asked the Minister of Pensions whether a clothing grant has been refused by the Worcester special grants committee in the case of C. Richards on the ground that the child was voluntarily looked after by its grandmother; whether the grant would have been made in the normal course of events if the child had been placed with its grandmother by the local pensions sub-committee; and for what purpose such Regulations are made?

Supplementary grants additional to pension of the kind referred to by my hon. Friend, may be made under the Regulation of the Special Grants Committee in the case only of children who have been found to be suffering from neglect or want of proper care. The Ministry assumes entire responsibility for such children, who have to be removed from their homes and boarded out at the cost of the Ministry, and the Ministry is obliged, in consequence, to pay some additional charges for the cost of lodging, clothing, and other expenses.

asked the Minister of Pensions, whether the special grants committee at Worcester has refused a recommendation from the Stourbridge local committee of a grant of 10s. per week to a child who was recommended special nutriment on a doctor's certificate; whether the reason given for refusing the grant was that no grants could be made unless the child was suffering from a specified disease; and whether no assistance can be given to a child who is in a weakly condition of health which will amount to disease unless specially nutritive food is given?

The particular case referred to by my hon. Friend has not been traced, but on the facts stated the application should have been submitted to the Special Grants Committee in London. That Committee is empowered by the Regulations under which it acts to make a grant up to 10s. a week for a limited period in respect of a child who is suffering from a prolonged illness.

asked the Minister of Pensions what is the number of pension cases examined by medical boards for reassessment during the last three months in this country, the number of pensions increased, the number of pensions decreased, and the number of pensions totally abolished after these medical examinations?

During the last three months (September, October, and November) there have been 283,000 pension cases examined for re-assessment. It is not possible to give the results of these individual examinations, but during the same period the number of cases whose assessment of disability was confirmed or altered as the result of medical examination was 268,900, of which

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he now has information as to whether Charles Lynch, of Milltown Malbay, was dragged from his bed on the night of 24th October and shot dead by servants of the Crown; whether Lynch was a man of 70 years of age; whether any form of inquiry has been held into this murder; whether it was held in public or in secret; what was the evidence and finding; and whether he has read the evidence?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to add anything to the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member to the question on this subject on the 8th instant.

Has an inquiry been held?

I understand that one has been or is being held into this matter.

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 have nothing at present to add to the reply already given to the question on this subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) visited the scene of this outrage, and is able to testify to the truth of the statements made in the question? Where did the right hon. Gentleman get his information?

I shall be very glad if the hon. Member (Mr. Lawson) will give evidence in any inquiry.

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to give some protection to this manager who was assaulted within twelve hours of the question being framed by my hon. Friend?

As to the latter part of that question I cannot speak with knowledge, but as to the first part I shall be very glad to give him protection, and I am in a position to guarantee it.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will compensate the co-operative creamery people or protect them for the great losses they have sustained in the loss of their creameries; and is he aware that these people are non-political and non-partisan?

I have nothing to add to the statements I have already made on this subject. I would refer the hon. Member in particular to my reply to a question by the hon, and gallant Member for East Newcastle on the 25th October.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the loss amounts to £46,000?

I understood it was much greater than that. I deplore the fact.

asked the Secretary for Ireland whether he can state the reason for the recent arrest of Mr. Edward Lysaght, a law-abiding citizen, who was nominated by the Government on the Irish Convention, and for the repeated raids by police upon his dwelling-house and business premises in County Clare, including on one occasion the destruction of valuable business records and the seizure of several bicycles and typewriters; and whether he will in future restrain the police from taking action in the nature of reprisals against this gentleman's property?

Mr. Lysaght's house was searched, and documents, from which the dates had been removed, relating to the purchase of large quantities of arms and ammunition were found there. Mr. Lysaght was, in consequence, arrested, but as it was believed that the transactions in question were not recent, he was subsequently released. I am making further inquiry into the alleged seizure of bicycles and a typewriter, regarding which I have received no previous complaint. There is no ground for the suggestion, which I must repudiate, that the action taken by the police was in the nature of reprisals, or was otherwise than proper.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that not only bicycles, but typewriters, were taken away, and that the Royal Irish Constabulary and the Auxiliary forces, when they arrived to search the house, brought bags and boxes to take away loot, and that this gentleman's clothing and under-clothing was taken away in every sort of bag and box that could be found in the house? Does he approve of that sort of thing?

I certainly do not approve of it, and if men are found guilty of it they will be sentenced to very long terms of imprisonment. But I have no knowledge of any of these acts.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, if any, or all, of the books and documents removed from the James Conolly College, 42, Great North Street, Dublin, were found to be of seditious or otherwise dangerous character; and whether these books and papers will be returned to the institution, particularly the 1,000 copies of one publication, entitled, " Labour, Nationality, and Religion," by James Conolly, to enable the work of the college to be carried on?

With the exception of a few letters all the books and documents seized from the James Conolly College including about 1,000 copies of the publication referred to have been returned.

Why was a copy of this publication taken? It is a well-known work?

When suspected premises are raided all documents are taken away so that they can be properly searched. They are always returned unless of a seditious or incriminating character.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if his attention has been called to the statement published in the "Daily Herald" of the 13th December that a large part of the centre of Cork city was destroyed by the forces of the Crown on the 11th instant; if evidence exists to justify this charge; and, if not, will action be taken against this newspaper for making accusations of such a nature?

Pending the result of the military court of enquiry which is now being held, I am not prepared to make any further statement regarding this matter.

If it is found when a court of enquiry has been held that there was no right for the publication of such a statement in a daily paper will any action be taken against the proprietors?

Is it not a fact that this statement appeared also in the " Times " and the " Manchester Guardian? "

And the "Evening Standard?"

May I press for a reply?

My hon. Friend asks a hypothetical question which it is impossible for me, with the best intentions in the world, to give a precise answer to.

May I ask whether, pending a judicial inquiry, it is proper for newspapers to make statements of this sort deciding a case one way or the other?

( by Private Notice ): I beg to ask the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can give full details of the circumstances under which Canon Magner of Dunmanway was killed, and whether General Strickland has yet completed his inquiries with regard to the origin of the incendiary fires in Cork?

I am informed by General Headquarters that it is not anticipated that the Cork military inquiry will be concluded until next week. I profoundly regret that Canon Magner, a much-respected Roman Catholic priest, and a farmer's son, Timothy Crowley, were shot dead yesterday near Dunman- way, in West Cork, by a police cadet, who is, of course, under arrest, and will be tried by court-martial.

Did these murders follow the transference of these cadets from Cork City, where all these things occurred, to West Cork, where this incident occurred?

There is no relevancy between one fact, namely, the transfer, and the second and most regrettable fact.

Are these men to be let loose in an isolated and peaceful community to murder innocent citizens as they are passing along carrying on their daily avocations. Are these men to be let loose and to be allowed to continue to carry on in this way. This is the first thing that we have got our grip upon.

Is not the first precedent of peace that these auxiliary troops should be withdrawn?

What about the murders of policemen?

Did not the right hon. Gentleman say in Debate that the Cork inquiry would be completed next day, and can he now say, in view of the later information, whether the House will have the report before it rises on Thursday next.

When I made the statement that the inquiry would be completed on the day following I did it on information received from General Headquarters in Dublin, but I understand that General Strickland is exhausting every possible avenue in order to find the perpetrators and, among others, is calling before him the Lord Mayor of Cork and the two Sinn Fein Members of this House whose names were given to me, and who will be compelled to appear before this tribunal. Though of course I cannot control and would not intervene in any judicial inquiry, military or otherwise, I hope it will be possible to give the House the result of this report before it rises next week.

May I ask whether something more than the result of this inquiry will be given. Will not my right hon. Friend communicate to the House and to the public a full report of that inquiry?

Following the traditional and, I think, proper rule governing these matters, the report must be read by the Government responsible before they can promise to give it to the House. I have no reason to doubt that there will be anything in the report we would not be glad to give to the House at the earliest possible moment, but I must maintain the rule covering these matters and consider the report.

While not disagreeing from what my right hon. Friend says as to the Government considering the report, will he not give a definite promise, in view of the extraordinary public interest taken in these lamentable occurrences, that that report shall be published? [HON. MEMBERS: "No, No!"]

I cannot give that promise for another reason. There have been many witnesses murdered.

On both sides.

Because of disclosures in giving evidence, and nearly every witness that gives evidence in Ireland asks for a preliminary pledge that the name will not be disclosed. Until I consider all the circumstances I cannot say more than I have already said.

In view of what has taken place in West Cork and owing to the opportunity that has since been afforded to the right hon. Gentleman of studying the topography of Cork City does he still adhere to the suggestion that he made in this House that the flames spread from Patrick Street, Cork, over an intervening area, which has been untouched, including the river, to the City Hall?

The remarks I made in reference to the spread of the conflagration were given to me on reports I had received and, more than that, on those reports coming to me the conflagration was understood to be much larger and more widely spread than happily it turned out to be. If I was in error I unreservedly withdraw.

I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for his manly acknowledgment that he did not know the topography of Cork at all.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will answer my question? In view of the murder of this priest and this innocent citizen peacefully passing along a country road by his cadets who were removed from Cork City after the ruin of that city, is he prepared to withdraw these cadets altogether?

I am not.

Then you are the murderer. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw!"]

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland how many of the police murdered or wounded by rebels in Ireland were ex-service men, and the names of the regiments they formerly belonged to?

The answer is necessarily a very long one, and I propose, with the permission of the hon. Member, to have it printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the answer:

The number of ex-service men in the Irish police forces who have been murdered during the past two years is 45, and the number wounded 26. The names of the regiments to which these men belonged are as follows:

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that the war bonus granted between 1st March, 1915, and 31st March, 1919, was made pensionable for members of the Civil Service and Post Office officials in Ireland who retired between those dates, and that this concession was recently extended to pensioned national school teachers who retired during that period; and whether this concession will be extended to pensioners of the Royal Irish Constabulary and the Dublin Metropolitan Police who retired during the same period, many of whom receive no benefit under the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1920, and are in great pecuniary want?

The cases of civil servants and of the police are not analogous. In the case of civil servants the increased cost of living has been recognised by the grant of war bonus, part, but not all, of which is pensionable without any general revision of scales of pay. The police, on the other hand, have had their permanent salaries revised on several occasions since 1914, their pensions are calculated on the revised scales of pay. In substance, therefore, the two classes have, in fact, received corresponding treatment.

Do I understand that the bonuses given to the police are pensionable?

If my hon. and learned Friend will read my reply, he will find that it meets the case absolutely.

In the case of police pensioners before the War, who re-joined during the War, will their pensions be based on the new scale?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is now in a position to state the results of his inquiry into the attacks by the armed forces of the Crown upon persons and property in Gortahork and Falcarragh, county Donegal, last month; and what steps he has taken to punish the perpetrators of these attacks?

I have made careful inquiry into this matter, and have been unable to discover any evidence to show that the forces of the Crown have been guilty of any attacks upon persons or property in the districts named.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that Mrs. Sheehy-Skeffington has repeatedly, and particularly on 9th December in London under the auspices of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, stated that Captain Bowen-Colthurst is employed by His Majesty's Government in an important position, and that Mrs. Skeffington is making inflammatory speeches in London and other places from time to time calculated to stir up hatred and to prevent reconciliation with Ireland; and whether, in view of the new movement towards a good understanding, he will consider the possibility of preventing Mrs. Skeffington from repeating her allegations?

:My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. I am aware that Mrs. Sheehy-Skeffington has recently made many statements which are totally devoid of foundation. No general credence is likely to be given to what she says, and, as at present advised, I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by instituting proceedings against her.

:May I ask the Prime Minister if he can state whether this gentleman, Captain Bowen-Colthurst, is employed by the Government in any capacity?

No, he is not.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received a resolution from the Peace with Ireland Council recording its emphatic conviction that reliance on martial law will fail as completely as lawless violence as a means to secure peace in Ireland; whether the resolution further urged him, as an earnest of his desire to secure the co-operation of the Irish people in a settlement which will put an end to the reign of crime, to give free passes to all elected representatives of the Irish people, to recall the auxiliary division and the Royal Irish Constabulary cadets, and thereby create an atmosphere in which it may be possible to reach a settlement; and whether he will take any action on the lines suggested?

I received a copy of the resolution referred to this morning, and as regards the rest of the question I would refer my Noble Friend to the statement which I made on Friday last.

In the interests of peace, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of first withdrawing the murderers?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Reports of other Commissions, besides those of the de Salis Commission to Montenegro, the Commission to investigate the massacres at Smyrna, and Lord Milner's mission to Egypt, are to be suppressed; and what has been the cost of these various Commissions?

My hon. Friend is not correct in speaking of the suppression of any Report. I cannot admit that whenever His Majesty's Government receive confidential Reports from British representatives abroad they must be held bound to lay them before Parliament. The adoption of any such rule would make the conduct of public business impossible. The cost of Lord Milner's mission to Egypt was £ 15,725. Count de Salis' mission to Montenegro involved a Foreign Office expenditure of £ 193 9 s . 10d., the War Office having met certain charges for transport, servants, etc. The Smyrna Commission was an inter-Allied body working under the authority of the High Commissioner at Constantinople. The British share of the expenditure appears to have been met by the War Office.

Was it not the Prime Minister who stated in this House during the War that there was to be no more secret diplomacy, but that everything was to be debated on the floor of this House?

No, certainly that was not my phrase. It was President Wilson's.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that his answer does not mean that the Milner Commission Report will not be published, after being promised by the Lord Privy Seal?

This refers to the de Salis Report, which arises out of confidential information.

Will a general Report regarding Egypt be laid on the Table?

We have not received the Report up to the present.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it extremely unsatisfactory that news should be conveyed piecemeal to this House through the newspapers? Are we not entitled to have it direct from himself?

I do not know to what my hon. Friend is referring.

Am I not correct in understanding that various reports of the Milner Commission have now been published?

How can the Report of the Commission be published if it has not yet been prepared or finally agreed to?

asked the Prime Minister what sum has already been placed at the disposal of local authorities for the purpose of relief work by the construction of arterial roads or the improvement or remodelling of existing thoroughfares; and what sum there is still in hand for the purpose?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The total amount of the proposed provision for grants and loans to local authorities, to enable them to expedite the class of road works referred to in my hon. Friend's question, with a view to the relief of unemployment, is £10,400,000. Approximately half of this sum will be distributed by way of grants, and the remainder will be advanced, if necessary, by way of short-term loans. About half the fund is earmarked for arterial road schemes in Greater London. Schemes of a total estimated cost of £2,250,000 have been provisionally agreed with highway authorities outside the metropolitan area, and further schemes are under consideration.

May I ask if any of this money has yet been placed at the disposal of the authorities?

Oh, yes; quite a consider-able sum.

How many men are now employed? Have any men been employed under these schemes as yet?

Yes. I cannot give the figure at the moment, but I hope to be able to do so later, when the Estimate comes up for discussion.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some of the metropolitan boroughs are very dissatisfied at the delay which has occurred in notifying them as to whether their schemes will be approved, and that, as a result, they are not able to give men employment?

No, Sir; I am not aware of that. I am aware that in the case of the borough which my hon. Friend represents there has been a few days' delay only with reference to the finance of the scheme; but, speaking generally, I think I may say that that is the only case in which I have heard of any delay in the sanctioning of schemes.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that four weeks ago the borough which I have the honour to represent was promised a definite answer, and that they have not had it yet? That was not a few days, but four weeks ago.

I think that that has nothing to do with arterial roads.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether, in making these grants, any fixed scale of wages is determined upon?

The schemes are undertaken by the local authorities, and the responsibility for the rates of wages is with the authority; but I do not know of any case in which less than the standard rate is paid.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the increasing unemployment and the failure to apply schemes for providing work, any provision is being made for an extension of unemployment donation to civilians on the same terms as those already provided for ex-service men?

I have been asked to reply. I cannot accept the statement of my hon. Friend that there has been failure to apply schemes for providing work to meet the prevailing unemployment. Speaking generally the schemes decided upon as a result of the Cabinet Committee's First Report, regarding which the Prime Minister made a statement on the 19th October, are being developed as rapidly as possible and I desire to thank the local authorities generally for their timely co-operation. In this connection I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given yesterday to the hon. Member for Chesterfield, of which I am sending a copy. The Cabinet Committee is now considering what further practicable remedies can be applied, and while I am unable at present to state the character of the further measures which will be adopted, I cannot hold out any hope of the resumption of the payments of out-of-work donation to civilian workers, which ceased on the 24th November, 1919.

Why should there be any difference between the donation benefit to civilians and to ex-service men in view of the fact that the cost of living is the same to both and to both families?

Does the right hon. Gentleman think unemployed men and their wives and families suffer less because they happen not to be ex-service men than if they happen to be ex-service men?

The out-of-work donation to ex-service men is a means—a small means if you like—of re-establishing them in civil life after having served with the colours. The House of Commons, on a free vote on 24th November, 1919, set aside the out-of-work donation for civilians. Since that time there has been an amended Insurance Act, under which, instead of 4,000,000 people, 12,000,000 are covered, and the benefit has been increased to 15 s . for men and 12 s . for women.

Have these schemes for providing work been set up in Ireland?

No, I do not think so.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know that there are an enormous number of people out of work in the industrial parts of Ireland?

Yes. My right hon. and learned Friend has called my attention to the case of the linen industry.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think for a moment that the unemployment insurance benefits are adequate to meet the situation; is it not a fact that at present we are living under abnormal circumstances; that there is depression of trade which is likely to continue for some considerable period, and in order to meet that is it not advisable that this should be extended to the civilian population?

I have said that I cannot hold out any hope of a resumption of the out-of-work donation to civilians. As regards the amount of benefit under the Unemployment Insurance Act, in a great many cases the trade unions themselves make an addition to that. I do not say it is fully adequate to meet the cost of living 176 per cent. above the pre-War standard, but it is more than the old Act provided.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that priority of employment will always be given in Government offices to ex-service men?

It is the Government policy to give preference to ex-service men.

Is it not a fact that since the cessation of hostilities the condition of industry has been such that it has never been possible to absorb the whole of the ex-service men, and is not that the real reason why there are so many out of work?

In August this year and up to that time we had still 142,000 ex-service men, many of them with very fine War records indeed, out of work.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to the fact that in America the trade unionists volunteered to share half time with those who are unemployed? May we hope that some such scheme will be provided here, so that men who fought for their country may have a chance of sharing the benefits of trade with trade unionists who did not fight for their country?

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of doing what was done during the War when the Prime Minister called the employers and trade union representatives together to consider the advisability of a reduc- tion? If there is not sufficient work to go round, will they consider the possibility of working short time in order that every man may have a share of the work?

Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that all the miners have been re-employed who came back from the War?

Undoubtedly the mining industry has done very well in absorbing the ex-service men. As regards short time, it is very general at present, and, largely as the result of friendly discussion between employers on the one hand and employed persons on the other, we have recently come to the decision that Government establishments, Royal dockyards and ordnance factories must go on short time, and thereby mitigate what is generally the hardship of unemployment.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the serious erosion that is taking place in the district of Blundellsands and Great Crosby, to the north of Liverpool, and to the destruction of valuable houses by reason of the same; whether he is aware that certain Government Departments have been approached but are unable to give any assistance; and whether he will depute a competent person to inquire into the matter?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. I have brought the matter to the notice of the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, who will inquire into the matter.

asked the Prime Minister whether one of the conditions to the resumption of trade with Soviet Russia was the cessation of propaganda; if so, whether his attention has been drawn to the seizure of two suit cases full of literature direct from Moscow and Petrograd at South Shields; can he give any information to the House on this point; and what effect, if any, it will have on the progress of any negotiations?

My information on the subject referred to in this question is that three men have been arrested in connection with the importation to this country from Norway of incendiary literature, and the Director of Public Prosecutions is now considering what action he will take in regard to these men. As already stated, it will be one of the conditions of any trade agreement with the Soviet Government that propaganda by that Government should not be carried on, and the continuance of an agreement would depend on that condition being fulfilled.

May I ask whether it is not a fact that this propaganda really did come absolutely red hot from Moscow and Petrograd?

That I cannot tell. I can only deal with the facts as they come to me— from Norway, and I daresay the country of origin is beyond that

Can the Prime Minister state what kind of literature this was?

I do not like to say too much about it, because it is in the hands of the Director of Public Prosecutions, and if there is a prosecution it would be unfair to prejudge the matter.

Are these men in custody?

I believe so.

Does not the right hon Gentleman think that the principal danger of this type of propaganda is in the endeavour to suppress it?

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement as to the present position of the negotiations with the Soviet Government for the conclusion of a trading agreement between Great Britain and Russia; and if the terms and conditions of such agreement, and the guarantees offered by Russia for compliance therewith, will be submitted to this House?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now make a statement as to the conclusion of a trade agreement with Russia?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now make any statement regarding the opening of trade relations with Russia.

I cannot add anything to the replies which I gave to questions on this subject on Monday last.

Is there any difference of opinion between the various Members of the Government in regard to this Commission?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give any estimate of the time required for the investigation of the Committee of Imperial Defence into the question of new ship construction for the Royal Navy; whether it is the intention of the Committee to take evidence from officers of the Royal Navy of all ranks; whether the evidence will be published as a Parliamentary Paper; whether the Committee of Imperial Defence who will finally decide the question includes a naval officer; whether the Board of Admiralty will be represented on the Committee; whether the Committee of Imperial Defence will be assisted in their consideration of the problem and of the evidence given before them by any naval officer or representative of the Admiralty; and can he state how the Committee of Imperial Defence is now constituted?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. With regard to the second part, it is the intention of the Committee to consult all naval and other experts whose advice may be of value. In regard to the third part, the answer is in the negative, as questions of high policy are involved. In regard to the fourth, fifth, and sixth parts, naval experts from the Admiralty are always in attendance, and take an active part, at meetings of the Committee of Imperial Defence whenever questions in which the Navy is involved are being discussed. As regards the last part of the question, the constitution of the Committee of Imperial Defence has undergone no change since its inception in 1904.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will not reconsider the question of the publication of the evidence given before the Committee, and whether it would not be of great use to Members of this House, and also to the country at large, and give them greater opportunities of understanding all the various aspects of the problem involved, if they could have an opportunity of seeing the evidence?

I think it must be obvious to my Noble Friend-that it would be very undesirable that discussions of this highly confidential character should be made public. If it were known that everything said there would be published, a good many things which it is very important that we should examine would be ruled out. It is vital that we should examine things which are very difficult and delicate, and of a confidential character, and if everything said or written on the subject were to be published it would make it impossible to consider them properly.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider the question of giving a summary of the evidence?

Will expert opinion be obtained from private shipbuilders?

That question was put recently by my right hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Sir H. Norman). I think it is absolutely essential, when we come to the question of construction, that not merely naval but also civilian evidence should be taken.

As the Prime Minister states that there has been no change in the constitution of the Defence Committee since 1904, may I ask whether Lord Esher was not a member of it in 1904, and may we take it that the principle is at an end by which civilians outside the Government are members of this Committee?

There is a right to summon anyone there whose information would be valuable in reference to a particular question. We are now beginning the examination of this problem, and we should certainly summon anyone there from whom it would be important for us to get counsel. I do not mean that the personnel of the Com- mittee is the same, but the principle is the same, and the construction of the Committee is the same.

In summoning these witnesses, would it be possible to summon those who have some special knowledge of the Dominion point of view on this question of naval defence?

That, of course, is a very important element, because in any naval construction in future I trust the Dominions will take a fair part.

{ by Private Notice ) asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is yet in a position to make any statement as to the emoluments of mates and lieutenants promoted from mate, in view of the serious financial embarrassment in which these officers find themselves?

Yes, Sir; a special scale of pay has been sanctioned for officers now in the Service who were promoted to the rank of mate prior to the 1st January, 1920, as follows:

{ by private notice ) asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Jutland papers will be obtainable in the Vote Office before the House rises?

Yes, Sir. To-morrow.

asked the Prime Minister whether agreement has been reached with the German Government that the Einwohnerwehr in Bavaria shall be allowed to remain armed to the extent of the estimated number of armed Communists in Bavaria; by whom this estimate is to be prepared; and what is the estimated number at present?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The other parts do not therefore arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the discovery of Mr. Skinner and four children in the dairy barn at Outwood, near Redhill, suffering from influenza, who were removed to Redhill Infirmary and are now in a critical condition; is he aware that the husband, Robert George Skinner, is a discharged soldier with a silver badge; that he was Ordered to vacate his cottage on discharge by his employer; that he was unable to obtain alternative accommodation for his wife and six children; and that his family and effects were forcibly removed from the cottage and placed in the barn, which had a galvanised roof with many holes plugged with clay; and whether, seeing that this treatment is directly responsible for the condition of the family of this ex-service man, can the Government take action to render such a state of affairs impossible?

I have been asked to reply to this question. My attention has not previously been drawn to this distressing case, and I am causing immediate inquiries to be made into it. As my Noble Friend is no doubt aware, the eviction of a tenant of a house to which the Rent Restriction Act applies is a matter for the Court, and that I have no authority to intervene in such matters.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now give the decision of the Government with regard to dilution in the building trade and the employment of ex-service men?

I have been asked to reply. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of the reply which I gave on this subject yesterday to my hon. Friend the Member for South Kensington.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received the Report of Lord Cave's Commission on their visit to South Africa; what is the cause of the delay in completing the Report; and whether the whole question of the future administration of Rhodesia is hung up "in the meantime?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The delay is due to the fact that the advisers of the Crown have found it necessary to make further inquiries in South Africa. I understand that the Commission will meet again at an early date. I hope it will shortly be possible to make a statement on the question of the future government of Southern Rhodesia.

Will any statement be made with regard to the Government of Rhodesia until Parliament has had an opportunity of considering this very important point?

Certainly, we will take no final decision without communicating to the House of Commons the Colonial view.

Are we to understand that negotiations are taking place between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the Union of South Africa with regard to the future status of Rhodesia in the British Empire?

Of course, a good deal depends on the result of the Commission, and there is ho doubt at all that the Colonial Secretary is in touch with the Government of South Africa on this subject.

asked the Prime Minister whether, by the peace signed on the 2nd December between the Kemalist and Armenian Governments, parts of Russian Armenia and of Persia are surrendered to Turkey; whether these conditions indicate a difference between the Kemalist and Soviet Governments; and whether he proposes to take any steps to prevent Turkey from controlling these areas where the Turkish race is in an insignificant minority?

The information in possession of His Majesty's Government as to the terms of the recent peace between Armenia and the Turkish Nationalists is not explicit enough to enable me to answer the question.

In view of recent developments in Turkey and in Greece, does not the right hon. Gentleman consider it advisable to try and reach an agreement with both Turkish Governments on the basis of freeing Turkish majorities in the Smyrna territory from Greek control, in consideration of evacuation by Kemalists of those areas in Kurdestan and Armenia where the Turks are only an insignificant minority; and, further, would not it be to the advantage of Allied interests if by such means a united Turkish Government could be re-established under Allied instead of Soviet influence?

My hon. Friend is raising a very big question, which involves several questions of controversy both as to fact, principal and policy.

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; 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 obligation as to financial reparations?

Yes, Sir. His Majesty's Ambassador at Berlin confirms the information. As regards the last two parts of the question, I cannot add anything to the answer given to my hon. and gallant Friend on this subject on the 9th December.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the provisions of the Treaty of 1st July, 1890, ceding Heligoland to Germany, whereby the ancient laws and customs of the islanders were preserved to them and certain rights accorded to British fishermen, were faithfully carried out by Germany; and, if not, whether Great Britain can hold Heligoland as part security for the due performance by Germany of her obligations under the Versailles Treaty or, at any rate, until the native laws and customs of the islanders and the rights promised to British fishermen are restored to them as promised by Germany when she obtained possession of the island?

The Anglo-German Agreement of 1st July, 1890, is one of those bilateral treaties which His Majesty's Government, in pursuance of Article 289 of the Treaty of Versailles, decided not to renew. The Agreement has therefore lapsed. His Majesty's Government have no reason to suppose that the German Government intend to withdraw the privileges granted under Article XII., Sections 4 and 7, of this Agreement. The action, suggested by the hon. Member, would not be possible.

Do I understand that the position is now as it was before and that the Treaty of 1890 has come to an end?

That is so.

As the islanders never wished to come under Germany and we secured for them certain rights which Germany has violated, and secured certain rights for our fishermen which have also been violated, cannot the island be either handed over to those people or kept by us as security for our indemnity?

As I have said, there is no reason to suppose that the German Government will not continue to observe the terms of the Treaty. If they fail to do so that will be a matter for consideration.

In view of the fact that the Treaty which was entered into when the island was ceded to Germany has come to an end, is not the position as if no such Treaty were established and therefore the position of this country is as it was prior to the Treaty?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a semi-official French Note just issued states that France intends to insist on the full claim made by her on Germany through the Reparations Commission for 500,000 milch cows and 10,000 oxen; and will the total claim for 810,000 cows be insisted upon by the Reparations Commission unless some of the Allied Governments protest?

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the full statement on this subject which was printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT on December 14th, in reply to the questions on the same subject asked by the hon. Member for Dartford.

asked the Prime Minister whether any agreement has now been reached between the French and British Governments regarding the northern and eastern boundaries of Palestine; what frontier, if any, has been agreed upon; whether any reservations have been made regarding the use of water power; whether the mandate for Palestine has now been decided upon and sent to the secretary-general of the League of Nations; and whether the terms of this Mandate will now be made public and laid as a Parliamentary Paper?

An agreement has been reached in principle with the French Government regarding the frontiers of Palestine and the use of water power, but negotiations are still proceeding on points of detail. They should be completed and the agreement signed at an early date. Subject to the concurrence of the French Government, the agreement will then be published and laid as a Parliamentary Paper. The answer to the fourth part of the question is in the affirmative. No decision can be taken regarding the publication of the Mandate until it is known what action the Council of the League intend to take in the matter.

Are we to understand that this mandate has been shown to any other Government, or has it been prepared by the British Government and sent direct by them to the League of Nations?

I think there was consultation, at least, with the French Government.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Northern frontier will include the waters of the Litany river?

No; they never have been included in Palestine. The agreement entered into between M. Clemenceau and myself was that Palestine was to be the old historic Palestine, that is, from Dan to Beersheba. That does not include the Litany river.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the reported statement of the Minister of Agriculture at Leicester, that the abnormal slaughter of calves in this country might make the importation of store cattle irresistible, with what the Minister called all the risks that might mean to the health and safety of our herds; whether, seeing that conflicting ministerial statements are disturbing the good relations between this country and Canada and between the federal and provincial authorities in Canada itself, he will say definitely what the Government policy is; and whether, in any circumstances, it is proposed to ask Parliament to legislate for the removal of the embargo?

I have nothing to add to the answer given on Tuesday last to a similar question by my hon. Friend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the reply on Tuesday had no reference to the statement of the Minister of Agriculture, and can he now say whether the statement by the Minister of Agriculture repeats the policy of the Government?

I think it does. I Lave looked carefully at the answer given last Tuesday to one of the very searching questions which my hon. Friend is in the habit of addressing to Ministers, and I think the answer was very satisfactory, as Ministers' answers usually are.

Is it a fact that the Government has no intention whatever of legislating for the removal of this embargo?

That is a very big question of policy upon which there are differences of opinion.

asked the Prime Minister if, in view of the number of men reported to be out of work in Lincoln and the fact that agricultural implement makers are very lightly employed owing to the inability of their normal markets in Central Europe to pay at the present rates of exchange, further State liability in assisting credits is preferable to complete loss by unemployment pay; and when he hopes to be able to make a definite statement regarding credit insurance now under consideration?

Exports of agricultural machinery from this country to the countries scheduled to the Overseas Trade (Credit and Insurance) Act, 1920, can already be dealt with under the export credit scheme. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade is in communication with the interests concerned with regard to credit insurance.

Can the Prime Minister say whether in view of the increasing difficulty of the adverse exchanges he will give the House an assurance that he will make every attempt now by consultation with bankers and insurance companies to evolve some auxiliary scheme of the existing Board of Trade credit scheme?

Certainly I will give that assurance. As a matter of fact the bankers and the Government are considering this question. They interchanged views on the subject some weeks ago at a general meeting between some of my right hon. Friends and myself and bankers and some of the industrial chiefs in this country. Since then there has been examination of details with a View to seeing whether it is possible for the bankers to elaborate a scheme of this kind. It seems to me at this time to be the most helpful way of restarting trade between Central Europe and ourselves.

Is it not a fact that a great deal of trade could be done and a great number of risks would be taken, thereby greatly increasing employment in this country, but those risks are not taken because the firms refuse to take them and then hand over their profits, if any, to the Government under the Excess Profits Duty.

The problem is not so simple as the hon. Member imagines these problems are. It is a problem of exchange, and if he were to abolish Excess Profits Duty to-morrow it would not solve this problem. It is a very big question of exchange. There must be some means of restarting the circulation of business with these countries.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether the inclusion of wool tops, noils, and waste has now been made within the provision of the exports credit scheme?

Arrangements have now been made to include wool tops, noils and waste—the products and by-products of combing—within the export credits scheme.

asked the Prime Minister if any communication has been received by the Government from Lever Brothers, Limited, with respect to the St. Omar dump sale since the issue of the last Report from the Select Committee on National Expenditure?

Yes, Sir. A communication has been received from Lord Leverhulme, the head of Messrs. Lever Brothers, which I will read to the House:

"MY DEAR PRIME MINISTER,

I am astonished to hear references in Parliament are still being made to St. Omer Dump, and have to-day telegraphed yourself as copy enclosed. The incident occurred whilst I was abroad, but after my return to England I made full enquiry into the details of the matter, and arrived at the considered judgment that Lever Brothers had received every opportunity to acquire the Dump, had we agreed to pay the price required. We have no complaint against the Ministry, and I sincerely regret the whole incident. As far as I know, it is merely one of those incidents where the buyer hopes to buy on more favourable terms later by non-acceptance, and, as so often happens, we missed the opportunity to purchase entirely.

Yours sincerely,

(Signed), LEVERHULME."

Is it not a fact that that is in direct contradiction to the findings of the inquiry; that the inquiry found that grave errors of judgment had been made in this matter, and is it not a fact that this scandal is one of the minor of the many scandals which still require to be inquired into?