asked the Minister of Pensions whether his attention has been called to an advertisement issued by the Minister of Health, inviting medical men to apply for appointments in the Ministry of Health at salaries of £1,000, rising to £1,400 per annum, with pension rights, etc.; whether these appointments are calculated to draw medical officers from the Ministry of Pensions; and whether he can see his way to giving similar salaries and advantages to the medical staff employed by the Ministry of Pensions?

My attention has been drawn to the advertisement in question, which related to certain appointments offered by the Ministry of Health of a permanent character, requiring special scientific qualification. It is, of course, open to the medical members of my staff to become candidates. I cannot undertake to revise the scales of remuneration of the temporary medical service of the Ministry of Pensions, which were settled so recently as January of the present year. It is not yet possible to forecast the permanent medical arrangements which will be necessary for the purposes of the Ministry.

Is the right hon. Gentleman taking any steps to place disabled medical men in appointments such as this?

Oh, yes; quite a large number of disabled medical men, certainly men who have served, are now on the staff.

asked the Minister of Pensions if a soldier on leave who loses his right arm by enemy action during an air raid is deprived of pension on the ground that his injury is not due to war service; and, if so, will he state how can this man at least receive the benefit of the necessary training and grant for injured men?

I find that the practice is as stated in the first part of the question. If, however, the injury sustained led to the soldier's discharge he may be eligible for a gratuity under Article 7 (1) of the Royal Warrant. As regards the second part of the question, I am informed that the man would be considered for training by the Ministry of Labour, and should make application to the nearest Divisional Director of Industrial Training.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the history manuals which he recently placed in the Library of the House of Commons are still in use in the Irish national schools, or whether their use has been objected to and discontinued; whether he is aware that an Irish history, written by a Mr. Murphy and dedicated to Father Findlay, is, or was until recently, in use in these schools; and whether he will place a copy of this Irish history in the Library of this House?

:Sanction for the historical text- books referred to has been withdrawn, and, so far as the Commissioners of National Education are aware, the use of these books in national schools has been discontinued. A short History of Ireland by the late Reverend Denis Murphy (edited by the Reverend T. A. Finlay) was sanctioned for use in national schools some years ago, but was not included in the lists of sanctioned books issued in 1911 and subsequently. The question of sanctioning this work was considered by the Commissioners in the year 1916, but as the book was then out of print no action was taken beyond requesting the publishers to submit a proof of edition, should it be reprinted. The book has not since been reprinted, and consequently the Commissioners are unable to supply a copy to the Library of the House of Commons.

How long was this book in use? Was it withdrawn in consequence of its being objectionable?.

I must have notice of that question.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that on Wednesday, 26th May, a motion was carried at a meeting of the Cork Harbour Board that in future the flag of the Irish Republic be floated from the flagstaff on Admiralty Pier, Queenstown, and on all buildings under the control of the board; and what steps he proposes to take to secure that the Union Jack and not the Irish Republican flag be flown in the future, as in the past, on these buildings and premises?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a resolution, which was adopted at a meeting of the Cork Harbour Board on Wednesday, 26th May, 1920, to the effect that in future the flag of the Irish Republic should be floated from the flagstaff on the Admiralty Pier, Cove, and all other buildings under control of the harbour board, as the board considered that the time had arrived when the foreigners should get notice to cuit; and if he will say what steps are being taken in the matter?

I have seen a statement in the Press to the effect men- tioned in the first part of the question. I am not aware whether any action has been taken to carry out this resolution, but I will have inquiries made.

Supposing it is true—as I believe it is—does the Irish Government intend to allow this to continue?

That is a hypothetical question; I have to deal with facts.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, in view of the fact that some 35 members of the Royal Irish Constabulary and Dublin Metropolitan Police have been killed and twice the number wounded since 1st January last, he will institute a medal or decoration to be granted to the officers and men of these two forces who have shown special gallantry in the execution of their duty under circumstances dangerous to life and limb; and, if so, whether to avoid delay, power will be given to the official heads of these two forces to bestow this medal or decoration on. their own initiative?

I shall consider my hon. and gallant Friend's suggestion.

Could not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider the issue of a medal to the police of this country as well as to the police of Ireland?

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

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can give any further information about the burning of the police barracks at Cully-backey, county Antrim, on the 30th May; whether any arrests have been made in connection with the outrage; and can he say what steps he proposes to take to prevent the recurrence of similar crimes in the neighbourhood?

About 3 a.m. on 30th ultimo a party of armed and disguised men demanded entrance in the name of the Irish Republic to the vacated barrack at Cullybackey, about four miles from Ballymena. They were admitted by a constable, who with his family occupied the house. They ordered the constable and his family to leave, then they removed some of the constable's furniture, spilt petrol in each of the rooms, and set it alight. They then "fell in" and marched off in file. The inhabitants of the village turned out and helped to extinguish the fire before much damage was done. No arrests have been made. All practicable steps are being taken to prevent recurrences of such outrages.

:Did these people come up in a motor car; if so, how is it that they are able to obtain motor cars in view of the fact that permits have to be granted by the Government to people before they can get motor cars?

I cannot give an answer in reference to this particular case; but the common plan of these raiders is first of all to raid for motor cars and then to use the raided motor car for the ultimate raid.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman give an assurance that in this part of Ireland there are sufficient troops available to prevent a recurrence of this kind of thing among a population which is entirely loyal to the British Crown?

Everything is done by means of the police and the troops to assist well-disposed persons. I hope that part of Ireland from which my hon. Friend comes will need only a minimum of troops, because of the loyalty—as he says—of the population.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman do anything to restrict the use of petrol, so as to prevent it falling into the hands of Irish anarchists?

I will take that question into consideration.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can make any statement with reference to the damage inflicted on the signal station at Malin Head; whether the damage is irreparable; and whether similar damage to other signal stations and similar institutions in Ireland by-Irish anarchists is being guarded against?

Nothing is known of the damage being inflicted on Malin Head Station, but I understand that some material has been removed from the Mizen Head Station. As regards the last part of the question, steps have been taken to prevent similar occurrences.

Have questions relating to damage done to Naval property in Ireland to be addressed to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, or to the First Lord of the Admiralty?

This particular question was sent to me by the First Lord, so I have answered it: that does not necessarily form a precedent.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will state what steps the Government intend to take to ensure that the amounts awarded as compensation for malicious injury during the present campaign of wanton destruction of property in Ireland by rebels shall not fall on well-disposed subjects of His Majesty, who are in the main the ratepayers?

:Under the provisions of the Criminal Injuries Act, 1919, the County Court Judge and the Judge of Assize, in making a decree, can exempt from the levy any premises that they think fit, and this power is frequently exercised in favour of the class of persons referred to in the question.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman willing to give a Return to the House showing in what cases that power has been exercised?

My hon. and gallant Friend knows I must have notice of a question of that kind, because, as he will see, it entails a very great deal of work.

Is it not the fact that these compensation claims are levied on the country at large?

Not necessarily. It is for the judge to decide.

Is it not a fact that the judge always does fix it upon a given area?

That is the rule, and I think it is a sound rule. I may say, further, that all damage that is done in a given local area will ultimately fall upon the ratepayers of that area, although in the interval the Government is taking steps to ensure that no innocent person is kept out of compensation for any undue length of time.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, owing to the prevailing terrorism, the coroner was unable to procure a jury to investigate the circumstances under which Sergeant Kane and Constable Morton lost their lives during the attack on Kilmallock Barracks on the night of 27th May by a large body of rebels; and whether the Government intend to take steps to substitute some other form of inquiry by which a true verdict according to the evidence can be obtained in such cases?

It is true that in this case the coroner summoned a jury to hold inquests on the two dead policemen, but only four responded. No inquest was held. With regard to the last part of the question the matter is under consideration.

Have the two men who were identified in the act of committing this murder yet been arrested?

I am told that they have not yet been arrested.

asked the Attorney-General for Ireland whether he is aware that on Thursday, 27th May, a large Sinn Fein Court was held at Ballinasloe Town Hall under the Republican flag, that the Court promulgated injunctions and decisions, that it was presided over by a barrister of the High Court, and that some eight or ten solicitors of the Irish circuit argued cases; and what steps he proposes to take to deal officially with this barrister and these solicitors who have taken part in the proceedings of a Court illegally held under the Republican flag?

I have seen in the Press a statement to the effect mentioned in the question. I am having inquiries made as to its truth.

What will happen to this barrister and solicitors who have taken part in these illegal proceedings as regards their position at the Bar?

In the case of the barrister that is a matter for the Benchers of King's Inns, and in the case of the solicitor for the Incorporated Law Society.

Do I understand that the Crown has no power to deal with a barrister or solicitors who have taken part in treasonable and illegal proceedings?

As I have already said, in the case of the barrister the matter is in the hands of the Benchers of King's Inns and in the hands of the Incorporated Law Society in the case of the solicitor. So far as any criminal offence is concerned, if evidence is available the Crown will move.

Is not the Irish Government in London kept informed of these things as they take place without having to wait for questions being put in the House of Commons to bring them to their notice?

The Irish Government in London is informed of all these things and a great many other things. Because questions are put in the House of Commons it must not be assumed that the Government was not aware of the facts before the questions are put down.

What steps have been taken to stop these illegal courts?

I wish the hon. and learned Gentleman would be more specific and name what courts he means.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that in various parts of the country totally illegal courts have been held and orders and injunctions have been issued, and will he take steps to put an end to this gross illegality?

There are not numerous courts of the nature indicated by the hon. Gentleman. There have been meetings of men under various names for various purposes. Those meetings are illegal and will be dealt with as far as and as quickly as we can, but many of the meetings cannot be called illegal.

Why did the military not occupy the town hall of Ballinasloe where these courts have been held?

It is impossible for me to answer a question of that kind. The military have many and serious duties put upon them, and they are doing their best under most difficult circumstances.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the fact that Mr. John O'Kelly, the diplomatic extraordinary delegate of the government of the Irish Republic gave a reception in Rome on the occasion of the beatification of Oliver Plunkett during the past week, and those present included many of the Irish Roman Catholic bishops, and that Cardinal Logue stated that this was the first time Irishmen had attended a gathering of the Irish Republic in Rome; and whether he will take steps through the ordinary diplomatic channel to inform His Holiness the Pope that the Irish Republic is not and never will be recognised by His Majesty's Government.

The Foreign Office has no knowledge of the alleged fact.

asked the Prime Minister when it is proposed to introduce the Irish Land Purchase Bill?

I am not yet in a position to name a date.

Can the right hon Gentleman say whether it is still the intention of the Government, as announced by the Leader of the House, to carry this Bill through concurrently with the Government of Ireland Bill?

In the absence of my right hon. Friend (Mr. Bonar Law), I could not answer that; I would rather leave it to him.

asked the Postmaster-General if he can state the amour of money which has been stolen from the mails in Ireland during the present year?

I cannot at present add anything to the answer furnished by my hon. Friend the Attorney-General for Ireland to a similar question asked by the hon. Member for Wood Green on the 6th of May.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether ships or soldiers of the Muscovite Government are still in possession of the Persian part of Enzeli or any other part of Persian territory; whether Persian Azerbaijan is threatened with invasion by Russian troops; whether the Persian Government has appealed to the Council of the League of Nations and, if so, when and where the Council of the League will meet to discuss the appeal of the Persian Government; and if any instructions have been given to the British representative on the Council of the League in regard to this matter.

The Soviet forces have not yet withdrawn from Enzeli. But it is believed that this will shortly take place. We have no information as to a threatened Russian invasion of Persian Azerbaijan. It is for the Persian Government to appeal to the Council of the League of Nations if they desire to do so, and this step they have already taken.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government proposes to recognise the new Government in Mexico?

His Majesty's Government have not yet been asked to recognise any new Government in Mexico. As soon as any such request is received from any duly authorised representative of that Government, the matter will receive careful consideration.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Prime Minister whether negotiations have been commenced with M. Krassin, and if so, will he state what is the purpose of these negotiations, and have they been commenced with the assent and co-operation of the Governments of France and Italy; what are the credentials of M. Krassin, and for whom is he acting.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the conflicting statements circulated in connection with the reception of M. Krassin by Members of His Majesty's Government, and the consequent disquieting effect on the public mind, both here and in France, he can explain the purpose of the conversations with the delegate of the Russian Soviet Government?

The decision to permit trade with Russia was arrived at by the meeting of the Supreme Council held in Paris on 16th January this year. This decision was reaffirmed at a further meeting of the Supreme Council held in London on the 24th February.

At San Remo, on the 26th April, the Supreme Council decided to authorise representatives of the Allied Governments to meet M. Krassin and the Russian trade delegation then at Copenhagen, with a view to the immediate re-starting of trade relations between Russia and other countries, through the intermediary of the co-operative organisations and otherwise. It further decided that the "Allied representatives will be prepared to discuss with the Russian delegates the best method of removing the obstacles and difficulties in the way of the resumption of peaceful trade relations, with a desire of finding solutions in the general interests of Europe."

At the same time, the names of the Russian delegates were considered, and it was decided that the Allied representatives should meet M. Krassin, and the Russian delegates—except Litvinoff, in London—at the earliest date. M. Krassin is head of a delegation represent- ing the Russian Co-operative Organisations, but he is also a Minister of the Soviet Government, and as such is acting in the name and under the authority of the Soviet Government.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why this very interesting statement is now made for the first time?

Obviously my Noble Friend does not pay any particular attention to statements made by Members of the Government. I made the statement myself in the House some time ago. In addition to that, the actual text of the Resolution was published in all the papers officially, and has been communicated officially by the Supreme Council.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is a fact that the Russian Co-operative Societies have now been taken over, and form a Department of the Soviet Government?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether M. Krassin was originally a German agent, who subsequently took employment in Russia?

I do not think he was a German agent. He was associated, I believe, with a German firm of electricians, or something of that sort; but he is a Russian.

Are the representatives of the Allied Governments taking any part in these negotiations, or are the negotiations proceeding only with the British Government?

Oh, no. There are certain questions which the British Government want to be cleared out of the way before they would undertake negotiations at all. One is the question of prisoners. We shall also want some guarantees that there will be no attack made upon British interests in the East—[An HON. MEMBER: "Or at home."]—Yes, or at home—while we are negotiating. These things we must clear out of the way for ourselves. The negotiations as to trade will then be conducted by representatives of all the Governments. The representatives of the French Government and of the Italian Government are here and prepared to proceed with the negotiations.

Are we to assume that the perturbation of French public opinion is entirely unjustified, and that the French Government are parties to all the negotiations which are going on at this moment?

I am not at all aware that there is any "perturbation" of French public opinion. There may have been statements in certain newspapers, which are trying to foment trouble and ill-feeling between two friendly allied countries, whose friendliness is essential to the welfare of the world, but that is no proof that French public opinion is perturbed.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has any information as to the recent capture of British naval officers and men by the Bolsheviks at Baku; and, if so, what steps he has taken to secure their immediate release?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that 18 officers, non-commissioned officers, and private soldiers are still held prisoner by the Bolshevist Government in Siberia, in addition to those in prison at Moscow; and whether, before any further negotiations are carried out with M. Krassin, assurances will be obtained that these officers and men will be put over the frontier as soon as possible?

asked the Prime Minister whether the British naval mission captured at Baku has yet been released: and, if not, whether he will take steps to see that M. Krassin is detained here under similar conditions until this is accomplished?

An undertaking to release British prisoners is an indispensable preliminary of the renewal of trading relations with Russia.

Would it not be better to see that these officers and men are over the frontier before we go on negotiating with the representative of this Government of torturers and scoundrels?

:Why was no publicity given to this question, which is one of supreme importance?

There is a question on that later on, and I will then give my reasons.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my question as to whether he will see that M. Krassin is detained here under similar conditions until the prisoners are released?

CROFT: May I ask whether, having regard to the fact that no one is aware of the number of officers and men who have been taken prisoner, he can give the House the number here and now. Is the right hon. Gentleman's answer intended to convey the fact that no negotiations of any kind will take place until every British citizen, however humble, is released from captivity?

The condition, of course, covers every British subject, whether military or civilian, and of whatever rank or grade?

Does the right hon. Gentleman's answer apply only to British subjects or does it also apply to subjects of our Allies?

That would be a matter for negotiation, I think, by the other Governments. I am not aware that they are in the same position. I know about our own prisoners, but not about those of our Allies.

Are the Government satisfied that they are being well treated?

Notice must be given of any further questions.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a statement has recently been issued by the Supreme Economic Council giving particulars of the proposed regulations for trading with Russia; whether he is aware that this document has been published in the Press in Italy and France; and, if so, will he take steps to see that this document is issued for publication in Great Britain?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second and third parts do not therefore arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether Japanese military operations for the occupation of Eastern Siberia were undertaken after consulta- tion either with the Supreme Council or with the Council of the League of Nations; and whether the Government will ask for a statement of the Japanese action and intentions in Eastern Siberia before entering into negotiations for the renewal of the Anglo-Japanese alliance?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As at present advised, His Majesty's Government do not propose to act in the sense of the second part of the hon. Member's question.

asked the Prime Minister if a state of war exists at the present time between Great Britain and Soviet Russia?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister if he can state that, before any negotiations for commercial business are entered into with any representatives of the Soviet Government of Russia, that Government will be required to restore to the English and French companies affected the properties which they had purchased in the Russian Empire, and which they were occupying when they were dispossessed of them by the Soviet Government, together with their offices, books, and cash which were appropriated forcibly; and if due compensation will be required to be paid to such companies for such unlawful seizure?

I do not think it would be desirable, whilst negotiations are proceeding, to publish details of the questions discussed and demands put forward.

May I take it that this will be clearly provided for, as it is a matter of such vital importance to shareholders in this country and France, whose position is now so hazardous?

I can assure my hon. Friend that this has not been lost sight of. I am only deprecating a discussion taking place at the moment. To go into detailed questions now will not help the negotiations, but I realise fully the importance of the matter, which has been, and is, the subject of careful consideration.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether the State is still giving gratuitous education at the universities to demobilised officers of the Navy and Army; and, if so, how long it is proposed to continue this appropriation of funds?

The Government scheme for assisting ex-service students to follow courses of higher education is still in operation. No new awards will be granted on applications made after the 30th June, 1920; but awards already granted on application made on or before that date will be continued until the conclusion of the courses approved for the students in question.

Do I understand that fresh applications may be made up to the end of the current month?

Yes, up to the end of the current month.

Is it not a fact that in the War Pensions Bill the date fixed is 30th July? Does my right hon. Friend propose to deprive officers of the privileges to which they are entitled?

It is anticipated that all the applications likely to come in are likely to have come in by the 30th of June.

To what extent is it proposed to devote public funds to this counsel of perfection? Is there to be a large number of officers admitted in the future to university education at the expense of the taxpayers, or is the number to be limited?

The number is to be limited in point of time. I wish to point out, however, that no applications will be received after the 30th of June, 1920, and that imposes a limitation on the number.

Are the numbers up to the 30th June without any limitation? Does that mean that practically any any officer at the present time may apply to my right hon. Friend for a university education at the taxpayers' expense? [An HON. MEMBER: "Why not?"]

Before a grant is made an officer has to satisfy me, firstly, that he has served in the War for a period of at least six months before the armistice; secondly, that he is in want of assistance and could not undergo a university education without assistance; and thirdly, that he is qualified for it by the courses he has undertaken to pursue.

Why should officers who are not yet demobilised at the request of the Government be deprived of the benefits of this educational scheme?

asked the Prime Minister if, in view of his statement to the National Federation of Discharged and Demobilised Soldiers and Sailors, that a certain order of discharge from Woolwich and other Government factories would be maintained, that is to say, non-service men engaged since the War, non-service men engaged during the War, ex-service men of the Great War, disabled service men, and pre-War employés, he can say if this applies or is to apply to Government dockyards?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that ex-soldiers under 21 who have fought in the War and are now employed as clerks in record and other offices under the War Office and other Departments receive a considerably lower rate of pay than clerks over 21; and whether it is possible to treat clerks under 21, who have fought in the War, on a somewhat different footing from civilian clerks under 21 who have not fought, and to give these ex-service clerks the same rate of pay as if they had attained 21?

I am aware of the facts as stated in the first part of the question. The existing differentiation in the rates of pay of temporary male clerks above and below the age of 21 years is at present under the consideration of the Treasury, and I hope in due course to be able to announce a decision on the subject.

Will the hon. Gentleman give due consideration to the fact that a man under 21 who has fought in the War ought to be treated differently from a man under 21 who has not fought in the War?

All relevant facts will be taken into consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will say how many policewomen are now employed, paid, and clothed in London at the public expense; whether any corresponding reduction has been made in the numbers of the policemen on account of the employment of such policewomen; what powers are possessed by the latter other than such as are possessed by members of the public; whether the policewomen are under the same discipline as policemen; whether they are permanently appointed; and what duties are discharged by the policewomen who perambulate the parks.

The number of women police employed in connection with the Metropolitan Police is 112. No reduction has been made in the men police. The women police have no special powers: but this point is under the consideration of a Committee. They are under the same discipline as men police. They are at present enrolled for one year only. They patrol the parks in order to assist in the observance of the law and the park regulations and to give advice to young persons of their own sex who appear to be in need of it.

Has the consideration of the Committee been directed to giving them extra powers, and if they have no powers other than such as are possessed by members of the public what advantage results from the expenditure of public funds upon their entertainment?

The Committee are going into the whole question and I hope that they will report very shortly.

asked the Home Secretary whether one Theodore Schlagentweit was prior to the War German Consul in Manchester; what were the circumstances leading to his deportation; what was his record during the War; whether he is now attached to the German Embassy here; and, if so, why such permission was accorded?

The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative. This man was repatriated. His previous record during the War was that he was convicted in August, 1914, for travelling more than five miles without a permit and was subsequently interned until the date of his repatriation. He is not, so far as I am aware, attached to the German Legation here, but he came recently to this country as a diplomatic courier. No question of granting any permission arose: but I am considering whether the British Government should take any steps with regard to the matter in the future.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a very strong suspicion in Manchester that facts with regard to the Manchester Regiment were conveyed to Germany by this gentleman, who had a brother commanding the forces which were actually opposed to the Manchester Regiment?

No, Sir. I am not aware of these suspicions in regard to the Manchester Regiment.

If I give the right hon. Gentleman the facts will he carefully consider them before he decides this case?

I will consider any in formation which the hon. Member places before me.

asked the Home Secretary whether a former German spy, Theodore Schlagentweit, has been allowed re-entry into this country; whether this man was known to have moved about amongst troops of the East Lancashire Division at Turton and Edgeworth during mobilisation, and to have visited ports and defended places on the South Coast in August, 1914; whether he was detained by the Manchester police, and afterwards allowed to return to Germany by the Home Office; and whether it is intended to allow known former enemy spies entry into this country?

Theodore Schlagentweit has recently come to this country as a diplomatic courier. I am not aware of any evidence that would entitle me to describe him as a spy. He was on one occasion seen motoring near Turton, and this led to his conviction for travelling more than five miles without a permit, and to his subsequent internment until he was repatriated. Persons known to have been enemy spies will certainly not be allowed to enter this country.

asked the Prime Minister whether, having regard to the decision given against the Crown in the case of the De Keyser's Hotel, he will say whether it is intended to proceed with, or to introduce legislation, to set aside the decision; and, if not, what is the position of a subject who has had his property occupied by a Government Department, and has not as yet received or agreed to ex gratiâ compensation for such occupation?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. I do not think "that the Indemnity Bill can be correctly described as a Bill to set aside the decision referred to. It is intended, as my hon. and gallant Friend is aware, to proceed with the Bill, which it is believed makes suitable provision for compensation in the class of cases mentioned in the question.

What is the position of a subject who has a claim against the Government? Has he to wait until the new Bill is passed?

I do not think so. It may well be that if he commences proceedings, he may find that they are afterwards superseded by legislation.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the great increase in banking businesses that is carried on in such towns as Geneva or Amsterdam since the War; and what steps is he taking to prevent the transfer of banking accounts from this country to the places mentioned, with the consequent danger of such accounts escaping their just share of taxation?

As my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated on 20th March, if my hon. and gallant Friend has information tending to show that taxation is evaded by the increase of banking business abroad, he would be glad if he would communicate with him. Interest on bank deposits is usually paid by British banks without deduction for Income Tax, and the taxpayer is under precisely the same obligation to include in his return interest on deposits abroad, as he is to include interest on deposits at home.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this banking business has greatly increased?

I think that the increase is common to this country as well as foreign countries.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the large numbers of business men and retail shop-keepers who are being compelled to give up their premises at the expiration of their lease and are unable to find alternative accommodation owing to the present shortage of houses; what action does he propose to take; and will he say if he has considered the recently established Danish system of rent courts to deal with cases at issue between landlord and tenant?

I have been asked to answer this question. I hope to be able to make a statement on this matter to-morrow.

asked the Minister of Health whether he can state the amount of building materials which have been acquired by the Director of Building Materials, the amount that he has disposed of, and the amount that he has in stock.?

:Owing to the hon. Member's absence at Question time yesterday, I circulated the answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I was here at Question time yesterday. I put the question, and postponed it at the request of the hon. Gentleman. If it is circulated I am quite satisfied.

I presumed the hon. Member was away studying the site value of the Epsom racecourse.

I was here yesterday. I put the question. Subsequently I received a letter from the hon. Gentleman asking me to postpone it until to-day and to put it down, and he would give me an answer.

I asked the hon. Member to postpone it, but I was here to answer it.

Why did not you answer it when I put it?

On two occasions the hon. Member did not put it. He may have put it to someone else later.

I put it.

Perhaps I can throw-light on it. My recollection is that the first time round the hon. Member was not here. The second time round he was.

That is right.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has any control over the price of bricks; if so, will he state to what extent this control is effective; and if he is aware that, on recent contracts placed for bricks, contractors have demanded 71½ per cent extra in one case and 15s. per thousand extra in another case, and that this constant increase of prices is having the effect of stopping house-building?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. I view with high concern the increasing cost of building materials. As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the matter is at present under consideration by a Committee appointed under the Profiteering Act.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the Bredbury and Romiley Urban District Council decided early in 1919 that there was a need for 450 houses in their area; that they purchased the land on a very reasonable basis, and actually borrowed the money at 51½2 per cent. locally; whether he is aware that, owing to the obstruction of his staff, no houses have yet been started; and whether he will take steps to dismiss the officials who are impeding the progress of house building, who in this instance have had plans in their possession since September, 1919, seeing that such methods discourage local enterprise and cause dissatisfaction to discharged soldiers and others who cannot secure houses?

The answer is a long one giving details of the proceedings, and perhaps my hon. Friend will allow me to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the answer referred to:

I am aware that considerable delay has taken place in connection with this housing scheme, but this delay has been due to the unduly high tenders, and I cannot accept the statement of the hon. Member that the fault lies with my Department. The District Council provisionally accepted in September last a tender of £88,993 for the building of 90 houses, subject to the usual provision for payment to the contractor of future rises in the costs of labour and materials. As this price was excessive, the Council were asked to modify their plans and obtain a, revised tender. A tender upon revised plans for £76,000 was obtained by the Council in February last, but when the contract came to be signed the contractor demanded 10 per cent. profit on fluctuations in labour and materials. It was impossible to accept this condition, and an alternative tender submitted by the contractor was so high that it could not be accepted. Further tenders have now been received for 230 houses, and the Council have asked the Housing Commissioners to confer with them on these tenders next week. I hope that the difficulties which have been experienced will then be overcome.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has refused to pass plans for housing estates for the London County Council because the Council propose to build rooms 8 feet 6 inches high and to lay house drains in concrete in accordance with their bye-laws under the London Building Acts; whether he proposes to override these bye-laws and to permit rooms to be built only 8 feet high and drains not to be laid in concrete; and whether he can make any statement on the matter so as not to delay housing progress in London?

I have not seen my way to pass plans for houses with rooms 8 feet 6 inches in height or, except when there are special circumstances to warrant that course, for encasing pipe sewers wholly in concrete. I am advised that the stipulations which I have made are ample for health and security. I may add that I have arranged to see a deputation from the County Council to discuss these matters. There should be no delay in proceeding with the housing schemes.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he is going to receive the deputation?

I think it is on Monday, but I am not sure.

asked the Prime Minister when the Bill continuing the Ministry of Food will be introduced?

I regret that I am not in a position to name the date.

asked the Prime Minister when control of shipping will come to an end?

I am not in a position to make any statement.

asked the Prime Minister when a decision will be reached with regard to the Channel Tunnel?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can state the personnel of the English representation at the Shipping Conference at Genoa; and if he can also state the policy of this country on the subject?

I have been asked to answer this question. With my hon. Friend's permission, I will circulate a list of the personnel of the British delegation to the Genoa Conference in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The policy to be adopted at the Conference by the Government delegates will be fully considered by the Cabinet immediately.

The following is the list mentioned:

The following delegates and advisers will represent British interests at the forthcoming International Labour Conference at Genoa upon matters affecting seamen:

Government Delegates:

Sir C. A Montague Barlow, K.B.E., M.P., Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Labour.

Mr. C. Hipwood, C.B., Senior Assistant Secretary of the Board of Trade and Secretary of the Ministry of Shipping.

Advisers to Government Delegates:

Captain R. C. Warden, C.B.E.,

Mr. G. C. Blair,

Mr. C. Stuart Hall-Board of Trade and Ministry of Shipping.

Mr. J. A. Dale,

Mr. I. Haig Mitchell,

Mr. A. A. A. Wotzel, O.B.E.-Ministry of Labour.

Mr. W. G. Nott Bower,

Mr. David T. Jones, C.B.E.-Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries and Scottish Fishery Board.

Secretary to Government Delegates:

Mr. O. C. Allen, C.B.E., Ministry of Labour.

Employers' Delegate.

Sir Alfred Booth, Baronet, Cunard Steamship Company.

Advisers to Employers' Delegate.

Captain J. W. Harris, R.N.R., The Booth Steamship Company, Cunard Building, Pier Hill, Liverpool.

Mr. J. F. Cobey, The White Star Line, Oceanic Chambers, Canada Dock, Liverpool.

Mr. J. Setterfield, The Cunard Steamship Company, Cunard Building, Pier Head, Liverpool.

Mr. H. C. Somerville, Messrs. Geo. Gibson and Company, 64, Commercial Street, Leith.

Commander H. L. Walton, C.B.E.,R.N.R., Ellerman - Wilson's Lines, Ltd., Hull.

Mr. E. W. Harvey, Messrs. Furness, Withy & Co., Billiter Street, E.C.3.

Mr. E. Sainsbury, Messrs. Shaw, Savill & Albion Co., 34, Leadenhall Street, E.C.3.

Mr. Cuthbert Laws, The Shipping Federation, Limited, 24, St. Mary Axe, E.C.3.

Workpeople's Delegate.

Mr. J. Havelock Wilson, M.P., C.B.E., The Merchant Seamen's League.

Advisers to Workpeople's Delegate.

Mr. T. W. Moore, Imperial Merchant Service Guild.

Mr. T. Scott, Merchant Marine Service Association.

Mr. J. Henson, National Sailors' and Firemen's Union.

Mr. C. McVey, National Sailors' and Firemen's Union.

Mr. D. Bramah, Marine Engineers' Association.

Mr. A. W. Gorman, Amalgamated Society of Engineers.

Mr. M. Joyce, United Kingdom Pilots' Association.

Mr. J. Cotter, National Union of Ships' Stewards, Cooks, etc.

May we hope for a public declaration of the policy which these delegates are to follow?

I will inquire as to that.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Financial-Committee of the Cabinet has met lately?

It is constantly meeting

Has any estimate been made of what this country can afford to spend?

I would like notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister when the Committee stage of the Finance Bill will be taken, and when the Government amendments in connection with Excess Profits Duty will be tabled?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer understands that the Committee stage of the Finance Bill cannot be taken before Wednesday, the 16th. He proposes to hand in his Amendments to the Excess Profits Duty early next week.

How many days are to be allowed for the discussion of this Bill, and will there be full opportunity to debate the question of the Excess Profits Duty?

That is a question which should be addressed to the Leader of the House.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the number of individuals who paid Super-tax in 1914 and the number who were liable for Super-tax last year?

Thenumber of individuals assessed to Super-tax for 1914–15 was 29,996 at 31st May, 1920. This number may be slightly reduced when a few appeals, which it has not yet been possible, to dispose of owing to the War and other causes, have been settled. The number of individuals assessed to Super-tax for 1919–20 was 43,576 at 31st May, 1920. Assessments for 1919–20 may be made up to 5th April, 1923, and the number of persons liable to Super-tax for that year is estimated at 59,000.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us, in view of these figures, how the War Wealth Tax is to be levied on 75,000 Super-tax payers?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount of revenue which is derived from British companies registered in this country which are carrying on business abroad?

I am having inquiry made, and will communicate with my hon. Friend in due course.

May I ask if that information will be furnished promptly?

I will get it as rapidly as I can, but it requires some research, and the officials engaged in the matter are very busy.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what amount has been realised by the Petrol Tax since August, 1914; and how much of this has been expended upon the roads?

The approximate receipts from the Motor Spirit Duty (including the special War increase in the rate) from 1st August, 1914, to 31st March, 1920, were £11,277,000. Between the 1st August, 1914, and the suspension of the road grant under Section 49 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1915,£1,039,000 was issued to the Road Fund. A further sum of £8,250,000 was provided for the Road Fund from Votes in 1919–20.

Was not a pledge given by the present Prime Minister that the whole of the result of this tax should be devoted to the improvement of the roads?

Not the war increase tax but the original tax, and more than that has been allocated to the roads.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is yet able to state the policy of the Government with regard to the Report of the Select Committee appointed to consider the practicability of a tax on war-time increases of wealth; and whether a day will be granted to this House to discuss the matter?

I hope to be in a position to make a statement on this subject on Monday afternoon.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of British companies registered in this country and the capital employed therein who carry on their business mainly abroad?

The returns which have to be filed by companies, registered in this country, in accordance with the provisions of the Companies (Consolidation) Act, 1908, do not disclose information as to where the business of the company is mainly carried on. In these circumstances I am unable to furnish the particulars desired by my hon. Friend.

Is there any information or evidence available as to British companies who are carrying on trade? Has the hon. Gentleman any returns of any kind?

We have no returns of the nature asked for by my hon. Friend whether the business is mainly carried on abroad or not. I will make further inquiries, and perhaps my hon. Friend will speak to me on the subject.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that a Bill has been introduced in the United States Senate giving preferential privilege to American vessels to pass through the Panama Canal free of tolls and dues, while tolls and dues will be imposed upon British and other foreign vessels; whether, if this Bill is passed into law, it will repeal the law at present in existence which places American and foreign vessels on terms of equality in regard to dues and toll charges; and whether His Majesty's Government proposes to communicate with the United States government with a view to the retention and maintenance of the existing law, which puts all vessels using the Panama Canal on terms of equality as regards dues and tolls?

His Majesty's Government have no knowledge of the Bill in question, but enquiries on the subject are being made of His Majesty's Ambassador at Washington.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the trend of legislation in the United States is detrimental and inimical to British interests, more particularly shipping, and will he look into this very important matter?