asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if his attention has been drawn to statements in the Press by the Archbishop of Tuam concerning the murder of a man 60 years of age named Horan, of Partly, County Mayo, on 7th March, in his own house by members of the Crown forces; whether this was a so-called reprisal for an ambush at Partry; and whether any persons have been arrested in connection with the ambush or the murder of the late Mr. Horan?

Perhaps the hon. and gallant Gentleman will postpone this question, as we have not yet got the information.

I shall be very glad to postpone it, but I should like to ask how it is in regard to a question put down a fortnight ago—a very long notice!—about a matter that occurred over a month ago, why the Department of the right hon. Gentleman has not yet got the information?

The delay is not in our Department.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he is now aware that John O'Connor, of Gloundaegh, Tarranfore, County Kerry, was arrested on 15th December last whilst on his way to church and driven away in a motor lorry; that he was beaten while in the lorry, thrown from the lorry into the road, fired on, and wounded; that civilians then carried him into the house of Thomas Brosnan, Threegneves, Currow, Tarranfore, where he was tended by the Rev. J. J. O'Sullivan, of Killentierna, Tarranfore; that' four officers returned from Tarranfore, to which place the lorry had proceeded, in a motor-car, and on ascertaining from the Rev. J. J. O'Sullivan where O'Connor lay wounded, entered Brosnan's house and murdered O'Connor by firing three revolver bullets into his head; whether he is aware that the Rev. J. J. O'Sullivan, Mr. Brosnan, and other eye witnesses are prepared to testify to the foregoing facts on oath; whether an inquiry has been held; whether these witnesses were called; what was the finding; what action, if any, has been taken; and whether any compensation is to be paid to the widow and seven children of the murdered man?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave to his similar question on the 6th instant. No report has yet been received by me.

The reply to which the right hon. Gentleman referred to said that the inquiry had not been completed? This is a fortnight later. Is the inquiry still sitting, and is the right hon. Gentleman really trying to get the information in this case?

Certainly, but I am not in a position to say exactly whether it is sitting at the moment. It is extremely difficult in these matters to communicate with those concerned, seeing that the roads, telegraph wires, and railways are all cut.

Three months ago!

asked the Chief Secretary whether he can give any information as to the circumstances attending the recent murder of Hugh Duffy, Rockcorry, County Monaghan, a Protestant Army pensioner, who was found shot dead at Moylemuck, two miles from Rockcorry; what reason can be suggested for this murder; and whether anyone has been arrested in connection with this crime?

A little girl found the dead body of Duffy lying in a country lane on the afternoon of the 1st instant. The police were informed and removed the body to their barracks. There were four bullet marks on the head, one near the shoulder and one near the wrist. Duffy was an ex-service man aged 65 years. He was acting as auxiliary postman and was delivering a telegram which turned out to be bogus and which was undoubtedly sent to bring him along the road where his assassins were lying in wait. He was on friendly terms with the police. A slip with the words in type, "Spies and informers beware," was found pinned to his breast. I regret to say no one has yet been arrested for the brutal murder of this old soldier.

How is it that the right hon. Gentleman can get these details at once when a question is put down by the hon. and learned Member for York, but that he cannot get the information when I repeat a question weekly and monthly?

Because this particular question deals with the County of Monaghan, with which it is comparatively easy to communicate, while the question of the hon. and gallant Gentleman deals with County Kerry, which is in quite a different position.

Has the right hon. Gentleman found out any more particulars in regard to this case than he has found out in regard to the other case of the hon. and gallant Gentleman?

asked the Chief Secretary whether he can give any information as to the circumstances attending the murder, on Saturday, 2nd April, of Thomas Morris, aged 68, a pensioner of the Royal Irish Constabulary, who served in the Royal Irish Fusiliers during the War, and who was taken from his house in the Thurles district by three armed masked men and was shot dead on the roadside near his house and was found with a notice pinned to his breast with the words Convicted Spy; and whether any arrests have been made?

The circumstances attending the murder of Thomas Morris are as follow: He was on a visit to his sister, and was forcibly taken from her house by three armed and masked men on the night of the 2nd instant. The police found his mutilated body on the road about noon the following day. There was a dirty white handkerchief tied across his eyes. There were three gunshot wounds on the body—one in the left breast, one on the left side in the neck, and one in the stomach, through which the bowels were protruding. A card was pinned to the body, and on it was written: "Convicted spy, tried, found guilty, and executed by I.R.A." I regret that no arrests have yet been made.

Is there any reason suggested why he should have been murdered, except that he was a pensioner of the Royal Irish Constabulary?

There is no suggestion, save that.

Are these unfortunate ex-service men and ex-members of the Royal Irish Constabulary given any arms whereby they may defend themselves, and, at any rate, have a chance of their lives? [Mr. LYNN: "No!"]

I think not, except on active service.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman represent to the Chief Secretary the desirability of giving these men some chance of life?

The question of giving them arms is considered by the competent military and constabulary authorities on application made to them.

Then may I ask the right hon. Gentleman if these men are allowed to apply for arms, and is each case considered on its merits?

That is so.

Is it not a fact that no one can really get a permit for arms in Ireland ac the present time?

Except your party!

asked the Chief Secretary whether the three men arrested on the charge of murdering Patrick Kennedy and James Murphy have yet been brought to trial; and what action is being taken with reference to those members of the forces of the Crown who formed the remainder of the escort on the occasion of this murder?

The trial of the three men arrested in connection with this murder began on Monday of this week, and is still proceeding. Pending the result of this trial, it is obviously impossible for me to discuss the matter raised in the latter part of the question.

As these men have not beeu arrested and the case is not sub judice, can the right hon. Gentleman say what action has been taken with regard to the remainder?

Is it in order to ask a question with regard to men who have been charged with murder, and have not yet been convicted?

I understand that this question refers to those who have not been convicted.

I may mention that every effort has been made to secure evidence against any other persons, and even in the case of the three persons before the court-martial one has been acquitted.

Will the right hon. Gentleman refuse to answer any questions on this matter until these men have been either acquitted or convicted?

In view of the fact that the men to whom this question relates have not been tried or even arrested, will the hon. and learned Gentleman state how many men formed this escort, and does he contend that the Department is not aware of the composition of this escort and how many went out? Is the right hon. Gentleman so occupied with his other duties that he does not even know the composition of this escort?

asked the Chief Secretary whether, in view of the statement made at Dublin Castle on 3rd March that advances of compensation money are made to policemen or their dependants who have suffered personal injuries or damage to their property out of grants which normally went to local authorities, he will authorise similar advances to be made to the innocent victims of outrages by members of the forces of the Crown; and whether, in view of his own admission as to the murder of Timothy Crowley by Cadet Harte, he will order an immediate advance to be made to this man's dependants?

In the particular case mentioned, which was one of murder, the County Court Judge has, I am informed, dismissed the claim for compensation, presumably on legal grounds. The arrangement referred to by which advances may be made out of diverted grants on account of awards made against a local authority is therefore inapplicable. On the general question I am not at present in a position to add anything to the reply given by my right hon. Friend to a similar question by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull on 9th of March.

asked the Chief Secretary what is the result of the inquiries into the death of Mr. John Geoghegan, who was shot by uniformed men at Moycullen; what action has been taken in the case of two policemen, who are stated to have brutally assaulted Mr. T. Fox, of Donegal, on 22nd February; what is the result of the inquiry into the murders of William Loughnane and Laurence Hickey and the attempted murder of four other men on the same occasion at Thurles; and what is the result of the court-martial on the soldier charged with disgraceful conduct in a woman's house at Thurles?

The investigation into the circumstances of Mr. Geoghegan's death are still proceeding. A careful official inquiry has been held into the allegation that the assault upon Mr. Fox of Donegal on the 22nd February was committed by policemen and it has not been found possible to obtain any evidence in support of this charge. The records of the movement of each member of the local police on the evening in question have been examined and the movements of each man have been satisfactorily accounted for. In regard to the murders and attempted murders at Thurles on the 9th ultimo, I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to a question on this subject by the hon. Member for the Pontypool Division (Mr. Griffiths) yesterday. The soldier referred to in the last part of the question has now been tried by court-martial and has been awarded 91 days' field punishment No. 2.

asked the Chief Secretary whether Crown forces bombed eight houses and shops at Abbeyleix, Queen's County, and destroyed the shops of Thomas Kearney and T. O'Farrell, at Ballyporeen, county Tipperary, on 23rd March last; whether houses and shops were wrecked by bombs at Westport, county Mayo, on 26th March last, also by Crown forces; whether these were official or unofficial reprisals; who ordered the destruction; and on what principle these houses and shops were selected for damage?

The Constabulary barrack at Abbeyleix was attacked by armed rebels on the night of the 19th ultimo. The attack was beaten off and the police pursued their assailants through the town, firing several volleys and throwing a number of hand grenades in the course of the pursuit. A certain amount of damage was caused to buildings, but whether by the fire of the rebels or that of the police is not known. Any damage due to the police fire was unintentional, and in the circumstances unavoidable. The burning of the two shops at Ballyporeen on the 23rd ultimo appears to have taken place about 2 a.m. while an attack on the police barrack of that town was proceeding, and the whole of the police force were in the barrack at the time. The police have been unable to obtain any information as to the origin of these fires. In regard to the last part of the question, my right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has directed an inquiry to be made into the occurrence at West-port on the 26th ultimo; and as that inquiry is still proceeding, I am not yet in a position to make any statement on the matter.

In regard to the latter part of the question, may I take it that these reprisals at Westport were not official reprisals, that they were not ordered by any competent military authority, and therefore unofficial; and will the House be informed of the result of the inquiry?

I have already told the hon. and gallant Gentleman that an inquiry has been directed and is still proceeding; and, therefore, pending its finish, I am not in a position to reply to, the question.

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?

The number of persons against whom internment orders have been made and who are now confined in the various internment camps is 2,208. The number of persons untried, including persons in civil and military custody against whom no charge has as yet been made and also persons awaiting release, is at present 1,250. This figure includes 438 persons against whom internment orders have been made who are awaiting transfer to internment camps.

How many of these, can the right hon. Gentleman say, are women and young persons?

I cannot say without notice.

Has the right hon. Gentleman had any complaints of the conditions of these internment camps, and will steps be taken to improve them in view of the fact that these men have not been tried?

No, Sir; judging by the reports published in the Press that I have seen, and the descriptions, the prisoners seem to be having the time of their lives.

Shocking, shocking!

How many of these prisoners are aliens?

I cannot say without notice.

Is, the right hon. Gentleman aware that the same thing, that they were having the time of their lives, was said about the Boer women in the internment camps in South Africa?

Is it not a fact that the bulk of these prisoners in the internment camps are really much better off than people earning an honest living?

asked the Chief Secretary whether the Auxiliary Division have the same quota of the Royal Army Medical Service attached to them as would be provided in the case of a corresponding number of troops employed in active military operations; and whether they have special ambulance cars allotted to them for the conveyance of wounded men?

The Auxiliary Division is not provided with its own special medical transports. Ambulances and other necessaries of medical equipment are borrowed from the regular forces as and when required, and this arrangement has been found to answer satisfactorily.

Has the attention of the Attorney-General been drawn to the terrible sufferings of many of the Auxiliaries who have been wounded in the Longford Camp; will he make further inquiries and consult the Director of the Royal Army Medical Service in Ireland as to what steps have been taken to prevent a recurrence of these terrible occurrences to men suffering from grievous wounds who have often been left lying in the open without proper attention?

I will certainly bring this matter to the attention of the authorities.

In the case of the Longford Camp there is a gross scandal in connection with the wounded servants of the Crown who have been left lying about for 24 hours, open to being mutilated by Sinn Feiners because no proper provision was made for them, and because it was not the duty of the Army authorities to convey them to the hospital

The matter is receiving the attention of the authorities.

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 1st January last, and how many have been brought to trial; what the results of the trials have been, and 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?

The numbers 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 is 221. Of this number 165 have been brought to trial, of whom 124 have been convicted and 41 acquitted. The sentences imposed in the cases of conviction were as follow: 12 sentences of penal servitude for periods from 3 to 10 years. 96 sentences of imprisonment for periods from 1 month to 2 years. 5 sentences of reduction to the ranks. 1 discharge under Probation of Offenders Act. 1 bound over to keep the peace. 7 sentences not yet promulgated. The number of men at present in custody is 51. Two were kidnapped by rebels while being conveyed in military custody, and 3 have been allowed bail. The number of members of the forces of the Crown who have been killed during this period is 140, and the number wounded is 266. It is not possible to give the number of civilian casualties, owing to the fact that those which have been sustained by armed civilians in attacks on the Crown forces are carefully concealed. I dealt with the last part of this question in a reply to a question by the hon. Member for the Silvertown Division on the 24th ultimo.

Has any member of the armed forces of the Crown been subjected to the extreme penalty of the law?

No, Sir; but at present a number of trials for murder are proceeding.

Has the report of the inquiry into the murder of Councillor O'Callaghan been received, and will it be laid before the House?

I have already referred to this in my answer given on the 7th of March to the hon. Member for Silver-town (Mr. J. Jones), and if my hon. and gallant Friend will refer to that reply, he will find the particulars he asks for.

What percentage do these convictions bear to the total number of the forces of the Crown employed in Ireland?

I could not give them offhand. The number of soldiers serving in Ireland is 50,000, and the police force numbers 18,000. That makes a total of 68,000, and the total convictions are 165. The hon. and gallant Gentleman can calculate the percentage for himself.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether those, members of the force charged with murder will have the advantage of defending counsel to cross-examine the witnesses for the prosecution?

They will have exactly the same privileges as any prisoner who is tried for anything before a court-martial.

Were any of these convictions actually for murder?

No, Sir. I said in my answer that the maximum punishment is ten years' penal servitude.

asked the Chief Secretary on what charge, if any, P. Colivet, Member of Parliament for Limerick City, was arrested; whether and for what reason Mr. Colivet has been kept for over a fortnight in a cell under the courthouse at Rathkeale, with a damp nagged floor, no means of heating, and lighted only by an unglazed grating which faces a blank wall, the cell being consequently so dark that reading is hardly possible except by candle-light; whether, these cells, of which Mr. Colivet's is the best, are quite unfit for human habitation; whether he will have the use of them discontinued; and whether Mr. Colivet, Member of Parliament for Limerick City, has been taken round on a lorry as a hostage?

Mr. Colivet was arrested in the martial law area as an officer in the so-called Irish Republican Army, and an internment order will be made against him. The cell mentioned in the question was the only accommodation available, and while it is true that it is not well lighted, it is perfectly fit for habitation, and is at least as good as many of the billets locally occupied by troops. I do not therefore propose to direct that its use shall be discontinued. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

Is it not a fact that the previous prisoner who occupied this cell had to be sent to the hospital to be treated for sores owing to the unhealthy conditions?

The cell is provided by the Town Council of Limerick, and it has been in use for many years.

Does this mean that men awaiting trial are being taken round as hostages on a motor lorry, and is that part of the Government's policy?

The hon. and gallant Member always seems to adopt a threatening or a bullying attitude, and that is not the way, if he wants to get an answer, to make it likely that he will succeed.

I beg your pardon, Mr. Speaker, if my action was not parliamentary, but circumstances like this rather stir many of us. Can I have an answer to my question?

asked the Chief Secretary what number of houses are estimated to be required by the local authorities in the area of Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland, respectively; what is the amount of the loans applied for for housing under the Housing Act, 1919, in these two areas; what amount has been advanced; and what amount is still awaiting the urban councils' assent to the statutory conditions as to audit?

The number of houses estimated to be required in the Ulster area is 11,233; and in the remainder of Ireland, 41,800. In the area of Northern Ireland £2,250,065 has been applied for and of this £705,765 has already been Sanctioned, and the remainder can be sanctioned when required. In Southern Ireland the amount of the loans applied for, up to date, is £2,180,223. Of this, £58,086 has been sanctioned, and the amount held over awaiting the assent of the urban councils to audit is £2,119,859.

Am I to understand that houses to the value of £2,000,000 will be erected, and that employment to that extent will be given?

At any rate, the Local Government Board will be quite willing to advance the sums required for the erection of these houses.

asked the Prime Minister whether the tribunal which inquired into the death of ex-Mayor O'Callaghan included a member with legal knowledge and experience; and whether in all similar inquiries such a member will be included?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Every court trying capital offences has at least one member certified to be a person of legal knowledge and experience, but it is not possible to have such a member on every Court of Inquiry.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this particular Court of Inquiry did not try a man for his life? It was a Court of Inquiry, and my question is directed to Courts of Inquiry and not to courts-martial.

I think the hon. and gallant Member has not quite understood my answer. There was a legal member of this Court.

Will there be a legal member on all such inquiries?

No, we cannot possibly provide a legal member for every Court of Inquiry; but on this particular Court of Inquiry there was a legal member.

On every Court of Inquiry which inquires into the death of a soldier of the Crown forces?

( by Private Notice ) asked why the inquiry into the death of Christopher Reynolds has been suspended; when it will be resumed; and whether the proceedings will take place in an open Court?

The inquiry is at present adjourned, owing to the fact that several of the witnesses are also witnesses in another case which is now proceeding, but it will be re-opened at the earliest possible date. Subject to the power of the Court to sit in camera for the protection of witnesses, the answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether it is still intended to bring to trial the 26 cadets discharged by General Crozier in connection with the Trim looting?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by me to a question asked on this subject by the hon. Member for Central Aberdeen on the 7th instant.

Are these 26 cadets still doing no duty, and what are they doing?

I have already informed the hon. Member that seven of the cadets, against whom there is evidence, are to be brought to trial. As regards the other 19, they are at present not doing any duty, but are not being brought to trial for the simple reason that there is no evidence against them.

If there is no evidence against them, are they to be allowed indefinitely going on doing no duty and drawing pay?

We are making the fullest enquiries for the purpose of trying to bring them to trial, if there is evidence against them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman forgetful of the fact that General Crozier, their Commanding Officer at the time, thought there was sufficient evidence to drive them out of the force and send them to England?

No, I am aware of the exact opposite. General Crozier came to the conclusion that there was evidence against seven of them, and directed them to be tried. He came to the conclusion, as regards 19, that there was no evidence against them.

Why, if there is no evidence against them, did he drive them out of the force, and send them over to England until they were recalled by General Tudor?

That is one of the things which was discussed in the course of the Debate, and no one could explain it.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the house of Mr. David Clancy, of Kilfinane, county Cork, was destroyed in the month of February by military or police as a reprisal for the burning of an aeroplane which had descended close by; and whether, in view of the admission by the police that the house was burnt without authority, the £900 compensation awarded by Judge Lawsmith at the Limerick Quarter Sessions will be paid by the Treasury?

The particular incident referred to is at present the subject of inquiry. In regard to the payment of the compensation awarded, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by me to the hon. Member for Central Hull on the 9th March last on the subject of compensation awards generally.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the total casualties to the forces of the Crown and the rebels in Ireland since the 1st January are known; and, if not, whether any approximate estimate can be given?

The total casualties sustained by the Crown forces in Ireland since the 1st January last number 406, made up as follows:— Police killed 95 Police wounded 173 Military killed 45 Military wounded 93 The casualties sustained by the rebels in ambushes and other attacks upon the Crown forces are carefully concealed, and it is not possible to furnish an approximate estimate for this period. The number, however, is believed to have been considerable.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House in the terms of the Chief Secretary that the policy is succeeding and is succeeding rapidly?

asked the Chief Secretary how many farmers and other civilians have lost their lives through acts of violence in Ireland since 1st January; how many of these men were ex-service men; whether the religious denominations to which they belonged are known; and in how many of these cases is it known whether these murders were due to Sinn Fein and how many to the forces of the Crown?

If the Noble Lord will repeat this question (of which I received notice only yesterday), on Thursday of next week I shall endeavour to furnish him with the desired information.

asked the Prime Minister what is the total tonnage handed over to the Allies and Associated Powers of the Austro-Hungarian commercial fleet; and in what proportions and to what countries it has been distributed?

I have been asked to reply. I have no complete information in regard to the total tonnage of the smaller ex-Austro-Hungarian vessels, but I am informed that the total tonnage of ex-Austrian and ex-Hungarian vessels over 2,000 tons gross amounts to about 700,000 tons, and that the whole of this tonnage is under Italian management, with the exception of about 61,000 tons, which is under the temporary management of France. Up to the present the Reparation Commission have only allotted 21 ex-Austrian vessels of 104,449 tons for final ownership, the whole of this amount being allotted to Italy.

Considering the great loss we sustained through the Austro-Hungarian submarines, will not some claim be made on behalf of this country?

The Austrian vessels would not by any means comprise the whole of the vessels which have been given up, and it has been arranged amongst the Allies that the various claims should be met in the most convenient way. The Italians get the Austro-Hungarian vessels, and, of course, that reduces proportionately any claim they would have upon German vessels.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has considered a Note from the Government of the United States of America; whether the Note affirmed that America is not bound by any decision contained in the Treaty of Versailles or adopted by the Supreme Council of the League of Nations; whether he is aware that such an affirmation implies that nothing that has been concluded in Europe since 1918 is in any way binding on America; and, if so, what action he proposes to take?

The Note which deals with the disposal of the Island of Yap and the general question of the oversea territories surrender by Germany has been published in the United States and reproduced in the English Press. It is now under consideration by His Majesty's Government, in consultation with the other Allied Governments, to whom similar Notes have been addressed.

Does not the refusal of the United States Government to join the League nullify the raison d'être of the League. Is it possible, when 70,000,000 people of the most enlightened community in the world refuse to join this new institution, that it can be successfully carried on?

May I ask the Prime Minister if he will indicate to the House how far the refusal of the United States to remain loyal to the signatories of the Peace of Versailles affects that peace as relating to ourselves?

Is the question going to be re-opened? Will there be another conference?

asked the Prime Minister whether the disposition of the Island of Yap was provisionally decided upon with the assent of American representatives at Paris in the year 1919; at which meeting and on what date the Supreme Allied Council selected Japan as mandatory for the island; whether the first protest against this decision was received from the American Government in November, 1920; and whether this protest was communicated to the Council of the League of Nations before they finally approved the Japanese mandate on 20th December, 1920?

The subject referred to in the question is under friendly discussion between the United States of America and the Allied Powers. I am sure that my hon. Friend will agree with me in thinking that nothing could be gained, and much might be lost, by dragging the controversy into the Parliamentary arena, whether by question and answer or otherwise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when he refers to dragging the controversy into the publicity of Parliament, he is touching the very point of interest to the masses of the people of this country, who wish these international questions to be brought before Parliament, in order that they may understand where they are? In view of the fact that the Treaty of Versailles required the four signatures of the four representatives of the four great countries, and that one signature has now not been honoured, will the right hon. Gentleman consider at an early date placing the people of this country, through this House of Commons, in a position to understand exactly where we are at the present moment with reference to international affairs?

I am perfectly certain that the last thing the people of this country desire is any misunderstanding with the people of the United States. Anything which will conduce to or provoke discussions which may lead to any such misunderstanding will be deprecated by everyone.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the chief cause of misunderstanding is the reticence of the executives of the various Governments, and that the best means of disposing of all misunderstanding is a plain statement, understanded of the common people, to the House of Commons?

asked the Prime Minister which of the Allied countries and which of the Dominions have passed legislation similar to the German Reparation (Recovery) Act?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answers which I gave on the 4th April last to questions by the hon. Members for East Edinburgh (Mr. Hogge) and West Derbyshire (Mr. C. White), to which there is nothing to add.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if the matter has got any further?

I cannot say.

asked the Prime Minister whether any agreement has been made with France as to the sanctions to be applied to Germany in the event of Germany's default in respect of reparation on 1st May?

The answer is in the negative.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that no further occupation of any part of Germany will take place until this House has been consulted?

asked the Prime Minister if he will give an assurance on behalf of the Government that no further financial or military or other commitments will be incurred or loans granted to any Ally by Great Britain, whether arising out of the Treaty of Versailles or not, without first obtaining the sanction of Parliament?

We shall follow the regular practice by informing Parliament at once of any action proposed by the Allies which involves the co-operation of this country, and where Parliamentary sanction is required it will be sought as early as possible.

May I ask whether, following the regular practice, it would not be the custom to require the sanction of Parliament first, and not merely to ask Parliament afterwards to support and approve of that which has already been decided by the War Cabinet?

In the event of no agreement being reached with Germany before the end of this month, will the right hon. Gentleman make a statement in this House explaining the situation before any fresh steps are taken?

I shall follow the ordinary practice, and I do not see how it is possible to conduct international business except on those lines. We shall first of all consult with our Allies. The moment we come to a provisional agreement, I shall announce it to the House of Commons, and the House of Commons will have the opportunity of debating it. That is the course I have always followed.

May we take it that Parliamentary approval will be sought before this country co-operates in any further occupation of German territory?

I think I made it quite clear that I shall state to the House of Commons what the arrangements are which are made at the International Conference.

As this is a matter involving our nation in a continuous expense of many millions, may I ask if I have understood the right hon. Gentleman properly as saying that before he commits this country, as the head of the Government, to expenditure of any sort whatsoever, he will seek first the approval of this Parliament, in view of the fact that the tradition of this House is always to support the decision of the head of the Executive if possible?

The hon. Member's question is of the nature of argument.

asked the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government have made any progress towards the liberation of Rahmy Bey; and why, after the thanks accorded to him by His Majesty's Government in Smyrna, this has not taken place long ago?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to the hon. and gallant Member for the Wrekin Division on Thursday last.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when this House is really going to be told the true reason of this scandalous piece of ingratitude to a man who befriended many British subjects during the War?

I hope it will be possible to give an answer in regard to the Turkish prisoners at a comparatively early date.

May I remind my hon. Friend that the same answer was given last year?

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government to renew the Profiteering Act when it expires in May next?

I have been asked to reply. The answer is in the negative.

Will the hon. Gentleman say whether the Government is going to consider the renewal of that portion of the Profiteering Act which provides for the investigation of the action of trusts and combines?

No, Sir; I do not think so. Hon. Members will recollect that in the Debate on the Board of Trade Vote I stated what was the intention of the Government with reference to legislation of this character. I think it would be much more satisfactory to allow the Profiteering Act to lapse, and to introduce, at the time when it will be required, legislation of a permanent nature.

asked the Prime Minister when it is intended that the House shall discuss the Ways and Means Resolutions relating to the Safeguarding of Industries Bill?

In view of the present industrial situation, I regret that it is not possible for me to name a date.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in order that Members may have a clearer view of the intended application of the Ways and Means Resolutions (Safeguarding of Industries Bill), he will circulate as a White Paper the draft of the Bill before the Resolutions are discussed in the Committee?

I have been asked to reply. No, Sir. Such a course would be altogether unusual, and would, in my opinion, offer no advantages.

May I ask the Prime Minister, arising out of that, whether the full powers granted under the Ways and Means Resolutions will be embodied in the Bill when it is introduced?

I think we will follow the usual course in that respect. As my hon. and gallant Friend knows very well, we may take full powers under the Resolutions, but it does not necessarily follow that the Bill will adhere strictly to the lines indicated by the wording of the Resolutions.

May I ask the Leader of the House why the Bill should not be printed and circulated before the Resolutions are taken?

I do not know of any occasion on which such a procedure as that has been followed.

If the Bill cannot be printed and circulated, could not a Memorandum be printed and circulated, giving us some information about these industries, the number of people employed in them, the wages paid, and the capital invested, in order that the House might have some real idea about the effect of the Bill?

I think the hon. Member had better wait for the discussion on the Resolutions, when information on these matters can be given. Many Bills—noticeably Finance Bills—have been founded on Resolutions before now, but no such Bill has ever been produced before the House has considered the Resolutions The framing of the Bill is dependent upon the decision which the House reaches on the Resolutions.

May we take it that the powers conferred by the Resolutions are not wider than the Bill will require?

When you introduce Resolutions on which to found a Bill, the Resolutions may be as wide as you may conceivably wish to make the Bill, but the Bill may be much narrower than the Resolutions. In the imposition of a charge the Bill cannot extend further than the Resolutions, but the Resolutions habitually do extend further than the Bill.

asked the Prime Minister whether any provision is made in the Estimates of this year for the salary of £5,000 for the Minister without Portfolio; if so, under what Vote it will come; and whether an undertaking was given to the House that no such salary would be payable.

An opportunity will occur this afternoon for the discussion of this subject on the Vote for the Cabinet Offices.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that very grave dissatisfaction exists among a great many of his supporters in the House over the whole arrangement?

My hon. Friend will be able to express that dissatisfaction.

Will the Prime Minister consider the advisability of allowing the salary of the Minister without Portfolio to be balloted upon by back benchers, several hundreds of whom are very anxious that their views should be pronounced?

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the definite intention of the Government to carry out the promise given during the passing of the last Increase of Rent and Mortgage Interest (Restrictions) Act and introduce legislation in respect of business premises before 24th June next?

I am not aware of any such promise, and the Government do not contemplate legislation on this subject during the present Session.

Is the Prime Minister aware that when this modification was urged on the House by the late Minister for Health, he stated that by the time the year was up the Government would have other proposals, and that he actually used these words: If at the end of that time our other proposals be not sufficiently advanced, it would be quite a simple matter to prolong the Statute. Will the Prime Minister give consideration to that statement with a view to prolonging the Statute in regard to business premises.

We have given some consideration to this subject. We certainly cannot introduce legislation this year.

Will the Prime Minister have inquiry made from those who are administering the Act as to how it is working throughout the country, considering the great dissatisfaction which exists generally?

We have had a great deal of inquiry made. There is always a danger if you have a restriction of this kind that it discourages building operations.

Will the Prime Minister consult the county court judges and other persons who have been administering the Act as to how far and in what respect it has failed?

Yes, but I am not at all sure that their opinion would be final in this respect. A special class of people comes before them. There are two sides to the question, and one side does not always come before the county court judge.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government will consider the advisability, in view of the serious unemployment, of facilitating, as they did during the War, the temporary acquisition of allotments in and round towns by persons who are unemployed?

The Government are strongly in favour of the development of the allotment movement. As was explained in the answer to the hon. and gallant Member's question on the 11th instant, compulsory powers have been conferred on local authorities enabling them to acquire land for allotments on 14 days' notice, and the Ministry of Agriculture is urging local authorities to exercise their powers where-ever necessary. The emergency powers under the Defence of the Realm Act which were exercised during the War have been repealed, and could not be restored without fresh legislation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that, under the Emergency Powers Act, the Government has again taken powers to acquire land, and could not that Act be used to facilitate the acquisition of land, not in permanency, but during the crisis in this country?

I should like notice of that question. I am not sure that we shall have those powers. It is obviously desirable, in view of the unemployment in the country, that healthy employment of this kind should be provided. If the local authorities can see their way, I earnestly trust that they will do their best, as it will undoubtedly help to improve the general conditions.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there would be thousands more applicants for these allotments if they were given some security of tenure?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some people today are demanding the necessary small holdings and allotments, and that parish councils and county councils have refused the applications, and in those cases will the Ministry of Agriculture be prepared to override such a decision?

I am not sure that that is desirable. The best way, undoubtedly, of dealing with this situation would be to interest the local authorities in the subject. They understand the local conditions. It is very difficult for a central department to override the authority of the people who know the conditions. Besides, they would be able to get the consent and co-operation of the authorities concerned if they take the thing in hand. What is really wanted is local pressure in order to induce, the same movement that we had during the War, which provided a good deal of useful employment and increased the food supplies of the country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that just the land that is wanted for these allotments is extremely expensive, and that the only way to get that land used is to allow people to use it temporarily, without forcing the local authorities to buy it at its very high price? Could not steps be taken under the Emergency Powers Act to inform local authorities that they were entitled to take up this land temporarily for the purposes of allotments?

I agree that we could get it cheaply if it is wanted for temporary purposes, and that, I should have thought, they could do. Whether it is desirable to send a communication to them I will consider.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government have considered the possibility of intimating to the Government of Greece that they are prepared, in conjunction with the Government of India, to accept as security for the moneys owed to His Majesty's Government by Greece the districts of Smyrna and Thrace?

The reply is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether anything is known as to the exact state of affairs arising out of the hostilities between the Turks and Greeks in Asia Minor?

On the northern sector the Greeks have fallen back to their original position east of Brussa. On the southern sector, the Greeks have evacuated Afuin-Kara-Hissar, to which they advanced early in the operation. As to the losses on either side, we have no definite information, and the rival claims are most conflicting.

Is it a fact that a Greek fleet is now menacing the Dardanelles?

Can we be quite sure that no British troops will be involved in helping the Greeks?

asked the Prime Minister whether Great Britain has agreed to take over any French obligations in Poland; and, if so, for what reasons?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister what was the French guarantee to Poland in support of the Allied policy in Poland; what forces the French have employed; and how far are we committed in the event of France finding herself unable to continue to carry out her undertaking?

I have no information with regard to the guarantee referred to nor as to the forces employed by the French. In reply to the third part of the question, His Majesty's Government are not in any way committed.

asked the Prime Minister whether any steps have been taken to formulate the general peace treaty alluded to in the preamble of the Russian Trade Agreement; and, if so, as no state of war exists between any part of Russia and this country, he can state what is the object of drawing up a peace treaty?

With regard to the first part of the question, I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I returned to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) on the 11th inst. In regard to the last part of the question, I would refer him to the preamble of the Trade Agreement, which states in general terms the purpose of a general peace treaty, and to the declaration of recognition of claims which is appended to the Agreement.

asked the Prime Minister how many Russian Bolsheviks have been allowed passports to this country under Article 4 of the Russian Trade Agreement since it was signed; and whether these persons are being carefully watched by the police to see that they do not indulge in propaganda in this country, in view of the instructions recently issued by Messrs. Bukharin, Berezin, and Pavlov Veltmau that trade delegations were to use every effort to spread discontent and cause strikes and disturbances?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. Permission has been given, so far, for three Russians to come to this country under the Article referred to. As regards the latter part of the question, I beg to refer to answers given in the last few days by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the House, to the effect that the instructions in question were stated by Krassin to be a forgery, and that in any case all due precautions against inflammatory propaganda would be taken.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these categorical denials by Bolsheviks are generally categorical falsehoods, and will he therefore see that the police watch these people, especially at this time?

All precautions will be taken.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, apart from the undertakings of the Soviet Government, the Moscow International, holding itself to be quite free and independent of that Government, is pushing its propaganda, and, of course, Lenin knows nothing about it?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us the names of the three Russians to whom permission has been granted to come to England?