asked the Minister of Pensions what is the total spent by his Ministry on central administration and local committees in his Estimates for 1921–22; and what proportion such administrative expenses bear to the total sums disbursed in pensions?

In the Ministry's Estimates for the year 1921–22, provision is made for the sum of £4,385,000 for cost of administration: The sum is made up as follows:— £ Headquarters and Regional Establishments (other than medical) 3,052,000 Local Committees 1,334,000 The total sum is approximately four per cent, of the amount disbursed in pensions, allowances and treatment.

asked the Minister of Pensions if the sum of £46,000 has been saved in pensions and grants to discharged soldiers suffering from heart disease; and what is the nature of the medical discovery by means of which this saving was effected?

I have no knowledge of the figure referred to in the first part of the question. A sum of nearly £4,000,000 a year is at present being paid to men who are pensioned for heart disease. Every effort is being made by the establishment of Cardiological Clinics with improved methods of diagnosis and treatment, to restore the health of men who suffer from this complaint.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question is based on a statement made in the Press by the hon. Member for Lanark?

I am not aware of that, but if the hon. Member will give me particulars, I shall be happy to look into the matter.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the inquiries with a view to identifying the person who shot Mrs. Ryan at her home at Cullen on 23rd December have been completed; whether the two constables arrested for the murder of Mr. J. Whelan at Ballyroan, Abbeyleix, on 27th December, have been tried; and whether the constable arrested for the murder of Mr. Patrick Thompson, of Lisnadar, county Westmeath, at Delvin on 6th October, has been tried?

The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the negative. In regard to the third part, the constable charged with the murder of Mr. Patrick Thompson was tried by court-martial on the 24th ultimo, and acquitted.

Why has the constable arrested for the murder of Mr. Whelan on 27th December not been tried yet?

There has not been time to procure evidence. Every effort is being made to do so.

Are inquiries as to who shot Mrs. Ryan still proceeding, and when will the Government be able to proceed in the matter?

Yes; inquiries are still proceeding, but the Government cannot fix a date.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he can now state the results of the courts of inquiry into the deaths of J. Hynan at Emly on 21st December, S. O'Brien at Charleville on 1st March, and Thomas Mullen at Clonberne on 2nd March; and whether any arrests have been made?

The finding of the court of inquiry in the case of John Hynan was that he was shot by a constable of the Royal Irish Constabulary, who fired in self-defence. The finding in the case of John O'Brien was one of wilful murder by persons unknown. No arrests have yet been made. The finding in the case of Thomas Mullen was that he was shot while attempting to escape.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that on 13th February two clergymen in Ballybay, co. Monaghan, the Reverend T. Connolly and the Reverend P. Murphy, were fired at from behind a hedge, three shots being discharged; whether a party of police, who happened to be passing in a motor, rushed behind the hedge and found concealed there a Black and Tan policeman named Cromwell and two civilians named Clark; whether two revolvers were found at the spot where they were arrested; whether Cromwell and the two Clarks were released immediately after being brought to barracks, and, if so, by whose order; whether it is usual to place under open arrest a policeman charged with attempting to murder; whether he has since been court-martialled, and, if so, with what result; and why proceedings against the Clarks were abandoned?

A very full and searching official inquiry which was held into this matter conclusively showed that the shots fired by the constable were not aimed at or in the direction of the priests, but were fired in the air with the intention of testing the revolver which the constable had recently had repaired. He was detained in custody pending the result of the inquiry and was then released on the ground that there was no evidence on which a criminal charge could be sustained. The two civilians who were in his company at the time of the accident and were both unarmed were released on the same ground.

Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say how many Protestants have been murdered in Monaghan?

If they were testing revolvers, how is it explained that they were crouching behind a hedge in the operation?

They were not crouching behind a hedge.

Were they not captured red-handed by the police, who arrived in a motor-car?

No. I have answered that.

Are not revolvers tested before they are issued? Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that the story is altogether incredible?

Is the court-martial concluded, and, if so, what is the result?

No. I have stated that when the matter was investigated they were released on the ground that there was no evidence on which a criminal charge could be sustained.

Is it not a fact that these men were released within, an hour of their arrest, and, if so, by whose authority?

I have already dealt with that point.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received from Mrs. Maire O'Donovan, widow of the mayor of Limerick, a letter with reference to the murder of her husband by Crown forces, in which she contradicts statements made by the Prime Minister, and asks him to make reparation for the injury he has done by these statements; whether he has personally investigated the facts set out by Mrs. O'Donovan, and especially the declaration by Mrs. O'Callaghan, widow of Alderman O'Callaghan, who was murdered in his own house on the same evening; and whether, if he still doubts the guilt of the Crown forces, he will set up the independent inquiry demanded by both Mrs. O'Donovan and Mrs. O'Callaghan?

Yes, Sir. I have received the letter referred to. A public inquiry into this murder has been held, and the relatives of the deceased, including Mrs. O'Callaghan, were invited to attend, and to assist in discovering the murderers, but they refused to do so. If Mrs. O'Callaghan is, as she states, in possession of important evidence, it is open to her, notwithstanding her previous refusal to assist in discovering the murderers of her husband, to forward it to my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary, who, I can assure her, is no less eager than she to discover the persons guilty of this wicked crime, or, if she prefers that the evidence should be investigated in public, I will request the Commander-in-Chief in Ireland to reassemble the Court. In view of the fact, however, which I think is well known to every Member of this House, that no jury in the South of Ireland can be trusted in present circumstances to bring in an impartial verdict, I am not prepared to assent to Mrs. O'Callaghan's request, and withdraw the Order made under R.O.I.E. 81, prohibiting coroner's inquests in the city of Limerick.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think an inquiry by Crown forces into charges of murder brought against the Crown forces themselves is an impartial method of investigation?

I have no doubt at all that it would be a most impartial investigation. These courts are very carefully chosen, and as a rule there is a legal representative present. It is our sincere desire to ascertain who committed this murder. There is a conflict of views. I know the hon. Gentleman is of opinion that it was organised by the Crown forces. It is my information—and I have made some inquiries into the subject—that these unfortunate men were regarded as being far too moderate.

"Oh!"

I am giving the information which I have, and it is that they were regarded as being too moderate, as declining to carry out the orders of the Irish Republican army, and that that is the reason why they were murdered. There is a conflict of view. We are quite willing that there should be the most complete inquiry into this subject, and that it should be in public.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his suggestion that these two men were murdered by Sinn Feiners is bitterly repudiated and resented by the widows of these two men, and that they have asked him, as a man of honour, to withdraw that suggestion; and, having regard to the attitude taken by the widows of the murdered men, I ask him whether, in justice to the memory of these men, he will withdraw the suggestion?

I would not like to say anything to hurt the feelings of widowed women—not a word—but I know the difficulties under which they exist at the present moment, and it is not very easy for them to express an opinion.

That is a scandalous statement—absolutely scandalous.

I repeat the statement, not for the sake of the hon. Gentleman, but of the people in Ireland—that if there be a desire to have an independent public inquiry, I shall do everything to facilitate it, and I will see that a Court is established, as long as they are prepared to give such evidence before that Court as they have got.

I think the right hon. Gentleman's offer of an independent public inquiry is a very fair one, but will he see that the inquiry will be in the real sense of the word independent, by having a tribunal which by no means could be regarded as interested in the dispute between the parties? There is a conflict of evidence. I have a strong feeling one way, and the right hon. Gentleman may have opinions the other way, and the relatives of these murdered people have a strong opinion which is rather against the impression suggested by the right hon. Gentleman. Is not the fair way in which to test the evidence to have a really judicial tribunal? There is no necessity for a jury. A County Court Judge [HON. MEMBERS: "Speech!"] The Prime Minister and myself both want to arrive at an agreement in this matter, and I want to suggest a better way of doing it—

There is only half an hour left for questions.

asked the Chief Secretary whether, following the assassination of two police-constables at Clifden, in Connemara, on 16th March last, nine houses, including the house of the father of ex-Sergeant-major M'Donnell, were burnt by the Crown forces; whether ex-Sergeant-major M'Donnell was shot while trying to extinguish the flames in his father's house; whether this was an official or unofficial reprisal; and whether Connemara is in the martial-law area?

The facts of the case are as follow. At 10 p.m. on 16th March two policemen, Constable Reynolds and Constable Sweeney, on patrol with others at Clifden were shot down in cold blood at point-blank range by a party of civilians, some of whom were masked. Reynolds, who had been living with his wife and young family in Clifden for some years and bore an excellent character, was instantly killed. Sweeney, who was also an Irishman and had served with distinction in the Irish Guards, was severely wounded in three places and did not survive 48 hours. News of this abominable outrage was conveyed to Galway 50 miles away by wireless, the telegraph wires having been cut. A party of Royal Irish Constabulary under three experienced officers was at once despatched by special train to the scene of the outrage in the hope of apprehending the murderers. This party, which included men who knew the locality well, arrived in Clifden between 3 a.m. and 4 a.m. on the morning of the 17th. As they approached certain houses which they intended to search fire was immediately opened from the houses on them. In the course of the encounter which ensued, twelve houses were burned and four others damaged. A man named John McDonnell, who escaped from one of the houses, was shot dead after running some distance. Another man named Peter Clancy, pensioner from the Royal Irish Constabulary, was wounded by a stray bullet. The statement that McDonnell was shot while endeavouring to extinguish the flames is untrue. As will be clear from what I have said this was not a case of reprisal. The district is not in the martial-law area.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the inhabitants of Clifden, who are not Sinn Feiners, deny the statement that any fire was opened, and state further that Clancy the ex-constable was put up against a wall, and shot?

No one is so likely to know whether fire is opened or not as the men who sustain it.

Is it not the usual excuse for acts of arson by Crown forces that they are fired on, and will the right hon. Gentleman have inquiries made into this case, as there seems to be a conflict of evidence?

Is it not a fact that any ex-soldier who is in the South of Ireland goes about with his life in his hands, owing to Sinn Fein?

If these houses were not burnt as reprisals, how does it happen that they were burnt accidentally?

I have already dealt with that in my answer. You cannot have an encounter of that kind without something of this sort.

Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that the burning of these houses was an accidental result of the encounter?

I suggest that it was a result of the encounter that arose in consequence of the firing.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain to the House how the firing of rifles could possibly set nine houses on fire?

asked the Chief Secretary whether he can give any information with regard to the recent shooting and burning of houses in Clifden, county Galway, by forces of the Crown; whether the Reverend Canon M'Alpine, the parish priest, was insulted and threatened to be, shot by one of the party in the presence of a member of the Royal Irish Constabulary; and if any arrest has been made?

As regards the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply I gave to a similar question asked by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull to-day (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy). As regards the latter part of the question, I am informed that, although an altercation took place between certain members of the party and the reverend gentleman, it is not true that his life was threatened or that he has been, or is now, in any personal danger.

Is not the reverend gentleman prepared to make a statement that he was threatened with being shot if he did not clear out?

I have given the hon. Gentleman all the information in my possession. There are two sides to every quarrel.

I am afraid, having heard the answer of the right hon. and learned Gentleman, that his information is entirely at fault.

That is nothing new.

asked the Chief Secretary whether, if further evidence is produced in any case of death in which a military court of inquiry, sitting in lieu of a coroner's inquest, has returned a verdict of murder by some person or persons unknown, or of justifiable homicide in cases where attempting to escape or resisting arrest is alleged, he will give orders for the reopening of the inquiry?

The General Officer Commanding-in-Chief has power to order a court of inquiry in lieu of inquest to reassemble in any case where he thinks this necessary, and where any evidence which might lead to the conviction of a murderer is forthcoming subsequent to the closing of a court of inquiry the case would always be further considered with a view to bringing the suspected person to trial.

Have these powers been exercised?

Not so far as I am aware, for the reason that the evidence has not been brought before the authorities.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the 26 cadets who were suspended by General Crozier in connection with the Trim looting are receiving full pay and allowances while awaiting trial; whether they are doing duty; if not, how long have they been receiving pay without doing duty; and whether, either under the Army Act or under the Regulations of the Royal Irish Constabulary, they are in such circumstances entitled to pay?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the replies given by my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary to the question asked by the hon. Member for the Falls Division on the 9th ultimo and to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for the Central Hull Division on the 23rd ultimo.

Does that mean that the 26 cadets have not yet been brought to trial?

Yes, because there is no evidence against them.

Have the six cadets who were put back for a field general court-martial because there was evidence against them been brought to trial?

Their trial is coming on very shortly. In that case there is evidence, and they are being tried. In the case of the other cadets there has been no primâ facie case against them up to the present.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, under the Army Act, if a man is accused his pay is suspended until he is either convicted or acquitted, and why is not that done in this case?

Is it not the fact that these men are not under the Army Act, do not receive Army rations, and feed themselves out of their pay, and if their pay was suspended they would be in a state of starvation?

They feed themselves out of loot.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he received a report of the raid made upon the house of Bishop Fogarty; whether the report disclosed conduct of the Crown forces which merited punishment; and whether he has taken disciplinary action in the matter?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and to the second part in the negative. The remainder of the question therefore does not arise. I would, however, refer the hon. Member to a reply which will be given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to a question by the hon. Member for the Welling-borough Division (Mr. W. R. Smith) this afternoon.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the member of the Auxiliary Division, Royal Irish Constabulary, responsible for the death of Mrs. Ryan, of Abbeyfeale, has yet been identified; and what further action has been taken?

Inquiries with a view to identifying the member of the Auxiliary Division by whom the shot which caused Mrs. Ryan's death was fired are still proceeding.

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to statements in the Press that recent issues of the "Irish Bulletin" are forged; whether he is aware that these documents could have been distributed only by persons in possession of the secret list of names and addresses to which the "Irish Bulletin" was regularly sent; and whether this list was amongst the documents seized by the Crown forces on the occasion of the raid on the headquarters of the Republican Propaganda Department?

asked the Chief Secretary whether he can state if, during the recent raid on the offices of the "Irish Bulletin," the Crown forces took away the list of journalists and politicians to whom that publication was being regularly sent; whether he is aware that since the seizure of that list the persons whose names appear on it have been receiving forgeries of that publication; whether the forged issues are being pre pared and posted in any Government Department in Dublin; and whether any of the money recently voted by this House for propaganda is being utilised in that work?

My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has no knowledge whatever of the authorship or source of issue of the publication which has excited so much interest and speculation, and he is in no better position than other hon. Members to express an opinion as to whether it is what it purports to be, a genuine Irish bulletin. Judging, however, from internal evidence of style and subject matter, and bearing in mind the date of its issue, he is inclined to accept what appears to be the general conclusion in regard to its authenticity. The suggestion that the Irish Government is in any way responsible for the document or that a single penny of the Irish Vote has been expended on its production is, of course, untrue. He has satisfied himself as to that.

How does the right hon. Gentleman think it possible for these forged "Bulletins" to come to private persons who have been receiving the genuine bulletins in the past unless they came from the Crown forces who seized the list of addresses, and will the right hon. Gentleman make further inquiry as to how this can be published and circulated without any expenditure of public money?

A great many things are circulated without any expenditure of public money.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that forged copies are coming out, each invariably bearing a twopenny stamp, to the list of, I believe, about 500 people who received the old "Bulletins," and how can that be done without an expenditure of public money?

It may be that the money is expended by benevolent politicians.

Will the Attorney-General assure the House that the same efforts will be made to trace the forged "Bulletins," and stop their circulation, as were made to stop the genuine "Bulletins"?

Certainly.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the Government have admitted having forged newspapers in imitation of the "Pravda" for circulation in Russia? Is this a case of the Irish Office following the example of the Home Office?

I do not admit anything of the kind.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the "Irish Bulletin" is such a stupid organ that it is not worth circulating?

asked the Chief Secretary the number of members of the forces of the Crown in Ireland who have been arrested for offences against the criminal law since the 1st January last; how many have been brought to trial; what the results of the trials have been; how many remain in custody awaiting trial; the number of members of the forces of the Crown who have been killed and wounded respectively, and the number of civilians, men, women, and children, who have been killed and wounded in Ireland since 1st January last; whether the report of the military court of inquiry into the murders of Alderman Clancy and Councillor O'Callaghan, of Limerick, on the 7th March last, has yet been received; and, if so, what is the nature of the report?

A return giving the particulars asked for in the first and second part of the question is in course of preparation, and if the hon. Member will kindly repeat the question on Thursday of next week, I hope then to be able to furnish him with the desired information. In regard to the last part of the question, I would refer him to a reply I gave to the hon. Member for the Silvertown Division on the 24th ultimo.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that on 9th January a party of auxiliary police from Beggar's Bush barracks, and armed with revolvers, raided the Pembroke fire brigade station at Ballsbridge, Dublin, and subsequently commandeered a motor car at a neighbouring garage; whether these policemen were under the influence of drink and threatened the lives of the firemen on duty; whether the lives of the firemen were again threatened when they were identifying the raiders; whether two of the auxiliaries again visited the fire station on 15th January, demanded the production of the men who had reported the previous raid and presented a revolver at the head of the superintendent; whether the same party held up at the same time two men of the Dublin Metro politan Police and stole their arms and ammunition, whether these raiders were surprised and captured by their own commanding officer and other officers; and what further action has been taken?

I have called for a full report with regard to these allegations. If the hon. Member will kindly repeat the question—of which I only received notice yesterday—on Thursday of next week I hope then to be in a position to furnish him with a reply.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that Major Ewen Bruce, of the auxiliary police, who was sentenced to nine months' imprisonment without hard labour for stealing £75 from a creamery, is no longer in Waterford gaol; and whether he is still in custody and, if so, where?

This prisoner was removed on the 11th February, 1921, from Waterford prison to Mountjoy prison, where he is now.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the withdrawal of all Crown forces and services from the martial law areas in Ireland and any loyalists who may wish to leave, and the establishment of a modified form of blockade, to be intensified as requisite, in order to save life to both sides and to secure an economy of force?

I trust it will not be necessary to contemplate any such action as is indicated in my Noble Friend's question.

asked the Prime Minister whether any guarantee of safety, and, if so, what, will be given to voters for a free exercise of their vote in the martial law and other areas in Ireland for the election of the Irish Parliament, both Sinn Fein and loyalist?

I cannot say more than that every possible step will be taken to secure the free and unfettered exercise of the franchise by all sections of the electorate during the forthcoming elections.

Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman will withdraw the auxiliary police before the election takes place?

Quite the reverse.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that no meetings of more than eight persons are allowed in the South and West of Ireland at present? How can an election possibly be held in the circumstances?

Quite frankly, that is not the real danger in the South of Ireland. The danger is that there is such intimidation that there would be no freedom for people to express opinions.

By whom?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Press is censored? How can there be an election in the circumstances? It is a farce.

The hon. and gallant Member has only to think of the number of murders that have taken place in the course of the last few days of civilians who dared to express an opinion contrary to that of Sinn Fein.

How many murders have there been by Crown forces?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there was a great deal of intimidation at the local elections in Ireland last year by the Sinn Feiners?

What about Belfast?

asked the Chief Secretary whether the recent deaths of six men at Clogheen, near Cork, has been the subject of a military inquiry; if so, what were the conclusions reached by the court; and whether his attention has been drawn to reports current in the district that these men were murdered and mutilated in a brutal fashion?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The court found that the deceased were killed instantaneously by gunshot wounds inflicted by forces of the Crown in the execution of their duty. My attention has not been drawn to any reports such as those suggested in the question, but I take this opportunity of stating that if any such reports have been current they are false, and are disproved by the evidence given at the inquiry, which included evidence from a doctor and from relatives of the deceased who saw the bodies.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is aware that at the military inquiry into the death of Christopher Reynolds, of Rathfarnham, alleged to have been murdered by Crown forces, the representatives of the Press have been excluded by written military orders; and whether, in view of his repeated assurances to this House that military inquiries in lieu of inquests are open to the Press and to the public, why they are excluded in this and in other cases?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to a private notice question by the hon. Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. O'Connor) yesterday. I would add, however, that if in the opinion of the Presiding Officer the admission of members of the public during any part of the proceedings of a Court of Inquiry would be likely to endanger the lives of witnesses, it would be within his discretion, and it would be his duty to direct that the public should be excluded while the witnesses in question were being heard.

Does the exclusion of the public mean the exclusion of the Press?

That is also within the discretion of the President if he consider that lives are endangered.

Is not that really a distinct withdrawal of the pledge given yesterday by the right hon. and learned Gentleman that the inquiry should be public?

I was dealing in that particular case with the inquiry as regards Christopher Reynolds, when I gave that pledge, but I am now dealing with the general question of the powers of the President of a court-martial.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the Chief Secretary has on several occasions told this House that the Press are always admitted to these inquiries?

My recollection is that it is so, but it is quite within the discretion of the President, for the very grave reasons stated in my answer, to exclude the Press.

asked the Chief Secretary the number of arms and ammunition captured from, or surrendered by, rebel forces in Ireland since the 1st January, 1921?

If the hon. Member will kindly repeat the question on Thursday of next week, I hope then to be able to furnish him with these particulars.

asked the Chief Secretary how many men have been carried as hostages on military or police lorries; how long they were detained; how many casualties have occurred among these men; and whether he has any report as to the circumstances under which the casualties, if any, took place?

I am unable to furnish the hon. and gallant Member with information as to the number of persons who have been carried as hostages, or as to the length of time for which they have been detained. There have been no casualties to hostages carried on military lorries, and there has been only one casualty, a case of wounding, to hostages on police lorries. An official inquiry is being held into the circumstances in which this casualty occurred.

Is it the official policy to carry civilians as hostages in these lorries, and is not that against all the laws of war?

That is a matter for the military authorities in the martial law area.

Is this the official policy? Has this the approval of the right hon. and learned Gentleman's Department?

Is there any record kept of the number of hostages carried in lorries, and, if not, does not the right hon. and learned Gentleman think there ought to be a record, or is any police officer entitled to take any Sinn Feiner or anyone and put him on a lorry whenever he likes?

Will the Government abandon a policy which is both useless and barbarous?

It is scandalous—like the Germans.

asked the Chief Secretary the circumstances under which Patrick Consellan was killed near Ennis; and whether the military evidence at the military court of inquiry showed that fire was opened on unarmed men leaving a church and that Consellan was killed during the firing?

The findings of the military court of inquiry held in lieu of inquest was that this man met his death on the 27th February, 1921, as the result of a gunshot wound caused by a shot which was fired by a soldier in the execution of his duty. The evidence given at the inquiry was to the effect that Consellan and a number of other men who were collected outside the church at Lissacasly on the morning of the above date were challenged by a party of military and called upon to halt. Instead of complying with this order they ran away, and the troops thereupon fired, with the result that Consellan was mortally wounded.

Does the fact of men running away unarmed, in terror or defiance, justify soldiers firing upon them and killing them?

The experience of the military has been that when groups of men are gathered together it invariably ends in the murder of either a policeman or a military man.

Is the Attorney-General aware that none of the men fired upon were armed and no arms were found there at all?

I must have notice of that.

asked the Chief Secretary who is responsible for the notice posted up in Tullamore last Monday stating that anyone seen loitering or standing at corners would be liable to be shot at sight, and that the same would apply to anyone seen with his hands in his pockets or acting in a suspicious manner; and whether any officer approved especially of the last sentence in the notice referred to?

My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary is inquiring into this matter. If the hon. Member will repeat the question one day next week he hopes then to be in a position to furnish him with a reply.

asked the Chief Secretary the total number of uncharged and untried prisoners now in custody in Ireland, giving the number in each internment camp and prison?

I only received notice of this question yesterday. If the hon. Member will kindly put it down again for this day week I shall be glad to supply the figures.

asked the Chief Secretary the total number of police and auxiliaries in Ireland, and approximately the monthly cost of the force?

The total strength of the police forces in Ireland, including the Auxiliary Division, is 18,330 and the total monthly cost (approximately) is £621,200.

Does not the right hon. Member think that the number of these forces should be largely increased, in view of the number of murders that are taking place?

That matter will be considered by the responsible authorities.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the questions on the Paper show the complete and disastrous failure of the policy of the Government in Ireland?

Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, may I ask if it is not the fact that the policy the Government are pursuing was in reality suggested by the Noble Lord the Member for Hitchin some months ago?

Would not a considerable reduction be made to our forces in Ireland if the rebels there did not get the support they are getting from hon. Members above the Gangway?

( by Private Notice ) asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that four political prisoners are being detained in one cell in Waterford Military Barracks and have been left without food for several days, and what action he proposes to take?

I regret that it has been impossible for me to complete my inquiry into the allegations in this question of which I only received notice this morning. If the hon. Member will put it down again I hope then to be in a position to reply.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the importance of the Washington Convention on Maternity, and also of the opinion that the draft convention of the Washington Conference must be submitted to Parliament, an opportunity will be given at an early date to discuss the Government's policy on the maternity convention, and also the Ministerial declaration that it is for the Government to decide whether any particular convention shall be sub mitted to Parliament?

In view of the great pressure of Parliamentary business, I regret that I cannot at the present time make any definite arrangements for such a discussion, and I must remind my right hon. Friend that it formed the subject of a discussion on the 22nd March.

If the Prime Minister cannot at present give an assurance for an early date, can he assure us that if things improve in the next week or two he will reconsider it?

We will consider it afresh, yes.

Will the right hon. Gentleman in reconsideration bear in mind the fact that there was some hope held out that there would be a full discussion. I do not put it as high as a pledge?

If my Noble Friend will look at those pledges he will find they were pledges given before the discussion in March.

asked the Prime Minister what are the duties and hours of work of the 363 employés of the League of Nations; what proportion of their emoluments is paid as frais de représentation and whether such proportion is free of tax?

As the answer to this question is rather long, I propose, with the permission of the hon. and gallant Member, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the answer:—

The figures given as to the number of persons employed on the Secretariat of the League of Nations at Geneva include experts on legal, political, economic, financial, and other matters, interpreters and translators, secretaries, stenographers, duplicators, messengers, etc., also house staff of caretakers, cleaners, firemen, etc. These constitute the Secretaries and staff provided for by Article VI. of the Covenant.

Their duties are to perform the secretarial work necessitated by the engagements laid down in Articles 1 to 26 of the Covenant, which have been subscribed to by 46 States.

The office hours of the clerical staff are from 9 a.m. to 5.30 p.m., with 1½ hours for lunch. House staff have an eight-hour day or its equivalent, in accordance with the Swiss law.

The Secretary-General and three undersecretaries-general are the only persons paid frais de représentation, which, in the case of the Secretary-General, amount to 60 per cent., and in that of the Deputy-Secretary-General to 40 per cent., and of the other two under-secretaries-general to 25 per cent. of their total emoluments. These sums are not subject to tax.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in addition to the salary and allowance of 200,000 gold francs paid annually to Sir Eric Drummond, the Secretary-General of the League of Nations, this gentleman has yet been provided with a house in Geneva; if so, at what cost; whether in addition to salary and allowances, he receives travelling expenses; and whether any portion of the sum paid to him is free of tax?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative; the second does not, therefore, arise. The answer to the third and fourth parts of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Prime Minister whether the official of the Treasury appointed to serve on the League of Nations' Committee to consider the organisations, numbers, salaries, and allowances of the permanent staff of the Secretariat of the League of Nations is to receive a special salary and allowances for that work; and, if so, at what rate and by whom are they to be paid?

The representative of the British Treasury, in common with the other members of the Committee, will receive from the League his travelling expenses to and from Geneva, and an allowance of 70 gold francs a day while actually engaged on the work of the Committee, but no special salary.

By whom is this paid? Is it part of the general expenses of the League?

I am afraid I have not the information. I will let my hon. and gallant Friend know later.

asked the Lord Privy Seal when the mandate for East Africa will actually be laid upon the Table?

Before the mandate is laid, it will be necessary to communicate with the French Government, but every effort will be made to expedite the matter.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Home Secretary stated on the 7th March that this mandate would be laid in a few days?

I was not aware that my right hon. Friend said within a few days, but I am quite ready to accept it from my hon. Friend. We will do our best to expedite the matter.

Will my right hon. Friend explain why it is necessary, in the case of a mandate which will only be executed by the British Government, to obtain the consent of anybody at all to lay it on the Table of this House, since the whole purpose of laying it on the Table of this House is to ascertain whether this House is ready to assume the responsibility which it is proposed to impose upon it by the terms of the mandate?

As my Noble Friend knows, these mandates have been a matter of discussion. I am not prepared, without notice, to give the particular reasons which render it necessary. They must arise out of the negotiations.

In making these inquiries, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that this is not a case of an agreement between this country and another country, but the case of a suggestion by this country as to the terms on which it will be prepared to accept the Mandate?

I do not wholly accept my Noble Friend's description. The terms of these Mandates have been a matter of negotiation between the principal Allied Powers, but if my Noble Friend wishes an answer to a specific question, which I am not able to give him to-day, if he will put it on the Paper, I will do my best to get an answer from the Foreign Office.

asked the Lord Privy Seal when the Mandate for Mesopotamia will be submitted to Parliament for its definite approval, and in what manner he proposes that this shall be done?

I will consult my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies as soon as he returns as to the manner and time at which the discussion promised by my predecessor, on the 23rd February, can best be afforded.

Has the right hon. Gentleman noticed the statement of the Secretary of the League of Nations in the "Times" which blows the great theory of Mandates to smithereens, and whether, under those circumstances, he will consider, as appears to be possible, with the consent of the League of Nations, the submission of the Mandate to us before it is submitted to them for final consideration?

Certainly I have noticed the statement of the Secretary of the League of Nations. I do not myself see anything inconsistent in that statement with the various statements made in this House by my predecessor. I cannot go further until I have been able to consult my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Churchill).

Will the right hon. Gentleman consult the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, who made a statement in the House of Lords diametrically opposed to that of the Secretary of the League of Nations?

I will certainly consult my Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

May I put down a question in a week's time?

indicated assent.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether that section of the ex-German Cameroons for which Great Britain has been granted a mandate is to be administered separately or as part of Nigeria; and whether any administrative deficit in respect to this mandated territory will be defrayed by Great Britain or by Nigeria?

It is proposed that the British sphere of the Cameroons should be administered as a part of Nigeria, and that any administrative deficit in respect of that sphere should be met from Nigerian funds.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that numerous murders of ex-service men by rebels have recently taken place in Southern Ireland; that in the month of February last eight ex-service men were so murdered; and what means exist of making provision for the families and dependents of such men?

I regret to state that the answer to the first and second parts of this question is in the affirmative. The continued loyalty to the Empire of these gallant men who fought to uphold the honour of Ireland in the Great War is the only known cause of their murder. Apart from any payments which may be due from the Ministry of Pensions in certain cases where the murdered men were in receipt of disability pension, compensation may be claimed from the local authorities subject to the provision of the' Criminal Injuries Acts.

If the local authorities do not pay is there any mode of forcing payment, or of providing it from some other place?

Yes, it can be deducted from the grants paid by the Crown to the local authorities, and it is open to the person aggrieved to attach by a garnishee order any rates payable to the local authorities.

Has the time not now come to afford special protection to these ex-service men, whose proved loyalty makes them a certain target for this murder gang?

Very often these men are murdered in protecting other people.

Is it not the case that many of the people whose claims are not paid are not in a position to enforce them, as they cannot obtain orders such as the Attorney-General mentions, and will he see if other means can be arranged to help them?

Every facility is given as regards deduction from the grants. I will see if these facilities can be extended.

Is not the best protection of the ex-service men for the Government to found their policy on the principles for which these ex-service men fought?

asked the Chief Secretary if he will state the number of ex-service men who have been murdered by the insurgents since 1st January, 1920?

The number of ex-service men who are known to have been murdered by Sinn Fein rebels in Ireland since the 1st January, 1920, is 150. Of these, 80 were members of the Royal Irish Constabulary and 30 members of the Auxiliary Division. The remaining 40 were civilians.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Imperial Defence Committee met and gave full considerations to the reductions in the cavalry of the United Kingdom and India, involving the disbanding in all of 67 cavalry regiments, before deciding to disband the four Regular and 45 Yeomanry regiments in the United Kingdom?

The answer is in the negative. The responsibility for these reductions must be taken by the Government and by Parliament.

Was the reduction of the Indian cavalry regiments settled in the first place in this country? Is the whole defensive position of the Empire being considered in this connection? So long as the vast majority of the British Army are in Mesopotamia, on the Rhine, and in Palestine, does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that the question of disbanding four cavalry regiments in this country should be delayed until some of the troops have returned to this country?

The hon. and gallant Member is raising very big issues, which have been discussed at considerable length here, and I do not think that by question and answer I can possibly deal with the subject.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider my suggestion?

We have considered this among other methods of securing economy in the country. We had to take into account, not merely the needs of the Empire, but the resources of this country.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to state definitely that it is not now intended, under any circumstances, to proceed with the construction of a Channel tunnel?

I regret that I am unable to make any statement on this subject at present.

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that Belgium has dispensed with the necessity for the visa on passports, and France has just decided to reciprocate, he will recommend that similar action be taken by this country with regard, at any rate, to our two nearest Allies?

The Belgian Government has decided to dispense with the necessity for visas for French and American citizens and for Japanese, Italian, Luxemburg, and British subjects, but I have no information that the French Government have decided on similar action. His Majesty's Government do not at present propose to abolish the Regulation by which all aliens are required to obtain British visas before entering the United Kingdom.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, when he has time, give his attention to this subject, the result of which would be to give intense satisfaction to our Allies in France?

If France and Belgium can do away with these very irritating and expensive hindrances to trade and travel, why on earth cannot we do the same?

I am sure my hon. Friend appreciates that while these Regulations are somewhat inconvenient in certain cases, there are a good many other considerations.

Do they not equally apply to Belgium, which is able to do without them?

Can the hon. Gentleman answer my question why, if it is unnecessary in France and Belgium, it should be necessary in this country? What are the different circumstances?