asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been drawn to the fact that certain manufactured articles and commodities of foreign origin are being sold in this country without any indication of the country which manufactured them being attached; and what steps he proposes to take to rigidly apply the provisions of the Merchandise Marks Act?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that large quantities of picture postcards are being imported into this country from Germany and elsewhere without any indication being printed thereon as to the country of origin; and whether any action is contemplated in the direction of insisting that each postcard shall bear an imprint?

I am aware that foreign-made goods are imported into and sold in this country without indications of origin. This is not illegal so long as the goods do not bear any marks or other indications denoting British origin. My predecessor set up a committee to consider the provisions of the Merchandise Marks Act respecting indications of origin, and I hope to receive their report very shortly. It is impossible to take any further action until their report has been received.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to protect the country from a famine in paper supplies; is he aware that it is impossible to dispose of waste paper in bulk; and has he any information to show that a monopoly exists in the supply of any or all ordinary qualities of paper?

I am aware that, in consequence of the great demand, and the general shortage of supplies of paper-making materials throughout the world, prices have risen everywhere to a very high level, and that users of newsprint in particular are anxious as to their future supplies, but I do not at present see what action His Majesty's Government can usefully take to ameliorate the situation, which is entirely due to economic causes. I understand that waste paper merchants are experiencing some difficulty in disposing of waste paper to paper manufacturers. With regard to the last part of the question, I am not aware of any monopoly as regards the supply of any qualities of paper.

May I ask whether the fact that it is so difficult to dispose of waste paper to-day, whereas before the War it was so easy to dispose of it at good prices, does not indicate that there is something fundamentally wrong which is injuring the paper industry and interests of this country?

It undoubtedly indicates that the people who want material out of which to manufacture paper prefer to get new and original supplies to getting waste paper, and, therefore, would seem to indicate that the shortage of pulp is not so great as some people imagine.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of reintroducing the system adopted in the War of using envelopes for the second time, and other expedients of that sort?

Is it not a fact that one of the greatest sources of the world's supplies of paper is the great Austrian paper mills, and cannot steps be taken to ensure them supplies of raw materials so that they can start to make the very excellent paper they made before the War?

My information is that everybody in this country wants greater supplies of raw materials, and America and Canada are suffering just as badly as we are. What action can be taken to get rid of this shortage in the world, I really cannot suggest.

Can the right hon. Gentleman see his way to urge upon the Government Departments the necessity of not making so much waste paper?

I will very gladly do that myself.

asked what proclamations prohibiting or restricting the importation of goods will receive legal validity if Clause 4 of the Indemnity Bill becomes law; and what goods are affected by such Proclamations?

My hon. Friend will find a complete list of the Proclamations in question, together with the dates at which they were issued and the commodities to which they relate, in the OFFICIAL REPORT of the 22nd December last.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, until the judgment of Mr. Justice Sankey on the subject, there was in operation a prohibition or restriction upon the importation inter alia of dye-stuffs from Germany; and, if so, for what reason and for whose benefit?

The importation of dye-stuffs from any source except under licence was prohibited until the date of the judgment to which my hon. Friend refers. This prohibition was maintained until that date for the purpose of promoting the dye-making industry in the United Kingdom, in order to safeguard the country from a recurrence of the difficulties which arose from pre-war dependence upon foreign sources of supply.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very grave injury inflicted by these Regulations upon the textile industries of the country, especially in the export trade, and will he see that a new Clause is inserted: and that nothing of the kind takes place again, in view of the great world shortage?

I think my hon. Friend must forget the pledges which have been given by all Governments since the War began, in connection with the dyeing industry, with a view to preserving our independence of foreign sources of supply.

What has been happening to the dyeing industry since the Sankey judgment? [HON. MEMBERS: "It has been dyeing!"]

My hon. Friend knows that we have not yet met with that opposition to the dyeing industry which we must anticipate in the near future?

Will the right hon. Gentleman very carefully consider the matter before giving undoubted advantage to this country whilst very large duties are being imposed upon the wines of our Allies?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Perim Coal Company, Limited, a British coaling depot at Perim on the eastern trade route, applied last November to the Coal Controller for a permit to ship a cargo of South Wales coal to their depôt; that after much delay a permit was granted and this company chartered the ss. "Belltown" to carry the cargo to Perim; that, as the coal was not forthcoming, the charter of this steamer had to be cancelled and the steamer was recently directed by the Ministry of Shipping to take a cargo of coal to Genoa; that this steamer has been chartered to load homewards from the East and, after discharging at Genoa, will have to pass Perim in ballast to load her homeward cargo; that the Perim Coal Company can get no satisfaction from the Coal Controller; and that, owing to their inability to supply their depot with coal, it will have to close down, to the inconvenience and detriment of British shipping; and can he state what measures he is taking to increase the output of the coal mines and the export of coal which is of such vital importance to the nation?

A general licence for the export of 5,000 tons of South Wales coal (October/November shipment) was issued to the Perim Coal Company in September, 1919. I understand that no shipment was effected under this licence; but the grant of a licence, or permission to ship, did not and could not constitute a guarantee that coal would be forthcoming. Seeing that the exportable surplus is now less than a third of what it was before the War, and that there has consequently been great difficulty in ensuring supplies, even to the coaling stations in the Atlantic and Mediterranean (to say nothing of the unsatisfied needs of our Allies and of British Possessions overseas), I regret that I cannot undertake that adequate supplies of British coal will be available for coaling stations East of Suez, which should have recourse as far as possible to Indian or South African coal. So far as it is within the power of the Government to overcome any impediment to increased output, everything possible is being done.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that other British shipowners are threatened with the same state of affairs owing to shortage of coal, and is he also aware that everything in connection with coal is in a state of chaos?

I am painfully aware of the shortage of coal.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the quantity of coal exported from South Wales to the River Plate for the use of British railways in the Argentine and Uruguay from 1st January last to the latest date of which he has a record and the date thereof; and the number of steamers now waiting for bunkers and for coal cargoes in the Bristol Channel ports, and the longest period that any of these steamers have been in port?

During the period from 1st January to 7th May, 1920, inclusive, the quantity of coal registered as exported from South Wales ports to Uruguay and the Argentine Republic was 258,321 tons. I have no information as to the proportion of this amount which was shipped for the use of British railways in those countries. I am informed that, excluding small craft under 500 tons nett, the number of steamers waiting for bunkers and coal cargoes in South Wales ports is approximately 105, of which 30 are under the British flag. The longest period any of these have been in port is since the middle of February, but no British steamer has waited anything like this period.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, prior to the War, millions of tons, in place of the thousands of tons he now cites, were shipped to the Argentine, and that prior to the War the export of coal to the Argentine practically paid for our imports of wheat from that country?

I am quite aware that the position was very much better before the War than it is now.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is being done by the Government to increase the output of coal?

Is it not a fact that many industries and manufactories in this country are held up for the want of coal, and will he consider the needs of the British manufacturers before considering the export of coal?

We are doing that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the acute shortage of coal in Manchester; and whether he will take action to relieve it?

From the information in the possession of the Coal Mines Department, it would appear that supplies of household coal for the Manchester district are approximately equal to the requirements. The question of the distribution of supplies within the area is being looked into. As regards supplies for public ultility undertakings, there is some deficiency caused partly by increased consumption of gas and electricity. The question of regular supplies is being taken up with the collieries concerned, and some additional supplies, to meet the increased demand, are being allocated.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the expediency of supplying Manchester with coal from Lancashire and Yorkshire, instead of restricting the supplies to districts further a field?

The whole system of distribution is carefully arranged between the Coal Department and the Ministry of Transport, and they have to make the best arrangements they can

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is in a position to announce the increase in the price of coal to the industrial and private consumer rendered necessary by the recent increase in the wages and salaries of those employed in the coal industry; and can he say that, with this latest increase in price, the coal industry-is now self-supporting and that no further call will be made on the taxpayer by way of subsidy?

I must apologise for the length of this answer, but, in view of the importance of the matter, I hope the House will allow me to read it in extenso.

The suggestion in the last part of the hon. and gallant Member's question to the effect that the coal industry is at present being subsidised by the taxpayer is erroneous. As the House is aware, coal sold for inland consumption is at present subsidised out of the profits derived from coal which is exported. Inland coal, even before the recent advance in wages has thus been sold at less than the average cost of production—taken together with the profit allowed to the coal owners. The greatest part of this subsidy has been granted in the form of a temporary reduction of 10s. a ton in the price of household coal. This reduction was made in order to assist the householder through the winter, but industrial coal, which did not obtain the advantage of this concession, has also been sold at a loss, which has had to be made up from the profits on the export trade.

The Government have given very careful consideration to the question whether present conditions justify the continuance of this policy of subsidy. They think that it is essential, in the interest of the coal industry and of the country, that the present system of controlling inland distribution should be altered as soon as possible. This can only be done if the artificial differentiation between the prices of household and industrial coal be removed. Further there exists no reason for supplying coal to the industries of this country at less than it costs; and the period for which the subsidy on household coal was intended to last has expired. In these circumstances the Government have come to the conclusion that household coal should no longer be sold at a less price than coal for industry and that both should be sold at a price sufficient to meet the cost of production and the standard profits allowed by the Coal Emergency Act.

To effect this result it is necessary to increase the price of industrial coal by 4s. 2d. per ton, and the price of household coal by 14s. 2d. per ton. The new price will be a maximum, not a fixed price, and will take effect on Wednesday, 12th May. It will be clear from what I have said that the necessity to increase the price of coal would have arisen apart from the recent advance of wages given in the mining industry. The advance of wages is, however, a factor in the case in so far as it increases the cost of production by about 2s. 10d. a ton, and therefore makes the increase necessary to place the price of coal on an economic basis greater by that amount.

Would not all the difficulties that the right hon. Gentleman has enumerated in the increase of price be overcome by a greatly increased output of coal?

There is no doubt at all that increased production would greatly mitigate prices.

Will the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the House give us the opportunity of discussing the Board of Trade Vote at an early date, in order that this very important statement may be reviewed by the House?

As soon as it is asked for, we shall be glad to put the Vote down.

Does the Government recognise the great hardship that is going to be inflicted on thousands of families in the country in the increase of household coal by 14s. 2d. per ton? It will mean more wages you can bet!

Does the hon. Gentleman consider that the increase of 2s. per ton on wages justifies the 14s. 2d. per ton on the retail price of coal? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the immediate result will be a further and immediate request for more wages, and so the old game will go on?

We have taken into account all the considerations to which my hon. Friend refers; but it is not really merely the 2s. increase in wages that requires the 14s. increase; the hon. Member must recognise that the coal has been sold at less than it costs to produce, and the only question is whether we can carry on like that.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that bunkers are now costing up to £9 per ton in some cases in this country, and can he review the whole coal position with the idea of getting it on an economic basis?

Yes, the whole question is being reviewed at the present time, and the supply of bunkers is having special consideration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of recommending that the Government should not profiteer when so much complaint is made against other people profiteering?

There is no case of profiteering at all against coal.

Does the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman mean that the new price foreshadowed leaves no profit to the Government from the coal industry?

There is no doubt there will be some profit from the export of coal, although what the amount may be is very uncertain. There will be no question of profiteering.

Have the Government considered the advisability of giving that profit on the export of coal to the consumer, and so saving the demand that will inevitably follow?

We have considered that very carefully.

As obviously we cannot discuss this matter by way of question and answer, I beg to give notice that I will raise it at 11 o'clock to-night.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of increasing the export?

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) whether he is aware of the very bad quality of coal for steam purposes which is now being supplied to local authorities in London who have public undertakings to carry on; whether he is aware that the Port of London Authority recently had to refuse over 200 tons of coal as totally unsuitable for heating boilers; if he can instruct the Coal Controller to specially consider this matter and supply a better quality of coal for public undertakings;

(2) whether his attention has been called to the serious complaints of municipal electric undertakings in London and district as to the quality of coal supplied to their works, which owing to its poor quality greatly increases the cost of their industry; and whether he will call the urgent attention of the Coal Controller to this matter and ask him to meet the representatives of these authorities and discuss the necessity of improving the present delivery and quality of coal?

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of the 3rd May to a somewhat similar question asked by the hon. and gallant Member for South Bradford. I have not received any complaint from the Port of London Authority respecting fuel unsuitable for heating boilers. The necessities of public undertakings in London are fully recognised and are receiving special consideration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the Thrapston (Northants) Co-operative Society have received no coal for their registered customers since 16th March last, a period of seven weeks; if he will state the reason why coal is sent to the same depot for other retailers of coal and that this society is refused; whether he is aware that this firm were 250 tons short in 1919, and that for the four months of this year they only received 40 tons, though they should have 45 tons a month; and if he will endeavour to do something, as all attempts with fuel overseers have been futile?

I understand that the Thrapston Co-operative Society obtains the bulk of its coal from the Co-operative Wholesale Society, but, in view of the statements made by the hon. Member, full inquiries are being made into the position of the local society's supplies. Should the inquiries show that the need exists, emergency coal will be sent into the district while the question of the regular supplies is being brought up with those concerned.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the answer to the question is rather belated, because since it was tabled a truck of coal has been sent; why, in that case, could not it have been sent before the question was put down?

If the hon. Gentleman knew that, he might have taken the question off the Paper.

asked the Prime Minister when the Bill for the improvement of conditions in mining areas and for the future ordering of the coal industry will be introduced?

I cannot add anything to the answer which I gave on the 25th March last, to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln

Is it still the policy of the Government to deal with this matter?

Yes, certainly.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the Bell Spinning Company, of Oldham, announced a dividend of 533⅓ per cent, per annum to be paid for the past half year; and whether, in view of the high cost of living, he proposes to deal with this case?

asked the Prime Minister if he has seen the Report concerning the dividends paid by the Bell Spinning Company, Oldham; if he is aware that the dividends announced at Wigan was one of 533⅓ per cent. per annum to be paid for the half year; if he is aware that the same company paid 200 per cent. six months ago; if he is aware that the Times Spinning Company, Middleton, paid 20s.' interest for the quarter in its 10s. shares, which represents 800 per cent. per annum; if he is aware that three months ago this company's dividend was 600 per cent., and six months ago 400 per cent., and that the company's paying such extraordinary dividends is the cause of so much unrest in the textile workers' trade in the various parts of Lancashire, demanding an advance of 60 per cent.; and if he intends taking any action in the matter?

I understand that the statement as to the dividend declared by the Bell Spinning Company, of Oldham, is correct, but I am unable to say whether the other statements made in the question of the hon. Member for Plaistow are accurate. I am calling the attention of the Central Committee under the Profiteering Act to these cases.

In the event of the facts being found to be correct, will the right hon. Gentleman recommend a prosecution?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the share Capital of that particular mill only bears about one-tenth part relation to the actual capital of the Company?

Will the right hon. Gentleman see, especially having regard to what has been said, that this firm is not allowed to write this off by way of a bonus issue amongst its shareholders, or in any way get rid of its profits, that will prevent the Government getting excess profits?

All these questions clearly indicate the necessity of full inquiry into the circumstances before any reply is given.

When the right hon. Gentleman is making that inquiry, will he endeavour to find out how many shares are held by the workmen themselves—a great many, I think?

I hope a large number are so held.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is now in a position to state what proportion of motor vehicles are now running on benzol?

There are no actual figures showing the proportion of motor vehicles now running on benzol, but on the best information available it is estimated that at least one-tenth use benzol, or benzol mixed with other non-dutiable fuels.

Does the right hon. Gentleman's answer refer to industrial or private vehicles?

The question says motor vehicles, and that question I have answered.

asked whether the Advisory Committee on Motor Taxation presented an Interim Report in favour of the continuance of petrol taxation; and, if so, if he will say why this was suppressed?

No question of suppression of a Report arises. The Committee, early in their investigations, indicated their preference for a Petrol Tax in an Interim Report. I think I may say that we all have that preference if it is a practicable one, but upon further consideration the Committee decided not to report in favour of a Petrol Tax, for the reasons given in their Final Report on taxation.

Will my right hon. Friend publish the Report if he does not wish to suppress it which was in favour of petrol taxation, and will he publish any communications made by him to that Committee?

Yes.

Has the right hon. gentleman received a detailed scheme in connection with the taxation of tyres?

Yes, Sir, I have.

asked whether in any amendment of the Acts relating to the use of motor vehicles he will make the carrying of mirrors enabling a view of overtaking traffic to be obtained by the driver compulsory?

The point referred to in my Noble Friend's question will be considered by the Departmental Committee on the Taxation and Regulation of Road Vehicles.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Reparation Commission will from time to time issue a balance sheet showing details of the receipts from enemy countries against the amounts due from them?

I understand that the Reparation Commission contemplates the periodical publication of accounts on the lines indicated in the question. But under the Peace Treaty a considerable interval will elapse before the total liabilities of the enemy countries can be finally determined.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication as to the approximate date of the first balance sheet?

No, Sir; not at present.

asked the Prime Minister, with reference to his statement that pending negotiations between the Italian and the Serb-Croat-Slovene Governments may be expected to determine the status of Montenegro as part of the Serb-Croat-Slovene kingdom, whether he is aware that there has been no decision by Montenegro to surrender her sovereignty by becoming incorporated in the Serb-Croat-Slovene kingdom; whether the royal Government of Montenegro will be represented at the negotiations referred to by which her fate is to be determined; and for what reason the repeated pledges of his Majesty's Government that free self-determination would not be denied to Montenegro are now to be thus violated?

The future status of Montenegro will not be determined without the consent of all the Allies, whose endeavour it will be to find a solution in accordance with the wishes of the inhabitants so far as it is possible to ascertain them. Whether the views of the Montenegrins would be correctly represented by the Royal Montenegrin Government is a point that will doubtless be considered.

Does the right hon. Gentleman adhere to the answer he gave last week in which he said the question would be decided by negotiations between Italy and the Czecho-Slovak Government?

I do not recall the exact affect of the answer. I do not think I said definitely that would be the only consideration.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the Treaty of London, 1915, recognises the sovereign independence of Montenegro, in as much as those parts of the Adriatic coast pertaining to Montenegro are expressly excluded from neutralisation; and, in view of the fact that it has now been decided to in corporate Montenegro in the Serb-Croat-Slovene kingdom without the consent of the Montenegrin Government and without consulting the Montenegrin people, on what date was it decided by the Allies that the independence of Montenegro should no longer be respected as it was in 1915; and what was the reason for this change in policy?

No decision has yet been reached with regard to the future of Montenegro. The fact that Montenegro is referred to as an independent country in the Treaty of London does not constitute a guarantee of her independence on the part of the signatories to that Treaty. The conclusion of the War left Montenegro without an effective Government. The question of her future status was one of the problems which faced the Peace Conference. In considering it the Allies were bound by no guarantees, and are endeavouring to arrive at an impartial solution.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there was no less effective government in Montenegro at the end of the War than there was in Belgium, and can he give any reason why it should be treated on different lines?

I think the case is different.

Why has the principle de minimis non curat lex no application to the dealings of the Allies with this petty principality?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Allies, in deciding to destroy the independence of Monte negro, which was recognised by the Treaty of London in 1915, base this policy on the precedent afforded by the action of Germany towards Belgium in 1914; whether the American Government has been consulted in regard to this policy and is a consenting party thereto; whether His Majesty's Government is still in diplomatic relations through Sir George Graham at the embassy in Paris with the government of the King of Montenegro whom it has been decided to depose; and whether the royal government of Montenegro has been officially informed of the decision to incorporate their country in the Serb-Croat-Slovene kingdom, and that the precise status it is to hold in that kingdom is to be decided by negotiations between that kingdom and Italy in which Montenegro itself is to have no voice.

As the future status of Montenegro has not yet been decided, the first, second, and last parts of the question do not arise. Diplomatic relations are still maintained between Sir George Grahame and King Nicholas of Montenegro.

Are we still paying the subvention to the King of Montenegro and his hangers-on in Paris?

I did not know we ever were. I should like notice.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Mandates for Togoland, the Cameroons, and Tanganyika Territory have been completed; whether they will be submitted to the Council of the League of Nations for approval, and, if so, when; whether the terms of the Mandate will be identical in the case of the areas of these three ex-German Colonies allotted to France, Great Britain, and Belgium as mandatories, respectively; whether the temporary administrations in these ex-German Colonies have any legal right or power to effect changes in the law of custom of the Colonies which would be repugnant to Article 22 of the Covenant of the Treaty of Versailles; and whether, on the publication of the Mandate, any Acts or new laws so repugnant will be declared null and void?

As the final form of the instruments defining the Mandates for Togoland, the Cameroons, and the Tanganyika Territory have not yet been completed, it is not possible to say whether those instruments will be identical. Upon their approval by the Supreme Council, they will be submitted to the Council of the League of Nations, in accordance with the Treaty.

Why is it necessary that they should go before the Supreme Council at all?

In all these matters it is the Supreme Council which defines the Treaty. I understand the principle decided was that it should be submitted.

Is not the Treaty with Germany already defined and ratified?

Yes, but by the Treaty the Allies were to distribute the Mandates.

In the meantime, how are these territories being administered? Are they being administered merely as Colonies or as trustee estates?

They are being administered, I believe, in trust, and they are being administered by the Governments to whom they have been mandated.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can state what the action of this country will be in the event of no Hungarian Government being found willing to sign a Peace Treaty which detaches 3½ million Magyars from their present allegiance without conceding one single plebiscite; and whether he can see his way to follow the precedent established in the case of our late enemy, Germany, which has been granted three plebiscites?

The hon. and gallant Member asks an hypothetical question. It is contrary to the established practice to answer questions of this nature. I have no reason whatever to anticipate the contingency contemplated.

asked the Prime Minister if he is now in a position to say what relief he will give to the old police pensioners who retired before the 1st April, 1919?

asked whether he is yet in a position to say when he expects to receive the Report of the Committee appointed to consider the necessitous cases of pre-War pensioners?

asked whether the Report of the Committee examining the question of pensions of ex-Government employees, such as police, ex-service men who retired before August, 1914, etc., may be expected before the Whitsuntide adjournment; and whether, in view of the urgency, an Interim Report dealing with the most necessitous cases can be issued at an early date?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the hardship caused by delay in executive action to relieve many old and deserving public servants as, for example, ex-Police constable Pippen, of Brislington, now incapable of work, who, after 24 years' service in the Somerset Police, has to support an invalid wife and family on a pension of 12s. 10½d. per week; and can he now announce the decision of the Cabinet Committee which has been considering such hard cases?

The Government have decided to relieve certain exceptional cases of hardship among pre-War pensioners due, for example, to age or infirmity, by granting an increase of pension to help the pensioner whose means are small to meet the increased cost of living, and to mitigate the effects of the reduced purchasing power of his pre-War pension. The relief will apply to pre-War pensioners aged 60 years and over, or retired for disability, whose total means (earned and unearned), inclusive of pension, does not exceed £200 per annum in the case of a married, and £150 per annum in the case of a single pensioner. For this purpose, a widower with children under the age of 16 dependent on him will be treated as married. Widows in receipt of pensions granted in respect of services rendered by deceased husbands will be granted the increase at the age of 40.

Subject to these over-riding conditions, a pensioner (married or single) with a pension of £50 a year or less will have his pension increased by 50 per cent. A pensioner with a pension of £51 to £100 single, or £51 to £130 married, will have his pension increased by 40 per cent. and a pensioner with a pension of £100 to £150 single, or £130 to £200 married will have his pension increased by 30 per cent.

The Government have also decided to give similar relief to such officers and men of the Navy and Army as have in the past been disabled by peace-time injuries and are pensioners.

Subject to the necessary legislative sanction being obtained, the increases will take effect as from 1st April, 1920.

With regard to the Irish Constabulary, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the fact that some of these men are out of employment, by reason of their being ex-policemen, will be taken into consideration as one of the grounds for increased pensions?

Under the scheme they will be treated exactly like other pensioners, but any special point should be put to the office concerned.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether it applies to age and infirmity or age or infirmity?

It begins at 60 and there are special cases of disability.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any idea of the probable cost of these changes?

It is impossible to name the exact figure, but I am afraid it will be something like £2,000,000

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his statement will bring a message of comfort and hope to thousands of men throughout the land?

Will the same rules that apply to the Royal Irish Constabulary as apply to the Metropolitan Police?

I think they are all Government pensions, and if so they are in the same position.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the information collected from the various Government Departments for the Committee inquiring into the position of pre-war pensioners will be published, and when it will be published?

This question was answered on Tuesday last, and appears in the OFFICIAL REPORT of that date.

asked whether any statement can be made as to the present position of affairs with regard to the Channel Tunnel?

The Cabinet have not yet been able to consider the question, but hope to do so shortly.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the report that the United States Government have seized the island of Taboga, the property of the Government of Panama, for the purpose of erecting fortifications; whether, in view of the desire of the Government to protect the rights of small nationalities, a protest will be made to the United States; and whether the matter can be referred to the League of Nations?

The United States Government informed the Government of Panama in November, 1918, that they were entitled by Treaty to erect defences on the island of Taboga, for the purpose of protecting the approaches to the Panama Canal. The Government of Panama protested, and it was eventually agreed to leave the matter in abeyance until after the signing of the Treaty of Versailles, the United States Government reserving the right to build a signal station on the island in the meantime. I do not know whether or not this station has been built.

In the circumstances, the matter does not appear to be one in which His Majesty's Government can properly intervene, and it is for the Government of Panama to refer the question to the League of Nations, if they think fit.

Will the Leader of the House say why we objected to the French occupying Frankfort while we made no protest against the United States occupying an island belonging to a small nation?

There is no analogy. As regards the enforcement of the German Treaty, our objection was to any Ally acting separately.

asked whether the Government will introduce a Bill to provide for the alternative Vote?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave on the 31st March to a question on this subject by the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardine and Western.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Minister for War recently pledged himself at a meeting at Glasgow that such a Bill should be introduced?

I was not aware of it.

Are we to understand that the Government approve of the return of Members by a minority of votes

The reply which I gave was that the Government did not propose to take any action.

asked whether any of the Allied or Associated Powers are supplying the Polish Government with money or munitions; if so, which Powers; and whether His Majesty's Government was consulted by the Polish Government before the recent offensive was launched against Russia?

As regards the first part of the question, I can add nothing to the answer given on the 6th May to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for Aberdeen Central. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Are we in any way encouraging Poland at the present moment, and is it a fact that a telegram has been sent by His Majesty congratulating General Pilsudski —[HON. MEMBERS: "Order, order!"]— on the re-incarnation of Poland, or in terms to that effect?

Is not Poland strong and able enough to look after herself without the intervention of any other nation?

As I have said many times, we take no responsibility one way or the other. With regard to the second supplementary question, if it be to be put at all, it should after notice has been given.

asked the Prime Minister what steps have been taken by the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers to define the eastern and south-eastern frontiers of Poland; and whether, with a view to preventing further loss of life and material in Central Europe, steps can be taken to settle the boundaries between Poland and Russia by arbitration or by reference to the League of Nations?

The hon. and gallant Member is no doubt aware that a provisional eastern frontier for Poland has been laid down already. It has not yet been possible for the Allies to exercise the right given them by Article 87 of the Treaty to determine these frontiers definitely. As regards the second part of the question, no useful purpose would be served by taking, at the present moment, the action proposed.

Do I understand, from the answer to the second part of the question, that the Government propose to do nothing except to allow a definite war in Central Europe? Have not we had enough of war and bloodshed?

Yes, quite enough; we are not having any there at present.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government accepts responsibility for the telegram which has been sent to Marshal Pilsudsky?

The hon. and gallant Member should give notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government favours the suggestion that the Supreme Council in any form should be made permanent either as co-equal or superior in authority to the Council of the League of Nations?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister what decision has been communicated to Germany as to her right to send troops into the neutral zone?

By a decision of the Supreme Council of 8th August, 1919, the German Government were permitted to retain in the neutral zone a force consisting of 20 battalions, 10 squadrons and 2 batteries until 10th April, 1920. At the San Remo Conference it was decided to grant an extension of this period, but to insist upon a progressive reduction of the occupying force.

Does that apply to the military police force as well as to the Imperial forces?

The Committee of Control advised the Council as to what is a military force. It does not apply to police.

Is it not a fact that the German police are trained and drilled in every respect as efficiently as ordinary soldiers?

asked the Prime Minister (1) what Minister of the Crown will, after the passing of the Government of Ireland Bill, answer questions relating to Ireland in this House;

(2) whether it is proposed to have an Irish Office or an Agent General for Ireland in London if the Government of Ireland Bill passes into law?

I think that questions of this kind can be better dealt with after the Bill has been considered by the House.

asked the Prime Minister whether Irish Members of the Imperial Parliament will be eligible to serve on Standing Committees or Private Bill Committees dealing with purely British affairs after the Government of Ireland Bill has passed?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Prime Minister when the promised Reports on the condition of Ireland will be laid upon the Table of the House?

A review of events in Ireland since January last is in course of preparation. This Report will be presented immediately on completion, and subsequently regular monthly Reports will be rendered for the information of the House.

Can my right hon. Friend indicate when the first Report will be ready?

I am sorry I cannot.

Will the Reports be prepared ex parte by Dublin Castle?

I do not know what the hon. and gallant Gentleman means. They will be Reports giving as accurately as they can be given analyses of the facts.

Will they include loss of life to civilians in collisions with the military and police, and will they be impartial?

They will be impartial. What they will contain will be judged the better after they have been seen.

asked the Prime Minister what advice the Government have received from the Lord Lieutenant and the Irish Government which has induced them to believe that the condition of Ireland is such that a Home Rule Bill is more likely to succeed now than it would have been in November, 1918?

The Lord Lieutenant and my right hon. Friend who was then Chief Secretary (Mr. Macpherson) had approved of the introduction of the Government of Ireland Bill before that course was decided upon by the Government.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received from the Paulton and other branches of Comrades of the Great War resolutions expressing grave concern at the news which reaches ex-service men in this country from many parts of Ireland of the condi- tions of persecution under which ex-service men are living in that country, and the danger to their wives and families; and whether he will inform the House what steps are being taken to give immediate protection to these men who went, without any compulsion, to fight side by side in the War with their comrades of Great Britain and the overseas parts of the Empire?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the latter part, I am unable to add anything to the replies which I gave on the 6th May.

Would it be possible to say what steps are being taken

No; I cannot say. I mentioned that steps were being taken by the Departments.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a large number of the men who are fighting against the authorities in Ireland are themselves ex-soldiers?

asked the Prime Minister under which Government Department the control and administration of anti-aircraft personnel in the metropolitan and the coastal area, respectively, is vested; how many officers and men are employed in these duties in both those areas, separately, and at what annual cost; and whether the whole matter can be reviewed in order to clear up existing misconceptions and to decide as to whether it is necessary to maintain permanent anti-aircraft personnel in the metropolitan area and not elsewhere, or vice versâ, or to enlist officers and men for this duty on terms of service similar to the Territorial Army where required.

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. Antiaircraft personnel is controlled and administered by the War Office and the Air Ministry, the former being responsible for the personnel of the ground defences as distinct from air units. The numbers of military personnel at present employed in these duties are 77 officers and 288 other ranks (inclusive of depots and anti-aircraft schools): of these, 35 officers and 142 other ranks are in and around the metropolitan area. The annual cost of the total number employed is £103,000. There is no Royal Air Force personnel specially engaged in these duties at present. As regards the last part of the question the whole subject of anti-aircraft defence is under review with a view to confining ourselves, for the present, to training and research, with corresponding reductions of establishments and to defining the future policy for the defence of the Empire.

Is there any truth in the statement that the staff of the anti-aircraft defence of London has remained unchanged since the signing of the Armistice?

No, I do not think so. At any rate, it seems to me that the number of officers and men provided for this extremely important branch of any defensive organisation which may be set up in this country is not at all on an exaggerated or extravagant scale.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why it should be necessary to keep 77 officers and only 200 men?

I presume it is because the work in question is largely in the nature of research and experiment.

Would not the solution of the question be to make the Germans hand over all their aeroplanes at once, and so remove the danger?

At any rate, we ought not to lose touch with the means of protecting ourselves from aerial attack, and still less ought we to cut ourselves off from even pursuing the theory of defence against potential aerial attack.

Is it not a fact that this force to-day is much more efficient than at any time during the War?

You are a better judge than I am.

asked the Prime Minister if last year he sent a letter to the Admiralty enforcing the necessity of economy; if he is aware that the number of civilians in Admiralty employ at home were 56,000 prior to the War in 1914 and 84,000 on the 1st March, 1920; and if he will inquire into the necessity for 50 percent. more Admiralty employés now the major part of the German Fleet no longer exists?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative The figures are as stated, but in order to minimise the hardships consequent upon too drastic reduction since the termination of hostilities, efforts have been made to find employment for a considerable number of workmen by the construction of oil-carrying ships and other vessels of a merchant ship type.

Are not a very large number of these men at the present time engaged in work of an unproductive character?

No; I think that is quite unfounded. One of the greatest difficulties we have had is in trying to make the inevitable hardship as little as possible in the case of men who have grown up in the Government service. All we are doing is to give them employment to whatever extent we can.

Is the keeping of a large number of men in the employ of the Government to be permanent?

No, it is certainly not a permanent policy. No one knows better than my right hon. Friend how great would be the hardship in turning these men adrift who have always been in Government employment, and have grown up in the expectation of its continuance.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government to support consular representatives in Albania at an early date; and what means are at present available for obtaining information as to events in that country from impartial sources?

His Majesty's Government are arranging to send a Consular Officer to Valona with as little delay as possible. There is at present no British representative in Albania. Reports as to events there have been received from His Majesty's Ministers at Belgrade and Athens.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the resentment felt by the taxpayer that decisions to increase the wages bill and expenses of working of subsidised and Government-controlled or nationalised industries and departments by many millions of pounds are arrived at by secret negotiations from which the public are excluded; and will he in the future refer any decision to increase the working expenses of any such industry or department to this House for ratification where the amount at issue involves more than £1,000,000?

With regard to the first part of the question, I am unable to add anything to the reply given on the 22nd March to my Noble Friend the Member for Battersea. As regard the latter part of the question, the fullest publicity is arranged for consistent with safeguarding the chances of a reasonable settlement.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a new form of strike that has occurred on some of the railway systems and known as the work-to-rule strike; whether, when the National Wages Board, from which any representation of the travelling public was excluded, was set up, it was agreed by the trades union representatives that no strike should take place before the dispute had been before the Board for a month; and, in the face of this breach of faith, is he prepared to resume secret negotiations for a further increase in wages to railway employés?

I have been asked to answer this question. I am aware that at certain places some of the men employed on the railways are, contrary, as I understand, to the advice of their unions, not doing the usual amount of work. In adopting this course the men have taken the law into their own hands, and are acting in distinct contravention of the agreement with the unions, which was to the effect that no strike should take place on any matter falling within the purview of the Central Wages Board until a month after that matter had been referred to the National Wages Board. As regards the third part, the recent claims for increased wages for railway employés have been referred by the Central Wages Board to the National Wages Board in accordance with the agreed procedure.

asked the Minister of Transport, whether his attention has been called to the dangerous condition of Kennington Road and most of the other main and side roads repairable by the Lambeth Borough Council; whether any grant from the Road Fund has been made to the above-mentioned Council, and, if so, how it has been expended; and whether he will bring pressure to bear on the Council to carry out their statutory duties in regard to the roads?

I am aware of the condition of the Kennington Road and of other roads repairable by the Lambeth Borough Council. A grant of £50,000 has been made to the Borough Council towards a special road improvement programme estimated to cost £62,578. This programme includes the repairing of Kennington Road, the cost of which is estimated at £13,220. In addition, I am informed that the Borough Council are raising for highway purposes, out of rates for the current year, a sum of approximately £79,000.