asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the South Wales Miners' Federation have given three months' notice for the total abolition of piece-work by all grades of colliery workers; if such notice still holds good; whether such a policy would prejudicially affect either the supply or the price of coal; and whether any action has been taken with a view to the reconsideration of this decision?

I understand that it was decided at the anuual conference of the South Wales Miners' Federation in June to take a ballot on the question of tendering three months' notice to terminate the present piece-work conditions, but that the ballot has not yet been taken and notices have not been given. I have no doubt that the aboliton of piece-work would prejudicially affect both the supply and the price of coal.

If piece-work were continued should we not know, at all events, what we are paying for, as the men would be paid for the work they did, and would that not be in the interest of the State?

That is the position at present, and we have not any notice of an alteration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he had observed in the public Press the announcement that the miners' representatives had decided, on account of the Government's refusal to grant their demands, to recommend a strike, and whether, in view of the gravity of the position which might arise, he had any statement to make to the House?

I am aware, of course, of the decision which has been taken by the delegate conference last week to recommend the members of the Miners' Federation to ballot in favour of a strike. That is a very grave decision. I cannot think of anything which would bring greater disaster upon the trade and industry of the country at the present time than a miners' strike. The Government have deliberated most anxiously upon the position, and they gave the answer which I communicated to the deputation of the miners which waited upon me some days ago. That answer appeared fully in the Press, and I have nothing to add to it. Obviously it would be inappropriate, in reply to a question, to discuss that answer in the House. I can only say this in addition: that there is sometimes an impression that when such a question as this arises, a strike should be voted for by the miners in anticipation that thereafter something more may be obtained, when the decision is known. I should regret very much if that view were to prevail upon the present occasion. I hope that wiser counsels may prevail.

May I ask whether, in the event of the miners referring this matter to the Council of Action, the right hon. Gentleman will or will not be prepared to receive representatives from such Council?

I have no reason to believe that the miners will refer the matter to the Council of Action.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will state the number of gold and silver railway passes that have been issued to Ministers and officers of the Ministry of Transport, to whom they were allotted, the name of the railways, and the date they were issued?

Railway passes have been provided by all the principal railway companies to the ten senior officers of the Ministry, in accordance with the practice of the companies of issuing passes to their own principal officers and directors. The passes were provided at various dates, beginning on 9th April, 1920. Passes were also provided for the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, but, as stated in reply to a question by the hon. and gallant Member on 5th July, it was decided not to issue them, and they were not issued.

Is it not a fact that the Minister of Transport, or, at all events, some of his officers, had particularly asked for these passes to be given, and was it because a question was put down in the House of Commons that they were sent back, and it was decided not to use them?

No; the passes were asked for by the Minister of Transport for his staff, himself, and the Parliamentary Secretary. They were provided for all. They were issued to the principal officers. The Minister of Transport stated in the House of Commons in July last, in reply to my hon. Friend, that he had decided on his own behalf—and I followed his excellent example—that he would not accept the pass. That was decided weeks before my hon. Friend gave notice of his question.

If the Minister had asked on behalf of himself and my hon. Friend for these passes, why did they turn round, and say they did not want them? Is it a fact that one or two of the railway companies absolutely declined to give them?

No, it is not the fact; and the Minister, in applying for them, followed a precedent established in 1914 by the Board of Trade. He considers it right and proper that passes should be issued to the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, but in our personal discretion we do not propose to use them while the State guarantees the cost of the railways.

Will the hon. Gentleman not go a great deal further, and ask for passes for every Member of the House of Commons?

Have any other Ministers applied to the railways for passes?

I am not aware that any other Ministers have done so.

Then why should you?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he can now make any statement as to the increase of railway rates on goods; what the increases will be; and if they will come into force on 1st September?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the recommendations of the Railway Rates Advisory Committee (Cmd. Paper 886), which have been accepted by the Government, and the necessary directions have been issued to the companies to bring the increases into operation on the 1st September next.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that Kennington Road and Kennington Park Road, in South London, have been up for months past owing to the Metropolitan Water Board laying new mains there; whether he is aware that these roads are dangerous to foot-passengers as well as vehicular traffic; whether he has any control over these roads; and, if so, will he use such powers as he has to compel the Board to work day and night in order to complete this work as expeditiously as possible in order to diminish the danger to the public and loss to the adjacent shopkeepers caused by this long delay in laying these pipes?

The Minister of Transport is aware of the work now being carried out by the Metropolitan Water Board in Kennington Road and Kennington Park Road, South London, and he is advised that suitable precautions are being taken to minimise the inconveinience caused to the public. A certain amount of the work is being carried on at night, and, although the Minister has no compulsory powers, he is supporting the representations made by the local authority to the Metropolitan Water Board with a view to expediting the work by all possible means.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has now conferred with the Railway Companies' Association in reference to the urgent need of increasing the pensions of the superannuated railway staff; and what steps it is proposed to take in order to give effect to the Resolution of the House on the subject?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has recently had any communication with, or information from, the Railway Companies' Association or any of the railway companies in reference to the expressed opinion of this House on the subject of allowances to superannuated railway servants; and whether he will state what result has followed upon any representations made by him to the railway companies on this question?

It will be convenient, if I may be allowed, to answer these two questions together. I regret that I am unable to add anything to the answer given in reply to a somewhat similar question by the hon. Member for the Edgehill Division of Liverpool on the 26th of July.

Has the hon. Gentleman told the railway companies that they can charge, say, half of the necessary outlay to working expenses?

No.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that great dissatisfaction exists among the railway superannuated staffs, and that the Minister of Transport has been superannuated to the extent of£50,000?

I do not see any connection between the first and second parts of the question. I am aware of the great dissatisfaction among the superannuated staffs, but the Government's decision was clearly stated in the Debate on the Resolution moved by my hon. Friend behind me.

Is it the case that the Government have made all the representations they can without effect, and that therefore it is now entirely a matter for the railway companies?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the matter has been discussed with the railway companies. The matter of how they shall dispose of their funds is a matter for them, and is hardly one in regard to which the Minister could put pressure on them.

Has the Minister offered them anything but sympathy?

asked the Minister of Transport whether, before the rising of the House, he will be prepared to make a statement regarding the proposed increases in workmen's fares which are to come into operation on the 1st September?

I would refer my right hon. Friend to the recommendations of the Railway Rates Advisory Committee on this subject, which have received the general approval of His Majesty's Government. With a view to the prevention of any hardship, it has been decided to limit the advance in work-men's fares on any particular section to a sum not exceeding 2s. per week.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state what is the National Labour Bureau and what relation, if any, it bears to the League of Nations; whether he is aware that a subscription of £4,000,000 has been suggested at Geneva from Great Britain towards this League; and whether it is proposed that the British taxpayer shall assist this enterprise?

In answer to the first part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to Part XIII. of the Treaty of Versailles, which sets out the constitution and functions of the International Labour Office and its relation to the League of Nations. So far as I am aware, no suggestion of the nature indicated in the second part of the question has been made, nor has it been proposed that His Majesty's Government should subscribe to the International Labour Office, the expenses of which will be defrayed out of the general funds of the League of Nations.

If His Majesty's Government subscribes to that general fund, will they not be subscribing to this international enterprise?

Yes, that is quite true, but not to the enormous extent indicated in the question.

Would it not be better to spend £40,000,000 on war rather than £4,000,000 on peace?

Has anybody else subscribed besides ourselves?

There are a number of contributory nations.

Having regard to the possible relation of the International Labour Bureau, are we to understand that the Government propose to finance the Council of Action?

I am not aware that there is any connection between the two.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Covenant of the League of Nations provides for the presentation of annual reports by mandatory Powers; whether the mandates under the German Treaty were conferred more than 15 months ago; and why no annual reports have yet been presented by the Powers on whom these mandates were conferred?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second and third parts of the question, it is true that the decision as to what Powers should act as mandatories under the German Treaty was taken more than 15 months ago, but the terms of the mandates have not yet been determined.

asked the Prime Minister what matters will be brought before the Assembly of the League of Nations by the British representative at the meeting of the Assembly in the autumn?

The Secretariat of the League of Nations has circulated the provisional agenda of the meeting to all members of the League. This agenda is of a most comprehensive nature, and His Majesty's Government have not hitherto deemed it necessary to suggest any addition to the items which it contains.

Can the right hon Gentleman state what are the principal questions that will be raised, or alternatively can he publish papers on this subject, before we adjourn, giving either a complete statement or a summary?

I will consult the League of Nations on the subject. So far as we are concerned, we certainly have no objection to publishing the agenda, and I cannot imagine that there will be any objection.

Will the meetings of the League be held in public, similar to the meetings of this House?

I should not like to answer that question without notice.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that the affairs of Nauru are not overlooked?

asked the Prime Minister whether the British representative will propose the inclusion of any of our late enemies in the League of Nations at the meeting of the Assembly of the League of Nations in the autumn?

The appointment of British representatives to the meeting of the Assembly of the League of Nations is now engaging the attention of His Majesty's Government, and questions of this nature will be considered on their appointment.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the question about our late enemies being asked to join the League is on the agenda of the next meeting of the Assembly?

I am not quite sure. I hope the agenda will be published.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not thing that the time has arrived when Germany might be invited League?

Never.

asked the Prime Minister what decision has been arrived at by the Council of the League of Nations at San Sebastian with regard to a permanent International Court?

asked the Prime Minister what decision has been come to by the Council of the League of Nations at San Sebastian with regard to the expenses of the Delimitation Commission of the Saar?

asked the Prime Minister (1) what decision has been come to by the Council of the League of Nations at San Sebastian with reference to the use of the economic blockade; (2) what conclusions have been arrived at by the Council of the League of Nations at San Sebastian with regard to the finances of the League?

I am unable to reply to these questions, in view of the fact that the record of the proceedings of the Council of the League of Nations at San Sebastian has not yet been communicated to His Majesty's Government.

Will the Lord President consider the immense desirability of making the decisions of the League as public as possible m the future?

I agree there would be great advantage in publishing the decisions of the League, in view of the interest taken in it in all lands.

Having regard to the importance of this international assembly, could we not have a publication of the nature of the OFFICIAL REPORT, so that we many have the benefit of the debates and speeches which led up to the decisions?

I agree with my hon. Friend as to the desirability of publishing the decisions, but I have some doubt as to the desirability of a full report of the proceedings of a small body like the Council. If, however, the question has reference to the Assembly, then I think there might be an advantage in having a full report.

Was not the idea of the creation of the League the abolition of secret diplomacy, and, therefore, is it not desirable that publicity should shine on realities?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any expenditure is being incurred upon the British representatives on the Permanent Advisory Commission for naval, military and air questions created by the League of Nations; if so, under what sanction; and, if not, whether the three British representatives are giving gratuitous service?

These officers will continue to draw pay from Navy, Army and Air Votes.

asked the Prime Minister whether the forthcoming invitations to Germany to attend the International Financial Conference at Brussels is to be taken as tantamount to a notice that she will be accepted as a member of the League of Nations, if she applies, to be so accepted?

The question of the admission of Germany to the League of Nations is one for the Assembly of the League of Nations to decide. The invitation to the German Government to attend the International Financial Conference at Brussels will in no way affect any decision on this point which may eventually be taken.

Would the acceptance of the invitation of the Secretary of State for War be favourably considered in this respect?

asked the Prime Minister whether it has been decided who shall represent this country on the Assembly of the League of Nations?

The answer is in the negative.

When is the Government going to determine who shall represent us on that Assembly?

It will be decided at the usual time, and in due course.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the claims of the hon. Member for East Edinburgh (Mr. Hogge)?

asked: the Minister of Health whether he is aware that several housing committees in England and Wales have passed resolutions protesting against the inaction of the Government in dealing with the continual increases in the cost of building materials, which retards the progress of the erection of houses for the working classes, and which is adding so considerably to the cost of building; and whether he is prepared to deal with this matter without further delay?

As I have stated on several occasions, the whole question of the cost of building materials is being investigated by a Committee appointed under the Profiteering Act by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

Is it not time that this Profiteering Committee should report? That answer has been given by my right hon. Friend now many times, and is it not time that we should really get that Report and something be done to prevent the soaring prices of building materials?

I am just as anxious as my hon. Friend to get the Report. I wish I could get it.

Has the right hon. Gentleman not influence, and will he not do something?

The Committee, I think, should be left to do its own work in its own way.

Does my right hon. Friend not realise how important it is to carry his scheme to success, and will he not urge this Department to issue this Report?

I regret with my hon. Friend the high cost of building materials. I have done all I can to get this Report. I know they are doing their best to produce it.

asked the Minister of Health if he will make a definite statement of the intention of his Majesty's Government to secure an economic rent at an early date for all State-aided houses, and will emphasise publicly the fact that every concession in building plans or in cost of labour or material will eventually fall on the tenant.

It is the intention of the Government to adhere to the regulations which require that after 31st March, 1927, economic rents on the cost of building at that time shall, as far as possible, be obtained. Any alteration in building plans which adds to the cost of building will clearly increase the rent which will require to be paid.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is an economic rent, and what will be an economic rent?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he can give a definite reply, without further delay, re a memorial to the Postmaster-General from the Junior Supervising-Officers' Association, dated 20th May, 1919, affecting the supervising messengers of London, Edinburgh, and Dublin; and, as it has been stated that their case is being considered with corresponding classes in other Government Departments, will he supply particulars of what classes and other Government Departments are being considered with those of the Post Office and when a definite reply will be given, seeing that it has taken nearly 15 months to deal with this memorial, the length of time being quite unreasonable and unprecedented?

I regret that it has not yet been possible to reach a decision as regards the classes in question. The rates of pay of established messengers throughout the service are under review, and pending a general decision (which I anticipate will be reached shortly), the case of the supervising messengers in the General Post Office cannot be isolated.

Does my right hon. Friend not appreciate that this matter has been before the Department ever since May, 1919?

asked the Postmaster-General at what offices in Scotland are adult night messengers employed upon postmen's duties; and whether those so employed will benefit by the increase of the adult night messenger's pay, which at present is 24s. a week and bonus or, alternatively, be placed at a suitable point upon the postmen's scale of pay?

Dundee is the only office in Scotland at which it has been necessary to transfer adult night messengers to postmen's duties. Men transferred will be given the benefit of any wage increase that may be granted to adult messengers in general.

asked the Prime Minister whether any contracts for the making of shell are running at the present time; if so, of what natures are the shell now being made and what sums are involved in the contracts; whether it was understood that all such contracts were to be brought to an end as soon as possible after the Armistice: whether the contract with the Wandsworth Projectile Company is still in existence or has it been terminated; and, if so, what was the the date of termination.

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. There are three contracts for shells on which deliveries are outstanding. These relate to heavy shells required for fixed armament of coast defences throughout the Empire. The values of the outstanding deliveries are about £150,000, £17,000, and £2,000 respectively. The Projectile Company's contracts for shell were closed immediately after the Armistice, with the exception of two contracts which were allowed to terminate on 14th January, 1919, and 14th February, 1919, respectively, as it was found more economical to allow them to be completed than to cancel them. Since the latter date the firm have held no orders for the War Office.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Munitions if Captain Pulleine, Controller of Mechanical Transport in France, has left the service of the Ministry; and, if so, on what date was he given notice to leave, for what reason, and what was his salary and total allowances when he left?

Captain Pulleine voluntarily resigned from the service of the Ministry with effect from 1st May, 1920. His total emoluments at the date of his resignation were £850 per annum.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give an assurance that the British Empire will not be committed to war upon Soviet Russia until the country has been able to express its opinion upon it?

I would ask my Noble Friend to await the statement which will be made this afternoon.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is proposed to allow the members of the Soviet Delegation to this country to be allowed to stay here indefinitely and, if not, what limit has been imposed upon their residence here; and is there any reason to think that any members of the Delegations have been in communication with revolutionary and seditious persons in this country, and have they as yet engaged in any political propaganda?

If the agreement is arrived at, or, in the alternative, if the conditions sought to be imposed by the Russian Government are not inconsistent with Polish independence, the Delegation will remain here to conduct the trade negotiations under the agreement already arrived at, provided the conditions of that agreement are respected. As to the latter part of the question, this matter is under the careful consideration of His Majesty's Government at the present moment.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give any further information with regard to the naval prisoners at Baku; what are the prospects of their release; whether he can explain how it is that Italian representatives can come and go without hindrance and French representatives practically so; whether this point has been put to Krassin and Kameneff; and whether he can state what are the pretexts advanced by the Soviet representatives for detaining these officers and men as prisoners in the hands of the 11th Soviet Army?

I am glad to be able to inform my Noble Friend and this House that a message has been received from Tiflis to the effect that all British prisoners were released from prison on 5th August and are now living in a private house outside the town of Baku. This does not include Consul Hewelcke, who is in hospital. The men are receiving sufficient food and money, but would be grateful for tobacco, cigarettes and soap.

Can the right hon. Gentleman hold out any hope that these men will shortly be allowed to return to this country; and whether he has any anxiety as to their fate in the event of a possible counter revolution?

Are we to understand that all the British prisoners in Russia have now been liberated?

I am not quite sure about all of them, but I think most of them have been released. Whether there are any more left I am not quite sure. With regard to the supplementary question put by the Noble Lord (Viscount Curzon), naturally there is anxiety as long as they are there, and we would rather see them out of the country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman in communication with the Soviet Government and can ho get from them a report as to how many British prisoners have been released and how many are still in Russia?

If the hon. Gentleman had given me notice I could have given an answer to that question, because quite recently I have read a communication referring to this subject, but I could not recall the figures accurately.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say definitely whether these prisoners are now being allowed to leave or are they still prisoners?

I have given the only information I have received up to the present and it is a great advance.

Are there any means by which the Government can provide material comforts for these men while they are there?

Yes. I think we have done so, and done it with considerable success.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when these prisoners are coming back; whether some are still there; and, if so, will they also be liberated?

The result of the steps we have taken is that we have secured these advantages up to the present, and I hope that we shall be able to get them all released, but they are under the control of the Soviet of Azerbaijan.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Japanese Government have communicated their policy in Eastern Siberia to His Majesty's Government; if so, whether this policy can be made public; and whether His Majesty's Government is using its good offices to bring about peace between Japan and Russia in Eastern Siberia?

With regard to the first part of the question, I cannot add anything to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Wirral on 4th August As regards the second part, the Japanese Government issued an official statement on 4th July last to the following effect: Owing to repeated massacres of Japanese subjects by the Bolsheviks between 12th March and the latter part of May, the Japanese Government felt it necessary to take steps to uphold the honour and prestige of their country, but, as there was no legal Government to which they could make representations and obtain a satisfactory settlement, they decided to occupy such parts of Saghalien as they considered necessary. At the same time, as the Zabaikal provinces had been completely evacuated of the Czechoslovak troops, the Japanese Government decided to withdraw their troops from those regions, in conformity with their declaration. The Japanese Government, however, are compelled, until peace and order have been completely secured, to maintain troops in the districts round Vladivostok, since not only is there a menace from those quarters against Korea, but there are a large number of Japanese residents in the neighbourhood, and Haravosk constitutes a point of strategic importance on the way to the province of Saghalien. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Are the Japanese acting on their own, or acting in concert with the other Allies?

I understand they are acting quite independently.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the present situation, he can give any information as to when the mines will be swept up in the Baltic and freedom of trade allowed to Petrograd?

As has already been stated in reply to a previous question by the hon. Member for White chapel, the removal of these mines is not an obligation resting on the British Government.

asked the Prime Minister whether any advice has yet been given to General Wrangel to cease attacking Russia with munitions provided by Great Britain?

I can add nothing to the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) on 10th June, when I stated that "we made it absolutely clear to General Wrangel that we should not be responsible for himself and his army if he undertook offensive operations. He has done so, and the responsibility is entirely his."

Can we have an assurance there is no British representative with General Wrangel?

There is no British Mission.

Is there any British representative?

I cannot say whether there is an Intelligence Officer, as has been the case in every war that has occurred—an officer representing neutral countries to report on operations.

Is this war a civil war? Would it not be possible either to withdraw the Intelligence Officer or to appoint one to the Soviet Army?

Does the hon. Member make that proposal with authority? It might be worth considering.

asked the Prime Minister if the Supreme Council have advised the Poles to accept the Russian peace terms?

The Russian peace terms to Poland have not been considered by the Supreme Council. There has been no meeting since these terms were communciated to the British Government by M. Kameneff.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether he has yet come to a decision as to the desirability of laying upon the Table the despatch to which the Prime Minister recently referred as embodying the advice, or the failure to give advice, to the Government of Poland?

I do not think the publication of an isloated despatch at the present juncture would be desirable.

Will the Government issue a Blue Book on the Polish proceedings? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that other countries have done so?

I was not aware of that. There is a good deal to be said for having the whole story published.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether a state of war exists between this country and the Soviet Government of Russia; and, if not, whether the co-operation of British troops at Danzig, m unloading munitions for Poland, constitutes a breach of neutrality?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part, the Allied troops at Danzig are under the authority of the Administrator who provisionally governs the city in the name of the Allied and associated Powers. Under Article 104 of the Treaty of Versailles, Poland is, among other things, guaranteed "without any restriction the free use and service of all waterways, docks, basins, wharves and other works within the territory of the Free City necessary for Polish imports and ex-ports," and also "the control and administration of the Vistula and of the whole railway system within the Free City …"

Is it not a breach of the oath on enlistment to compel troops to do this?

Nothing of the kind has been done except voluntarily, and I am told it is not now being done.

Are no British troops now unloading munitions at Danzig?

That is my information.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many coastguard stations, lighthouses, and signal stations on the Irish coast have been attacked up to the end of July; to what extent has their efficiency been impaired; and what steps have been taken to safeguard vessels approaching those parts of the coast which have been affected?

Twenty coast guard stations, 2 Board of Trade watch huts, 3 war signal stations, 1 W/T station, 1 lighthouse, 1 fog signal station, I lighthouse dwelling have been attacked up to the end of July, 1920.

Efficiency has been impaired in the case of 4 coast guard stations and 3 war signal stations, which have had to be abandoned. Permanent efficiency has not been impaired in the case of any lighthouses, fog signal stations, watch huts or W/T stations. With regard to the latter part of the question, information has been issued in Notices to Mariners that the lights and fog signals on the Irish coast cannot be re-hed upon in the future.

Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say what becomes of the wives and children of these men?

I am sorry to say that, in the first instance, they are thrown out on the street, or on the beach, as the case may be; but as soon as the news comes to the Admiralty, we take every possible care to bring them back to England, and restore them to their homes.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the Irish Prisoners interned at Wormwood Scrubs and elsewhere awaiting trial, and who were subsequently released without a charge being made against them, were refused any assistance to get home; and, if so, will he reconsider the decision, in view of the fact that these pepole were stranded in London after being deported from Ireland without trial?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. Those of the prisoners in question who were released from prison were supplied with railway passes to their homes and subsistence money for the journey. It was, of course, impossible to do this for men who had been removed to hospitals in consequence of their refusal to take food, and who subsequently left of their own accord.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why it is that the personal property, including money, taken from these men on their arrival in prison has not yet been returned to them?

I suppose they can have it if they go for it.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Thomas Healy, 41, Central Street, Belfast, who was forced to leave his work at Harland and Wolff's East Yard on the 21st July last; whether he is aware that he was given six hours to leave his house and, on his return from endeavouring to procure a van for the removal of his goods, found the house in the hands of looters, who did a considerable amount of damage and took away a number of articles; that Healy is an ex-service man; and that the body of his dead child was lying in the house at the time he and his family were evicted; and if he proposes to take any action in the matter?

I have made inquiry into this matter, and am informed that Thomas Healy, who is an ex-service man, was working at Harland and Wolff's and was forced to leave. He was living in a Protestant neighbourhood, and, fearing that he would be attacked, he decided to leave. None of Healy's furniture was injured in any way either during or before removal. Healy's child died in the Union Hospital, and the body of the child was not in the house when he gave up possession.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the workmen who have been ejected from their employment in Belfast on account of their religious or political opinions, are being denied State unemployment benefit on the ground that they are out of employment in consequence of a trade dispute; whether this interpretation of the trouble in Belfast has received his approval; and, if so, whether he will state the grounds upon which such interpretation is based?

I am aware that a large number of men have not been able to follow their employment in Belfast in consequence of the disturbances there. Claims for unemployment benefit made by the men were in accordance with ordinary machinery laid down by the National Insurance Act, 1911, referred to the local Court of Referees, who recommended that the claims should be allowed. In view of the important and difficult issues involved, the cases were, in accordance with normal procedure, referred by the Insurance Officer to the Umpire. As the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, the machinery of Insurance Officer, Referees, Umpire, etc., is set up by Section 89 of the National Insurance Act, 1911, and these officers exercise their functions under that Section without reference to the Ministry of Labour. I may add that, in view of the important questions which arise, the whole matter is under the careful consideration of my Department.

May I take that answer to mean that the hon. Gentleman will take steps, in view of the long time during which these men have been out of work, to hasten the final decision in this matter?

I can only say that if I send my right hon. Friend a copy of the Act he will see, as I have already stated, that these officers exercise their functions irrespective of the Ministry of Labour, but, no doubt, his question in the House to-day will possibly achieve the result he desires?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the statement made by Archbishop Mannix that after many years' absence he wishes to go to Ireland to see his aged mother and not for any political purposes whatsoever, the Government will reconsider its decision and remove the restrictions on the archbishop's personal movements so as to allow him to proceed to his native land for the purpose mentioned?

The answer is in the negative. The Government will however, be prepared to give every assistance to Archbishop Mannix's mother to visit him in England.

Was the Government justified in using ten destroyers to keep out a harmless archbishop?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many jurors in Ireland were fined last month for refusing to discharge their duties; and what steps the Irish Government has taken to collect the fines?

The number of jurors fined was 1,068. In Counties Down and Wicklow the fines were remitted by the judge. In King's County three jurors paid the fines and two appealed. In 579 cases the usual warrants have been, or will be, issued to recover the fines.

asked the Lord Privy Seal for what offence the Lord Mayor of Cork has been arrested, what is his present state of health, and when will he be brought to public trial?

I have not had notice.

I have been asked to reply.

By whom?

By the principal Private Secretary of the Lord Privy Seal. The Lord Mayor of Cork is being tried by court-martial to-day, under the Defence of the Realm Regulations 22 and 27. The state of his health is satisfactory.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say for what offence he is being tried, and will he also say whether on request he would grant permission for near relatives of the Lord Mayor to visit him in prison?

I gave my hon. Friend the Regulations under which the Lord Mayor is being tried. They are very long Regulations, but I can summarise one, namely. "for being in possession of a secret police cypher code."

Is this court-martial being held under the Restoration of Older (Ireland) Act?

No. It is being held under the Defence of the Realm Regulations.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my other question—whether near relatives can have permission to visit this Lord Mayor in prison?

Visits to accused persons are matters which come under certain regulations, and nothing exceptional will be done to preclude the Lord Mayor from receiving the full benefit of the regulations that would apply to any similar case.

Has the Lord Mayor, according to the papers, began a hunger strike with other prisoners, and, if so, does the right hon. Gentleman call that good health?