asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the imports of foreign toys into this country this year up to the end of September amounted in value to £1,381,287; whether it is the case that these imports of toys are constituting a grave threat to a new British industry; and whether the time has now arrived when the Government should consider means to check the importation of toys, in accordance with the undertaking of his predecessor?

I am well aware that the value of toys imported into the United Kingdom is now as great as the hon. Member states. As I have already stated in this House, the whole question of the increased importation of goods resulting from the state of the exchange is under the consideration of the Government.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some months ago his predecessor, in answer to a question, stated that the value of the toys imported from Germany was negligible, but that should it amount to a considerable figure proper steps would be taken to put a stop to it?

If other nations can send us goods, and make them to advantage, is not that the essence of profitable international trade?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the importation of foreign toys into this country is one of the causes of unemployment to-day?

I am afraid that we are getting into a debate by question and answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of the imports of toys and games from Germany, Netherlands, and other countries during the first ten months of the year 1920, as compared with the similar period in the year 1913?

The answer will involve a statistical table, and, if my hon. Friend will allow me, I will have this published in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the table referred to:

The values of the imports of toys and games into the United Kingdom consigned from Germany, Netherlands, and other countries registered during the 10 months ended 31st October, 1913 and 1920, respectively, were as follows:

Country whence consigned.	10 months ended 31st October.
	1913.*	1920.
	£	£
Germany	920,564	1,095,262
Netherlands	2,166	60,905
Other Countries	217,482	941,066
Total	1,140,212	2,097,233
* The figures for 1913 probably include a small amount in respect of balls, wholly or mainly of rubber, and of sports goods, which are not now classified under the heading of "Toys and Games."

It ought to be kept in mind that figures in money for 1920 are not really comparable with such figures for 1913.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that average wholesale prices in America in January last were 227·2 as against 288·5 in this country, and that by September the American average had fallen 43·2 to 184 while the average in this country had only fallen 4·4 to 284·1; and can he give the reasons why the decline in prices should be so much greater in America than in this country?

I cannot accept the figures given in the question as accurate,

INDEX NUMBERS OF WHOLESALE PRICES ON THE BASIS, 1913=100.
Year 1920.				U.S.A. Bradstreet's.	U.S.A. Bureau of Labor.	U.S.A. Federal Reserve Board.	U.K. "Economist."
January		…	…	227·2	248	242	288·5
February		…	…	226·4	249	242	303·1
March	…	…	…	225·5	253	248	310·2
April	…	…	…	225·7	265	263	305·7
May	…	…	…	216·4	272	264	304·5
June	…	…	…	210·7	269	258	291·4
July	…	…	…	205·0	262	250	292·5
August	…	…	…	195·7	250	234	287·6
September		…	…	184·1	242	—	284·0

asked the President of the Board of Trade which countries, including the Colonies, sent glass goods to this country during 1913; and the value and volume of such imports in each case?

The answer to this question involves a long statement of figures, and to print it would in effect be to reprint the relevant page from the Annual Statement of Trade. I would accordingly venture to ask the hon. Member to refer to pages 122 and 123 of the Annual Statement of the Trade of the United Kingdom with Foreign Countries and British Possessions for 1917, compared with the four preceding years (Cd. 9127), which will be obtainable in the Library. If he has any difficulty in satisfying himself, I will be glad to give any further explanation necessary.

asked the President of the Board of Trade which countries, including the Colonies, have sent glass goods to this country since the Armistice; and the value and volume of such imports in each case?

The answer will involve a statistical table; and, with the hon. Member's permission, I will have one printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT when it has been completed.

Has anything been done to protect our glass industries?

Nothing has been done in the nature of protection.

Is there any suggestion by the answer of the right hon. Gentleman that anything is to be done in the nature of protection?

I am not making any suggestion.

Is nothing to be done to protect key industries?

I do not think my hon. and gallant Friend properly discriminates as to what is a key industry and what is not. Part of the glass industry is a key industry and part is not.

Will protection be given to that part which is a key industry?

The use of the word "protection" involves elements of controversy which I do not think it is necessary to raise, but in so far as this industry is a key industry, undoubtedly proposals will be made in a Government Bill dealing with this subject. I do not know whether my hon. and gallant Friend would regard bottles as a key industry or not.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us a definition of what is meant by a "key industry"?

I will try to do so when I come to make a speech dealing with this topic as a whole.

May I ask whether the Board of Trade have kept in spirit the agreements made with certain glass manufacturers in the early stages of the War, under which they agreed to deal with those companies on certain lines for a period of ten years after the War?

I am afraid, if my hon. Friend wishes to ask me any questions about specific agreements, he will have to refer me to those agreements. I am not aware of any such items to which he refers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether German goods for export are invoiced by order of the German Government in the currency of the purchasing country; on what rate of exchange is this calculated for goods to England; is this by arrangement with the allied Governments: and can he state the object of these orders?

I am not aware of any orders of the German Government to the effect stated in the question, but a requirement that sales should be effected in foreign currency is frequently, although not always, included in the general conditions governing the issue of export licences in particular trades which are framed by the semi-official bodies representing those trades. In the case of goods invoiced to this country in sterling, the rate of exchange is, I understand, that of the day. No question of arrangements with Allied Governments arises. When the practice is adopted, it is probably with the object of securing the best possible prices for exports and obtaining bills of exchange for financing imports.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is being done universally in Germany, and that the explanation given to our buyers is that it is by order of the German Government, and that it is being done at the request of the Allies; and is he aware that this means that we are not getting the benefit of the low exchange, in Germany?

I am afraid my information does not coincide with that of my hon. and gallant Friend. I am not aware that it is universal, and, in fact, my opinion is to the contrary. My information is also to the effect that it is not done by the German Government. I have no doubt German exporters are encouraged to sell at rates which would represent those in terms of the currency in the countries to which the exports are being sent. Obviously that would be a wise policy on their part.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is looking into the matter, and can he assure us it is engaging the attention of his Department?

Of course, we are perfectly aware of all these things, but I do not know any means by which you can determine the price at which a German is prepared to sell his goods here.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the value of imports to and exports from this country, respectively, during the nine months ended 30th September, 1919, and the same particulars for the nine months to 30th September, 1920?

The total values of the imports into and the exports and re-exports from the United Kingdom registered during the nine months ended 30th September, 1919 and 1920, respectively, were as follows: Imports for 1919, £1,166,000,000; for 1920, £1,501,000,000 Exports for 1919, £541,000,000; for 1920, £1,007,000,000. Re-exports for 1919, £98,000,000; for 1920, £180,000,000.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the values of to-day were those of 1913 imports and exports would be much lower than they are at present?

That is quite a proper observation. You cannot really compare the money prices of to-day with the money prices of an earlier period or before the War; but if you take 1920 as compared with 1919 a far less allowance has to be made obviously.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the quantity of cement exported to foreign countries during the last six months?

During the six months ended 31st October, 1920, 158,245 tons of British cement were registered as exported to foreign countries.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any permit is necessary to export cement, having regard to our own shortage?

No permit is necessary.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of making a permit necessary, so that the Minister of Health might be able to get on with his housing scheme?

I have been in constant communication with the Minister of Health on this matter in order to avoid the possibility of the home supply being short.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that the home supply is not short?

Do not our exports of this cement help the exchange very much, and so reduce the cost of living?

Of course they do. I hope the House will remember that in these matters we must try and keep the balance as nearly as we can; sometimes it is on the wrong side and sometimes on the right side, but we are endeavouring to do our best. What my hon. Friend has just said is true; you want to export all you can in order to benefit this country, provided you keep the home market supplied, and all the time we are trying to attain that object.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that the home market is supplied?

As I say, I keep in constant touch with the Ministry of Health on this subject.

As the bulk of this exported cement is charged at a higher price than the home cement, do I understand that the foreign countries are objecting to our dumping cement in those countries?

That is the very reverse of dumping.

asked the Prime Minister whether the consumers and manufacturers of the British dyestuffs industry are substantially agreed as to the lines upon which a Bill to safeguard its interests should be framed; and, if so, will the Government introduce a Bill without any unnecessary delay?

I am sorry to say that there is no such agreement as is suggested in the first part of the question. As to the second part, the Government are prepared to give an undertaking that the first measure to be dealt with in the coming Session will include the Government's proposals for carrying out their pledges in this matter, and their obligations as contained in the; prospectus of the British Dyestuffs Corporation.

If the right hon. Gentleman receives satisfactory assurances that there is a substantial agreement—if the users and manufacturers show that—will the right hon. Gentleman introduce a Bill this Session?

My hon. Friend is very much more sanguine than my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and the rest of us in touch with consumers and users of these dyes. But if there were agreement that a Bill would go through very easily—that is a matter which the Government might be prepared to consider.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that the Government accept the allegation in the whole of the prospectus issued by the British Dye-stuffs Corporation?

I cannot remember what the whole of the prospectus contained. My recollection is that those concerned set out certain pledges which were given at the time by the Government—I believe they set them out quite fairly. Those pledges we must honour.

Is it not the case that there was a definite guarantee held out in the prospectus, and that the longer the Government delays in fulfilling that guarantee the longer it is a breach; and are not the ordinary directors of a company issuing a prospectus liable to damages for failure to implement their guarantee?

Was there any limitation of the amount of the profit?

I am afraid there is for the moment no question of profit. My hon. Friend need not worry very much about that. Certainly there was an undertaking given by the Government, and we are in honour bound to invite the House of Commons to honour that undertaking.

In honouring that agreement will the right hon. Gentleman take care that the textile industries are not injured, and are able to have access to the cheapest and best dyes procurable?

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure himself in future that he has the support of the House of Commons before he gives these undertakings for the Government to honour?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction at the delays of the British clearing-house for enemy debts, involving the retention by that Department of many millions of British money for which British claims have been duly lodged and proved several months ago; whether he will take steps to have diplomatic pressure brought to bear upon the German clearing-house authorities in Berlin, so that the machinery of the British clearing-house may not be blocked by the inefficient methods of the German authorities; whether he is aware that nearly a year has elapsed since many of the British claims were lodged and proved with the British clearing-house; and what steps he proposes to take in the British clearing-house itself to speed matters up?

Claims cannot be paid until they have been properly found due in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Treaty of Peace, but claims by British creditors to the amount of £10,000,000 sterling have already been paid or will be paid this month. I do not think that any occasion for taking diplomatic action has arisen. I am aware that claims were lodged with the British Clearing Office soon after it was opened in January last, but they could not be notified to the German Clearing Office until the latter was established at the end of April. The British Clearing Office is working under extreme pressure, and I am satisfied that there has been no delay on its part in dealing with the claims of British creditors.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say the same as to Germany?

My hon. Friend must recognise that this is a very, very large matter. I do not wish to criticise the German operations. I think our own have been more efficient. We are doing everything in our power to expedite the satisfaction of these debts.

asked the Prime Minister when he will carry out his undertaking to publish all agreements, protocols, &c, relating to the execution of the Treaty of Versailles?

As my hon. Friend is aware, publication of the documents in question is not a matter for the sole decision of His Majesty's Government. Negotiations are now proceeding with the other parties interested, and I hope to be able to give my hon. Friend the information he desires at an early date.

When shall I put a question?

Will the hon. Gentleman put it on this day week?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether His Majesty's Government has decided to restore to individual Germans, to a certain limited and specified value, property confiscated from them during the War; and, if so, what is the specified value in question?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The property of individual Germans was not confiscated either during the War or by the Treaty of Peace. Under the Treaty, however, such property in this country may be charged to meet German obligations to this country. An arrangement has been under discussion with the German Government and is, I think, on the point of conclusion, for facilitating the restitution of British property in Germany, and meeting certain difficulties in regard to storage and other charges incurred on such property where it was not actually taken over by the German authorities. As part of this arrangement, it is proposed to release from the charge established under the Treaty of Peace household furniture, personal effects and implements of trade in this country belonging to German nationals up to an amount of £500 in addition to the amount of storage and other charges, in cases where the income of the German national does not exceed the equivalent of £400 a year. In addition a Committee has been appointed, consisting of Lord Justice Younger, the hon. and gallant Member for Reigate, and Sir Malcom Macnaghten, to advise upon applications from ex-enemy nationals for the release of their property within certain limits upon the grounds of necessitous circumstances. The limits which have been communicated to the Committee are property to the value of £1,000 in the case of ex-enemy nationals now resident in this country, and to the value of £200 in the case of ex-enemy nationals formerly resident in this country and now resident elsewhere. In addition to capital, income may be released up to a reasonable amount.

Will the details in regard to the proposed arrangement be laid before the House as soon as it is ready?

I shall be glad, if there be any desire, to look into that.

asked the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether all Diesel engines in Germany are to be destroyed; and whether such engines are indispensable in industry?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can state approximately the number of Diesel engines which the Ambassadors' Conference, in accordance with its decision of 2nd December, has called upon Germany to destroy; whether any of these engines are capable of being used for other than naval purposes; and whether the Allies will see that Germany is not called upon to destroy engines capable of being used for industrial purposes?

It has been decided to leave the engines at the disposal of the German Government on the understanding that they can be used for commercial purposes only. To ensure that this is actually the case, the German Government has been asked to report the actual employment of these engines not later than 31st March, 1921.

Is Germany going to pay for these engines?

I do not understand what my hon. Friend means.

The engines were to be destroyed under the Peace terms. If these engines are not going to be destroyed but are going to be handed over to Germany for industrial purposes, ought not Germany, under the circumstances, to pay for them?

Have the Government considered the advisability of taking over these engines for our own commercial work, having regard to the fact that they use crude oil, by which great economies can be effected?

Perhaps I had better have notice of that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the number of amalgamations that are taking place between soap manufacturers and tobacco manufacturers and other big firms, which will prevent healthy competition; if he is aware that it is easy for such big firms to amalgamate, but that when one or more trade unions want to amalgamate they have to take a vote of the members, 50 per cent. of the total membership have to vote, and they have to obtain 20 per cent. majority of those voting; and if he can see his way clear to get an alteration in the Trade Union Act so that trade unions can transfer their business in the same way that big commercial concerns do at the present time?

I have been asked to take this question. I am aware of the general tendency towards amalgamation both amongst manufacturers and trade unions. The Trade Union Amalgamation Act, 1917, does not, in my opinion, hamper trade unions in their desire to amalgamate. It does, however, provide safeguards which were considered by Parliament to be necessary at the time of the passing of the Act, and it would appear that no circumstances have arisen which would justify an Amendment on the lines suggested by my hon. Friend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Registrar-General knows of the difficulties placed in the way of trade unions amalgamating in consequence of the fact that it is very difficult to get 50 per cent. of the members to go to the branch committee rooms to record their votes; and if it is easy for big firms to amalgamate, why should not the same conditions apply to trade unions, so that they could amalgamate as easily?

If there is any instance of difficulty, and if the hon. Member brings it to my notice, I shall be glad to see if anything can be done. When he suggests that it is easier for employers' associations to amalgamate than for trade unions, he must bear in mind that shareholders in big concerns must be in a majority, and that it would not require a majority under the Act of 1917 for trade unions.

If the Ministry of Labour take any action in this matter, will they provide for trade unions submitting themselves to the ordinary law of the land, the same as the trading organisations?

Will the hon. Gentleman see that neither great combines nor powerful trade unions are in a position in their own interests to tyrannise over the general public?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that Messrs. J. and P. Coats have during the past 12 months made a profit of over £4,000,000; whether the Committee charged with the duty of inquiring into the prices charged for cotton reported that such prices were not unreasonable; and whether, in view of the profits since made by this firm, he will invite the Committee to make further inquiry into the matter?

The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the affirmative. The present price of sewing cotton as compared with the reduced price of cotton had already come under the notice of the Central Committee appointed under the Profiteering Acts, and is now being investigated by the Standing Committee on Trusts

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that the cotton industry always take what is known as the long view in regard to raising prices, and the short view as far as reduction is concerned?

That seems to me to be a wise business policy.

Is it not a fact that most of Messrs. Coats' business is carried on abroad, and that the amount they pay to this country in the way of taxation is vastly larger than the whole of the profits that are earned in this country; and if that is so, why should they be so much harassed?

asked the President of the Board of Trade when the remaining Reports of the Committees which are inquiring into the question of building materials may be expected?

I understand that the Sectional Committees investigating Cement and Mortar and Light Castings have concluded the taking of evidence, and I hope to receive their reports at an early date. The Stone, Bricks and Clay-ware Sectional Committee are still taking evidence, and I am unable to say when their remaining reports will be received. Every effort compatible with the necessity of obtaining full and accurate information is being made to hasten these inquiries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that municipal building has been going on now for 18 months and that the cost of it has nearly doubled by the combines that have been set up to exploit the Government in these building materials, and is there any hope of a Report being received in sufficient time for the Government to act before the municipal enterprises have gone bankrupt?

I am afraid I should require a detailed question from my hon. Friend before I could answer that. All I can say is this—by way of reassuring him—that the Report of the first Committee, dealing with the primary needs, was to the effect that there was no profiteering in them. The Committee that is now sitting is considering the more subsidiary materials.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to ascertain how it is that cement has gone up from 38s. 6d. a ton to £5 8s. 6d. a ton?

May I ask whether it is not a fact that in certain cases manufacturers are sending cement that is badly needed here abroad, because they can get a better price for it, and does not that account for the rise in price here?

There is a certain amount of cement going abroad at the present time at a higher price than is obtained here. I know my hon. and gallant Friend will realise that in not charging the full market world price to the homo consumer a cetain sacrifice is being made. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, oh!"] Well, it is perfectly plain that where the producer is not exacting the full world price of a commodity, he is to that extent relieving the person who consumes at home, and while prices are high, it must be remembered that costs are infinitely higher to-day than they were before the War.

Can the right hon Gentleman tell mo one case where a British cement firm has refused to export up to the total amount of the export business offered, and is it not a fact that we only get the residue of what they cannot export, and that for that we have to pay £5 8s. 6d. a ton?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give some explanation of the titanic rise in cement?

When the right hon. Gentleman stated that there was no profiteering in connection with cement—

I did not state that.

I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say so, but was he referring to the men who made cement prior to the War at a price of 21s. and a profit, or to those who were making it prior to the War at a cost of over 35s. and no profit?

I am afraid the supplementary questions which are now being put only exhibit the fact that one had better ask for notice. I always try to answer a question as fully as I can, but obviously I was misunderstood. I did not state that there had been no profiteering in cement. What I said was that the first Report of the Committee dealing with building materials was to the effect that there was not any profiteering, but that was dealing with bricks. The Committee dealing with cement is still sitting, and has not yet reported, and my hon. Friend is erroneous in assuming that I suggested there was no profiteering in regard to cement. As to that, I do not know; I await the Report of the Committee.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay down what is profiteering?

As the Committee have been sitting for something like ten months, cannot something be done to expedite their Report?

I endeavour to expedite these Reports to the fullest extent in my power, but again I beg hon. Members to remember that the people who are giving these services to the State are giving them gratuitously and in the intervals of their own business. Obviously, no Report is worth while unless it is given by men who know enough of the business to make their Reports such as can be received with confidence, and you must not push these people too hard. I will do my best to get the Report as quickly as possible, and I hope the House will have some patience in the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Report presented by the Home Office Committee on Workmen's Compensation has been considered by the Government; and whether it is intended to present this Session a Bill to amend the Workmen's Compensation Acts on the lines indicated in the Report?

I am asked to reply to this question on behalf of the Home Secretary, who would refer the hon. Member to the answers he gave to similar questions on the 26th October and the 9th instant. He regrets it will not be possible to introduce a Bill on this subject this Session.

asked the Minister of Transport what part the then deputy general manager of the North Eastern Railway took prior to the outbreak of war in the negotiations which led to the 1914 railway agreement?

The question refers to myself. The Board of Trade records show that the first meeting between that Department and the railway companies to negotiate the 1914 Agreement was held on 31st July, 1914; that I was present at that meeting only, and that I resigned from the Railway Executive Committee forthwith, and took no further part in the negotiations.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the principles finally embodied in the Railway Agreement were sketched out at that original meeting?

I am afraid I cannot remember what happened at the meeting of 31st July, but I am quite sure there were many subsequent meetings when the whole question was discussed.

asked the Minister of Transport whether in the recent revision of railway rates for goods traffic, the rates for coal were increased by 100 per cent. plus 6d. per ton, subject to a maximum increase of 4s. per ton, where as the rates for pit wood were increased by 100 per cent., plus 9d. per ton, without any maximum; whether this works out in practice at an increase of, approximately, 50 per cent. for coal and 105 per cent. for pit wood; what is the reason for this discrimination against the timber - growing industry; and whether, in view of the desirability of increasing the production of timber in this country and the efforts which the Government is otherwise making to promote afforestation in the national interest, he will take steps to remove this discrimination?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The percentage of increase on coal traffic as a whole has been estimated to be, approximately, 103 per cent., and for traffic in Class C, which includes pit wood, 106½ per cent., while the percentage for all traffics is 112 per cent. A separate figure for pit wood is not available. There is no discrimination shown between timber and other comparable traffics, and I regret that I am unable to see my way to depart exceptionally from the recommendations of the Rates Advisory Committee in favour of timber growers. I would, however, remind the hon. Member that the whole question of Railway Rates is now under consideration by that Committee.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in large areas in Scotland the freights, respectively, for coal and pitwood produced there represent an increase of about 50 per cent. in the case of coal and over 100 per cent. in the case of pit wood?

There will certainly be cases where you can pick out individual rates of that kind, but on the whole the increase for coal and timber is less than that for other goods.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that the Edinburgh Branch of his Department recently refused the suggestion of the Ministry of Labour that it should supply an expert ex-Service woman to fill a temporary vacancy, and that, consequently, the Labour Ministry had to supply an ex-Service youth of 23 years of age of the name of Lipetz, and of Russian parentage, this boy not having been a pre-War typist, but having had only six months' clerical experience in 1914 with a firm which could have reinstated him; and whether he can state upon what grounds such preference is given to an ex-Service man of alien origin able to find other work over the many skilled ex-Service women of British origin out of work in Edinburgh?

In accordance with the recommendations of the Committee of which the Eight Hon. the Earl of Lytton is Chairman, preference is given by the Ministry of Transport to ex-service men in the engagement of staff. The vacancy in question was for a temporary male clerk and the Ministry of Labour were accordingly requested by the local officer of this Ministry in Edinburgh to supply a suitable ex-service man. The selection of candidates for consideration rests with the Ministry of Labour. It is understood that Mr. Lipetz is a British subject; that he has lived in Edinburgh since early childhood, that he served throughout the War in the Scottish Horse, and that he is in receipt of a disablement pension.

Is it not a fact that Lord Lytton's Committee especially recommended that ex-service women should receive equal treatment with ex-service men?

I am afraid I do not know, but this was a vacancy for an ex-service man.

asked the Minister of Transport whether the committee set up by his Department, representing the London County Council and the motor omnibus combine in London, for the purpose of arranging fares and preventing unnecessary competition between tramcars and omnibuses, has made any report to his Department, or if he expects them to report to him as regards its decisions; and will he report to the House any conclusions this committee agrees to?

The committee to which the hon. Member refers was not set up by me. As a result of a conference between representatives of the London County Council and the Underground group of railways, which I arranged by request, it was decided by the two parties to set up the committee on which representatives of both sides would sit to discuss the relationship between L.C.C. Tramways and other forms of London traffic with the object of seeing whether it was possible to arrive at an agreement for co-ordinating and improving transport facilities in London. I suggested an outside chairman, but both parties requested that I should allow an official of the Ministry to act. The committee will not report to me. My only function is that, as requested, I brought the two parties together and found a chairman to preside over their deliberations.

asked the Minister of Transport whether the Government propose to introduce a Bill this Session to carry out the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on London Traffic to set up an authority to control the traffic in the greater Metropolitan area; and, if so, can he state when the Bill will be brought in?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the public disappointment at the delay in the production of the promised Bill creating a traffic authority in London; and whether, as the need increases daily, he can accelerate the preparation of the masure and ensure its introduction before Christmas?

I am unable to state whether it will be possible to introduce this Bill during this Session. It is now being drafted, and will be considered by the Cabinet when it is ready. In this connection I would refer to the reply- given to the hon. Member for Hammersmith North on the 11th of this month. I am sending the hon. Members copies of that reply and the reply referred to therein.

asked the Minister of Transport whether the experiment of painting or otherwise marking parallel lines on the roadways of the more congested streets for the guidance of traffic of varying speeds has ever been considered; and, if not, whether a trial will be given to such an idea?

The suggestion has been carefully considered on several occasions by the Metropolitan Police authorities, but under existing conditions it is not regarded as practicable.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has received any applications from London road authorities for grants towards the cost of maintenance of main roads carrying through traffic; whether such applications have been granted and, if so, to what extent; has any proposal been made by his Department towards helping road authorities finance loans for the same purpose; and whether, in view of this kind of work being suitable for the unemployed, he can make any statement giving approximately the money to be spent on construction of the new proposed arterial roads and on the maintenance of other roads in London?

Applications have recently been received from several Metropolitan Borough Councils for assistance from the Road Improvement Fund towards the cost of strengthening and repairing roads carrying through traffic, and grants amounting to £125,149 and loans of £77,724 have been indicated. Schemes have also been discussed with other Metropolitan authorities and favourable consideration promised on the receipt of details of the works proposed. In reply to the last part of the question, I may say that arrangements are far advanced for putting in hand the construction of five or six sections of arterial roads within the London County Council area. It is proposed to make grants up to 50 per cent. of the initial cost of construction of these roads, and in many cases assistance will be given by way of loan towards the remaining half of the cost. It is impossible at present to give an estimate of the total grants to be made towards arterial roads in the Metropolitan area, but it will certainly amount to a very considerable sum. As regards maintenance, when the proposals with regard to the classification of roads are complete, the Metropolitan boroughs will receive assistance towards the cost of maintenance of classified roads in the same way as other highway authorities.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that when the driver of a motor car is charged in Court with causing material or bodily injuries it is frequently made a ground of defence or mitigation that he has suffered from shell shock or from some injury likely to affect his nerves; and whether, for the protection of the public, he will consider the desirability of issuing Regulations imposing upon local authorities the duty of making inquiries as to the history of applicants for drivers' licences and for the passing of a test of fitness to drive a car or other mechanically propelled vehicle?

The points raised in my hon. Friend's question are being considered among other matters connected with the regulation of road vehicles. Legislation would be required.

Has not the time come when anybody desiring to drive a motor car should pass some sort of examination?

As the matter has been referred to a Committee, whatever my own personal views are, I would rather get their report first.

If the Committee recommend that there should be a test of fitness, will the right hon. Gentleman adopt it?

I would rather see what the Committee recommend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that in actions for causing personal injuries the defence which is continually being set up is that the driver suffers from shell-shock or some other, injury likely to affect his nerves?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the fact that five new engines were ordered by the Furness Railway Company at Government expense; whether he will agree to this charge on the Government subsidy; whether it is a common practice for the railway companies to purchase new equipment with Government money; and, if so, what action has he taken in the matter?

I learn from a speech of the chairman of the Furness Railway Company that five new locomotives have been provided by that company on revenue account. The Furness Railway Company has no arrears of maintenance to make up under the appropriate head in their accounts; nevertheless in respect of the first nine months of the current year it has debited to the Government under this head £120,000, as against £20,000 spent in the same period of 1913; after allowing for increased cost at present prices there is an excess debit of £63,263. The Government investigator, when dealing with the accounts of this company, will pay particular attention to this excess charged. As my hon. Friend knows, the Committee under Lord Colwyn is reporting upon these financial arrangements.

What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by "excess debit"?

It is excess over what was debited in the basic year of 1913, after the 1913 figures had been adjusted to the present-day prices.

Will the right hon. Gentleman lay a Paper on the Table of the House giving a list of these debits?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether before the coal strike the railway rates then in existence were or were not sufficient to wipe out the Government subsidy?

I have undertaken, as soon as the accounts showing the result of the increased charges are in, to communicate them to the House. I gave that undertaking a fortnight ago. With regard to laying a Paper, I do not know what my hon. Friend wants, but if he will confer with me, I will give him all the information I can.

asked the Prime Minister if he can now say whether the Italian steamship "Ancona" was stopped at sea on her way to Novorossisk and taken to Batoum by British warships; and why we are interfering with trade between Russia and Italy in this way?

As my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House stated on Monday last, in reply to a question by the hon. Member for West Bermondsey (Mr. Glanville), the Italian steamer "Ancona" has not been interfered with in any way by His Majesty's ships. The Italian authorities have no knowledge of this alleged incident, and state that the "Ancona" stopped off Batoum to await orders from the agents respecting the discharge of her cargo, and anchored there on receipt of these orders.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this ship was laden with 20,000,000 liras worth of goods for Novorossisk, and was prevented from going there, taken to Batum and ordered to Kerch; that the captain protested and said he must go to Italy; and that a Note has been addressed to His Majesty's Government by the Italian Royal Government?

The telegram states that "the Italian naval authorities here"—I think that means Constantinople—"can give no explanation of the rumour. The captain of the 'Ancona' has been personally interviewed, and states that he has never met a British man-of-war."

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the great hardship caused to country wine merchants by the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic) Order of the 17th February, 1916, Section B, paragraph (4), Clause (e), stating that no person shall either by himself or any servant or agent take or solicit orders for intoxicating liquor except on licensed premises; and whether he will consider the mitigation of this Clause in connec- tion with the forthcoming licensing legislation?

The Home Secretary has been asked to reply to this question, and I am requested by him to say that the Order to which the hon. and gallant Member refers is part of a series of provisions which will come up for review in the event of the Bill which is now before the House being passed into law. In the meantime, he cannot add anything to previous answers which have been given on the same point.

Will the hon. Gentleman point out to the Central Control Board that the only effect of this absurd Regulation is to compel people to frequent public-houses?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the advisability of immediately placing those towns or counties in Ireland where the murder of members of the Royal Irish Constabulary is constantly taking place under martial law, and send to those areas sufficient troops so that law and order may prevail?

I can add nothing to the previous statements on this subject. The authorities in Ireland already possess very wide powers, and I am satisfied that effective use is being made of them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that last Saturday afternoon three members of the Royal Irish Constabulary were foully murdered, and does he propose to take more drastic action to see that these men are properly protected?

Yes, I am too painfully aware of that circumstance. I think my hon. Friend may rest assured that every step that can possibly be taken is being adopted by the authorities there.

Is it not quite evident that the policy bas don force has completely and hopelessly broken down, and is it not probable that the pacification of Ireland could be better secured by the application of liberal principles rather than the principles of militarism?

I do not agree with my Noble Friend that it is evident that a policy based on force has failed. Every law is based to a large extent upon force. Unless a law can be enforced, that law must be futile. We are simply enforcing law in Ireland, and I believe we are doing it successfully. It is perfectly true now that the police, instead of remaining inside their barracks, as they had to do until we were ready two or three months ago, are going all over the country and enforcing the law, they are running much greater risk, and consequently there are heavier casualties,; but we have overwhelming evidence that the power and authority of the law are being established throughout the whole country.

Will the right hon. Gentleman guarantee that a lawful policy will be enforced in a lawful manner?

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that the burning and sacking of towns, creameries and farms in enforcing any sort of law before God or man?

Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman prefer the murder of police?

asked the Prime Minister if the Government have been notified of the proposal to send a Labour Commission to Ireland to investigate, under Sinn Fein auspices, the origin, nature, and extent of the reprisals by police and military; what were the numbers of police and soldiers murdered in Ireland between the beginning of 1917 and the date when the first so-called reprisal took place; whether, during such intervening period, any request was made for facilities for a Labour Commission to investigate the conditions obtaining in Ireland; and, if in the present case a Commission visits Ireland, will he offer its members an opportunity of mixing, unidentified, with the soldiers and constabulary in the performance of their ordinary duties, so that the Commission may obtain an unbiassed impression of the other side of the picture?

I know nothing of any such proposal beyond what has appeared in the Press. The number of soldiers and policemen murdered between the beginning of 1917 and the middle of this year was 57. I have no knowledge of any request for facilities for an impartial investigation made prior to the latter date. It would not be practicable to adopt the course suggested in the last part of the question, but the Irish Government have always been ready to facilitate in every way possible any genuine endeavour to obtain accurate first-hand impressions of the conditions actually obtaining in Ireland.

Does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman think that those who are so much, or pretend to be so much, interested in labour will embrace the opportunity contained in the last part of the question?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman had better put that question to the Labour party.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman make a collection of mares' nests?

(by Private Notice) asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can give the House any information as to the murder of Constables Turner and Woods on the 9th November?

Constable Turner, in company with Constable Woods, was returning in plain clothes to Castleisland by train from Killarney on the evening of the 9th instant. When the train halted at Ballybrack a number of armed men appeared on the platform, having alighted from the train, and fired revolvers at the two constables through the carriage window. They then entered the carriage, dragged the wounded constables on to the platform and fired into their bodies as they lay dying. The assassins then left them for dead on the platform where their bodies were found by the stationmaster. The murderers boarded the train again, some on the engine itself, and compelled the driver to start the train. After pro- ceeding about a mile they compelled the driver to stop the train and made their escape.

The answer just given by the right hon. Gentleman replies to a part of the question of which I had given notice in my desire to call his attention to the incidents of the week-end in Ireland. I wish further to ask him whether it is the fact that on Saturday evening a military party in pursuit of a crowd of men in Dublin shot a young girl aged 12 years, killing her almost immediately, and also wounding a five-year old girl. Will the right hon. Gentleman also give us further details, if he has received them, of the case in which two civilians are alleged to have been killed by soldiers?

I have no information as to the last question of the hon. Gentleman. In answer to the general question as to events during the week-end, I am glad to say that in four or five counties only in the whole of Ireland were there any serious outrages during that time. In three counties, however, there were serious outrages. In reference to the Dublin affair, I have received a telegraphic report to the effect that on Saturday evening, at about a quarter past five, two military lorries were passing down Charlemont Street, near Charlemont Avenue, in Dublin, when a group of five or six young men was observed to run away. They were ordered to halt, and on failing to do so three shots were fired. I deeply regret to have to say that as a result of the firing a young girl named Annie O'Neill, aged 8 years, was killed, and another girl, named Teresa Kavanagh, was slightly wounded. The loss of this young innocent life is deplorable, but I hope the House will agree with me in the view that the responsibility does not rest upon the soldiers.

Is it the practice to fire on men who are running away?

Men who are ordered to halt and do not halt are fired at. I have further to state that in County Kildare Sergeant Brown and six constables proceeded to a farmer's house at Knochbounce, Athy district, which was reported to have been fired into at 11.30 p.m. on the 13th instant. When about 50 yards from the house, about 15 men came up a side road, flashed bicycle lamps on the police, and fired three shots. The police returned five shots, wounded Thomas Haslett, a shop assistant, and William Martin, a butcher of Kilcullen, and arrested five others. There were no police casualties.

Perhaps the House will allow me to read a long telegram giving an account of an ambush at Lisvername, Co. Tipperary, on Saturday last, which resulted in the murder of four constables and the wounding of two others. There appears to have been a prolonged interchange of shots. The lorry rushed past the, ambush, none, of the crew sustaining injury, although heavily fired upon, but the steering gear was put out of action by a bullet and the lorry swerved into the ditch, where it was again subjected to a heavy fusilade from the attackers, who were estimated to number 70. The police vigorously returned the fire from the floor of the lorry, and when this became untenable they got underneath it and kept on firing. It was when in this position that Constables O'Leary, Mackesey and Bustrock received their fatal wounds. Constable O'Leary's last words were, "Carry on." During the action the petrol tank of the lorry was perforated by a bullet and the escaping petrol caught fire and dropped on to the body of Constable Mackesey, which was badly charred. One of the constables is stated to have said when the fight was over to the attackers, "You don't want to burn us, take these bodies out," and it is alleged that the attackers refused any assistance, whereupon the constable, though himself wounded, at great risk dragged out the bodies of his fallen comrades from the now burning lorry. The attackers carried off the arms of the policemen, but no ammunition, as the defenders are believed to have exhausted it before surrender. News of the ambush was conveyed to the Bansha police station by one of the less injured constables, and later four lorries packed with soldiers and police arrived from Tipperary and scoured the district. Several arrests were made. There was a house near the scene of the ambush in which it was alleged the wounded were refused shelter. It was burned to the ground.

Arising out of the answer to the first part of the question, do I understand that the military fired upon five men, missed them all, and hit a girl and a child? Do I understand that they murdered a girl and a child?

May I ask whether we could not adopt the suggestion made by an hon. Member opposite, and let these constables have armoured cars with machine guns, so that they may have some protection? There are armoured cars in Belfast which, I am sure, are not being used.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman has any information in connection with the burning of the creamery at Ballymaeelligot, near Tralee, and is he aware that in addition three adjacent homesteads were burned to the ground, quantities of hay and straw were destroyed, two men were shot dead, two wounded, and seven taken prisoners, including the doctor who was attending to the wounded?

I think that occurred last Friday, and by "weekend" I mean Saturday and Sunday. With reference to what is called the Ballymacelligot creamery, there was a conflict between the police and a large body of Sinn Feiners. In the conflict a number of Sinn Feiners were killed, and many others were taken prisoners.

With reference to the shooting of the two children in Dublin, is it surprising that young men run away when they see an armoured car coming in Dublin, in view of the reckless firing which is continually taking place? [HON. MEMBERS: "Sit down!"] Now, Black and Tans, behave yourselves. May I ask whether it is a fact that if young men run away it is considered to be a sufficient excuse for firing at the crowd?

With reference to the very important statement which the right hon. Gentleman made a few moments ago, to the effect that he considered it to be the duty of the soldiers to fire when people do not halt upon command, may I ask whether he has considered the possibility of people running away in terror, and whether there is not in many cases a risk of people being shot down who were quite innocent and who acted, not in disobedience to the order to halt, but in terror of the result of the soldier's firing?

I appreciate perfectly the situation in Ireland to-day. In many counties, though not in most, it is tragic. But when men are ordered to halt, surely, if they are innocent men, they will halt.

Is that any reason why you should shoot women?

It is a great tragedy when innocent people are killed or wounded.

Then why do you justify it?

Unfortunately, so long as the armed forces of the Crown are liable to attack by assassins, these most unfortunate tragedies will be one of the consequences.

May I ask how it was, when these men refused to halt and were fired upon, that none of these men were murdered, but an innocent girl and a little child were murdered? [Interruption.]

Order. Black and Tans!

Order, yourself; you are all black, and no tan!

I hope the Sultan of Turkey will read about this performance in the House of Commons to-day in connection with the murder of women and little children. I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman why it was that when the military fired upon these men who were running away none of them were killed or injured or touched, whereas a young girl and a little child were killed and wounded respectively?

Baby-killers!

Is this a war against women and children?

(by Private Notice) asked the Leader of the House whether he is prepared to give a day for a discussion on the present grave situation in Ireland, including the murder of women and children, the threatened closing down of the railways, the limitations placed upon the use of motor cars, the threatened stoppage of the mails, and other threats to create famine among the population and to bring about a complete paralysis of trade.

There have been a good many discussions on the Irish situation lately, but at the same time the Government will welcome a discussion when the full facts have been put before the House, and will be glad to have it. We cannot have it this week, because the business has been already arranged, but, if notice be put down, I will arrange it as early as I can next week.

Will the right hon. Gentleman suspend the operations or put an end, at all events for the present and until we have had a Parliamentary discussion of this matter, to the conspiracy for the complete destruction and devastation of Ireland?

The value of a discussion in my eye, and I am sure in the eyes of the public, is to show the absurdity of that suggestion.

asked the Prime Minister if he can now say when the Regulations governing the admission of women to the Civil Service will be laid upon the Table?

Certain details of the draft of the Regulations still remain to be settled, but my hon. and gallant Friend may rest assured that the Regulations will be laid on the Table in ample time for consideration by Members before the House rises.

asked the Prime Minister whether the concession for the further development of the Mosul and South Kurdistan oil fields has been granted to the Anglo-Persian Oil Company; and, if so, on what terms?

The answer is in the negative.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when this question is likely to be decided as to who is to develop these oilfields?

First of all, we have to establish an Arab authority, and it will then be for them, on the advice of the Mandatory, to choose their own method of developing the oil fields.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is in a position to state when the official account of the battle of Jutland will be published; and if he can give an assurance that Sir Julian Corbett will have no part in the publication?

I have been asked to reply to this question. It is hoped that publication will be possible within a month. As the Paper will consist solely of official records, Sir Julian Corbett will have no part in the publication.

May I ask the hon. and gallant Gentleman, or the Prime Minister, whether the publication will include the original Report upon which the Official Report issued to the public was based, and whether he is aware that the first Report issued to the British public was that we had sustained a grave defeat, in consequence of which over £16,000,000 was made on the American Exchange within 24 hours, that a great deal of that came from this country, and will he take steps—

Notice must be given of that question.

Who made it?

Rothschild and Waterloo.

asked the Prime Minister whether the despatches in full relating to the escape of the "Goeben," the Scarborough raid, and the battle of the Dogger Bank have been as yet published; and, if not, will he give an assurance that they will be published in due course, with any relevant information of an authentic character which may come to light from German sources?

I have been asked to reply to this question. So far as the near future is concerned, it is not proposed that documents in regard to these incidents shall be published. The first of them has already been, and the other two will very soon be, dealt with in the Naval History of the War.

I did not quite hear what the hon. and gallant Gentleman said, but am I right in assuming that in due course, on some day in the future, the full despatches relating to these will be published?

I would not look so far into the future. It is not intended to publish them at the present moment.

Are details of these available for use at the Staff College, Greenwich?

Perhaps the hon. and gallant Gentleman will put down a question.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can make a statement with regard to the present position in Armenia?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the present position in Armenia?

Our latest information is that the Armenians, having lost Kars and Alexandropol, have signed an armistice with the Nationalist Turks, and that hostilities ceased on 7th November. Peace negotiations are presumed to be proceeding.

Does not this mean that there is contact between Mustapha Pasha and the Bolshevists, and what is the use of our attempting to prevent that contact by naval means in the Black Sea?