 40 days has been allotted to the Commission for their visit to Eritrea and I am advised that this will be sufficient. The answer to the last part of my hon. Friend's Question is, "No, Sir."

Can the Minister say if and when Eritrea will be allowed to return to the Mother country, Ethiopia, or whether we must wait until there is a repetition of what is now happening in Somaliland?

That is a different question.

On what grounds is Eritrea included in the category of ex-Italian colonies?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Lord President of the Council why the words "the Duke of Edinburgh" instead of "Philip, Duke of Edinburgh" have been inserted in the Prayer for the Royal family; and whether a correction will be made.

The words to which the hon. Member refers were inserted in the Prayers for the Royal Family because they were not only adequate, but also consistent with recent precedents. As regards the last part of the Question, the answer is in the negative.

May we take it that all the precedents, modern and not so modern, were consulted before the words "Duke of Edinburgh" were decided upon?

I cannot say about all the precedents, but they are fairly clear. In the reign of George II the Duke of Cumberland was referred to as "the Duke" and nothing else. Then there was reference to the Princess Dowager of Wales, the widow of the eldest son of George II. Other examples are: the Princesses, presumably the daughters of George II; the Prince of Wales who became Edward VII—that is fairly modern; the Prince Consort; the Princess of Wales on various occasions; and the Duchess of Cornwall and York, who is now Her Majesty Queen Mary. I think that is fairly conclusive that the precedents justify this action.

Are we to take it from this Question that the recording angel may have some doubts about the subject?

I think the recording angel often has some doubts about the hon. Member for West Fife (Mr. Gallacher).

Are we to take it that the Duke of Edinburgh received his title without any consultation with the Scottish people?

That has nothing to do with the Question on the Order Paper.