asked the Minister of Pensions whether a further inquiry will be made into the case of Private Arthur William Coker, No. 35,879, Royal Army Service Corps, now unable to find employment, and living in one small room with his wife and four children, having been discharged from the Army as unfit with a paralysed arm, and stated to be suffering from delusions; whether neither his father nor mother, who are still living, nor any of his family, have suffered from delusions at any time; whether it is admitted that paralysis and delusions are sometimes the sequelæ of inoculation; and whether he will state the reasons for the decision of the appeal tribunal that no assistance is to be afforded him in his distressed circumstances?

This case was very carefully considered by his local war pensions committee, by a medical board, by my technical advisers, and by an appeal tribunal; and on each occasion it was found that the man's condition was not due to service.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether his attention has been called to the statement of the Clerk to the Clutton Guardians to the effect that it was only after a correspondence ex- tending over 19 months, during which he, the Clerk, wrote, 40 letters respecting the case, that the Ministry of Pensions accepted liability for payment of the sum of £7 13s. Poor Law Relief granted to an ex-Guardsman whose pension was reduced and who was certified as being unable to work; and what steps are being taken to expedite matters of this kind in the future?

I have not yet been able to complete my inquiries into this case, but I will communicate with my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that the Ministry in a recent letter informed the London War Pensions Committee that, as regards the payment of treatment allowances, the question to be considered is whether a man is prevented from following his occupation in consequence of the amount of time taken up in obtaining the treatment ordered by the Ministry, and that if he is so prevented treatment allowances are payable, but not otherwise; whether he is aware that in 1917 the Ministry's instructions to local committees under the Royal Warrant stated that treatment allowances were payable to disabled men undergoing a course of treatment if it was considered that during the period of the treatment the man was not reasonably able to work, and that such interpretation of the Royal Warrant has been in force up to the present time; and whether he will state the reasons of the Ministry for adopting this new and restricted interpretation of the Royal Warrant, which has the effect of denying treatment allowances to men who during a course of treatment are unfit for work unless the amount of time occupied in the treatment would prevent the man following his occupation, and why instructions on the subject have not been circulated to local war pensions committees generally?

I am not able to identify the precise letter referred to by my hon. Friend, but from the terms of the letter I gather that it related to cases of men in receipt of out-patient treatment at hospitals or clinics, or of treatment in their own homes. I would draw my hon. Friend's attention to the terms of Article 6 of the Warrant, which clearly provides that allowances at the maximum rate of pension are only payable where, in consequence of the course of treatment deemed necessary in the man's interests, he is unable to provide for the support of himself and family. The condition for payment of such allowances, referred to by my hon. Friend in the first part of his question, is only one, though an important one, of the conditions which would entitle the man to full allowances; but clearly also a man may be actually prevented from working, not by the length of time occupied in treatment, but by the fact that the treatment, coupled with the condition for which treatment is being given, is such as to render it undesirable, or even impossible, in the doctor's opinion, for the man to work, and in such a case full treatment allowances would be payable. This is not a new interpretation of the Royal Warrant, but, as it was found that misapprehension had arisen as to the terms of the instructions, and considerable abuse of the provisions of Article 6 had occurred, the attention of local committees and others concerned was drawn to the matter by a circular issued in the early part of the present year.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether Frank Hardy was sentenced to five years' imprisonment for forgery and released after only eight months' imprisonment in 1919, supplied with money, and employed as secret service agent for nine months, until he was exposed by the hon. Member for Cavan, East, before a meeting of journalists; whether Frank Hardy testifies to the truth of the above, and states that other convicts were released to take service under the Government; and what action he proposes to take?

Before I answer this question may I say, with reference to Irish questions generally, that 44 new questions appeared on the Paper yesterday for answer to-day. I am most anxious to supply the fullest possible answers, but I appeal to hon. Members to give me at least three days' notice, and also to remember that it is difficult to ask officers who are searching for assassins in any disturbed area to secure quickly the information which the House requires.

The answer to the question is as follows:—This man was convicted of false pretences on 3rd December, 1918, and was sentenced to five years' penal servitude on 17th April, 1919. His sentence was reduced by the Lord Lieutenant to one of three years' penal servitude, and on 29th July, 1919, he was released on licence. This clemency was shown to him for no other reason than that his wife was ill and in poor circumstances, and that he himself gave promise of amendment. I have no knowledge, other than that from statements which have appeared in the Press, as to what happened to Hardy subsequent to his release, except that in May, 1920, he had employment as a journalist on a religious paper in London, and was well reported on by the police. The statement that convicts have been released to take service under Government is untrue.

May I say that I put this question down a fortnight ago, so that the Chief Secretary's strictures do not apply to me. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that. Frank Hardy is going about London seeing influential people and taking his oath that these things are true, and that he has seen a Member of the Government and sworn to him that they are true?

As the man has seven previous convictions against him, it is hopeless—

If he had seven previous convictions against him, how did he get into the service of the Crown?

I am not aware that he was in the service of the Crown.

Has he been invited to become a Member of the Coalition Government?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the police who attempted to extinguish the flaming houses in Temple-more on the night of 29th October last have any information as to the persons who fired the houses and sacked the town; and what steps they took to check the riot and restore law and order?

I am informed that the police who attempted to extinguish the fires in Templemore have no information as to the perpetrators of the damage except that they numbered about 25 and were masked and disguised. On hearing of the occurrence the police, who were not in sufficient strength to cope with the situation, at once requisitioned military assistance, which was furnished with all possible speed. The raiders had meanwhile disappeared, and the police and military thereupon proceeded immediately to the task of extinguishing the flames. The local council thanked the police for their efforts in helping to extinguish the fires. There are 437 houses in Templemore. Only two were destroyed, though many more received some damage. No lives were lost nor was anyone injured on this occasion. The expression "sacked the town' in the hon. and gallant Member's question, therefore, has no relevancy to the actual facts.

When does the right hon. Gentleman think that the expression "sacking a town" will apply? If there is one house left, does he think that a town is not sacked? Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware of the detailed statements made in respectable journals that this town was damaged by uniformed men in the service of the Crown, and that the police tried their best to restrain the uniformed men, supposed to be soldiers, who took part? Will he prosecute the journals for making false statements?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he has now received the evidence of the court of inquiry into the deaths of Frank O'Dwyer and Edward O'Dwyer, sons of William O'Dwyer, farmer, of Ballydavid, near Bansha, stated to have been shot by men in uniform on the night of 18th October last; whether he has read the minutes of evidence; what was the composition of the court; what witnesses were called; whether the court sat in secret; whether any motor lorries were taken out by the police or military in that part of Ireland on the night in question; and whether he has any information showing who murdered these young men?

I have read the minutes of evidence given before the court of inquiry in this case. The court was composed of three military officers, two of the rank of major and one captain. The proceedings were held in secret solely out of consideration for the personal safety of the witnesses, and for the same reason I am unable to give the names of the witnesses. The finding of the court was that the deceased were murdered by some person or persons unknown, and the court recorded their opinion that the murders were not committed by any person or persons belonging to the armed forces of the Crown. The evidence conclusively proved that no police or military motor lorries were in the vicinity on the night of the murder. I have no information as to who were the actual perpetrators of the crime, but I agree with the further opinion expressed by the court that the circumstances in which the murders were committed, which were of a cowardly, inhuman, and utterly despicable nature, show a close similitude with the methods adopted in the murders carried out by the Sinn Fein organisation.

May I ask whether the aged mother and the sister of these unfortunate men were called as witnesses, and is the right hon. Gentleman aware that they solemnly declare that these men were shot by uniformed members of the armed forces? Is he further aware that two other brothers of the O'Dwyer family fought in the American Army in France? Is this incident going to help good relations between this country and America?

Does the Chief Secretary propose now to publish the evidence?

I must protect witnesses who came forward at the risk of their lives in many parts of Ireland, as things exist to-day, in giving evidence to help the Government.

Do the mother and the sister of these two boys, who gave evidence to show that this murder was committed by men in uniform, want protection for their evidence?

Is it not a fact that it is the custom amongst assassins to dress in uniform?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the eye-witnesses of this crime were the mother and sister, and is their evidence totally swept away by the statement of an interested party?

I can assure the hon. and gallant Member and the House that I have given the best answer I can supply.

They were called?

Yes, they were called; certainly, the sister was called, although she refused to be sworn.

Will the right hon. Gentleman publish the evidence of witnesses who do not claim protection or privilege? You will not, because you are afraid of it.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland why resident magistrates in Ireland have not yet received the increase or arrears of pay promised in the Bill passed some months ago?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to a somewhat similar question asked by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Bury St. Edmunds on Tuesday last.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether robberies and outrages have been committed in Dublin recently by uniformed unauthorised persons under the guise of official searches for aims; whether a raid was made at the Home and Colonial Stores, South Great George's Street, Dublin, by armed men holding up the manager and assistants with revolvers, whilst others ransacked the premises and carried away some £149; and whether any arrests have been made?

There is ample evidence that raids with criminal intent have been made by persons falsely representing themselves to be members of the forces of the Crown. An arrest was recently made in Dublin in connection with a case of this kind, but I cannot make any statement on the subject at present, as the matter is sub judice. I shall inquire as to the specific case referred to by the hon. Member.

May I ask if there was any damage to the building, as I happen to own it, and this is the first I have heard of damage?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland why the summaries of official reports of outrages committed daily to the Press from the beginning of May were discontinued on the day when the sack of Balbriggan occurred; whether he will explain why in the month of August only four cases of private dwelling houses maliciously destroyed are specified in these summaries, no indication being given as to the perpetrators, and in the month of September only six such cases; and why the malicious destruction or partial wrecking of houses at Kildorrery, Templemore, Oranmore, Kill, Ballaghaderrin, Inniscarra, Tullow, and other places, all occurring in August and September, were not mentioned in these summaries?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland what are the instructions of local detachments of Royal Irish Constabulary with regard to forwarding to Dublin Castle, by telegraph or otherwise, reports of outrages against persons and property occurring in their respective districts; what are the instructions to the officials of Dublin Castle with respect to the publication of reports of such outrages through the agency of the press; whether all outrages are reported and published or only selected outrages; and, in the latter event, on what principle is the selection made?

The discontinuance of the publication of the summary of outrages had no reference to Balbriggan. Responsible police officers report in the ordinary course of their duty upon all outrages which occur in their districts. These reports are sent to headquarters in Dublin in all important cases by telegram. The Press, apart from their own avenues of information, are given every facility for obtaining accurate information upon all subjects of public interest, and it was because of increased facilities in this connection that the summary was discontinued.

Is it not a fact that the summary was discontinued on the date on which the reprisals began by the forces of the Crown?

It has no connection with what are called reprisals.

Is it not a marvellous thing that they ceased to be published on the day of the sacking of Balbriggan?

That is only one of the many marvellous things that occur in Ireland.

Will the right hon. Gentleman indicate to us why these outrages on the part of the forces of the Crown are not included in this list, as they were formerly?

Reports of outrages of all kinds are available to the Press who take advantage of the facilities given, and it is because, in the first place, of increased official facilities to the Press, and in the second place, I am glad to say, because of the increased interest taken by the Press itself in Irish affairs, that the daily publication of these outrages is no longer necessary.

Is the reason why they are not published because the Government themselves were committing outrages and burning towns, and will there be a bulletin issued headed "Government outrages; the burning and looting of towns; the destruction of villages, and the murder of innocent civilians."

If the hon. Member has any evidence of that list, I wish he would submit it to me.

I can send him tons of it.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many recruits have been obtained to date in Ulster for the new Special Constabulary of well-disposed persons; and how many of such recruits were formerly members of the Ulster Volunteer Force.

Before the right hon Gentleman gives the information asked for in the last part of the question will he say if he does not consider that men qualified for service, during the War are men who may be thoroughly trusted, and relied on to put down rebels who never lose an opportunity of insulting the British flag?

I do not wish to enter into that. About 2,000 applications for enrolment in the Special Constabulary have been received to date, but as yet none have been sworn in. All well disposed persons were invited to join, and no information is available as to the number of the applicants who were-formerly members of the Ulster Volunteer Force. It is not at present known how many applicants have offered themselves as officers.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman did not declare that these special constables were to be recruited all over the country, and subsequently, he confined the recruiting to Belfast and Tyrone in order to arm the political opponents of the Nationalist party to shoot them down in an emergency?

The last part of the question is utterly untrue. I have power to appoint special constables to each county in turn, and I am doing so.

Why are these special constables confined to the City of Belfast and the County Tyrone, the most loyal, law-abiding, orderly parts of the country, and no special constables recruited from any other part? What is the reason why, in the most orderly and law-abiding part of the country, special constables are being recruited?

I consider they are most needed, for various reasons, in the places where we have commenced.

Is it not the fact that special constables have also been recruited in County Armagh, and are not some of them Roman Catholics?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether at every inquiry held into alleged reprisals in Ireland there has been present some person with legal training or qualifications; and, if not, in the case of how many inquiries such a person has been present?

As I have already stated, the inquiries unto such allegations are conducted by responsible police or military officers, upon whose findings I can rely.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman considers that courts of inquiry into murders, presided over by majors in the Army as senior officers, and into alleged excesses by troops are competent courts on which we may rely?

I do.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many cases of alleged reprisals have been brought to his notice; in how many cases an inquiry has been initiated; and in how many cases such inquiry has been concluded?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland the number of alleged reprisals into which inquiries have been held; and whether he will publish the result of these inquiries?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland (1) whether he has any information which he can communicate to the House with regard to police or military excesses at Ballymote, Cullen, Ballingare and Galway on 2nd October; at Lacklagh, Turloughmore and Tuam on 4th October; in Cork on 5th October; in Meelick, Mount Bellew, Gort, Cloondara, Tuam, Sheverie, Bally-boy, Ballymoe, Castlereagh, Williamstown and Ballintober on 8th October; in Kilhimo, Pallashenry, Pike, Cork, Dublin and Drum on 9th October; at Clifden on 10th October; at Clifden on 13th October; in Athlone and Dublin on 16th October; in Corofin, Cummer, Anbally, Ballin-tubber and Tralee on 17th October; in Tipperary and Mallow on 18th October;

(2) whether any official inquiry has been made into the atacks made by uniformed servants of the Crown, accompanied by wrecking, looting, arson, and, in some cases, murder, on the following towns: Fermoy in September; Kinsale and Cork in November; Thurles in January; Thurles, Cork and Dublin in March; Burladuff, Kilcommon and Limerick in April; Limerick, Thurles, Bantry, Kilcommon and Kilmallock in May; Middleton, Limerick, Bantry, Fermoy, Lismore, Newcastle West and Kilcommon in June; Limerick, Union Hall, Middleton, Bally-landers, Tralee, Arklow, Galbally, Cork, Ballagh, Emly, Tuam, Enniscorthy, Ballina, Leap, Caltra, Upperchurch and Tipperary in July; Castlerca, Doon, Rosegreen, Tralee, Kildorrey, Enniscorthy, Swords, Limerick, Tralee, Templemore, Castleiny, Loughmore, Killee, Bantry, Oranmore, Glengariffe, Dundalk, Kill, Knocklong, Shanagolden, Naas and Cove in August; and Ballaghaderin, Inniscarra, Tullow, Galway, Salthill, Carrick-on-Shannon, Tuam, Balbriggan, Drum-shambo, Ennistymon, Lahinch, Milltown Malbay, Ballinamore, Athlone, Killorglin, Trim, Kilfenora, Silvermines, Cork, Mallow, Liscarrol, Dunkerrin, Clonmore, Ballyshannon, Listowel, Ballygar, Drimo-league, Tuam, Galway, Roscrea, Tubber-curry, Ballyara, Achonry, Kilshenane and Gort in September; by whom were such inquiries conducted; whether any Reports have been made; and whether signed Reports will be called for and embodied in a Parliamentary Paper?

As I have already stated in the course of recent debates, full and careful inquiry is made into every allegation of misconduct against the armed forces of the Crown in Ireland. The inquiries are conducted by senior officers, and the results are, embodied in signed reports. A number of such inquiries are still proceeding, and I am not yet in a position to furnish the House with a complete detailed account on the subject, but I hope to do so at a later date.

Can the right hon. Gentleman answer how many cases have been brought to his notice, and in how many cases have inquiries been initiated?

I am unable to do so, principally because of the short notice given by those who ask the questions.

Does the right hon. Gentleman, as Irish Secretary, not go to the Irish Office and get the totals of the inquiries which are being held either on one side or the other, or are we to understand that the information is not got until he telegraphs specially to Ireland?

My hon. Friend is not putting the case exactly as it exists. I do my best to get detailed information for the House, but on a long series of questions affecting most disturbed parts of Ireland I cannot on short notice give details.

Did the right hon. Gentleman say he was endeavouring to answer questions Nos. 72 and 73?

I ventured to say that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer Question No. 73—whether any reports have been made with regard to the outrages mentioned in that question, and some of which took place twelve months ago, and whether any reports in those instances will be called for and embodied in Parliamentary Papers?

I repeat the last part of my answer:

"A number of such inquiries are still proceeding, and I am not yet in a position to furnish the House with a complete detailed account on the subject, but I hope to do so at a later date."

Surely the right hon. Gentleman is in a position to tell us whether any reports have been received as to the wrecking, looting, and murders which took place twelve months ago.

I have said so.

Can we have those Reports? Are they going to be issued as Parliamentary Papers?

Is it in order, to put as a supplementary question a question which appears on the Paper?

The Chief Secretary said he was answering the question to which I am putting a supplementary.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he will initiate prosecutions for perjury against all Irishmen who have embodied in sworn affidavits to the effect that they have seen outrages deliberately committed by the forces of the Crown?

No, Sir.

Is so little weight attached to sworn affidavits that no action is taken to find out whether they are true?

I cannot answer a general philosophic inquiry of that kind.

It is specific.

I have answered the hon. Member's question—No, Sir.

When these affidavits are made, particularly as in the case of Abbeydorney, docs the right hon. Gentleman take any steps, or his representatives, to see the people and bring them before some Court and find out if they have committed perjury or not?

It is not my business to try people for perjury. I am very much relieved that it is not.

Is it the business of the right hon. Gentleman to inquire whether it is perjury or not?

That is not my business.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland what is estimated as the total value of property destroyed in Ireland during the 12 months ending 1st November, 1920?

Pending the results of the numerous compensation claims awaiting decision under the Criminal Injuries Act, I am not in a position to furnish the hon. Member with this information.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the circumstances of the arrest of Mrs. J. Annan Bryce at Holyhead; whether he can state the offence which she was suspected to have committeed or to have been likely to commit; whether he will state which Minister is responsible for her arrest; and whether, as it is now admitted that there was no ground for arresting Mrs. Bryce, the Government will offer her an apology and redress for this invasion of her personal liberty?

In reply to the first and second parts of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the replies which I gave to previous questions addressed to me on this subject on the 8th instant. The officer who effected the arrest is of course under the control of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War, but I am prepared to take full responsibility for this arrest. It is not the case that it is admitted that there was no ground for arresting Mrs. Bryce, and in view of the fact that the documents found upon her contained gross libels upon the Royal Irish Constabulary I cannot agree that any apology or redress is due from the Government.

This question was addressed to the Prime Minister, and I want to ask the Prime Minister whether he can state the offence which she was suspected to have committed, and whether he, as a Liberal, agrees with this invasion of personal liberty?

The action taken by my right hon. Friend and by those who are associated with him in the government of Ireland is for the defence and for the protection of liberty, and therefore I certainly, as a Liberal, support fully the action which they took.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that very high legal authorities are of opinion that the action of the Executive in the arrest of Mrs. Bryce was wholly illegal? [HON MEMBERS: "Name," and "Take action."]

If there was any illegality committed, it was committed in this country. The courts are open, and it is not for me to pronounce any opinion.

May I ask, if this lady was arrested for an offence, why she was not tried for it? I must press for an answer.

That question has been answered over and over again, and it has been the subject of discussion. I do not think there is anything to be gained by re-opening this question by a system of cross-examination.

If this lady was subjected to the humility stated in the question and admitted, it was for some offence she committed; why was she not tried for that offence before some tribunal?

When there are so many outrages committed in Ireland—where thorp is undoubtedly a widespread conspiracy, ending in the loss of life—the police are entitled to take precautions. Whether in this particular case the precautions were necessary or not, my right hon. Friend (Sir Hamar Greenwood) has already answered, but they are entitled to make examinations and search where there is suspicion, and that is the only way.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the only conspiracy this lady has been engaged in for the last five years was to establish and maintain out of her own pocket a hospital for wounded officers in the South of Ireland?

I am making no suggestion at all about Mrs. Annan Bryce. I am only answering a question put by my hon. Friend as to the right of the police, to search and investigate and, where there is suspicion, to arrest, for the protection of their comrades and themselves, and for the establishment of law and order in Ireland. If that is restricted, it is quite impossible for them to carry out their duties.

Is that not done in this and in every other country in the world?

Is no person, however eminent or however free from the possibility of charges of this character, to be immune from being seized by the police? [HON. MEMBERS: "Certainly not!"]

Does the Prime Minister mean to suggest by his answer that Mrs. Annan Bryce was suspected of committing outrages, or of being engaged in a murder conspiracy?

I most carefully safeguarded myself against anything of that kind. I have always said that the police are entitled to take steps of this character where they suspect that any person has got either information or documents which they believe will interfere with the carrying out of the law in Ireland. If we interfere with the discretion of the police in this respect, and say, "You must not exercise your functions if a person happens to be eminent," it will be quite impossible for us afterwards to expect them to take the risks which they are taking in carrying out their duties.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now publish the documents found in the possession of Sinn Fein leaders in 1918, which prove that they were involved in a German plot?

Yes, Sir. The Government have decided to publish these documents.

Can my right hon. Friend say when they will be published?

They will be published in a few days. As a matter of fact, the documents are in front of me now—[HON. MEMBERS: "Read them!"]—at Downing Street. There is a good deal of information which comes from secret sources that has got to be very carefully scrutinized; otherwise we might be giving away something which might be valuable to the Empire, and that is the only thing which is preventing the publication. I have not had the time to go through them with my colleagues with a view to that contingency; otherwise, the hon. Gentleman might see the documents.

Is it a fact that the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Lord Wimborne, who was charged with the whole government of the country at the time, has stated that he has never heard of a German plot?

When my hon. Friend sees the documents, he need not go to Lord Wimborne.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say why these documents have never been published before?

Will the right hon. Gentleman also include any negotiations which have taken place between the Sinn Fein movement and Lenin and Trotsky?

The question has been put to me about the War, and these are the only documents before me. As to the question of my hon. Friend (Captain Redmond), he will understand also that we could not publish before the information we sire going to give to the country.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to a statement, reported to have been made on the 7th of November by the hon. Member for East Leyton to the effect that 4,000,000 roubles had been raised in Soviet Russia for Sinn Fein in Ireland; whether he has any information confirming the truth of the statement; whether any steps are being taken to prevent or to intercept the transmission of this money from Russia; and whether it is the policy of the Government to open friendly relations, commercial or diplomatic, with a State that is providing large sums of money for assisting a conspiracy to subvert the Government and institutions of this country?

There is no confirmation of the statement in the question, but the Government are keeping a close watch on this matter.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether it is the practice to send the OFFICIAL REPORT and other Parliamentary printed matter to Irish Members who were elected to Parliament, but who have not taken the oath?

The answer is in the negative.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has sent copies of the OFFICIAL REPORT containing speeches of members of the Nationalist party to the Sinn Fein members?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the proceedings of the court-martial which is trying seven men on a charge of being implicated in the destruction of property at Mallow have yet been concluded; and, if so, what is the result?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. I would refer the hon. Member to my answer on Tuesday last to the hon. Member for Central Hull. As I then stated, none of the seven non-commissioned officers tried by court-martial were proved to have been implicated in the damage done to the town.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many persons have been killed and wounded, respectively, in Ireland during the 12 months ending 1st November, 1920.

It is impossible to state exactly the number of persons who have been killed or wounded in Ireland during the 12 months ended the 1st November, 1920, but the number is approximately 300 killed and 500 wounded.

Does that include civilians?

Yes, I think it does.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many creameries in Ireland were destroyed by fire or partially wrecked in each month beginning with April, 1920; why no Report of the destruction of any creamery was published in the summaries of official Reports of outrages communicated to the press during the period May to September, 1920, although these summaries contained comparatively trivial Reports of the burning of hay, peat, and other private property, without any indication as to the perpetrators or the motive; why no official Report of the destruction of any creamery has been published since these summaries were discontinued, with the exception of a Report communicated to the correspondent of the "Manchester Guardian" and published in that paper on 7th October, in which it was admitted that the creameries at Achonry and Ballygar were burned by the constabulary; will he state what is the policy of the Irish Government as to the publication of official Reports of the malicious destruction of property in Ireland and of the murders of civilians, respectively?

I have already given particulars of the number of creameries destroyed or damaged, but without longer notice I cannot give separate particulars for each month. The official summaries referred to did not purport to be a complete record of all outrages committed, and if the suggestion in the latter part of the question is that there his been any deliberate suppression of facts by the Government I desire to repudiate it emphatically. Every facility is given to the Press for obtaining accurate information, on matters of public interest.

Does the right hon. Gentleman still main- tain that there is not a tittle of evidence to show that these creameries were destroyed by the armed forces of the Crown?

There was not a tittle of evidence when I made the speech I did as to the identity of any individual responsible for the destruction of the creameries.

Does the right hon. Gentleman now admit that a tittle of evidence has been produced since he made his statement?

Yes, since I made my statement some evidence has been produced as to the destruction of these creameries by the forces of the Crown, and as to the provocation there has also been further evidence.

At what date will the right hon. Gentleman be able to answer the question as to how many creameries in Ireland were destroyed by fire or partially wrecked in each month beginning with April, 1920?

Will the hon. Gentleman put down that question for next Thursday?

With pleasure.

(by Private Notice) asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if it is true that a party of men alleged to be in khaki forcibly entered the offices on Tuesday night of the "Leitrim Observer," held up the proprietor and his sister at the point of the revolver, and systematically wrecked the machinery and plant, pianos, and other contents, and whether an attempt was not made to set the office on fire; whether a plateglass window in the house and the shop of the brother of the owner of the paper was shattered with revolver bullets, and at other places in the town there were large chalk-mark inscriptions, accompanied by drawings of a skull and crossbones, with the inscription: "Three lives for one of ours. Take heed, Sinn Fein. Up the Black and Tans"; whether the local police have not dissociated themselves with this outrage, and whether the Government will help them in the inquiries they are making as to their origin, and will undertake to prosecute the perpetrators if discovered?

I received this question at 12.20 today, and I have not been able, in the interval, to obtain any information as to the attack stated to have been made on the offices of the "Lei trim Observer." With regard to the alleged attacks on newspaper offices in the last few months, I must ask the hon. Member to give me reasonable notice, so as to enable me to inquire into the facts in the cases referred to.

How is it that these outrages can appear in the English newspapers two days before questions are put in this House and the right hon. Gentleman has no information to give to the House when he is invited to do so?

The information is no doubt in Dublin, but my time is taken up not with allegations of outrages, but in the pursuit of notorious criminals.

Why is it that when these crimes are committed in Ireland against innocent people the authorities for whom he is responsible in this House do not report these outrages to him? Are they not criminals who burn down houses and murder innocent civilians? Does the right hon. Gentleman assert that they are not criminals?

Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, does not the evidence show that if an attack was made on the "Leitrim Observer," which, I believe shows Nationalist leanings as opposed to Sinn Fein, it looks like the work of Sinn Feiners?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many applications by ex-service men in the County of Antrim have been made for land, cottages, and plots under the Act passed last Session; and how many of the, applicants have so far received the land or cottages?

Nine hundred and nine applications have been received by the Local Government Board for cottages and plots in the County of Antim. Schemes which make provision for 86 cottages and plots are under consideration, but the legal preliminaries which have to be complied with before possession of the land can be obtained take a considerable time, and so far no cottages and plots have been actually provided.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give any explanation as to why only 80 out of 900 men have had their cases considered in this important matter?

It does seem a bit slow and I will institute inquiries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last week the Prime Minister promised to give his personal attention to this matter?

I am aware of that.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give the House any information as to the recent massacre by the Turkish Nationalists of the Christian population of Nicæa, and the destruction of the historic church of the Koimesis with its mosaics, tombs, and unique Christian monuments; whether, when the Greek Government was ready to occupy Nicæa in order to protect its Christian population and buildings, it was refused permission by the Allies; and, if so, whether this permission will now be given them?

Massacres have occurred during the last two or three months, especially in the district lying between Broussa and Ismid which is upon the fringe of the zone occupied by the Greek army. According to a local report, which His Majesty's Government have no means of verifying, Turkish Nationalists on the 27th August, surrounded the Greek quarter at Nicæa and massacred the inhabitants. It may therefore be true that the Church suffered at the same time. As regards the latter part of the question, the operations agreed upon between the Greek Government and the other Allies were duly carried out I am not aware that the Greek Government proposed to occupy Nicæa.

Will the hon. Gentleman inquire of the Minister at Constantinople whether the allegations contained in the question are correct?

Yes, I will in quire, though I am not at all sure I shall be able to give any additional information.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has come to any decision as to the continuance of the mission to the Vatican?

His Majesty's Government have decided, after full and careful consideration, that it is desirable in the public interest to continue the diplomatic representation of Great Britain at the Vatican, which has been in existence since the first year of the War and has been attended with beneficial results.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether our representative at the Vatican will continue there only as long as the Vatican lends no approval to unfriendly acts by its agents towards the British Empire?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that no such unfriendly acts have, as far as we know, been committed? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, oh!"]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this appointment was made as a temporary appointment for the duration of the War, and does he realise the strong feeling that there is in the country that the functions of this Envoy should cease, inasmuch as they are not producing any peace in the nation at the present time?

I do not quite agree with my hon. Friend as to the feeling in the country. I think the general feeling is that it is in the general interests of the country that the British Envoy should remain there.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the importance of the assembly of the League of Nations to meet in Geneva on the 15th November, it is his intention to attend this Conference?

I hope that I may be able to take some part in the work of the Assembly of the League at Geneva, but in the final decision I must be guided by the course of events at the Assembly and by other calls upon me at the time.

asked the Prime Minister whether China and Hedjaz are sovereign-state members of the League of Nations; and whether these two states will be represented at the forthcoming meeting of the assembly of the League at Geneva?

China is a member of the League of Nations; I am not, however, aware what steps she is taking to be represented at the meeting of the Assembly. The Hedjaz, not having ratified the Treaty of Versailles, is not yet a member of the League of Nations and cannot be represented at the Assembly until she has ratified.

Is it not a fact that Japan objected to China appointing delegates to the League of Nations, and suggested it should be her delegates who should represent China; and is not that the reason why China has not been able to take definite steps in the matter?

I must have notice of that.

Is it a fact that the Allied nations such as Hedjaz are refused admittance to the League of Nations unless they ratify the Peace of Versailles, and was it not agreed at the time of the Peace Conference that every Allied nation would be admitted into the League, whether they ratified the Treaty or not?

Can it be said that the Hedjaz is a nation? Is it not merely a section of Arabs?

It has been recognised as a Sovereign State. I think my Noble Friend is wrong. The Hedjaz is supposed to be a party to the Treaty. They have not ratified that Treaty. It is in the Treaty that the Covenant is contained, and if they have not given their consent to the Covenant, they can hardly be expected to be a member of the League.

Was not the Hedjaz definitely invited to become an original member of the League, and, if it ratines between now and the meeting of the Assembly, will its delegates be admitted?

That is a question I should like to consider. I am perfectly certain that no one wants to exclude the Hedjaz. That State took a very leading part in the War, and I have no doubt very friendly consideration would be given to its application.

Is it not a fact that the reason the Hedjaz has not ratified the Treaty is because we have not so far carried out our pledge given to the King of the Hedjaz?

I cannot agree as to that. I know the suggestion is that we have given way to the French. That is not so. So far as we are concerned, we have respected all the promises Sir Edward Grey, as he then was, gave to the Hedjaz.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can inform the House as to the amounts paid by Great Britain, Italy and France, respectively, towards the necessary expenses incurred by the machinery of the League of Nations?

As regards the amount paid by Great Britain towards the necessary expenses incurred by the machinery of the League of Nations, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave him on the 8th instant. I am making enquiries of the Secretariat of the League as to the amounts subscribed by other Powers.

In addition to the amount of subscription, are we in any way responsible for any overdraft?

We are not going to let them run into debt.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the statement of His Highness the Aga Khan that the presence of British military forces in North-West Persia is not to the interest of either Great Britain or India; and whether he accepts this advice and will withdraw the troops from North-West Persia?

I have seen the statement in question. His Majesty's Government have no desire to keep troops in North-West Persia a day longer than is necessary. We have adopted no policy in Persia which would necessitate a continuance of our troops in Persia much longer, and we look forward to their withdrawal, I trust, at an early date.

Is not the small British brigade at Kazvin the only real defence of Teheran, the capital of Persia, against the advance of the Bolshevist forces from Enzelli?

I do not think so. I think the Persians themselves are quite capable of defending their capital.

Is there still any fear of a Bolshevist invasion of Persia?

Personally, I think it is very exaggerated.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the recommendation of the International Postal Union Congress at Madrid that in future Congresses only parent countries will have voting power, Colonies being excluded from voting, although they may send delegates: whether such a definition would deprive Canada and the other Dominions represented at such Congresses of the enjoyment of their new status of nationhood as established at Versailles; and what steps His Majesty's Government are taking in the matter?

I am informed that no such recommendation was made at the Postal Union Congress at Madrid. The voting power of the British Dominions is not affected in any way by the decision of the Congress.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire into this matter, because at Ottawa definite statements have come from official sources to that effect?

Are not Canada and other Dominions sister nations and not daughters?

asked the Prime Minister whether it is intended to summon an Imperial conference next year; and, if so, upon what date.

I have been anxious for some time past to renew as soon as possible that personal consultation between Prime Ministers which produced such good results in the last two years of the War and at Paris. I recently made inquiries of my colleagues in the Dominions as to the date which would be most generally suitable for them, and I am glad to say that a meeting with the Prime Ministers of the Empire has been arranged for the middle of June, 1921.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that no definite decision will be come to with regard to questions such as Mesopotamia until the Prime Ministers of the Empire have been consulted?

I think that would be quite impossible. After all, the burden of the expense is not on the Empire, but on Great Britain, and we could not keep troops in Mesopotamia for months beyond what is actually necessary.

Has the suggestion ever been made that the Empire as a whole should accept that mandate and provide the cost?

What about bringing in the National party?

May I ask whether it has been considered desirable to hold the conference at Ottawa?

That was discussed.

asked the Prime Minister if he can now name a date for the introduction of the promised Bill for the prevention of dumping and the protection of key industries?

I cannot add anything to the answer which I gave on the 28th of October to questions on this subject.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if the Bill will be introduced during the present Session?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a Motion on the Paper not to sit until Monday? Could we not have the Anti-Dumping Bill to-morrow?

In view of the general agreement which exists in the ranks of the Coalition on this subject, could not the measure go through without opposition?

The hon. Gentleman will be surprised when he sees how much he is disappointed. We have given definite pledges, and we mean to carry them out.

We all agree that the Coalition Liberals would vote for anything.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is able to inform the House as to the approximate date upon which the Departments concerned will arrive at any decision upon the points now being considered by them in reference to the simplification and cost of passports and visas?

I regret that I am unable to give any information as to when a decision will be arrived at on this question. And I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave him on this subject on the 8th instant.

Would the Prime Minister endeavour,, if time permit, to put forward this question at Geneva, and thereby earn the gratitude of the travelling public?

I will consider that.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that a prospectus issued by the British Dyestuffs Corporation, Limited, of 18th July, 1919, contained Government guarantees protecting the British dye industry for a period of years; what was the nature of such guarantees; whether the prospectus also contained a proclamation of the Government in regard to the dye industry; whether this proclamation is still in force; if not, why it has been repealed; whether the industry is now subjected to unrestricted foreign competition in regard to which imports show a progressive increase; and whether shareholders of the British Dyestuffs Corporation, Limited, will receive compensation for losses sustained if, and as the terms of the prospectus are not or cannot be carried out or, in the alternative, an agreed and non-contentious Bill will be introduced to ratify the solemn engagements entered into by the Government?

The prospectus issued by the British Dyestuffs Corporation in July, 1919, quoted a statement made by the President of the Board of Trade in this House on 15th May, 1918, to the effect that the importation of foreign dyestuffs would be controlled by a system of licences for a period of not less than ten years after the War, and stated that effect had been given to this guarantee by a Proclamation dated 24th February, 1919, prohibiting the import of dyestuffs except under licence. This Proclamation, however, in common with others purporting to be made under Section 43 of the Customs Consolidated Act, 1876, was rendered void by the decision of Mr. Justice Sankey in December, 1919, in the case of the Attorney-General v. Brown. There is therefore at present no restriction on the import of dyestuffs, and the importation has increased in the course of the present year. The Government, however, fully recognises its obligations in this matter, and it is our intention to introduce legislation dealing with the subject at the earliest possible moment.

In view of the national and military importance of this industry, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he will not reconsider his decision in regard to the introduction of an agreed, non-contentious measure?

Well, if my hon. Friend could give a guarantee, after consulting the various sections of the House, that such a measure will be non-contentious, that might alter the view of the Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also kindly remember that the West Riding of Yorkshire and Lancashire are dependent upon having dyes at a reasonable price to carry on their business?

Will the legislation be introduced during this Session?

My hon. Friend has already had an indication of the differences that will arise at the moment the Bill is introduced. I am afraid that it would be rather too sanguine if we anticipated the measure would be a non-contentious one; that is why it is quite impossible for me, between now and the Christmas Adjournment, to guarantee the introduction of a measure of this kind.

Would the right hon. Gentleman kindly give some indication of what now is, or is to be, the position of the shareholders who subscribed the money to these concerns?

Are not these dwindling quantities?

Is it not the fact that the Government has an overwhelming majority, and rather than see thousands of men thrown out of employment in this country in the coming winter could we not sit on Saturdays and carry this legislation?

I do not think Saturday sittings would quite achieve the object the hon. and gallant Gentleman has in view. We propose to deal with this matter at the earliest possible moment next Session, but it would be a mistake to give an undertaking which I do not believe could be carried out to deal with this matter in the present Session.

Seeing the time is so short, could not the right hon. Gentleman substitute this legislation for—[HON. MEMBERS: "The Irish Bill!"]— the Ministry of Health Bill against the Second Reading of which many of his own followers voted?

Will the right hon. Gentleman substitute it for the Irish Bill, for which no Irish Member voted?

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received representations from public bodies and political associations urging a temporary suspension of the putting into effect of the provisions of the Education Act, 1918; and what answer has he been able to make?

Yes, Sir. I have received an appeal on this subejet, but I am unable to add anything to the replies given by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House on the 27th October to similar questions.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the House who the political associations are that are anxious to stop education?

May we have the assurance that there is no intention of doing anything that will prevent the efficient progress of education in this country.

Have the appeals been many, or a single one, or general?

Will the right hon. Gentleman say how many local authorities have sent in schemes and how many are putting them into operation?

I do not think that I have received very many, but I have received some. I think it would be very serious—I could not conceive anything more serious—than that the nation should come to the conclusion that it cannot afford to give a good education to its children.