asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) what actual cash payment has been made in respect of the 50,000 £1 shares, constituting the nominal capital of the Products Corporation, Limited; what is the annual turnover of this firm and of the businesses which it has acquired; if he can state from what sources this company, with its small capital, derives the financial backing necessary to the successful carrying on of the business transactions in which it is involved;

(2) whether the business of the Products Corporation, Limited, has been established at the instigation of the German financier, Herr Stinnes, to continue the sale in this country of German chemicals and other products, formerly carried on by firms which have been voluntarily dissolved because of their known German connections; and whether, having regard to the importance of making this country independent of Germany in regard to the supply of chemicals and other key products of which this corporation acts as agent for the Stinnes industrial group, he will institute an inquiry into the manner in which the firm came into being and the steps which it may be desirable to take to prevent German financiers obtaining a control of British markets in this secret manner?

As I informed my hon. and gallant Friend, the Board of Trade is making a full inquiry into this case, but I am not yet in a position to make a statement on the subject.

When does the hon. Gentleman think he will be able to give a reply to these questions?

As soon as the information is complete, but it would be very unfortunate to take any decision until the fullest possible inquiry has been made.

If I put down a question for the week after the Whitsuntide Recess, will the hon. Gentleman be able to give a reply?

I cannot tell. You may be very speedy in your attempts to get information, but the information may not be forthcoming with the same speed as it is sought.

Have inquiries so far shown that if German chemical and surgical instruments be prohibited, we shall be as a nation chemically and surgically inefficient?

I do not think that that arises out of the question. It is a matter more conveniently discussed in Debate.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the price of milk in the metropolitan area has been fixed at 8d. per quart for the summer months; and whether, in view of the vital necessity of cheap milk to the working population, he will immediately appoint a Committee to inquire into and report on the cost of production and distribution with the view to determining what is a fair price to the consumer?

I understand that the price of 8d. is that recommended by the National Federation of Dairymen's Associations. The retail price of milk depends not only on the cost of production and distribution of such milk as is consumed directly, but also upon the loss which has to be incurred by the conversion of large quantities of milk at this season into butter and cheese, the prices of which are governed by those of imported supplies. The Report on Milk prepared by a Sub-Committee appointed by the Standing Committee on Trusts (Cmd. 1102) indicated that combinations of distributors had not dealt unfairly with either producer or consumer down to the autumn of last year, and I see no reason to think that circumstances are different at the present time. To reimpose control of milk prices would involve the re-engagement of a considerable and costly staff, and it is not clear that the consumer would ultimately benefit.

Am I to understand that in the view of the hon. Gentleman no reduction in the figure of 8d. is possible, and is it not a fact that milk is at present sold in certain areas at a cost of 6d. per quart. How can he explain the difference?

I should require notice of that question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that Sub-Committees of the Profiteering Department of the Board of Trade investigated the operations of the soap combine and the sewing-cotton combine with a view to ascertaining whether undue profits were being made, he will issue similar instructions to the Profiteering Department to investigate the operations of the milk combine in the Metropolis before the Profiteering Act expires on 19th May and not leave it to an individual member of the public, who has neither the time nor the money, to proceed against a whole industry before a local profiteering committee?

As I have just stated in reply to my hon. and gallant Friend, the Member for Battersea, South, the questions of combines in the milk trade has already been investigated by a Sub-Committee of the Central Committee, and I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of their report.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the amount charged per month by the Swedish Government to a British commercial traveller in Sweden, and what form of registration is involved; and whether there is any charge made to Swedish commercial travellers in this country or any necessity for registration on their part?

A British commercial traveller visiting Sweden must obtain a licence, costing 100 kroner. This licence is available for 30 days from the date of issue, and an additional 50 kroner is charged for every 15 days by which this period is exceeded. No charge is made to Swedish commercial travellers visiting the United Kingdom unless they solicit or take orders for goods for the sale of which a licence is required from domiciled traders, e.g., wines, spirits, &c. Commercial travellers visiting the United Kingdom from Sweden are not required to register as such.

While agreeing that it is more blessed to give than to receive, is it not a fact that in all these cases we are rather apt to give too much and receive too little?

That is a matter of opinion, but my hon. Friend will remember that it has been dealt with a great many times already this Session. The difficulty we are in is, that we could not put on in any special case a charge which would be a breach of the most favoured nation Clause.

If that is a most favoured nation treaty, how are we favoured?

Does any commercial treaty with Sweden contain a most favoured nation Clause which would prevent us from dealing—

Notice should be given of that question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the profit made by retailers of goods manufactured in Germany, Belgium, Czecho-Slovakia, and other countries is far higher than the profit made by them on the sale of similar goods made in this country; and if this inducement to press the sale of these foreign goods to the disadvantage of the home-made goods is resulting in great losses to the British labour market and the increase of unemployment?

There are no official sources of information as to the profits made by retailers in the sale of goods of any particular origin, but I have received representations in the sense of the allegations contained in my hon. Friend's question, and I think there is little doubt that such allegations are well founded.

Who is getting the profit? Is it the retailer or an intermediary?

That would depend on the circumstances of each ease. In some cases it is the retailer, and in others the middleman.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the prices of crude oil and fuel oil have fallen by 50 per cent. since May, 1920, whereas the price of petrol has arisen by 10 per cent. since that date; and whether, having regard to the fact that the cost of producing petrol is necessarily dependent in a large measure upon the costs of producing crude oil and fuel oil, respectively, he will institute an inquiry into the present prices of petrol?

The price of petrol has been closely investigated by a Sub-Committee under the Profiteering Acts, who reported in February and November of last year. I do not think any further inquiry would add to our knowledge of the general situation.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the facts are correctly stated in the question?

Is it not the fact that the rise in the price of petrol has kept pace with the rise in the value of Government shares in the Anglo-Persian Oil Company?

I think the figures given in the question are approximately correct.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the salary in each instance of the 16 transferred servants from the Ministry of Food and the four transferred from the Ministry of Munitions to the Board of Trade who do not give their full time to their duties; what are their hours of work; and when will their services be dispensed with and their duties performed by members of the transferred staffs who work full time?

Of the 16 part-time officials transferred from the Ministry of Food to the Board of Trade, two have retired, three receive no salary, and two are Provincial Enforcement Officers at £300 a year. The remaining nine are expert technical advisers and receive remuneration for services actually rendered. The rate of remuneration for a full day's attendance is on the average three guineas. The liquidation of accounts involves constant reference to officials conversant with the administrative details, but would not justify the expense of their full-time employment. Their services will be dispensed with whenever they cease to be remunerative to the State. Questions relating to officers transferred from the Ministry of Munitions should be addressed to the Treasury.

asked the Prime Minister whether men serving in the Navy, Army, Police, or Civil Service get a war bonus; whether those serving in the Navy, Army, and the Police are allowed to join a confederation such as the Civil Service Confederation; whether they are allowed to join any organisation which expresses such views as those in the manifesto of the 12th April; and, if not, what are the reasons for such a discrimination?

The answer to the first part of the question is that the pay of the Navy, Army and Air Force is fixed on a post-War basis which does not provide for a cost of living bonus as a separate item, whereas the pay of the Police and the Civil Service consists partly of rates or scales of wages and salary and partly of a cost of living bonus. With regard to the latter part of the question it is certainly permissible for civil servants to form themselves into associations of a kind that would not be allowed in the case of the Navy, Army, Air Force and Police forces. Within the limits of question and answer I could not usefully enter into a discussion of the principles governing the regulation of these differently constituted branches of the public service, but it must be obvious to my Noble Friend that the same considerations do not apply, and indeed could not reasonably be made to apply, to all these services alike.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the proved efficiency of oil as a substitute for coal for motive power, what steps he is taking to secure an increasing quantity; and whether he will take steps to reduce the cost and also to stimulate the activities of the oil wells of this country?

This question is already receiving the careful consideration of the Government. There are ample supplies of fuel oil available, and its price is at present comparatively low. An important feature of the question is the need for adaptation of plant to burn oil, and I understand that this is at present under consideration by many power users. The oil wells of this country are, unfortunately, not yet a material factor in the provision of fuel supplies.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, notwithstanding the Emergency Regulations, citizens and townsmen's associations will be given fair opportunity of obtaining by lawful and peaceable methods the necessary supply of coal for their localities which, by active or passive methods of resistance, other sections of the community are seeking to deprive them of?

I am afraid I do not quite understand what is in my hon. Friend's mind. The whole object of the Emergency Regulations relating to the distribution of coal is to give all citizens a fair opportunity of obtaining coal for their urgent needs so far as the quantity available permits.

Suppose that hundreds of tons of coal are hung up in a river, how can the associations get hold of it?

By swimming for it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the approximate value of the privilege with respect to obtaining coal free, or at reduced prices compared with the general public, enjoyed by persons engaged in the mining industry during 1920?

The value during 1920 to persons engaged in the mining industry of the privilege of the supply of free coal or coal at a reduced price is estimated at approximately £7,000,000.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is it worth to the miners separately? Take the number of miners who have this allowance: how much is it worth to them per week?

I could not give an answer without notice, and I do not think that it would be very valuable because there are so many different cases.

Is it not a fact that the miners receive considerable advantage out of this free coal added to their wages, and that they also receive in many cases free houses?

I thought that that was dealt with by my answer.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in those districts where, presumably, free coal is given, the basic rate in several instances is lower than that of other districts, and that there is an enormous number of districts where there is no free coal or coal at a reduced price granted to the miners?

I am not aware of that, but I do not dispute it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries, and find out?

If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will put down a specific question, I will do so, but I cannot answer a general question like that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the distress which is now prevalent among merchant service sailors and their families and dependants at British ports in consequence of the coal stoppage; whether he will take into consideration the privations which are being endured by these men through no fault of their own, and who, having regard to the services which they rendered to the country during the War, have a powerful claim upon the nation; and what measures he proposes to take for the relief of these men and their families?

I am aware that there is a serious amount of unemployment in the mercantile marine, and there is no doubt that it has been increased by the Coal stoppage; but my hon. Friend will realise that anything in the nature of a special relief measure for one particular industry, at a time when all are suffering, would be out of the question.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are large numbers of other classes of workmen affected in exactly the same way?

I have just said so.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in order to secure economy of fuel, the House can meet at 12 o'clock daily during the continuance of the coal strike; and whether, with the same object, an earlier closing hour can be fixed for all places of entertainment, relaxation, and refreshment, which depend upon the consumption of coal for their lighting?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will recommend that the House of Commons should meet on and after Tuesday next at 12 noon each day, and adjourn at 8.30 p.m. until the coal dispute is settled?

For reasons which have often been stated in the House by myself and others, I do not think that an earlier meeting of the House is necessary. With regard to the second part of my Noble Friend's question, I can add nothing to the answer which was given him on Thursday last.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on Wednesday of last week, among the Emergency Regulations passed, one was passed which would empower the Government to take over the mines of the country? That being so, would not the taking over of the mines and the working of them obviate any difficulties?

asked the Secretary for Mines whether any addition has been made to coal mines which have been flooded since the last Report; and, if so, how many men were previously employed in such mines?

The number of mines now wholly flooded is 46. The number of persons employed in these mines was 14,656. The reason why the latter figure has fallen, while the former has risen, as compared with the figures which I gave on the 25th April, is that since that date some of the larger pits which were then flooded have been un-watered to the shaft bottom, while several smaller pits have become flooded.

Will the right hon. Gentleman issue a tabulated statement giving the names of the flooded mines and the districts in which they are situated? Is he aware that several large mines, which were in the list and are kept in, are now being inspected daily?

I have just said that there has been a change since the first figures were issued. I think I could give the figures for which the hon. and gallant Gentleman asks.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the wide powers given to the Government in the Emergency Regulations passed by this House on 4th May; that if and when the property mentioned in ( a ), ( b ), ( c ), ( d ), and ( e ) of Regulation 13 is taken over by the Government it will be possible to make arrangements with the Miners' Federation and enable the Government to

asked the Secretary for Mines whether, under the proposals put before the Miners' Federation by the Government, he will say how, if 130 per cent. for the increase in the cost of living and 20 per cent. in order to provide the coal getter with a fuller life was added to his pre-War wage, such coal-getter's wage would compare with that which he could earn if he resumed work at the present time in Scotland, Yorkshire, and South Wales?

As the reply involves a number of figures, I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following table shows the average earnings per shift of coal-getters (1) on piece-work, (2) on day-wage, in South Wales, Scotland, and Yorkshire, respectively, ( a ) at June, 1914, ( b ) as estimated for May, 1921, under the proposals submitted by the Government, assuming in each case a reduction of 3s. per shift as compared with March, and ( c ) with the addition of 150 per cent. to earnings of June, 1914:—

pay the miners the wages demanded, thereby putting an end to the present lock-out; and whether he is prepared to advise the Government to put Regulation 13 into operation at once?

I am aware of the wide powers given to the Government by the Regulation in question, but I am afraid they are not quite so wide as my hon. Friend suggests.

In order to give the Government a chance of making up its mind, I shall put down this question again three weeks from to-day.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether, seeing that the coal industry is a complicated one and that this House and the country are unavoidably ignorant of many facts necessary in order to form an instructed opinion, he will appoint a Select Committee of this House, composed of unofficial Members who have no connection with the coal trade, who would report on the conditions prevailing in the industry and what changes, if any, are desirable in order to secure permanent peace therein?

No, Sir, I cannot agree that the course proposed by my hon. and gallant Friend would bring about the end which he desires.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has considered the question of recommending the use of fuel oil for railway locomotives; if so, will he state his decision; and what steps he has taken in the matter?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that locomotives can be run efficiently on oil fuel; that in many countries oil is the sole fuel used in their railway systems; that abundant supplies of oil are available at British ports; and whether he will consider the advisability of using oil fuel for the railways to meet the crisis that has arisen owing to the curtailment of our coal supplies?

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the shortage of coal, any of the railway companies are in a position to use oil fuel, which can be obtained for the use of locomotives; whether his Department has drawn the attention of the companies to this fuel; and whether he can bring any pressure to bear on them if this fuel can be used, so as to relieve the public from the present reduced passenger service?

The railway companies are fully aware of the possibility of utilising oil fuel for locomotives, and, with the object of saving coal, certain companies have already fitted engines with the necessary apparatus for the purpose of substituting oil for coal during the present emergency. I am in close touch with the railway companies in this matter.

asked the Minister of Transport what is the effect on railway men owing to the present reduced services caused by the shortage of coal; are all or any of them put on short time or reduced wages, or have the railway companies, under their labour agreements, to pay a full week's wages to all men in railway service irrespective of the hours they work on the present short services, or are the companies enabled to save on their usual weekly labour costs; and can he say approximately what the weekly savings are to the companies?

Arrangements have now been introduced, with the agreement of the Railway Unions, under which the work will be shared out among the men, and the guarantee of a full week's wages was suspended as from Monday last. The men will, however, be guaranteed for the present a minimum of three days' work per week, and work to this extent exists. I am afraid that I cannot give an estimate of the savings that may be effected by this arrangement.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the lessons of the coal stoppage and the danger of depending for the national industries on one type of fuel, he proposes to stimulate the development of electrical power to enable this alternative to be more generally utilised?

I am fully alive to the point raised, and am taking all possible steps to stimulate the development of electrical power.

asked the Prime Minister if his attention has been drawn to the case of two pit ponies left underground at the Leven colliery, Fifeshire; whether the local inspector's report confirms the statement that one of the ponies was injured whilst they were being taken into the mine workings on bogies; and if any steps can be taken to stop the prac- tice of taking ponies into mine workings on bogies, which makes their movement in an emergency difficult or impossible?

I have been asked to reply. I have had a further inquiry made by one of the local inspectors of mines, and find from his report that a member of the party who took one of the ponies in now states that the pony was kept on the bogie for on hour and a half while a fall was cleared. The register shows that the pony was lame for the next five days with a swollen leg, and it is impossible to resist the inference that the lameness resulted from his having been kept so long on the bogie. The report on which my answer of the 12th April was based did not bring out this fact, and I regret that I was not then aware of it. I will consult my advisers as to the feasibility of prohibiting the practice of taking horses into workings where they can only be got in or out on bogies. I agree with the hon. Member in deprecating the practice.

asked the Minister of Labour the figures of unemployment on 30th April; and how many men and women have been entirely thrown out of work owing to the coal strike, and how many were put on short time as a result of the strike?

The number of men, women, boys, and girls on the live registers of Employment Exchanges at 29th April was 1,854,000, while, in addition, there were about 1,077,000 persons on short-time working. The corresponding figures at 1st April, when the coal trade dispute commenced, were 1,506,000 and 884,000, respectively. It is not possible to state how much of this increase is due to the coal dispute, but the numbers of unemployed have increased more rapidly since the beginning of this dispute than in any recent corresponding period, and there can be no doubt that by far the greater part of the increase is due to the stoppage in the coal trade. I should add, that the above figures do not include the mineworkers, numbering over 1,000,000, who were employed in coal mines affected by the stoppage.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this week-end a number of employers have stated that they are going to shut down their factories and workshops for at least 14 days or more, and will those employés who have paid insurance be entitled to unemployed benefit?

As far as they, are insured under the Act, and as far as the works concerned come under the Act, I assume they will be entitled to their benefit?

May I ask the Prime Minister or the Leader of the House whether the Government are taking, or contemplate baking, any further steps towards a settlement of the coal dispute?

I shall answer this question, together with a question by my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle, North (Mr. Doyle), of which I have also received Private Notice. The Government are taking every care to ensure that no possible means likely to bring about a settlement is neglected. It would be inadvisable for me to say more.

On a point of Order. Arising out of the question that has just been answered by the right hon. Gentleman, may I ask if he will reply to the private notice question I sent to him to-day?

My hon. Friend asked a question concerning the proposals of Lord Weir. [HON. MEMBERS: "Let him read it!"]

What I desired to know was whether the attention of the Prime Minister has been called to the proposals of Lord Weir for the settlement of the coal dispute published in this morning's press; whether he is prepared to accept these proposals as a basis of agreement between the parties concerned and to recommend them to the coal owners and miners in order to terminate this disastrous struggle, which is rapidly becoming a strangle-hold on the industrial life of the nation?

I think it would be very inadvisable for me to express any opinion upon the many sug- gestions which have been put forward in connection with the dispute. I am always very glad to consider any suggestion, but to pick one out and express an opinion on it is, I think, inadvisable.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the German Reparation (Recovery) Act, Order 6, issued by his Department, deciding that goods imported from the Saar basin, which is in French occupation, are to be considered, for the purpose of the above Act, as being goods of French origin, he is prepared to issue similar orders that goods from the Cologne area, occupied by the British, and the Coblenz area, occupied by the Americans, are to be considered as of English and American origin?

No, Sir. I would point out that the Saar Basin is not in French occupation in the same sense as that in which the other areas mentioned in the questions are in Allied occupation. The possession and exploitation of the coal mines is ceded by the Treaty of Peace to France, but the government of the territory is administered by the League of Nations in the capacity of trustee. It was for these reasons that it was thought inexpedient that the products of the basin should be treated in the same way as the products of German territory, whether occupied or not.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can state the French plans for the occupation of the Ruhr if the ultimatum is rejected by Germany?

asked the Prime Minister whether the German Reparation (Recovery) Act will be suspended in the event of the German Government accepting the latest proposal of the Allies for the payment of reparations?

I can add nothing to the very full statement which I made on Thursday last.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman answer "Yes" or "No" to the question whether the Reparation (Recovery) Act will be kept in force in case of the present arrangement being satisfactorily concluded with Germany?

I think I will see, first of all, how it works.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great inconvenience caused to British traders by the present state of uncertainty?

Could not the Prime Minister say that the German Reparation (Recovery) Act will be suspended or withdrawn if the 25 or 26 per cent. on German exports is continued, as he suggested in his speech with regard to reparations? Are the two to be exercised simultaneously?

No, I made that quite clear. I can give no answer, at any rate, until I know that the Germans have accepted the terms.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he made no statement with regard to the Reparations (Recovery) Act at all, and cannot he state the Government's policy?

I think I stated that it was at the option of the Governments concerned.

On the contrary, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that that Act will not be suspended, but will be kept in force?

( by Private Notice ) asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the terms of the German Reparation (Recovery) Act, 1921, if a British importer finds it necessary to pay the full purchase price to the German exporter in respect of any goods, a similar amount should be paid to the Customs Authorities and not only an amount equal to 50 per cent. of the invoice price of the goods?

The answer is in the affirmative. The levy is fixed at a percentage of the value of the goods. That value is defined by Section 3 (1) as including the sum pay- able to the Commissioners, and Section 3 (2) provides that the invoice shall be accepted as primâ facie evidence of the value, if it includes the sum payable to the Commissioners. The value on which the prescribed percentage is payable to the Customs is, therefore, the sum of the amount payable to the German exporter and the amount payable to the Customs, and while that percentage remains fixed at 50 per cent., it follows that if the whole invoice price is paid to the Germans an equal amount is payable to the Customs, being 50 per cent. of the value of the goods as defined by the Act.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury explain how it is possible for Commissioners of Customs to demand 100 per cent. of the value when the German Separation Recovery, 1921, limit the duty to 50 per cent.?

The question asked and answered by me had reference to the interpretation of the Act; that interpretation is as I have given it.

Is not this an Act for retaining 50 per cent. of the value? If the value is £100, by what process do you claim £100 from the importer?

The hon. Gentleman is asking a question on policy, and I must ask for notice of it.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will issue a White Paper indicating the Amendments to Annex II to Part VIII of the Treaty of Versailles which will be rendered necessary by the new terms presented to Germany?

The important parts of the text were published in Friday's newspapers, and I should have thought that it was unnecessary to go to the expense of printing and circulating them as a White Paper. But this shall, of course, be done if the hon. Member presses his request.

May I ask why, in a matter of this kind, we should be referred to the public Press? Would it not be better to have a White Paper placed before the House?

I agree, if there be a real desire to have it, but to print all the documents would involve a vast addition to printing expenses.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a statement made in the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, on 29th April, that a certain Major Blackwell had been employed on semi-official publicity work during the year 1920 at a salary of £2,000 a year; whether he is aware that, in reply to a question by Mr. Justice Shearman, counsel for the said Major Blackwell stated that he could not say whether or not this salary was paid out of public moneys, as that might be giving away a secret; whether, in view of these statements, he will say whether Major Blackwell received any payments from public moneys during the year 1920; if so, what amounts and in return for what services; if Major Blackwell is still being employed in an official or semi-official capacity at the public expense; and, if so, on what Vote his salary or emoluments will be charged?

My attention had not previously been called to the statement referred to. I am not aware of any pay to Major Blackwell from public funds, either at the present time or in 1920.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Greek Government has invited the intervention or mediation of the Allies in the present and new hostilities between the Greeks and Turks; whether arrangements are being made for the abdication of King Constantine of Greece; and whether any steps are now being taken by His Majesty's Government to bring about peace between the Greek and Turkish Governments?

The answer to the first and last parts of the question is in the negative, and, so far as His Majesty's Government are aware, the answer to the second part of the question is in the negative also.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether the Græco-Turkish situation is being very closely watched and whether he will seize any favourable opportunity of mediation with the view of settling that part of the world?

Certainly.

asked the Prime Minister whether it will be competent to a mandatory Power to tax the inhabitants of the mandated territory for administrative purposes or whether such Power must in such case obtain the permission of the League of Nations?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative.

Without the League of Nations?

asked the Prime Minister whether the amendments by the mandates sub-committee of the executive committee of the League of Nations Union to the draft mandate for Tanganyika, as published in the Press, have any, and, if so, what, official or other authoritative or responsible origin?

The Government is in no way responsible for the Press statement referred to by the hon. Member.

If this body has no official backing, is the Under-Secretary of State in Order in canvassing for it on the Floor of the House and offering to pay the subscriptions of new members?

That is a question which should be addressed to Mr. Speaker.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has official information to the effect that the Soviet Government of Russia has arrived at the conclusion, after a lengthy experiment, that industries must either be denationalised or destroyed?

His Majesty's Government have received no official information to this effect.

asked the Prime Minister whether now that we have concluded a trade agreement with Soviet Russia, he can state the exact territories to which the operation of this agreement applies?

I have been asked to reply. The trade agreement applies to the areas under the control of the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic. I am not in a position to define with precision the exact boundaries.

Does that include Siberia as well as European Russia?

It is exactly that kind of question, as to the extent to which Siberia is at present under the control of the Soviet Government, which makes it impossible to decide what are the boundaries.

asked the Prime Minister whether the new regulations of the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic) will embody a relaxation of present regulations to the extent of permitting persons obtaining meals in hotels and restaurants to be supplied with excise-able liquor with those meals, if required, without restriction of hours up to the time fixed for closing of public-houses in the localities in which they are situated, and also of removing all restrictions in respect of the sale and supply of excise-able liquor to persons permanently residing in hotels and clubs?

I have been asked to reply to this question. I cannot say whether the Board will think it right to adopt these suggestions, but I have no doubt that they will pass them under careful review in the course of the consideration which, I understand, they are prepared to give to the whole subject.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the suggested conference which the Government propose to convene for the purpose of endeavouring to secure agreement on the subject of licensing legislation, he can give an assurance that there will be no further relaxation of the regulations of the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic), especially in the matter of the hours during which it is permissible to sell liquor, pending the sittings of the conference?

No, Sir. I do not think it would be desirable to give an assurance which might in any way prejudice the powers or the policy of the Board.

Is not the question of the hours of opening licensed premises one of the most important questions which could be considered?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the strong feeling amongst working people against the continuation of these restrictions?

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that it is the unanimous desire of the Welsh Members of this House that a Secretary for Wales should be appointed in order that Wales should have the same advantages and privileges as Scotland enjoys in the matter of separate administration, the Government will give facilities during this Session for the passage of the Secretary for Wales Bill now before the House?

In view of the great pressure on the time of the House, and the desirability of avoiding an Autumn Session, the Government cannot promise facilities for private measures.

Are we to understand that Wales is to get less consideration than Scotland? Is no time to be devoted to the Principality in this House?

I do not think Wales has anything of which to complain. It would be quite impossible to give time this Session for the consideration of Bills of this sort.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of having an Autumn Session? Is he aware that Welsh Members of all parties are strongly in favour of this measure and, having regard to that, will he consider an Autumn Session?

The hon. Member is repeating the question which is on the Paper.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the 500,000 stockholders of the railways are anxious to have the opportunity of considering and, if necessary, discussing at public meetings the terms of the forthcoming Railway Bill, he will defer taking the Second Reading of the Bill until after the Whitsuntide Recess?

The answer is in the affirmative, but it is intended to introduce the Bill this week.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the great volume of support that exists in the country for the Bastardy Bill; whether he realises that the Bill is identical in its Clauses with the Bill which left the Standing Committee last Session; and whether, in view of its simplicity and of the urgent needs of its reforms, he will facilitate the passage of the Bill into law?

It is premature, until we see what time is available at the end of the Session, to make any fresh promises as to the allocation of the time of the House.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government have considered the Report of the Select Committee on Members' Expenses; and, if so, can he state their decision thereon?

Yes, Sir. The Government have carefully considered the Committee's Report, and will propose to the House that the whole of the existing allowance of £400 should be paid free of Income Tax; and that there should be granted to all Members first-class railway travelling between London and their constituencies and homes. These changes will take effect as from 1st April, 1921. It is not proposed to adopt the other recommendation in the Select Committee's Report relating to free postage.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say if that will be done before we rise for the Whitsuntide Recess, so that the railway passes will be available then?

Yes. We are endeavouring to arrange that, but, if not, Members will be recouped for any money which they have had to spend.

Will steamboat fares be allowed to Members who represent island constituencies?

Yes, Sir; it is intended to provide for travelling between the House of Commons and all constituencies.

Does it apply to an unlimited number of journeys, or only one per month?

An unlimited number.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to explain the exact meaning of making this retrospective as to 1st April? Are we to recover what we have spent since that date?

What I had in mind was the case of Members who had to renew season tickets. This was raised when the subject was last before the House, and I was asked if the Government—for reasons which were within the knowledge of the House—was unable to come to a decision earlier, that the position of those Members whose tickets were expiring should not be prejudiced. I do not mean to say that every Member who has taken a single individual ticket is to be recouped, but that they shall be recouped for season tickets.

Will there be an opportunity for the House to debate this question? In view of the fact that there is a grave industrial situation in this country, may we not have an opportunity of deciding whether this proposal should be suspended or not?

Is it proposed to issue season tickets between London and the constituencies to Members, or must they apply on each separate occasion?

Will this cover bus fares, as far as London Members are concerned, or will it go as far as taxi-cab fares?

No, Sir. There is a public call upon Members in the discharge of their duties bearing very unequally, according to the distances of their constituencies and their homes from the House of Commons. We think, and I believe the House thinks, after an inquiry into the matter, that it was in the public interest this should be met. Such a proposal as that of my hon. Friend would only make the House ridiculous.

As regards the question of my hon. and gallant Friend below the gangway (Lieut.-Colonel Croft), there will be an opportunity for discussing this matter on the Supplementary Estimate which will be required to meet the expenses. [HON. MEMBERS: "What date?"] I cannot name a date. As regards the other questions put to me, it is not proposed to issue season tickets, but I cannot at this moment give any details. I have been anxious to afford the House every information on the Government proposals generally, but I am not in a position to state details. It would not appear to me that the Government should provide season tickets for every Member.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the fact that a large money Derby sweepstake is now being organised upon the London Stock Exchange; and whether the Government proposes to take steps to prohibit illegal lotteries of this character being permitted?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. A quasi-private lottery, participation in which is strictly confined to members of the London Stock Exchange, and honestly conducted, as undoubtedly this would be, is not such a sweepstake as calls for interference by the Government.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the recent proceedings under the Lotteries Act against a Member of this House the Attorney-General distinctly stated that all such sweepstakes as these were illegal lotteries, and would the right hon. Gentleman consult the Attorney-General, and keep an eye on the Stock Exchange and the Carlton and Reform Clubs to stop these illegal lotteries?

Will the organisers of the Victory Bonds also be proceeded against? [HON. MEMBERS: "French premium bonds!"]

I do not know that the particular lottery referred to in the question is of the same sort.

Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman regards a sweepstake on the Derby promoted by the Stock Exchange as legal?

Of course it is. Everything they do is legal.

I have nothing to add to my answer.

Consult the Attorney-General.

asked the Prime Minister whether any Cabinet decision has been made to the effect that official reprisals for outrages will be taken against selected persons known to have rebel sympathies, although proof of their implication has not been proved, as announced in a military proclamation at Listowel on the 28th April?

I am informed by the Commander-in-Chief that the military governor of the martial law area ordered the destruction of four houses at Listowel as a punishment for the murder of Sir Arthur Vicars, because the owners had aided and abetted the rebels in their campaign of murder although there was no definite proof that these particular owners were the actual perpetrators. This action was taken by the military governor on the discretion vested in him under martial law.

Would the Prime Minister kindly answer the question, whether the announcement made at Listowel, that in future premises would be destroyed, whether proof of implication is forthcoming or not, was made with the authority of the Cabinet?

I have already answered the hon. Member that the action in question was taken by the commander-in-chief and the military governor and, so far as I know, both of them have the support of the Cabinet and the Irish Government.

Has the announcement, that in future burnings would take place whether there is proof or not, been made with the authority of the Cabinet?

I have answered that in the case of Listowel four houses were actually burned, but I have no information as regards any Proclamation.

asked the Chief Secretary if he is aware that considerable offence has been given to the parishioners of St. Mary's Catholic church, Rathmines, by the fact that the precincts of the church have been made a loitering place by soldiers and that while, in response to representations made to the military authority, a marked improvement has taken place, it is still possible to remove any cause for complaint; that, upon the night of Good Friday last, Mr. Philip Francis Little, residing at 30, Rathmines Road, Rathmines, county Dublin, was followed from his house to the sitting-room of the parish priest, and was there covered with revolvers by five of his pursuers, who ordered him to accompany them; and that, leaving the room of the parish priest and accompanied by Father Mulderry, Mr. Little went out to the street and the parties concerned separated without further incident, but that Mr. Little found upon his return to his house that two plate-glass windows and his hall door had been smashed and that his watch, valued at £8, was missing; can he say with what object Mr. Little was raided; and whether he will be compensated for the resulting damage to and loss of property?

I have asked the commander-in-chief to furnish me with a report with reference to these allegations. Perhaps the hon. Member will kindly repeat the question on Thursday.

asked the Chief Secretary whether his attention has been called to the statement that the public are excluded from the Castleconnel inquiry; and whether the Reports of the Debate on the incident in the House of Lords have been excluded by the military censor from the local Press?

The Press and relations of those interested were admitted, which gave ample publicity. The Reports of the Debate on this incident in another place were also published in the Press in Cork.

Was the statement that the public crowded the court substantiated by the facts?

asked the Chief Secretary with reference to the alleged ambush near Mountcharles, County Donegal, on the 22nd ultimo, whether he is aware that the people in the district strongly deny that any ambush took place; whether Crown Forces subsequently dragged from their homes a young lady named Waugh and a lad named Albert Griffen and maltreated them; whether Miss Waugh has since been in hospital; whether a policeman named Chapman has been identified as assaulting Griffen when in custody; whether, when burning and looting in Mountcharles, the police fired upon the house of Miss M'Manus and shot dead Police-constable Hughes and Miss Horley who were inside the house at the time; and whether a public and sworn inquiry will be held?

A military court of inquiry found that a party of Crown Forces consisting of one military officer and nine other ranks with four constables from Donegal, were ambushed on the afternoon of the 22nd February last at a point on the road between Donegal and Mountcharles, about half a mile from Mountcharles, and that one constable named Satchwell was killed. I am not aware that this occurrence has been denied by any person in the locality. The report of the proceedings of the inquiry contains no evidence with regard to the alleged subsequent ill-treatment of Miss Waugh and Albert Griffen, and I have therefore called for a special report with regard to these matters. The court of inquiry commented strongly on the refusal of the civilian residents of the district to assist them in their investigation into the charges made against the Crown Forces in connection with the disturbances which followed the ambush, and on the evidence before them were unable to give any definite finding in regard to the manner in which Miss Horley and Constable Hughes met their deaths. Separate courts of inquiry in lieu of inquest which were faced with the same difficulties in obtaining evidence, found that Miss Horley was murdered by some persons unknown, and that the circumstances of Constable Hughes' death were a matter of uncertainty.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he has received the reports of the inquiries made into the treatment at the hands of the Crown Forces of the following persons elected to represent the Irish people, namely, Councillor W. Allen, of Tipperary, who was visited at his business premises on 23rd October by Auxiliary Police, who flogged him and his son; County Councillor P. Forde, Loughrea, County Galway, who was taken from his bed and beaten by constabulary on 1st November; Councillor J. Brennan, who was taken from his bed in Kilkerrin, County Galway, and beaten by constabularly on 5th November and sent home naked; County Councillor J. Harte, of Leitrim, who was taken from his bed by constabulary and beaten on 5th November; Councillor W. O'Grady, of Rathdrum, County Wicklow, who was taken from his bed and beaten by constabulary on 18th December; and Councillor W. Loughrey, Killala, County Mayo, who was taken from his bed at 2 a.m. on 28th January and flogged by constabulary, who beat him about the head and shoulders with Indian clubs belonging to his children; and, if so, whether he is prepared to make any statement with regard to them?

I have called for a special report with regard to each of these cases, from which it appears that these persons did suffer ill-treatment on the dates stated in the question; but it has not been found possible to establish by whom they were maltreated. If proof is forthcoming that the police were responsible, severe disciplinary action will be taken.

asked the Chief Secretary whether T. J. Redmond and Patrick O'Reilly, of Mullingar, both members of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union, were arrested by members of the Crown forces on 6th March, 1921; whether Redmond, after being kept in custody for five week, was unconditionally released on 28th April, without being brought to trial or any charge being preferred against him; whether O'Reilly was charged with being in possession of a rifle bullet, which on investigation was proved to be a bullet-shaped lead pencil; whether the witnesses for the prosecution were unable to produce the lead pencil at the trial, but produced in its place a new rifle bullet which they swore was similar to the one found in O'Reilly's possession; whether O'Reilly, after being acquitted on 13th April, was immediately rearrested in the military barracks, Mullingar; and why he has since been kept in detention without any charge having been preferred against him?

Thomas Redmond was arrested on the 26th March, and not on the 6th as stated in the question. A number of papers were found in his possession showing, among other things, that he had been appointed a Sinn Fein Magistrate, and that he was a local organiser of the Belfast boycott. After inquiry, his activities and influence were not considered to be of such importance as to make a prosecution necessary, and he was accordingly released as stated on 28th April. I regret that my inquiries into the case of O'Reilly are not yet completed.

Is it the practice and custom to keep a number of men in prison without any trial for a number of weeks?

As soon as inquiries can be made with reference to the evidence against them, they are either brought to trial or released.

Are we then to understand, in a case like this, it has taken the authorities something like four weeks to make the investigation?

Yes, it takes a very considerable time in certain districts to make investigations of that kind.

Is any compensation paid to the victims of illegal arrest?

No, Sir; as a rule the arrest is not illegal.

Has any charge ever been brought against O'Reilly, and on what ground is he still being detained?

I am still making inquiries in the case of O'Reilly. My answer applied to Redmond.

asked the Chief Secretary whether Patrick Casey, who was executed in Mitchelstown, county Cork, within 25 hours of his arrest, was tried by court martial or by a military court; whether under court martial procedure a prisoner is given adequate time to prepare his defence and, in case of sentence of death, the proceedings of the trial must be submitted to and approved by the Judge Advocate-General in London before the sentence is carried out; whether the same procedure obtains in the case of military courts; and, if not, why a different procedure is adopted?

Patrick Casey, who was caught in the act of attempting to shoot an officer and was in arms joined with others in rebellion against His Majesty, was tried by a military court in the martial law area, sentenced, and convicted. The sentence was confirmed by the Military Governor. The procedure governing courts martial has no application to the cases of military courts in a martial law area and never had, and this has frequently been established in court. A Proclamation to this effect was issued by the Commander-in-Chief so far back as 12th December, 1920.