asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state what the date was upon which steps were taken by the British Clearing House to collect unpaid British-owned coupons of the German Government and municipal loans; what those steps were and what were the terms of the notice, if any, to the public; whether such notice specifically asked the British owners to lodge their unpaid coupons with a Government Department or nominee; in what publications did the notice appear; and will the British Clearing House repeat the notice?

Upon the day the Treaty was ratified a letter was sent to every creditor who had registered his claim with the Public Trustee requiring him to prove his debt and to give particulars of all negotiable securities held by him. On 13th January last a notice was inserted in the Press requesting that any creditor who did not receive this letter should communicate with the Clearing Office, and a further notice appeared in the Press as recently as 11th June. The German Clearing Office was established on 26th April, and from then onwards letters have been sent to individual creditors whose claims disclosed the possession by them of negotiable securities, requesting them to forward them at once to the Clearing Office A very large proportion of these securities have already been collected and delivered to the German Clearing Office, and it is "anticipated that by the end of the present month every individual creditor whose claims disclosed the possession by them of such securities will have received a letter requesting him to forward his coupons or other securities to the British Clearing Office for transmission to Germany. No further notification appears to be necessary.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the Bell Mill, Limited, Oldham, charge exactly the same price for their yarn on the Manchester Royal Exchange as all other mills do for the same quality of yarn; and, if so, will he state why special investigations have to be made in their case?

I am not in possession of information concerning the price at which the Bell Mill Company, Limited, of Oldham sell their yarn on the Manchester Royal Exchange. My attention was called to the profits made by this company in consequence of two questions asked in the House on the 10th May by the hon. Members for Plaistow and Kettering respectively, and I accordingly decided to call the attention of the Central Committee under the Profiteering Acts to the matter in order that if it was considered desirable the position might be investigated.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the result of the investigation into the price of sewing cotton; and, if not, when he expects to receive and publish the Report?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Report of the Profiteering Sub-Committee which inquired as to the reasonableness or otherwise of the increased price of sewing cotton will be published without qualification in precisely the form in which it was forwarded to the Board of Trade and the Central Committee?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the result of the investigation into the price of sewing cotton; and, if not, when he expects to receive and publish the Report?

As I informed the hon. Member for North Lambeth last Monday, the Report of the Sub-Committee on Sewing Cotton contained certain statements concerning which the Committee considered it desirable to consult Messrs. Coats before publication. The observations of Messrs. Coats have been received, and are at the present under consideration by the Central Committee and the Sub-Committee. While I hope the Report will be published at an early date, until such time as the matters at present under consideration have been decided I am unable to say when or in what form the Report will be published.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the result of the inquiry into profiteering in building materials; and, if not, when he expects to receive and publish the Report?

I am at present unable to make any statement regarding the result of the investigations into building materials. As my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade informed the hon. Member for North Hammersmith on Wednesday last, I fully appreciate the urgency of the matter and am doing everything in my power to expedite the issue of the Reports. It has been found impossible to complete the Reports until more detailed statements of costings have been received from the accountants.

When does my right hon. Friend expect to get the result?

It depends on the amount of investigation required. I do not want to deceive my hon. Friend by giving too early a date.

Will it be before the adjournment?

I hope so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps, if any, have been taken to check profiteering on the part of manufacturers and wholesalers; how many cases have been brought before the Central Profiteering Committee; and in what number of cases have charges of profiteering been substantiated against manufacturers and wholesalers.

Complaints of alleged profiteering by manufacturers and wholesale traders are investigated by the Central Committee which was established for that purpose.

Three hundred and ninety-two cases of alleged profiteering have been brought before the Central Committee; the investigation has been completed in 323 cases, the charge of profiteering being substantiated in 31 cases, while 69 cases are at present under or awaiting investigation.

What was done in the 31 cases in which the charge of profiteering was held to be substantiated?

I anticipated that some one would request that information. The situation is this. In three prosecutions that were undertaken convictions were obtained; in 17 cases prosecutions are pending or have been ordered; in five cases there has been a refund of the amount paid in excess of what was declared to be a reasonable price; in six cases the Committee although satisfied that the charge was established, recommended no action presumably because they thought the man was sufficiently punished by having to pay the costs already incurred.

What punishment was inflicted in the cases where convictions were obtained?

I cannot charge my memory with the penalties inflicted. Perhaps the hon. Member will put down that question.

Was a single profiteer sent to prison?

I am not in a position to say.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what arrangements he proposes to make for the supply and price of bunkers to fishing trawlers when and if coal control terminates on 31st August next; and whether he is aware of the anxiety among trawler owners on this subject and that fishing vessels are already being laid up owing to the present high price of bunkers?

Provision has been included in the Ministry of Mines Bill to continue the existing powers for regulating the supply and price of coal for bunkers, so that the eventuality to which the hon. and gallant Member refers is not likely to arise.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware, with regard to the statement in the last part of my question, that fishing vessels are already being held up owing to the high price of bunkers, and what does he propose to do?

Bunkers are sold at the same price as industrial coal for home consumption, and so I do not quite see what the grievance is.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what will be the effect on the index figure of the cost of living of a rise of 2s. a ton in the price of domestic coal?

As the index number to which my hon. Friend refers is prepared in the Ministry of Labour, I have been asked to reply to this question. A rise of 2s. a ton in the price of domestic coal would raise the Ministry of Labour retail prices index number by nearly one-half of a point.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the reply he has given or proposes to give to the claims presented by the Miners' Federation with regard to wages and coal prices?

The Executive of the Miners' Federation of Great Britain met the Coal Controller on Thursday last and placed before him the claim of the Federation. The claim is now being considered, and I am not yet able to say what reply the Government will give.

Can the hon. Gentleman hold out any hope that prices to consumers are going to be reduced?

I cannot add anything to my answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the District Coal and Coke Supplies Committee for Scotland is still persisting in maintaining that duff or waste material, whereof colliery bings is composed, shall not be available for shipment, and has, within the last fortnight, refused to allow steamers to load or sail carrying duff; whether he will investigate the grounds of the said Committee's interference with the shipment of a commodity outwith their jurisdiction in respect that it is not coal; and who it is that is causing them to go beyond their province?

There were formerly difficulties upon this subject owing to the latitude taken by coal owners and exporters in the material which they shipped under the name of bing-duff. Arrangements have again been made as regards Scotland to treat duff from bings as being outside the export allocation: and the District Coal and Coke Supplies Committee for Scotland is entrusted with the duty of exercising the necessary discretion in the matter, so as to ensure that the irregularities which previously made it necessary to curtail shipments of duff are not repeated.

How is it that duff has been rejected as not being coal? How came the Department to interfere, with it? Is it realized that the Department will probably be liable in damages for loss to the people who own it? The Department have no more right to refuse to allow it to be exported than they have to refuse to allow slate, or sand, or any other of these commodities to be exported?

On these various questions, I shall require to take advice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has received a telegram from the chairman of the North of England Steamship Association drawing his attention to the Report of the septennial survey of the River Tyne, pointing out that many ships are laid up in that river because they cannot obtain shipments of coal, while on the other hand collieries are being laid idle from time to time because, while no market can be found at home for their output, they are prohibited from sending it abroad?

I have received the telegram referred to. On Friday last I received a deputation from the North of England Steamship Association, at which the hon. and gallant Member was present, when the whole position was explained and the reasons for the restriction of export made clear. I do not think my hon. and gallant Friend will regard it as necessary that I should add anything to these explanations at the present time.

Will the right hon. Gentleman allow the whole of the increased output in the areas in question to be exported?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman knows the answer given, and I think he might put that question again when we see how the modified promise works out.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of sailors of alien origin now employed on purely British ships; and whether, in cases where this type of crew is engaged, he will make representations to the owners or charterers?

The estimated number of foreigners employed in trading Vessels belonging to the British Islands which were employed some time during the year 1919 was 16,771, or about 7 per cent. of the estimated total number of seamen employed. In so far as the employment of aliens is permitted by Statute it would not be competent for me to make representations to owners or charterers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state what moneys have been spent to date in the irrigation schemes in the Sudan with the objective of cotton growing, and when it is hoped to commence delivery of such cotton to this country?

I have been asked to take this question. I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Rossendale on 9th March last. His Majesty's Government have no more recent information with regard to the amount spent on the irrigation schemes in question, which are now in progress and are estimated to require four to five years to complete. Cotton grown on the new areas to be irrigated as a result of these projects cannot therefore be harvested before 1925.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether it is proposed to publish at an early date the conventions agreed to at the International Conference of Seamen held in Genoa?

I have been asked by my right hon. Friend to reply to this question. The conventions and recommendations adopted at the Genoa Conference will be published as soon as authentic copies of the texts have been received from the International Labour Office.

Will this House have an opportunity of discussing any conventions before they are ratified?

I think the procedure in the past has been to give an opportunity for discussion, and I presume the same procedure will be followed in this case.

asked the Prime Minister if the Government will consider the advisability of postponing the date for the increase in railway fares one week, in order that thousands of people may be able to take a much-needed holiday, particularly in view of the fact that most of these people had saved for their holiday, calculating their fare at the present rate?

asked the Prime Minister, (1) whether he is aware that many families have made arrangements for their holidays in the month of August, and that the increased fares which are now proposed by the Ministry of Transport will entail hardship, and of the possibilities of cancelling such holidays, thereby entailing considerable hardship upon many of the seaside and other towns, and thus causing a loss of revenue to the railway companies from a decreased traffic; whether he is prepared to consider the postponement of the increased rates till September or a later date;

(2) if the proposed increase of railway fares which is to come into operation on 6th August applies to season or contract tickets?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has yet received any Report from the Advisory Committee on Railway Bates as to increasing passenger fares; if so, can he state what rate of increase has been decided upon and if it will apply to workmen's, season and traders' tickets; from what date it is proposed to charge such increases; and if he will state if the return-halves of ordinary return tickets will be available after the date which is fixed for any increased rate of fares?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will consider the advisability of not raising railway fares until the summer holidays are over, in order not to disturb the arrangements come to by many people of small means?

asked the Minister of Transport whether, having regard to the vast number of clerks and other small salaried workers in London who are forced to live in the outer suburbs, and whose salaries make it impossible to pay the suggested increase of fares, he will take steps to meet these hard cases?

asked the Minister of Transport (1) whether he is aware of the burden the introduction of the increased railway fares on the 5th August will place upon those of the middle classes with fixed incomes who have arranged to take their holidays in that month or in September; whether he is aware that whole families who have been saving week by week for their annual holiday will be prevented by the increased fares from going to the seaside or into the country in accordance with arrangements made months ago; whether he can see his way to make such re-arrangement of the proposed new charges as will during those two months secure to bonâ fide holiday makers with children the benefits of the present rates;

(2) whether he is aware that many people intending to go to the seaside in August and September are ex-service men in receipt of disability pensions for maladies which urgently require a change of air and rest; and whether, both from the point of view of State expenditure and the general health of the community he will arrange for special consideration with regard to travelling charges to be extended to these cases?

I have been asked to answer these questions. The position as regards railway charges is that, owing to rise in costs generally, and particularly the rise in wages and materials due to the recent findings of the National Wages Board and the Shaw Commission of Inquiry into Dock Wages, the rise in the cost of coal and all other materials, a substantial increase in railway charges must be faced if the policy of the Government, this House, and the country against subsidy is to be adhered to.

These large increased costs have only recently culminated, and must be recovered before the 15th August, 1921, if a subsidy is to be avoided, as the Government guarantee of railways then ceases and the income reverts to the shareholders.

The Government referred the question as to how the increased cost is to be made good to the Bates Advisory Committee, and published the reference and full data in Command Paper 815 of 7th July. On 3rd June and 21st June, in reply to questions in this House, the Ministry of Trans- port and the Leader of the House made it quits clear that these increases were inevitable.

The Government do not make proposals or recommendations to the Advisory Committee as to the distribution or amount of increase of fares, rates, or charges to produce the required revenue, that being the statutory duty of the Rates Advisory Committee, who are also authorised to take evidence thereon before making their recommendations—which have not yet been received. The whole question of cheap tickets and excursion trains is within the scope of their reference.

The Government is sensible of the need for consideration to railway users, and decided to spread the recovery of the deficit beyond the financial year, and not to impose any increase of fares on ordinary tickets until after the Bank Holiday, provided every effort was made to produce equilibrium by the date when the Government cease to have any right to the railway revenue.

The increases in railway rates and charges generally so far made have not kept pace with the general rise of costs in this country.

As against this:

This has only been possible on account of economies made, as a clear indication of which I may say that whereas the numbers of passengers buying ordinary tickets are up 31 per cent., comparing the first quarters of this year with 1913, the record pre-War year, the engine power used to work this vastly increased traffic has been reduced by over 20 per cent. below the 1913 level on main-line railways.

The increased cost must be borne either in higher railway rates or by the taxpayer, and the Government decided and announced its decision to the House that the cost must fall on the users of the railways, and that the additional rates would be imposed as soon as the Advisory Committee have reported.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the great point at issue in this question of increase of rates is when it is going to take place, so that holiday-makers may be able to make their arrangements? May I ask what notice is going to be given to the public if a rise in rates, as seems quite likely, is going to be made?

Perhaps I may be allowed to answer that question, as in this matter the Ministry of Transport is only carrying out the decision of the Government. The question we had to decide was whether or not the deficit should be paid by the taxpayer or by the users of the railways. Postponement means a subsidy, or, alternatively, it means that, when the rates are put up, they will have to be much higher than if they are put up at once. The Government have definitely taken the decision that the users of the railways must pay.

May I ask when this increase of fares will take place—on what actual date?

The announcement was made in this House as long ago as June that it will take place as soon as the Advisory Committee have reported, but we decided to put it off until the 5th August, even if the Committee report earlier.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all the figures which have been placed before the Advisory Committee by the railway companies are based upon an increase for passenger fares and goods as and from 1st September next, and that therefore——

That is not so.

I understand that has been stated before the Committee this morning. If that is so, cannot the right hon. Gentleman say at once, so as to get rid of the irritation and great inconvenience which is caused, that the rise will not take place until 30th August or 1st September?

I am not aware of the facts as to the figures which the right hon. Gentleman has given, but they are not in accordance with the reference given to the Advisory Committee. I have already explained that delay means either increased taxation or raising the rates to make up the deficit caused by the delay. The Cabinet were well aware of the outcry this would cause, but they knew it was right to do it.

If what I have said is correct—and I have the best authority for so believing—that the figures submitted by the railway companies are based as and from the end of August or 1st September, will not the right hon. Gentleman now say he will be guided by that fact?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that under the Ministry of Transport Act, whatever be the rates in force on 15th August, they must continue in force for 18 months afterwards? That is to say, that if a change has not taken place by 15th August, it is stereotyped and cannot be altered for 18 months afterwards?

Yes, I am aware of that. As to the point put by the right hon. Gentleman, I am, of course, unaware of the figures given to this Committee, but the decision of the Cabinet, which was contained in the reference to the Committee, was that the rates should be put on as soon as they decided what the proper rates were.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that during the period of the War, when the railways were controlled by the State, the charges which were made to the Government for the carriage of goods and passengers were a mere fraction of the similar charges which would have been made to the ordinary consignors and consignees and passengers, with the result that, instead of there being a great surplus on paper—a mere book-keeping transaction—instead of the Government charging themselves fully and making the cost of carriage of goods, munitions and passengers during the War a capital charge chargeable either to reparation from Germany——

The hon. Member's question is exceeding the usual limits.

Having regard to the fact that the fare which prevails on 15th August is the governing fare until the end of Government control, cannot the right hon. Gentleman postpone the increase until 15th August?

It is all really one question. I quite realise that it is a great hardship, but it is not the only hardship resulting from the War.

What is the total number of railway directors compared with pre-War times, and what is the rate of remuneration?

That does not arise.

In view of the universal concern, is not the right hon. Gentleman prepared to give the House an opportunity of expressing its views on the proposal?

I have already said I fully realise the hardship, but the House has to decide whether charges of this kind are to be borne by the taxpayer or the users, and the Government have taken their decision.

Will the Government take into consideration the fact that the Belgian State railways carry a passenger 100 miles for 3s. 6d.?

That does not arise.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been called to the statement of Sir Sam Fay before the Rates Commission on 15th July which suggests that fares were to be increased to as much as the people would stand; and whether any steps have been taken to ascertain the actual cost of working the railways?

I would refer the hon. Member to the statements and estimates contained in Command Paper 815.

Why should not some of this money come out of the dividends and not out of the workers' salaries?

Because the Government in 1916 guaranteed the net receipts of the railways.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what would be the effect on the index figure of the cost of living of an average increase in goods rates on the railways of 112 per cent.?

I have been asked to reply. I regret that it is impossible to give an estimate of the effect on the cost of living index number of an increase in goods rates.

asked the Prime Minister upon what date the Cabinet decided against nationalisation of the railways; whether the decision was based upon written memoranda or verbal advice; if written memoranda, can the House be placed in possession of same; and whether the Minister of Transport advised for or against nationalisation?

The answer to the first part of the question is, that the subject had been discussed in the Cabinet on numerous occasions, but the definite decision as to the railway policy of the Government was taken on the 7th of June, 1920; to the second part, that the decision was based both on verbal expressions of opinion and on written memoranda, which were prepared for the consideration of the Cabinet and will not be published; and to the last part, that the Minister of Transport, in common with his colleagues, was opposed to nationalisation.

Can my right hon. Friend say that that means that the Government have repudiated their own pledge on nationalisation of railways expressed at the General Election by the Secretary of State for War at Dundee?

The answer I have given is the policy of the Government.

How does the right hon. Gentleman account for the pledge given by the Secretary of State for War at Dundee?

asked the Minister of Transport what steps he proposes to take to either standardise warning sound-instruments on motors and motor lorries and to restrict the use of such instruments where such local authorities deem the same objectionable or harmful to children or invalids after nightfall?

I do not at present propose to take any steps in the direction suggested in my hon. Friend's question, as the matter is one that falls within the terms of reference to the Departmental Committee on the Taxation and Regulation of Road Vehicles, and that Committee is undertaking its task as rapidly as possible.

asked the Minister of Transport if he proposes to include the section between Rochdale, Oldham, and Manchester in the electrification scheme; and when such scheme will be put into operation?

The Electricity Commissioners have provisionally determined an electricity district for South-East Lancashire which includes Rochdale, Oldham, and Manchester, and have fixed the 31st October as the date by which schemes may be submitted to them. The necessary local inquiry will be held as soon as possible after that date, but pending the result of that inquiry, it is impossible to say how soon a scheme can be put into operation.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that, owing to the loading dock at Gunness Station having been removed when the new Trent Bridge was built, there is no accommodation to deal with the produce of the surrounding district; and if he could expedite the building of a loading dock and save the farmers the extra cost entailed in conveying their produce to a distant station?

It has been arranged that this matter should be investigated by the local officer of this Ministry, and I will communicate the results to the hon. Member.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he can give any reason for the protracted delay on the part of the negotiating committee of general railway managers in arranging a meeting with the accredited representatives of the railway police, in view of the fact that the only amended proposal submitted by the men was one respecting the establishment of a Railway Police Federation based on the Police Act, 1919?

I understand that a meeting has been arranged for Wednesday, the 28th July.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been called to a recent accident on the London and South Western Railway suburban service, by which a passenger was killed owing to the door opening of a crowded passenger carriage; whether he has called for any report on the subject; and can he take any steps to compel railway companies to provide proper and sufficient fastenings to all carriage doors so as to prevent such accidents in the future?

This unfortunate occurrence was duly reported to me by the railway company, and I have since ascertained that the lock of the carriage door in question was found to be in perfect working order when examined immediately after the accident. I am advised that the fastening is of a type which is regarded as proper and sufficient, provided that it is not actuated when it should not be.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will state how many ex-officials of the North Eastern Railway Company are now employed in the Ministry of Transport; what salaries did they receive as Company officials; what are their present salaries; how many received compensation on leaving the Company's service; what were the amounts so received; and what is, in total, the difference between the salaries paid by the Company and the salaries now falling upon the Treasury?

There are eleven ex-officials of the North Eastern Railway permanently transferred to the Ministry of Transport, under the provisions of Section 7, with a total salary of £6,860 (exclusive of war bonus). No compensation was paid to any of these officers on leaving the Company's service. In addition, there are two temporarily on loan. I cannot give the comparison asked for without an inquisitorial discussion of the personal affairs of each officer, prior to his entering the service of the State, and the altered conditions of his service.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will state how many railway officials with salaries over £1,000 a year were lent to the Government by the railway companies during the War; how many were lent by the North Eastern Railway Company; which of these officials offered honorary services to the State and did they continue to receive their salaries from the North Eastern Railway Company; and were those salaries in nearly all cases larger than the sums they would have been receiving as Government servants?

I have no information as to the total number of railway officials lent to the various Departments of the Government at various times by the railway companies during the War, but I understand that the practice was for the officials so lent to continue to receive their salaries from the companies employing them. In reply to the last part of the question, it is obviously impossible, in the case of officers lent to the Government by the railway companies, to state what salaries they would have been receiving had then, been Government servants.

Has not the right hon. Gentleman himself said that many men who have since been taken into the Government have been taken in at lower salaries than those they would have received elsewhere? How does he know that?

Because I know of a few individual cases.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, during the period of the War, the Government were debited for their traffic at the ordinary fares and at the ordinary rates which have been charged in normal times to the passengers and to consignors and consignees in the respective trades; and, if not, can he state what would be the difference in the figures now shown as earned by the railways during the period in question and those which would have appeared if the full rates and fares had been charged?

Since the 1st of April, 1919, the percentage increases applicable to ordinary traffic have been applied to Government traffic. If the hon. Member's question is directed towards ascertaining what would have been the effect upon the estimated figures given in Cmd. Paper 402, if the 50 per cent. increase in passenger fares had applied to Government traffic from the 1st January, 1917, I will consider whether it is practicable to make the calculation from the data available, and to assist him in any other way if he will confer with me

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to reply specifically to my question about the relative rates charged to the consignor and consignee of goods?

I think my answer did reply to that. It says that 50 per cent. increase has been applied.

That applies to passenger fares. I am talking about rates for goods, for munitions.

That also has been added, whatever the percentage was.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give me the figures from the beginning of the War? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in Statement 402 his Department gives what purports to be charges that were made for the carriage of goods. Can he give me what would have been the figures of the goods were charged for at ordinary rates?

I am afraid I cannot give that. They are charged for at the proper rates.

What is meant by proper rates?

Specially sanctioned by the Government.

May we take it that the statutory provisions prior to the War has been rigidly applied to the Government rates for goods carried during the War?

No, I did not say that. I said that the percentage increase had been put upon the statutory rates.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the amount of German dye-stuffs imported during the first six months of this year; and how much of this was received under the Reparation Clauses of the Treaty of Versailles?

The total quantity of synthetic dye-stuffs, including a small quantity of intermediates, imported from Germany during the first six months of the current year was approximately 387 tons, of which about 150 tons were received under the Reparation Clauses of the Treaty of Versailles.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to statements in the Press that the Hungarian Government is unable to disarm or control the armed detachments known as the Brachiagewald; whether Desiderius Ruppert, a member of the Smallholders party in the Hungarian National Assembly, was recently attacked in a caf6 by a member of one of these armed detachments with impunity for advocating that strong measures should be taken against the detachments; and whether the continued existence of the Brachiagewald is in accordance with the terms of the Peace Treaty with Hungary?

My attention has been repeatedly called by His Majesty's representative at Budapest to the activity of the Brachiagewald which the late Hungarian Government do not appear to have been able entirely to control. I have no information as to the second part of the question. As regards the last part, I would remind my hon. and gallant Friend that, pending the coming into force of the Treaty of Peace with Hungary, the Inter-Allied Military Mission at Budapest is charged with the duty of supervising Hungary's execution of the terms of the Armistice.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the record of Herr Hugo Stinnes, as revealed by the statements of Herr Erzberger and Herr Breitschied in the German Reichstag in February and July, 1919, to the effect that Stinnes was mainly responsible for the robbery of Belgian workshops; that he had induced the German military authorities to undertake the deportation of Belgian workers; that He was responsible for the destruction of workshops in Belgium and Northern France; the transport of the stolen machinery to Germany; and that he suggested and drew up the plans for the destruction of the French coal mines; and if the Supreme Council will include him amongst those whom the Allies insist shall be brought to trial?

asked the Prime Minister why, in view of the fact that Herr Stinnes was personally responsible in large measure for the looting and destruction of factories and workshops in France and Belgium during the War, and for the deportation into slavery of Belgian workers, he consented to this man being honoured by admission into conference at Spa with representatives of the Allied Governments; if he can say whether a safe conduct was granted to Stinnes by the Belgian Government; and, if no such safe conduct was granted, why Stinnes was not arrested and put on trial for his crimes instead of being taken into consultation?

I am aware of the reputed record of Herr Stinnes. As regards the last part of the question, as the House is aware, each of the Allied Governments put in its list those who had committed outrages on its own citizens, and it is not proposed, as far as His Majesty's Government are concerned, to add any further names to the list. Herr Stinnes was brought to Spa by the German Government as one of their coal experts. The Belgian Government raised no objection to his entry into Belgium.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why, if he considered that it was not desirable to put this man's name on the list of war criminals, he was called into consultation?

So far as our committee for dealing with war criminals is concerned, we had no information in regard to Herr Stinnes. Surely it was the business of the Government of Belgium, where the atrocities are alleged to have taken place, to deal with the matter.

Can the Leader of the House tell us when the Government propose to take the statement as to the proceedings and results of the recent Conference at Spa?

The Prime Minister returned on Saturday night, and he has asked me to apologise to the House for not being here to-day. He proposes to make his statement immediately after questions on Wednesday.

In connection with that statement, will the Government give the House the opportunity of discussing it, either by a Motion for the Adjournment or in some other way?

Yes. I think probably it will be by a Motion for the Adjournment, as on previous occasions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that there are a number of ex-service men employed as clerks in the Coal Mines Department at present who are under notice to be discharged on the 31st July; and whether he will approach other Departments, such as the Ministry of Pensions, with a view to replacing some of the women employed in those Departments by these ex-service men, and more especially those women who are known to be of independent means?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The Ministry of Labour have been notified of all ex-service men in the Coal Mines Department who are under notice, and it will be their function to arrange, where possible, for their re-employments.

asked the Prime Minister what is the Government's Irish policy; and if he will shortly make a statement on it in the House?

I have no new statement to make on the Irish policy of the Government, which has been put quite clearly before the House. It is, by the use of all the means in our power, to restore law and order in Ireland and to carry into law the Government of Ireland Bill.

Can my right hon Friend state what further steps, if any, the Government propose to take to safeguard the lives of those engaged in its service?

That is being considered every day. I have no further question on that on which I shall have co say something.

Is it not a proper time for the imposition of martial law?

I have another question on that subject.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is intended to erect in Dublin a memorial to the Irishmen who lost their lives in the Great War?

I understand that a considerable sum of money has been collected for this purpose, and that the form which the Memorial should take is now under the consideration of the representative committee which has the matter in hand.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that 12 months since, in this House, the right hon. and learned Attorney-General for Ireland said the form of memorial was under consideration. Thereupon asked if it would be erected soon, and the reply was, "I hope so." As that is understood to be a Government undertaking and not a private one, surely the Government are not going to throw the onus now on private individuals?

I understand that the money has been raised privately. My memory does not serve me enough to say what was the answer of the Attorney-General.

asked the Prime Minister why martial law has not been proclaimed in the large areas in Southern Ireland where the ordinary law has long ceased to operate and in which the inhabitants are living in a state of terror and are obliged to obey the decrees issued in the name of the Irish republic; and whether, if legislation is necessary to impose martial law, he will take steps to secure the passing of the same before the House adjourns.

The Government have considered that, in view of the powers possessed under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, the proclamation of martial law would not provide a satisfactory method of dealing with the present situation. The Cabinet are, however, now considering whether additional powers could be usefully secured by new legislation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in all parts of the South of Ireland piteous appeals are being daily made to the police for help and protection, and that the people are being informed that they are unable to give that protection, and are being advised to leave the country?

I am aware of the deplorable state of things in many parts of Ireland, but I was not aware, and I hope it is not the case, that an answer such as my hon. Friend suggests has ever been given.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in spite of the recent civil and military changes in Ireland, things are rapidly going from bad to worse in that country?

My information from those who are best able to judge is to the contrary—that we are getting the trouble better in hand.

Are there fewer murders than there were?

I do not think it would be reasonable to judge the matter simply by the number of murders committed in one week or another. I can assure the House that those who are best competent to judge say that the position is better.

May I ask whether the occurrences reported in this morning's papers really confirm the right hon. Gentleman's optimistic view of the situation?

I certainly did not express any optimistic view. I think it is very deplorable, but it is much easier to criticise it than to set it right.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he can get all the extended powers under Martial Law, and that the power to enforce Martial Law resides in the Crown, and does not require legislative sanction?

My hon. and gallant Friend is much more certain than those who ought to be better informed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it was given from that Bench by Mr. Pitt in 1803?

I do not remember that.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has been asked to receive a deputation representing organised labour to acquaint him with its decision to substitute industrial for political action should the Government not accede to its demand to withdraw the forces of the Crown from Ireland and to legislate on certain lines with regard to the future government of that country; and whether, in view of the unconstitutional nature of the demand, he will seek to obtain the leave of Parliament, to whom he is responsible, before consenting to be interviewed by any such deputation?

asked the Prime Minister if his attention has been called to the Resolution passed by the Trades Union Congress threatening a cessation of work unless the military are withdrawn from Ireland and the opportunities for murder left without the slight check afforded by the presence of soldiers or if any help is given to Poland to enable that country to resist the invasion of its territories by Russia; and if he will state what action the Government propose to take in the matter?

The answer to the first parts of both questions is in the affirmative. The Prime Minister will receive the deputation, to which he will give what seems to him a suitable reply.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has had his attention drawn to a speech by Dr. Mannix, Roman Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne, delivered last week in the United States, wherein he is reported to have stated that England was the enemy of the United States of America, that she is their enemy to-day and will be their enemy for all time, and to have urged American recognition of the Irish republic; and whether, seeing that the archbishop indicates his intention of visiting Ireland, the Government will take steps to prevent him from so doing, having regard to the serious situation in Ireland and to the added difficulty in such situation which his presence and speeches are calculated to create?

My attention has been drawn to the utterances of Archbishop Mannix in the United States, and the whole matter is now under consideration.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether representations have been made to his Holiness the Pope in regard to this matter by our representative at the Vatican, and whether an apology will be tendered?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that loyal Catholics resent this man's statements as much as anybody else, and will he see that he is deported from this country?

I am well aware of the feeling of loyal Catholics in the matter. As I have said, the action to be taken by the British Government is now under consideration.

If no representation has been made by our representative at the Vatican, what is the object of retaining that Gentleman in that position?

Even if we considered it advisable to make such representations I do not think it would be a proper subject for discussion in this House.

Has the right hon. Gentleman noticed in the Press to-day that this Gentleman proposes to sail for Queenstown before the end of this month?

We have noticed that.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether any Report has been received at any Government Department concerning certain events that are reported to have taken place at Bantry during the holding of quarter sessions last month; whether any lives were lost during these occurrences; whether any Report was received from the general officer commanding that area or from the judge presiding over those quarter sessions; and whether, if such Reports were made, they may be published, since the reports circulating in Ireland are both harmful and possibly inaccurate?

Several reports have been received of occurrences at Bantry prior to and during the holding of the Quarter Sessions there last month. The chief events referred to in the reports were the killing of Constable Brett, and the wounding of Sergeant Driscoll on 21st ultimo. The killing of a civilian named Cornelius Crowley on the 25th ultimo, the burning of the dwelling-house and shop of David O'Mahony, and the attempted burning of a garage of Mr. G. W. Biggs, J.P. The Resident Magistrate and other Magistrates, the Roman Catholic Clergy, and other influential residents volunteered to patrol the streets and maintain order, and their offer was accepted by the local force with satisfactory results. Reports were also received from the General Officer Commanding the area, and from the County Court Judge, but the Government cannot agree to their publication.

May I ask whether any arrests have been effected in connection with the murder of Commissioner Smyth in Ireland?

Up to three o'clock, I regret to say I have had no information of arrests for that foul murder.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House any further information about the murder itself and subsequent events in the city of Cork, and what steps he proposes to take?

And as to the other murders?

I have no information other than that which has appeared in the Press. I am sure the House will share with me in a feeling of horror and detestation at this senseless, callous and brutal murder of a very gallant and distinguished officer. As to the further question, I can assure the House that every step that vigorous, courageous and fearless policemen and military can take is being taken, not only to track down the brutal murderers of Colonel Smyth, but of other murderers on other occasions.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that General Macready will be supported by the Government in any action he may take, however fearless, to put down these infamous events, and that we will not have a repetition of the Dyer incident in Ireland?

Why not have martial law and be done with it?

General Macready and myself are in almost daily consultation, and he has never been refused any request by His Majesty's Government, and certainly not by the Chief Secretary. I shall continue to support, as I have supported, every officer, whether in the police or military, who is endeavouring, and rightly, and I maintain adequately endeavouring, to carry out his duties in these most difficult circumstances.

asked the Prime Minister what steps are being taken to refund the sums advanced by various British subjects and Russians to the Reverend F. North to enable him to carry on the Red Cross work among the British military and civilian prisoners in Moscow?

The loans made to Mr. North are now being repaid by the Foreign Office, who have received special authority from His Majesty's Treasury to do so. A nominal list of the lenders is in possession of the Foreign Office and all those whose address is known are being circularised on the subject.

May I ask at what rate of exchange these loans will be repaid?

I should like to have notice of that.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will give an assurance that in no case will British prisoners, naval, military, or civil, be compelled by the Soviet authorities to return to England via Moscow; and will he take steps to see that, as far as possible, British warships are sent to embark them at the nearest available port?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative, but I can assure the House that all practicable steps will be taken to secure the early repatriation of such prisoners as are released, by whatever route and in whatever way may be the safest and most convenient.

asked the Prime Minister why he arranged that the conference with representatives of the Russian Bolshevik autocracy should be held in London in view of the fact that he recently described them as assassins whose system excited his disgust; and, whether, in order to avoid wounding the self-respect of the British people, he will reconsider this decision and arrange that the meeting with Bolshevik emissaries, if necessary to be held, shall take place in some other country?

The object of the proposed Conference is not to benefit the Bolshevik Government, but to secure peace in Eastern Europe, and the holding of the Conference in London was proposed as the best means of securing that object.

asked the Prime Minister whether Litvinoff will be allowed to enter this country in view of his past record here in connection with the Allied negotiations with the Soviet Government; how, in all the circumstances, it will be posible to prevent Soviet representatives who may come here from breaking any agreement they may make not to engage in political action while in this country; will any inquiry be made into or limit placed upon the amount of money they may bring over and spend while in this country; and will the Soviet representatives be allowed to live anywhere in this country at their own expense or will they be provided with accommodation at the expense of the British Government?

In answer to the first part of the question, as was stated in the messages to the Soviet Government, His Majesty's Government will not place any restrictions on the representatives which Russia may nominate for forthcoming conferences, provided they undertake, while in Great Britain, not to interfere in the politics or internal affairs of the British Empire or to indulge in propaganda. In answer to the second part of the question, I assume that representatives of the Soviet Government who may come to this country will not break the solemn engagements which they will have entered not to engage in political action while in this country. No representative of any foreign power would be permitted to take such action, and if it were taken by any representative he would not be allowed to remain in the country. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative. In answer to the fourth part of the question, the Soviet representatives will, naturally, live in London and at their own expense.

asked the Prime Minister if the conditions laid down in the Note on which the British Government would begin trade relations with the Soviet Government include the unconditional return by the Soviet Government of the properties in Russia and Siberia which are owned by British and French companies and individuals, but which have been nationalised or expropriated by the Soviet Government?

I can add nothing to the very full statement which I made on Wednesday last on this subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a number of these properties have been scheduled at Moscow as being ready for sale by the Soviet Government?

I cannot be expected to answer details on a general statement of that kind.

asked the Prime Minister whether a sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence has been set up with equal representation of the land, sea, and air forces with a view to the effective co-ordination of those forces?

The answer is in the affirmative.

May I ask, then, if there is equal representation, by Ministers of equal status, of the Army, the Air and the Sea?

I suppose my hon. and gallant Friend refers to the fact that the Minister for War is also the Minister for Air. That is so, but the Under-Secretary for Air is also one of those on the Committee.

Is there a Treasury representative on this Committee?

No, Sir, not for this purpose.

asked the Prime Minister whether peace negotiations have been proceeding between the Government of Lithuania and the Russian Government; whether an agreement has been reached; are the terms known to His Majesty's Government; and why Lithuania has been invited to send representatives to a peace conference with the Russian Government and Poland?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second and third parts of the question, it is understood that peace was concluded on 12th July, but the terms are not yet known to His Majesty's Government. As regards the fourth part, Lithuania had not concluded peace with the Soviet Govenment at the time of the despatch of the telegram to Moscow; but it would in any case be very desirable that Lithuania should be represented at the Conference, which it is hoped will result in the settlement of the frontier and other questions in which that and the other neighbouring States are concerned.

May I ask if any reply has been yet received with regard to this matter?

I have asked an hon. Member who has a question to that effect to postpone it until to-morrow.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government have any financial interest, direct or indirect, in or give financial assistance to any news agency; and, if so, on what Vote the policy of the Government in this respect can be discussed by this House?

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