asked the Minister of Pensions upon what lines the Departmental Committee of Inquiry into the administration of pensions and other grants has been constituted, and why representatives of ex-service men's organisations have not been appointed as members; whether he will consider a medification of the constitution of the Committee in order that representation may be given to the Comrades of the Great War and the Federation of Discharged Sailors and Soldiers; and whether he will insist that any representatives of ex-service men's organisations who may be appointed shall be qualified as laid down in the War Pensions Act by being discharged as disabled?

The Departmental Committee of Inquiry is, in accordance with the usual practice composed of such persons, as in the judgment of the Minister, are best qualified to advise him upon the subject under investigation. I indicated in the reply given by me on the 25th November to the hon. Member for Kingswinford that at least one member of the Committee is, in fact, a member of the Federation of Discharged and Demobilised Sailors and Soldiers. The Committee has been in Session for some time and it would not be practicable to add members to it now. Any further additions would make it unwieldy. I have other opportunities of meeting the representatives of the ex- service organisations at regular intervals and hearing their views. I may add that the Departmental Committee will be glad to hear evidence from any, or all, of the associations referred to by my hon. and gallant Friend, and invitations with this object have already been addressed to them.

asked the Minister of Pensions why the total pension of E. C. Hughes, late Private, No. 201176, l/4th Northants Regiment, has been totally stopped although, after many months' treatment for tuberculosis, he is only allowed to work three hours per day; and, seeing that he is married with a family dependent upon him, whether the decision can be expedited?

The medical authorities were unable to accept the disease from which this man is suffering as due to or aggravated by service. No award of pension can therefore be made, nor can continuance of the advances be authorised pending consideration of his claim. Private Hughes has, however, exercised his right of appeal against this decision; and when, with the assistance of his local committee, he has completed his evidence to his satisfaction, the papers will be forwarded to the Pensions Appeal Tribunal without delay.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that he gets some assistance?

I will look into it. I am rather sympathetic, and will see whether anything can be done.

asked the Minister of Pensions the number of officers and nurses drawing retired pay?

On the 31st October, 39,872 officers were in receipt of retired pay, and 1,413 nurses were in receipt of pension.

asked the Minister of Pensions the number of officers' widows receiving pensions?

The number of officers' widows receiving pension at 21st October, 1920, was 9,750.

asked the Minister of Pensions the number of officers and dependants receiving allowances?

The number of officers and dependants, including widows and children, receiving retired pay or pension and allowances under the Royal Warrants or Orders-in-Council was 65,143 on the 31st October.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he has received resolutions from Local War Pensions Committees that delay is constantly experienced, and forms a legitimate ground of complaint, in obtaining decisions or claims for alternative pensions, and that this delay is due to the referring of such claims to regional head quarters; that to investigate claims locally is a more expeditious, sympathetic, and satisfactory method; and that a searching inquiry should be con ducted into the whole system of regional administration; and what action does he propose to take?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answers given to the hon. and gallant Member for Bournemouth in reply to similar questions on the 2nd December, of which I am sending him copies. My hon. and gallant Friend will see that recent reports in the working of the new alternative pension procedure show a material shortening of the period taken under the old procedure to arrive at a decision.

Is it not a fact that this system leads to the employment of a great many more people in pensions administration?

I am satisfied that that is not the case.

Will not the system ultimately lead to a considerable reduction?

I believe that that is so.

asked the Minister of Pensions if pensioner J. Surridge, of 88, Victoria Road, Edmonton, who lost a leg in the War, has been out of work for two years; whether he and his wife and two children are living on £2 14s. 6d. pension and unemployment allowance; whether he has been suffering during the last two years from an artificial leg which is too heavy and too short, and of which the harness is burdensome; whether the Minister of Pensions in the first instance ordered this unsatisfactory essential limb which has caused him so much trouble; whether he has asked for the new light metal limb; whether this has been refused and Surridge told that he must take a Blatchford No. 3; whether a Blatchford No. 3 limb weighs from 7 to 12 1bs.; whether it is very liable to break if made lighter than 7 1bs.; whether Mr. Surridge is a small, light man; whether the Blatchford No. 3 is carried from the shoulder, of which method Mr. Surridge has two years' unsatisfactory experience; and whether, in view of the Ministry's statement that pensioners are allowed to choose any limb in the Ministry's approved list which is suitable from a surgical point of view, there is any reason why this pensioner, who has suffered for two years from a bad artificial limb, should not be given the light artificial limb for which he has asked, and, if so, what?

I regret that I have not yet been able to complete my inquiries into this case, but I will communicate fully with my hon. and gallant Friend at an early date.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether his attention has been called to the case of Mrs. Huntley, widow of Private James Huntley, No. 15893, Northumberland Fusiliers, about which the hon. Member of the Consett Division of Durham wrote to him on 1st November and again on 25th November; whether the above soldier died on 28th July, 1920; whether he had been shot through the head and also gassed during the War, and was in receipt of a disability pension of 56s. a week; whether Mrs. Huntley was subsequently in receipt of a temporary pension of 74s. 2d. a week until 30th October, when she was informed that she was not eligible for a pension; whether she appealed; and, seeing that she and her nine children are in great want, whether he will ex- pedite a decision in her case, and meanwhile order her temporary pension to be again paid, or whether she must apply to the Poor Law?

I am having this case reviewed, and have meanwhile ordered the continuance of payment of her temporary pension.

asked the Minister of Pensions the cost of the conversion of the Buttrills Camp, Barry, Glamorgan, into a convalescent treatment and training centre for the wounded?

The total estimated cost of conversion is £62,150, including equipment and furnishing, and payments to the Disposal Board in respect of hutting, etc.

asked the Minister of Pensions the number of permanent Civil servants at present employed in the Ministry of Pensions?

There are 270 permanent Civil servants of all grades in my Department.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he has yet completed the inquiries into the damaging to the extent of £2,000 of the co-operative creamery at Abbeydorney and the assault on the manager; if he is aware that the manager, Mr. T. O'Donovan, has made a sworn affidavit that the looting and firing of this creamery and the unprovoked assault on himself was committed by uniformed forces of the Crown; and that, since this matter was raised in this House, the dwellings of the manager and engineman have been burnt down by forces of the Crown?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to add anything to the statement I made with reference to this matter in reply to a similar question by the hon. and gallant Member on the 25th ultimo.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this sacking took place on 18th October, and how is he not able to give the House information about it? Furthermore, is ho aware that, following the first raising of this question in the House of Commons, the manager and engineer of the creamery had their houses burned down by uniformed police, and cannot he take some steps to find out about this matter?

The question of my hon. and gallant Friend was put down on 28th November. It is extremely difficult in the disturbed condition of that district to get an inquiry together. Very often the officers who are to hold the inquiry are shot.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when questions are put down asking for information as to the burning of these creameries we are always put off with evasive replies of this character?

Is not the House tired of these constant allegations against men who are engaged in the execution of their duty?

The House can form its own opinion as to that, but there is no attempt on the part of the Irish Government to evade responsibility.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that four officers sent to make inquiry into this particular case when questions were put down have been shot while making inquiries?

Some officers certainly have been shot.

Has any evidence yet been received that uniformed officers of the Crown were responsible for this?

No.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that this question was repeated on November 28th, but that notice of it was given a month ago and that it has been postponed four times?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that every time these questions are put down a policeman is murdered?

No. The houses are burned.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland the number of cooperative concerns that have been either totally or partly destroyed from March up to the end of November in Ireland; if he can state the estimated value of such property; and if the owner of such property will be entitled to compensation due to such destruction?

For details regarding the destruction of co-operative creameries in Ireland, I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave in reply to a similar question by the hon. Member for Kettering (Mr. Waterson) on the 25th ultimo. So far as I am aware, no other creameries were destroyed in Ireland during November, with the exception of the Duharran creamery near Nenagh, which was destroyed on the 25th or 26th ultimo, of the attack on which I had no knowledge at the time when I gave that reply. I have no means of ascertaining the information desired in regard to co-operative institutions other than creameries in Ireland.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, following on the murder of 15 auxiliary police in an ambush near Macroom on 28th November last, many houses and shops in the vicinity were burned or damaged as a so-called reprisal; whether the owners or occupiers, irrespective of age or sex, are supposed to have taken part in the ambush or to have been accessories to the crime; and, if so, why they were not arrested and brought to trial?

I am informed that the only houses which have been burned in or near Macroom are those overlooking the scene of the massacre in which the murderers had lain concealed in preparation for the ambush in which 16 officers were killed. The occupiers of these houses had fled when the police came to arrest them for their complicity in the crime, and the houses were burned as a precautionary measure against similar attacks, and not as a reprisal.

Are we to understand that in future, if one of these terrible outrages occurs, all the houses overlooking the scene of the outrage are to be burned irrespective of ownership, sex, age or any other condition of the occupier?

No, but these particular houses were occupied by the men who committed the murder.

Are the wives and families of these men supposed to be accessories to the crime? Why punish the families and not the men themselves? [An HON. MEMBER: "Because they ran away."]

Is this burning done under civil or military law?

Are these questions put down with the object of condoning and encouraging crime?

It is to get the truth, and we cannot get it.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, on the night of the 29th-30th November last, forces of the Crown raided the town of Ardee, county Louth; whether they arrested Patrick Tierney and John O'Carroll; whether the two men were later found dead from gunshot wounds; and what is his explanation for these deaths?

A party of police were sent to Ardee from Drogheda on the night of the 29th ultimo in view of an apprehended attack on the Ardee police barrack. The party while in Ardee did not leave the vicinity of the police barrack, and it is not correct to state that the town was raided. Tierney and O'Carroll were not arrested, and the police have been unable to obtain any information as to the identity of the persons by whom they were murdered. The finding of the military court of inquiry was that their deaths were caused by bullet wounds inflicted by some person or persons unknown.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the relatives of these men declare positively that they were taken into custody by armed servants of the Crown, and when men are taken into custody by armed servants of the Crown, why are they not safeguarded from gunshot wounds?

The servants of the Crown deny that absolutely.

Of course they do.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether any understanding has been arrived at between the national teachers of Ireland and the education authorities on the question of increased salaries; if so, whether the proposed increase refers to primary or ordinary schools, or to secondary or intermediate schools; and will he state the conditions of service and when this increase becomes effective?

As the answer is a very lengthy one, I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, publish it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

With regard to that part of the question which asks whether the proposed increase refers to primary or ordinary schools, or to secondary or intermediate schools, if the answer with regard to the secondary schools is in the negative, will the right hon. Gentleman say if it is the intention of the Government to deal in the immediate future with the teachers of the secondary schools, who are in a much worse case than the teachers of primary schools?

My right hon. Friend is further considering the question of the secondary schools.

The following is the answer promised:

I am glad to say that, after a series of conferences between the Treasury, the Commissioners of National Education, and the representatives of the Irish teachers, a complete understanding on the question of teachers' salaries has been arrived at. The settlement covers teachers in primary schools only, and takes effect from the 1st April, 1920. The scales of salary and the terms of "Carry Over" are based upon the recommendations of the second Burnham Report on English Teachers' Salaries-salaries with such modifications as were necessary to suit Irish conditions, principally on the lines laid down in the Report of the Vice-regal Committee, under the chairmanship of Lord Killanin, which reported in 1919. The most important item in the provisional agreement is the fixing of a permanent and inclusive scale of salary of £170, rising by annual increments of £12 to £370 for trained men teachers, and of £155, rising by annual increments of £10, for trained women teachers, in either case with opportunity of advancement within the normal scale by the grant of special increments at intervals of not less than three years, and of rising above the maximum of the normal scale by five supernormal increments of varying amount, both these additional benefits being conditional upon reports of highly-efficient service by the teacher. There are a large number of other conditions in the settlement which is on comprehensive lines, and embraces almost the whole of the points dealt with in paragraphs 41 to 48, 55 and 58 of the Killanin Report. I shall be happy to send the hon. and gallant Member a copy of the formal agreement in which they are contained. I am sure that the House will agree with me that this settlement by mutual agreement and, as I understand, with goodwill and harmony on both sides, of a long-outstanding and highly-contentious question is a matter of great satisfaction.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can state when the increases of pension authorised by the Increases of Pension Act will be issued to the pensioners of the Royal Irish Constabulary; and whether, in view of the small means and the distress of many of these pensioners, he will give directions that such increases should be paid at the earliest possible moment?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the increases of pension authorised by the Pensions (Increase) Act are being issued to the pensioners of the Royal Irish Constabulary as rapidly as possible. The preliminary inquiries have been completed in over 1,800 cases, increases have already been paid, and the special staff appointed to expedite the work are dealing with the outstanding applications at a rate of over 500 a week.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when they will be completed; will it be before the end of the year?

The total number of cases outstanding is 2,150, and at the present rate of progress that is being made they ought to be completed in five weeks.

Are the pensions being paid as soon as they have been allocated?

Yes.

Are the worst cases being taken first?

It is very difficult to say which are the worst cases, as each person thinks his is.

Some of them are getting only 9s. a week.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will indemnify all sufferers from the activities of the Sinn Feiners in this country, whether the injuries be to persons or to property?

No, Sir; I see no reason to relieve insurance companies of the risks which they take in the ordinary course of business.

asked the Prime Minister if any negotiations that may be entered into arising out of the willingness of the Government to explore all avenues that might lead to a lasting settlement in Ireland will be upon the basis that under no circumstances will Ireland be granted complete independence or fiscal autonomy; and, if this is not the case, will he indicate what concessions the Government would be prepared to make on these two questions?

I have repeatedly laid down the limitations with which the Government is prepared to discuss this question, and I have nothing to add to what I have previously said.

In view of the reports that have been given by the newspapers on this very subject during the last two or three days will the right hon. Gentleman undertake that no arrangements are entered into that give to Ireland fiscal autonomy or complete separation?

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he is aware that much misapprehension is caused both at home and abroad by statements and questions so framed that they convey the impression that armed or uniformed men who commit outrages in Ireland are necessarily servants of the Crown; and, if this is not so, can he do or say anything to remove such misapprehensions and to prevent repetitions of suggestions which can serve no good purpose, and which are unfair to the military and police forces?

I have repeatedly stated in the House that murders and other outrages in Ireland have been committed by persons unlawfully dressed in the uniforms of the soldiers or police. This was true of the recent ambush massacre and mutilation by axes of 16 members of the Auxiliary Division at Killmichael, in County Cork, on the 28th November last. The murderers were dressed in khaki and wore trench helmets.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is now in a position to say whether the Death Duties (Killed in War) Act, 1914, and the Finance Act, 1918, apply to officers and men of His Majesty's forces killed in connection with the present disturbances in Ireland; and whether he will introduce a one-clause Bill to extend the same privileges to all servants of the Crown killed in these disturbances?

The benefits of the Death Duties (Killed in War) Act apply to all ranks of the military forces serving in Ireland as long as the Act itself remains in force. They do not apply to civilian servants of the Crown in Ireland including the Royal Irish Constabulary. But the Chief Secretary and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer are agreed that they should be so extended under present circumstances. My right hon. Friend gathers that this is also the view of the whole House and he will, therefore, act upon it in anticipation of legislative sanction which in the present state of public business he fears it would be impossible, to get before we adjourn.

asked the Prime Minister if advantage will be taken of the provisions of the Order-in-Council of January, 1910, to ask all Civil Servants who have attained the age of 60 years and over to retire in order to make room for others and help to diminish the, ranks of the unemployed.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in order to save pensions and salaries at this critical financial time, he will consider the propriety of relaxing the 60-year-old rule in the case of all Civil Servants who continue to be equal to the discharge of the duties required of them.

With the permission of the hon. Members, I will answer these two mutually distinctive questions together. It would not conduce to the efficiency of the public service either to retire or to retain indiscriminately all Civil servants who have attained the age of 60; the public interest is best served by maintaining the present discretion of Heads of Departments.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that many employés in the British glass industry, largely built up during the War, are being daily discharged owing to the fact that the present rate of exchange renders it almost impossible for English manufacturers to compete with German manufacturers, further assisted by the prevailing conditions of sweated labour; and if he is yet in a position to give an assurance to those reliant upon the continued existence of this industry that the difficulties created by the rate of exchange have not been overlooked and that temporary emergency legislation, calculated to provide definite and early relief, can be confidently expected?

My right hon. Friend is aware of the position m the glass industry, but is not able at present to add anything to the answer of the 17th November given by the Parliamentary Secretary to the hon. Member for South Nottingham (Lord H. Cavendish-Bentinck), of which he is sending my hon. and gallant Friend a copy.

Is it not a fact that the glass industry has been compelled to close down some factories, and can nothing be done now to safeguard this industry before it is too late?

My right hon. Friend is keeping the glass industry under close observation, and the hon. and gallant Member may rest assured that he will do everything he can do.

asked the Prime Minister what is the total amount of wheat which has been bought or is held by the Wheat Commission on behalf of the Government; what is the present value of all such purchases; whether it is still the policy of the. Government to purchase wheat; if so, will such wheat be sold at the market price or at the purchase price; and, in view of the constant and probable further fall in the price of wheat, can the Government remove all restrictions whatever upon the price of wheat?

asked the Minister of Food whether the world's market price of wheat is well below the subsidy level at the present time; and what immediate steps the Government propose to take to remedy the grave injustice of the existing high price of bread?

I have been asked to reply to these questions. It has already been stated that so long as wheat is being bought for the Government it is clearly undesirable to make public announcements as to the quantities and the prices paid. Such information would be beneficial to sellers and might seriously pre- judice the Exchequer. It has also been announced that the policy of the Government is to decontrol wheat and flour as soon as possible, and the methods by which the prices of wheat and flour may be brought into day-to-day relation with the movements of the world markets without unnecessary losses to the Exchequer and to distributors, and serious disturbance of trade, are receiving careful consideration. It is obviously impossible to predict the future course of markets, and the Noble Lord who refers to the constant fall in prices overlooks the wide fluctuations that still prevail. Within the last fortnight the average quotation for No. 1 Northern Manitoba wheat, c.i.f. United Kingdom ports, fell to 93s. 6d. per quarter, subsequently rose to 108s. 6d. on Tuesday last, and to-day stands at 104s. I must again point out that wheat not yet shipped cannot at the earliest be available for use as bread flour much before the middle of January.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can answer the third and fourth parts of my question, namely, whether it is still the policy of the Government to purchase wheat, and, if so, will such wheat be sold at the market price or at the purchase price?

I think when the Noble Lord reads my answer he will find that it does in effect answer his questions. It is the policy of the Government to discontinue the purchase of wheat as soon as practicable, and for that purpose we are considering what steps are necessary in order to ensure that the transition from Government purchase to private purchase may be accomplished without unnecessary losses either to the taxpayer or to the trade.

Are the Government still buying wheat, or are they not?

Yes.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state when the control of wheat will cease?

Is it a fact that the right hon. Gentleman's Department are making a profit out of these transactions?

The last question has been answered a good many times. The trading transactions of the Ministry of Food during the period, I think, of the last three years have amounted to something like £1,000,000,000. The object of the Ministry was to make neither profit nor loss, but we did, as a matter of fact, make a profit of one-tenth of one per cent. As regards the question as to when the decontrol of wheat will be accomplished and Government purchases cease, I can only repeat the answer I have already given, that the matter is receiving immediate attention, in consultation with the trade, with a view to considering when that course can safely be taken without injury to any of the vital interests concerned.

Having regard to the statement which the right hon. Gentleman has just made, that the food control is not being conducted with a profit to the Ministry, and as it is proved that it is not being conducted with profit to anyone else in the country, will he consider decontrolling food altogether?

Will the right hon. Gentleman give a decision within, say, one week as to when the control of wheat will come to an end?

One of the problems which has to be considered in fixing a date for the decontrol of wheat is the assurance that the milling industry will be in a position to undertake its responsibilities. There are agreements entered into with the milling industry during the War which have to be honoured, and the conclusion of which requires some negotiation, and it is quite impossible to contemplate the conclusion of these negotiations, with due regard to the trade interests affected, within any such period as the hon. Member suggests.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state when he will be able to come to a decision on this point?

asked the Minister of Food whether, when the price of flour was advanced last September, the retailer was protected against loss but prevented from making a profit by an adjustment of account; and whether, in the same way, arrangements will now be made to credit bakers with any loss which may be incurred by using their stocks at the new retail prices for bread, in view of the fact that a uniform price must be charged for bread and flour in each district, and that the public cannot be expected to take into consideration the varying stocks of flour which may have been bought by retailers from the Government at a higher price?

asked the Minister of Food why, in the recent reduction of 4s. per sack in the price of flour, the bakery and flour trades were not protected against consequent loss, whereas upon each advance in price this year the Food Ministry took measures to prevent the trades gaining any benefit; and whether compensation will be paid to those trades which have sustained loss by the fall in prices?

With regard to the position of retailers I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given yesterday to the hon. Member for Morpeth. With regard to the position of wholesalers whose sales remain subject to maximum prices, I am considering the possibility of dealing with individual cases of proved hardship.

Is it not a fact that accounts were adjusted when the price was recently raised by the Food Controller even in the case of retailers, and is it not equally practicable and essentially fair that the converse should take place now to prevent these same retailers suffering loss?

On the occasion on which the price of food was advanced as the necessary machinery for giving effect to the decision of the Government to reduce the bread subsidy, steps of that kind were taken, but they did involve the most extensive account-taking, which, as a matter of fact, took a great many months. Should we be faced with a fall in the world price and the necessity of a fall in the price of flour in this country, it will be quite impracticable to continuously follow the precedent set on that occasion.

If for the purchases the Government are making with regard to wheat now they are making them for ward, are they making them at the present price or a reduced price in anticipation of a considerable reduction?

I must ask for notice of that question.

Is it not a fact that it is quite impossible for retailers in any one district to charge prices in accordance with their stocks, and a man who holds a big stock is therefore bound to suffer very heavily, and is not the solution of the difficulty that to which the hon. Gentleman has referred, of continual adjustments of account, to remove the food control of wheat and flour?

The fact that retailers necessarily suffer loss upon their stocks upon a falling market is an economic truth wholly independent of the existence or non-existence of control.

Is it not a fact that when the price was going up the Minister prevented the ordinary economic rules applying, and prevented any adjustment or balance which might have taken place?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Admiralty have decided as yet on the future shipbuilding policy of the Navy; if so, whether it is the intention to build capital ships; and whether a committee could be set up under the Committee of Imperial De-fence, assisted by experts, if necessary, to inquire into and report upon the whole shipbuilding policy of the Navy, before that policy is finally decided?

A statement on this subject will be made in the course of to-day's discussion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether a committee can be set up for the purpose mentioned in the second part of the question?

asked the Prime Minister if he will consider the advisability of initiating an international conference called together to discuss the mutual difficulties of industrialists throughout the world by the current rates of exchange, and to report on the best means of restoring normal conditions?

These questions were fully discussed at the recent International Financial Conference at Brussels, of which a Report has been published, and I do not think that a further conference would throw any additional light on the subject.

Is it not a fact that there is very little hope that there will be any improvement in trade so long as this matter is allowed to drift by the Allied and Associated Powers?

I do not quite know what my hon. Friend means.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the dissatisfaction that prevails amongst the few recipients of the Victory Medal with regard to its tawdriness and appearance; and whether, in view of the fact that comparatively few have as yet been issued, future issues of this medal will be improved upon?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my answer on 7th December in reply to a question put by the hon. Member for Aberdare (Mr. Stanton). I would add that the question of improving the finish of the Victory Medal is now receiving further consideration, and a statement on the subject will be made as soon as possible.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say who designed the Victory Medal?

No, Sir; I am not able to answer that without notice.

May I ask where it is proposed to make these Victory Medals. Has the right hon. Gentleman's Department ever been able to turn out anything artistic?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is great disappointment with the Mons Star, and will he see that the General Service Medal is a better medal than either the Victory Medal or the Mons Star?

asked the Prime Minister why it is necessary to devise machinery in accordance with the law and practice of the constitution, in order to give effect to the decisions of the Washington conference on maternity, in view of the fact that the provisions of the Convention merely require legislative enactment?

I cannot add anything to the reply which I gave to my right hon. Friend on the 6th December, as the matter is still under consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has now received information that at the International Postal Conference at Madrid a proposal was made that the British Empire should be allowed one vote only; whether he is aware that this proposal, which would have denied to Canada and the other British Dominions the voting power proper to their new national status, was defeated by 43 votes to 22; and what action the British dele gates took upon the question?

A proposal was made by the delegation of the United States, supported by various South American States, to take away all votes at present accorded to Colonies, etc. This would have involved the withdrawal of the votes at present enjoyed by India and the Dominions. The proposal was opposed by the British delegation, and was defeated by 41 votes to 22.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to consider the bringing together under one roof of the Ministries of Munitions, Shipping and Food, and to place them under one director, whose duty would be to see that they were liquidated at the best prices available and in the shortest possible time?

A statement in regard to these Ministries will be made this afternoon by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Prime Minister what is the cost per month of our occupation of Palestine; what, if anything, is the return; and whether the time has now arrived for us to relieve ourselves of this financial responsibility?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the replies given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War on this subject on the 26th October and on the 23rd November, to which I have nothing to add. With regard to the last part of the question, the British forces in Palestine are already in course of reduction.

Having been put off twice by the Minister for War, to whom I addressed this question, may I ask my right hon. Friend, seeing that we have to make big cuts somewhere in regard to national expense, whether we could make them anywhere better than by taking away the forces from Palestine

That is a big question of policy I am willing to discuss, but the Secretary of State for War made the fullest answer on the 26th October.

Is it not a fact that the civil administration in Palestine is now self-supporting?

Yes, I believe it is.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that no commermoration has ever been held in this country which so touched the hearts of the people as did the burial of the unknown warrior in Westminster Abbey, it is possible to record for future history the name of the individual who first publicly made this very beautiful and appropriate suggestion?

I feel sure that the individual, whoever he was, will be quite satisfied with the result of his suggestion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept it from me, as the individual in question, that that is so?

Was not this suggestion first made publicly by Mr. J. B. Wilson, the news editor of one of the great metropolitan dailies?

asked the Prime Minister if his attention has been called to the attacks by a certain syndicate of daily and weekly newspapers upon Members of this House whereby Members who voted in certain Divisions of Thursday and Friday of last week are described as wastrels; whether this is an attack upon the privileges of this House; and what steps, if any, he intends to take to protect Members in the performance of their duty against such attacks?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the action of a certain newspaper threatening to pillory as national wasters all Members of this House who refuse to vote against the Government's economic policy on the 9th December; and whether he will consult the Law Officers of the Crown as to how far it is legal for a daily journal to openly threaten to villify, in their respective constituencies, Members who refuse to support the policy it advocates?

Before these questions are answered, may I ask whether it is in accordance with the practice of this House for hon. Members to complain of attacks made upon them in the Press, and, if it is in order, therefore, for the question to appear on the Paper?

On a point of Order. Is it not in accordance with the practice of this House for the Members of this House to be protected in performing their duty?

As one who has, during his political life, endured more newspaper attacks than probably any man in this House—

And inspired a good many.

I would respectfully counsel my fellow-Members not to take these newspaper attacks too seriously. If we do our duty fearlessly the public will judge us fairly in the end. There is no fairer tribunal than the British public, who are quick to resent unfair attacks, and there are many signs that they are doing so in this case.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think there is a difference between fair criticism and literary hooliganism?

Is it not a fact that this House recently has not been reported or taken sufficient notice of in the Press, and that public service has been done by drawing public attention to the doings of this House?

The Press have only a certain number of columns.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in consequence of the action of a certain part of the Press, many Members of the House intend to vote for the Government who would have felt that it would be advisable for them under the circumstances to have voted against the Government? I shall vote with the Government.

When I saw these attacks I rejoiced because, knowing how the British hate to be bullied, I knew the Government is all right.

Is not the question of the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Sir F. Hall) tantamount to an admission that he has been driven into another lobby by the action of the newspapers?

I do not want Lord Northcliffe to run the country.

asked the Prime Minister the position at present reached with regard to the resumption of trade relations between this country and Russia; and if the negotiations, if there be any, will have to be modified by the fact that the Communist Government has recently put into effect one of the leading principles of Communist policy by abolish the use of money in Russia?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to make any statement regarding the opening of trade relations with Russia?

I hope to be in a position to make a statement soon.

Is the Prime Minister in a position to deny or assent to the statement in the French newspapers that we have reached an agreement?

Is the Prime Minister in a position to make a statement before we adjourn for the Christmas holidays?

That does not altogether depend upon this Government.

But have not we had a reply from Moscow?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the statement in the Press that the South Australian House of Assembly at Adelaide has decided to grant the privilege of free first-class travel for life to crippled ex-service men; and whether he will follow so good an example and confer upon all disabled ex-service men in this country the privilege of travelling first-class at the expense of the State?

I have been unable to obtain confirmation of the Press statement referred to.

If I can bring the right hon. Gentleman evidence that this if so, will he then consider the matter seriously, and is he not aware that the present facilities for these disabled men travelling in crowded compartments render it very difficult for them to undertake long journeys?

I quite agree with my hon. and gallant Friend, but this illustrates one of the difficulties with which we are confronted whenever we come to the question of expenditure. It is really a difficulty between competing claims, all of great merit. This is one, but we must take into account the condition of the national finances.

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that the French and the Italian Governments recognise that the Turkish Treaty is unjust and unworkable, the British Government agree with their two Allied Governments?

So far from the French and Italian Governments recognising that the Turkish Treaty is unjust and unworkable, the High Commissioners united on 24th November in pressing the Turkish Government to ratify the Treaty immediately.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the declaration of the French Prime Minister in to-night's evening papers?

No, I have not seen any papers.

Is it not the fact that the French and Italian Governments are very well satisfied, and that if there is any dissatisfaction with the conditions it is with the British?

asked the Prime Minister if the present Turkish agreement in the Near East contains the violation of the Allied pledges in respect to the Bulgarians, Turks, and Arabs; whether, as one consequence, Turkish nationalism is successfully opposing the Allies; and if the whole of the Moslem world is restive under the imputed breaches of faith on the part of Great Britain?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister what is the total number of guns, rifles, and aeroplanes surrendered or destroyed by the Germans under Allied supervision since the Armistice, excluding naval material; and what percentage of the total numbers of each of the above categories of surrendered or destroyed arms bear to the total number in possession of the German armies at the time of the Armistice?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given on Monday to a similar question by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. With regard to the second part, the percentage in the case of aeronautical material represents 92 per cent. of the number in possession of Germany at the time of the Armistice, but it is not possible to form an exact estimate of the percentage in regard to guns and rifles.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Government have any information regarding the Report that the Main Committee of the German Reichstag have approved the expenditure of 25,000,000 marks for the building of a light cruiser; if he will state whether such action conforms to the spirit of the Peace Treaty; and whether expenditure of this nature will affect the ability of Germany to comply with her obligations as to financial reparations?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, but His Majesty's Ambassador at Berlin has been instructed to make an immediate inquiry. With regard to the second part of the question, Germany has the right under the Peace Treaty to build light cruisers up to 6,000 tons, in order to replace ships allowed under the Treaty. The point, however, is one for the Reparation Commission, whose attention has been drawn to it.

As my right hon. Friend is inquiring from our representatives at Berlin, will it be convenient if I put a question down for this day week?

Yes.

May I ask you, Sir, a question concerning the future powers of the House? The terms of the mandate to be assumed by the British Empire under the terms of the Peace Treaties have to be submitted for approval to the Council of the League of Nations, and the Government have declared their intention of submitting the terms of the mandate to the Council of the League for approval, and then of laying them before Parliament, and I wish to ask you whether, when the terms of these mandates are laid before Parliament, you will admit hon. Members to attempt to move or to carry out amendments or extensions or alterations of any sort in the terms of the mandates if they have been once approved by the Council of the League of Nations?

The question the hon. and gallant Gentleman puts to me is rather of a hypothetical character. I have not seen one of these mandates myself, and when they come here I do not know whether they will be laid before the House simply for its information, or whether the House will be asked to take some action upon them. All I should be justified in saying at present is that, so far as I can see, they would not be exempted business within Standing Order No. 1. Whether Amendments can be moved to them or not will depend upon what action the Government invites the House to take upon them.

asked the Prime Minister whether any of the hymns sung at the recent burial of the unknown warrior were written by the Poet Laureate; whether, in connection with that solemn event on the declaration of peace, or the unveiling of the Cenotaph, or any of the other great events of the War, he has written any poems or verses; and, if not, will he consider the question of the appointment of a national poet whose muse is more attuned to the soul of the British nation?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that question, may I ask, in the event of his adopting the suggestion in the last line of the question, he will take into consideration the ability of my hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Bottomley) to soothe the soul with mournful numbers?

So far as I am aware, the Poet Laureate has not written any hymn commemorating the recent burial of the unknown warrior. Mr. Bridges has written and published many poems on the War which my hon. Friend does not appear to have read. As regards the last part of this question, I would refer to the answers given to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for West Ham on the 6th August, 1919.

Ought not the Laureateship be offered to Mr. Rudyard Kipling?

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the claims of the hon. Gentleman the Member for St. Helens (Mr. Sexton)?

Is this distinguished poet paid by-[HON. MEMBERS: "Order, order!"]

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the statement that the City Corporation propose to proceed shortly with the building of the new St. Paul's Bridge; whether he is aware that it is estimated that this bridge, at present prices, will cost about £4,000,000; that there already exist two bridges, namely, Blackfriars and the rebuilt Southwark Bridge, quite close to the site of the new bridge, and that it does not connect any main traffic arteries north or south of the river; and whether, in view of the present need for economy in public expenditure, the Government will use their influence with the City Corporation not to proceed with the proposed new bridge, but to use their Bridge House Estates' money on a part of the river where a new bridge is more urgently needed in the interest of London traffic?

I have been asked to reply to this question My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport is receiving a deputation from the Corporation of London in the course of next week, when the policy to be pursued by the Corporation will be discussed. The financial aspect of the proposal and other considerations referred to in the hon. Member's question will doubtless come under review on the same occasion, and pending that interview, the hon. Member will realise that I should not be justified in expressing a definite opinion upon the project.

asked the Prime Minister whether any financial assistance has at any time been either given or promised to Greece for the Greek Army in Asia Minor?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if Great Britain is now rendering any financial assistance to Greece; if so, what is the nature and extent of such financial assistance, and on what terms it is given?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether British credits to the value of £10,000,000 were advanced to the late Greek Government; whether there is still an unused balance of approximately £3,000,000; and whether it is proposed to take any action regarding this latter sum should ex-King Constantine return to the throne of Greece?

Under the financial agreement of February, 1918, His Majesty's Government opened a book credit in favour of the Greek Government to the approximate extent of £10,000,000. The Government of M. Venizelos had already drawn upon this credit to the extent approximately of £6,500,000. The new Greek Government have now been informed that in the event of the return of the ex-King Constantine to the throne of Greece no further financial assistance will be afforded, and all further Greek drafts upon the balance of this credit will thus have to be suspended.

Have we got any security for the £6,500,000 which they have already had? Will my hon. Friend say upon what terms this loan was granted?

Perhaps my hon. and gallant Friend will give me notice.

It was in my question.

In view of the very large sum advanced to Greece, has the hon. Gentleman been branded as a waster by the Press?

I do not know.

Is it not a fact that the financial assistance to Greece has been spent on the Greek Army?

Perhaps my hon. Friend will give me notice.

In the event of the return of ex-King Constantine, is there any machinery for getting back this £6,500,000?

That question should be addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.