asked the Secretary of State for India whether, in the recent political trials in India, the special tribunal was exclusively British; whether the Indian pleader had any effective jurisdiction; whether his concurrence was essential, and was obtained, in each decision; whether his status was that of a judge or of a Government official; whether the trials were open or secret; and whether the accused persons were allowed the assistance of counsel of their own choosing?

Two of three members were British; the Indian member, who was not an official, had the status of a judge equal to that of the other two; his jurisdiction was effective, and he concurred in the judgments. The trials were open, and the accused were defended by counsel of their own choosing.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will say how many merchant ships have been converted to fixed naval hospital ships, and are still acting as such in these islands and also abroad; and whether he can state the objection to erecting huts on shore so as to release tonnage?

None of the merchant ships taken up as naval hospital ships are being used as fixed hospital ships. The whole question of the possibility of releasing naval hospital ships has been most carefully considered by the Board of Admiralty in close conjunction with the Commander-in-Chief, Grand Fleet, and it has been decided that the number now employed cannot be reduced or superseded by huts on shore without materially interfering with the efficiency of the Fleet and the proper care of the sick and wounded officers and men.

Is not my right hon. Friend relying on a verbal trick of words in saying that none of these ships are fixed ships, and is it not the case that some have remained in position for from two to two and a half years?

No, I am not relying upon a verbal trick. I am advised, as I say, that the matter has been carefully gone into, and I am sure my hon. and gallant Friend would be the last to desire to disregard naval opinion in a matter of this sort.

Why cannot these men be looked after just as well on shore as on a ship, as is the case with soldiers?

Well, I have given the view of the naval authorities on the matter.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty (1), in view of the fact that the Admiralty have stated that they do not consider any hardship is involved in the payment to the wife and children of a sailor in the lower ratings a separation allowance which, including maximum allotment from pay, may be 6s. a week less than that of a private soldier's wife and family, whether the Admiralty has made, any representations to the Treasury that the scale of Army separation allowances is too high; whether it has resisted, as extravagant and wasteful, proposals to raise the naval separation allowances so as to secure that in no case shall a sailor's wife and family receive a smaller separation allowance, including allotment, than a private soldier's wife and family; and (2) whether the Admiralty has invited the Statutory Committee to make a supplementary grant in those cases where the total separation allowance received by a sailor's wife and family, including the maximum allotment from the sailor's pay, is less than the separation allowance received by a private soldier's wife and family; whether any answer has been received from the Statutory Committee: and whether the Statutory Committee refuses to supplement the hat rate of separation allowance paid by the Admiralty to the wives and families of its lower ratings, so as to raise these allowances, including allotment, to the level of the allowances in the case of a private soldier?

As I have indicated in previous replies, no scheme which provides for the payment of flat rates will secure absolute uniformity in treatment, but to attempt to meet individual cases by a general increase in the flat rates would not, in my opinion, be justified. I am in communication with the Treasury and the Statutory Committee, through the Pensions Ministry, and hope to be in a position to make a statement on the subject at an early date.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he will state the objections of the Army Council to relieve; local rates from funds placed at their disposal for Army purposes, in consequence of which families of soldiers in rate-aided institutions are pauperised when maintained in Poor Law institutions while Army separation allowances are continued when such families are received into philanthropic or charitable institutions; and whether he is aware that the soldier husband or father is himself thereby legally held to be in forma pauperis by the relief afforded to his dependants in rate-aided institutions?

The objection to the relief of local rates out of the Exchequer, otherwise than by specific provision of Parliament, is a general principle not confined to Army Funds. I am not aware that any substantial disability is thereby imposed upon the soldier, but I will look further into that aspect of the matter.

Is there a greater objection to the relief of institutions which are subsidised from the rates than to the relief of philanthropic and charitable institutions outside?

Yes, I think so.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether there are any naval men serving in the Royal Naval Division in France who receive less pay than an A.B.?

So far as is known no naval men serving in the Royal Naval Division in France receive less pay than an able seaman. If, however, my hon. Friend is aware of any specific instance to the contrary, and will furnish me with particulars, I will inquire further into the matter.

Should there be any at 1s. 3d. per day?

No, that is the pay of an ordinary seaman.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has brought, or will bring, under the notice of the United States Government the fact that Dr. Patrick M'Cartan, an American citizen, has been, with others, deported from Ireland and is now interned at Oxford, without trial, and on no charge but an alleged suspicion of having acted, acting, or being about to act in a manner prejudicial to the public safety, and whether the American Government requires a charge to be formulated and tried in a civil Court in this case?

I have no knowledge of the case to which the hon. Member refers.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire about it?

I do not think it is the business of the Foreign Office to interfere in internal matters.

asked the Attorney-General for Ireland under what Statute fifty policemen, fully armed with rifles, bayonets, and revolvers, entered Ballinagh on the 12th instant, and with the assistance of the local police arrested the four youths, Charles Fitzpatrick, John Kinkart, Roland Finnigan, and Thomas Fitzpatrick, for having a week earlier celebrated the Nationalist electoral victory in North Roscommon, brought them handcuffed in pairs and without food to Belfast, and handed them over to the military authorities who discharged them on the 15th instant; and under what Statute the police, after that discharge, again arrested them for the same alleged offence and brought them before two magistrates in Belfast who, after the police had failed to produce any evidence of sedition and had sworn that the youths had been sober and orderly and had gone home early on the night in question, imposed a fine of £10 upon each; for what supposed offence was this fine imposed; what evidence was produced that this offence had been committed; if any but police evidence existed why it was not produced; whether the defendants have refused to pay the fines for an offence not proved; what imprisonment they are now enduring in default; and whether the Lord Chancellor has considered the conduct of the magistrates in this case?

The men referred to were arrested in Ballinagh on the morning of the 12th instant and taken by train to Belfast, but not without food. They were tried before two justices on charges under the Defence of the Realm Acts of, inter alia, having attempted to cause sedition or disaffection by singing disloyal songs and making use of disloyal expressions. There was no denial of this charge, and a fine of £10, or in default, three months' imprisonment was inflicted. The defendants refused to pay the fine, but not on the plea that no offence was committed, and they are undergoing the term of imprisonment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the county council and the district council of Cavan have condemned these arrests on the ground that they are in conflict with the professed Government policy of increased food production?

I am not aware of it.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give the House a sample of a disloyal song?

I fear any effort of that kind would bring me into conflict with the Chair.

asked the Home Secretary whether, since the 19th December, when he refused to release the ten Irish youths under nineteen, now in penal servitude by order of a secret court-martial, he has verified the statement made on the 11th May by the then Prime Minister (OFFICIAL REPORT, page 956) that, as regards the rank and file, many of them very young men, even lads….what in their case is a merely venial and pardonable error; and whether, in the spirit of that view, he will now release those youths?

I have read the passage to which the hon. Member refers. The late Prime Minister in the sentence partly quoted in the question referred only to those members of the rank and file who had been duped or misled into the rebellion. I have no reason to believe that the prisoners to whom the hon. Member refers come within that category.

Mr. Speaker, are not these members of the rank and file?

I am not able to say; they were condemned by court-martial.

Secret court-martial.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware of the anxiety of the relatives of the white troops engaged in the East African campaign in respect to the health of such troops, the transport of materials, and the rationing; and whether, having regard to the statement of General Smuts that white troops were not suitable for fighting in East Africa, he can give the House an assurance that in all particulars these troops are well conditioned in every respect, so as to assure their efforts being effective to bring this campaign to a successful conclusion?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. The composition of the East African Expeditionary Force has been varied from time to time according to the climatic and other conditions under which it was operating. It was long since recognised that in the event of the German forces retiring into the malarious southeastern portions of their colony it would be desirable to reduce the number of white troops employed to a minimum. Steps were accordingly taken to provide coloured units to replace white. At the present moment the bulk of the white troops have been withdrawn, or are in process of being withdrawn, whilst arrangements have been made to give other white units a period of rest and recuperation in a healthy climate. In regard to certain reports of the hardships undergone by the troops in East Africa, which have gained currency, the following extract from a telegram from General Smuts may be of interest:

"The complaints are exaggerated perversions of the admitted fact that the hardships have been unusually great in this campaign."

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a number of warrant and non-commissioned officers and men have served continuously in the fighting line for over two and a half years without having been fortunate enough to have been brought to notice for some act of gallantry for which the military medal can be awarded; and whether steps will be taken with a view to a grant of military medals to meet such cases of this kind as may be recommended by commanding officers?

Decorations are granted on the recommendation of a soldier's superior officer or for some definite act of bravery or exceptionally good service. No reports have been received from Commanders-in-Chief in the field that any necessity exists for extending or modifying existing principles. I would remind my hon. and gallant Friend that there are no restrictions on the number of military medals which may be awarded.

asked the Under-Secrtary of State for War, whether the Army Medical Department has now seen the statement by the sister of the late Earl Kitchener, Mrs. Parker, with reference to the case of W. H. Townley, a soldier in the West Kent Regiment: and whether he can state the present occupation of Townley?

No, Sir; the Department has not seen the statement referred to, and knows nothing about the ease or about Townley's present occupation. If the hon. Member will furnish the necessary particulars I will make inquiries.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that men attached to the Royal Flying Corps have been allowed to engage in photographing public functions, such as the recent Royal visit to the City, in opposition to the professional Press photographers; whether the act of contributing to the Press is a violation of the regulations; whether the practice referred to had the sanction of the War Office; and whether he will take steps to prevent this competition with men who are dependent upon the work for their livelihood?

I think my hon. Friend is under a misapprehension. Certain photographs of the recent Royal visit were taken by the Royal Flying Corps for official purposes. None of these photographs were sent to the Press, and the last part of the question does not, therefore, arise.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War, whether an order has been issued prohibiting officers and men who have returned from the Expeditionary Force from wearing while under the Irish command in Ireland the distinguishing badges they wore at the front; whether the officers and men in the 8th and 9th Munsters have under this order been told to remove the shamrock worn on each shoulder; will he say what is the object of this order; and will he see that it is cancelled?

I have no information as to the badge, which my hon. Friend informs me is worn by such troops, nor of any order prohibiting such a badge in Ireland; but I will make inquiries and inform my hon. Friend of the result.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will state the reasons why the exchange of British and German civilian prisoners is opposed by the War Office; and whether very few of the German prisoners would now be fit for military service?

Many of the German civilian prisoners in this country are Reservists and quite fit for military service; while nearly all of them would be available for enrolment under the general levy for national service lately brought into force in Germany. On the general question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave yesterday to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow and Aberdeen Universities. I would, however, repeat that the only proposal for a wholesale exchange which the Germans are willing to entertain is one that against our 4,000 at most would entitle them to some 26,000 in this country alone, and 9,000 to 10,000 in the Dominions and Colonies. In other words, they would stand to gain nearly nine men to our one, namely, over 35,000 to probably less than 4,000.

Can my hon. Friend give any approximate estimate of the number who would be fit for service in the field?

No; on the spur of the moment I cannot. No doubt the figures could be got, but not without some considerable trouble. But all of them, or nearly all, are in a position to be made use of by the German authorities if they were returned.

May I ask whether there would not be a corresponding, and even a much greater, benefit to this country by getting rid of these. 35,000 Germans altogether?

That is not the opinion of the responsible military authorities.

If that be so, would it not be advisable to get rid of all German prisoners of war?

Is it not the case that many interned German civilians are extremely capable men who have now become possessed of information which it is very undesirable that they should be in a position to pass on?

That is another consideration which the military authorities have in mind.

Would it be possible to carry on the arrangement by the pooling of Allied nationals for the purposes of exchange?

That is one of many alternatives that have been proposed at different times and which have not been—I do not say that one in particular—but there are several alternatives which have been proposed and have not been finally rejected.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in reference to the fact that manipulative treatment is in full swing in the Army under well-known authorities on the subject, he will give the House the names of such authorities, and state the source of their qualification in manipulative treatment; whether he is aware that in the American school of manipulative treatment, which is known as osteopathy, the course of study and diligent practice considered absolutely essential extends over a period of four years before the qualifying examination can be entered for; and whether, now that manipulative treatment is being freely resorted to in the Army, he will recommend a substantial increase in the number of manipulators available by the employment of others who have been specially trained and have passed qualifying examinations on the subject, and who have offered their services without fees for the cure of wounded soldiers?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can state if the War Office received an offer for services of about 100 Canadian and American experts in manipulative treatment for the help of the wounded; if so, whether the War Office replied that they could not accept this offer; whether he is aware that the gentlemen whose services were offered hold the highest American qualifications in manipulative surgery, known in America as osteopathy; whether the War Office has more of such assistance than it requires; and, if not, whether he can state on what ground the offer was refused?

Surgeons who have paid special attention to orthopædic surgery are well acquainted with manipulative methods and have them in constant use. Offers, I believe, have been received from time to time, from America and elsewhere, from osteopaths, faith healers, Christian Scientists and others, but they were refused on grounds which I have now frequently stated to the House.

Do I understand that the hon. Gentleman agrees that the services of about a hundred Canadian and American experts in manipulative treatment were offered? I did not quite catch his answer.

No. I will read the last part of my answer again: "Offers, I believe, have been received from time to time, from America and elsewhere, from osteopaths, faith healers, Christian Scientists, and others, but they were refused on grounds which I have now frequently stated to the House."

Does the hon. Gentleman class Barker with faith healers and Christian Scientists? Are they in that state of ignorance still?

Is he aware that these gentlemen own the highest American qualifications?

All I know is that we are precluded by law from employing any man as an officer in the Royal Army Medical Corps who is not a registered medical practitioner.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that they have never asked to be employed as recognised doctors or surgeons, but that they only ask to be allowed to go in and assist the surgeons in the hospitals to cure the wounded?

The hon. Member must remember that we have a responsibility to the wounded, and that we must have skilled men in accordance with the recognised test, and there is no place so averse to allowing the employment of unskilled and unqualified surgeons as the House of Commons.

They are qualified.

What is good enough for a Minister is surely good enough for a soldier.

Why did—

We had better resume the Debate to-morrow.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War, with regard to an officer who has been attached to another corps and who has obtained promotion to the rank of captain and been awarded the Military Cross and a bar to the same, whether, on being wounded and returned to the establishment of his own regiment, he must revert to the rank of second-lieutenant while officers junior to him in his regiment have received promotion?

If an officer has been promoted, he does not revert to lower rank; but if he has been granted acting rank, which is given for the performance of the duties of a specific appointment, then he would relinquish his acting rank on vacating his appointment.

Is it the case that by giving distinguished services and by being wounded this officer, while attached to another corps, has lost all chance of promotion in his original regiment?

No, the hon. Member is quite wrong in that assumption. The point is that if a man is of acting rank he is bound to revert to his former rank.

Is it the case that, while he is of acting rank, officers junior to him, who have never seen service, have been promoted over his head?

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office (1) in view of pecuniary compensation being considered inappropriate to the case of Lieut. Barrett, if he will say what form of compensation it is proposed to make to this officer for the wrongs he has suffered; and (2) whether, in considering the propriety of making pecuniary compensation to Lieut. Barrett, account has been taken of the fact that, although, the commanding officer of Barrett's battalion was removed from his command and the Quartermaster-General of the Army was severely reprimanded by the Government for their conduct in relation to Barrett, the former of these two officers has since been given a staff appointment and the latter retains his position in the Army Council; whether these circumstances, in conjunction with the refusal of compensation to the junior officer whom they wronged, are an indication of reluctance on the part of the Army Council to accept the report of the court of inquiry; and whether, in view of the recent precedent supplied by the Archer-Shee case, where a sum of £4,000 was awarded as compensation to an officer for a wrongful accusation having been made against him, the question of pecuniary compensation to Lieut. Barrett will be reconsidered?

The late commanding officer of Lieut. Barrett's battalion is at present medically unfit, and ho is to be sent to France on recovery. He has not been given a staff appoint- ment. I have already explained to the House the Quartermaster-General's position, and I will remind hon. Members that the court expressly said that no action of Sir J. Cowans's had any bearing on the decisions of which 2nd Lieut. Barrett had to complain. My hon. Friend the Financial Secretary said on the 22nd that pecuniary compensation does not appear to be appropriate in Mr. Barrett's case. I would point out that Mr. Barrett's character has been amply vindicated in circumstances of the fullest publicity, and he has before him the prospect of a long and useful military career. Mr. Archer-Shee's case does not appear to me to be a precedent, as I understand he suffered loss by having to abandon the profession for which he had been prepared and was put to the expense of fitting himself for another. In justice to Lieut. Barrett, I think that I should state that he himself has not made any application of any kind for any compensation of this sort.

Does my hon. Friend not know perfectly well that as a result of the transactions which were inquired into, Lieut. Barrett has been rendered totally unfit for military service for the rest of his life?

I am not aware of that fact, and I do not think the hon. Member is right in stating that. All that I know is that Lieut. Barrett is still an officer and is still being paid by us.

I give notice that I will raise the question on the Debate on the Army Estimates.

May I ask if the report presented to the House on the Lieut. Barrett affair was bowdlerised or accurate?

All that we promised was that the terms of the findings were to be published, and we did publish the findings as they were presented to us.

Inasmuch as Lieut. Barrett has not asked for any pecuniary compensation, may I ask why Members of this House should take upon themselves to ask it for him?

Can the hon. Gentleman say that at no time has a claim for compensation been put in on behalf of Lieut. Barrett?

I understand that at no time has a claim of any sort been made by Lieut. Barrett, or by anybody on his behalf.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether on the 14th January, 1915, Army Council Instructions were issued increasing the pay of civilian clerks in Record Offices from 30s. to 33s. for a six-day week of ten hours per day, subject to certain qualifications; whether he is aware that no additional pay in accordance with the Instructions was given to the civilian clerks in the Royal Garrison Artillery Record Office in Dover until April, 1916, and that, although an application has been made for fifteen months' arrears due under the Instructions mentioned, no payment of these arrears has yet been made; if he will say why the Instructions were not complied with in the case mentioned for fifteen months; and if he will give directions for the arrears due to be paid without further delay?

I will make inquiry.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether the Board is still pursuing its inquiries into the Isle of Wight bee disease, and with what results; and when the Report of the Board's protozoologists on Microsporidiosis will be laid before the House?

The Board's expert adviser on protozoology is now in South Africa, and her experiment on Isle of Wight disease is at an end. She left at short notice, and was not able to complete her Report before leaving, but she has promised to send it as soon as possible.

asked the First Comsioner of Works the date or dates upon which the leases of the properties lying between Trafalgar Square and Charing Cross station fall in to the Crown?

The Crown property referred to will fall out of lease at various dates between 1927 and 1982.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the small number of cases of appeal which take place in Scotland from sheriffs substitute to sheriffs principal in all sheriffdoms outside the populous areas of Glasgow and Edinburgh and of the high salaries which are paid to these sheriffs principal; and, if so, will he take the opportunity of the War to introduce legislation abolishing these sheriff principalships outside the populous areas in view of the facts that in some instances only two cases annually are being appealed to the principals?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. My hon. and learned Friend appears to be under a misapprehension as to the nature and extent of the duties devolving upon sheriffs in Scotland, which are by no means confined to the function of hearing appeals from their substitutes. In addition, the sheriffs act as judges of first instance in both civil and criminal cases. They are responsible for law and order in their sheriffdom, and they also perform a variety of important administrative duties, including, at the present time, the duty of presiding over the Appeal Tribunals under the Military Service Acts, in which capacity they have given, and are giving, most valuable service. I am not prepared to introduce legislation on the lines suggested.

Are not the sheriffs paid for these duties in connection with the tribunals themselves, and does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the country gets value for its money in view of the large sums paid to these sheriffs?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative and to the second part in the affirmative.

asked the Prime Minister if it is proposed to cancel the Bank Holidays at Easter; and, if so, will he publish the Order as early as possible, so that traders, shopkeepers, and others affected by the same may make their arrangements in good time?

The matter is now now under consideration, and it is hoped to make an early announcement on the subject.

asked the Prime Minister if he had received a resolution from the Lord Mayor of London, which was passed on Thursday, 15th February, declaring that the invasion of Belgium and France by the German armies threatens the very existence of independent nationalities and strikes a blow at all faith in treaties, a victory for German imperialism would be the defeat and the destruction of democracy and liberty in Europe, and agrees that the fight should continue until victory is achieved; and whether he proposes to make any statement on the subject?

The Prime Minister has received the resolution referred to. The resolution so exactly represents the views and the intentions which have already been expressed on behalf both of the Government and the people of this country that no further statement seems necessary.

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether any progress has been made in regard to the proposed inquiry into the question of establishing Parliamentary Committees on the general lines of the French system; whether the question will be referred, as he declared to be probable, to Parliament itself for decision; and (2) whether he will publish the Report or other material upon which it has been decided that the system of Parliamentary Committees prevailing in France is unsuitable to this country; and whether the Government is considering any other plan which would accomplish the desired results?

I cannot add anything to what I stated in reply to a similar question by the hon. and gallant Member for Enfield on 15th February. The Report to which I referred was a confidential one, and it would not be advisable to publish it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Prime Minister expressed the opinoin in this House that France has been saved by her Committee system?

The Prime Minister was favourably disposed towards a proposal of this kind; but on examination of it, and seeing exactly what it meant to Ministers, he and the Government came to the conclusion that it would be impossible to adopt it.

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered what it means to the country, as well as to Ministers?

Was the decision arrived at by the Cabinet because the system would be an inconvenience to Ministers?

No, not at all. It was due to an examination of the whole working of the system.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department the present condition of a young man named Tierney, transferred before he was fit for removal from Dublin Castle hospital to Frongoch camp; there punished with others for refusing to betray his comrades; driven insane by cruelty which he was physically unable to bear, and removed to an asylum without notice to his wife; and what facilities are now afforded to friends for visiting him and promoting his recovery?

The orders given by the military authorities for Tierney's removal to Frongoch directed that he should be transferred, when medically fit to travel, and there is no reason to suppose that he was not fit when he was removed. He was one of several hundreds of prisoners placed in a separate camp for refusing to answer to their names, but he was not otherwise punished. The statement that his insanity was due to his treatment has been the subject of careful inquiry and is believed to be absolutely unfounded, and it appears from his wife's statement that he had had previous attacks of mental trouble. It is also totally untrue that he was sent to the asylum without notice to his friends. His wife visited him in the camp hospital on two successive days before his removal. Tierney is no longer a prisoner, but an ordinary private patient in the Denbigh Asylum, and his friends can visit him in accordance with the ordinary rules of the asylum. I regret to say that his mental condition has not improved.

asked the Home Secretary when the present Order as regards early closing of shops in London expires; if it is proposed to renew the Order; and, if so, for what period?

The present Order will expire on the 30th April. On the question of its renewal, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to the right hon. Member for West Islington on Monday.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider, before he renews the Order, the desirability of getting an expression of opinion from this House?

I do not think I could undertake to do that. I am considering all representations.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that shipping space to the extent of nearly 2,000,000 cubic feet was taken up by the importation in 1916 of tyres from other countries, representing about 50,000 tons; that British manufacturers are able to meet the demands for tyres for all purposes connected with the War; and will he consider the advisability of saving this tonnage?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. This matter was most carefully considered by the Committee on Import Restrictions, but in view of international considerations in regard to the importation and exportation of rubber and manufactures of rubber the Committee advised that it was undesirable to impose the suggested prohibition.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the number of charity funds existing in Scotland, and presumably throughout the United Kingdom, that were subscribed by the public on the occurrence of disasters such as the "Daphne" disaster, the Udstone Colliery, and others; is he aware that the beneficiaries under these funds have long since died out or fallen out of benefit otherwise, and that the funds exist now only for the advantage of professional men who audit them annually; and, in view of the present wartime, will he consider the advisability of taking legislative steps to obtain for the State these unused charitable funds?

I have no precise information as to the existence of the charity funds described by the hon. Member. But I am having further inquiries made.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can undertake that rural district councils in Ireland becoming owners of land in trust for small holders, whether under the Land Act of 1903 or under the present schemes, and whether for tillage or pasturage, shall be exempt from Income Tax on such lands, seeing that they freely discharge the duties of the trust and derive no benefit from the lands; and whether he will see that the demand made on the Delvin District Council for £14 8s. 9d. Income Tax on land so held is not enforced?

I am having careful inquiry made into the matter referred to, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member as soon as I am in a position to do so.