asked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to negotiate with the Soviet Government on the basis of the terms brought back by the hon. Member for East Leyton?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the general uncertainty in the public mind as to the nature of British policy with regard to Russia, he will give an early day for a further discussion of the subject in this House?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the apparent discrepancy in the statements of our policy towards Russia as announced in this House on the 5th instant and at the Guildhall on the 8th instant, he will state whether the policy of the Government has been modified since the Debate on the 5th instant; and, if so, what fact, or facts, in connection with the Russian situation came to the knowledge of the Government in the interim?

asked the Prime Minister, in view of the published official Reports on Bolshevism in Russia, as well as the evidence of reliable witnesses, regarding the moral turpitude of the Bolshevik Government and of its connivance in the conspiracies against Aliied and Neutral Governments in order to set up Soviet rule, will he state what guarantee he proposes to obtain, and will be able to enforce, that any agreement or treaty such Bolshevik Government may sign will be loyally carried out?

asked the Prime Minister whether any person has on his behalf or with his knowledge interviewed representatives of the Bolshevists for the purpose of ascertaining whether and upon what terms negotiations for peace might be opened?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the situation in the Ukraine where British munitions and details are being employed against the Ukranian people by General Denikin; whether this state of affairs has his sanction; and what steps he proposes to take to cause a cessation of these hostilities, which inevitably result in the massacre of unoffending people?

asked (1) the Prime Minister what is the nature of the civil administration in the territories under the control of General Denikin; whether there is at present any commerce between this country and those territories; if not. what steps the Government propose to take to open up such commerce;

(2) Whether he can give the House any information as to the present position of Admiral Koltchak and the administrative and military causes of his retirement?

asked (1) whether any undertaking is given in return for assistance to Russian Armies as to the use to which such assistance will be put;

(2) whether the decision to bring to an end assistance in personnel and material to the anti-Bolshevik Armies applies to naval as well as military assistance?

asked the Prime Minister whether he intends to propose a conference with the Russian Soviet Government with a view to establishing peace in Eastern Europe; and, if not, whether His Majesty's Government will consider favourably any similar proposal from a neutral Government?

asked the Prime Minister whether the reference by him in his speech at the Guildhall on the 8th November to a renewal of the attempt to reach a settlement in Russia indicates a possibility of the Allies entering into negotiations with the present Soviet leaders, or if what is contemplated is an effort to restore constitutional Government in Russia through the leaders there who are now trying to restore popular democratic control?

I propose, with the permission of the House, to answer all these questions together.

On a point of Order. The Prime Minister is coming here to answer questions on one day each week. Is he entitled, in the usual phraseology "with the permission of the House" to answer questions in bulk, or is he entitled to answer each Member's question as it arises?

If one reply covers them all, what is the use of repeating it?

On that point is not the Member who puts the question a much better judge as to whether the reply covers the question which he has put and which the Prime Minister has answered in the bulk?

Let us have the answer first.

I am answering all the questions together. It is impossible to answer them separately because they run into each other, and some of them cover exactly the same ground. As to the question in regard to the so-called peace advances from the Soviet Republic, the Allied Governments have always declined to take any action on communications which purported to come from the Governments of hostile countries through irresponsible agencies. They have acted only on communications coming officially and directly from such Governments. That has been the practice of the Allies during the War, and events have fully justified it. The Government do not think it advisable to depart from that practice now.

In reply to the question asked by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Barnstaple (Captain Tudor-Rees). I wish to state categorically that no person has at any time on my behalf or with my knowledge interviewed representatives of the Bolsheviks for the purpose of ascertaining whether, and upon what terms negotiations for peace might be opened.

I have never agreed with what I may call the "Northcliffe policy" explained by its author earlier this year, that the world powers should sink their pride for a moment and get into communication with the Bolsheviks, and that we should employ an avowed English Bolshevik sympathiser for that purpose. In my judgment that certainly is not the method by which peace can be secured in Russia.

In reply to the question put by my Noble Friend the Member for Hitchin (Lord R. Cecil), first of all, as to the present position of Admiral Koltchak and the administrative and military causes of his retirement. The position in Western Siberia is undoubtedly grave. The Bolshevik forces are marching rapidly on Omsk, but the Koltchak Armies have not evacuated that town, and its fate will be decided by the battles that are to be fought in the course of the next few days in front of the city. As to the causes of the retirement, they are rather too complicated to give in answer to a question. But it illustrates the aspect of the Russian Civil War which I ventured to emphasise on Saturday—its abnormally swaying character. Early in the year Admiral Koltchak's Army had crossed the Urals and advanced beyond Perm, and a junction with General Denikin in the south and the Archangel forces in the north was regarded as imminent, whilst an advance to Moscow before the winter seemed quite within the limits of practibility. At that time General Denikin was only just holding his own in a limited territory on the eastern shores of the Black Sea. Now Admiral Koltchak has retreated 660 miles, and General Denikin has swept the Bolshevik Armies from a vast and fertile region covering thousands of square miles. Within the last few weeks he has lost some ground, but he still holds by far the greater portion of the recovered territory.

We are far too apt to examine the fight in Russia in the light of our experience of the great struggle in France. There an Army of the size of General Denikin's or of that of his Bolshevik foes would hold a front of a little over fifty miles with well-organised communications behind. Here, such an Army has to hold a front of 1,300 miles, with a vast country behind thoroughly disorganised, often overrun by marauding bands, who temporarily capture and loot great cities in the recovered territories. The vast majority of the population feel no ardent loyalty for either side, and very quickly change their allegiance. There is the further complication of provincial or national movements like Petlura's. The result is that General Denikin has not so far been able to establish administrative control over the conquered territories. That makes trade in this very important region for the supply of food and raw material for the present almost impracticable. I might also add that the absorption of the railway equipment in the supply of the Armies adds to the difficulty.

It is the policy of the Government to open up trade and commerce as much as possible with South Russia, in the interest not only of Russia, but of the world. We have made special efforts in that direction during the last few months, and the hon. Member for the Camlachie Division of Glasgow (Mr. MacKinder)—a well-known and able Member of this House—has been appointed to go on a special mission to South Russia with the object of, amongst other things, investigating what can be done in these respects, and of generally advising the Government on the position.

As regards general, policy, the Government have repeatedly stated this in the House. I stated it in some detail in the month of April. More recently it has been explained to the House of Commons by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War and by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his written and financial statements. From the policy thus enun- ciated the Government have no intention of departing. As has been explained, between the date of the Armistice and the end of October, in cash and in kind, the value of nearly £100,000,000 has been spent or sanctioned by the United Kingdom on account of assistance sent to Russia. A substantial part of this sum has been, or will be, added to the permanent indebtedness of this country. The Government has repeatedly made it clear to the House of Commons that, with the crushing financial burden already cast upon it by the Great War, it cannot contemplate the assumption of new obligations under this head. As the Chancellor of the Exchequer explained in the White Paper and in his speech, there is no provision made for such additional expenditure on Russia. If an addition is to be made to the national obligations under this head, it will be the responsibility of the House of Commons to determine the additional taxation that shall be imposed for the purpose.

On the other hand, the Government have an overwhelming sense of the importance of bringing peace to Russia. Not only is Russia a source of unrest and disturbance to all its neighbours, with all the infinite possibilities for mischief which lurk in such a condition over so vast an area, but a settlement of the Russian problem is essential to the reconstruction of the world. Russia is one of the great resources for the supply of food and raw material. The present condition of Russia is one of the contributing causes to the prevailing high prices, and high prices are undoubtedly in all lands the most dangerous form of Bolshevik propaganda. There are also many indications that German, reactionaries are using the present strike in Russia to strengthen their influence with all the struggling parties alike in that country, and I have no doubt that if the struggle continue the military party in Germany will secure a great hold in Russia through the medium of the very numerous bodies of demobilised officers and non-commissioned officers out of work, who will find ready employment in that country if the war proceed. From the humanitarian point of view it is no less important in the opinion of the Government that civil war, which is not only destroying the economic life in Russia and thus impoverishing the world, but is slowly decimating its inert and helpless population, should be brought to an end as soon as possible.

That is why the Government have always been ready to take any reasonable opportunity which may present itself to effect a settlement of the Russian question on conditions which will really bring peace and good order and constitutional government to Russia, on terms that are acceptable to the Russian people themselves. Their views on this subject were embodied in the Allied letter to Admiral Koltchak. It is proposed to hold, I hope at early date, an International Conference at which Ministers of the Allied and Associated Powers will consider the various grave and outstanding problems which the Peace Conference has so far been unable to settle for one reason or another. Russia will be amongst these problems. If the House of Commons wishes to have a discussion of the Russian question before the assembly of this Conference, the Government will, of course, be prepared to give the necessary facilities. But I would respectfully suggest before the demand be made that Members should bear in mind that in a difficult and delicate matter of this kind it is not always the best plan to have a public debate in which the Government may be forced in support of its views to give publicity to information on matters connected with the position in Russia—information which has influenced their judgment on policy. The House, of course, may rest assured that the Government will inaugurate no new policy and commit the country to no fresh action without giving the House the fullest opportunity of discussing it.

May I have an answer to my question as to whether it is intended to keep on the form of blockade this winter in view of the suffering it will cause to innocent children at Petrograd?

I am sure the right hon. Gentleman—

I understand that the hon. and gallant Gentleman is entitled to put a question but not to make a statement.

My question—[No. 47, relating to local housing schemes]—has been associated with the Russian question, and, though my name is Malone, I am not the Russian Malone.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman's question was dealt with on a previous occasion. It was not dealt with by the Prime Minister.

While I agree that the Prime Minister must take opportunities which are offered to him of announcing the Russian policy, I should like your ruling, Sir, on this. If the Prime Minister is going to come down or. Thursdays to answer questions, is he entitled to use that opportunity for making a long statement of policy when the questions which are put on the Order Paper are questions of fact on which in ordinary circumstances hon. Members are entitled to ask supplementary questions if the facts are not elucidated, and in that case is the fact of the Prime Minister coming down to answer questions of any good to us on Thursdays?

It is very obvious that the House wanted the statement. If the hon. Member looks at the number of questions, and if the House wanted the statement the House has had it. We have only five minutes more for all the rest of the questions.

Is it not the case that the first hour of Parliamentary time is devoted to questions and that the Prime Minister has an opportunity—

The hon. Member is abusing his right and depriving all other hon. Members of the opportunity of putting-questions.

My question was supposed to be answered with the rest, but I do not think it was dealt with. I wanted to know whether the Prime Minister would do anything to stop the civil war between Petlura and Denikin, which is being waged on the side of Denikin with British munitions against a people rightly struggling to be free. Will he stop this by-sending out instructions?

With respect to the question by the hon. and gallant Member (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy), there is a direct question later on which is to be answered by the First Lord of the Admiralty. Therefore I did not answer that question. In regard to the question by the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Wedgwood), I thought I gave a comprehensive account of the difficulties in the Ukraine, where it is in a complete state of disorganisation, where there are a good many roving bands.

Speech!

I am trying to answer the question. Therefore, when those are the facts, you cannot say to General Denikin, "We have supplied you with munitions to hold your own, and if you are attacked by Petlura you must not use the guns with which we have supplied you." Here may I point out to the hon. Member (Mr. Hogge) that the first question I answered is the question which he has on the Paper; and if he looks at it he will find that it is a categorical answer.

No; it is not possible to send a political mission to that division of Denikin's army, which is engaged not in fighting the Bolsheviks but in fighting these other people. Cannot he not take steps to protect the Ukraine from the Donikin troops, and is the right hon. Gentleman aware—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech!"]

The hon. Member is making a speech.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many Notes have been addressed to the German Government by the Supreme Allied Council on the subject of German troops in the Baltic provinces of Russia; what steps have been taken to enforce the Allied demands for their withdrawal; and whether a blockade of the German coast was declared in connection with this matter; whether this blockade has been raised; and is it intended to carry on a form of blockade of Soviet Russia without German co-operation and moral support?

Since the beginning of June this year six Notes have been addressed to the German Government by the Supreme Council, with reference to German troops in the Baltic States.

The pressure which is being brought on the German Government in this connection is of two kinds. In the first place, the discussion of arrangements for the supply of food-stuffs to Germany has been suspended, and permission is being refused for financial transactions for that purpose. In the second place, all free sailings of German ships in the Baltic have been suspended. These naval measures do not apply to German fisheries and coastal trade. No blockade of the German coasts has been declared, or is being enforced.

As regards the last part of the question, the Supreme Council have not yet had before them the question whether the measures which are being taken to prevent trade with Soviet Russia should be made conditional on German co-operation or support.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these German troops with their loyal Russian collaborateurs have already killed nine British sailors by gunfire, and is more rigid action to insist on their withdrawal in. contemplation?

That question scarcely arises out of this question. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman has any special information I should be glad to receive it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the formation of a United States of America Legion for service in Lithuania; and whether this legion is intended to operate against the Poles, the Soviet Russian troops, the Tsarist Russian troops, the Germans, the British Military Mission, or the native Lithuanians?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative The second part of the question does not, therefore, arise.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any negotiations have been or are being carried on and agreements arrived at by His Majesty's Government with the Belgian Government for the adequate preservation of Ypres as a memorial of British valour and sacrifice in the War: whether its boundaries for this purpose will be delimited clearly and protected from wanton damage by tourists; under whose care the ruins will be; and who will be responsible for their necessary repairs?

Yes, Sir; this question has been entrusted to a War Office Committee, under the chairmanship of the Adjutant-General, which is in touch with the appropriate Belgian authorities on the spot. The remaining points raised by the right hon. Gentleman will, I am sure, be carefully considered by this Committee, and I will draw their attention to them.

asked the Pensions Minister whether he has received protests against the present method, which involves payment by widows and dependants of ex-Service men in procuring necessary death certificates; and, if so, what action he proposes to take?

I am not aware of any protests such as that referred to by the hon. Member. Occasionally certificates are forwarded by widows, but in the usual course of procedure they are obtained by the Pension Issue Office from the local registrars and are paid for out of public funds.

asked the Pensions Minister whether Lance-Corporal Thomas Vallance Birkett, No. P/16294, Royal Field Artillery, who served four years 101 days, and was wounded, was discharged as being no longer physically fit for war service; whether no allowance is being paid to this man, his wife, or two children; and when his case will be settled by the granting of allowances?

Lance-Corporal Birkett has been drawing pension since his discharge in December, 1918, the present rate of payment being 28s. a week. He is not eligible for allowances in respect of his wife and children, as he was married after the receipt of the wound which led to his discharge.

asked the Pensions Minister whether, when an application is made by the widow of a soldier for a grant from the King's Fund to enable her to obtain a sewing machine it is a condition, if a grant is made, that the machine has to be one of the Singer Manufacturing Company's make; and, if so, whether he will in future allow these widows to choose the make of machine that they prefer?

The answer to the first part, of this question is in the negative. I understand, however, that the trustees of the fund have frequently suggested to local committees that they should purchase Singer machines owing to the exceptionally favourable terms offered to the trustees by that company.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these most favourable terms mean that over £11 is paid for a Singer machine when they can buy one equally as good for £5 or £6?

I am not aware of that, but if the hon. Gentleman will give me any information as to where those equally good machines can be obtained, I will forward it to the trustees.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make it quite clear to the war pensions committees that they have the power to buy these as well as the Singers?

They have not the power to buy any machine at all. This is a grant from the King's Fund.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform those responsible for administering the fund that these cheaper machines can be got and that some women can work them a great deal more easily than they can work the Singer?

That is what I ask the hon. Gentleman to give me information about. I will pass on to the King's Fund any information he can give me.

asked the Pensions Minister whether he is aware that discharged soldiers suffering from mental derangement produced by wounds or shellshock are at present inmates of the pauper lunatic asylum at Rainhill, Lanca- shire; by what authority they were sent there and treated as pauper lunatics; and whether he can arrange that such men shall be transferred from the Bainhill Pauper Lunatic Asylum to suitable hospitals or homes where they will receive special treatment with a view to their recovery?

I am aware of the fact stated in the first part of the question. The men to whom the hon. Member refers are, however, not treated as pauper lunatics, but as private patients, the cost of their maintenance and of the special privileges which private patients enjoy being borne by the Ministry of Pensions.

But does my right hon. Friend realise the distress, and the humiliation that this supposed stigma of pauperism inflicts upon men and their relatives, and will he take effective measures to dispel this belief?

I hope my hon. Friend's question may help to dispel it, and I am glad to repeat that they are not treated as pauper patients at all, but they are treated as private paying patients, and they are paid for out of pension funds.

But the fact that they are sent to a pauper lunatic asylum gives the impression that they are so treated.

That is a superficial impression which I hope will be removed. It is not possible for the Ministry of Pensions to start asylums all over the country, and if we do not use those already existing, friends of the men will be deprived of visiting places near their homes.

But does my right hon. Friend realise that the object of my question is to remove this strong impression?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend.

asked the Pensions Minister (1) the number of children of widows in Poor Law institutions, and the cost of their maintenance;

(2) the number of widows and their dependent children receiving out-relief under the Poor Law, and the cost of such relief?

I regret that no figures are available as to the number of widows and their dependent children in receipt of relief at the present time, but I am proposing to obtain a return showing the number of such cases on the 1st January next.

Is the Pensions Minister not aware of the number of children in those circumstances whom the Committee in his Department looks after?

I have no information on that point, but if my hon. Friend—

I asked the right hon. Gentleman.

I am in charge of this, and if my hon. Friend will repeat the question I will do my best to dig out all the information I can.

I fail to understand why the Paymaster-General should be in charge of a question which deals with wives and children under the jurisdiction of the Pensions Ministry?

In my present capacity I represent the Ministry of Health. These questions relate to Poor Law institutions, and Poor Law institutions are under the Ministry of Health.

asked the Pensions Minister the number of children of widows in industrial and reformatory schools, and the cost of their maintenance?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. I regret that the information asked for in the first part of the question is not available. The present average cost of maintaining a child in these schools is about 18s. a week.

Is it possible to obtain the information? As they have to maintain them, they ought to know the number?

I will make inquiry.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland when the Government proposes to introduce legislation in support of the blind in Ireland?

I trust that this matter may be dealt with in the contemplated Irish Education Bill.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will state for the past year, or for any convenient period, the number of persons convicted in Ireland under the Crimes Act or under the Defence of the Realm Act, specifying the Section under which they have been convicted and the punishment inflicted for the offence?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland (1) whether he is aware that the Act prohibiting street collections without permit did not apply to Ireland as originally introduced; whether there have been any cases of bogus collections against which the Act was directed; if not, whether it was extended to Ireland as a convenient method of summarily punishing Sinn Feiners for their political opinions and preventing them from raising money for propagating those opinions;

(2) whether he will state how many persons in Ireland, in each of the last three years, have been tried by a single resident magistrate out of Petty Sessions; how many of these were men, boys, women, or girls; how many had been previously tried for the same offence and discharged; how many in each year were bound to the peace or bound to good behaviour; how many were sentenced to gaol for refusing to give bail or refusing to recognise the Court; whether this procedure was adopted in consequence of the large percentage of cases dismissed by the magistrates in Petty Sessions;

(3) whether he will state how many per sons are now in prison for political or seditious offences; how many of these were sentenced by court-martial, civil Courts, Crimes Acts Courts, or a single resident magistrate; and how many were, respectively, for speeches inciting to crime, speeches calculated to cause disaffection, being suspected of intention to commit an illegal act, drilling, possessing arms, carrying arms, street collecting, or other new offences created under the exigencies of the War?

The information asked for in these questions could not be given without a minute examination, of the circumstances of each case, and I have already stated that such minute investigations would impose so great amount of work on the already overburdened police in Ireland that I could not ask them to bear this additional burden. I have already prepared and published a list of outrages during the last three years, and, if desired, I will publish this list in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

If the right hon. Gentleman has the information from which to put his side of the case, why cannot he give the House of Commons the information as to how many people in Ireland have been locked up, or for whom warrants have been issued under the powers of the Defence of the Realm Act?

I have given the fullest possible and most unbiassed information I have. If the House still presses me to ask my overburdened police to bring these under investigation, of course we are bound to do it. But I refuse unless the House wishes me to do it.

Is not the latest achievement of the Irish Government the imprisonment of a couple of girls for selling flags on behalf of the Irish language?

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to convoy to the House that he has not got this information asked for in the question?

I said this had already imposed a great deal of work upon the police.

That is not an answer to the question put. I have asked him: Does he represent to the House that he has not got the figures which are asked for in these questions?

If any unbiassed Member of the House will look at the list to which I have referred I think he will be satisfied.

Would the right hon. Gentleman, if I specify certain sections of D.O.R.A., tell me how many convictions have taken place under them?

I will do my best if the hon. and gallant Gentleman puts a specific question. But these questions are rambling over most difficult and most minute investigations, and if there is anything in them at all it means that the overburdened police of Ireland would have to collect the information.

Have the overburdened police anything to do with the preparation of statistics?

They certainly have.

Oh, they have, have they?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he is aware that over 600 applicants could not obtain admittance this year to the Technical Institute in Belfast; whether there is any provision to enable such applicants to continue their education; and what steps the Government propose to take under the circumstances?

The Technical Instruction Committee for the County Borough of Belfast have been unable to admit all applicants to the Technical Institute this year owing to lack of accommodation. The Department of Agriculture have applied to the Treasury for funds to enable them amongst other purposes to aid technical instruction committees to provide further accommodation for the increased number of pupils seeking admission to the schools.

Where these applicants are rejected is there any provision made to enable them to continue their education?

I am speaking off-hand, but I am afraid there is not. But I will make it my duty to approach the Treasury to see whether we can get an additional grant.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland what steps, if any, he is taking to reconstruct the horse-breeding industry in Ireland?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given to his previous question on this subject on the 20th February last. The Act dealing with the licensing of stallions which will effect considerable improvement by the elimination of unsound and unsuitable sires is to come into operation on 1st January next, and arrangements for putting it into force are now almost completed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to advance financial aid towards horse-breeding in Ireland?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put a specific question down on that point.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that instructions were issued to feed the troops in Ireland on chilled beef for six days per week; and whether, owing to the congestion of traffic and to the great loss to the Irish farmers which would ensue if this order were carried into effect, he will make representation to the Secretary of State for War to have it cancelled?

I have been asked to answer this question on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the War Office. The order referred to-has already been cancelled.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland the number of murders and attempted murders of soldiers and members of the Royal Irish Constabulary and Dublin Metropolitan Police which have occurred in Ireland during the past year; and whether these outrages or the perpetrators of them have been denounced by any of the Sinn Fein leaders?

I will send my hon. and learned Friend a copy of a list giving this information up to the 11th October. I am bringing this list up to date, and if my hon. and learned Friend will put down a question next week I will give him a complete answer. With regard to the last part of the question I have seen no denunciation of these dastardly outrages by a single Sinn Fein political leader.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he thinks he has suppressed the Sinn Fein organisation, and whether he has all the Sinn Fein Members of Parliament in gaol; if so, how are they to denounce these outrages?

Would the right hon. Gentleman also tell why, if Sinn Fein has been suppressed, the crimes are still being carried on?

But Sinn Feiners could not do them!

I am glad to see that the hon. Gentleman is an advocate of Sinn Fein!

Don't be impertinent!

"Order, order!"

You are given too much to that altogether.

I cannot allow that expression, which doubtless escaped from the hon. Member. It is not Parliamentary.

May I draw your attention, Sir, to the most insolent remark made by the Chief Secretary which had nothing whatever to do with the question on the Paper—most insolent! [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw!"]

The hon. Gentleman's observation is one we are not accustomed to hear in this House. I hope he will see his way to withdraw it.

May I ask you whether, if an abusive epithet were applied by a Minister of the Crown to a Member, you would call that Minister to order?

If the word "impertinent" were employed?

No, Sir; but the Chief Secretary is getting into a habit of replying that is characteristic of him. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, oh!"] He interjected this observation: "I am glad to see that the hon. Member is an advocate of Sinn Fein." I ask you whether that does not call for rebuke?

I do not think there is anything unparliamentary in that expression. What I take exception to is the hon. Member's remark that the statement of the Irish Secretary was an impertient one. That I shall always take exception to.

Withdraw!

On a point of Order. May I respectfully call your attention to the fact that in immediate contiguity to the suggestion that Sinn Feiners are responsible for many of the acts of violence and assassination in Ireland, the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary followed by the statement that my hon. Friend was practically a Sinn Feiner, thereby suggesting—[HON, MEMBERS: "Oh, oh!"]—that my hon. Friend was in some way or another, near or remote, associated with a body which the right hon. Gentleman charged with fomenting assassination. I am sure that observation did not reach you at the moment, or catch your attention, or—if I may respectfully say so—you would have called the Minister to order.

Speech, speech!

Practise a little fair play!

The right hon. Gentleman, if I may respectfully put it to you, was making a suggestion which was most offensive and most uncalled for.

I cannot say as to that. There are a number of Sinn Feiners amongst the Members of this House. Whether hon. Members act with them or not is a matter for everyone's own judgment. I do not take any exception to that; it is not my business. What I take exception to is that an hon. Member should say that an observation made by a Minister of the Crown is an impertinent one. That is not a Parliamentary expression, and I ask the hon. Member to withdraw it.

I think you know perfectly well, Mr. Speaker, without any assurance from me, that there is no person in this House who has a higher respect for you, or is more anxious to bow to your ruling. In view, however, of the habitually offensive character of the interjections of the Chief Secretary for Ireland— [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, oh!"]—in this House, I very much regret that I cannot see my way to withdraw it.

Under these circumstances, I must ask the hon. Member to withdraw from the House.

I am quite prepared to do so, Mr. Speaker. I am convinced that before many months have passed the whole House will have the same opinion, of the Chief Secretary as I have to-day.

It is not a question of the Chief Secretary. It is a question of whether or not the hon. Member will withdraw a statement which I say is un-parliamentary.

I should have withdrawn it with reference to anybody in the House except the Chief Secretary.

thereupon, pursuant to Standing Order No. 20 relating to disorderly conduct, ordered Mr. MacVeagh to withdraw immediately from the House during the remainder of this day's Sitting.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many of the Government Departments in Dublin have Whitley Councils in existence; and in how many Departments have no meetings of Whitley Councils been held?

Councils are in existence or in immediate course of establishment in eleven Departments in Dublin. Owing to difficulties as to representation only two of the councils have held a meeting, but it is hoped that most of the Departmental Councils in Dublin will be in full working order shortly.

asked the Minister of Health for what reason the Ministry of Health have instructed local authorities in rural districts in Sussex that one-eighth of an acre is sufficient area for a house and garden under the National Housing Act, in view of the fact that the price of agricultural land in most parts of Sussex is low and that the majority of existing cottages have a total house and garden area of between a quarter and half an acre?

The principle I have laid down is that in rural districts not more than eight houses should, as a general rule, be built on an acre of land. This limitation applies to the maximum and not the minimum number of houses that should be built on an acre of land.

In view of the fact that it was impossible to hear the right hon. Gentleman's answer, will he kindly repeat it?

repeated his answer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman approach the Minister of Health and ask him for what reason the housing committee in West Sussex instructed the rural district council of the Petworth district that they could not exceed eight houses to the acre, in view of the cheapness of agricultural land in that district?

I will make inquiries.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the number of local authorities who are unable to proceed with the housing schemes in, their area owing to being unable to borrow the necessary funds, and what the policy of the Government is in the matter of finding a way for these authorities out of their difficulties, so that these schemes may proceed without further delay?

The Public Works Loan Commissioners will be prepared to lend to local authorities having a rateable value not exceeding £200,000 who are unable to obtain loans from other sources. It is anticipated that the larger local authorities will themselves be able to obtain the capital for their present needs. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has appointed a Committee to afford guidance to local authorities, as to the steps to be taken in placing long-term loans for housing purposes.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us when that Committee is likely to report, in view of the very grave urgency of the housing problem in rural districts?

At a very early date.

asked what number of houses are now completed under the Government housing scheme; and what approximate number are in course of construction?

The Returns up to Saturday last show that local authorities and public utility societies in England and Wales have submitted detailed plans for 56,168 houses, of which 43,299 have been approved. These include a large number of types which will be repeated as schemes develop. Detailed information as to the number of houses which have been completed and are fit for immediate occupation, is not available, but tenders have been actually approved for 9,500 houses.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he will be able to give a return of the number of houses actually completed?

That would involve an inquiry from all the local authorities who have actually commenced building.

Is it not a fact that the Minister is in constant communication with all these districts and he can get this information in a very short time?

I will make inquiries.

Is it not a fact that only two houses have actually been completed, and if that is so it would not take long to find out?

That is not correct.

How does the right hon. Gentleman know it is not correct if he has not received a return of the number of houses completed and building?

I happen to know it is not correct because my own society has already completed twelve.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has seen a notice in the Press to the effect that on 6th November the mayor of a Midland city opened the first two houses completed under the Housing Act; whether this statement is true; if not, how many houses were completed by 6th November; and what is the exact number completed to date?

I have seen the notice to which the hon. and gallant Member refers, but the statement that the houses mentioned were the first completed is not correct. No detailed information as to the number of houses actually finished for occupation, is available.

Can the Leader of the House now say when the House will be given an opportunity of discussing this matter?

I shall make some reference to that in the announcement of business for next week.

In view of the fact that housing questions are only reached on one day in the week, and it is an absolute waste of time to ask supplementary questions of a Minister who is not responsible for the answer, will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the Minister of Health to attend on the day his questions are reached?

From my own observation, I do not think that is a complaint that can be directed against the Minister of Health. To-day I believe he is prevented being present by an engagement which is, in fact, connected with the housing question.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that considerable dissatisfaction exists amongst local authorities with regard to the Regulations governing the financial assistance available for housing schemes, which were laid before the House on the 22nd ultimo, and which local authorities feel do not guarantee them against being involved in a financial loss in excess of the produce of a penny rate, notwithstanding their endeavours to grapple with the housing problem; and is he willing to modify these Regulations so as to meet their legitimate fears on this point?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on the 5th instant to the hon. Member for Shrewsbury. As I stated in that reply, local authorities will not be called upon to bear more than the proceeds of a penny rate in connection with their housing schemes unless, in the opinion of the Minister of Health, confirmed in the event of any dispute by an independent person, they have failed to charge sufficient rents or make adequate arrangements for supervision, management, or administration. It seems to me that the Regulations fully safeguard the position of the local authorities, but I am willing to consider any suggestions that may be made to me for a declaration on points as to which there may be any doubt.

asked the Minister of Health whether the Ministry have refused to sanction any self-contained one-room tenements in connection with State-aided housing schemes; and whether he is aware that there is a great demand for this class of accommodation in urban areas among single persons engaged in work all day and also among old age pensioners, neither in a position to pay rent for, nor clean, larger tenements?

I am not favourably disposed, in principle, to one-roomed tenements in State-aided schemes. The primary need is obviously for larger tenements. But, in exceptional circumstances, where it is guaranteed by the promoters of a scheme that any one-room tenements proposed are to be used for the special purpose of housing aged single persons or aged couples, I am prepared to authorise the inclusion of a small proportion of such tenements in a housing scheme.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider it a crime for a single charwoman to live in a one-roomed tenement?

No. He does not consider it a crime, but he considers it foolish to supply single-roomed tenements when there is such a demand for other tenements.

In view of the fact that there is a large demand for this class of accommodation in certain parts of London on the part of people who have to be out all day and have no time to keep larger tenements clean, why does the right hon. Gentleman refuse to allow these tenements to be worked in with dwellings of a larger type. Does it not moan that when they are eventually provided, single persons will have to be put in separate colonies?

My right hon. Friend will be very pleased to consider any special scheme that may be submitted in relation to local circumstances.

asked the Minister of Health whether he can give the all-in estimate of cost to erect a house under the Motional Housing Act, and, on the assumption of 50,000 houses being built and let in a given year, the probable amount that the taxpayer will be called on to provide to supplement the difference between the economic and commercial rent?

The average total cost of a house, including land, roads, sewers, and all other charges, may be estimated, on the basis of the tenders already approved, at about £800. There is not yet sufficient information available as to the fonts that can be obtained to prepare a precise estimate as to the loss that would fall upon the taxpayer, but assuming an average loss of £15 per house per annum, as estimated in the White Paper issued in April last, the total loss on 50,000 houses which would fall to be met by taxpayers and ratepayers would amount to £750,000 per annum.

Is that not a rather sanguine estimate?

asked the Minister of Health if he will shortly publish a series of pamphlets, on the lines of the valuable pamphlet on housing already published, explaining the powers of local authorities in connection with milk, food, and fuel, in view of the mass of different Regulations dealing with these subjects?

I have issued an explanatory circular dealing with the powers of local authorities in respect of the supply of milk for expectant and nursing mothers, and children under five. In the matter of Regulations as to other food arrangements and as to fuel I must refer the hon. Member to the Ministry of Food and the Board of Trade respectively.

When can we get these publications?

I will be pleased to send copies to the right hon. and learned Gentleman.

They should be sent out broadcast.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is prepared to allow Miss Lillian Scott Troy, an American citizen, deported in April of this year, to return to this country; and if not so prepared whether he will state the reasons?

Miss Troy was deported as an undesirable alien, and for the same reason it is not desirable to allow her to return.

asked the Home Secretary the reason or reasons which led the Government to intern and afterwards to deport Baron Louis Anton von Horst?

This man was interned and subsequently deported because he was an alien enemy whom it was contrary to the interest of this country to allow to be at liberty here.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the fact that the United States Government are purging their country of the Bolshevik and revolutionary plotters whose activities have recently been brought to light, he will take special steps to see that these people are not allowed access into this country?

Yes, Sir; the necessary steps are being taken.

May I ask whether the historic right of asylum for genuine political refugees is to be preserved?

asked the Home Secretary if any deduction is made from the pension of a superannuated member of the police force if he obtains subsequent employment; and, if so, if he will explain for what reasons members of the force are treated differently to other public servants?

If a police pensioner rejoins the police, and receives full police pay, his pension may be suspended, but if he takes any other employment, no deduction can be made from his pension. The enactment under which such deductions were formerly made was repealed a year ago.

asked the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether the recent appointment of a senior official of the Home Civil Service to a first-class Colonial governorship is an indication that the Government consider that they have no officer in the Colonial service capable of filling such an appointment; and whether, if, as at present obtains, Colonial appointments are open to the Naval and Military Departments, and also to home Government Departments, he could arrange for some interchangeability between the Colonial service and home Departments so that the authorities at home should get to know their own Colonial officials personally and so afford their Colonial officials, if deprived of the prizes of their own service, at least some relaxation from the severe climates that they have to live in by being granted periods of service in home Government Departments in England?

I hope my hon. Friend will not draw any such inference as he suggests from the appointment in question. Colonial governorships have always been open to other services besides the Colonial service, and any attempt to narrow the field of selection would be open to serious objection in the interests of the efficiency of the public service. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that there would be many advantages in establishing a system of interchange between the home and the Colonial services. The possibility of doing so has been often under consideration, but the difficulties are very great.

In view of the fact that the Colonial Secretaryship of Ceylon has recently been given to an Admiralty official, will the hon. Gentleman do his best to prevent the Colonies becoming the dumping ground for other Government Departments to the detriment of the officers of his own Department?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Trade Marks Act has been suspended with regard to German goods; and whether it is possible for any goods of German origin to enter this country without a clear indication of their country of origin?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. I may, however, point out that even if the Trade Marks Act were suspended it would have no effect on the marking of German goods as such.

With regard to the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answer given to the hon. Members for Portsmouth and South Hackney on the 27th October last. I am sending a copy of the Memorandum issued by the Commissioners of Customs referred to in that answer to the hon. and gallant Member.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now name a day for the discussion of premium bonds?

I hope that it will be possible to arrange for this discussion at an early date; probably an early day in the week after next.

asked whether, on the day on which the question of premium or lottery bonds is discussed, the Government will place upon the Paper an outline of the terms of an issue of such bonds which, if approved by the House, the Government would adopt?

I should prefer to hear from the advocates of such an issue what form they think that it should take.

asked the Prime Minister how many Members of this House have been imprisoned or for the arrest of how many warrants have been issued for offences under the Crimes Act and under the Defence of the Realm Act, specifying under which Section the offence was committed and what punishments have been awarded in each case?

Every case of the nature indicated in the question is communicated by Mr. Speaker to the House and is to be found in the Journals. A list has, however, been compiled and will be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that it includes the particulars of the sections of the Defence of the Realm Act under which the convic- tions have been secured, and the nature of the Court, in which the trials have taken place?

I am told that it includes the sections. I am not quite sure of the second part of the hon. Member's question, but I will look into it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of these cases are men who have taken the oath of allegiance?

A good many.

asked the Prime Minister whether a new appointment has been made of a secretary to the Cabinet; if this is so, whether he is entrusted with the keeping of national secrets in the same way as members of the Cabinet; whether he takes the same oath as Cabinet Ministers; whether his appointment is sanctioned beforehand by His Majesty as in the case of Cabinet Ministers; and what reason there is for the appointment of such a secretary, establishing, as it does, a departure from a practice which has existed since Cabinet government was instituted?

The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the affirmative. The secretary to the Cabinet is trusted in precisely the same way as the secretary of the Committee of Imperial Defence was trusted in the past. The experience of the War has convinced the Government that the appointment of a secretary is necessary if the work of the Cabinet is to be carried out promptly and efficiently.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what the functions of the secretary will be; whether they will be functions of a recording nature, whether he will be permitted to submit questions to the Cabinet, or whether the position will remain as in the past whereby only Ministers may submit questions to the Cabinet; and seeing that there may be important points—

That is an important point, and the hon. Member had better put it on the Paper.

asked whether a Report of the negotiations between the Government and the National Union of Railway-men is to be published; and, if so, when?

A statement of the result of the negotiations will no doubt be published in due course, but it is not proposed to publish a detailed account of the proceedings at the various meetings that have been and will be held, and no shorthand note is being taken.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why the practice has been departed from, by which we were always acquainted in the past?

Oh, no. I have had to do with negotiations of this kind for fourteen years, and no report of that kind has ever been published.

asked the Prime Minister whether the steamship "River Clyde" has been brought back to this country, and how it is proposed to deal with her, having regard to the associations of this ship?

I have been asked to reply. The "River Clyde" is at present at Malta, and the question of her disposal is under consideration.

asked whether the decision of the Government that the State would acquire the rights of owners of royalties applies to the acquisition of shale royalties by the Government?

I have been asked to reply. I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to him by the Leader of the House on 27th October.

asked what are our commitments in the Near East; and whether our treaty with Greece is secret?

It is impossible to make a statement on our general policy in the Near East in reply to a question. We have no secret Treaty with Greece.

When will the Prime Minister put his precept into practice, and allow this House to discuss a settlement that is very detrimental to the Empire?