asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can make any further statement with regard to the political situation in Persia; whether the Red Army reported to be operating in Northern Persia is composed of Russians or of local Maximalists and insurgents; and whether His Majesty's Government is assisting the royalist government in Persia in any way?

I regret that, in the present circumstances, I am unable to give any comprehensive review of the political situation in Northern Persia, which, pending the consolidation of the new Ministry, is somewhat inchoate. With regard to the second part, information has reached me that the Bolshevik forces which are operating in Northern Persia have been joined by a certain number of local insurgents. In answer to the third part, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answer given by the Lord Privy Seal on the 14th instant regarding the terms on which His Majesty's Government are prepared to resume negotiations with the Soviet. These include a cessation of Bolshevik operations of this nature, and it is hoped that this may prove a means of assisting the Persian Government to deal with the situation created by the Bolshevik invasion of their country.

Is that the only assistance being given to the Royal Government of Persia?

My hon. and gallant Friend knows what are the relations between His Majesty's Government and the Government of Persia.

The hon. Gentleman has told us that we are intervening on their behalf with the Russian Government, but are we giving them any material assistance in Persia?

I must ask my hon. and gallant Friend to give me notice of that question.

May I ask whether the Persian Government have given any indication to His Majesty's Government that the Medjliss is going to be, summoned, and are British troops still occupying Reshid?

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

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any of the managing directors of the Shell Transport and Trading Company, Limited, have any association, either direct or indirect, with the Foreign Office?

No, Sir.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Governments of Finland, Latvia, and Lithuania have accepted the invitation of His Majesty's Government to a peace conference in London; whether the Russian Government has sent any reply to the same invitation; if so, what is it? Whether General Baron Wrangel has accepted His Majesty's Government's suggestion for an armistice; and, if not, what action does His Majesty's Government suggest with regard to Baron Wrangel?

asked the Prime Minister whether any reply has been received by the Government to the Note addressed by them to the Russian Government; and, if so, what are its terms?

The answer to the first part of the question of the hon. and gallant Member for Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) is in the negative, and to the second in the affirmative. General Wrangel has not, so far, been approached in the matter by His Majesty's Government. As negotiations are proceeding, the Government do not think it desirable to publish the telegram from the Soviet Government by itself, but as soon as it is possible to do so in the public interest, all the correspondence will be given to the House.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that summaries of this reply are appearing in the French Press and our own "Times," and does he not think it would be more respectful to this House if we could have it as soon as possible?

I have seen what purport to be summaries of the report in the newspapers. I know nothing of what has appeared in the French Press, except what the hon. and gallant Gentleman has told me.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in the event of the territory occupied by General Wrangel being handed back to the Communist Government of a part of Russia at the instance of this country, any steps will be taken to protect the non-communist section of the population from outrage and punishment?

If the proposed conference on Russia and the border States takes place, the question of General Wrangel's position will be discussed at that conference and a satisfactory solution will be sought for the many difficult problems connected with it. It is, however, impossible for me to state at present what would be the details of such a solution.

Is it the fact that the Government is putting pressure on General Wrangel?

As a matter of fact we have sent no communication to General Wrangel, but I think the House understands that a long while ago we made it clear that if offensive operations were undertaken by him, we should accept no responsibility.

Is it not a fact that when Odessa and Archangel were taken by the Bolshevists an amnesty was given and observed?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the British Institute at Florence was founded by His Majesty's Government in 1918; whether at the opening ceremony it was announced by the British Ambassador that it would be permanent; and how, if it is now closed, His Majesty's Government will fulfil its obligations to Italian students who have commenced long courses at the institute?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the French and German Governments maintain institutes at Florence; whether a British institute was established there during the War by the British Government for the permanent cultivation of a good understanding between Italy and Great Britain; and whether he will consider the unfortunate effect on Italian opinion in present conditions if that institute is closed?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state what assistance the Government is prepared to give to the British institute at Florence; and whether such assistance will enable the institute to continue the work on which so favourable an opinion has been expressed by the Committee on British Communities Abroad?

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that active propaganda in favour of German kultur is being carried on at the principal educational centres in Italy; and, if so, will he at once take steps to advance the better understanding of British ideas at those centres?

I am informed that there is an institute which is assisted by the French Government at Florence. There was also a German institute before the War, but I have no information as to whether it has again begun its work.

The British institute was founded, as suggested, in 1918. The question as to the assistance which can be given to the institute other than by a money grant is at present under consideration. I fear, however, that as far as its financial needs the concerned the continuance of the institute must depend on the fees obtained from the scholars and the generosity of private subscribers.

Does the Government realise how necessary it is to do all we can to dispel any coldness in Italian circles towards this country, and does the hon. Gentleman recognise that an institution of this kind will strengthen the relations between the two countries?

I entirely share the view expressed by my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he can state the reasons that have led to the recently announced decision to add two permanent Civil Service officials to the Army Council, thereby impairing its military character by transforming the Board, which executes the functions of Commander-in-Chief of the Forces of the Crown, into one in which the military members are no longer in a majority; what steps he proposes to take to prevent these two secretaries, who will be the only permanent members of the Council, from obtaining undue influence, owing to the fact that the other members, both military and political, will be constantly changing; and whether, if these two secretaries must be on the Council, the Government will arrange for them to be gazetted as associate members without votes, thus preserving the military majority of votes on the Army Council, as laid down by the Committee which recommended, and by the Government which adopted, the present Army Council system?

The decision of the Government to make the Permanent Secretary directly responsible to the Ministerial Head of the Department for the control of expenditure, and to give him the status of a full member of the Council or Board, was announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Debate on the Consolidated Fund Bill on 24th March last.

The Permanent Secretary of the Admiralty has for many years been one of the Lords Commissioners.

As regards the War Office, it was decided that the best means of giving immediate practical effect to the decision was to make the Assistant Financial Secretary a joint Secretary for Financial Duties, and to put both the Permanent Secretary and the Secretary for Financial Duties on to the Army Council. This avoided the imposition of further heavy duties on the newly appointed Permanent Secretary, Sir Herbert Creedy, and utilised to the best advantage during this critical period, when financial control is of the utmost importance, the long experience of the Assistant Financial Secretary, Sir Charles Harris.

This is an interim and transitory arrangement, as, in due course, the two sets of functions will be exercised by one Permanent Secretary, and the Civil Service element on the Army Council will be correspondingly reduced.

Thus, normally, the constitution of the Army Council would be as follows: —

Will this not lead to the military members being in a minority?

The procedure is not conducted by the counting of votes, but by weighing them.

If there be a difference of opinion and a vote be taken on it, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the decision will be given according to the number of the votes recorded?

Yes, Sir, but I think there is a complete misapprehension as to what kind of body this is, if it be supposed that matters are settled only by votes, in the same way as divisions are taken in the House of Commons. Opinions are expressed, and the opinion of the Council is finally pronounced; but neither in the Board of Admiralty nor in the Army Council is the usual procedure that of counting votes.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is the relative weight of the vote of a civilian and of a military member?

The value of the opinion expressed makes for the general decision of the Council.

If an acute difference of opinion occur, what do they do?

Does the right hon. Gentleman wish us to understand that votes in this House are not weighed?

Will not the weight of the five civilians overbalance that of the four military men?

I do not consider that that point arises in any direct way. I should be glad to discuss these matters, in regard to which I have had considerable experience at the Admiralty and at the War Office, if an occasion occurred in Debate, but I can only say at Question Time that I do not think the issue arises in that form at all.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called recently to the case of Private William Wilson, No. 189752, Machine Gun Corps, of 11, Pine Street, Southmoor, Stanley, county Durham; whether this lad, being then less than 17 years of age, enlisted on the 6th October, 1918; whether his parents applied for his discharge personally within the next day or two and in writing on or about the 29th of the same month; whether the discharge was first promised and afterwards refused by the Army authorities; whether they now demand £35 payment for the discharge; and, if so, whether he will say why?

Private Wilson was a few days under 17 years of age when he enlisted in October, 1919, not 1918, as stated in the question. There is no record of any application for his discharge until 29th October, 1919, when he was over 17 years of age, and his release was refused by the proper authority in accordance with the discretionary powers vested in him. The case is, however, being further considered and I will let the hon. Member know the result in due course.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether officers reemployed during the War who had previously retired on gratuity were given the same gratuity, bonus, outfit, uniform, and other allowances as officers who had never served before; and, if so, in what way were they treated better than officers who had never served before?

Officers who had previously retired with a gratuity were only eligible, like officers in receipt of retired pay, to a gratuity at a lower rate (Article 497A, Royal Warrant for Pay etc.) than that applicable in the case of a temporary officer (Article 497B, Royal Warrant). They receive the same bonus, allowances and outfit allowances as officers without previous service except that those rejoined as officers between August and December, 1914, were eligible in certain circumstances to a higher rate of outfit allowance (£100 instead of £50).

asked the Secretary of State for War if copies of the physique records of each county, city, and county borough in Great Britain of recruits received therefrom between August, 1914, and August, 1918, could be supplied on request from such counties, cities, and towns, on condition such request was preferred by the medical officer of health of such places for the purpose of considering schemes to improve the physique of the inhabitants?

I am afraid it is not possible for the War Office to furnish such information as this, but I am consulting with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health.

asked the Secretary of State for War why the portion of the 97 acres of Wimbledon Common in the occupation of the War Office, which was to have been handed back to the conservators of the common in June, has not in fact yet been handed back; and what is the reason for the failure to carry out the arrangements?

The temporary retention of this camp is necessary for the accommodation of battalions of Foot Guards. The question of releasing part of the camp has been carefully considered, but it has been found impracticable to surrender any portion at present. It is proposed to remove two of the battalions, in October, and it is confidently hoped that it will then be possible to give up one complete lines.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state what were the ration strengths and establishments, separately, of British troops, all ranks, in the undermentioned areas on the 30th June last: Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales, France and Belgium, Rhine area, Constantinople area, Black Sea area, Palestine, Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, and the Crown Colonies?

No, Sir, I do not think it is desirable at the present stage to make public this information.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether there were sold to G. Stanley, on 18th September, 1919, 50 tons of sago at £23 per ton, and also 50 tons of tapioca, at £23. per ton, the market prices being £55 per ton and £49 per ton, respectively, these sales resulting in a needless loss to the Navy and Army Canteen Board of £2,900; whether there were sold to Adam Montgomery, on 22nd September, 1919, 10 tons of sago at £25 per ton, the market price being £55 per ton, and also 20 tons of seed pearl tapioca at £27 10s. per ton, the market price being £52 10s. per ton, a loss to the Board of £800;

(2) whether certain stocks belonging to the Navy and Army Canteen Board have been sold at prices considerably below current market prices, namely, 30 tons of macaroni to G. Blake and Company, on 20th August, 1919, at £45 per ton, the market price being £68 per ton; whether again, on 28th August, a similar quantity was sold at £44 per ton, the market price remaining at £68 per ton, showing a loss to the Board of £1,410 on these sales; whether, at about the same time, several hundred cases of candles, six dozen pounds in each, were sold at 6s. per dozen to the same company, the market price at that time being 8s. 4d. per dozen; and whether, in this connection, his attention has been drawn to the criticism directed against the Board by the complaints tribunal of the central committee on 14th May, 1920, regarding the disposal of candles by the Navy and Army Canteen Board by private treaty at 6d. per lb. while at public auctions nearly twice that amount was obtained for them.

The Army Council has no reason to suppose that the trading of the Navy and Army Canteen Board, viewed as a whole, is not properly and efficiently conducted. The individual transactions of the Board are not carried out with public money, nor charged upon the Votes of Parliament, and my right hon. Friend is not prepared to regard them as proper subjects for question and answer in this House.

Is it not a fact that the War Office is represented upon the Board of the Navy and Army Canteen Board, and therefore shares the responsibility for their policy?

My answer refers to the transactions of the Board, and not to their policy. The War Office are represented on the Council of the Board, but not on the board of management.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the facts stated in this question are correct?

Seeing that the transactions in this case are, on the face of them, so unsatisfactory, is there no means of investigating them? Can no one find out why these goods were thrown away like that?

Is it not a fact that the very existence of this Board depends upon the approval of the War Office?

Yes, Sir; the existence of the Board does depend upon the approval of the War Office; but, having selected men and given them your confidence, it is your duty to accept their acts, if they be bonâ fide, with regard to the details of commercial transactions I understand, in connection with these goods, that it was difficult to dispose of some of them, and that some were not of first-rate quality.

Will the right hon. Gentleman request the military representative on the Board to ask for an inquiry into this matter?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, also, that one of the men mentioned was until recently a member of the firm to whom the goods were sold, and also had some control or say in the Army Canteen Board?

No, Sir; I am not aware of that.

Will he make an investigation into these abuses—for they are abuses?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the maximum amount of the affiliation order which can be made against the soldier for his illegitimate child, or children, is still the same as when his rate of pay was 7s. a week; and, if so, why?

The amount which can be stopped from the pay of a private soldier for the maintenance of an illegitimate child, which was 4d. per diem when his pay was 1s. per diem, has been raised to 1s. per diem by the Army and Air Force (Annual) Act, 1920.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that the claim for damages done by the military occupation of the Mornington Road Wesleyan Church, Southport, premises have not yet been settled, despite the fact that this matter has been in hand since September, 1919; whether he can state adequate reasons for the excessive delay; and whether he will take steps to have this claim met forthwith?

I have no information as to the present stage of the negotiations in this case, but the local military authorities are being urged to expedite the matter. I would point out that the applicants are largely responsible for the delay, as they did not make any claim until nearly 12 months after the Armistice. Such a delay adds enormously to the difficulties of negotiations, owing to changes of staff, demobilisation of personnel, etc.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the French Government have given permission to relations of fallen soldiers to remove the bodies to cemeteries near their own homes, and that the American Government is removing at public expense the bodies of those whose relatives desire it to America; and whether he will give permission to relatives of English soldiers who are buried abroad to remove the bodies to England?

I am aware that the American Government are taking action as stated, and that the French Government contemplate similar action. I regret, however, that, for the reasons which have already been carefully explained to the House in reply to previous questions on this subject, I can hold out no hope of similar facilities being afforded for the removal of British dead. In particular, I would refer the Noble Lord to the answers to his question on 14th July, 1919, to the hon. and gallant Member for Fairfield on 25th March, 1919, and to the hon. and gallant Member for Finchley on 18th February, 1919.

As the French Government has now given this permission, which they had not done at the date referred to, what reason is there why the British Government should not give a similar permission?

Is it not a fact that the only permission given by the French Government is the removal from one communal cemetery to another, and that a large number of Americans very much dislike having the bodies removed against their wishes, and wish them to remain where they are?

I cannot answer the last question. With regard to the Noble Lord's question, the matter has been fully explained, and I have nothing to add.

Will a further opportunity be given of discussing this matter? There is very strong feeling on the matter, and it is unsatisfactory that it should remain where it stands.

It has been discussed before, and it was decided not to take a Division. I thought the House came to a final decision.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is a new point, which was not discussed, and that there is feeling among a certain number of individuals as to the removal of bodies? Should not their grievance be considered?

I realise that. Unless my memory fails me, that point was discussed. I do not think there would be any desire on the part of the House to have another discussion.

Does the decision which the right hon. Gentleman has announced alter the decision announced by Order in Council in regard to the soldiers buried in occupied areas?

I am not able to answer that without notice.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Army Council is satisfied that the safety of British and Indian troops can be maintained; and how comes it that the Arabs are so hostile as to cut the railway and attack British detachments?

Large reinforcements have been ordered from India, and the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief Mesopotamia has been given full authority to take any measures of concentration or contraction which the military situation requires. In these circumstances there is no reason for anxiety about the general safety of the garrison in Mesopotamia. The small force in Rumeitha is holding out, and is being supplied from the air.

The second part of the question should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India.

Is not the policy of His Majesty's Government to establish an Arab State in Mesopotamia, and has that been known to the Arabs who are now attacking British forces?

The War Office is not responsible for the policy which is adopted with regard to the political treatment of the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, but only for military security of the country so far as it is possible for us to maintain it.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman a Member of the Cabinet, and therefore jointly responsible for its policy in Mesopotamia?

Yes, but it was from the point of view of the Department to which particular questions should be addressed that I was speaking, and from that point of view the hon. Gentleman should address himself to the Secretary of State for India.

Are we, therefore, to understand from this very important answer that the Government are going to increase our commitments in Mesopotamia instead of diminishing them?

"Commitments" is a term I do not quite understand in this connection. The Government at the present moment, instead of diminishing the forces in Mesopotamia to the extent of one-half during the current financial year, have found it necessary to order large reinforcements.

Instead of doing that, would it not be much better to evacuate a great deal of territory?

That is a question that should be dealt with in Debate, and not by question and answer.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the inquiries into the recent disturbances at Fermoy and Lismore, in which soldiers and police are stated to have damaged shops and houses, have been completed; and when he will be able to make a statement on the alleged occurrences?

A report has been received regarding the disturbances at Fermoy, but I have not yet had time to consider it.

May I ask when the Report on the disturbances at Lismore will be ready?

I should have said "Fermoy and Lismore."

May I ask the reason for the continued delay in the receipt of this Report? It has been asked for three times in this House, and three times the answer has been the same.

The inquiry has been proceeding. I am sure that no one would wish to hurry it, or that it should be otherwise than leisurely, thorough and searching. It is now completed, and the Report actually arrived last night. I hope to have it examined in the Department and to read it myself during the course of next week, and if my hon. and gallant Friend will put down his question next week I shall be able to give him an answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether any escort of soldiers or police was in charge of the consignment of 3,000 gallons of petrol sent by rail from Dublin to Oranmore which was looted at Mullingar on 30th June; and what was the Report of the court of inquiry held to investigate this loss of public property?

The petrol referred to was being delivered by the Shell Company under a standing contract with the Army, but was, in this case, delivered by the company to a Royal Air Force unit. No escort was provided. No Court of Inquiry of the ordinary Military or Air Force pattern has been set up to inquire into the loss, but investigations of a less formal kind are proceeding. In future an escort will be provided where-ever possible in cases where it is considered that there is a risk of loss or damage to valuable stores.

Has any censure been passed upon the official who neglected his duty in regard to this petrol, and provided no escort for this very important convoy?

I have said that less formal investigations are proceeding —of course, without prejudice to any more formal investigation that may afterwards be required. It is absurd to suppose that there are enough troops or airmen or police in Ireland to secure simultaneously the protection of all kinds of stores in transit at every vulnerable point at which they may become the subject of a treacherous attack.

Is it not equally absurd to suppose that the Sinn Feiners would let 3,000 gallons of petrol pass without capturing it?

asked the Prime Minister whether it has been decided to abolish the office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; and, if not, what useful purpose is served by the continuance of this appointment under the Crown?

Is it in order to address a question of this sort, reflecting on His Majesty's representative in Ireland?

I do not see any reflection upon the Viceroy. It is a question of the abolition of the office, and there is no reflection upon its occupant.

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second part of the question raises too large a subject to be dealt with by question and answer.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know that as long ago as 1862 it was decided to abolish this office, and is not this a reform rather long overdue?

It is a considerable interval, but the fact that it was considered then and has not been carried out suggested my answer.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will introduce legislation to increase the penalties for kidnapping in Ireland, in view of the plan of intimidation against the sympathisers with law and order in that country lately instituted by Sinn Fein, whereby those who actively assist the executive are deprived of liberty for indefinite periods, the victims including railway men and labourers, as well as officials; and have any of those who have been kidnapped been rescued by the authorities?

The question of increasing the penalties for false imprisonment and other offences is now under consideration.

Is the right hon. Gentleman considering the case of the kidnapping of children by the police?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police controls were in operation in the Metropolitan police area for detecting infringements of the Motor Car Act between a.m. 17th July and p.m. 19th July; how many police officers were employed, and with what success; and were any cases of dangerous driving reported?

There were 97 controls during the three days; 68 officers were employed; 159 cases were reported by the officers on control duty for prosecution, of which three related to dangerous driving; and two cases of dangerous driving were also reported by police on ordinary duty during the period.

Were the fines obtained sufficient to pay for the employment of the police?

Is it a right and proper thing in these unsettled times to give information to the enemy?

asked the Home Secretary whether ex-Police Constable Lowes, who was demobilised from the Army in January, 1919, has yet been re-examined by the Metropolitan police surgeon; and, if so, whether he can say if it is proposed to reinstate ex-Police Constable Lowes in the Metropolitan police, so that he may be able to serve the three and a half years necessary in order to qualify for a full police pension?

The Report of the Medical Board on which the Pensions Ministry based their award of pension to ex-Police Constable Lowes on his discharge from the Army, and his medical history in the Army, were received by the Commissioner of Police on the 15th instant, and they are now under the consideration of the chief surgeon.

asked the Minister of Pensions if any decision has yet been reached regarding the treatment of ex-soldiers who were wounded while home on furlough by enemy air raids?

I regret to find that these cases do not properly come within the terms of the Warrant, unless the soldier was actually performing military duty at the time of the accident.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that some of these men have had to apply to boards of guardians for relief on the ground of destitution?

They would be entitled to the same pension and remuneration as are civilians under the same circumstances, and they apply for them through the Ministry of Health.

asked the Minister of Health if his attention has been called to the dismissal by the Edmonton District Council of a gardener, ex-Rifleman R. Digby, on the ground that he was not a trade unionist; if Digby served five years during the War, joining up originally when over age; and if he has any powers which enable him to prevent this kind of persecution by public authorities of ex-soldiers?

My right hon. Friend has not received any official information of this case, but he observes from the Press that the council have agreed to reinstate Mr. Digby.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the reason the Edmonton District Council have reinstated this man is the agitation amongst the non-unionists? Does he think it advisable that any borough or district council should adopt methods which are detrimental to the interests of those who are not prepared to join trade unions?

My hon. Friend began by asking me whether I was aware of certain facts he mentioned. I was not aware of them. Therefore the second part of his question does not arise.

asked the Home Secretary whether under the police regulations taxi-cabs are required to carry sufficient light to enable passengers to read the meter and the fare bill at night without difficulty; and, if so, whether it would be possible for police officials at various points to see that these regulations are carried out?

There is a police regulation that taxi-meters are to be properly illuminated to show to the hirer the amount of fare payable. The police are instructed to see these regulations are observed, and renewed instructions will be given.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that at present it is impossible to read the meter inside the cab and the meter outside the cab is never properly lighted?

I think it varies. Sometimes you can read it and sometimes you cannot.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he can now see his way to include in the return being prepared in connection with the Temperance (Scotland) Act the number and classification of existing licences in each voting area?

As the information referred to appears to be of considerable importance, my right hon. Friend is endeavouring to obtain it, and hopes to include it in the statement promised in his reply to my hon. friend on the 20th June.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Rhine-land Commission has suppressed various journals for publishing articles against the employment of coloured troops in the occupied regions; whether the Rhineland Commission have satisfied themselves that charges brought against coloured troops are false; and whether the British representative on the Commission has sent any information on this subject to His Majesty's Government?

The Inter-Allied Rhineland High Commission recently pronounced a sentence of suspension for fifteen days from 16th June as regards seven German publications, of which the two most important were the "Kolnische Volkszeitung" and the "Rheinische Zeitung," for articles attacking the French coloured troops. The High Commission are satisfied that the accusations made against these troops are devoid of any substantial foundation. Several of the newspapers which published these charges having apologised, the period of suspension was reduced to five days. The British representative on the High Commission has reported in this sense.

asked the Prime Minister whether the cost of producing the film "The Land of Mystery" has been or will be defrayed wholly or partly out of public funds; who is the author of this film; and how did the 33 film artists who took part in the production of the film obtain their passports to Russia and other countries?

The film in question has not received and will not receive any grant from public funds. It is entirely a private venture. I understand that the author is a Mr. Merwin and that the film artists received passports in the ordinary way for Poland and other countries.

Does "The Land of Mystery" refer to Russia or to Great Britain?

asked the Prime Minister how is it proposed to deal with the port of Richborough; whether such a large reduction of staff has recently taken place as to impair the use of the port; whether there is any prospect of disposing of the port to any private concern; whether there are a large number of railway wagons at present at the port lying almost derelict, and a number of steam rollers; and whether these could be presented to various firms and public bodies as War memorials?

I am informed that Richborough is being advertised for sale, and it is hoped that a purchaser may be found for the port as a whole. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative. There are some 500 railway-owned wagons under repair, which will be handed back to the railway companies, and 23 steam rollers which were returned from overseas a fortnight ago. Six are being handed over to the War Office and 17 are being sold.

Have any steps been taken to dispose of such things as lighters? There is an enormous number of iron and steel lighters getting derelict. Have steps been taken to see whether they can be used on inland waters?

A great many have been sold.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some steam rollers have been there for several months and are rapidly deteriorating through being left there?

No, I am not aware of that, but I think it would take more than a month to deteriorate steam rollers.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the determination of the general public not to submit to the loss and inconvenience caused by the sudden withdrawal of labour and refusal to go to arbitration in essential public services, and to themselves maintain such services if necessary by volunteers drawn from their own ranks; whether an improvised service of coal getting is alone impossible; and will he, in consequence, facilitate the manufacture and importation of oil-burning devices for household and other purposes in every possible way, and also maintain at suitable centres the most ample supply of oil fuel?

This question seems to be more suitable for Debate than to be dealt with by question and answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether aero engines are still being manufactured for the Air Ministry; if so, how many and of what types; whether engines of a similar type are now and have been declared surplus to the Disposal Board; and if so, why are engines still being manufactured?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The following engines are now on order for the Air Ministry:—

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he can state the present position with regard to the extensions of the Great North of Scotland Railway to Braemar and Strathdon, as recommended by the Rural Transport (Scotland) Committee, 1919?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The proposed extensions of the Great North of Scotland Railway from Ballater to Braemar and from Alford to Strathdon as recommended by the Rural Transport (Scotland) Committee are at the present time under investigation by the Ministry of Transport in conjunction with the other Government Departments concerned.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that they have been under investigation for six months? Has any improvement been made in the right direction?

These cases have been under careful consideration during that period. The rapidity with which they can be proceeded with depends entirely upon the Votes which the House may give for this purpose.

The following question stood on the Paper in the name of :

66. To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer in how many cases railway servants lent to the Government by their companies during the War refused to take State salaries; whether in all such cases they continued to receive their salaries from the railway companies; whether the Treasury has made any calculation of the extra cost to the State of this arrangement under the guarantee of the railway companies; and whether he will consent to a Return showing all salaries above £1,000 paid by the companies to railway officials lent during the War, contrasting the sums they would have received as Ministers of the Crown or officials of the Government, and so revealing the extra cost, if any, to the taxpayer as a result of their honorary services to the State?

Before asking this question may I ask what are the principles governing the sub-editing of questions? In the third line, after the word "war," and before the word "refused," there came the word "patriotically." Possibly you will be good enough, Mr. Speaker, to tell me why that has been deleted?

We discourage all these adjectives.

Am I then to understand that no adjectives are allowed in questions?

No unnecessary adjectives.

I beg to put my question.

I have no complete information showing the number of railway servants employed in Government work during the War who continued to receive salaries from their companies instead of from the State. The compilation of a return such as that suggested is not practicable, since no estimate can be made as to the salaries particular individuals would have received in respect of war work.

asked the Minister of Transport what are the exceptional conditions that differentiate hop-pickers going from London to Ashford from those going from Portsmouth to Farnham?

The hop-pickers going from London to Kent travel in considerable number, and, as I pointed out to my Noble Friend on the 12th of July, they are carried by special trains which run after midnight.

Would my hon. Friend be prepared to provide special trains for the hop-pickers of Hampshire?

If we can do it I shall be glad to take the matter up with the railway companies.

Will they pay the higher fares now proposed?

( by Private Notice ) asked the Leader of the House whether his attention has been drawn to the evidence given by Sir Alexander Butterworth before the Rates Advisory Committee yesterday to the effect that the railway companies, in submitting their figures, in justification of the proposed increases in fares and rates, had no thought of applying these increases to the month of August, and whether the Government will at once confer with the Advisory Committee with a view to arranging that the increases should commence on 1st September?

As I understand it, Sir Alexander Butterworth's evidence was that the 1st September was the earliest date they thought practicable, but in any event the responsibility is not that of the railway companies. As I stated yesterday, the Rates Advisory Committee have been asked to fix a scale of charges which will make good, by July of next year, the deficit due to the recent increased costs of working the railways, and the Cabinet definitely decided to give effect to this decision. It is impossible for us, therefore, to postpone the imposition of the new rates beyond the date to be fixed if the deficit is to be wiped out. I am not yet in a position to state when the Report will be received, the amount of increases, or the date for their introduction which the Committee will recommend. It is for the purpose of arriving at a sound and an equitable decision on these points that the Committee is taking evidence.

When does my right hon. Friend think that he can make an announcement as to the date from which the increase is to be operative.

I quite realise that, in addition to the general hardship, with which I sympathise, it is a great pity not to let the public know the exact date of the increase. For that reason I asked the Minister of Transport to-day when he thought the Advisory Committee would report. He said he could not tell definitely, but he thought it would be within about a week. I wish the House to understand that the actual problem is to meet a deficit. The Advisory Committee are asked to give us their method of meeting the deficit, and what the Cabinet and the House have to decide is whether or not we shall meet it in that way, or whether the taxpayer will pay for it.

Is it the assumption of the Government that this considerable increase will substantially diminish receipts?

That is obviously one of the great difficulties, and it is evident that the time must come when continual increases of rates will destroy the revenue. It is for the purpose of judging as to the amount which can be put on without destroying the revenue that the Advisory Committee is working.

Will the Cabinet consider as germane to this position the fact that in parts of England, particularly in the north, holidays are taken late in August, and that, therefore, the divi- sion of that month will be unduly in favour of one part of the country, and unduly harsh to another part?

That is perfectly true, and I myself am convinced that the only fair and reasonable thing to do is to act upon the advice of the Advisory Committee, whatever it may be.

Are we to understand that the date of 5th August, which was definitely fixed, is definitely gone for the present?

It was never given as a definite date.

Oh, yes!

At all events, the decision of the Cabinet was not given as a definite date. What we decided was that, even if the Committee reported before that date, the increased rates would not be imposed before 5th August.

Having regard to the hardship experienced by people who have made arrangements for holidays, unaware of this rise in fares, would it not be possible for the Government to charge a slightly higher rate as from 1st September, rather than have a lower rate as from 5th August?

My hon. Friend may be sure the Government do not wish to impose this hardship upon holiday traffic. [HON. MEMBERS: "Then, why do it?"] My hon. Friend's alternative is quite right—postpone it, and have a higher rate for the remainder of the year. I am quite sure no Advisory Committee would advise that.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all the factory hands in Lancashire have holidays in September, and would he favourably consider the postponement of any increase?

That surely is justification for the action of the Government. If we postpone it until that date, why not until after Christmas?

It is not a fact that the Minister of Transport definitely stated that they postponed the imposition of these new fares until after the Bank Holiday, and that they would not come into operation before 5th August; and was it not the understanding of the general public that the new rates were to come after 5th August?

My right hon. Friend definitely stated they would not come into operation before 5th August, but it was always stated that the date would depend on the decision of the Advisory Committee.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in calculating the ability of Germany to fulfil her financial obligations under the Peace Treaty, any allowance is made in respect of interest upon her own war loan, or whether the payment of such interest is to be deferred until after her obligations to the Allies have been discharged?

The Treaty provides that the sums for reparation which Germany is required to pay shall become a charge upon all her revenues prior to that for the service or discharge of any domestic loan.

asked the Prime Minister on how many occasions the Education Vote has been discussed in the House of Commons since 1914; and whether, in view of the fact that the Education Vote for England is now upwards of £45,000,000, an opportunity can be given this Session for discussing this expenditure, and investigating how much of it is justifiable and how much is extravagant and wasteful?

The answer to the first part of the question is four, exclusive of the discussions of the Education Act, 1918, and of educational matters on 12th August, 1919, on the Third Reading of the Consolidated Fund Bill. As regards the last part of the question, I regret that I see no prospect of time being found for further discussion.

In view of the fact that the Education Vote, which has so largely increased, has not been discussed this year or last year, is there no means of bringing this wasteful expenditure before the consideration of the House before next year, and before the wasteful expenditure has been increased?

It is not the fault of the Government that any particular Vote is not taken. To describe the expenditure as wasteful is to anticipate the discussion beforehand. I see no prospect of the discussion now.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the Report of the Committee on National Expenditure is likely to be out, and whether it will include any statement as regards the expenditure of the Board of Education?

I cannot say without notice.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that during the past 18 months we have had under three hours' discussion on the Education Vote, despite many requests for opportunity by hon. Members?

I realise that, but we do not select the Votes that are taken.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Minister of Education to avoid any expenditure which may be considered wasteful, pending discussion by this House?

I am sure it is not necessary to give my right hon. Friend that advice. Any expenditure which he incurs he thinks is not wasted.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is proposed that the cost of the proposed national war memorial in London should be borne by the taxpayer in part or whole; and, if so, will its erection be delayed until such time as this country receives from Germany an instalment of the war indemnity and a portion of the indemnity can be ear-marked for the purpose.

asked the First Commissioner of Works if anything has been decided as to the pylon proposed to be erected at Hyde Park Corner; who was responsible for asking Sir F. Baines to prepare the design; whether any expert opinion has been obtained as to its suitability; whether an estimate has been obtained as to the total cost, including the alterations to the site and the removal of Decimus Burton's arch, the Quadriga, and the Wellington Monument; whether the consent of His Majesty has been obtained for the curtailment of the garden of Buckingham Palace; whether an Act of Parliament will be required to curtail the Green Park; whether, in these days of heavy expenditure, the Cenotaph is not an adequate and a sufficient memorial of the War for the present; and whether the House will have an opportunity of discussing the proposition before further expense is incurred.

asked the First Commissioner of Works if the monument for Hyde Park Corner projected by his Department is intended as a national memorial to our soldiers; is it, in the opinion of his Department, quite fitting that such a monument should be crowned with a ball-room and bar; and can any English or European style of architecture be adopted in preference to barbaric and pagan Egyptian?

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether any official communication was made by his Department to the effect that the design for a war memorial at Hyde Park Corner is making a profound impression on the collective feeling of the House of Commons; whether he has received any intimation that a single Member of the House is favourably impressed by the design; whether it was by his instructions that a design in Oreintal style, abhorrent to English taste and incapable of expressing Christian sentiment, was prepared for the purpose; and whether, in order to allay at once all apprehension lest London be disfigured by the erection of an Egyptian building devoid of beauty or meaning at Hyde Park Corner, he will give an assurance that there is no intention of using the design referred to for the purpose of a war memorial?

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether the design by Sir F. Baines for a proposed war memorial at Hyde Park Corner has been put forward with the approval of the Cabinet; whether it has the approval of the Royal Institute of British Architect's; and whether it is desirable that any design put forward for consideration should be more in accordance with the traditions of the best periods of British architecture?

asked the First Commissioner of Works by whose direction the plans for a war memorial at Hyde Park Corner were prepared; what is the estimated cost of the same; and will he state whether Parliament will be given an opportunity of discussing the matter before the country is committed to the present or any other proposal for a war memorial for the Empire?

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he can give an approximate estimate of the probable cost of carrying out Sir Frank Baines's design for a national war memorial?

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether the proposal to erect another war memorial will be brought before Parliament prior to any commitment being made in this behalf?

I propose, for convenience, with the hon. Members' permission, to incorporate in one statement my replies to all questions in regard to the proposed design for a war memorial. The design was prepared by Sir Frank Baines some time ago, entirely on his own initiative and in his own time. It has never been put forward for official consideration, and I have never contemplated submitting it to the Cabinet. The questions in regard to detail do not therefore arise. I allowed the designs to be exhibited in the tea room at the request of the hon. and gallant Member for the Tradeston Division of Glasgow, who informed me that a number of Members would be interested to see them. No memorial could be erected out of public funds without the approval of Members of this House who would have to sanction the necessary expenditure.

Is it a fact that this design is in the Egyptian style, of the period of Pharaoh, and does the right hon. Gentleman realise that what is wanted in London is a memorial of the War, and not of the Exodus?

May we regard this particular scheme as quite dead?

I should certainly think so myself.

What reason does the right hon. Gentleman adduce for having put this design in the Tea Room? Can any design, however monstrous, be put in the Tea Room of the House?

I was endeavouring to meet the wishes of an hon. and gallant Member who pressed me, and who said that a number of Members were interested. Apparently a large number of people are very interested.

Will the right hon. Gentleman have it removed from the Tea Room?

May we take it that nothing will be done to commit the Government to the scheme until the House has had an opportunity of expressing an opinion?