asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government has any information on the alleged atrocities committed by Japanese troops on the Korean border; whether 15,000 troops sent to Manchuria to maintain order are persecuting Christian communities, destroying their villages and burning their churches; whether His Majesty's Government acquiesces in the assumption by Japan of sovereign rights in Manchuria; and whether His Majesty's Government will state their policy with regard to Japanese territorial claims in Manchuria and Mongolia?

As regards parts 1 and 2 of the question, and the action already taken by His Majesty's Government, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply returned to the hon. Member for Workington on 14th December. His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokyo has already made a representation to the Japanese Government. The number of troops employed is believed to be far less than the hon. Members estimate of 15,000. There has been no question of the assumption by Japan of sovereign rights in Manchuria. British policy in China is based upon the maintenance of the territorial integrity of that country.

Have any representations been made by His Majesty's Government in reference to the alleged persecution of missionaries or the alleged excesses of the Japanese troops?

Perhaps my hon. Friend would give me notice of the question.

Is not our interference in these matters likely to lead us into a number of other expensive little wars?

I do not think so. These matters are regulated under the Anglo-Japanese Agreement.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the attention of His Majesty's Government has been drawn to the reports in the Press as to the action of the Japanese Military Commission in Manchuria in addressing a warning to the Canadian missionaries working in Manchuria that they must change their tactics or abandon their work; whether there is any ground for the assumption that the missionaries aid the Korean malcontents; whether His Majesty's Government have noted the threat that, if British Christians assist the Koreans, Japanese Buddhists are entitled to -assist anti-British Indians; and whether His Majesty's Government propose to take any steps to protect British subjects labouring for the moral and educational advantage and progress of Far Eastern people?

The attention of His Majesty's Government has been called to these reports, and representations have been made to the Japanese Government, with the result that an official disavowal of Colonel Mizumachi's improper utterances was published in Tokyo on 13th December. His Majesty's Government have no reason whatever to suppose that British missionaries are aiding Korean malcontents.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will call for a report on the application in France of the principle of monthly bonuses to wage earners in proportion to the size of their families?

I have been asked to reply to this question. Some information on the subject referred to by my hon. Friend is contained in the current issue of the Ministry of Labour publication, "Labour Overseas," a copy of which I am sending to my hon. Friend. I understand that the French Ministry of Labour are about to conduct an investigation into the subject. When the English translation of their Report is available I will have a copy sent to my hon. Friend.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will state what steps are being taken to clear up the political situation in Yemen and Asir; when it is proposed to send further communications to the Imam Yahya and the Idrissi; what steps are being taken to come to a decision as to the future status of the Yemen; and whether any representations in regard to this have been received either from the Italian Government or from King Hussein?

As regards that part of the question which relates to the Imam Yahya, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply to his question on the same subject addressed to the Prime Minister on 15th November. There has been no change in the situation since that date. The Idrissi, whose country possesses the same status as that of Yemen, is in cordial relationship with His Majesty's Government. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

When are the Foreign Office going to advance from the purely negative position with regard to the Imam which they adopted on 15th November? Will anything be done?

I do not know why my hon. Friend should describe it as a purely negative attitude.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Persian Mejliss has yet met; if so, whether it has declined to ratify the Anglo-Persian Agreement; whether the new Persian Government takes the same view of the Agreement as the late Government which negotiated it; and why the later fell?

The Persian Mejliss has not yet met and has therefore had no opportunity of expressing its opinion on the Anglo-Persian Agreement. That Agreement was not negotiated by the late Persian Government but by its predecessor which fell, as did its successor, owing to internal political vicissitudes to which even more stable countries are sometimes exposed. The view taken of the Agreement by the Persian Government is that it is in suspense until the consent of the Persian Parliament has been obtained.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can make a statement as to the pre sent Government of Armenia and as to the attitude of the League of Nations to recent developments?

According to the most recent information available Armenia is now under a Soviet form of government, but this change does not appear to have affected the attitude of the League of Nations or their desire to bring about mediation between Armenia and the Turkish Nationalists.

Is our representative of the League of Nations likely to make a statement in this House to-morrow?

I have heard rumours to that effect. Perhaps the hon. Member will put a question to the Leader of the House.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many dumps of War stores still to be sold now remain in this country; and what are the reasons for their not having been disposed of?

I have been asked to answer this question. The stores in this country handed over to the Disposal Board for sale, are not in dumps, but in storehouses and depots belonging to the Ministry of Munitions and other Government Departments. The stores are being sold as quickly as the markets are capable of absorbing them.

Why, in the public interest, are not all these stores, those in dumps and those referred to in the answer to the question, advertised and put up to public auction, so that everyone may be allowed to bid for them in public competition instead of continuing the present hole-and-corner methods of disposing of them?

I do not expect that the hon. Gentleman has been reading the periodical called "Surplus "in which these things are fully advertised. If he had, he would not have said that these stores are disposed of in a hole-and-corner method.

Will the hon. Gentleman call for a return of the food dumps rotting in France at present? The Secretary for War stated that there was quite a number of perishable dumps exposed to the weather, and that he had no facility for doing what my hon. Friend says.

As far as I know, there are no food dumps which are the property of the Government.

Is it not a fact that the great delay in disposing of the material is on account of the slowness of the Disposals Board?

No. It is not the Disposals Board that are responsible.

Is not the reason that those stores are not disposed of the very simple one that people will not bid for them?

That is largely the case at the present moment.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of his statement on 16th November that no trials have been held on soldiers for being concerned in alleged reprisals, the six non-commissioned officers stated by him on 9th November to have been reduced in rank for using Crossley tenders without permission, but not proved to have been implicated in the damage done to the town of Mallow, were charged with having done any such damage, and was the charge simply one of indiscipline; on what charge, and for what offence, were certain officers censured, and the leave of certain men stopped, in connection with the sack of Fermoy on 28th June, 1920, as stated by him on the 29th July, and whether the House is to understand that at no time in the last 18 months has any soldier been charged with the destruction of property or killing or wounding a civilian?

The non-commissioned officers referred to in the first part of the question were not charged with having done damage to the town of Mallow as there was no evidence implicating them. They were charged and punished for using a Government motor lorry without permission. Certain officers were censured after the disturbance at Fermoy on 28th June, 1920, as it was considered that they had shown lack of judgment in not taking special precautions to prevent the men from breaking out of barracks, and leave was stopped for three months. As regards the last part of the question, three soldiers are being charged with rioting during which a civilian Was wounded.

asked the Secretary of-State for War whether under the martial law now in force in Ireland members of His Majesty's Naval, Military, Air, or Police Forces will be forbidden from burning down property indiscriminately; and what the punishment for such an offence will be?

The answer to the first part of the question is contained in Martial Law Circular No. 1 issued by the Commander-in-Chief the Forces in Ireland on the 16th instant, by which all Forces of the Crown are warned against committing any offence against the person of property of an inhabitant or resident in the country. As regards the second part, Martial Law does not apply to the Military and Air Forces: any offences committed by members of these Forces on active service being punishable under the Army and Air Force Acts respectively. As regards the Navy and Police, I would refer the hon. Member to the Admiralty and Irish Office. Naval and Air Force personnel in Ireland are under the command of the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief in Ireland, but for the purpose of discipline, they are subject to their own Acts.

Can we have an assurance that they will not get promotion for any such destructive work in Ireland?

Can the right hon. hon. Gentleman state whether the police in the martial law areas are under the supreme command of the General Commanding?

I cannot add anything to what I have said. If the hon. and gallant Member wants further information perhaps he will put down a question?

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether any of the Naval forces have lost their lives during the operations in Ireland?

That question should be addressed to the Admiralty.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, since the proclamation against reprisals by General Macready in the shape of killing of civilians and arson, there have been any cases of the one or the other; how many civilians have been killed by the forces of the Crown since last Saturday, and what were the names and the circumstances; also what were the circumstances under which a farmer named O'Connor was killed?

In answer to the last part of the question, I have asked for a Report concerning the man O'Connor, but I have not yet received it. The total number of civilians reported killed since Saturday (inclusive) is 20. The number shot dead by forces of the Crown is six, in addition to 11 civilian casualties in Nine Mile House ambush, and three cases of murder, two of which were committed by unknown persons. Four were shot dead while attempting to escape, and two were shot after being challenged and refusing to halt. One ex-soldier was found murdered. Thomas Gleeson, an employé of the Tipperary County Council, was murdered by a fellow employé, Joseph Reid. Joseph Walsh, the landlord of a police barracks, was murdered by civilians, who escaped in a motor car; and, as I said, 11 men were shot dead in an ambush during their attack upon the forces of the Crown.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information as to the murder of William Delany and James Looby, and is he aware that since that murder Looby's brother was dragged out of his house and murdered by the forces of the Crown?

I am not aware of that. I believe the other two were men who have been shot after refusing to halt.

Oh, no. They are entirely different cases. I put the question before about Looby and Delaney, and the right hon. Gentleman said that he would have inquiries made. I should have thought that he would have had the results of those inquiries by to-day. I want to know whether he has made those inquiries, what reply he has received, and how is it he has not received the information about the subsequent murder of Looby's brother?

It is impossible for me to give an answer to all these various question offhand. I do my best to get information. If the hon. Member disputes what I have said, and if he has more accurate information, I shall be glad if he will communicate it to me.

There will be no difficulty about that.

When does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take effective steps to stop this constant murdering of civilians, and is it not a fact that these shootings of people because they refuse to hold up their hands is simply an excuse for murdering these men?

Is it not a fact that the military authorities in Ireland have decided upon a policy of carrying local leaders of the Sinn Fein party in lorries in order to prevent attacks on the lorry; and is he aware that when the same practice was attempted to be introduced by the British forces in the South African War the present Prime Minister denounced it as barbarous and un-Christian?

Yes, that is the policy carried out in certain parts of Ireland.

Can the right hon. Gentleman not conceive, with all the forces of the British Empire at his back, some more humane plan of fighting this battle than carrying out a barbarous policy of this sort?

Is it not a fact that some of these civilians were murdered by Sinn Fein rebels?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that during the War the Admiralty were advised to carry German officers in hospital ships, and the Government refused to do so because it was contrary to the usages of war? Under these circumstances, why are we sinking to these methods now?

We are not sinking to any unworthy methods.

You cannot sink much lower than you have sunk.

Is it not a fact that there is great confusion as to the way the word "civilian" is used? Is it not a fact that in the majority of cases the so-called civilians were men caught in the act of endeavouring to murder forces of the Crown?

I am very glad that my hon. and gallant Friend has given me an opportunity of answering that question. With the exception of three who were murdered by other civilians, seventeen of the men killed during the week end were Sinn Feiners, attacking or endeavouring to avoid arrest by the forces of the Crown.

Does that apply to the cases of Looby and Delaney?

I have already answered that question.

It does not apply to them.

I desire to ask whether the investigation into the circumstances concerning the assassination of the Very Rev. Canon Magner of Dunmanway, in the County of Cork, will be a public one?

I understand it will be a public inquiry, but I must guard myself by saying that this is a question entirely within the discretion of the Court.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that the Press will be admitted to the inquiry?

If it is a public inquiry the Press must be admitted.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say, apart from the trial of the person charged with this crime, what has been done with regard to the other men who were associated with him in the attack on this clergyman?

That is a matter concerning the internal administration and the discipline of the auxiliary forces, and it is being closely looked into.

Is it not a fact that this crime took place near the site of a foul and cruel ambush in which 15 auxiliary police were killed?

Can the Chief Secretary make any statement to the House with reference to the circumstances under which a farmer named O'Connor was placed in a military lorry, subsequently thrown out on to the road and shot at, and afterwards murdered by the military forces of the Crown in the presence of a clergyman? Can he also make any statement in regard to the murder of Michael Walton and Patrick Connor, who were murdered at Newport?

Those are questions of which no notice has been given.

Will the right hon. Gentleman hang up in the tea-room the number of murders of civilians every day by the forces of th Crown in Ireland?

rose —

I think that all the questions of which the hon. Member gave me notice have been asked.

No, Sir, there is one other which I submitted yesterday. It is whether the Chief Secretry can state if the Proclamation issued by General Macready as to the death penalty applies to the Royal Irish Constabulary and to the Black and Tans, and whether it applies to the whole country, and, if not, whether he intends to make the Order general?

I think that question was asked in the general course of questions to-day, and it has been answered.

No, Sir, the question was not asked.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the officers who were murdered in Dublin four weeks ago had no revolvers with which to defend themselves; whether an Order had been issued that officers should have no firearms in their billets or when travelling by train; and, if so, will he have the Order rescinded and opportunity given to such officers to defend themselves if attacked?

No orders have been issued that officers should not have firearms in their billets or when travelling by train. It is not known whether all the officers who were murdered in Dublin five weeks ago had revolvers, but some of them certainly had. One officer who escaped did not have his revolver with him because he was in his bathroom.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry as to whether certain Commanding Officers have not issued orders that officers are not allowed to have in their possession revolvers or firearms?

I will make inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the War Office intend to charge to the relatives the costs of funeral expenses involved in bringing home to Great Britain the bodies of British soldiers killed in execution of their duty in Ireland; and whether, in such cases where money has been paid for these purposes, it will be refunded in order that the relatives of soldiers may be put on the same footing as relatives of police in similar circumstances?

Reasonable expenses of the funerals of soldiers killed in Ireland and brought to this country for burial will be refunded to the relatives. The cost of conveying the bodies to homes in this country will also be defrayed by the War Office. In cases where the expenses are paid by relatives, refunds will be made on the production of evidence of payment.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now prepared to set up a special committee of inquiry into recent events at Cork?

A special military court of inquiry has already been set up, and is at present engaged in taking evidence in regard to these events.

That is not an answer to my question. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we are aware of that committee? What I asked is whether the Prime Minister is prepared to set up a special committee of inquiry, not this inquiry, and, if he is not, can he give an assurance that before we prorogue on Thursday we shall have an interim report of the Strickland inquiry?

The hon. Member seems to be under the delusion—it may be true of some Governments, but it certainly is not true of this Governmeint—that there is a division in the views of the Government on this matter, that the Chief Secretary says one thing and the Prime Minister another. That is a mistake.

Will my right hon. Friend look at my question, and see that I do not ask about any inquiry that is already in operation? What I ask is whether the Prime Minister is prepared to set up a special committee of inquiry that is not a military inquiry; and, if not, can he say that we shall have the interim report of General Strickland's inquiry before we prorogue on Thursday?

I think my answer dealt with that. The question has already been answered by the Chief Secretary, who has declined to set up a special committee. The Chief Secretary has promised carefully to consider whether he can safely allow the Strickland Report, when we receive it, to be published. We cannot go beyond that.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Employers' Association of Cork, which can in no way be described as a Sinn Fein, but rather as a Unionist, body, has demanded that a public and impartial inquiry shall be made into all the facts surrounding these circumstances?

Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that the charge at issue in this case is that the forces of the Crown committed these burnings in Cork, and does he think it impartial to set up a military inquiry into a charge made against the military and police themselves?

Yes; I think that under the present conditions in Ireland we are much more likely to get an impartial inquiry under a military court than any other.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not take into consideration the views of the association to which the owners of this property mostly belong, and that is the Employers' Association of Cork?

It is quite right that consideration should be given to the views of anybody concerned, but the Government have the responsibility, and they have come to their decision.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that the railway companies are refusing to accept parcels for delivery in Ireland except Belfast and its immediate district; and why there is such discrimination against the other portions of the country?

I am not aware that the rail way companies are refusing to accept parcels for delivery in every part of Ireland except Belfast and its immediate district. I am informed that they are ready and prepared to receive parcel traffic for any part of Ireland where the Irish railway company concerned is in a position to deliver to the indicated destination. The unsettled condition of the Irish railway situation has necessarily interfered with the normal free reception of traffic. The limitation of service is entirely occasioned by the action of certain railwaymen in refusing to handle such traffic as was offered, and the remedy for this state of affairs is obvious.

Have the Irish railwaymen ever refused to handle any goods other than Government goods?

I am not aware that they have, but I do not think that makes their conduct any the more praiseworthy.

Will he be able to inform the House of the result of the conference of railwaymen, which was to have taken place to-day in Dublin?

I have not the result to hand, but I hope it will be favourable.

Concerning the statement which the hon. Gentleman has made, that the railway companies are not refusing parcels, may I say that I rang up three railway companies yesterday, and I was refused by every one of them?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether soldiers who rejoined the Army in the summer of 1919 for the purpose of carrying out exhumation duties in France and Flanders have been demobilised, and Belgian civilians are being engaged by the Director of Graves to work in their places; and, if so, will he consider the wisdom of retaining the services of soldiers so employed rather than throw them on to the labour market in this country in its present condition?

Soldiers are still employed wherever possible, and the number now serving will be retained for some months.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my question, and say whether Belgians are employed instead of British soldiers?

I am not in a position to give that information. I understand that British soldiers are employed as far as possible. There may be some Belgians employed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that in the present state of the labour market no soldiers will be demobilised to make room for Belgians to be employed?

I cannot add anything to the answer which I have already given. The number already serving will be retained wherever possible.

What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by "wherever possible"? Are there places where it is impossible?

Is there not here a field for employing unemployed men? Could we not send across some of the unemployed to assist?

I shall be very glad to bring that suggestion to the notice of the Minister.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the object of keeping British and Indian troops at Hodeidah; and, in the event of withdrawal, whether the city will be handed over to the forces of the Idrissi or of the Imam of Sanaa?

No British troops have been kept at Hodeidah for the last year. There is an Indian battalion there which will be withdrawn as soon as possible. No definite arrangements have been made to hand over the town to any particular authority, but it is possible that the Idrissi, who is in effective occupation of the hinterland, will come to an agreement with the townspeople as regards its administration.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of ladies who have been sent out to the Army of the Black Sea and other areas to serve as clerks; what salaries and allowances they are receiving; whether they have any special qualifications for the work on which they are employed; and whether disabled officers and men who have had experience in military clerical work and administration could be employed instead?

In compliance with a request from the General Officer Commanding the Army of the Black Sea for shorthand typists of superior education capable of dealing with, and being entrusted with, very secret matters, eight ladies have been sent out to Constantinople. Six of them had special experience in intelligence work in the War Office and the other two were very carefully selected. Their salary is £200 per annum plus rations on the Army scale and hostel accommodation. No other lady clerks, so far as I am aware, have been sent to Constantinople or elsewhere, such posts having been given to ex-soldiers.

Were there not any ex-officers with experience of the Intelligence Department who could have been sent instead?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the type of men who would join the National Reserve is not the same as of those who would join the Territorial Force, and, in view of the eminent services of the National Reserve during the War, he will reconstitute the National Reserve, or at least give official recognition and support to such units as have preserved up to date an efficient organisation?

This matter is receiving consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for War what has been the reduction in numbers of our forces in Egypt since the Armistice; and what are the present numbers of our forces?

I regret that separate figures for the Army in Egypt and in Palestine at the date of the Armistice are not available. Comparing the total numbers in both countries, however, there has been a reduction of 248,000. The strength of the Army in Egypt only on 1st December last was approximately 30,600. As regards the Royal Air Force, the numbers have been reduced by 5,242 during the period from 1st December, 1918, to 4th December last The strength on the latter date was 2,588.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of officers and men of the Imperial forces originally reported missing who have, since the Armistice, been traced as the result of exhumation and other searches by the Imperial War Graves Commission?

It is estimated that in approximately 5,800 cases of officers and men originally reported missing evidence of death has been obtained as a result of the work of the Directorate of Graves Registration and Enquiries, and the number is being added to as the work proceeds.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the present number of public motor-cars allotted to the British Army in Constantinople?

The number of War Department motor-cars in use by the British Army of the Black Sea is 52. Without making special inquiry of the General Officer Commanding, I cannot say how many of these are actually in Constantinople.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, apparently as the result of a previous question I asked, there was a temporary reduction of these cars by the expedient of transferring them to that part of the Mediterranean Fleet which was then in Constantinople, and will he take steps, in conjunction with the Admiralty, to try to cut down the present waste of motors, petrol and tyres on the so-called Turkish roads?

I am not aware of the suggestion made by the hon. Member, but I will inquire.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the War Office whether his attention has been drawn to a report in the Press of a trial at Hereford on 24th, 25th, and 26th November, in connection with the disposal of goods stored at the central stores department at Rotherwas, Hereford; whether under the Regulations employés of the War Office are allowed to trade in goods which are in their charge; and, if not, whether steps will be taken to recover any profit received on the transactions disclosed in this case?

The sale of wood for firewood to employés of the Hereford factory under the War Office is permitted under strict Regulations laid down by the Disposal Board, and no reason is seen for stopping this class of sale, which is a boon to the workers. Employés are not allowed to trade in goods which are in their charge, and no case is known of an employé having purchased firewood with a view to resale.

asked the Secretary of State for War why Deptford cattle market is still retained by the Government; whether an approximate sum of £250,000 was spent on improvement; and whether, although it was carried on at a loss by the City Corporation in pre-War days, a yearly rent of £10,000 is being paid for its retention?

The Deptford cattle market is still retained by the Government for use as a supply reserve depot (which before the War was at Woolwich) and for the receipt and despatch of articles included in the ration issued to the troops in the United Kingdom and overseas. I am informed that approximately £280,000 has been spent on improvements by the War Department. The rent paid is £10,000 a year; the agreement gives the Department an option to purchase, and also includes favourable terms as regards reinstatement and conditions of tenure.

Do the Government consider that they made a good bargain in paying £10,000 a year and in spending £250,000 on improvements, for premises which are being carried on at a loss?

I understand that the depot was exceedingly useful during the War, and that the bargain of £10,000 a year was not an unreasonable bargain. With regard to the present, I understand that it is necessary to continue the use of Deptford market.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the care, control, management, and regulation of Trafalgar Square and the ornamental and other works therein were vested in the Commissioners of His Majesty's Works by the Trafalgar Square Act, 1844, and the Crown Lands Act, 1851; that, in exercise of the powers vested in them by the above Acts, regulations have been made by the said Commissioners of His Majesty's Works with regard to the holding of meetings in Trafalgar Square with a view to the public convenience and safety and to the due observance of order; and that under the regulations it is provided that no public meeting may be held in the said square without four clear days' notice to the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis specifying the object of the meeting and further providing that speeches shall not be delivered except from places authorised by the Commissioners of His Majesty's Works; and whether he will see that the national monument to Nelson is not authorised as a place from which speeches of a seditious or revolutionary character may be delivered?

The answer to the first three questions is in the affirmative. As for the last, my right hon. Friend does not propose, as at present advised, to take any action in the matter.

Will the hon. Gentleman say why, on several occasions, I was informed that the Home Secretary had no power under these Regulations, whereas it is expressly provided that speeches shall not be delivered except from places authorised by the Commissioners, and whether, if the Home Secretary is of opinion that poison gas has a purifying effect on the London atmosphere, he will arrange for the speeches to be delivered from the walls of the square or the walls of the fountains, and not from Nelson's monument?

It is impossible to say what kind of speech will be delivered. We know what the speech is only when it is delivered.

Will the hon. Gentleman take steps to stop the ears of the lions?

Regulation No. 2, to which I have referred, provides that the object of a meeting is to be specified before permission is given. What is the good of the Regulation if meetings are held, whatever the object?

Is it not a fact that the Nelson Monument was erected to a man who had a blind eye and covered the other eye when necessary?

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the establishment of a system for giving coupons for permission to make speeches?

If the hon. Member will refer to the answer given to him on the 14th instant, he will see that my right hon. Friend said that there is no power under the Regulation to require any such undertaking, and if the conditions prescribed in the Regulations are fulfilled the meeting must be allowed to be held.

If people misbehave themselves, have not the police the right to prosecute?

That is so.

I have been one of the victims.

asked the Home Secretary if he can state the place of detention of the man Redfern, an ex-officer of His Majesty's forces, who was convicted of robbery with violence, amounting to murder, in a bank in Leeds?

He is serving his sentence of penal servitude for life in Parkhurst prison.

asked the Home Secretary if he is aware that individual Members of the Birmingham Police Force, all of whom are in receipt of a regular minimum wage of £4 9s. per week, plus 9s. rent allowance and other emoluments, are permitted by the Chief Constable of Birmingham to accept engagements at concerts at terms that are considerably below those agreed upon by the concert-givers and the organised professional musicians of the Midlands district; that a large number of professional musicians have to depend upon these private engagements for part of their means of livelihood; and that this competition, which the Chief Constable has admitted is illegal, is causing discontent, hardship, and unemployment amongst those who are thus deprived of a part of their employment; and whether he will have this matter inquired into and a stop put to such competition, in view of the distress now prevailing through unemployment?

I have made inquiry and am informed by the Chief Constable of Birmingham that members of the police force have not accepted musical engagements for fees or competed in any way with professional musicians. Some members of the police band have played at concerts in their spare time when a professional musician has not been available, but no professional has been deprived of employment thereby. The Chief Constable has made a rule that no police officer should play if a professional musician is available. The men have not acted illegally, and this has been explained by the Chief Constable to the local branch of the Amalgamated Musicians' Union.

asked the Home Secretary how many police controls of all kinds, respectively, were in operation in the Metropolitan Police Area between a.m. 18th December, 1920, and p.m. 20th December, 1920, and with what results; how many police officers were employed; and were any cases reported by police on other duty?

During the week-end a.m. 18th December to p.m. 20th December one control was operated in the Metropolitan Police District to detect infringements of the speed limit, three officers being employed, and three cases reported for prosecution. Seven controls were operated to detect other infringements of the Motor Car Act, six officers being employed and four cases detected. Seven cases were reported for prosecution by police on ordinary duties.

asked the Home Secretary whether he can state the number of aliens admitted into this country between the 1st January and 30th November of this year; how many of this number were given permission to reside here; how many were journeying to other countries; how many were journeying to other countries; and how many were on temporary visits and have since left this country?

398,626 aliens were admitted into the United Kingdom between the 1st January and 30th November this year. During the same period 386,061 aliens left the country. No "permissions to reside" are given; but as the Home Secretary stated in reply to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for Bournemouth on the 29th November, it may later be possible by analysis of these figures to estimate the number of individuals who have come here to reside. At present it is not possible to do so. Nor is it possible to give the other figures asked for in this question.

How many of those were commercial travellers?

An answer to that question would involve a great deal of research which might or might not be justifiable.

Will the hon. Gentleman see that no persons are admitted unless they give satisfactory evidence that they will not become a burden on the ratepayers and taxpayers, and that they will not increase unemployment?

Does that apply to Members' wives?

Their admission is governed by the Aliens Act and the Regulations made under it.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, having regard to the lamentable want of progress in housing in Scotland and to the uncertainty as to the future imposed on the local authorities by the three-years limit provided in the 1919 Act, he will initiate legislation to extend the definite period of subsidy by the State to a five-year limit with the same provision as to further extension beyond that time if difficulties with the supply of labour and material render it necessary and justifiable in the opinion of the Board of Health to grant such extension?

As my hon. and gallant Friend is aware, that is a matter which affects the Treasury and the Ministry of Health. My right hon. Friend is in course of conferring with them on the subject.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that eighteen months ago Glasgow alone required 50,000 new dwellings, and up to the present only 40 under this Act have been occupied, and does he think that the three-year limit will be sufficient to meet even one-tenth of the need?

I am already aware of the figures, and, as I have stated, the whole matter is at present in the hands of my right hon. Friend, and he hopes to confer both with the Ministry of Health and the Treasury on the matter.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that under the existing Regulations there are supervisors at salaries of over £5 per week superintending the work of some times not more than two or three workmen engaged upon house construction under the Housing Act in various areas in Scotland; and whether, in view of the close proximity of some of these areas to each other, he will cause inquiry to be made in order that one supervising official may be able to overlook the work of more than one area, and thus save considerable expense?

1 am advised that appointments of clerks of works to housing schemes lie with the local authorities concerned, but the Sctotish Board of Health, before approving the salaries attached to these posts, have regard to the practicability of employing clerks of works already engaged on neighbouring sites. This practice already prevails at a number of sites. I am not aware of the particular cases referred to, but if my hon. and gallant Friend will furnish me with particulars, I shall cause inquiry to be made.

Will the Board of Health in Scotland inform the local authorities that it is not their wish that they should employ one supervisor to look after two bricklayers?

You may take it that it is not their wish.

Will the Board of Health contradict the Order they have issued on the subject?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, following the public inquiry held in Arbroath recently, a Report has yet been made to the Scottish Fishery Board on the question of opening Carnoustie and St. Andrew's Bays to revive net fishing; and whether, having regard to the continued welfare of important sections of the fishing community on the east coast of Scotland, which rendered valuable service to the. Navy during the War, he will favourably consider the granting of this concession?

The Report on the inquiry is at present under consideration by the Fishery Board for Scotland, who hope to be in a position to submit their recommendation to me at an early date.

In the event of the Report being favourable to the concession will the right hon. Gentleman see that no time is lost in carrying out the recommendation?

Certainly.

Does this refer to the whole of Scotland or only a particular bay?

It refers to the two bays mentioned in the question and not to the whole of Scotland.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether the Cabinet have yet considered the Report of the Committee appointed to review the question of land settlement in Scotland; and, if so, what action is to be taken upon it?

I hope that this Report will be considered by the Cabinet this week.

asked the Post master-General what postage the ordinary Christmas card in an envelope requires, a halfpenny or a penny; whether any writing is allowed on printed cards of greeting; whether the recent International Postal Convention made any effective alterations, upwards or downwards, for seasonable correspondence; if so, what; and will he state the general position?

A Christmas card may be sent by post in an unsealed envelope for a halfpenny provided that it bears nothing in writing except dates and names and addresses of sender and addressee and formulas of courtesy or of a conventional character not exceeding five words or initials. I am not yet in a position to make any general statement as to alterations in rates which may be made as a result of the recent International Postal Convention.

Will any printing on the card be a breach of the Regulations?

No, it will go at printed rate.

asked the Postmaster-General the numbers of parcels consigned from Ireland during the last seven months; and whether it has entailed the employment of extra labour?

No records are kept of the number of parcels passing between Great Britain and Ireland, but I have no reason to think that any extra labour is entailed in dealing with them.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he can now state when the river tugboat now carrying mails to Harris and Uist will be replaced by a boat capable of carrying passengers and livestock with a reasonable degree of comfort and safety in winter weather, and suitable for conveying necessary supplies to those islands?

I am informed that the steamship "Clydesdale" was placed on this service on the 15th of this month, but that there is still difficulty arising from adverse weather conditions.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in consequence of the present condition of the exchange between this country and France it is less expensive to send letters unstamped to the latter country and to pay the surcharge than to affix the Regulation postage; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any steps to remedy this anomaly?

The facts are as stated. The advantage would, however, be slight, and I have no reason to think that letters for France are being systematically posted unstamped. Under the decisions of the recent Postal Union Congress, it will be possible to refuse to send on correspondence for a foreign country in circumstances such as those alluded to by the hon. Member unless the postage is fully prepaid. I shall be prepared to avail myself of this power whenever the circumstances render it desirable.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will give an undertaking that the establishment of the Holy Land as a national home for the Jews will not involve the taxpayers of this country in any permanent expenditure; whether the cost of the British Army in Palestine is now being borne by the Jewish population in that country; and, if not, whether the cost will be refunded in the coming financial year?

The acceptance of a Mandate for Palestine is not intended to involve any permanent expenditure on the taxpayers of this country. The answer to the second and third parts of the question is in the negative.

May I ask if the present expenditure in Palestine is definitely to be paid back to this country?

I think the answer to that is in the negative. I have no hope of it.

Will the House know when such expenditure in the form of a gift to Palestine is going to cease?

Of course, in accepting the Mandate we did undertake a certain responsibility, but the Government have no intention whatever of this country being involved in heavy expenditure in connection with it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make an appeal to the Jewish population to raise a fund for this purpose and so relieve the British taxpayer. They are very wealthy?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Jews have raised large sums for the development of Palestine and are we not under obligations to the Jewish people for fighting for us?

Is it not the fact that ever since the occupation of Palestine the Jewish population of the world spent many thousands on education, public health, and other sources in Palestine which otherwise would have fallen on this country?

Yes, very large sums have been raised and hopes are entertained of still larger sums being raised by Jews throughout the world. I think my hon. Friend is right in saying it has saved expenditure by this country.

Is it not a fact that many Jews fought and were killed on our side on the distinct pledge that we would help them to regain their national home?

I never understood that there was any suggestion that they fought merely on that ground.

asked the Prime Minister at what date the British troops will be completely withdrawn from Palestine?

The forces in Palestine, as the House has already been informed, are being reduced, but some force must be maintained until the civil administration is in a position to maintain internal order and to resist aggression from without. It is impossible to say when this will be the case.

May I ask if it is not possible to set up a time limit of six months or a year, so that we do not become involved in the same way as we have in Mesopotamia?

The only way we could set a time limit would be to say now, "We will not spend another penny six months hence," and I do not think that would be wise.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that Palestine is the bridgehead of the Suez Canal and a most important link in our Imperial communications, and in the event of the Milner proposals for Egypt going through, will it not be essential to keep a considerable garrison for the protection of the Suez Canal in Palestine?

That is rather a technical question. I am not sure that my hon. Friend is right. Some people think that we can maintain the Suez Canal from Egypt.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the advisability of interesting all Government officials in administrative economy by intimating that promotion, salaries, and bonuses will, as far as possible, be dependent upon efforts in the direction of reducing expenditure.

Promotion will depend upon efficiency, and without economy there cannot be efficiency.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to paragraphs 3 to 6 of the Fourth Report of the Com- mittee on Public Accounts; and whether any further correspondence between the Treasury and the Air Ministry in connection with the alleged waste of public money other than that furnished in the Appendix to the Report may be laid upon the Table of the House?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. All the correspondence between the Treasury and the Air Ministry, together with other relevant documents, has been laid before the House, either in the Appropriation Account for Air Force Services for 1918–19, or in the Fourth Report of the Committee of Public Accounts.