asked the Secretary of State for India whether, considering that Rule 22 of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules lays down that no Government servant shall subscribe in aid of any political move in India, instructions were issued by the Government of India for bidding Government servants to contribute to the Tilak fund, the Paisa fund, and other funds of an obviously political character; and if such instructions were not issued in these cases, why the Dyer fund was selected by the Government of India as an occasion calling for special prohibition?

My hon. and gallant Friend shows by his question that he is aware of the general prohibition contained in the Rule. As regards its application to the Dyer fund, I presume that the Government of India issued their instructions in response to a request for orders. I do not know whether similar action was thought necessary in the case of the other funds mentioned, as to which I have had no particulars.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information as to whether the Government of India have issued instructions forbidding Government servants to contribute to the Julianwala Bagh memorial fund?

I have no information.

asked the Secretary of State for India the number of volun- tary enrolments in India up to date under the Auxiliary Force Act, and how this number compares with the number that were enrolled under the Indian Defence Force Act; and what is the date fixed as the time limit for volunteering under the new Act?

I regret that I am not able to give the information, as I have not yet received the report from the Government of India. I anticipate that it will take a little time to collect the returns from the various parts of India.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me when I can put a question down and get an answer?

I will inquire from my office this afternoon and let the hon. and gallant Gentleman know.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the fact that the rules for the election of Burma's representatives to the Council of State and the Indian Legislative Assembly are unsatisfactory and temporary arrangements, he will now revise the rules and order a fresh election under the revised rules?

It will necessarily take time to revise the electoral arrangements in Burma. Meanwhile, I think it is preferable that the present arrangements, which should be completed by the 14th of this month, should be carried out than that Burma should have no representative on the Indian Legislature at the outset.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can now state what has been done to reconstruct the Royal Naval Reserves; whether recruiting has as yet been recommenced; if not, when it will be; whether the conditions of service have as yet been published; and, if not, when they will be?

There are still outstanding several financial questions in connection with the scheme. I hope that a satisfactory conclusion will soon be reached, when a full statement will be made.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that the reserves are suffering seriously through not being able to know the conditions under which they are likely to serve, and that recruiting is going ahead rapidly in the Territorial Army, which draws its recruits from the same source? Can nothing be done to expedite the scheme?

All these considerations are being borne in mind, and we are doing all we possibly can to get a complete scheme put in hand.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the recruiting for the Territorial Army is not going ahead rapidly?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if a Royal Naval Reserve sailor who completed his time in the coastguard in October, 1914, thus qualifying for a pension, but was mobilised on the outbreak of war and served on mine-sweepers and trawlers until August, 1919, being awarded the D.S.M. and long-service medal, is entitled to have his pension of £12 per annum, now given to him as from October, 1914, re-assessed so that it may be made equal to the pensions granted to active-service ratings and pensioners who served under similar conditions?

Royal Naval Reservists are not eligible for service pensions like naval ratings. In certain circumstances, however, they may be granted an allowance of £12 a year, which is ordinarily payable from the age of 60, this being a flat rate granted in consideration of liability for service in the fleet in time of emergency. In the case of a Royal Naval Reservist with at least 10 years' service in the Coast Guard the allowance may be granted from the earlier age of 50. There is no provision for the reassessment of such pensions on the scale of long-service pensions in consideration of war service.

Is this man, 56 years of age, able and willing to work, to live on 5s. a week, or will the Admiralty find work for him?

If my hon. Friend will send me the specific case, I will give my best attention to it.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that many pre-War pensioners entitled to increased pensions have not yet been paid, and in several cases no application forms have been received; and will he give some explanation to the House regarding the delay in this matter?

A number of pre-War pensioners entitled to increases of pension have not yet been paid, and in certain cases application forms have not yet been issued. As my hon. Friend will realise, the work entailed has been considerable. I may state that payment has been made in about 12,000 cases, and is about to be authorised in 1,000 others. Approximately 4,000 cases are under investigation which are mainly those of Old Age pensioners, or pensioners otherwise in receipt of more than one pension. The cases in which application forms have not been issued are not numerous and mainly concern pensions at present in course of payment by the Ministry of Pensions and about to be transferred to the Admiralty.

Am I to understand that the matter is being hurried up as fast as possible?

Yes, Sir.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to demands for the scrapping of the British Navy and its reconstruction on more up-to-date lines; whether any such plan is being considered; and whether he can give an assurance that no steps in this direction will be taken until the Report of the League of Nations dealing with dis armament has been considered by this House?

Existing warships must gradually become obsolete owing to developments in naval science and the building by other Powers of ships embodying these developments. The attention of the Admiralty has not been called to demands for the scrapping of the British Navy, and no such plan is being considered. The last part of the question therefore does not arise.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there is any body of experts, who are not engaged in administrative work, looking into the whole question of the future of our fighting forces at sea?

Yes, Sir.

Who are they?

You!

The hon. Member must give notice of that question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the full Report of the Harper Committee on the Battle of Jutland has been supplied to the Royal Naval Staff College for the use of officer-students and their instructors?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my reply to the same question on the 1st December and add that his reference to the full Report of the Harper Committee on the battle of Jutland shows him to be under a misapprehension. As I have already explained in reply to other questions, Captain Harper did not draw up any Report on the battle, but simply a record of events based on official British documents.

Has the record of events been placed at the disposal of the Royal Naval College, and in view of the fact that the students and instructors of the Royal Naval College are the principal means of drawing up a sound doctrine for the future of the Navy how can they do that without full information?

I think I answered that question last Wednesday.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell me whether the materials gathered by Captain Harper and his committee have been placed at the disposal of the Royal Naval College?

I answered that question last Wednesday. I think there were three supplementary questions, and I did my best to answer them.

I beg to give notice that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment to-morrow.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, amongst other documents relating to the battle of Jutland, he will publish the accounts given by the gunnery officer of the "Derfflinger" of his experiences in the battle and the official reports made by Admirals Hipper and Scheer?

Admiral Scheer's report, which is the only official German report in the possession of the Admiralty, will be published among the other official documents relating to the battle.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this so-called secret report of Admiral Von Scheer to the German Emperor, which, according to to-day's newspapers, is to be published in Germany, is known to the Admiralty, and will be published?

I am afraid that I have not seen the papers to-day, and I cannot answer without notice.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the first part of the question is not to be considered to be answered in the affirmative?

I have answered that. The only German official report in the possession of the Admiralty will be published.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the refusal to include the Harper diagrams in the Jutland papers may be reconsidered; and whether, in the interests of economy as well as of historical accuracy, he will recognise the peculiar advantages to be derived from the pub lication of the original track-charts, as correlated by Captain Harper, a highly skilled expert in navigation, rather than by the publication of track-charts of individual units, which, by reason of high speed, frequent alterations of course, and other disconcerting factors during the battle, must inevitably be liable to certain margins of errors?

As I explained in my reply on the 1st December, the inclusion of Captain Harper's diagrams would be quite outside the scope of the Jutland Papers as promised by the Prime Minister.

Does the hon. Gentleman think that records kept by certain ships constantly under helm and under fire are as reliable as those correlated by Captain Harper in his very exhaustive inquiry?

That question also has been answered on former occasions. Facts were asked for, and the facts at the disposal of the Admiralty, which have been promised by the Prime Minister, will be published.

Can the hon. Gentleman say why it is outside the scope of the Prime Minister's promise to supply this information?

If my hon. Friend had been in the House and had heard the series of questions which were put and answered he would have thoroughly understood the differentiation between Captain Harper's report and official records.

As we are to get so little out of the Harper report, will the hon. Gentleman give the expenses of this committee of four officers which made exhaustive inquiry and provided a narrative?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the official despatches will be so much Greek to the general public and to most of the Members of this House, and that it is only by such a report as Captain Harper's that anything intelligible can be made out of them?

The hon. and gallant Member will recollect that that was the attitude which the Admiralty took up in the first instance; but the demand of the House for immediate publication of the official documents was granted by the Prime Minister. So we had no other alternative. The Admiralty was rather turned down by the House as to the procedure which they proposed to take, and which we were advised was the best course.

Did not the Admiralty themselves object to the publication of the Harper report?

My Noble Friend knows that in the first instance the Admiralty proposed to hand over the Captain Harper report and all documents bearing on this question to the historian of the War and to leave it to him to correlate and bring the whole thing out in consecutive order. My Noble Friend was one of those who objected most strongly to that, and it was only at the desire of himself and other Members that the official records are being published.

Why is the diagram not to be published?

Because it is not official.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is in a position to state whether the fore-and-aft rig can now be granted to all petty officers?

This matter is receiving consideration.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the extensive naval programmes entered upon by the United States of America and Japan, and the fact that no capital ships are being laid down either in the Royal or private dockyards, he can give the House any information as to what steps, if any, the Government are taking in the matter of new naval ship construction?

The requirements of the situation have been carefully considered in connection with the Navy Estimates for next year, and the general view of the Cabinet regarding new construction will be announced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to-morrow.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he is aware that, in order to obtain recruits for the sick-berth staff, the physical standard has been considerably reduced, the educational standard has been reduced to that of seamen boys on entry, and that the term of engagement has been reduced to seven years; will he consider the advisability of improving the conditions of this branch, particularly as regards promotion, as a means of accelerating the rate of entry, especially in view of the fact that at present there are a number of ratings with eight years' seniority still awaiting their first advancement, that the younger petty officers can never hope to attain the rating of chief petty officer, and that many of these ratings are married; and is he aware that this continual waiting for promotion, coupled with the insufficient rates of pay throughout the service, is causing the members of the staff in question considerable financial hardship?

As the answer is rather long, perhaps the hon. Member will not mind if I have it printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the answer prepared:

The standards required on entry naturally vary from time to time according to the state of recruiting. As stated in the question, the physical standard for this branch has been temporarily reduced and the educational standard is now the same as for the seaman class. The term of engagement has not been reduced, but candidates who wish to join for seven years only are now permitted to do so. As regards advancement of sick-berth ratings, there is at the present moment a small surplus of sick-berth chief petty officers and petty officers, and a small shortage of leading sick-berth attendants on the numbers required for the whole service. Promotions of sick-berth attendants on 1st January next will mostly meet the latter shortage, while the surpluses must inevitably retard promotion temporarily. With regard to the statement that the younger petty officers can never hope to attain the rating of chief petty officer, I think the hon. Member takes an unnecessarily gloomy view. I must not be taken to agree with the suggestion in the last part of the question that the rates of pay throughout the Service are insufficient, but, as stated in my reply to the hon. and gallant Member for South Battersea on the 24th November, the question will not be lost sight of.

asked the, Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when the Admiralty will decide on the number of paymaster-lieutenants, commissioned writers, and warrant writers who are to be retained in the Royal Navy; and if he is aware that the number of the first-mentioned class is 10 per cent., of the second 20 per cent., and of the third 30 per cent. below the standard, and that the delay in fixing the number is acting, and has acted, prejudicially to some deserving officers who did good service during the War?

The question of the establishment of the Accountant Branch generally is now under consideration. No fixed standard of numbers for paymaster-lieutenants promoted from warrant rank, commissioned writers and warrant writers has yet been laid down, but the present numbers borne, although below the provisional numbers allowed during the War, are not below existing post-War requirements. The reduction in the requirements of officers after a long war must always involve a certain amount of hardship, but this hardship is not confined to any one branch, and is common to all classes of officers, whether promoted from the lower deck or not.

When is this matter likely to be decided?

We are working as quickly as we possibly can. I hope very shortly.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether officers and other ratings in the Royal Navy and civilians in the employment of the Admiralty, who are killed or wounded when on service in connection with the present disturbances in Ireland, will be treated, as regards pension for disability or pension for their dependants if killed, on the same scale as laid down for those who suffered in the great War?

Until 30 days after the Statutory date for the termination of the War, which has not yet been announced, officers and ratings of the Royal Navy who may be injured and the dependants of those who may be killed on service in connection with the present disturbances in Ireland, have pension rights upon the war scale. Civilians in Ireland are entitled to the same regulated compensation as civilians injured in the United Kingdom, but the hon. and gallant Member is doubtless aware that they can also claim compensation under the Criminal Injuries (Ireland) Act, 1919.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the statement recently published in the Press, from a New York correspondent, to the effect that Mr. de Valera, the so-called president of the Irish Pepublic, expressly approves of the wholesale murder of British officers and, at the same time, asks the American public to demonstrate its horror at the massacre of Irish civilians by English soldiers; and whether, in the interests of Anglo-American friendship, he will request the Government of the United States of America to take official notice of Mr. de Valera's anti-British activities?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second, that the matter is under consideration.

Is it not a fact that the American citizens themselves on their own soil are showing their disapprobation very strongly of this man?

Undoubtedly there is a very severe campaign being carried on in America against this country, but so far we have found that we can trust American opinion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether the time has not arrived to make a serious representation to America that any further toleration of the activities of this man and the conferring upon him of municipal honours is an unfriendly act?

I think there is no doubt that from the diplomatic point of view we would have a right to take the course suggested by my hon. Friend, but it is not a question of a right; it is a question of what is expedient.

Do not the laws of extradition apply, and enable us to arrest this man?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he now has information as to whether, on the 25th October last, a band of armed men, who described themselves as secret service agents, entered the house of William Gleeson, Moher, county Tip-perary, in search of his son, James, whom they stated they had come to kill; whether they threatened the father with death, and, on his son, William, offering his life for his father they took him, the son, outside the house and murdered him; whether any form of inquiry has taken place; and what was the evidence and finding?

The report of the military court of enquiry held in lieu of inquest in this case has now been received. The finding of the Court was that William Gleeson was wilfully murdered by unknown men on the 25th October, 1990, at Moher, County Tip perary, and that there was no evidence as to the identity of the murderers, or the circumstances of the murder.

May I ask if the Court of Inquiry was held in public or in secret, and whether the next-of-kin or solicitors were allowed to be there?

I may inform my hon. and gallant Friend that the next-of-kin were allowed to be present, and gave evidence. In the course of that evidence the sister of the deceased was ordered by her father to refuse to give further evidence. Both the father and another sister were present in the house at the time of the murder.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he now has information as to whether Charles Lynch, of Milltown Malbay, and Michael Ryan, of Curraghduff, Thurles, were dragged from their beds on the night of the 24th October and shot dead by servants of the Crown; whether Charles Lynch was a man of 70 years of age; whether Michael Ryan was the only son of a widow and was seriously ill in bed when the band of men arrived; whether any form of inquiry has been held into these murders; and what was the evidence and finding?

I have not yet received the report of the Court of Inquiry in the case of Lynch. In the case of Ryan the finding of the Court was that he was wilfully murdered by unknown men on the 25th October, 1920, at Curraghduff, County Tipperary, and that there was no evidence as to the identity of the murderers, or the circumstances of the murder.

Was this Court of Inquiry held in public?

I am able to inform my hon. and gallant Friend that the evidence was cut short in the same way as in the last case, by the refusal of the relatives to continue.

When will the case of Lynch be looked into?

I am having inquiry made into it at the present time.

Arising out of that answer, is there any evidence at all, in relation to the allegations in Questions 88 and 90 that servants of the Crown had anything to do with those outrages?

No evidence whatever?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will state whether Bowen Coulthurst, the officer involved in the death of Sheehy Skeffington, and the man Iledfearn, recently charged with the murder of a bank manager at Leeds, are now engaged in any civic occupation or public service in Ireland, or if they have been so engaged at any time since the events with which they were respectively associated; and, if so, in what Department?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether Bowen Coulthurst, the officer involved in the death of Sheehy Skeffington, and the man Red-fearn, recently charged with the murder of a bank manager at Leeds, are now, engaged in any military or auxiliary forces in Ireland, or if they have been so engaged at any time since the events with which they were respectively associated; and, if so, in what department?

Neither of these ex-officers has been employéd in a military capacity since the incidents mentioned.

Have they been employéd with the auxiliary forces?

I cannot answer that without reference.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Chief Secretary whether he has seen the statement that on Monday and Tuesday last a large force of Auxiliaries held up the main streets of Cork, searching every passer-by and relieving some of them of money; whether it is true that the Auxiliaries rushed into three shops on Monday night, looted them, smashed their contents and the furniture in the houses attached; whether one of the shopkeepers who went to protest to the Labour Commission was arrested by an officer of the Auxiliaries; whether a party of Auxiliaries in Washington Street rushed into the shop of Mr. J. Cudmorc, rifled the till, smashed up the place generally, breaking plate-glass windows and glass shelves; whether they afterwards went up to the living rooms, destroying mirrors, chairs, and pictures, and throwing loose articles of furniture about; whether in the tobacco and sweet shop of Mr. Kenny, an invalid man, the Auxiliaries ransacked the till and took tobacco, and then went upstairs and ransacked the living rooms; whether on Monday afternoon, in Lower Glanmire Road, John Fleming, who was returning from work with two brothers and a friend, was shot in the abdomen by police in lorries; whether the Chief Secretary can say when the incendiary fires and the other forms of terrorism in Cork will be brought to an end?

I have communicated with the Police Authorities who informed me that the Auxiliaries conducted a general search of people in the streets of Cork on Monday and Tuesday, but that the allegation of theft of money, or any other property, is entirely untrue. The three shops which were raided on Monday night were raided because the police had been fired upon in the vicinity, and were endeavouring to find and arrest their assailants. The allegations of looting and of wanton destruction of property in this case, and in the other cases referred to, are absolutely unfounded. The shopkeeper who was arrested while on his way to complain to the Labour Commission was arrested on account of his using insulting and inflammatory language to the Auxiliary officers in question. Mr. Fleming was not shot by the police, who have been unable up to the present to ascertain by whom he was shot. Three police lorries passed at the time, but the sergeants in charge deny that any one of their men fired, and the ammunition was carefully checked on their return to barracks and found to be correct. The locality is a very bad one, and it is not unlikely that the shot was intended for the police and hit Fleming by mistake. As regards the last part of the question, the district inspector states that there have been no incendiary fires in Cork City this week.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the statements I have set forth in my question have not appeared in responsible and respectable English journals, and whether, if these statements be, as the right hon. and learned Gentleman asserts, entirely unfounded, they are not calculated to produce very evil results in Ireland, and whether under these circumstances the Attorney-General will not feel it his duty to take the same criminal proceedings before a court-martial in Ireland against these English journals as he has been taken against the "Freeman's Journal" in Dublin?

The reason was explained last night to my hon. Friend as to what makes the difference between England and Ireland. I have been asked to give the information, which I have already given, and if the hon. Member has any further questions, and will submit the names of the journals I will consider them.

If I give the right hon. and learned Gentleman the name of the journal now, which I do—the "Manchester Guardian"—having that information now in his possession, will he immediately initiate the proceedings, which ought to be as necessary in the case of an English paper with a large circulation as in the case of an Irish paper with a large circulation?

It will be considered.

Is there any difference between the law of sedition in England and the law of sedition in Ireland? [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes, all the difference.']

Not that I am aware of, but naturally there is the Restoration of Order Act in Ireland and not in England.

Is the real reason why the right hon. Gentleman does not prosecute the "Manchester Guardian" that in England he would have to bring the paper before a jury, and in Ireland he would have to bring it before a court-martial?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Labour which of the borough councils in London are not as yet on the King's Roll; and will he state what replies he has had to representations made to them upon the subject?

As a result of questions on Wednesday last, I have personally addressed the five mayors whose councils are not on the Roll requesting them individually to bring the matter before their respective councils as early as possible, and pointing out the very great desirability of completing the record of the Metropolitan Borough Councils with regard to the National Scheme. Three of the mayors have written saying they will bring the question before their Councils as early as possible, and I am in further communication with a fourth. Perhaps my hon. and gallant Friend will repeat his question this day week?

Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to give the names?

Yes As I pointed out, I have the names before me, but it may very well be—and in one case I know that it is the fact—that they are employing more than is required, but I do not want to publish the names until I have exhausted all other means. Perhaps my Noble Friend will put down a question next week?

Is there any reason why the right hon. Gentleman should not give the names of those borough councils which are on the King's Roll?

That would not be a bad plan.

Will the right hon. Gentleman do it?

Yes.

asked the Minister of Labour whether any representation has been made to any of the local authorities or firms in Ulster regarding the King's Roll of Honour and the employment of ex-service men?

Representations by letter and by personal canvas have been made to a considerable number of local authorities and firms in Ulster, and the results so far reported show that undertakings to employ the requisite percentage of disabled ex-service men have been completed in 32 cases, which include the Belfast Corporation.

Has the right hon. Gentleman received a statement by the Lord Mayor of Belfast that out of a total of 5151 employés in the service of the corporation 1625 are ex-service men, and in the circumstances is not the Belfast City Council entitled to be on the King's Roll of Honour, and will the right hon. Gentleman be willing to co-operate with hon. Members from Ulster in expediting the employment of ex-service men?

I am very glad to hear those figures. I think that the Belfast Corporation is already on the Roll. I will certainly co-operate with anybody willing to get ex-service men employment.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will consider the claims of ex-service men who, on being demobilised, endeavoured to start in life without applying for a State training grant, but who, having failed, now desire to obtain some professional instruction, but find that, not having applied for the grant within a certain number of months, they are debarred from receiving any assistance from the State, though had they at once on being demobilised applied for a grant before trying to start life without it they would have been entitled to receive the same?

With the permission of my hon. Friend, I will have the answer to this question printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the answer referred to:

To meet the claims of ex-service men of the category referred to by my hon. Friend, the following facilities remain available:

Until the 30th April, 1921, ex-service officers and men of similar educational qualifications may apply for assistance under the Business Training Scheme recently announced in this House. In initiating this scheme I had in view the relief of the type of case referred to by my hon. Friend. Under Article 7 of the Royal Warrant, any ex-officer who had not received State assistance, but finds his normal occupation debarred him owing to War disability, may receive professional or agricultural training under the appropriate Government Department, not exceeding one year. There is no time limit for applications under the Industrial Training Scheme, the scope of which is well known. During the life of the Maintenance and Training Grants Scheme, special concessions were afforded to ex-service men of the category referred to, and where, in view of the changed circumstances, such men found it necessary to apply for State aid after the failure of their personal endeavours, the regulations as to time limit for application were relaxed in their favour. This scheme, however, having accomplished its object, is now virtually at an end. The Military Service (Civil Liabilities) Department is authorised to consider applications from ex-service men for grants to resettle them in civil life, notwithstanding that the period of 12 months from discharge or demobilisation has elapsed, this time limit having been extended to meet the type of case in question, and this extension remains in force until 31st December, 1920, up to which date applications for assistance will be sympathetically considered and dealt with by this Department.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the negotiations with the building trades unions which have been in progress for the past 16 months to allow dilution so that at least 50,000 unemployéd ex-service men may be employéd in the building of urgently needed houses for the working classes have now been completed; and whether he will assure the House that, in the event of an agreement not being arrived at before the House rises, the Government will themselves take such steps as may be necessary to secure the employment of these men in the building of houses, especially having regard to the prevailing distress which is being occasioned by their prolonged unemployment by reason of trade union regulations which they have been unable to comply with owing to the fact that they were fighting for their country?

The Government hope to meet the representatives of the building craft unions next week, and if my hon. Friend will put down a question this day week, I hope to be able to answer it. In any event I can give rny hon. Friend the assurance that I will do my best to be in a position before the House rises to say definitely what action the Government intend to take.

This is the reply which I have had for very many months and surely the right hon. Gentleman can say on behalf of the Government, that in the event of these negotiations not coming to a satisfactory issue the Government which is the Government responsible for the Government of the country will take steps to secure the employment of these 50,000 odd men who are sick at heart from not getting employment?

As I have just told my hon. Friend, I will do my best to give the House a definite assurance before it rises. Then when my hon. Friend says, in the event of the failure of these negotiations, will we then employ the 50,000 men, for the moment I am negotiating, and if he will put a question down for this day week, I will report progress.

As this question implies blame to one side only, is it correct to say that the Cabinet only yesterday had this matter before them, and that the delay is as much due to the Government as to the men's side?

Have not these negotiations been going on for nearly 16 months, and, although the ball may now be in the hands of the Cabinet, it has been frequently in the hands of the unions, and they are mainly responsible for the delay?

It is the fact that we have had discussions going on intermittently for some time. I am not prepared to attribute blame. I want to get something done, and I will do my best.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the unions involved put suggestions on 3rd November, and were promised a reply on 8th, and that on 29th November no reply had been received by the unions?

I cannot tax my memory to say that that is accurate.

If I put a question down for this day week, can the right hon Gentleman answer the House that he will give a definite reply?

No. I will state where we then stand. I have given an undertaking before the House rises to do my best to have a definite answer one way or the other.

Can the right hon Gentleman tell the House briefly and broadly what are the proposals he is going to put to the trade unions?

No, I do not think so.

Is this not more a dispute as to demarcation between trade unions as to the particular work on which men are engaged?

I do not think I can answer that question.

asked the Minister of Labour what was the number of unemployéd ex-service men on the registers of the unemployment exchanges on the last available date?

The number of ex-service men on the live Registers of the employment exchanges at 26th November was 251,407.

Is there any distinction made between men who served in France and on other fronts?

asked the Minister of Health if substitution committees, as recommended by Lord Lytton's Committee, to ensure the continued employment of ex-service men in the Civil Service have been set up in his Department; and to state the constitution of the committees already set up?

A substitution committee, as recommended by Lord Lytton's Committee, has been set up in the Ministry of Health. The committee consists of a representative of the ex-service men, a representative of the temporary women clerks and an officer of the Establishment Division of the Ministry.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that at Manchester a certain firm recently received a contract to build 1,000 brick houses; that, as there were not sufficient bricklayers to carry on the work at the desired speed, it was decided to adopt composite concrete construction (Fidler) system; that this system consists simply of placing concrete slabs on edge which are held in alignment by strips of metal, and that no mortar or trowels are necessary; that directly arrangements were started for the adoption of the composite concrete construction system, the bricklayers notified their intention of deserting the brick houses if the simple system of building concrete blocks was carried out by unskilled labour; that this threat was issued as a protest, as the bricklayers claimed that the composite concrete construction system work was their work, despite the fact that there was sufficient work upon the brick houses for at least three times as many bricklayers as were obtainable; and whether, in view of the urgent need of new houses and of reducing the unemployment amongst unskilled labour, he will make representations to the trades unions concerned that this boycotting of a system which would be of real value to the country should cease forthwith?

I understand that the question is being referred to the local demarcation committee for the building trade, and I hope that in this way a satisfactory solution of the difficulty will be found.

In view of the delay that has taken place, and the way Members of this House have been put off, will the right hon. Gentleman give full publicity to such cases as these as and when they arise in order to enlist the sympathy of public opinion and get the best settlement of the question?

I will certainly adopt my hon. Friend's suggestion and publish full lists of this and other cases that crop up.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that if this case is not settled within a week he will take steps to show up this trade union which is holding up work, and whose selfishness is preventing ex-service men from getting employment?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that owing to this action of trade unions under housing schemes only 88 houses have been completed in 18 months in Manchester?

I think that it would be convenient to collect together the ascertained cases dealing with this kind of thing, and circulate them to Members.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also circulate the list of merchants and combines in his possession who are preventing housing because of increasing prices?

I am only too anxious to place before Members all the information we have got on that particular point to which my right hon. Friend refers; but the matter was, as he knows, investigated only lately by a Committee of the Board of Trade at great length, and its Report is available. We have no information beyond what is contained in the Report.

Is the statement of facts in the question correct or not? The right hon. Gentleman has hitherto avoided answering that point.

No. I have not intentionally avoided it. The case has been referred to the Departmental Committee which deals with these things in each area. I am not prepared to say that the statement is fully accurate.

Is there no possibility of fixing some time limit in this dispute?

asked the Minister of Health in how many cases building schemes are being carried out under the Office of Works; and whether any of the men employéd on these schemes are not members of trade unions?

Seventeen schemes are now being carried out by my Department. I am unable to state whether all the men employéd on these schemes are members of trade unions, but labour is recruited through the Labour Exchanges and with the assistance of local labour and trades councils, and the local branches of the Federation of Building Trade Operatives.

Does the right hon. Gentleman's Department require any authority to take on this work, and, if so, who gives the authority?

Is there any difficulty in getting men for this particular class of work, and is he in a position to get all the material he requires?

There is certainly a difficulty in getting certain classes of labour for this work.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the dissatisfaction of the various bank clerks on account of their being compelled to pay contributions for the State Unemployment Insurance Act; and that, in consequence of there being such a small percentage of bank clerks being dismissed and out of work, he can see his way clear to exempt bank clerks from paying contributions under the Act?

As has already been stated, I have no power to exclude bank employés from the Unemployment Insurance Act unless they are entitled to rights in a superannuation fund established by, or in pursuance of an Act of Parliament, and unless, in addition, the employéd person is not subject to dismissal except for misconduct, neglect, or unfitness, and generally if conditions of employment make it unnecessary that he should be insured. In any case, bank clerks earning over £250 a year do not come within the Act.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has received a deputation from the National Alliance of Employérs and Employéd which proposed that unemployment benefit should be paid as from 8th November, irrespective of any question of contribution; and what is the decision to which he has come on the question?

I received this deputation yesterday, and a full report of the proceedings has been issued. As regards the suggestion that unemployment benefit should be paid irrespective of contributions, I am afraid I have no power to modify the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act in this respect.

( by Private Notice ) asked' the Minister of Labour whether he can state the number of persons covered by the Unemployment Insurance Act who are at present out of employment and will, therefore, not be entitled to receive unemployment benefit this week; and whether, in view of the many persons so placed, he will consider the advisability of taking some steps to enable them to qualify for benefit?

It is not possible to give the number of persons who are unemployéd and who are not qualified to receive benefit under the Unemployment Insurance Act. Benefit may be drawn for eight weeks as soon as four contributions have been paid, and under this provision large numbers of the persons now unemployéd are entitled to benefit under the Act. As regards entitling persons to benefit irrespective of payment of contributions, I am afraid I can add nothing to the reply given to-day to the hon. Member for Middlesbrough West.

Have the Government considered the advisability of making some provision for these unfortunate fellows who are getting no payment?

The difficulty of qualifying by the four weeks payments has been before me, but it cannot be done under the Act. As a rule, the qualifying period is 26 weeks and not four. A person on short time is qualified to stamp, even though it be no more than one day bonâ fide employment during the week.

Do I understand that where the men are working short time, if the employérs are not in the position to put on the stamp for the employér's contribution, can the employé' put on his own stamp?

Both are parties to stamping the card. I imagine his employér would stamp it under those circumstances. If a man is at work one day a week bonâ fide employéd, that is employéd service under the Act, the card should be stamped.

Under the circumstances of the period of the operation of the Act, and the many thousands who have no employment, but two stamps and not four, three stamps and not' four, could not some concession be granted as would enable the fourth stamp to be placed on, in order to entitle that unemployéd person to benefit?

I am sorry that that would not be possible under the Act. It would be using the premiums of the Insurance Act as an out-of-work donation. I have handed the matter on to the Cabinet Committee on Unemployment, and asked them to consider it. I realise that it is a real difficulty, but I can give no assurance and I have no authority.

Has the right hon. Gentleman made such representations to the Cabinet Committee as would permit of representations being made to that body by persons in authority and in direct touch with the circumstances?

I assure my hon. Friend that the Cabinet Committee have the whole of the facts before them.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he can give an estimate of the number of operatives in the cotton industry who are on half-time?

I understand that the Federation of Master Cotton Spinners' Associations decided on 3rd December that, commencing with Monday, 6th December, spinners of American cotton should stop their mills on Monday, Tuesday, and Saturday of each week. The exact number of persons affected is not yet known, but is probably not less than 100,000.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, having regard to the admitted need of economy in his as well as other Government Departments, and to the fact that the Committee of Inquiry have reported that employment exchanges have failed to displace other methods of getting employérs in touch with employés, and are not generally popular, he will cease the building of further exchanges until the House has had the opportunity of considering and debating the Report of the Committee referred to.

No building work is at present being undertaken in connection with employment exchanges, except the provision of temporary hutments and certain adaptations of existing premises, and even this work has been cut down to the lowest possible point. The question of the provision of suitable buildings will be one of those which will be carefully considered in connection with the Report of the Committee of Inquiry. I would point out to my hon. and gallant Friend that the Committee find that in very many cases the premises now used for employment exchange work are unsuitable, and record their emphatic opinion that ths use of unsuitable buildings for employment exchanges is not an economy.

May I have an answer to the last part of the question as to whether we shall have an opportunity to consider and debate the Report before anything is resolved on?

I should be very glad if an opportunity were afforded, and much obliged to the hon. and gallant Gentleman if he puts down that question again.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us why employment exchanges always require to take sites in the most expensive places, such as in Princes Street, Edinburgh?

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the Lunacy Board of Control, in a statement dated 16th November, 1920, have declared that the only section of the Lunacy Act, 1890, which safeguards voluntary boarders in mental institutions (Section 229) is inapplicable to boarders in registered hospitals, and have likewise declared inapplicable to registered hospitals the form (No. 14) prescribed for obtaining the written consent of two commissioners to the admission of a boarder who shall have made previous application in writing; and if he will say whether the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown was taken before the Lunacy Board's declaration was issued?

The letter from the Board of Control to which the hon. Member refers merely stated that Section 229 of the Lunacy Act, 1890, does not apply to registered hospitals. I see no necessity to consult the Law Officers on a point which has never been in doubt.

Is there any safeguard in law for those people who are incarcerated in such hospitals?

That is quite a different question from that on the Paper.

asked the Minister of Health what was the income under the National Health Act for the last completed financial year, and the amounts paid for administration, sickness and other benefits, and remuneration to doctors; and what was the balance on the year's working and the total amount at the credit of National Health Insurance fund?

I am only in a position to answer for England and Wales, and would refer the hon. Member to the Secretary for Scotland and the Chief Secretary for replies as to Scotland and Ireland. For most of the information asked for by the hon. Member I would refer him to the reply given on the 30th November to a question by the hon. Member for Twickenham, of which I will send him a copy. The other matters raise detailed questions, and I hope that it will meet my hon. Friend's convenience if I send him a detailed statement on the subject.

Are the 1919 balance sheets published?

I think so, but as I am not sure, I should want notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister whether any further information has been received with regard to the fate of the two British officers, Captain Frecheville and Lieutenant Couche, supposed to have been murdered by Bolshevists at Rostoff-on-the-Don last January; and whether, in any negotiations now pending, he will stipulate for investigation of the crime and the punishment of the guilty?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. All the information on this subject in the possession of His Majesty's Government has been forwarded to the Soviet Government, whose reply is awaited.

As this is one of the last chances we shall have of dealing with this most unfortunate question, may I ask whether, before making peace, the right hon. Gentleman will press on the Soviet Government in the case of these officers who were foully murdered for some answer, and as to the reparation to be given?

I have explained to the House over and over again that we are using this opportunity to make sure that every British subject who wishes to leave Russia is allowed to do so. As regards indemnity, we have reserved all our rights. The main object is to save the lives of the British subjects still left.

Is there not more than the saving of lives of the men in Russia? Before we make peace with people whose hands are red with the blood of British officers, should we not have some answer about these officers?

The hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension. The negotiations we are considering now are not negotiations for the making of peace, but with a view to resuming trade, which we wfluld not undertake if we did not think they were at least as important to us as to them.

Is it not a fact that there is no information about the fate of these officers, but that it is only based on rumours from Con stantinople?

We fear the worst.

Are we to treat with people whose hands are red with blood?

I do not think that question can be dealt with by way of question and answer.

asked the Prime Minister whether, having regard to the importance of the subject in the interests of public health and the delay that has occurred in dealing with it, he will arrange for the introduction early next Session of a Bill to give effect to the recommendations, or to some of the recommendations, of the Select Committee on Patent Medicines?

I have been asked to answer this question. It is proposed to introduce next Session a Bill giving effect to the proposals which have now been agreed with the parties concerned.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that it is the wish and desire of all members of clubs in Wales that the opening hours on Sunday evenings should be from 7 p.m. until 10 p.m.; whether the same rights of citizenship in this respect will be applied to Wales as to England; and whether he is aware that the change of hours asked for would promote no abuse, but confer a benefit, and be to the greater domestic convenience of members and their families?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. I am not aware that all members of clubs in Wales entertain the desire which is stated in the first paragraph, and I know from a resolution passed unanimously at a recent meeting of the Welsh Liberal Parliamentary party that there is a large body of Welsh opinion which would be opposed to the assimilation of Wales to England in the matter of the sale and supply of intoxicating liquor on Sunday.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that I do not believe the Welsh Liberal party to be authorities upon the desires of the members of Welsh clubs? We want to know why we are debarred in Wales from the rights and privileges of other people in other parts of the country.

I understand that the Welsh Liberal party do not agree with the hon. Member.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will without further delay restore to the working classes their ancient right to purchase alcoholic spirits in small quantities for off consumption?

asked the Prime Minister if he will have the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic) Order which restricts the hours of sale modified, and will he allow the hours of sale on Saturday to be from 12 noon to 10 p.m., having regard to the great hardship experienced by large masses of the population who are now unable to obtain access to houses of refreshment between 2.30 p.m. and 6 p.m.; and is he aware of the serious inconvenience the present Regulation causes to persons who have to travel to various parts of the country?