asked the Secretary of State for India what is the present situation as regards the scheme of assisting emigration to Jamaica, Fiji, Trinidad, and British Guiana?

The Government of India are taking no steps to proceed with the scheme. It involves legislation, and Indian public opinion is strongly opposed to it.

asked the Secretary of State for India if he can state when the dispatch from the Government of India on the subject of the increased pay and pensions for the Indian Services recommended in the Montagu-Chelmsford Report may be expected?

The Government of India have undertaken to expedite the dispatch. I am unable to give a date.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether the Government of India fixed the children's allowance for officers of the Indian Army at £2 a month for officers drawing up to Rs.500 a month, and £l for officers drawing up to Rs.625 a month; that captains who are in command of companies or adjutants drew Rs.637 a month, including exchange compensation allowance, and that the Government of India deprived these captains of the allowance by thus fixing the limit at Rs.625; that the exchange compensation allowance has now been withdrawn, and the pay of these captains has been reduced to Rs.600 a month, and the Government of India now refuse to pay these officers the allowance of £1a month, on the ground that their pay is theoretically still Rs.637 a month; and will he therefore instruct the Government of India to pay up this allowance with all arrears, and also suggest the advisability of raising the limit to Rs.650 a month, so as to put a stop to this treatment of officers by the Indian Pay Department in the future?

I have received no complaints on the subject, but will ask for a Report.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will provide facilities for this House to discuss the Motion on the Paper on the subject of the East India Criminal Law (Amendment) Bills, in the name of the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland and others?

I hope that it will be possible for a general Debate on Indian affairs to take place on Thursday of next week.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any payments have been awarded to naval ratings for the salvage of merchant vessels during the War; if so, will he stats the ships salved and the amounts awarded; and whether a merchant vessel chartered by the Admiralty is considered during the time of charter one of His Majesty's ships?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. A statement is being compiled for my hon. Friend's information showing the names of ships salved during the War, in respect of which salvage awards have been distributed among the officers and men concerned, with the amounts in each case. As regards the second part of the question, if this refers to the status of the salvors, it depends on the provisions of the charter, or other title by which the Admiralty hold her. If it refers to the status of the merchant vessels salved, the rule is not to allow salvage to the crews of His Majesty's ships in respect of salvage services where His Majesty's Government takes the risk. In this connection I would add that in the case of the "Ernaston," recently raised by my hon. Friend, the owners took the marine risks and the Admiralty took the war risks. The loss of this ship was held to be due to war risk, the captain, officers, and ship's company having been compelled to abandon their ship by the commander of a German submarine. No claim for salvage was therefore allowed.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to publish that statement with the Papers or will he send it to me?

I propose to send it to my hon. Friend. If he wishes any further action, perhaps he will consult with me.

It is naturally a point of great interest to the officers and men of the Mercantile Marine.

I will discuss that matter with my hon. Friend

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the number of naval officers employed at the Admiralty on the 1st May, 1914, the number on the 1st November, 1918, and the number on the 1st May, 1919?

The following are the figures regarding officers (Naval and Royal Marine) employed at the Admiralty:

It has not been practicable in the time at our disposal to prepare the exact figures for 1st November, 1918. The staffs of the various Admiralty Departments, both civil and naval, are at present under review by the Board.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he hopes shortly to have the figures of the Staff of the Admiralty in London the same as in May, 1914?

That depends upon the work that they have to do.

What more have they to do?

A great deal.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what was the number of admirals and commodores employed in shore appointments on the 1st May, 1914, on the 1st November, 1918, and on the 1st May, 1919?

Thirty-two admirals and six commodores were employed in shore appointments on the 1st May, 1914. The number so employed on the 1st November, 1918, was 63 admirals and 26 commodores, and on the 1st May, 1919, 55 admirals and 20 commodores.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether a body called the Imperial Service League has the official sanction and approval of the Lords Commissioners; whether any public money from the Navy Votes will be paid, or has been paid, to this body; whether any Grant has been made to this body from the Grand Fleet Fund or from canteen profits; and, if so, whether the men of the Royal Navy have been fully consulted as to such payments of the Grand Fleet Fund or canteen money?

The scheme for the formation of the Imperial Service League Originated with the Army, but the Admi- ralty, at the request of the War Office, arranged for representatives of the naval forces to join in the consideration and preparation of the detailed scheme, and for information with regard to it to be put before the Fleet with the object of obtaining the views of the men as to whether they desire it to be supported financially or otherwise. As a result of the reports received from the Fleet, General Sir Ian Hamilton was informed on the 4th February that the Admiralty gladly avail themselves of the offer to the Royal Navy to join in the League, but that the question of financial support must be reserved, as there is at present no fund at the disposal of the Board which could be diverted towards the expenses of the League. It was added that, should funds become available in the future, the Admiralty will gladly contribute to the League.

No public money from Navy Votes has been paid to this body, and there is no intention of paying any, nor has any grant been made to it from the Grand Fleet Fund or from canteen profits. The disposal of money from the Grand Fleet Fund is a matter for the committee and members of that fund, and not for the Admiralty, but, as regards canteen profits, it is the policy of the Admiralty to consult the men of the Fleet to the fullest extent possible before deciding how such profits shall be disposed of, if and when they arise, and it was for this reason that the proviso in the letter to Sir Ian Hamilton was inserted.

Has there been any official information given with regard to this Imperial Service League?

To the Members of this House?

Yes.

Not to my knowledge.

Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to see that information is furnished as soon as possible?

I think my hon. Friend should address his question to the Secretary of State for War, because, as I have said, it originated with the War Office.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when the official Naval History of the War will be published, and whether it is intended to publish the earlier instalments as soon as ready?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I gave on this subject on 14th March, to the effect that it was hoped that the first volume of the official Naval History of the War would appear before the end of the year. That volume would not include the Battle of Jutland.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the wireless logs of His Majesty's ships are regarded as strictly confidential documents which have to be properly safeguarded like the signal books?

All signal and wireless logs are regarded as confidential documents, but the Regulations as to the custody of the logs provide for degrees of security depending upon the nature of the messages they contain. Thus, certain classes of messages are entered in special logs which may only be handled by certain officers, while other messages are seen by ratings under the strict reservation that all messages, whether visual or wireless, are strictly confidential and are not to be promulgated, or even discussed by those whose duty it is to handle them, without permission. The Regulations as to the custody of signal books provide in like manner for different degrees of security according to the purpose for which each class of book is intended; it may therefore be taken, in general, that the answer is in the affirmative.

May I take it from the right hon. Gentleman's answer as to the official character of this book that if a wireless log is missing it will become the subject of inquiry, to be followed by a court-martial?

I imagine that it would become the subject of inquiry, but whether a court-martial would follow would be a matter for the commanding officer.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether Frederick Ashley, late stoker 1st class, on., s.s. 109461, His Majesty's ship "Edgar," Devonport division, was discharged on 18th January last and was informed that his gratuity, after nine years and three months' service, would be paid him in one month; whether repeated letters to the Admiralty bring only the reply that nothing is known of him; and when will this gratuity be paid?

Ashley's war gratuity has now been paid. The delay in the issue of this award arose from the fact that the report of the man's dispersal did not reach the Admiralty. Two communications were received from Ashley, but in neither did he give his official number, the ship from which he was demobilised, or even his full name. Consequently, after endeavours had been made to identify him, the letters had to be returned to him for further particulars.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether Mr. C. Kemp, late No. 204826, Royal Navy, A.B., was discharged from the Royal Navy early in 1914, time expired, and passed to the Royal Fleet Reserve; whether he was recalled to the Service on the 2nd August, 1914, and admitted to hospital suffering from valvular disease of the heart on the 15th August, 1914, and invalided; and whether, in view of the fact that this man's disease is, in the opinion of his medical adviser, directly due to his pre war service and that he is now totally in capacitated from earning a livelihood, it is proposed to award him an adequate pension on the scale laid down by the Ministry of Pensions for similar cases caused by serving since 2nd August, 1914?

I have been asked to reply to this question. Mr. Kemp's disability was regarded by the Admiralty at the time of his discharge as not being due to his pre-war service and that question cannot now be re-opened. Mr. Kemp has appealed to the Pension Appeal Tribunal on the ground that his disability was caused or aggravated by his service in the present War, but the Tribunal rejected the claim. In these circumstances, it has only been possible to award a pension of £9 18s. a year for life, that being the amount to which Mr. Kemp is entitled under Article 1932 of the King's Regulations in respect of his total period of service.

asked the Pensions Minister if it has been decided to add the 20 per cent. war bonus on pensions to the wounds pensions or retired pay of officers discharged in consequence of disablement prior to 4th August, 1914?

This matter is under consideration.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been called to the interim Report issued by the Joint Committee of Manufacturers and Representatives of Organised Labour appointed at the Conference presided over by Lord Balfour of Burleigh on the 9th February; and whether it is his intention to bring this officially before the notice of the Standing Committee of the National Industrial Conference with a view to the adoption of the detailed proposals therein set out?

I have read the Report to which the hon. Member refers, and it is proposed to bring it to the notice of the proposed National Industrial Council when it is established.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) whether his attention has been called to the case of Mrs. Annie King, of 25, Church Street, Stanley, county Durham, about which the hon. Member for the Consett Division wrote to the Minister of Labour, Montagu House, Whitehall, S.W., on the 28th March; whether Mrs. King was employed at the Birtley munition works until they stopped, was discharged on 18th December, 1918, and received out-of-work pay to 29th February; whether she was then offered domestic service; whether, having two children, she was unable to leave home and go into domestic service; whether the assessors nevertheless dismissed her appeal; whether she has been refused all further out-of-work benefit; whether there is any appeal beyond the Court of Referee in such cases;

(2) whether the case of Mrs. E. A. Urwin, of 17, Meldon Terrace, New Kyo, Ann field Plain, county Durham, about which the hon. Member for the Consett Division wrote to the Ministry of Labour, Montagu House, Whitehall, S.W. 1, on the 28th March, has had his attention; whether Mrs. Urwin is a married woman with a husband who is practically an invalid; whether she is about forty years of age, and obliged to stay at home to look after her husband; whether she has, nevertheless, been refused out-of-work donation on the ground that she wil not accept domestic service; and whether it is the policy of the Ministry of Labour to compel married women with husbands or children dependent upon them to go into domestic service under conditions which prevent them attending to their homes or else forfeit the unemployment donation to which they are otherwise entitled?

The facts are substantially as stated. In both cases the claim to donation was referred to a Court of Referees, who unanimously decided that reasonable offers of work had been refused, and disallowed the claims accordingly. Leave to appeal to the umpire was not given, and the decisions of the Court are consequently final.

Is there any means of contesting this proposition that married women are to be forced away from their homes into domestic service?

I am not sure that that necessarily follows.

That is the objection to the service offered them.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in the event of any Colonial Mandatory failing to carry out the obligations of its mandate and charter, the League of Nations possesses, or will possess, any machinery for the transfer of the mandate to some other Power?

The terms of the several mandate charters have not yet been decided upon.

It is provided in the Covenant of the League of Nations (Art. XXII., last paragraph) that "a permanent Commission shall be constituted to receive and examine the Annual Reports of the Mandatories, and to advise the Council on all matters relating to the observance of such mandates."

In the event of the permanent Commission advising the Council that a Mandatory Power was not carrying out its obligations, it would lie with the Council to consider what steps should be taken.

asked the Prime Minister what arrangements, have been made at the Peace Conference for the future government of Mesopotamia; whether the future development of the country's resources will be left in the hands of the British who have conquered it; what Army of Occupation it is proposed to leave; and whether or no a British Governor will be appointed to ensure a just administration and a continuation of the development which has already begun with British money?

It is not possible to make any statement on this subject at present.

asked the Prime Minister whether there is any provision in the peace terms which compels the enemy countries to pay in full the Allies war bill when, and as, they are in a position to do so?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which I gave on Monday to the hon. Member for Hackney, South.

Is the right hon. Gentleman now in a position to allocate a day for the discussion of the peace terms, and will he in any case, in compliance with the promise he gave to my hon. Friend (Mr. Bottomley), promise that that day will be given before the peace terms are signed?

I am sure that the hon. Member for South Hackney recognised that I gave no such promise. I said, if circumstances in the opinion of the Government made it possible to have a discussion without doing harm, it would be given. My hon. Friend recognised my answer when he reserved his right to move the Adjournment.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any idea of the last day on which this Peace Treaty will have to be signed?

I cannot. I wish I could.

Will the Government bear in mind that upon the last occasion that the German Empire made peace they inflicted the whole cost of the war and, in addition, large indemnities upon their enemies?

The peace delegates are well aware of that. We have not forgotten that at any stage of the proceedings.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is now in a position to announce the name of the successor to, the Earl of Reading as His Majesty's Ambassador to the United States of America?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the importance, particularly at the present moment, of the proper and effective representation of the country at Washington, he can make any announcement as to the immediate appointment of a successor to Earl Reading as British Ambassador?

I regret that I am unable to add anything to the reply made to a similar question of the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardine and Western on the 7th instant.

Will the hon. Gentleman convey to the Prime Minister in Paris the universal feeling of this House that this appointment should be filled up without further delay?

I will do so.

I give notice I will raise this question on the Foreign Office Vote to-morrow.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, with reference to a statement recently made on behalf of the Foreign Office that Spitsbergen was a no-man's land, whether he is aware that Henry Hudson raised the British flag on Spitsbergen in 1607 and it was formally annexed to Great Britain as King James his New Land in 1614; whether the British sovereignty has ever been abrogated; and, if not, whether it is intended to maintain that sovereignty in the interests of the present or future settlers?

I am aware that Henry Hudson visited the island in 1607; I have, however, no evidence that he raised the British flag there. It appears that the British claim was intermittently acknowledged by the Dutch interests concerned, but there is no evidence that it was ever formally recognised by the Dutch Government. Even if British sovereignty at that time were proved, it would be difficult now to base a claim on it as occupation ceased for more than two centuries. Apart from this, all the Powers interested, including Great Britain, recognised at the Spitsbergan Conference in 1914 that the island was a terra nullius.

Having been a party to the decision of the Conference of 1914, His Majesty's Government cannot take independent action, and the whole question of Spitsbergen is one for international arrangement.

In view of the fact that there is a good deal of coal there cannot this matter be referred to the Coal Commission?

What right had the British representative at the Conference to agree that Spitsbergen was a no-man's land?

The hon. and gallant Member must allow me to make some research before answering that.

Is it a proper thing for a Foreign Office representative to give away the interests, of this country gratuitously?

:Is it likely that this question will be considered by England with the Allies with the view of re-establishing possible British rights which have been abandoned?

:I had hoped that the question would be considered by the Paris Conference, and I am not yet without hope that that may be done. It must be considered in conjunction with our Allies.

What other powers are claiming?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any further progress has been made in the negotiations with the Government of Venezuela for the removal of the 30 per cent. surtax on British goods upon importation into that country; and whether he will say how the matter stands?

The Venezuelan Government have recently expressed their readiness to enter into negotiations with His Majesty's Government for the conclusion of a new commercial treaty, and His Majesty's Chargé ďAffaires at Caracas has been instructed to inform them that His Majesty's Government will be prepared to do so provided that the Venezuelan Government will, on their part, agree to abrogate the surtax of 30 per cent. imposed on imports into Venezuela from the West Indies and British Guiana.

If this country adopts Imperial Preference, how can we complain of foreigners putting on a surtax?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Governors of the various Crown Colonies and Protectorates have received instructions to consider and report upon the question of increasing, by way of war bonus or otherwise, the scales of salaries paid to Colonial Civil servants so as to make these more commensurate with the present high cost of living and heavy taxation; and, if not, whether he will consider the desirability of issuing such instructions?

War bonus schemes designed to meet local conditions, which, of course, vary in different places, have been adopted in practically all the Colonies and Protectorates, and are reviewed by the Governments concerned from time to time.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction existing amongst the officials of the Colonial Civil Services at the present system of confidential reports, under which an unfavourable or adverse report by the Governor to the Colonial Office is not communicated to the official concerned; and whether he will take steps to alter that system and bring it into line with the Army procedure, which makes it incumbent upon a commanding officer to bring, before transmission, any unfavourable or adverse confidential report to the notice of the officer concerned?

I am not aware that any general dissatisfaction is felt in connection with the present system of confidential reports on officers of the Colonial Civil service. The question whether the system should be altered as suggested by my hon. Friend has been repeatedly considered by successive Secretaries of State, who have decided against the proposal, and the Secretary of State agrees with them that the disadvantages of the proposed change would outweigh its advantages.

Can the hon. Gentleman give any reason why successive Secretaries of State have treated these officers in a disadvantageous way?

I shall be glad to discuss the question with my hon. Friend. It is generally connected with the efficiency of the service.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to a cable in the Press of 8th May stating that German traders in Rabaul are cancelling their freight contracts with Australian shipping companies with the intention of diverting trade to Hamburg through Japanese and Dutch vessels; and, if so, what action the Government proposes taking in the matter?

I have seen the cable referred to. The question of action is primarily one for the consideration of the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia which is administering German New Guinea.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether a considerable number of public school boys, who voluntarily joined the Artists Rifles (Officers' Training Corps) in 1918 with a view to obtaining commissions, were compulsorily and permanently transferred, when their course of training was almost completed to the 5th Battalion King's Royal Rifle Corps as riflemen instead of passing into an Officers' Cadet Battalion; whether Colonial members of the same Officers' Training Corps were sent to No. 11 Officers' Cadet Battalion, Pirbright, given commissions, and then demobilised; and whether some compensation will be made to these public school boys for the inequality of treatment and the disadvantages they have suffered?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given yesterday to similar questions asked by my hon. and gallant Friends the Members for Epping and Finchley. In this reply it was explained that members of the Inns of Court Officers' Training Corps were ordinary enlisted soldiers and as such were liable for service in the Army unless they could be demobilised under the Regulations in force. The Colonial members were under an agreement as to repatriation under a scheme made with the various Governments. It was for this reason and for the better organisation of repatriation that these members were collected and placed at the Officers' Cadet Battalion mentioned.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether Private E. S. Storror, No. 16743, 9th Section, 11th Platoon, 2nd Battalion Gloucester Regiment, Mesopotamia Expeditionary Force, joined the Army on 5th February, 1915, after serving in France from November, 1915, to March, 1916, was sent to Salonika in 1916, and after being constantly in the doctor's hands and with no home leave for two and a half years has been sent to Tiflis, in Russia; and has this treatment of a volunteer who is legally entitled to be discharged his approval?

As I have already stated, it has been necessary to include in the Army of Occupation in the Caucasus some troops from Salonika who are eligible for demobilisation, but I can assure my hon. Friend that every effort is being made to release all demobilisable men at the earliest possible moment. As regards the medical fitness of a soldier, this is a matter for the local military medical authorities and I have no reason to suppose that any men who are not medically fit for service are being retained. I am, however, having inquiry made regarding Private Storror, and will write to my hon. Friend later.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, with regard to Sapper A. W. Hendy, No. W.R. 554331, Royal Engineers, Post Directorate, Marghil or Tancomat, Mesopotamia, having lost a father and sister, and having a widowed mother and two children to support, he expressed the hope that it would be possible to arrange for Sapper Hendy's transfer to a home establishment and to then consider his discharge on compassionate grounds; is he aware that neither Sapper Hendy or his mother have yet heard anything of his transfer; and what steps has he actually taken?

A cable was sent to Baghdad on the 8th April asking for Sapper Hendy to be transferred to a home establishment at once and for the date of his departure to be telegraphed. No reply has yet been received and a reminder has been sent.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is prepared to consider the demobilisation, as a special case, of Gunner F. Woodgate, No. 21640, 115th Heavy Battery, Royal Garrison Artillery, France, who was recalled to the Colours on 7th August, 1914, went to France 14th August, 1914, became time-expired in October, 1917, has pre-war employment to return to, and has been applied for by his employer, but whose release has been refused by his commanding officer on the ground that his battery is below cadre strength?

Gunner Woodgate is not registered by the War Office either as pivotal or for special release. If his term of Colour service has been completed he is eligible for demobilisation, and will be released as soon as circumstances permit.

Seeing that this man rejoined the Colours in August, 1914, is he not now entitled to demobilisation?

I must presume without further knowledge that the man is filling some post of importance in connection with demobilisation.

Is a man who joined on 7th August, 1914, to be retained while hundreds of thousands who joined at a later date are being released?

I am afraid that the longer their service the more indispensable many of them become.

asked the Secretary for War whether he is aware that Gunner H. Goldsmith, No. 906170, C Battery, 337th Brigade, Royal Field Artillery, 18th Indian Division, Mesopotamia, has been refused release on compassionate grounds, although his parents, who are getting on in years, have lost two sons in the War, and this man, who was helping to contribute towards their support, is their only surviving son; and whether he can see his way to reconsider the decision in this case?

Careful consideration has been given to this case, but I regret that the compassionate grounds put forward by my hon. Friend do not fall within any of the categories prescribed in the instructions recently issued governing releases on compassionate grounds. If Gunner Goldsmith is eligible for release under current instructions he will be released as soon as the exigencies of the Service permit.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he can state for what reason men in the Non-Combatant Corps at Hilsea hutments, Cosham, Hants, are not demobilised; and what work of value they are now doing?

If the men referred to by my hon. Friend are eligible for demobilisation under current instructions they will be released as soon as circumstances permit, unless they are temporarily required for the military machinery of demobilisation, when they will be released as soon as their services can be spared or they can be replaced.

Will a non-combatant soldier who enlisted after the 1st January, 1916, be held for another year?

The same Regulations apply to non-combatants as to combatants,

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Territorial formation called the 271st London Divisional Engineers (Signals) was reduced to cadre strength some time back and the remaining men, most of whom joined in, 1914, were informed that they would very shortly be demobilised; and when he expects that the demobilisation will be effected?

I regret that it is not possible to identify the unit which my hon. Friend has in mind. If he will verify the particulars given or furnish some additional information, I shall be happy to have further inquiry made. In any case, all men who are eligible for demobilisation are being released as rapidly as the exigencies of the Service permit.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether a number of men of the Inland Water Transport, homeward bound for demobilisation after nearly three years' service in Mesopotamia, have been detained at Karachi for service in India; and, if so, for what service they are required, in view of the fact that they have no military qualifications?

I have no information as to any Inland Water Transport personnel, homeward bound for demobilisation, being detained at Karachi, but it is possible that they have been held up there temporarily in consequence of the recent disturbances in India.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will have investigations made into the treatment in Gabbari Prison, Alexandria, of men who had volunteered for the Royal Army Medical Corps and refused transference to combatant units; whether he will give the dates of the death of Private N. Johnson and Private Tiller in this prison; what was the cause of their death; whether they were treated according to the regulations of the prison; and whether he will state the number of men who have died in this prison since January, 1917?

This matter is being inquired into, and I will communicate with my hon. and gallant Friend as soon as I know the result.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether soldiers who have been abroad for two or more years without leave and arrive home for demobilisation only receive the twenty-eight days' furlough on full pay and ration allowance which is given to all soldiers on demobilisation; and whether he will consider giving to such soldiers some extra allowance or furlough in lieu of the overseas leave of which they have been deprived owing to the exigencies of the service in distant theatres of war?

Careful consideration has been given to the question of the granting of additional furlough to soldiers who have been abroad for two or more years without home leave but I regret that under present circumstances I do not see my way to grant such additional furlough in these cases. I would point out to my hon. and gallant Friend that a number of the men referred to have already received overseas leave.

:Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that holidays or leave on full pay are part of the emolument of a soldier and that if the man gets no holiday the Government profits by it?

The conditions under which leave may be granted have been very carefully gone into.

But this is a question of money. Cannot some recompense be given to men who do not get a holiday?

If cases are submitted they are considered.

Did the hon. Gentleman not promise to consider this matter again?

My reply was given after the final reconsideration of the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for War if demobilised soldiers are not allowed to work at Tallaght Aerodrome, close to Dublin, unless they join the Transport Workers' Union or one of its branches, and if that body charges demobilised soldiers 10s. 6d. as fee because they have served, the ordinary fee being 2s. 6d.?

Difficulties have arisen at the aerodrome through the refusal of union men to work with non-union, but I am informed that no pressure is brought to bear on the latter to join the Transport Workers' Union, if they prefer to join some other recognised union. I am further informed that no distinction is made as regards fees for admisson or re-admission to the Transport Workers' Union between ex-soldiers and other men.

Were sixty or seventy demobilised soldiers requested by the Transport Workers' Union to join that union, and did the chief engineer call up the men and tell them that they must join or they would be discharged?

There is always difficulty in securing the co-operation of those who are in a union and those who are not. In this case, so far as I can ascertain, the best steps have been taken.

If the discharged men would form a union of their own, would not that get over the difficulty so far as the Air Department is concerned?

If it is any recognised union all difficulties cease.

asked the Prime Minister whether Scottish tube makers are buying steel strips in large quantities from America; whether large consignments of American steel strips are coming into the Midlands at prices considerably below those of local makers; whether steel strips is to be regarded as a pivotal industry; and, if so, how this fact is to be reconciled with the declared intention of His Majesty's Government to provide adequate safeguards for the protection and expansion of key industries?

The Prime Minister has asked me to answer this question. The importation of tube strip has been licensed freely since January, and is now allowed under general licence, as manufacturers in this country are quite unable to meet the demand. No representations as to the maintenance of any restriction have been made by manufacturers to the Board of Trade.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government intends to take any action to give relief to the holders of patents who have been unable to work their patents during the period of the War, and have thus lost so much of the time for which the patent was granted?

The Prime Minister has asked me to answer this question. I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given on Thursday last to the question asked by the hon. Member for Mile End, of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received a protest from the Admiralty against the appointment of the right hon. Member for Blackburn to the Imperial Communications Board; if so, what action, if any, he has taken in the matter; whether he is aware that dissatisfaction on the same subject exists in both the Army and the Air Department; and whether, in the interest of the wireless service of the Empire, he will take steps to remedy the present unsatisfactory condition of affairs?

The answer to the first and third parts of the question is in the negative. The appointment was made because it was thought to be in the interest of the wireless service.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the feeling long existing in Scotland, which found frequent expression at the recent General Election, that the control of purely Scottish affairs should be vested in a Scottish Parliament, and moreover, having regard to the urgency of relieving the constantly growing congestion of business in the House of Commons, he will consider the desirability of setting up at an early date a Scottish Convention to advise and make recommendations as to what measure of Home Rule, consistent with the maintenance of the Union, should be granted to Scotland?

The Government cannot undertake to adopt the course suggested.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not take any steps whatever to grant Home Rule to Scotland; and is he aware that the extension of the Grand Committee system which the Government introduced has proved perfectly impossible?

I hope the last part of the hon. Member's question is not correct. The impossibility will be judged by the results of the Bills. Certainly at present the Government are not prepared to take any steps in that direction.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the sending of an army to Scotland immediately?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that many orders by home and foreign traders are at present being placed in countries outside Great Britain, and especially in the United States, by firms which in pre-war days used to deal almost exclusively with Great Britain; whether this is caused by the inability of British firms to manufacture the articles at the same cost of production as other countries; whether as a result many factories in this country are idle, or about to become idle, at a time when reconstructional work is calling for orders all over the world; and when His Majesty's Government will introduce such means for the reform of the existing economic policy of this country as will enable British manufacturers to maintain their competitive power in home and foreign markets?

I am aware that to some extent a diversion of trade of the nature indicated has taken place, but I regret that as regards the last part of the question I can add nothing to the reply which I gave to a supplementary question, by my hon. Friend the Member for Chippenham on Monday last.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether certain persons of American nationality have been given passports from Paris to Ireland for the purpose of an unofficial political mission; whether he is aware that they have declared the object of this mission to be to confer with President de Valera upon the question of securing international recognition of the Irish Republic at the Peace Conference; whether this was known to be their object by the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when the passports were issued; whether these men are accredited by the American Government; if not, what are their cre- dentials and whom do they represent; whether it is the intention of the Prime Minister to receve these American gentlemen on their return to Paris; and, if so, whether he has considered the effect likely to be produced in Ireland by his encouragement of foreign interference in British affairs and by his patronage of revolutionary propagandists?

The object of this visit, as it was understood by the Prime Minister, was simply to enable these visitors to see for themselves the conditions in Ireland. The persons referred to are not representatives of the American Government, and it is not the intention of the Prime Minister to receive them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is very widely reported and believed in Ireland that the Prime Minister favours the granting the demand for an Irish Republic, and, if there is no truth in it, why has that report remained uncontradicted?

No, I was not aware of that. If there is such a belief, it is an indication that all Irishmen are not of a, practical nature. As regards denying, it would be absurd to deny it, for, on the face of it, it is impossible.

Is it a fact that the Prime Minister himself requested these gentlemen to call on him and himself issued their passports?

I think the first part of the question is not correct. As regards the Prime Minister seeing them, I discussed this with him, and I am glad to have an opportunity of saying he thought it would be rather an advantage if American citizens interested in Ireland should be received by him, when he would have an opportunity of putting the British case and having it widely reported in America, where, I am sorry to say, it is not sufficiently understood.

Why, having issued that invitation, has he now withdrawn it?

I think the reason must be very obvious. He was willing to receive American citizens, but he is not willing to receive American citizens who go to Ireland and not only take part in politics, but in a rebellious movement.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, considering that the military authorities removed in March all patients and personnel from the Girls' High School and the Central Higher Grade School, Aberdeen, which had hitherto been used as hospitals, in order to give the school board possession of these buildings, and that notwithstanding up to date the board has been refused entry to either of these buildings as surplus equipment has been left in them, he will give immediate orders for the removal of this equipment and the release of the buildings, as the schools are most urgently required in the educational interests of the city?

I understand that it has been found impossible to remove the surplus equipment referred to by my hon. Friend to other War Department buildings in Aberdeen pending sale by auction. I am informed that the disposal of the equipment is now in the hands of auctioneers, who will proceed with the sale without any avoidable delay, and the premises will then be completely evacuated.

asked the Secretary of State for War if notice was published in daily routine orders at No. 5 Camp, Northern Command Labour Centre, Ripon, to the effect that any man who had previously been on active service overseas would not be placed in Labour Corps' drafts for further service overseas; whether such order has been cancelled and when; and whether men who have seen service overseas are being put on draft for overseas again?

I am having inquiries made, and will let my hon. Friend know the result as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, before they leave these shores, arrangements may be made for visits to other great centres of the British Isles of representative troops of each of His Majesty's Dominions upon the lines of the recent successful march through London?

I sympathise with the desire expressed in my hon. Friend's question, but I am afraid I can hold out no hope of its being possible to arrange for visits of this kind to other centres as he suggests.

Cannot the troops already in camp in this country be used for this purpose to meet the wishes of a large section of the country?

It involves a great deal more careful organisation than that.

As arrangements have already been made by some large centres to give receptions to Canadian troops, could not the same facilities be given to Australian, New Zealand, and Newfoundland troops?

The question is one for the Governments concerned, and it must largely rest with them.

asked the Secretary of State for War if Hyde Park and the West End have already had the privilege of witnessing several triumphal marches; is he aware that the route arranged for the triumphal march of the London regiments does not give the people residing in the East End the opportunity of showing their appreciation of their citizen soldiers; and will he arrange that units will be paraded in Victoria Park and march to the City and the Tower of London?

In the settlement of the route for the proposed triumphal march of London regiments, the claims of the East End have not been overlooked. At the same time, as was pointed out to my hon. and gallant Friend in answer to his question of the 25th March, the length of the route and other matters have to be taken into consideration. Troops are being drawn from all parts of London, and the concentration, area decided upon is considered the most suitable that could be chosen in the interest of the troops as well as of other military requirements.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will have inquiry made into the case of Private Henry Jones, No. 341012, Labour Corps, of 9, Lily Road, Liverpool; whether this man while serving, as No. 2701, in the East Lanes Territorial Force, Royal Field Artillery, was taken prisoner, being exchanged, invalided from Germany in October, 1918, and discharged from King George's Hospital on the 11th November; whether he was told at that time that he would hear from the proper authorities regarding his discharge from the Army; whether during the past six months he has been making repeated efforts to obtain instructions until the present time, when he was suddenly in formed that the civil police would be notified if he did not return forthwith; whether he has now returned and what is his position; and whether he will lose his gratuity in consequence?

Inquiries will be made in this case, and I will inform my hon. and gallant Friend of the result as early as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the position of persons who have evaded military service; and whether all proceedings against them are still suspended as stated in the House of Commons on 11th November, 1918?

I understand that the instructions of the 11th November last, which were issued by the Ministry of National Service, are still in force.

asked the Secretary of State for War, in view of the misapprehension that might be caused by a single recent case as to the fighting spirit of the officers, whether he will state the number of officers who have volunteered or been accepted for service in North Russia as privates or non-commissioned officers?

So far as my information goes, thirty-seven demobilised officers have volunteered and been accepted for service in the ranks for the North Russia Relief Force.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he can now say if the rates of commutation of pension for warrant officers, non-commissioned officers, and men have been revised so as to bring them into line with the rates for officers?

No, Sir, I am afraid not. The revision of an actuarial life table which is here involved, is a very lengthy and laborious work.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is in a position to publish the Report on the Consular Service, and to state the intentions of the Government with regard to it?

I would ask my hon. Friend to postpone this question.

May we have the Report of the Inter-Departmental Committee before the discussion comes on in the House?

Yes; I will try to arrange for that, but I do not like to lay a Paper before the House until it has been considered by the Cabinet.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he has been made aware of the contents of the Report of the Forestry Sub-Committee of the Reconstruction Committee, printed in 1918; whether prior to the War this country was dependent on foreign countries for nearly two-thirds of its timber supply; whether the proportion of timber required for national use which was derived from sources within the Empire had been falling off steadily for fourteen years before the War; and whether, as a result, he will take steps to encourage and promote forestry in the Empire to reduce in the future of our present dependency on foreign countries for the supply of timber?

Yes, Sir, my attention has been called to the report to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers, and I am well aware of the dependence of this country on foreign supplies of timber before the War. The proposals which are now under consideration by the Government include the promotion of forestry within the Empire, with the view of meeting the conditions to which the question draws attention.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether the muzzling could at once be made general instead of local, in view of the great hardship imposed upon dog owners by not being able at present to move their dogs from one county to another?

The subject to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers has received the careful attention of the Board, and they do not feel justified at the present moment in issuing a general muzzling Order. I might add that even if universal muzzling were decided upon, it would not be possible to allow free movement of dogs from infected areas.

asked the First Commissioner of Works if he is housing in India House staffs from the Hotel Cecil, and as a result the Shell Marketing Company and Sir Isaac Pitman, Limited, are both forced to occupy temporary quarters, and that this arrangement will be a serious charge on the taxpayer and detrimental to both of the British firms interested; and whether, in view of these facts, he will arrange to house the Hotel Cecil staffs in hutments, and so save money to the taxpayer, and give the two firms mentioned the quarters to which they are legally entitled?

As I informed the hon. Member in reply to a previous question, the Air Ministry staff from the Hotel Cecil are shortly to be removed to India, Canada, and Empire Houses. This will necessitate the Shell Marketing Company remaining for some further period in their present temporary premises, and Messrs. Sir Isaac Pitman and Son, Limited, will be delayed in obtaining possession of these premises, which it is understood they have acquired. This is the most economical arrangement that can be made for the housing of the Air Ministry in order to release the Hotel Cecil. The suggestion made by the hon. Member in the last part of his question is impracticable.

Does the right hon. Gentleman feel that hotels should be released before business premises?

I understand that is the general desire of the business community.

Is every effort being made to release not only hotels but business premises in general?

Every effort is being made to release all possible accommodation.

asked the First Commissioner of Works which hotels are likely to be released before the end of June; and if he is aware that the lack of hotel accommodation in London is generally prejudicial to the interests of the country?

I expect to be able to release the Hotel Cecil from Government occupation before the end of June. I hope it will be possible to put into effect various schemes which I have in hand by which most of the hotels in Government occupation will be vacated. I fully appreciate the great inconvenience caused by the shortage of hotel accommodation.

Will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that if accommodation is curtailed the reduction of staffs will automatically take place?

I am afraid I am responsible for providing accommodation for staffs, and not for reducing it.

asked the First Commissioner of Works if he is aware of the considerable reduction in the staff at the Windsor Hotel; and if he has made any arrangements to relinquish this hotel?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and steps are now being taken to utilise the surplus accommodation. The answer to the last part is in the negative.

For what purposes will this accommodation be used?

To transfer other staffs.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me what other staffs?

If the hon. Gentleman will give me notice I shall be glad to do so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Government will support any combination of insurance companies or other responsible groups in any effort they may make for reinsurance work by British-owned companies; and if legislation is possible, with a view to prevent enemy-owned companies from again making large annual sums out of reinsurance work connected with British reinsurance companies?

Any representations made to the Board of Trade by a combination of insurance companies or other responsible groups regarding reinsurance work by British-owned companies shall receive careful consideration.

The question of restricting reinsurance business with enemy-owned companies is part of the general question of our future commercial relations with the present enemy countries, in regard to which I am not in a position to make a statement.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has as yet made any estimate as to the amount of new rolling stock requisite properly to fit out the railways of the country; whether the ordering of new rolling stock is being left to the individual railway companies; or whether any new official policy of standardisation is being introduced?

The points raised by the hon. Gentleman are not being overlooked, but I am not in a position at present to give him specific information, except that the ordering of new rolling stock is still left to the railway companies.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the fact that there has been no declared policy in relation to this matter by the Government is preventing the railway companies from entering upon re-equipping the railways and is responsible for the congestion of traffic which exists to-day?

No, I am not aware of that.

Are railway companies ordering new rolling stock?

There is a great deal of rolling stock at present on order and being manufactured.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Metropolitan Railway manager, in a Committee-room, on Monday last, stated that they were not ordering new rolling stock and were not going to until the Government declared its policy as to railways?

I am aware he stated that. I received, a day beforehand, a request for a statement of policy which was obviously quite impossible.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what Government. Department is actually now in charge of the national shipbuilding yards at Chepstow, Beachley, and Portbury and what is to be the ultimate fate of these yards?