asked the Secretary of State for India whether the Bombay mill strikers were fired on in January of this year; and how many casualties resulted among the Indian population?

I am informed that before a settlement of the strike was reached the mob attacked a picket of military police accompanied by a magistrate, the magistrate and others of the party being struck by stones. On the crowd being ordered to disperse they displayed a defiant attitude; threats of firing had no effect on the mob, and the magistrate gave orders to disperse it by force. The sergeant and one private fired one round each, killing one rioter and seriously injuring another.

Subsequently, when, as the result of the Governor's mediation, concessions were made to the strikers and preparations made to start work at four or five mills, determined efforts to prevent this were made. At one mill large crowds stoned the military posts, forcibly entered the mill compound and stoned the cashier and two sepoys. A few rounds were fired, one mill hand being wounded in the thigh.

The Governor of Bombay has brought to my notice the admirable conduct during these disturbances of the military and police, who were on duty continuously for nearly a month, and were constantly engaged in minor conflicts with the mob. I feel sure that the House will agree that Sir George Lloyd was justified in this opinion.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this conduct of the police and troops in Bombay is not a good example for the Punjab?

asked the Secretary for India whether his attention has been called to the fact that British ex-warrant officers and non-commissioned officers who are pensioners of the Indian (Service) Departments receive their pre-War service pensions on the 15th of each month after the pensions become due, whereas all ex-warrant officers, non-commissioned officers, and men of the British Service receive their pre-War service pensions quarterly in advance; and whether he can apply to the former class of men the practice that prevails with regard to the latter class and thereby make a concession which would be greatly appreciated?

The rules regarding pensions of warrant officers of Indian Army Departments are similar to those applicable to Departmental commissioned officers. Commissioned officers, both in the British and Indian Services, have their pensions paid in arrear, and I do not think that there is sufficient ground for altering the existing system in the case of Indian Departmental warrant officers. The pensions of these officers are paid on the 16th of each month up to the previous day, not to the last day of the preceding calendar month. The only non-commissioned officers whose pensions are paid by this Department are the few survivors of the East India Company's European Forces, and these have their pensions paid quarterly in advance, as in the case of the British Service.

asked when the new warrant for increasing the pensions of the retired officers of the Indian Army will be issued as promised by him to the deputation of officers in November last?

The subject is still under consideration. It is hoped that a decision will be arrived at shortly, but the exact date cannot yet be stated.

Are we likely to get it before the end of the month?

I hope so.

asked what decision has been arrived at regarding the refund of the sums deducted from the pay of officers on the unemployed list of the Indian Army who served as censors and in such like capacities during the War on pay of less than £400 a year, so as to place them on the same footing as officers on the retired list?

As I stated in answer to a question on the 16th December last, I am not prepared to reopen the arrangement regarding the pay of these officers which, as my hon and gallant Friend is aware, was made after full consideration in communication with the War Office.

asked whether the exclusion of Ministers from being sued in the High Courts in India, as provided for in the Government of India Act, will have the effect of differentiating the constitution of India from that of all the Dominions and of this country, and of denying to the peoples of India any means of re dress in the case of illegal proceedings by Ministers; and, if so, whether this position will be reconsidered?

I understand that my hon. and gallant Friend is referring to the Amendment made by means of Part II. of the Second Schedule to the Government of India Act, 1919, whereby Ministers appointed under that Act are brought within the scope of Section 110 of the Government of India Act, 1915–16. The Amendment referred to has no effect at all in five of the major provinces in India. In three provinces it has the effect of placing Ministers in the same legal position as that occupied by Governors and Lieut.-Governors of provinces and members of their Executive Councils. To a limited extent no doubt the position of Ministers in India will in this respect be different from that of Ministers in the Dominions, but it must be remembered that Ministers in India are not in all respects on the same footing as Ministers in the Dominions. It is not the case that the Amendment will have the effect of denying to the people of India all means of redress in the case of illegal proceedings by Ministers. Proceedings may be taken against Ministers under other provisions of the Act. I may also remind my hon. and gallant Friend that the provisions of the section in question may be repealed or amended at any time by the Indian Legislature.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to institute an Amendment to put these Ministers on a proper and equal position with Ministers in any other part of the Empire?

No, Sir. That is a matter expressly left to the Indian Legislature.

asked the Secretary for India if our troops are making use of gas-shells or gas in any form against the tribes on the North-Western Frontier; and, if not, will he give the reason?

The Government of India as at present advised do not propose to use gas except as a retaliation.

Does not my right hon. Friend think we are more than justified in using gas-shells against a savage enemy and so save the lives of our own men, when it is known that the enemy never takes prisoners and cuts up the wounded?

Is it the settled policy that we are not going to adopt these German methods of barbarism, even against savages?

I have nothing to add to what I have said.

asked on what date the Government of India made known their requirements for aeroplanes for military purposes; and on what date those requirements were supplied?

In July and August, 1918, representations were made as to the need of additional air forces in India, but the requirements of the Western Front rendered it impossible to comply with the demand. In November, 1918, shortly after the Armistice, Air Vice-Marshal Salmond proceeded to India to confer on the post war organisation and strength of the Royal Air Force in that country, but without waiting for a final decision on those points, additional air forces were demanded in January, 1919. It was accordingly arranged that additional air forces should be despatched to India, and that the squadrons already there should be re-equipped with up-to-date machines. Owing to the difficulty of providing suitable shipping, and to the shortage of personnel due to demobilisation, the reinforcements did not reach India until the late summer and autumn of 1919. These reinforcements fulfilled all requirements.

asked the Secretary of State for India if something can be done to expedite the return from India of the papers of soldiers who have been returned to England and demobilised, and who have to wait three months or more before they can obtain payment of the war gratuity they have earned; and if he realises that a payment on account is of no use in really helping the men to obtain work or set up in a small way of business?

The inconvenience caused by delay is fully realised, and special efforts have been and are being made to expedite the despatch to this country of the papers. If the hon. Member has in mind any particular case and will supply me with details enquiries will be made.

Is it not the case that there are many cases, not only individual cases, who have actually had to borrow small sums, and will the right hon. Gentleman do something to remedy this state of affairs?

I realise the position and I can assure my hon. Friend that everything possible for the best will be done.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether the Director of Public Instruction, Burma, has issued a circular under which no newspapers published in Burma or India, other than the "Times of India." the "Rangoon Gazette," and the "Rangoon Times," may be read in Government schools in Burma; if so, whether this involves the exclusion of the whole of the Native press; what are the reasons for the issue of this order; and whether he will cause instructions to be issued revoking the order and allow the same freedom as has existed hitherto in the circulation of Indian and Burmese papers in these schools?

I understand from articles in the Press that orders have been issued prohibiting the entry into schools of certain newspapers. But I have no detailed information. I will communicate the hon. Member's inquiry to the Government of Burma.

asked the Secretary for India whether he can give the House any information concerning the progress of negotiations in regard to the reservation of seats for non-Brahmins in provincial councils.

My hon. Friend has no doubt seen since he put down his question a Reuter's telegram in the "Times" of the 20th reporting the appointment of Lord Meston as arbitrator. I have no further information, and I would remind my hon. Friend that this question was remitted for settlement in India.

asked the Secretary for India whether his attention has been called to the telegram regarding the failure of the non-Brahmin negotiations at Madras on the subject of the distribution of seats according to the recommendation of the Joint Committee, published in the Press of 21st January; and will he give the text of his telegram to Lord Willingdon, the Governor of Madras, giving the latter private instructions that the reservation of seats for non-Brahmins should be ruled out of the discussion?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer given on the 18th February to the hon. Member for Stafford. My right hon. Friend gave no instructions in the sense indicated.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the Question? Will he give the text of the Secretary of State's telegram?

As I have already pointed out, the Secretary of State gave no such instructions.

Is the report in the Press entirely erroneous as to the statement made by Lord Willingdon?

Before answering that I must see the report in the Press.

Does not that erroneous Press report allege that Lord Willingdon tried to interfere on his own initiative as the result of a telegram from the Secretary of State, and that in fact no such telegram was sent by the Secretary of State, and that though Lord Willingdon called this Conference together he was not present at the Conference, and made no communication to it whatsoever?

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that (1) the Government of India are making a profit of 100 per cent. on rice purchased in India and Burma by the Indian Rice Commissioner and exported for consumption in Ceylon and to certain other neighbouring British Colonies; (2) that this is causing great hardship, especially to those rice-eating natives of the population in Ceylon who do not reside on estates, and who have to buy their rice in the open market; (3) that the Indian Government will make a profit of 55 million rupees on the total transactions in Ceylon; (4) that there has been a bumper rice crop in India, and that had the market been a free one, the price would have fallen to more normal levels; and, whether, in view of these circumstances he will cause an immediate communication to be sent to the Government of India with the object of inquiry into the whole matter?

We are in communication with the Government of India on the whole subject, and it is hoped that a definite statement will be made very shortly.

If the right hon. Gentleman is satisfied that the facts I have stated are correct will he bring pressure to bear upon the Government of India to have the matter rectified?

My information leads me to believe that the estimated profit is greatly exaggerated, but as I have already pointed out, representations have been made to the Government of India, and we are now awaiting their reply.

If the estimated profit is exaggerated will the right hon. Gentleman say what the profit actually is: if it is not 55 million rupees, what is it?

That is a question of which notice should be given.

asked whether the reports made by the officers of the Central Information Department from time to time on the Jallianwall Bagh and other incidents in the Punjab disturbances were placed before the Hunter Committee, and whether the said officers were examined as witnesses before the Committee?

The Hunter Committee has been supplied by the Governments in India with all the information which it desired, but I do not yet know precisely what documents were put before it. I believe that three officers of the Punjab Criminal Intelligence Department gave evidence. The Report will be presented at the earliest possible moment.

Is there in this country a copy of the Reports made by the C.I.D. Central Information Department of the disturbances in the Punjab? Has the right hon. Gentleman seen them, and is the alleged implication of the police in the looting substantiated by them?

Notice should be given of that question.

asked the Secretary of State for India why the Government does not build railway lines through the passes on the north-west frontier of India and keep armoured trains running through them, and so avoid the necessity of the long convoys which are being so often captured in the repeated wars which take place on the frontier; and if the expense of such railways would be saved by avoiding the cost of each of the frontier wars?

One one case has occurred of a convoy being actually overwhelmed or captured in recent times on the north-west frontier. The main reason why construction of railways through the passes has not hitherto been undertaken, is that the territory in question is not part of British India, but belongs to the independent tribesmen, who have generally been bitterly opposed to its being opened up.

Is it not a fact that the real reason why this project has been blocked is that the Indian Government would not face the expense of the railways?

I am not aware of that.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is yet in a position to make any statement as to the future of the Naval Reserve?

As my Noble Friend knows, this is a very difficult question. I am afraid all I can say is that it is still under consideration. I will refer to it when making my statement on the Navy Estimates.

Is the right hon. Gentleman bearing in mind that recruiting for the Territorial Army has already commenced, and that the position in reference to recruiting for the Naval Reserve will be greatly prejudiced unless there is an early decision?

I am not quite sure that the Noble Lord is right or that the competition which he anticipates will take place, but I quite appreciate the desirability of having an early decision.

When will a decision be given?

I cannot say, but I expect about the middle of next month.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether any statement can now be made with reference to any increase of pay for Naval school masters; if he is aware that, owing to the withdrawal of the children allowance, many of the schoolmasters are in a very serious financial position; whether the Admiralty has taken dockyard apprentices as schoolmaster probationers; whether Naval schoolmasters have been appointed to train them; and, if so, whether any special grant will be made to the schoolmasters entrusted with such instruction?

As regards the first part of the question, I explained, in a reply to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth Central on Wednesday last, that representations regarding the rate of emoluments for schoolmasters have been made by the Admiralty to the Government. It is true that the Schoolmaster Branch, with all other branches, are affected by the withdrawal of children's allowances, and that the schoolmasters did not receive increases of pay granted to other officers on 1st May, 1919. The third part of the question is dealt with in another reply which I gave on Wednesday, of which I am sending my Noble Friend a copy. As regards the remainder of the question, the schoolmasters required to train schoolmaster probationers do this as part of the educational work of the establishment in which they are employed.

Can the right hon. Gentleman hold out no hope of the schoolmasters getting an increase of pay as has been given to other ranks in the Navy? Why have these men been kept out?

We have made repersentations in the sense suggested by the Noble Lord.

Is it a fact that by a recent decision the Naval schoolmasters have been given a better status, but no increase in pay?

My hon. Friend should put that down. With regard to pay, we have made representations.

asked whether there have been any casualties among the crews or landing parties from His Majesty's ships in the Black Sea during the recent fighting in South Russia; whether any of His Majesty's ships have received damage; and whether they are at present taking part in the operations in South Russia?

So far as is known by the Admiralty the reply to the first two parts of the hon. and gallant Member's question is in the negative. As regards the last part of the question, the operations of His Majesty's ships are confined to the protection, as necessary, of British and Allied personnel and interests.

asked whether the Soviet Government of Russia and neutral Governments, respectively, will be informed of the positions of the minefields laid by His Majesty's ships in the Gulf of Finland during 1919, in view of the present policy of the Allies of permitting trade with Soviet Russia; and whether any action will be taken by His Majesty's ships to prevent mine-sweeping operations by the Soviet Government after the ice clears from the Gulf of Finland?

We shall naturally take all necessary steps when the time comes to see that innocent traffic is not endangered.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will state the composition and size of the British Naval Missions and forces now in Poland and what services they are performing?

The composition and size of the British Naval Mission to Poland is, one commander, four other officers and nine ratings. There are no British naval forces in Poland. The duty of the Mission is to advise the Polish Government on maritime matters such as river police, wireless telegraphy, etc.

May we assume that no officers or men are serving as volunteers in the Polish naval forces?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is entitled to assume anything he likes. That is matter for himself. I could not offhand answer a question of that kind. Obviously there must be notice.

asked what is the reason for disregarding Recommendation No. 3 of Admiral Halsey's Recommendation with reference to the pay of officers of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines?

asked whether, when the present rates of pay of naval officers was decided upon, they were intended to be such as could stand being charged the full civil rate of Income Tax, and whether they exceed those recommended by the Halsey Committee, which were based on the service rate of Income Tax?

It was considered by the Government that there was no justification for treating naval officers, in the matter of Income Tax, differently from the rest of the community, and it was therefore decided that tax at the ordinary civilian rate should be charged as from the beginning of the ensuing financial year. The rates of pay approved are substantially those recommended by the Halsey Committee, and were deemed adequate, notwithstanding the Committee's Report that any increase in the rate of Income Tax would necessitate in creased scales of pay.

Is it not a fact that, owing to the present position of naval officers with regard to Income Tax, and the withdrawal of children's allowances, the increase of pay will all be absorbed? And why is there a differentiation as compared with officers in the Army?

I can only say that that is not my experience. I have had a good many figures before me, and they by no means confirm what my Noble Friend suggests. With regard to Income Tax, the matter has been under consideration, and I consulted many naval officers, who held strongly the view that, subject to their pay being put on a proper basis, they would prefer not to have special exemption with regard to Income Tax.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that the proportion of surgeon-captains to surgeon-commanders is 1 to 19, of paymaster-captains to paymaster-commanders 1 to 11, of engineer-captains to engineer-commanders 1 to 9½, and of executive captains to executive commanders 5 to 9; whether he realises that this point is a serious matter for the Naval Medical Service and may markedly increase the difficulty of recruiting for that Service; whether any steps are being taken to remedy this disparity between the various branches of the Service and, at least, to place the surgeon-captains on the same basis as the paymaster and engineer-captains; and, if so, when the result will be announced?

As the answer to this question is a long one, perhaps the hon. Member will allow it to be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he has any information as to the shipping captured in the Black Sea harbours by the Russian Soviet armies; and what orders have been issued to officers commanding His Majesty's ships with regard to merchant ships under the Soviet flag proceeding to sea for purposes of peaceful trade and upon their lawful occasions?

In Odessa, the Russian light cruiser "Admiral Nakhimoff" has been captured by the Soviet army. There is no other authentic information. The matter referred to by the hon. and gallant Member in the last part of his question is under consideration.

When will some settlement be come to on this very important matter, and will freedom of trade for merchant ships be permitted in view of the recent declarations of the Government?

I told the hon. Gentleman, in answer to a previous question, that everything necessary to carry out the policy of the Government will be done, and at the proper time a Government announcement will be made.

Which policy is the right hon. Gentleman referring to? There have been six since the Armistice.

The statement made by the hon. Gentleman was referring to the policy of the Government. He apparently knew what that policy was. He did not talk about six policies. He talked about the policy, and he has had an answer to his question.

Is the last policy announced yesterday by the Lord Privy Seal going to be carried out by H.M. ships with the Black Sea in spirit and in letter, with reference to peaceful merchant ships?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman excites himself about nothing. There is no alteration in policy. The idea of six policies seems to be on his brain. The Government announced their policy, and he knows it very well. Take, for instance, the evacuation of Batum, to which he referred. He knows quite well that the policy has not been altered. That cannot be done in a moment; it has to be carried out gradually. The Government is doing whatever is necessary in order to secure that peaceful ships are allowed to carry on trade, as we have undertaken that they shall.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly tell us definitely, "Yes" or "No," has the blockade in the Black Sea ceased?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman, I am afraid, has not studied the peculiarities of the case. My answer is that you cannot remove a blockade in a moment.

Why not?

If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will take a little trouble to look into what a blockade of the Black Sea means, he will understand the peculiar conditions obtaining there now, which make it quite impossible to remove the blockade immediately. We are carrying out our policy in a straightforward way, consistently with our promise.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when the new rig for petty officers is to be issued; and, having regard to the anxiety which exists in the Navy upon this subject, if he could state whether petty officers need any further supply themselves with the present uniform pending the expected alteration?

This question is still under consideration, and it is hoped to make an announcement at an early date.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can give any indication of Admiralty policy as to the retention or retirement of senior officers, in order that these officers may be in a position to forecast their future?

As regards flag officers, the lists have already been reduced to the numbers allowed in the pre-war establishment, allowing for officers borne supernumerary: and no further reduction is contemplated. With regard to captains, no steps are contemplated to effect reductions in numbers required, other than those laid down in the general rules for retirement, namely, retiring such officers as it is not intended to employ as flag officers on the active list.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether a commander receives full pay for six months at any time that he is on the unemployed list, whereas a captain receives full pay pay when unemployed for six months only after first promotion, and therefore in subsequent periods receives less pay than when he held the lower rank; and, if so, whether steps will be taken to remove this anomaly?

A commander receives the full pay of his rank for the first six months of unemployed time. A captain does not receive the full pay of his rank at any time when unemployed. The position is that a captain, on promotion, if re-appointed in that rank, may receive 48s. a day during any period of unemployment within the first six months from the date of his promotion. If not reappointed in the higher rank, he may receive unemployed pay of 48s. a day for six months, if so long unemployed, from the date following the expiration of any full pay leave due on ceasing duty in his former appointment. At the end of this period he receives half-pay at the rate of 32s. 6d. a day.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether Admiral Jerram's Committee has considered the claims put forward by the Naval Welfare Committee last December; and, if so, when will the Report be available for publication

The Welfare Committee under the presidency of Admiral Jerram has considered the questions put forward by the Advisory Committee, and is about to present its Report.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is prepared to extend the Welfare Committee scheme to the three home ports, thus enabling the men to have a naval welfare committee at each port?

The present system includes a meeting of lower deck representatives at each Home Port as a preliminary to the inter-port meetings and the final meeting of the Committee in London. The future constitution of Welfare Committees will be considered when the Board receives the report of the Committee which assembled in October, 1919. My. hon. Friend's suggestion will then be considered.

Is the right hon. Gentleman yet in a position to say when the Committee's Report will be available to Members?

My Noble Friend had better put down a question on that.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can make any statement as to the result of the petitions of the subordinate officers of the naval prison service which was under consideration last July?

The sanction of the Treasury has now been obtained to a revision of the emoluments of the subordinate staff employed in the Naval Prison at Bodmin and Naval Detention Quarters where civilian warders are still borne, and steps are being taken to promulgate the revised rates. These rates will be given effect as from the 1st April last, and will be subject to review in two years' time.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty to state the number of men now weekly being discharged from the Portsmouth naval establishments; whether he is aware that there are upwards of 4,200 men unemployed in Portsmouth at the present time; whether, in consequence, any further discharges can be discontinued; and is he now in a position to state what is proposed to be done to carry out the recommendations of the Colwyn Committee, particularly in reference to Portsmouth?

The number now being discharged weekly is about forty-two. We are aware of, and regret, the amount of unemployment at Portsmouth; but we cannot retain men for whom we have no work. As regards the last part of the question, I may inform my hon. Friend that it is contemplated to allocate to Portsmouth a certain amount of work for the machinery and boilers of an oiler, which it is intended to construct at Devonport in pursuance of the recommendations contained in the Report of the Colwyn Committee.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether a man who has served four and a half years in the Royal Engineers Civil Department and, on being discharged on reduction of staff, enters Sheerness Dockyard, is entitled to count the service in both Departments as seniority for establishment?

In assessing seniority as a factor for determining selection for establishment in His Majesty's Dockyards, it is the policy of the Admiralty to take into account only the time rendered in their service. Such a man as the one referred to in my hon. Friend's question would, however, be eligible for consideration with others for establishment in vacancies as they may occur, subject to compliance with the Regulations as to age, etc.; and as he appears already to have served in another Government Department, allowance would be made for the time so served in determining his eligibility in respect of age, up to the actual age of fifty.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether the men are discharged in accordance with seniority?

I will let my hon. Friend have the whole of the Regulations in regard to it. We have gone into it with great care.

Can the right hon. Gentleman inform us why they have refused to allow merchant ships to be constructed in these docks, thus necessitating the discharge of these men?

I do not know whether my hon and gallant Friend referred to Portsmouth?

Yes.

There was an offer of two merchant ships for that yard, but no slips are available. The possibility of building merchant ships elsewhere is still before us.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will consider the desirability of allowing gratuities to the crews of those dockyard tugs which, though manned by civilians, performed similar work to those tugs which were manned by naval ratings, who are to receive gratuities?

Men who received civil rates of pay are definitely excluded from the Naval war gratuity, and it is not proposed to depart from this principle, which has been adopted after full consideration of the circumstances of the case.

Is it not very hard on the crews of these tugs who were doing the same duty as naval ratings and exposed to the same dangers that just because they happen to be civilians they should be less well treated?

It is not because they are civilians. It is because they are receiving a civilian rate of pay, which is higher than the naval rate.

asked whether it is intended to give war service medals to the crews of those dockyard tugs which, though manned by civilian crews, were employed in carrying out duties which in many cases brought them under the fire of enemy ships or batteries?

This matter has been and is still under consideration by the Admiralty. I am advised that an announcement may be anticipated at an early date.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been drawn to allegations as to the defects in the administration of juvenile employment exchanges; and whether he will now, in conjunction with the President of the Board of Education, take steps to remedy these defects?

I am aware that there are certain difficulties arising from the present arrangements between Local Education Authorities and Juvenile Departments of Employment Exchanges. I agree that the existing administrative arrangements are in need of revision and I am at present in consultation with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Education on the subject.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of appointing a committee to inquire into this?

I have been considering that suggestion and I think it is very likely to be carried out.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he intends to make any improvements in the pay and conditions of the staff of employment exchanges?

I have this matter under review, but any proposals to vary the pay and other conditions of service of the staff of the employment exchanges must, of course, be considered in the light of the Report which it is anticipated will shortly be made by the National Whitley Joint Council for the Civil Service with regard to the pay and conditions of the clerical grades of the Civil Service generally.

If the right hon. Gentleman gives increased pay, will he guarantee increased efficiency?

I am afraid it does not always follow.

asked the Minister of Labour whether any, and, if so, how much of the £500,000 allotted for training women will be applied to assist women to complete their education interrupted by the War, in similar manner to the £6,000,000 allotted for men's education?

The Central Committee on Women's Training and Employment, to whom the sum of £600,000 referred to has been allocated from the National Relief Fund, are giving careful consideration to the problem of women whose education or training was interrupted in consequence of the War. The Committee are working in the closest co-operation with the heads of the women's services and other organisations concerned.

Is it the case that £6,000,000 has been allotted?

I do not find any statement in the question about £6,000,000?

Yes, there is.

Then I beg pardon, certainly.

Has any of this been allocated to the training of women in Ireland?

The Committee which is dealing with the matter acts entirely on its own discretion. I have no doubt it will consider every proposal that comes before it.

What department makes these proposals?

This matter is in a somewhat anomalous position. The fund is not in any way under my jurisdiction, nor is the committee. This particular committee of women, who were charged under previous funds with the duty of helping women whose interests were injured in the War, were awarded this sum by the National Relief Fund. They came to me and asked for my help, and I am giving my help, but I have no jurisdiction over anything they do, nor can I supervise their executive actions. They act according to their own discretion in the matter. I put the whole of my machinery at their disposal to give them help.

Will the right hon. Gentleman suggest that in the distribution of this money the needs of each country should be considered?

I think it is for those who hold that view to put their applications before the committee.

Is there any representative of Irish women on this committee;

I cannot answer that from memory.

asked the Minister of Labour if he can give the House any details beyond those already published of the application of the £500,000 allotted for the training of women?

Full details of; the proposals contemplated by the Central Committee on Women's Training and Employment have already been published. I understand that the Women's Committee hope within a few days to make a further announcement dealing with the method of application for individual assistance, and giving details of the procedure to be adopted in selecting applicants.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is in a position to give an approximate date when the King's Roll of Employers of Disabled Men will be sub-divided into towns and districts and ready for publication?

As stated in my reply to the hon. and gallant Member on 18th February, the names in the first issue of the Roll have been arranged by counties. This issue is now in the hands of the printers, and will appear in the first or second week in March. Any question of a revision of the form of publication must therefore be deferred until a second edition is printed, as to which I cannot yet give an approximate date.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman—I think he accepts it—if the Roll, as at present constituted, does not meet the purpose for which it was created, that is to say, letting the public generally know how to distinguish between those employers who are co-operating with the Government and those who are not doing so?

I do not agree that it does not meet the purpose, but I agree that my hon and gallant Friend's suggestion was a better one than my own.

asked the Minister of Labour how many firms of employers have undertaken to co-operate with the Government in the matter of the employment of disabled ex-service men in accordance with His Majesty's appeal; and if ho is in a position to give a rough estimate of the number of firms under British management which, although in a position to do so, proved unwilling to cooperate with the State in the matter?

The number of firms on the King's National Roll on 21st February was 11,700. I regret that I have no data on which to answer the latter part of the question.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the hardship which will be, caused to ex-service men and others by the expiration on 1st July of the Increase of Bent (Amendment) Act, 1919, he will bring in legislation to prolong its validity till the other Rent Acts of 1915 and 1919 expire, namely 25th March, 1921?

I cannot add anything to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Dundee on the 18th of February.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to secure that the Committee which has been appointed, and which is investigating the whole of this question, will report in time for legislation to be brought in to continue the Act of last year till March, 1921, if necessary?

The object for which the Committee was appointed was to consider what steps were possible to meet the very contingency to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers. We cannot do more than that.

Is he aware that landlords are now giving ten days' notice for people to quit or buy their houses?

asked the Minister of Health whether he can see his way to circulate to Members of this House copies of all Regulations and Orders as and when issued to local authorities under the provisions of the two Housing Acts of 1919, in order that they may be able to follow the local administration of these Acts?

I will arrange for copies of Regulations and Orders to be circulated to Members of the Housing Group, and any other Members who signify their desire to receive them.

asked the Minister of Health whether, for the convenience of the public, he will arrange for the General Housing Memoranda to be placed on sale at His Majesty's Stationery Offices at the same time as they are despatched to local authorities instead of some days or weeks later?

I am in communication with His Majesty's Stationery Office with a view to arranging that the memoranda referred to are available for the public as soon as possible after dispatch to the local authorities.

asked the Minister of Health if his attention has been called to a letter written by a large firm of builders had contractors, and published by a daily newspaper on the 19th instant, which in effect states that, owing to the action of certain trades unions, their building of cottages has been seriously delayed and in some cases entirely stopped; and, if so, what action does he propose to take?

I have been asked to answer this question. My attention has been drawn to the statements made by the firms in question to the effect that, owing to the action of certain trade unions, there has been refusal to erect houses which have been constructed in the firm's works under a system whereby the men receive a bonus on output. I am in communication with the firm with a view to obtaining particulars of the cases in which workpeople have refused to erect houses, so that the matter may be further examined.

I may add that for some time the Government have had under consideration, as part of the general question of the urgent need for increasing production, especially in connection with the erection of houses, the question of the advantage to the community of arrangements whereby workpeople are placed upon systems of payment by results, and it is proposed to set up a Committee to enquire into, and report upon, the whole matter.

asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been drawn to the case of a Mrs. Handridge, against whom an ejectment order was granted at the Woking Police Court on the 21st January, to come into operation at the expiration of the month; whether he is aware that this woman is a soldier's widow with children, and is unable to obtain other accommodation; and whether he can take any action in the matter?

This particular case has not been brought to my notice, but the granting or refusing of orders of ejectment is a matter for the Courts; and if the Court is satisfied that, having regard to the provisions of those Acts, an order should be made, I have no power to intervene.

asked the Minister of Health how many men in the building trade are at present out of employment: how many skilled and unskilled workers are still in the Army; and, in view of the fact that the employment of the unskilled depends on the employment of the skilled workers, what steps will the Government take to bring back into the industry skilled workers from the Army and from other occupations into which they were driven by the uncertain character of the trade before the War?

I have been asked to answer this question. The number of men on the live register of the Exchanges as belonging to the building trades on 13th February was 25,000, of whom about half were skilled men and half labourers. The Noble Lord will appreciate that these men include a large proportion of the least able workers and exist in small numbers spread over the whole country. While there is a large unsatisfied demand for building labour of every kind, it is more difficult now than at any time to shift the man to the place where he is wanted owing to the lack of accommodation.

No precise information is available with regard to the number of building trade operatives still in the Army, but this number is now inappreciable. The remainder due for demobilisation will be released within a short period.

The general question of the recruitment of operatives for the building trades (including, I understand, that of the measures which may be practicable for bringing back into the industry skilled workmen who left the industry before or during the War) is under consideration by the Resettlement Committee appointed by the Building Trades Joint Industrial Council, and I am informed that this Committee will shortly make its report, which will receive the immediate and careful consideration of the Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman put himself into communication with the War Office and really find out the number of bricklayers and other men connected with the building trade in the Army; and see whether that class of men cannot be released at once?

I have done that repeatedly, and I am in a position to assure my hon. Friend that—though I cannot give the exact numbers now—there were very few men of the building trade left in the Army.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the best way of bringing skilled men back into the building trade is to devise some scheme of insuring them against unemployment and broken time?

I hope that will be one of the results of the measure which I am moving to-day.

asked the Prime Minister when was the telegram sent to Admiral de Robeck announcing the decision of the Peace Conference not to put an end to Turkish rule in Constantinople; and when was that decision arrived at?

The telegram to Admiral de Robeck was sent on the evening of February 16th. The decision of the Peace Conference was arrived at on the previous day.

That was Monday, the same day the question was asked in the House.

May I ask whether at Question time of the day on which this despatch was sent to Admiral de Robeck any intimation, suggestion, or even hint was given to the House of Commons of what the decision of the Government was?

As far as I know, the decision to which I referred was only arrived at in the afternoon of the 16th. Therefore it could not by any possibility have been announced to the House of Commons before the following day.

Were your minds made up at the time you were addressing the House of Commons?

I was not addressing the House of Commons.

asked the Minister of Labour how many applications have been received for grants from the Civil Liabilities Department; how many claims have been met; and how many are still under consideration?

The total number of applications which have been received for grants from the Civil Liabilities Department since its inception up to and including 14th February, 1920, is 641,937, of which 473,937 were received under the 1916 scheme and 168,000 under the resettlement scheme. The number of grants made is 365,353. The number of applications awaiting consideration is 10,572. The balance represent "nil" grants and withdrawn applications. It is to be noted that of the 10.572 still under consideration, 5.353 were received in the week ending 14th February. The total amount paid out by the Department under the. 1916 scheme is £9,552,000, and under the resettlement scheme £1,576,300.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been drawn to the delay, amounting to several months, in settling claims by the Civil Liabilities Department: and whether steps are being taken to hasten decisions with regard to grants for re-starting pre-war businesses?

I am aware that for a variety of reasons delay has occurred in settling claims in this Department in the past, but the machinery has been entirely reorganised and applications are now-being dealt with expeditiously.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that rural district councils have no representatives on the Roads Advisory Committee, and if he will consider the importance of such a representative being appointed?

I have been asked to answer this Question. I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to the hon. Member for Seven oaks on February 12th.

asked the Minister of Health if he is aware that the death rate at the Chinley Isolation Hospital was 55 per cent. during the period 24th to 29th November, 1919; what was the reason why this high death rate took place; whether three boys, aged nine, seven, and five years, respectively, died within the dates referred to, all members of the same family, after anti-toxin treatment; whether the cause of these deaths has been investigated and the anti-toxin in use at the time stated compounded for analysis as to its purity and with what result; whether two of the cases referred to were out of bed one hour before death; and whether the third case, admitted for observation only, died from an overdose of anti-toxin?

I am informed that during the period mentioned the number of patients in the Chinley Isolation Hospital was 24, of whom 12 were cases of diphtheria, and that during the same period the number of deaths in the hospital was four, in each case from diphtheria. These fatal cases included the three boys referred to by the hon. Member.

The facts as to these cases, together with the local incidence of diphtheria in the neighbourhood, have been fully investigated by one of the Medical Officers of the Ministry as well as by the County and local Medical Officers. They are of opinion that the high mortality was due to the malignant character of the disease, and to the fact that those in charge of the cases before admission to the hospital had failed to administer diphtheria anti-toxin. When the cases were admitted to hospital they were all in an advanced stage of the disease; and, although anti-toxin was at once administered, it was then too late to stay the progress of the disease. I am satisfied on the evidence that the administration of anti-toxin was in no way prejudicial or related to the fatal result, and that the treatment given to the cases after admission to hospital was in all respects adequate.