asked the Secretary of State for India what money is being spent during the current year in Mesopotamia on roads, railways, canals, and Government buildings; and what money does he estimate will be required next year for these undertakings?

I must explain that the Provisional Estimates submitted by the Civil Commissioner in June last were referred back to him for further consideration which was interrupted by the outbreak of the disturbances. The provisional figures for public works including roads, bridges and Government buildings (such as schools, hospitals, etc.) were Rs.98,00,000, of which about one half was for maintenance. A further 69 lakhs were estimated for irrigation. I have recently been in communication with the High Commissioner, who informs me that he is not yet in a position to furnish revised Estimates. Railways which had previously been military undertakings were to be transferred to the civil authorities on the 1st April. The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury sanctioned for the current year a capital expenditure of £500,000, as well as £761,155 for stores transferred. As regards next year, I cannot anticipate the Estimates of the Arab Government which is being set up.

Shall we be under any obligation to finance this Arab Government or to guarantee expenditure or the wages of the people employed?

The hon. and gallant Member will be aware that hitherto, roughly speaking, the civil administration of Mesopotamia has paid for itself out of the revenues of the country.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether the Joint Committee to which the Burma reforms are to be referred will be able to hear evidence from the Burmese delegation now in this country; when the Committee is likely to be constituted; and whether it is worth the while of the Burmese delegation to remain in England, or whether it is more advisable for them to return to Burma and come back to this country next summer to give their evidence?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply I gave yesterday to the hon. Baronet the Member for East Nottingham (Sir J. D. Rees), of which I will send him a copy. As regards the second part of the question, I hope that it will be found possible to constitute the Committee at an early date next Session, though I cannot say when the Bill will be referred to it.

As yesterday's answer was a written answer merely circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT, and it did not appear in any of the newspapers, will the right hon. Gentleman see that publicity is given to it, in Burma especially, and that the Burmese delegation now in this country is informed of the terms of his answer?

Yes, Sir. I will see that the question and answer are communicated for publication.

Has the Burmese delegation any weight whatsoever in Burma?

Surely the hon. and gallant Member does not wish me to express an opinion about the relative merits of the contributions to discussions on Indian questions made by individuals?

asked the Secretary of State for India whether in the charges against the British Government in respect of the Eastern Persia Expedition are included payments made by Indian political officers; and, if so, will he take steps to have such items re-credited to the British Government?

I am not quite certain what the hon. and gallant Member has in mind. Any special expenditure of a military character, whether involving disbursements through political officers or not, is debitable to the Imperial Government. Any expenditure which is definitely of a political character {e.g., diplomatic or consular expenditure) is shared equally between the two Governments.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he will give the House any information before it rises concerning the position in, and British Mission to, Afghanistan?

I do not think that I can usefully add anything to the statement already published. It is probable that the Mission will leave India in the first week of January, not in the last week of December as previously stated.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether any and, if so, what non-official agricultural associations or organisations exist in India; and, if such information is not available at the India Office, whether he will call for it from India?

I will take steps to obtain a report on this subject for the information of the House.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the floating crane lately based at Invergordon has been wrecked; how much the crane was worth; what are the prospects of salvage; how it was that this crane was towed from Invergordon in mid-winter and at a period when the most unsettled conditions of weather were forecasted; and who was responsible?

It is, unfortunately, true that the crane was wrecked whilst being towed from Invergordon to Chatham. The crane was worth £70,000. The prospects of salvage are not very hopeful, as the vessel is on rocks in an exposed position. The crane had been urgently wanted at Chatham for some time. It was, however, not possible to release her from Invergordon until early November, as she was required for lifting machinery, etc., in connection with closing that base. The crane was in readiness for towing away several days before the voyage on which she was wrecked, but was detained by weather conditions. No doubt the local officers were satisfied with the weather conditions when she was actually allowed to leave. An inquiry is now being held into the matter, and until the result is known it is not possible to reply to the last part of the question.

Is it not a very serious thing that a craft of this sort, very unseaworthy and valuable, should have been sent into the North Sea in midwinter? Was it necessary? Could the journey not have been delayed until better weather?

The answer gives the opinion of the Admiralty. An inquiry is being held, and until it is completed I cannot give any further information.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether H.M.S. "Tobago" has recently been mined in the Black Sea; whether there has been any loss of life; whether the vessel is a total loss; and whether there is any information as to under what conditions she was mined, and by whom?

H.M.S. "Tobago" was damaged by a floating mine in the Black Sea on 12th November. No lives were lost, and the vessel has now been brought safely to Malta. The Court of Inquiry held into the matter proved that the vessel had struck a mine, presumed to be floating.

Is it a fact that this ship was taken to Trebizond, and was there not a danger that it would be seized there by Turkish Nationalists?

I require notice of any question as to the port. As to the latter part of the question, I do not think there was any risk.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is now in a position to state if the naval history of the War which is being written by Sir Julian Corbett is to be regarded as the official history?

If my hon. and gallant Friend will refer to the first paragraph of the Preface of the first volume of Sir Julian Corbett's work he will find it clearly stated in what sense the work is to be regarded as an official history.

Is it proposed that any official history of the naval side of the War shall be published?

Perhaps I might quote the preface to show exactly how the matter stands. It says:

"On 28th June, 1916, the then Prime Minister, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Paisley, announced in Parliament that ' In view of the demand which is likely to arise and the desirability of providing the public with an authentic account, it has been decided to prepare for publication, as soon as possible after the close of the War, an Official History dealing with its various aspects.' The present volume is the first instalment of the promised work. Although full use has been made of enemy and Allied sources of information so far as they were accessible, the work is based throughout on our own official documents, not only naval, but also military and political. In this sense, but in this sense only, the work is to he regarded as official; but for the form and character of the narrative as well as for opinions expressed the author is alone responsible."

Is it not the regular practice of armies and navies that the only official histories are those compiled by the war staffs? Is it not the case that at this moment an official history of the Battle of Jutland is being compiled by the war staff?

It is being completed.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can make any statement as to the possibility of dealing with the pay or marriage allowance of all officers of the Royal Navy and the pay of the lower deck, in view of the rise of 44 points in the cost of living since the pay of the Royal Navy was last adjusted; can he state how much prize money has been paid out to the Royal Navy; how much still remains to be paid; and does this represent the total amount payable to the Royal Navy?

With regard to the first part of the question, I regret I am not in a position to make any statement at present. With regard to the second part, the amount of prize money authorised for payment to members of the Naval Forces to date is approximately £4,000,000, and a. further £1,500,000 remains to be paid. The possibility of a further distribution depends on the amount still to be collected as proceeds of prizes. The Prize Courts have not yet completed the adjudication of captures, and the final accounts will not be available for some time.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise the very great anxiety on the part of certain officers and men with regard to the first part of my question, and, in regard to the second part, can he give any indication as to when it will be possible to say how much prize money is still outstanding?

As to the first part of the question, the Admiralty are fully possessed of all the information. As to the second part, it is quite impossible to say when the second instalment will be paid or the amount to be shared until the Prize Courts have dealt with the matter.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, when he is considering the first part of the question; he will take into special consideration the case of Warrant Officers, Royal Navy, and commissioned officers promoted from warrant rank?

Yes, Sir.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether his answer applies equally to the men who were engaged in mine-sweeping, whose prize money has not been paid in, I think, about 400,000 cases?

My hon. Friend knows well that the prize money is payable only to those who went to sea in ships of war, and if there has been any delay in payment in any of these particular cases, I will have inquiry made at once on his , bringing the cases to my notice.

Will members of the Royal Naval Air Service be entitled to any form of prize money?

The hon. Member should put down that question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether notice has been given to all the temporary clerks employed by his Department; how many such are employed; and whether the notice applies to any ex-service men who have served in any previous war, or who were rejected upon medical grounds from service in the great War?

A considerable number of temporary clerks will be discharged in the next few months—some as a result of the clearing up of temporary work due to the War, and some in order to provide employment for ex-service men. The temporary staff employed on the 1st instant numbered 3,166. Notice of discharge is not being given to any ex-service men who have served in any previous war. Men who were rejected upon medical grounds from serving in the recent War and who had not previously served in the regular Navy or Army are not regarded as ex-service men, and are consequently liable to discharge.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what is the total cost to the National Exchequer of the compilation, printing, and issue of the official despatches of the battle of Jutland, 30th May to 1st June, 1916?

The cost of printing the official despatches of the Battle of Jutland, published as Cmd. 1068, may be taken as approximately £2,175. This figure includes the cost of paper but does not include the cost of drawing and printing 2,000 copies of the German charts Nos. 1-7, the cost of which (£325) was included in the figure (£3,500) given as the total cost of Captain Harper's Report in the reply given by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty to the hon. and gallant Member for South Battersea on Wednesday last, the 15th instant. I understand from the Admiralty that no extra cost was incurred to the State in compiling the official despatches. Similarly no special expenses were incurred in connection with the issue of the Report. Five thousand copies of Cmd. 1068 were printed, and it is impossible at the present moment to say how many of these will be issued for official use and how many will be sold. Assuming the latter figure to be 4,500 (a full sale) the net proceeds from sales after deducting trade discounts and overhead expenses may be taken as £2,625.

Am I to understand from that that it will not cost anything— that the cost of printing is £2,200 and that it is estimated that the cost of sales will be £2,100?

If a full sale is secured that will be so, but it is impossible to say how many copies will be left; of course, we hope they will be sold.

May I ask whether this exceedingly large order was put out to tender or whether the printing was done in the ordinary course by the Department; and may I also ask whether in future, in the case of possible great publications like this, the right hon. Gentleman will see that tenders are asked for, if they have not already been asked for, as it is possible that the work could be done at half the cost in that way?

Is there any reasonable probability that this large number of copies will be sold, for otherwise the expenditure will fall on national funds?

I could not answer that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my question?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the serious disapproval with which bank employés are regarding their inclusion in the scheme of unemployment insurance, as likely to prejudice seriously their present conditions of employment; and whether he can consider the possibility of their exemption in this connection?

asked the Minister of Labour whether bank officials are exempt from the provisions of The Unemployment Insurance Act, 1920.

I am afraid there is nothing to add to the answers given previously on this point, and I would refer in particular to the answer given on the 20th December to the hon. Member for Barnard Castle (Mr. Swan), a copy of which I am sending to my hon. Friends.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this profession has a right, like other industries, to contract out of the scheme and have a scheme of their own?

That is really the point of the question, and as a good many questions have been addressed to my right hon. Friend and myself on this subject, perhaps I might take this opportunity of making it clear that there is no general discretion lodged in the Minister under the Act, but there is a limited discretion on three very strictly defined conditions. Bank employés, however, do not come within those conditions, and if hon. Members would look at the Schedule to the Act they would see that there is no general discretion in the Minister to say who does and who does not come within the Act.

My point is this, that the miners, for instance, have got a scheme of their own; can the bank clerks have a scheme of their own?

There is nothing to prevent that happening. If they choose to make either a special or a supplementary scheme, they are entitled to do so, and it is the policy of the Ministry and of His Majesty's Government to give all the encouragement possible to industries or to particular branches of industry taking the burden of insurance upon themselves.

Does the Minister regard it as a fact that there ever has been unemployment among bank employés, and are they not really in permanent employment, looked after by their own banks?

All this was discussed when the Bill was passed. There is less unemployment among bank clerks than among many other classes, but, at the same time, there is some risk of unemployment, and, that being so, they come within the scope of the scheme.

asked the Minister of Labour whether the building trade unions have accepted the definite and final proposals of the Government to secure employment in the building industry for at least 50,000 unemployed ex-service men; and, if not, will he in form the House what action the Government is taking to secure the immediate employment of these men who have for so many months been kept unemployed by the action of the building trade unions?

I am informed by the President of the National Federation of Building Trade Operatives that he is taking steps to summon the committee of the federation together to lay before them the proposals and he has promised to communicate the committee's decision.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Minister of Labour gave the House to understand on Wednesday last that a definite and final decision would be arrived at on Monday of this week, and that yesterday he informed the House, in the letter which was circulated, that the building trades unions were to have till the end of the year to consider the Government's pro- posal, and will he now give an assurance to the House that if this final and definite offer which has been submitted is not accepted, the Government will themselves take immediate steps to secure the employment of these men in the building of State-aided houses?

The hon. Member raises two points. The first is as to the undertaking of the Minister of Labour. My recollection of the undertaking, such as it was—it was in very general terms—was that a conclusion would be arrived at by the end of the year, not by last Monday. [HON. MEMBERS: " No, no ! Last Monday."] Well, that is my recollection. However, apart from that altogether, my hon. Friend is as well aware as I am, standing at this box, of the position of affairs, and the matter obviously will be pressed on with all the speed possible.

Will the hon. Gentleman understand that this is the reply which I have had month after month for about ten months past, that everything will be pressed forward in this way, and that I was given to understand on Wednesday last that the matter really was now final, and that I informed the Minister of Labour that I should have to move the adjournment of the House if—

The hon. Member is making a speech now.

May we have an assurance now that if this final and definite offer as it is called is not accepted by the end of the year, when the House will not be sitting, the Government will themselves put the men into employment?

May I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he cannot give an assurance that no further procrastination will be tolerated in this matter, yes or no?

Both my hon. Friends heard the Debate yesterday. They both heard the statements made by the Minister of Labour and by the Prime Minister, and I really cannot carry the matter any further than that. They heard what the Prime Minister said.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the badge national scheme for disabled men authorised to be used by employers engaging a certain percentage of discharged and disabled men is being used in some cases as a badge for goods, thus leading the public to believe that the goods so marked are made by disabled men, whereas this is generally not the case; and if he will take steps to make it clear that the badge is not to be used in this manner?

My attention has been called to certain cases of misuse of the official seal or device of the National Scheme and, in particular, to cases where it has been used on wrappers for stationery sold by house to house canvassers in a manner calculated to give the impression that the sale of these articles is part of the National Scheme. I wish it to be clearly understood that the National Scheme is concerned only with the employment of an agreed percentage of disabled men by the employer, and that the use of the official seal or device of the National Scheme should not in any case be regarded as meaning that the particular business on which the employer is engaged forms part of the scheme.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he can give any information as to the policy which he proposes to adopt with reference to Employment Exchanges, especially in relation to the recommendations placed before him by the Select Committee which recently investigated this matter?

The Committee of Inquiry presided over by my right hon. Friend the Member for the Gorbals Division of Glasgow (Mr. G. Barnes) has made a number of important recommendations in its Report, which has been published as Command Paper 1054. These recommendations are receiving very careful consideration, but I am not yet in a position to make any statement with regard to the steps which it will be decided to take.

asked the Minister of Health if a belief in the efficacy of vaccination is still regarded as necessary by his Department in the case of candidates for appointment as medical officers of health?

I cannot give a general answer on the point raised in the question. Should it come before me in any particular case, I shall be prepared to consider it.

Will my right hon. Friend arrange for some mild form of restraint for the candidates who do not believe in vaccination?

asked the Minister of Health whether the firms engaged in the light castings trade have received instructions from the Department of Building Supplies and Materials to add an additional 2½ per cent. to the agreed prices for castings, and to hand over the produce of this addition to prices to the Department to cover their establishment charges; if so, whether he will explain the reason for this attempt to run a Government Department by taxation imposed by itself, and which does not come under review by the House of Commons, but is, in fact, concealed from the House and from the taxpayers; and whether the same instructions have been issued to firms engaged in the supply of other building materials, such as bricks, timber, etc.?

The hon. Member is mistaken. The percentage addition to which he refers is not payable to the supplying firms, and there is therefore no question of their handing it over. It is a charge made by the Department to the local authorities and others to whom the materials are sold in accordance with the conditions on which the money was voted by Parliament. If the hon. Member will look at the terms of the Estimates which were laid before Parliament in respect of this service, he will see that it was provided that the whole of the cost of the materials purchased by the Department should be recovered from the local authorities and others to whom such materials are sold. The sale price must therefore include a percentage sufficient to cover interest on capital, and also overhead charges.

Are we to understand that anything of this kind received by the Department has to be shown in the Apropriation Accounts as Appropriations-in-Aid?

I think I have to reply to that in a later question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that the price of all materials is raised by 2½ per cent.?

My hon. Friend is aware that the Department some time ago [HON. MEMBERS: "Speak up!"] made an arrangement whereby large orders were placed shortly after the Armistice for bricks, in order to get the brickyards started, and I am quite sure that the effect has been to secure bricks at a lower price than that at which they would otherwise have been obtained.

Is this 2½ per cent. put on the price of bricks, timber and other building material, as in the last part of the question, which the right hon. Gentleman did not answer?

If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will give me notice—

It is in the question.

Unless I have said anything to the contrary, it would be, but I will tell the hon. and gallant Gentleman, if he will give me notice. Whatever percentage is necessary will cover the whole expense.

Does the money derived from this source appear in the accounts of the Auditor-General?

Certainly.

Are we really to understand that the cost of distributing these supplies purchased by this Department amounts to 2½ per cent. of the cost?

Certainly not. It certainly relates to the cost of distribution. It relates to all charges of the Department, and this is only one charge.

asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the cost of houses on the London County Council's Roehampton estate, where 582 houses have been erected, and the rents to be charged the tenants are 15 s . 6d. per house per week, whereas public funds are to contribute £1 14 s .3d. weekly, or more than two-thirds of the cost; and, in view of the fact that, if the above is typical of the subsidies required for house-building, the 500,000 houses to be built will require contributions from public funds of £45,000,000 annually, whether he will reconsider his housing policy with a view to mitigating the above burdens on the taxpayer?

I do not regard the Roehampton scheme as typical, as it possesses several expensive features which are not common to other schemes. The charge on public funds will be very much less than suggested. As I have already stated, I am considering whether further steps can be taken with a view to reducing the excessive cost of schemes.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the First Commissioner of Works stated in this House the other evening that he was able to build houses at a little over half what the Minister of Health was able to build them, and has the right hon. Gentleman considered the advisability of consulting him?

I am quite sure my right hon. Friend said nothing of the kind.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the First Commissioner of Works stated that he was actually building houses at £900 and that the lowest estimate the Ministry received was £1,650, and can that be taken as an indication of the form of contracts which have been entered into throughout the country?

The estimates have not been received by the Ministry at all. The fact that high tenders have been received and were not accepted by the Ministry was the real reason why my right hon. Friend arranged to undertake the building, in order that we might not incur the very high costs.

asked the Minister of Health the cause of the delay in proceeding with the housing scheme at Reigate, Surrey; whether it is indefinitely suspended; and, if so, will he take the necessary steps to compel the Reigate corporation to proceed without further delay with the building of the badly needed houses?

My Department approved plans for 96 houses at Reigate early in this year. Tenders for 42 houses were submitted to the Housing Commissioner on the 6th October last, but their price was prohibitive, and the local authority accordingly resolved to proceed by means of direct labour. Later, however, on the 23rd November, they rescinded this Resolution, and decided to make fresh inquiries for tenders. I understand that fresh tenders are to be considered by a committee of the council on the 30th instant, and the Housing Commissioner has arranged to meet the committee the next day to consider them.

May I ask whether, between the dates mentioned, there has not been a municipal election fought, at which all those candidates who supported the principle of direct labour were heavily defeated, and if part of the delay is not due to the fact that, as a consequence, it was necessary to give effect to the wishes of the municipal electors?

Yes, I believe that the course of the proceedings of the council was as my hon. and gallant Friend says. At the same time, our reasons for refusing to accept the first tenders was because they were far too high. We have been taking that course of action for many months past, and propose to continue it.

In the event of later contracts being tendered to this new council against direct labour, and proving too high, will he prohibit the council taking action?

I have no intention of agreeing to any contracts which seem to us unreasonably high.

Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that this election was definitely fought on the one issue of direct labour?

I am not suggesting anything; I am answering a question.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has accepted the conclusions of the Committee on Smoke Abatement; and, if so, whether he will explain why in Sheffield and elsewhere contracts for thousands of houses are being approved by his Department without these conclusions being specially brought to the notice of the local authorities concerned?

I have circulated copies of the Interim Report of the Committee on Smoke Abatement to all local authorities with a memorandum recommending consideration of the various substitutes suggested for the open coal fire, where these can be economically adopted. The Report has also been brought to the notice of the Housing Commissioners. I understand that in the case of Sheffield, the Housing Commissioner has been in touch with the local authority, and that the council are considering the Report with a view to the possibility of taking action in accordance with the suggestions made.

Is it not the fact that the architect responsible for this building scheme stated before the Committee that the Ministry of Health had not brought to his notice or suggested to the council the adoption of these plans?

I know nothing about that. The statement I have made here is correct.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has a Department for the buying of building materials for housing purposes; will he state what class of goods they purchase; what is the approximate value of such goods bought during this year; if they buy in the open market or under contract; will he state the number of staff employed in this buying Department; the annual cost of same; and what buildings are retained for offices?

The Department of Building Materials Supply has recently been transferred to me from the Ministry of Munitions. The Department makes purchases, under contract, of certain materials required for housing, including bricks, cement, light castings, drain-pipes, and sanitary ware; purchases have also been made of slates and tiles. The approximate value of the materials contracted for during the present year is £5,000,000. The staff employed number 308 and the total salaries amount to £69,570. The staff occupy portions of Imperial House, Tothill Street, and No. 1, Queen Anne's Gate Buildings, Dartmouth Street. The whole of the expenses of the staff and rent involved are recovered as part of the cost of the materials sold.

Ought not this Department to be part of the Civil Service, and the cost shown in the Civil Service Estimates?

I will look into that. I took the Department over only a short time ago, and I am seeing whether I can arrange for reducing the Department.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any evidence to show that the operations of this Department has not led to a distinctly upward tendency in the average cost of materials; and if that is so, can he not save the country expense, and housing schemes additional cost, by doing away altogether with the Department?

That is the point I am now going into. I think it is very difficult to say reliably whether the effect has been to put the price down or up; in some cases there has been a reduction in the price. At all events, we are now going into the question to see if the expenditure of the Department can be reduced.

Is the cost of this Department borne by the money made out of the sale of material, and should not that money required be provided in the Estimates?

I have a form of estimates by me now. When it was submitted to the House it was provided in that Estimate that the cost of the Department should be included in the charges made to the authorities for the sale of material, and that the sales should be accounted for in the ordinary way, and the accounts be available for the Public Accounts Committee to examine. That was in the form of the original Estimate. That is being adhered to.

Is it not the case that establishments and staffs may be in existence of which this House is entirely ignorant, and entirely with the control by the Government, and the cost not borne on the Estimates, but by the trade of the country?

I must say that I generally agree with my hon. Friend. This was an organisation for getting material during the War, and it was started under exceptional conditions; but in a general way I certainly agree with my hon. Friend.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake, whether he brings the Department to an end or not, that he will show its real expenditure on the Estimates?

I will take care that it is very substantially reduced at a very early date.

asked the Minister of Health whether local authorities in Scotland are allowed to purchase bricks and cement for house-building wherever they can at a reasonable price, or whether the Department of Building Material Supply controls, under the Ministry of Health, the supply of building materials in Scotland?

The Department of Building Materials Supply does not control the supply of building materials, but it has in the past made purchases of certain materials required for housing schemes in Scotland. I am discussing the future arrangements with my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland. Local authorities in Scotland are at liberty, subject to the approval of the Scottish Board of Health as to the price, to purchase materials otherwise than through the Department of Building Materials Supply.

May we take it that local authorities may purchase materials without reference to the Minister of Health in England?

Oh, certainly.

But the Secretary for Scotland stated that he could not arrange anything without consultation with the Minister of Health in England and with his approval; was the Secretary for Scotland under a misapprehension when he made that statement to the local authorities?

I do not know what the statements were. But I am sure my right hon. Friend was under no misapprehension. This Department had been transferred shortly before, and he naturally wished to consult me upon any change in this connection. At all events, the local authorities are, so far as I am concerned, entitled and encouraged to purchase their materials on their own account, apart from the Department. But we are bound to withhold sanction if the price seems excessive.

Will the 2½ per cent. be put on all material whether purchased through the Department or privately—is it 2½ per cent. in all cases?

My hon. and gallant Friend must be well aware that the ordinary merchant adds to the price he charges to the customer, and this is only—

Speak up! There are two sides of the House.

We cannot hear a word.

This is only an equivalent.

asked the Minister of Health whether he met recently a deputation representing the asylum committees of the country on the question of an increased allowance being made to the authorities by the Treasury; whether any reply has been given; and, if so, what was the nature of such reply?

No such deputation has been recently received by me. Possibly the hon. Member has in mind a deputation representing the Mental Hospitals Association, which was received by the Parliamentary Secretary in July last. If so, I shall be happy to send him a report of the proceedings.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will further consult the Association of Poor Law Unions with regard to the best method of rendering all surplus hospital accom- modation in Poor Law institutions available for the treatment of the sick before reintroducing Clause 9 of the Ministry of Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill; and whether it is his intention to make any alterations in the Bill before reintroducing it?

I am prepared to consider any suggestions, whether from the Poor Law Unions Association or from any other source, which are consistent with the declared policy of the Government that the treatment of the sick poor should be merged in the general health services of the community. In reply to the latter part of the question, I am not at present aware of any valid reason why the Clause should be altered?

asked the Minister of Health how many naval or military cases of smallpox were reported to his Department during the year 1919; what was the vaccinal condition of the cases; and how many ended fatally?

Four naval cases and thirteen military cases of smallpox were reported to my Department during 1919. Four of the patients were stated to have been unvaccinated, and three of these cases proved fatal. There was one other fatal case, the vaccinal condition of which could not be ascertained. The remaining twelve cases were stated to have been vaccinated in infancy, and one of them to have been re-vaccinated.

asked the Minister of Health if claimants for old age pensions, under Section 1 of the Blind Persons Act, are required to attend before a pensions committee or sub-committee even in cases where a registered medical practitioner has certified that they are wholly blind or that their eyes have been removed; whether such committees and sub-committees are allowed medical assistance; and whether pensions officers habitually appeal against their decisions on the ground that the persons granted pensions have failed to produce a certificate from some approved agency or institution for the blind that they are known to such agency or institution as blind persons?

Claimants for old age pensions are not required to attend before the Pension Committee, but they are informed when their claims will be considered by the committee and of the effect of the pension officer's report upon the claim, and they are given the opportunity of attending if they desire to do so. The committee are not allowed medical assistance. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative, but I would refer to the reply I gave on the 20th inst. to the question of the hon. Member for the Plaistow Division, of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether Messrs. Thomas Pierce, James Dolan, John McAllister, and John Carey, of Mala-hide, County Dublin, were recently arrested by the military; whether it is a fact that no charge was made against these men, and nothing incriminating found in their houses when searched; whether he will say why, and where, they are being detained; and will steps be taken to bring them to trial?

The answer to the first parts of the question are in the affirmative. These persons are in military custody. Their cases are still under investigation.

When will there be some ending to this policy of arresting people and taking them away without acquainting their relatives where they are, and not stating the charge on which they have been arrested?

These persons were arrested on 10th December. John Carey is known as the local leader of the Irish Republican Army, and the others are well known as members of the branches. The competent military authority is trying their case.

May I press for an answer to my question: Whether, in view of the custom that prevails; without charge, taking these people away, and not acquainting their relatives where they are, there will not be a departure from this abominable system?

They were removed in the ordinary way to the prison of the district. I am not aware that the relatives do not know where they are.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I am constantly sending communications to the Irish Office asking, on behalf of the relatives, where these people are. Does the right hon. Gentleman know anything about them?

No, Sir; happily, I do not get them.

You will get them from this day forward !

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he now has information as to whether Charles Lynch, of Miltown 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 have not yet received the report of the military court of inquiry in this case, but I have called for the police report, which states that Lynch was accidentally shot by a party of military and police near Miltown Malbay, County Clare, on the 21st October. The police and military had been fired upon, and Lynch, who was standing at the gable of his house, was unfortunately caught in the line of their fire.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why, seeing this unfortunate man was murdered on 24th October, the report of the military inquiry is not yet available?

I have already, on both occasions, stated that it is extremely difficult for the military authority to hold these inquiries. In some instances in County Clare, in the course of the inquiry, the military officers have been shot.

Has any military inquiry been held at all; if so on what date, and when can the House have the result of that inquiry?

I have given particulars to the hon. Member of the police report, and my right hon. Friend has not yet received the result of the military inquiry.

Can the Attorney-General tell me whether there has been a military inquiry, and on what date?

Yes, I believe there has been an inquiry, but I cannot give the date.

How many inquiries are there into these matters-police, military, and otherwise?

Generally, two; one by the police; and then one by the military.

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 Abberdorney 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 to add to the replies that I have already given on this subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chief Secretary replied that he is awaiting the result of the inquiry, and does he know that the hon. Member for Chester-le-Street (Mr. Lawson) went to this creamery and can substantiate the facts as set out in my question? Why is there not an answer to this question which has been repeated over and over again during the past month?

I am not aware of the facts mentioned by the hon. and gallant Member, but I am aware that my right hon. Friend has replied two or three times to this question and has at least made three speeches on the question.

Are these co-operative societies likely to receive compensation, for the destruction of their property?

I can only refer the hon. Member to the reply given by the Chief Secretary.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that two months is a long time to wait before we can get any definite information about this case in which there is a sworn affadavit that this creamery was burned by the police and this is substantiated by an hon. Member of this House?

Is it not a fact that this manager was a known rebel?

You were a rebel at one time.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland the amount of war bonuses and the increases of pay, respectively, which were given to the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary between 1st March, 1915, and 31st March, 1919; whether these war bonuses were given to the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary to meet the increased cost of living just as much as in the case of Civil Service and Post Office officials and national school teachers; and whether he will take steps to ensure that the war bonuses granted to the members of the Royal Irish Constabulary between 1st March, 1915, and 31st March, 1919, are made pensionable for those men who retired between those dates?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if the war bonuses in this case will be made pensionable?

As the answer to this question involves a number of figures, with my hon. and learned Friend's permission, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the answer:

In the period mentioned the statutory pensionable pay of members of the Royal Irish Constabulary was increased in the case of head and other constables by 3s. weekly in 1916, and by a further 11s. weekly in 1918, and in the case of county and district inspectors by £50 and £40 per annum respectively in 1918. In the same period non-pensionable war bonus was paid as follows: ( a ) to head and other constables, 3 s . 6d. weekly, from 1st July, 1916, 5 s . 6d. weekly from 4th June, 1917, 8 s . weekly from 1st December, 1917, and 12 s . weekly from 1st June, 1918, in addition to certain war bonus allowances in respect of wives and children from 4th June, 1917; (b) to county and district inspectors, civil service rates from 17th December, 1917, to 30th August, 1918, and thereafter the same rates as head and other constables. As explained in my reply to the hon. Member's question of the 16th instant, the reason for treating a portion of war bonus as pensionable in the case of the civil service is not applicable in the case of the constabulary.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that on the 8th November last a young woman named Moira O'Niell was stabbed in the wrist with a bayonet by a member of the Royal Irish Constabulary; if he is aware that she has been treated at the London Hospital for blood poisoning; whether he is aware that the poison was of such a virulent character that her hand has rotted off at the wrist; and what steps he proposes to take in awarding compensation?

I am not able to trace the case on the information contained in the hon. Gentleman's question. If he will furnish me with further particulars, I will have enquiries made.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the complaints from Ireland of inadequate publicity given to methods of government of which they complain, he will suggest in any negotiations he may carry on that the Sinn Fein Members of Parliament should attend Westminster, and thus give first-hand information on current happenings across the Irish Channel?

The Prime Minister has already made it quite plain that in the view of the Government there can be no peace in Ireland until those who claim to speak for the majority in that country have returned to constitutional methods.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Chief Secretary for Ire- land whether General Strickland has presented an Interim Report with regard to the incendiary fires in Cork, and whether it will be presented to the House before its rising?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second part of the question does not, therefore, arise.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say when he expects to get this report? I understood that he gave a pledge that, if possible, he would see that this report was produced before the end of the Session.

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman misunderstood what I said. I said that I would do my best to get information from General Headquarters in Ireland, in order to make a statement, if possible, before the House rose. I canot go further than that.

Is the right hon. Gentleman in a position to make a statement now?

I am not.

When will he be in a position to make a statement?

I have answered that.

Is he aware that it is rumoured on very good authority that he has the report from General Strickland? [HON. MEMBERS: " Oh, oh! "]

That is not true, and I shall be very glad if the hon. Member will give me the authority for the rumour.

On a point of Order. Is not an hon. Member obliged to be responsible for the truth of statements that he makes in a question?

The hon. Member for the Falls Division asked whether there was such a rumour. He remarked that a rumour had reached his ears, but I do not suppose that he invented it himself.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman clear this matter up by saying definitely that we cannot get any Interim Report, in view of the fact that to- morrow is the Prorogation, and we cannot have a Debate on that? [HON. MEMBERS: "Friday!"]

I have tried to make it perfectly clear. I will try again. A military court is sitting in the city of Cork inquiring into the cause of these fires. That court is responsible to General Sir Nevil Macready, the General Officer Commanding in Ireland. I have asked if it is possible to supply me with a statement that I might communicate to the House, but up to the present I have not received an answer to my telegram. I hope that I have made it perfectly clear that I have not neglected the matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Cork Employers' Federation have been refused admission to this court of inquiry, and can he say on what ground that admission has been refused?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman should give notice of that question.

{ by Private Notice ) asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, in spite of the Proclamation of General Macready, reprisals have still gone on, and further reprisals are threatened by the forces of the Crown; whether the Proclamation of General Macready applies to the Black and Tans and the Auxiliaries, and to the whole country; and, if not, will the order be made general?

So far as I am aware the answer to the first two parts of the question are in the negative. The Proclamation referred to explicitly states that it applies to all persons subject to military or martial law. It follows that, within the area in which martial law has been proclaimed, this Proclamation applies to the whole of the police forces equally with the military and the civilian population. The third part of the question, therefore, does not arise As regards the last part of the question, the House is already aware that the supreme control in the martial law area, both of the troops and of the police,' is vested in the General Officer Commanding in Chief in Ireland May I say here that the so-called Black and Tans are British recruits to the Royal Irish Constabulary? They are not a separate force in Ireland. These men are recruited, in the majority of cases, from selected ex-service men who had first-class military records during the Great War.

4.0 P.M.

Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that General Strickland will be fully supported by the Government in enforcing discipline, and is there any truth in the rumours published in the papers — [HON. MEMBERS: " What papers?"]—the "Times"—that General Strickland is going to be relieved?

I have had no notice of that question from the hon. and gallant Member.

May I ask whether the effect of the right hon. Gentleman's answer to-day is to establish that General Macready's Order only operates in the districts in which martial law has been proclaimed, and that in all the other districts the military and police are still free to engage in murder, looting, and the destruction of property?

That question has not been submitted to me by the hon. Member. I would ask him to put the question which he did submit to me.

Then I will ask the question that I did submit to you. Can the Chief Secretary now state if General Macready's Order threatening the death penalty for troops engaging in murder, destruction of property, or looting applies to the police and Black and Tans; whether it applies to the whole country and to all branches of the military and police; if not, why it is made to apply only to certain districts and certain arms of the Service, thus encouraging the abuses in the districts and in the branches of the Service not covered by the Order; and whether similar Orders will be issued by the Inspector-General and by General Tudor?

On a point of Order. Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, may I ask whether it is either Parliamentary or compatible with the dignity of the Army constantly to refer to these men as " Black and Tans?"

I cannot stop the expressions which hon. Members use.

I understand that private notice was given of this question. Is it in order to give private notice of a question in certain words, and then ask the question in other words? If so, did you pass the words " Black and Tans " in the question of which private notice was given to you?

Are you aware that these ex-service men refer to themselves as "Black and Tans" and are very proud of the title?

Are you aware that every newspaper, both in England and Ireland, and the whole population of Ireland refer to them continually as "Black and Tans"?

Would the expressions "Buffs" and "Bluejackets" equally be out of Order?

I do not think that the expression "Black and Tans" is always used in a derogatory sense. Some people use it in a commendatory sense.

I have not yet had an answer to my question.

The hon. Member has had his answer in the previous reply.