asked the Under—Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any official or other communications that have passed since last April between the American and the British Governments with reference to Irish affairs will be submitted to Parliament before the introduction of any Bill relating to the government of Ireland?

No such communications have passed.

asked the Home Secretary whether he has yet received any account of the arrest of Dr. Dundon on returning to Ireland from his honey-moon after the insurrection, and therefore unconnected with that event, and his deportation and detention since; why in the circumstances security for appearance, if required, was not taken from a gentleman of his class occupying a public position; how soon will he be released or tried; and what tribunal is to deal with claims for reparation in cases of mistaken arrest and discharge without trial?

Dr. Dundon's case is under consideration by the Advisory Committee, who will consider any evidence he may offer on the point mentioned. The case was not one in which security could be taken, and I cannot entertain any question of compensation.

asked the Home Secretary if he will have inquiries made into the case of the boy William Derrington, aged sixteen and a half years, at present in Wormwood Scrubbs undergoing a sentence of twelve months' hard labour; if he is aware that this boy was only a member of the rank and file of the Irish Volunteers; and if, having regard to his age, he will order his discharge?

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has asked me to answer this question. This youth was taken amongst other per-sons when the Mendicity Institute was assaulted by a party of troops on the 26th of April. There was heavy firing from this building, and a number of casualties among the troops resulted. Derrington's age was taken into account by the Court, and a much lighter sentence was passed on him than on the other prisoners, and the sentence awarded was subsequently reduced by the General Officer Commanding-in—Chief in Ireland. The sentence will be brought forward for review at a later date.

May I ask if the imprisonment of a boy of sixteen years is calculated not to eliminate the Sinn Feiners but to increase them?

That is a question on which the hon. Member can make up his own mind.

asked whether the naval and military authorities have given or can give an assurance to the Government that fewer soldiers and fewer ships will be required to garrison and guard Ireland after Home Rule has been set up there during the War?

Such an assurance has not been asked for, and obviously cannot be given.

asked whether an inquiry will be set on foot to ascertain the circumstances in which Ernest Cavanagh met his death on 25th April on the steps of Liberty Hall, Dublin; and, if so, whether the statements of his relatives will be tested, to the effect that Ernest Cavanagh was never a member of any organisation which advocated physical force, that he was absent on a holiday during four days preceding the rising, that having been employed as a clerk in the State insurance section of the Irish Trans-port Workers' Union he had gone, on Tuesday, 25th April, to Liberty Hall to ascertain whether the staff was still there, that he was shot and killed while alone and unarmed, that the shots came from the Customs House near by, and that no warning was given?

My information is that Ernest Cavanagh was accidentally shot by a member of the Citizen Army, and I do not propose to institute an inquiry in the matter.

What evidence has the right hon. Gentleman for making that statement, which is greatly at variance with the evidence otherwise available? Will the right hon. Gentleman lay even that evidence before Members of the House?

There was a police inquiry in Dublin into the circumstances, and the result of it I have told the House.

May Members of this House, and particularly Irish Members, have access to that evidence?

I would like notice of that.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will explain why, notwithstanding the promise that Irish newspapers would be allowed to reach Irish prisoners at Frongoch, "An Claideam Soluis," the "Irish Nation," and the "Irish Independent," sent to prisoners there, have not yet reached them?

Sanction has been given to the prisoners at Frongoch receiving the "Irish Independent" and certain other Irish papers, and they are regularly delivered. I am informed that the prisoners have been notified by the Commandant that, should any other Irish papers be desired in addition to these already in circulation in the camp, application should be made to him who will give it consideration. I am further in-formed that, so far, no such requests have been made.

Will the papers mentioned on the Order Paper be admitted if sent by post, and why have they not' been admitted so far, seeing that they have not been suppressed?

It depends upon the character of the papers whether they pass the Censor, or not.

Is not the character of them verified by the fact that they are allowed to be published?

I wish that were so.

Complaints have been made by some interned prisoners that there is an average delay of from five to ten days from the time the papers are published to the time of delivery to these men?

That does not arise out of this question. Postal arrangements have been very much improved now that representations have been made.

asked the Prime Minister the object of continuing martial law in Ireland at a moment when good will is so necessary; and how soon the country may look for the re-establishment of civil justice there?

asked the Prime Minister whether he proposes to still continue martial law for all Ireland, including areas where no disturbance of any kind took place; and whether, in view of the necessity of restoring a civil Executive at the earliest opportunity, he will remove martial law from all districts in which no disturbance took place immediately?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in addition to the reports of the military authorities, he receives communications from civilians competent to judge as to the effect of the continuance of martial law in Ireland; and whether, if it be made clear that martial law is extending the area of unrest and disaffection and increasing the spirit of resistance to the Government, he will take steps immediately to put an end to martial law?

I will answer these three questions together

I beg to postpone my question as it is a matter affecting policy that can only be answered by the Prime Minister.

Then I will answer the other two questions. Such action, for the maintenance of order, as the Government has been obliged to take has been taken under Statutory authority or the ordinary law. The Government are as anxious as my hon. Friend that the necessity for any exceptional action should cease.

Is their any statutory authority for military absolutism when peace has been restored after a rebellion?

I am not sure what my hon. Friend means by military absolutism. The action taken by the military authorities in Ireland at the present time is taken under the Defence of the Realm Act and not under the ordinary law.

asked the Under—Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any request has been made to the Russian Government that British subjects of a military age in Russia should be returned to this country in order that they may serve in the British Army?

The answer is in the negative.

Will the Noble Lord inform me why it is proposed to deport-beginning to-morrow—Russian subjects in order to take their place in the Army of Russia?

This matter was dealt with very exhaustively by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and I have nothing to add to what he said.

I must press for a reply. Why, in spite of the pledge that these men were to be allowed to go before the tribunal, are the Foreign Office allowing these men to be deported to-morrow?

That question should be addressed to the Home Office.

asked the Home Secretary (1) whether a Russian subject who on 20th June was granted a permit to go to Russia at his own expense on 5th July had that permit withdrawn, and was told that he was to be sent forcibly at public expense in order to serve in the Army; whether this gentleman is medically unfit for military service; whether this action embodies the considered policy of the Foreign Office and the Allied Governments; and (2) whether a Russian Jewish subject on applying for a permit to return to Russia was told that he must go as an Army defaulter at the British Government's expense, and on the Russian gentleman stating that he had heart disease and would pay for the journey at his own expense rather than suffer the hardships of forcible deportation to Arch-angel he was informed that this did not matter; whether it is intended to deport all Russian Jews to Russia whether medically unfit or not; and, if not, whether he will take immediate steps to correct a wrong impression to which official action has already given sanction?

Without further particulars the case or cases referred to by the hon. Member cannot be traced. If he will furnish me with particulars I will have inquiries made.

Why is it that the man to whom this refers is to be deported to-morrow although he has intimated that he wishes to appear before a tribunal as promised by the Home Secretary?

No such case is known at the Department. We do not know to whom the hon. Member refers, but if he sends the name I will inquire.

Does the right hon. Gentle-man mean to deny that the man is to be deported to-morrow without appearing before a tribunal?

I do not know anything about the case, but if the hon. Member gives me the name, I will inquire.

Why is it that the man to whom this refers has had, late last night, a notice that he is to be deported to-morrow?

The hon. Member should give the name.

I will give the name of the man either in public or immediately to the right hon. Gentleman, but I will only do so on the assurance that the man will not be deported to-morrow.

This is not the time for making bargains.

I wish to give notice that I shall call attention to this matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Treasury has considered the financial expenditure involved in the Home Office proposal to de-port Russian subjects to Russia, presumably that they may there serve in the Army; and whether, in view of the need of Russia being for munitions and money rather than for untrained men, he will state what action the Treasury is taking on this question?

It would be outside the province of the Treasury to interfere with the exercise of his discretion by the Secretary of State in the matters referred to in my hon. Friend's question.

asked the Under—Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any steps have been taken by our Allies, or any of them, to give legislative effect to the recommendations of the recent Economic Conference in Paris?

So far as I am aware, none of the Allied Powers have yet introduced legislative measures to give effect to the recommendations of the Economic Conference at Paris. The resolutions passed at the Conference have been confirmed by the French Government.

May I ask the Noble Lord, in view of the great importance of this matter, and the great interest taken in it, whether, where effective legislative provisions are made, we shall be informed in this House?

I shall be very glad indeed to meet my hon. Friend in any way. I am not quite sure what it is he desires, but perhaps he will be good enough' to communicate with me privately.

asked the Under—Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether he can state the amount of lard imported into Belgium in 1913 and the amount imported by the Neutrals' Relief Commission during the six months ending 30th June, 1916; (2) whether he can state the monthly importation, in tons, of lard into Belgium by the Neutrals' Relief Commission up to 30th June, 1916; and (3) whether he can state the monthly importation, in tons, of foodstuffs into Belgium by the Neutrals' Relief Commission up to 30th June, 1916?

As these questions involve detailed statistics up to a very recent period, I will, if the House will allow me, have them inserted in the OFFICIAL REPORT as soon as possible. [ See Written Answers, 18th July, 1916. ]

Will the answer to appear in the OFFICIAL REPORT be a specific answer to the questions I have put?

I will do my best.

I hope it will be better than last time.

asked the Under-Secre-for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact Sir Francis Oppenheimer, our Commercial Attaché at The Hague, is the son of a German, and was born and educated at Frankfort, in Germany, and that his mother lives in Germany, and that the British Minister at The Hague refers everything connected with British trade in Holland to him, he can see his way to appointing a British-born and British-bred subject in his place during the War?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply to a similar question asked by the hon. Member for the St. Augustine's Division yesterday, but I must not be taken to admit the accuracy of the statement contained in the hon. Member's question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that the question is not correct?

Some of the statements in the question are not correct.

asked the Under—Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what communications have passed between His Majesty's Government and other Governments, particularly those of Russia and Japan, with regard to the new Russo—Japanese Treaty; and whether Papers on the subject will be presented to the House at an early date?

The terms of the Treaty were communicated to His Majesty's Government confidentially by the Japanese Government before publication, and His Majesty's Government thereupon expressed to both the Japanese and Russian Governments their great satisfaction on its conclusion. Otherwise no communications have passed between His Majesty's Government and the Governments concerned, and it does not therefore seem necessary to lay any Papers on the Table.

asked the Under—Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any reply to his last proposal to the German Government on the question of the treatment of British civilian prisoners at Ruhleben; and whether he can add anything to his last public statement with reference to this matter?

The substance of the German reply which we have received is as follows:

The German Government categorically repudiate the charge made by us, that they do not recognise their obligations as to the supply of food to British prisoners of war, as also the assertion that less food is supplied to civilian than to military prisoners, the rations furnished to all prisoners of war being identical. The Report recently made by Dr. Taylor will be carefully verified, and the result communicated in due course. In this latter connection it is remarked that on the occasion of his visits to the camp kitchen Dr. Taylor frequently ex-pressed to the officer in charge his appreciation of the' quality of the food.

The German Government state that they have, at our request, sanctioned the dispatch to the captain of the camp at Ruhleben of collective consignments of food for those prisoners who receive no direct parcels, on the condition that those consignments shall not contain a pre-dominance of such commodities as are only obtainable to a limited extent by the German people themselves in consequence of the British blockade.

If, on grounds of reprisal, we should in any way reduce the rations now supplied to German prisoners of war in this country, the German Government propose not only to withdraw the permission for collective parcels, but also to prohibit the receipt of individual parcels, the camp ration being then ordered so as to correspond with the measures taken by us.

The German Government declare them-selves as not averse to the proposal which we communicated to them for the release of all British civilian prisoners of war, but they consider that this could not take place on the basis of the release of a similar number of German prisoners by us, as such an exchange would encounter insuperable difficulties in regard to the selection of those prisoners who are to benefit by it.

A further communication from us on the subject will now be awaited.

It is a little difficult to be quite sure what that last paragraph means. It appears to me that we should release all German prisoners in exchange for British civilian prisoners.

To this Note His Majesty's Government propose to reply that they cannot accept the proposal to repatriate all the Germans interned in this country in exchange for the British civilians interned in Germany, since that would be to send back some 26,000 Germans in exchange for only 4,000 British. They have already proposed to the German Government that all civilians on both sides over fifty should be repatriated, and also all those over forty-five who are unfit for service in the field with the exception of certain persons to be retained for military reasons. This proposal they will once more press upon the German Government, with the addition that persons so retained shall not exceed twenty on each side. They further propose that the remaining British civilians and an equal number of German civilians shall be interned in a neutral country.

May we take it that the policy of reprisals is abandoned?

No, Sir; the House must not arrive at any such conclusion. The Government hold themselves perfectly free to retaliate if that proves to be the only way of obtaining justice for our prisoners.

What is the number of British civilian prisoners in Germany as compared with the number of interned Germans in this country?

There are about 4,000 interned British civilians, and 26,000 interned Germans.

Is it not a fact that about 600 of the 4,000 interned in Germany are prepared to accept German nationality at the end of the War and that they would not be counted in the 4,000?

I cannot pledge myself to the absolute figures, but I think the hon.

Member is substantially right. There are a certain number of prisoners at Ruhleben who have intimated in some form or other that they would be prepared to accept German nationality.

What is the number of Germans over military age among the 26,000 interned?

I am not able to give that figure; I must have notice.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether Mr. S. M. P. Wijetileke, a notary public practising at Matale, Ceylon, is one of the persons whom he alleges to be illiterate and not responsible for his statutory declaration made before a magistrate on the 7th November last with reference to illegalities practised upon him by order of the officer commanding the military at Matale; and, if he is literate and responsible, as his profession implies, what reparation has been made to him?

I have no information about Mr. Wijetileke, and I see no reason to take any action in the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in the event of any of the Crown Colonies of West Africa or occupied territories there being handed over to a Foreign Power, he will undertake that one of the conditions of such transfer will be a guarantee that the rate of duty at present imposed on all imported spirits shall be maintained?

If the circumstances referred to in the question should arise, the desirability of preventing the lowering of import duties on spirits will not be lost sight of.

Is there any intention to cede any Colonies?

I have no heard of no such proposal.

asked the First Commissioner of Works, whether the refreshment stalls in the parks are under any supervision as to the nature and quality of the food sold, especially to children, and as to the amount of money spent at these stalls in food which, if not positively injurious, is at least not nutritious; and whether any steps will be taken to check the wasteful expenditure which is to be observed at some of these stalls?

These stalls in the Royal Parks are under the supervision of officers of my Department who investigate any complaints as to the quality or service of the food supplied by the contractors. I am not prepared to make inquiries as to the amount of money expended by individual members of the public who must be considered to be the best judges of their needs, and as to whether they are receiving value for the money they can afford to pay.

Does it not strike the right hon. Gentleman as rather absurd that this waste of money should go on while on the other side of the street there are suggestions for reducing expenditure?

There is a great deal of very undesirable waste everywhere.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether the Liquor Control Board have exempted their managers at Annan from the provisions of the Licensing Acts under the power given them to do so by Section 9 of the Defence of the Realm (Liquor Control) Regulations, 1915; and, if not, whether the managers can be prosecuted for offences against the Licensing Acts?

The Central Control Board have not exempted their managers at Annan from the statutory provisions referred to, and those managers can consequently be prosecuted for offences against the Licensing Acts.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether his attention has been called to the inconsistency of decisions of the local munitions tribunals in Glasgow on the subject of smoking by the men while engaged on munitions; whether he is aware that one of the tribunals awarded three riveters £3 each for compensation for wrongful dismissal for smoking in working hours, whereas two other Courts refused to grant the men any compensation in similar circumstances; and will he instruct the tribunals how his Department wishes them to act in these cases?

The attention of the Minister of Munitions has been called to a case in which the Glasgow local munitions tribunal awarded £3 each to three riveters for compensation in respect of dismissal due to smoking and idling during working hours. This decision was given at a rehearing after an appeal. I have no information showing inconsistent decisions were given by the Glasgow munitions tribunal, and in any case my hon. Friend is under a misapprehension in supposing that there is more than one tribunal for the Glasgow district. The munitions tribunals are independent Courts of Law, and the Minister of Munitions has no power to issue to them instructions as to the decisions they shall give.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether during the last month a number of joiners over military age have been discharged from a munition works in Nottinghamshire; whether Mr. F. Waterson, recently discharged from the Royal Engineers as unfit for further war service, was also discharged, while at the same time single and married men of military age have been retained; whether two young men of military age were recently started as joiners who are by trade butchers; and will he give the reasons why men over military age are not given the preference, especially those who have served their country?

I am causing inquiries to be made into the points raised in the hon. Member's question, and will inform him of the result.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give instructions to other Departments with regard to discharging men under the circumstances suggested in the question?

I do not know yet what the circumstances are, so that I do not know what the instructions will be.

May I be allowed to put a question, of which I have given private notice to the Prime Minister in the hope that, in his absence, somebody will be able to answer it—whether his attention has been directed to proposals for a further postponement of holidays for munition workers, whether the question has received his consideration, and, if so, is he in a position to make any statement thereon?

The Prime Minister had hoped to be here in time to answer that question, but he will take another opportunity in the course of the day of making a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will arrange that, under the Defence of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Bill, the Dublin Port and Docks Board properties shall be exempted from its provisions, as already granted in favour of commons, parks, and recreation grounds?

This matter will be dealt with by a Government Amendment to the Bill, of which notice has been given.

asked the Home Secretary whether he has received official information as to recent collisions between the police and civilians in county Galway; have any members of the police force been seriously injured in attempting to carry out their duty; and have any arrests been made?

I am not aware of any collisions in county Galway, but if I may assume the hon. and gallant Member to refer to the adjoining county of Roscommon, it is the fact that on the 4th instant cattle-driving at two places brought about collisions with the police in the course of which seventeen constables received in-juries, one of whom was seriously injured. No arrests were made at the time, but proceedings will in due course be instituted in certain cases. A strong force of police has been ordered to the spot, and military support, if it should be required, is available locally.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware of complaints of the conduct at public restaurants of interned aliens when released on parole on short leave of absence; whether he will state the Regulations under which leave of absence is granted to aliens interned at the Alexandra Palace; and whether the commandant of the camp will impress on those to whom leave of absence is given the propriety of care in their conversation when frequenting on parole places of public entertainment?

No such complaints have reached me, nor, I am informed, have the Metropolitan Police heard of any. If the hon. and gallant Member will give me any specific facts I will have inquiry made.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me what the arrangements are for letting these men out on parole?

The Alexandra Palace is under the control of the War Office, and not under my control.

asked the Home Secretary whether J. D. Ayres Mather, of Delanes, Nairn, is at present at Falty Moor, Ballinasloe; whether he is under forty, and whether he has been asked to serve in the Army; whether he is aware that since Mather came to the district he has created disturbance and trouble by altering the user of land which existed during the past seventy years; and whether at the present time, when sons of tenants affected are at the front, the Government will refuse police assistance to him in his policy?

The reply to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative, and as to the third part I have no information. I understand that Mr. Mather, having lost a farm elsewhere this year, required for his own use meadow lands at Cloonaburren, which had previously been let to local farmers, and that since the 1st June his cattle have been driven off his lands on three occasions by riotous crowds in defiance of the police. I am not aware that there are sons of the tenants affected at the front. As stated in reply to a previous question, the necessary police arrangements have been made locally.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this man Mather has 4,000 acres of land, of which these poor tenants have been in possession for the last seventy years, and under those circumstances I ask why are the grievances of the Irish farmers located differently from those of the Welsh miners, and will he send a copy of his answer to the Connaught soldiers?

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that Miss French Mullen is still left without her luggage, which was detained at Southampton; and if he will state whether Miss Mullen will be compensated for her loss and inconvenience caused by the withdrawal of her passport?

If Miss Mullen is with-out her luggage the remedy is in her own hands. She might have brought it with her when she came to London, and may now obtain it, I have no doubt, by applying to the railway authorities at Southampton. The case is not one in which I could recommend the grant of any compensation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, seeing that Mr. Emile d'Erlanger, born of German parents, is now a naturalised British subject, he will say whether this gentleman is entitled to all the privileges of a British citizen and at the same time to retain his German title of baron; whether, at the time he became a naturalised British subject, he notified the Home Office of his intention to retain his German title; and whether he is aware that Mr. Emile d'Erlanger, under the title of Baron Emile d'Erlanger, has raised money from the British public for his companies, the said money being employed in the case of the Forestal Land and Timber Company to promote German interests?

The use by a British subject of a foreign title which is not officially recognised, is a matter in which the Home Office cannot intervene. I have no information as to the last paragraph of the question.

Are we to under-stand that a German can be naturalised and has a right to use a German title which he has not given up?

I understand this gentleman was not a German, but was of French nationality. With regard to the use of the title, the title is not officially recognised.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he definitely stated that this gentleman was born of German parents in an answer he gave two days ago?

He is not of German nationality.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the case of Louis Benjamin, of the firm of Benjamin Brothers, Bermondsey Street; is he aware that this man has a brother registered as an alien, and has himself served in the German Army, and used to go over to Germany to do his training before the War, and that he changed his Christian name when allowed to be naturalised in December, 1914, although expressing himself in favour of Germany at the beginning of the War; and whether, under these circumstances, he could see his way to have this man of German origin interned?

Yes, Sir; I am well acquainted with this case. A naturalised British subject can be interned only if that course is necessary for securing the public safety or the defence of the realm. There is no information before me indicating any such necessity in this case

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this man is an extremely undesirable person; and if I bring evidence to show that he was very much in favour of the Germans at the beginning of the War, will the right hon. Gentleman further inquire into the matter?

Certainly; I shall be very grateful to the hon. Member.

asked how many firms in Scotland have been wound up on account of enemy origin or association since the passing of the recent Act of Parliament?

Under Section1 of the Act of January last, relating to businesses carried on wholly or mainly for the benefit of or under the control of enemy subjects Orders have been made by the Board of Trade for the winding-up of two firms in Scotland. Notice of these Orders appeared in the "Edinburgh Gazette," of the 14th April and the 4th July.

asked the Post-master-General whether his attention has been drawn to a resolution passed by the Stationers' Association to the effect that, while the association recognises that the sale of letter-cards and post-cards at face value is a convenience and a boon to the public, they are of opinion that, in the interests of national economy, the sale of such articles should be limited to single packets to each purchaser, and that firms and corporations should no longer be permitted to purchase these in large quantities for business use; that the stamped envelopes and other articles sold by the Post Office should no longer be supplied at present prices, many of them under cost, but issued at a price commensurate with the increases in the cost of material caused by the limitation of imports by the Government; and what, if any, steps the Government propose to take in the matter?

My attention has been drawn to the resolution. I have the matter under consideration, and will acquaint the hon. Member with my decision.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the prices of coal and food in Ireland; if he is aware that coal is now 3s. 6d. per bag to the poor; if he can state whether the prices are being caused by the rates charged by shipping rings for transit; and if he will take steps to limit the prices of coal and food in Ire-land, where the wages paid to workers are much less than those paid to workers in Great Britain?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on Tuesday to a similar question, asked by the hon. Member for the St. Patrick's Division of Dublin. I propose to direct the attention of the Committee on Prices to these questions.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the question of allotting some of the captured German ships to the Irish trade?

I did not catch the question; perhaps the hon. Member will give me notice of it.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the increase in the price of coal and food in Ireland; if he will take steps to increase the old age pensions to 7s. 6d.; and if he is aware that such a proposal would have the support of almost every Member of the House?

Yes, Sir; I am aware that Ireland, like the rest of the United Kingdom, is suffering from the increased cost of living. With regard to the last part of the question, I can only refer my hon. Friend to the answer the Prime Minister gave him on the 26th June.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is now in a position to make a statement as to the steps he proposes taking to regulate the price of coal; and whether he will consider the desirability of substituting the average prices of each quality of coal for the standard instead of the corresponding price?

The question of limiting the price of export and bunker coal is receiving careful consideration, but I am not in a position yet to make a definite statement. In the event of any amendment of the Price of Coal (Limitation) Act being found necessary, my hon. Friend's suggestion regarding standard price will be borne in mind.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say when he will be in a position to make his statement?

Very shortly.

Next Tuesday?

asked how many interned alien enemies in this country are now being employed on any national or remunerative work; and why all able-bodied interned alien enemies should not be employed on some work of a public character instead of remaining idle in their various camps?

I am afraid I have not the answer to this question with me, but the number is about 4,000 employed in useful and remunerative work other than fatigue duties in the camps. Other schemes are under consideration now by means of which it is hoped to employ a considerably larger number of these interned persons.

Is not the difficulty to get local people to employ them?

Yes.

[The following is the reply which the Home Secretary had prepared: Over 3,000 of the interned civilians are employed on work which is to the public advantage, without counting those engaged in per-forming ordinary camp fatigues. As regards the second part of the question, only a few kinds of industrial work can be carried on profitably inside the camps; and it is difficult to provide the guards necessary for the employment of numerous parties in labouring or agricultural work outside; but fresh schemes are under consideration, and I hope that the numbers in useful employment will be increased.]

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether they are contemplating removing the recruiting office from Johnstone Terrace, Edinburgh, to a more prominent position elsewhere?

My hon. Friend's representations as to the desirableness of transferring this-recruiting office have been very carefully considered, and we are of opinion that the present office satisfies all our requirements.

asked the Prime Minister if he will state when he pro-poses to introduce legislation to reduce the number of Commissioners forming the Board of Control, as recommended last May in the Report of the Committee of Public Accounts?

The hon. Member no doubt refers to a recommendation in the Report of the Committee on Public Retrenchment.

Public Accounts Committee.

My information is that it is in the Report of the Committee on Public Retrenchment. However the recommendation is the same. The proposal would involve extensive alterations both in the law and in administration which cannot be undertaken at present, especially as one of the Commissioners is serving with the forces, and two are almost wholly engaged in work connected with the War. An immediate reduction would not in any case be practicable, and was not recommended by the Committee: a reduction could only be brought into effect as vacancies occur.

There is some misunderstanding. I will put the question down again.

Would it not be a good opportunity to put off some of the extreme teetotalers on the Board?

This is not the Board of Control.

It is the Board of Control.

The Board of Control is the body which has the care of lunatics and mentally deficients.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that my hon. Friend's question refers to the Board of Liquor Control?

If the hon. Member wished to refer to that Board he ought to have referred to it as the Central Control Board.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all the lunatics are not interned?

asked the Prime Minister whether it was with Government sanction martial law and the Defence of the Realm Act were recently used to pre-vent a meeting in the Ulster Hall, Belfast, for the purpose of opposing the partition of Ireland and to facilitate a meeting in St. Mary's Hall, Belfast, in promotion of partition; whether it was with Government sanction Mr. Stuart, an official in the office of the Irish Insurance Commissioners, spent the fortnight preceding the latter meeting motoring in Ulster canvas-sing people to attend that meeting in support of partition, and paying by cheques signed Joseph Devlin; whether the money so drawn upon was supplied by the Government or any State Department; whether he is aware that another insurance official, Mr. Skeffington, of Dungannon, got himself appointed to oppose partition in St. Mary's Hall, when there supported partition, and subsequently explained that if he had done otherwise the Member for West Belfast would have got him deprived of his means of living; on what principle insurance officials in Ireland are allowed to interfere and be used in controversial politics against the wish of the public; and, seeing that the project for the partition of Ireland has none but this manufactured support, that no elected statutory body in Ireland has asked it, and that the people of all classes so far as allowed have pro-tested against it, whether that project will be withdrawn?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, may I ask, on a point of Order, whether the hon. Member for North—West Meath is entitled to make use of the Order Paper of this House in order to make unscrupulous and anonymous attacks upon an hon. Member of this House? The statements contained in this question would not be made either in the public Press or on the platform, for the simple reason that the hon. Member would be brought to book. Is it fair that state- ments which could not be made outside the House should be made inside for the purpose of attacking an hon. Member? The last part of the question refers to Mr. Skeffington, of Dungannon, who is supposed to be an insurance official. He is a solicitor, and has no connection what-ever with the Insurance Commission. I have a telegram from him in which he says that the whole story is a hoax as far as he is concerned.

In reply to the hon. Member's question, I have constantly deprecated references to and attacks upon other hon. Members in questions, and I shall continue to do so as far as I can. But I am afraid that I have little or no influence with the hon. Member who has put this question on the Paper. With regard to attacks upon those who are not members of the House, all I can say is that, in my opinion, for an hon. Member to make use of the privileges which this House gives him in order to attack innocent people outside, is one of the most despicable proceedings imaginable.

The reason why this question has caused irritation is that it is true. I beg to ask Question 46.

As regards the first part of the question, I have nothing to add to the answer given by the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Cork City on 26th June. As regards the latter part of the question, Mr. Stewart, who is a temporary clerk in the service of the National Health Insurance Commission, Ireland, denies specifically the truth of the allegations contained in the question, and there is no officer of the name of Skeffington in the employment of the Irish Commission.

Does the right hon. Gentleman deny that a meeting announced to be held in the Ulster Hall was pre-vented by the military and the police, to my personal knowledge, for I went there? Does he claim to know more about cheques in Tyrone than the people of Tyrone?

Do not answer!

With regard to the first part of the question, it is the case that a meeting was prohibited, as was stated by the Prime Minister on the 26th June. The meeting was of a character which was regarded as connected with the rebellious movement which came to a head some little time ago. With regard to the cheques, I have no knowledge.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered the last part of the question—whether the partition proposals based upon manufactured opinion will be withdrawn?

Do not answer!

That is a question that does not call for any reply.

asked whether it is still the intention of the Government to defer the final settlement of the government of Ireland, including the continuance of the exclusion of any part of Ireland from the provisions of the Government of Ireland Act of 1912, or subsequent amending Acts, to an Imperial Conference, to be summoned after the conclusion of hostilities?

The Prime Minister can add nothing to his public statements on this subject.

asked whether the acceptance by both the Unionist and Nationalist parties in Ireland of the application to Ireland of the Military Ser-vice Act will be one of the conditions embodied in the proposed Home Rule Act Amending Bill?

I can make no further statement on this matter until the introduction of the Bill to give effect to the Government's proposals.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, is not this pledge of sincerity on the part of all parties in Ireland necessary and essential to any settlement? Without equal co-operation on the part of Ireland, what becomes of the bond of common sacrifices and glories—

That question is one more for argument in debate.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why the Prime Minister is not able to be here to-day?

I understand that he has important matters of public business to attend to for the moment; he will be here shortly, when the business is disposed of.

He has gone to the Dardanelles.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can see his way to inform the House of the reason for the delay in the publication of the Dardanelles Papers, in regard to which a definite pledge has been given to the House; whether the Papers in question were fully examined before such pledge was given and all necessary authorities consulted; and whether he can now undertake that the publication will take place before the House adjourns for the summer Recess?

asked how soon the Papers relating to the operations in the Dardanelles, promised by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, will be published?

The Prime Minister will make a full statement on this matter and the Mesopotamian question on Tuesday next.

Will the House have an opportunity of discussing the statement? What we really want is opportunity for discussion in the House, and we never get it.

I shall put the representations of my right hon. Friend to the Prime Minister, and I am quite sure that if the House desire to discuss the statement they will get an opportunity of doing so.

Is the right hon. Gentleman's position exactly the same as it was six weeks ago when he said that the Dardanelles Papers could now be published with perfect security to the public interest, as the book was now closed?

So far as I know, my position is exactly the same as it was then.

Then we may take it that Papers are to be published?

If I could give that answer it would not be necessary to postpone the statement till Tuesday.

Are we to understand that Papers cannot be published? [HON. MEMBERS: "Wait and see!"]

Are we to have any Papers relating to Mesopotamia before the Prime Minister makes his statement?

It is in regard to these Papers that the Prime Minister has said he will make his statement on Tuesday.

asked the Prime Minister whether any steps have been taken to inquire into and report upon the water power of Wales, with a view to its utilisation for the production of electrical energy for agriculture and other industries; and, if not, in view of the importance of increasing the productive capacity of the country, whether he will cause the matter to be investigated?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. I understand that a power and traction company possessing statutory powers for the supply of electricity obtains energy by utilising water power in North Wales, but I am not aware of any general inquiry into the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that railway companies are further punishing men by refusing to employ them after they have served sentences for offences under the Military Service Act; and, having regard to the definite assurances given that the Government would not countenance any form of industrial compulsion, he will take steps, as the president of the Railway Executive, to protect the men from dual punishment?

If my hon. Friend will give me particulars of the cases which he has in mind, I shall be happy to look into the matter.

asked the President of the Local Government Board if he will make inquiries concerning the action of the Burley-in-Whafedale Tribunal in allowing Messrs. William Fison, Limited, to make the selection of one weaving overlooker to be refused among four married men who applied for exemption, with the result that the firm in question decided to refuse exemption to a man of thirty-eight years of age with six children, whilst of the remaining three who were given exemption one man, twenty-seven years of age, had no children, another, forty years of age, had only one child, and the third, twenty-nine years of age, had only two children?

My right hon. Friend is making inquiry into the subject.

asked what remedy a married man belonging to a certified occupation, namely, a wholesale fish salesman and fish curer, has when the local tribunal refuses him a certificate of exemption from military service and leave to appeal?

An applicant has an unrestricted right of appeal from the decision of the local tribunal to the Appeal Tribunal. Appeal from the Appeal Tribunal to the Central Tribunal can be made only by leave of the former, and their decision granting or refusing leave is final.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether a Reservist called to the Colours on the outbreak of war, who has now been discharged from the Army, and whose principal and usual occupation prior to the War was that of a coal miner employed underground, is liable to be again recalled for military service if, after his discharge from the Army, he returned to the occupation of a miner underground and is now engaged in this same occupation; and will he say what steps a miner who comes under this category should take when he receives notice to rejoin the Army, seeing that all underground miners are exempt?

Under Section 3 (1) of the last Military Service Act men of military age who have been discharged from naval or military service on the termination of their period of service become liable to serve again. Applications for exemption can be made in respect of these men as well as other men. In the case of miners the application should be made to the Colliery Recruiting Court.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the meaning of his answer when he says, "Applications for exemption can be made in respect of these men as well as other men?" Do they start in the same position as other men when they come before the tribunal, and were they prejudiced in any way because they have been in the Reserve?

Certainly they are not prejudiced. We are now in communication with the Home Office, and a further communication will be sent.

asked the Secretary to the Local Government Board whether the Military Services Committee who are dealing with civil liabilities in the case of men who have joined up and who can claim either by themselves or by their representatives that such claims may go back to August, 1914; will he say whether, if such a man is purchasing a house or has a mortgage on the same, he can to-day claim a grant towards monthly or quarterly payments, but if such a man were killed in January, 1916, his executors do not get the benefit from the Military Services Committee, though he had the same liability as the man living to-day, who can date back; whether he is aware that these defaults of payment will be to the detriment of his widow and family; and, seeing that if the man were killed after putting in his claim his claim holds good, will he take steps to ensure that this principle holds good for his widow?

The scheme administered by the Military Service (Civil Liabilites) Committee applies to men who joined the forces on or after the 4th August, 1914, or are members of the Territorial Force. The assistance granted will generally date from the commencement of the operation of the scheme—that is from the 25th May last—though in exceptional cases a grant may be made in respect of arrears. If a man who has received a grant is killed, the grant may be continued for a period not exceeding twenty-six weeks after his death. The widow of a man who is killed is entitled to a pension, and if, owing to exceptional circumstances, the pension is inadequate, it may be supplemented by the Statutory Committee.