asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) if he will state 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?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answers given to him on this subject on the 9th May. The inquiries are not yet completed, and consequently I cannot at present make any statement.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have put this question down two or three times, and that I have always had the same reply? Is the Government desirous of giving information to the House and the country on these subjects? If so, let us know where we are.

As I stated in my reply, inquiries are proceeding. They are very difficult matters upon which to get information.

When does the right hon. Gentleman think that it will be possible to reply, and I will then put down a question?

I will ask my hon. Friend to put down a question when I have a reply.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Report giving the latest information available regarding the fees levied by foreign countries on British commercial travellers entering those countries has been published; and, if not, when it will be published?

The whole of the information, which is being obtained from abroad, has not yet been received, and I am afraid a short time must elapse before the Report is published. A considerable amount of information is, however, available at the Department of Overseas Trade.

Is it the custom in this country to levy fees on foreign commercial travellers in this country, and, if not, why not?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade which of the European countries now prohibit the importation, except under licence, of British manufactures?

Nearly all European countries have a system of import prohibitions, but the number of classes of articles prohibited varies very greatly, being small in the case of some countries, while in others practically all goods are covered by the prohibitions. The extent to which the prohibitions are mitigated by the issue of licences also varies. The regulations apply to British goods as well as to those of other origin.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any efforts are being made by the British Government to secure the abolition of these prohibitions on imports?

My hon. Friend must give me notice of that question.

Is it not a fact that the Government themselves have introduced new prohibitions on foreign goods?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Customs duties on cotton manufactures have been increased in certain European countries since the War; which countries have so increased the duties; and will he state the rates of duties in force in such countries in 1913 and 1921 on representative grades of cotton manufactures?

Since 1913 increases in the duties on cotton goods have come into force in France, Belgium, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, and Finland, whilst in several other countries general surcharges and surtaxes have been applied throughout their respective Customs tariffs, with a view to increasing duties payable in paper to their alleged equivalents in gold or for other purposes. The Customs tariffs on cotton goods are so detailed and vary so much in their basis from country to country that it would, I fear, be impossible to give in a concrete form the information asked for in the last part of the question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the present position of the tariff proposals now before the Congress of the United States of America; and whether he has any information bearing out the statement, cabled from New York that, by agreement between the two Houses of Congress, the Bill will become operative in June for a period of six months, and will impose upon agricultural products duties so high as to be practically prohibitive, and empower the Secretary of the Treasury to exclude from the United States any foreign goods which, in his opinion, will injure a similar United States industry by their low cost price?

The Emergency Tariff Bill has received the assent of the President of the United States, and came into operation on 28th May for a period of six months. I understand that the duties on agricultural products are being increased, and that anti-dumping provisions of the nature indicated in the question are also included in the measure.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think it is desirable that the House should have information of all the necessary details affecting our trade?

If my hon. Friend will let me know the point on which the House wishes to have information, I will see whether it can be given, but the details of all foreign tariffs would be overwhelming.

Is there no ready means by which the Board of Trade can give the trading community full information on a matter of this sort, which is already decided in a foreign country?

I will consider that, but I think generally the traders of this country are well informed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, with a view to assisting sheep farmers in the conduct of their business, he can state the amount of wool now held by or on behalf of the Government and the arrangements made as to time, quantity, and price for putting it upon the market?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The approximate amount of wool now held by or on behalf of the Government is 1,500,000 bales. Marketing arrangements must necessarily vary from time to time, but in general wool is placed on the market in quantities commensurate with the absorbing power of the trade, and sold to the highest bidder subject to a reasonable reserve.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how much wool has been disposed of by the Government in the last 12 months?

I must have notice of that question.

Surely you ought to know?

Can the right hon. Gentleman not see that his attitude demoralises the market altogether?

That must be a matter of argument.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the heavy dismissals of wireless telegraphy operators by the shipping companies during the last few months owing to the employment of the class of watchers in Class 2 passenger and cargo steamers in lieu of trained operators; that some 300 ex-service men who have been trained by the Ministry of Labour as operators at great expense are now out of employment; that the employment of these watchers means increased risk to life and property at sea owing to their inability to read Morse efficiently; and whether he will consider amending the Rules made under the Merchant Shipping (Wireless Telegraphy) Act, 1919, so as to make the carrying of two trained operators compulsory in Class 2 vessels, and the abolition of the watcher class?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which was given on 9th May to the hon. Member for Eastbourne. I am sending him a copy of that reply.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the situation has become worse since then owing to the further dismissal of these highly skilled wireless operators, and is he further aware that the various seamen's organisations are firmly in support of these wireless operators in demanding that there should be two of them carried in a second class ship, so that there can be a continual watch?

I am afraid that a great many of these dismissals are incidental to the terrible state of trade and industry, including shipping. I will look into the point.

In view of this terrible state of shipping, is it not all the more desirable to give these skilled ratings employment, and will not the abolition of the watcher class do that?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any of these skilled operators are out of work owing to industrial difficulties preventing ships sailing?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to that portion of the Report of the Select Committee on Pensions which recommended that all officers and other ranks of the mercantile marine who served afloat during the War in British merchant vessels should be regarded as having been engaged on war service, provided that such service was performed under circumstances where the normal risks or strain were increased by war conditions; whether this recommendation has yet been adopted by the Government; and, if not, whether immediate attention will be given to the matter?

This recommendation is receiving attention, and I hope to be able to let my hon. and learned Friend know in the course of a few days the terms of the decision arrived at.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will ascertain if there is an unusual quantity of imported meat now being held in cold storage in this country or on board ship awaiting discharge; is he aware that the consumer desires to have cheaper meat; and will he say if the investigations he has been able to make lead him to suppose that this hold up of imported meat is the reason why the price of meat has not fallen to a more appreciable extent?

The quantity of meat now in store in this country, or in ship awaiting discharge, is undoubtedly large; but I understand that, so far from sales toeing restricted, every effort is being made by reduction of prices to dispose of the meat. For instance, the wholesale price of certain descriptions of imported meat has fallen by more than 50 per cent. during the past two months.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me why the retail price has not been correspondingly reduced?

I must ask for notice of that question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Board of Trade have any power in a case where meat is being held up for a considerable time to make them put it on the market?

My information is that it is not being held up.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether his attention has been drawn to the present high price of coal; and whether any steps will be taken to limit these present prices to a reasonable figure in the interests of consumers generally?

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of 12th May to the hon. Member for Walthamstow. The matter is being very carefully watched, and action will be taken where it appears that prices are being charged which cannot be justified by increased costs referred to in that reply.

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 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 can add nothing to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member on the 9th of May.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that putting this Regulation into operation will avoid all trouble?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the Regulation be put into operation, it will apply compulsory labour to the mines?

Rubbish!

What about compulsory arbitration?

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what was the total cost to the State of the proceedings in connection with the Sankey Commission of Inquiry into the conditions of the coal industry in the spring of 1919?

The total cost of the Sankey Commission was approximately £8,400.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Prime Minister whether, as reported in the Press, he informed the executive of the Miners' Federation that, if they did not agree to the suggestions made by the Government, legislation would be introduced compelling them to submit their case to arbitration?

The answer is in the negative. The Government hope that the terms suggested may be accepted, but I made no announcement of the steps which were to be taken in the event of their being rejected either by the miners or by the mineowners. The question of asking Parliament to establish a system of compulsory arbitration was not even mentioned. It was agreed that no note should be taken of the interview, and that nothing should be communicated to the Press except what was agreed upon by the parties. This shows, I regret to say, the danger of depending entirely upon arrangements of that character. I earnestly hope that in future that, when interviews of this kind take place that an unauthorised communication will not be sent to the Press by any of those present, otherwise it will be quite impossible to conduct these negotiations. Having reporters present makes it very difficult to do business at all. This is one of the illustrations of the danger depending entirely upon reports of this kind.

Would the right hon. Gentleman explain how this report got into the Press about the Government making this definite statement to the Miners' Federation, that unless they were prepared to accept the terms, the Govern- ment would bring in a Bill for compulsory arbitration? The report has already done a tremendous amount of harm in the Miners' Federation in all parts of the country.

I cannot account for it.

But was the statement made?

No, no! The words "compulsory arbitration" were not even used, I venture to say, in the whole course of the proceedings. How they came to be reported I do not know. Something was said about what would happen if the owners refused to carry out certain terms, and I think I said, "Well, the Government would have to consider what steps they would take to press them to do so." I do not know whether someone drew the inference as to compulsory arbitration from that observation, but the words "compulsory arbitration" were not used by anybody during the whole course of the proceedings.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the first reading of this statement has created the impression that the report was an official report? That is the impression it gives one, and it has done undoubted damage among the miners of the country—

No doubt about that!

Can the right hon. Gentleman see his way to take steps against the people who publish such statements?

It was certainly not official on this occasion. I should be very much surprised if anyone on the part of the Government—I mean that certainly no member of the Government has done it, and I doubt very much whether—well, I do not think it is fair to say more—all I know is that it has appeared in the Press, but I do not know where it came from. The words "compulsory arbitration" certainly do not represent in the least what passed at the conference.

Will the Prime Minister issue an official denial?

I am giving that now—at the first opportunity I have had.

Was an official note taken of this interview?

No; we discussed the question whether there should be an official note taken or not. On these occasions, I usually put myself in the hands of the parties, and inquire whether or not they want an official note taken. On this occasion they said, "No, we think on the whole we can talk much more freely if there is not an official note."There was not even an official note-taker present. We relied upon the honourable understanding that nothing should be published except what was agreed upon. Unfortunately, someone made a statement to the Press who, naturally, were hungering for information about this very important conference, and this has appeared, very much to my surprise, and to the surprise of all others present.

Is it possible to do something considering the injury which has been done to the prospects of settlement? I understand that up and down the country—I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman has had his attention directed to the matter—but in many cases the meetings have not even considered the proposals, but merely taken the alleged threat of compulsion, and turned the thing down. Under these circumstances it is most unfortunate. May we, therefore, assume that it was an enemy who made this report—someone who did not wish the terms to be accepted?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that there is still a great loss of time and inconvenience caused daily to thousands of the travelling public who use the Midland station at Nottingham owing to the exit opposite Trent Street remaining closed; and will he state whether, under the powers of the Railways Bill, he will be competent to require the Midland Railway Company to re-open this exit?

In reply to the first part of this question, I have nothing to add to my previous answers on the subject. The reply to the second part is in the negative. In this connection, however, I would refer the hon. Member to Clause 12 of the Railways Bill.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept my assurance that the closing of this exit does entail a great deal of inconvenience to the people of Nottingham?

Has the right hon. Gentleman had an opportunity of seeing the petition which I presented to the House containing 20,000 signatures?

I cannot say that I have seen them all, but I have seen many of them.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has been able to ascertain from the Midland Railway Company the information promised on 29th November last in reference to the date when the platform tax was first levied at their Nottingham station and the amount of revenue which has accrued therefrom?

In accordance with the promise made to my hon. Friend on the 29th November last, I applied for and received from the Midland Railway Company a statement as to the amounts received from the issue of platform tickets and the cost of the staff engaged at the barriers which are similar in amount. The company objects to the exact figures being published, and I do not think the matter is one in which the House would wish me to override the company's view, having regard to the Bill now before this House.

asked the Minister of Transport (1) whether, on the resumption of normal railway traffic, he will urge on the various railway companies the desirability of issuing tourist tickets for the holiday months with the same facilities for alternative routes and stopping-off privileges as were granted by the companies on tourist tickets issued before the War;

(2) whether any arrangements have been made by all or any of the railway companies to issue cheap return tickets available specially for weekends, namely, from Friday to Monday or Tuesday; can he state at what rate of fare such tickets will be issued; and whether such tickets are limited for issue to certain stations, or if they will be issued from and to all stations on any railway company's system?

The railway companies have already been requested to grant reduced fare facilities in all cases where, in the opinion of their responsible managers, an increase in net revenue will result, and I have no reason to doubt that the companies in their own interests will act accordingly as soon as they are in a position to provide the necessary facilities.

asked the Minister of Transport whether all railway companies are compelled to issue third-class season tickets or if the issue of such tickets is at the discretion of the railway companies; is he aware that certain companies refuse to issue such tickets between certain stations; and will he take steps, in view of the present high cost of railway fares, to urge all railway companies to issue third-class season tickets from and to all stations on their systems?

The railway companies are under no legal obligation to issue season tickets. I am aware that some companies do not issue third-class season tickets between all their stations. Certain companies have already been asked to consider the extension of the issue of such tickets, but as such a course would, in their opinion, result in a loss of net revenue, I fear that it is not practicable to press the matter in present circumstances. Further information on this subject is contained in the answer given to the hon. Member for Ilford on the 19th April last, of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy.

asked the Minister of Transport what is the total number of shareholders in the railways of Great Britain and Ireland, and what is the average amount of each holding?

I regret that the information for which the hon. Member asks is not available, and could only be obtained with considerable clerical labour.

asked the Minister of Transport who is responsible for the appointment of the Thames Conservancy; whether a statement of revenue and expenditure is published or submitted to any authority other than the Conservancy; what was the revenue and expenditure for last year; and what remuneration the members of the Conservancy receive?

The appointment of members of the Thames Conservancy rests with the bodies mentioned in the 3rd Schedule to the Port of London Act, 1908, but two out of the four members to be appointed there under by the Board of Trade are now appointed by the Minister of Transport. The annual accounts of the Conservancy are presented to Parliament by the Conservators each year. No remuneration is payable to the Conservators other than the Chairman, to whom the Conservators may pay such annual sum not exceeding £700 as they, with the approval of the Minister, think fit. I understand, however, that the present Chairman gives his services free.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the licence for pleasure boats has been increased by 1,200 per cent., inflicting a terrible hardship on a comparatively poor class of men, and that, while the revenue of the Conservancy is about £85,000, the cost of administering that revenue is over £14,000?

The hon. and gallant Member seems to have more information than the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Transport whether it is still the intention of the London and North-Western Railway Company to proceed with the deepening of the Holyhead harbour; and, if so, in view of the exceptional unemployment in Anglesey, if he will urge that the work be expedited?

Negotiations are in progress for leasing certain properties at Holyhead to the company. It is hoped that these negotiations will be successfully concluded at an early date, and that it will be open to the company to apply for permission to introduce a late Bill for the necessary powers in the present Session. The dredging of the harbour would then be taken in hand.

asked the Minister of Transport whether motor vehicles brought over to England under a foreign triptych are now compelled to adopt a special number plate and special number, whereas English motor vehicles are allowed to travel abroad with English number plates; what is the reason for such a Regulation; and can it be considered by the House of Commons before being enforced?

No change has been made with regard to the identification marks required to be carried by motor cars brought into this country by foreign tourists. If my Noble Friend has in mind any particular case in which difficulties have arisen, and will furnish me with particulars, I will have inquiries made at once.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Automobile Association are issuing now special number plates for cars imported into the country?

I think that it is only for cars that do not come into the general arrangement, but I do not think that there has been any alteration in the practice.

asked the Prime Minister whether facilities will be given for a discussion in this House of the subjects mentioned in the agenda of the conference of Dominion Prime Ministers before that conference takes place?

asked the Prime Minister whether, before the Premiers' Conference meets, he will give this House an opportunity to discuss the programme or subjects likely to come before that conference, so that the British Parliament may not be precluded from stating in general terms the British view, just as the Canadian, Australian, and other Parliaments have stated the Canadian or Australian position?

If there be a general desire in the House for a discussion, I should be willing to try and arrange it, but unless more precise indications are given of the matter or matters which it is desired to discuss, it would seem useless to give a day.

Will the right hon. Gentleman follow the example of the Prime Ministers in the self-governing Dominions, where, in each case, the Prime Minister himself made a statement as to the business to be examined and discussed at the conference?

The answer which I have given indicates that if there be any desire by the House to have a discussion, it will be arranged, but as our time is very limited, I do not wish to press it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in all quarters of the House there is a desire to discuss the agenda of subjects which are likely to be brought before the Imperial Cabinet before the Imperial Cabinet meets?

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that the term "Imperial Cabinet "as officially applied to the forthcoming gathering of Empire statesmen in London, implies collective executive powers, and seeing that General Smuts has declared the term to be a complete misnomer, and that this gathering is purely advisory in character as regards the Dominion and Indian representatives who attend, he will, in order to avoid misapprehension overseas, call it an Imperial Cabinet Conference?

I propose to discuss with the other Prime Ministers how the forthcoming Conference should be described.

What are we to call it in the meantime?

Simply call it a conference.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to state whether it is the intention of the Government to renew the Anglo-Japanese Treaty; whether the terms of the Treaty will be submitted to the House for ratification; whether the Government will insist upon Japan recognising her obligations under the present Treaty to maintain the independence and territorial integrity of Korea and China; and whether the restoration to Korea of her governmental, educational, and other institutions now dominated by Japan will be made one of the conditions of the Treaty, together with the cancellation of the Treaty between China and Japan which was signed as a result of Japan's ultimatum to China on 7th May, 1915?

I have nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Member by the Leader of the House on the 11th May to a similar question.

Am I to understand from that that the Government desire to withhold information from the House until after the Treaty is signed, and that this House is to have no opportunity of finding out what the Clauses in that treaty are?

No.

I give notice that I will repeat this question next Tuesday, and that if the answer be still unsatisfactory, I shall try to move the Adjournment of the House.

Will the House have an opportunity of discussing the Treaty before it is finally ratified?

I think that there will be many opportunities of discussing it before that arrives.

I mean a discussion which will give us an opportunity to vote.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware of the great loss to British trade as a result of the fighting and disturbed conditions in Turkey-in-Asia; and whether His Majesty's Government are at present taking any steps to bring to an end the hostilities between the Greeks and Turks in Asia Minor?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second part, I can add nothing to the answer which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle North on 21st April.

I is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that answer means that we are doing nothing and that we are allowing the question to drift along without making any effort to bring about peace?

asked the Prime Minister by what statutory authority 25s. per quarter is being paid to millers out of the funds of the Wheat Commission for every quarter of British wheat which is milled?

I can add nothing to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture on the 19th April last.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that nothing was said at that time because this question was not asked, that the question asked then was as to whether the money had been promised, and the question now is by what statutory authority it is being paid? There is no information on that subject.

If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will look up the Report, he will find that it was dealt with very fully by my right hon. Friend.

Does this mean a subsidy, and, if so, how much is it going to cost?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that Wednesday next, the 1st June, is a great historical anniversary; and will he consider the propriety, of adjourning the House over that date in order to afford Members the opportunity of suitably observing the occasion?

I presume that the hon. Member refers to the "glorious 1st of June,"but it has never been the practice of this House to adjourn in memory or in anticipation of victories.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, though there were many victories on the 1st of June in addition to the glorious victory of Ushant, what I had in mind was the fact that the 1st of June is also the anniversary of the birth of Robert Cecil, the first Lord of Salisbury, and in view of that fact will he reconsider the question?

Will the Prime Minister give us a "tip" for the winner?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the sentence passed upon the first convicted German War criminal by the Leipzig Court, the Government will consider the propriety of having the rest of the trials removed to London?

I have been asked to reply to this question. There is no reason to doubt that when the present series of trials, selected and accepted as it was as a test of good faith, has been completed all relevant matters, including the sentences passed, will be considered by the Powers concerned, and such action will be taken as may then be resolved upon. Meantime it does not appear to be desirable, even if it were practicable, to interrupt the present series of trials.

In the meantime, are we to accept as final the verdicts passed by this Court, and what is the sentence passed on the second prisoner?

I cannot say what is the sentence passed on the second prisoner, as I have not the information. I do, with all seriousness, deprecate the tendency which I observe, not only in this House, but also in some parts of the Press, to sit in judgment upon this sentence upon very imperfect material. For my own part, I know in outline the evidence that was to be adduced, but I have not yet received a full report of the trial. What was proved and what was proved per contra I do not know. I propose to wait until I have full information.

Are we to understand that the House will have an opportunity of discussing the question of the sentence passed upon the man called Heinen by the Supreme Court of Germany when the full facts are before us?

Is the learned Attorney-General primâ facie satisfied that the sentence is proof of the good faith of the Germans?

I do not know what is meant by the phrase "primâ facie satisfied." In order to be satisfied or dissatisfied, I propose to wait until full information is received. With regard to the other question, it is not within my province to say whether the House will have an opportunity of discussion or not.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to see that people in Ireland who are being arrested shall have a legal opportunity of trial?

"No!" and "Sit down!"

Why should I? Shut up!

Would the Prime Minister consider the advisability of making representations to the German Government in view of the intense and passionate indignation of people in this country after having read the evidence accepted by the judge presiding over the Court, which proved that infamous and inhuman conduct was exhibited towards British prisoners—conduct for which the contemptible sentence proclaimed turned the whole thing into a judicial farce?

I do not know that the proper course in reply to that question would not be to give the answer I have already given. I can only say that if there be the "intense and passionate indignation" to which the hon. Member refers, it is in my opinion a little premature.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in the event of Germany's failure in the future to carry out any of the terms in the London Agreement, the Sanctions in the ultimatum will become immediately applicable?

This question is hypothetical, and I am not, therefore, in a position to add anything to what has already been said on this subject.

If there be any commitments they are not hypothetical, but very practical and important, and will the Prime Minister state what are the consequences that will inevitably arise according to the commitments to which he has committed this country?

I hope they will not arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that Members of Parliament voluntarily surrendered the privilege of franking letters when penny postage was established, and in view of the all-round increase in postal charges, he will reconsider the recommendation of the Select Committee to allow Members of Parliament a limited amount of free postage?

I am unable to accept the interpretation suggested in the first part of the question, and with regard to the last part I cannot add anything to the replies which have already been given on this subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the majority of letters which hon. Members receive are in connection with Government business and refer to the neglect of the Departments to deal with pensions and similar cases? Does he not think that a limited postal allowance would be advantageous?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Government have inquired from the principal railway companies if they would be willing to grant Members of Parliament passes between London and their constituencies either free or on greatly reduced terms; and, if not, will he cause such inquiries to be made, and inform this House of the result?

No, Sir. We have not made inquiries of this kind, and do not propose to do so. If it be desirable that Members should be relieved of these charges, it would not seem to me proper that Members should owe the relief to companies whose affairs are frequently the subject of Parliamentary discussion.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman, before making the announcement to the House relative to the granting of passes to Members, did not take the ordinary businesslike precaution of first ascertaining from the railway companies the most favourable terms on which passes could be obtained?

As regards the terms on which we should pay for the concession, if the concession be made, I consulted the Ministry of Transport, who had the arrangements in hand. I did not, acting on behalf of His Majesty's Government, think it proper to ask a favour from companies whose affairs are often the business of this House.

Is it not possible for the Government, which has the sending over the railways of very large quantities of Government material, to get from the railway companies similar privileges to those enjoyed by business firms up and down the country, by means of traders' tickets? Is it not within the Government's province to obtain similar concessions?

I do not think the two cases are analogous. I do not want to anticipate Wednesday's discussion, but it does seem to me that if it be in the public interest—and that is the only ground which would justify it—that Members should be paid travelling expenses, the relief should be given out of public funds. This House neither individually nor corporately ought to accept favours from any bodies whose affairs may be under discussion here.

Is it not the case that my question does not involve asking a favour, but is simply putting the Government in the same relationship with the railway companies as the trading firms of this country who send goods over the railways?

A trading firm, no doubt, if it has a certain volume of trade, and agrees to put that trade on with a particular company, may get certain concessions from that company. I do not think His Majesty's Government or this House should be put into the same position in relation to the railway companies.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Treasury will lay down rules as to the administration of the issue of free travelling tickets for Members; and, if not, by whom such rules will be laid down?

No, Sir. The rules as to the administration will be laid down solely through the House of Commons administrative offices.

Was any Parliamentary sanction given before these tickets were issued?

That was explained in the statement made by me before the Whitsuntide Recess, which contains the answer to that question.

Was the permission of the Committee on Supply obtained before this new service was introduced?

That is a question which should be put down.

asked the Prime Minister what is the reason for the delay in proceeding with the Irish Land Bill which was introduced last Session?

I regret that, owing to the exigencies of Parliamentary business, it has not been possible up to the present to re-introduce this Bill.

Does the right hon. Gentleman remember that he stated to me more than a year ago that this Bill was a necessary corollary to the Government of Ireland Act, and that it would be passed concurrently with that Act? Is he now aware that the Government of Ireland Act has been passed for some months?

I have a recollection that I gave a pledge in the House that a Bill would be brought forward, but we found it very difficult to find time. The Bill has been prepared, and I hope it will be re-introduced shortly.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not know that this Bill will be practically non-contentious, and that if it should go to a Standing Committee, it will pass very quickly?

Does it involve any charge on the Exchequer of this country?

Oh, yes. I am afraid my hon. and gallant Friend (Major O'Neill) is taking much too sanguine a view of the prospect of obtaining unanimity for the voting of money from the British Exchequer to Ireland. I do not think British Members take quite the same view, because we know that the Bill does contain contentious possibilities, and we cannot find time to press it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, on behalf of the Government, restate the pledge he has given—that this Bill is to be taken up by the Government, and passed if the Government can pass it?

asked the Prime Minister whether the heavy loss occasioned by the destruction by fire of the Customs House buildings at Dublin will fall upon the city of Dublin; and if this House may have an assurance from the Government that no British money will be spent in rebuilding it or any other public buildings which may be wilfully destroyed in Ireland?

This fine building, which was justly regarded as one of the most precious possessions of the Irish people, has been wantonly destroyed by the deliberate act of the Sinn Fein organisation. There can be no question of making good the damage at the cost of the British Exchequer. Under the law, the loss will fall on the local authorities, but it will, of course, be within the power of the Southern Parliament to make special provision for meeting it in whole or in part. A claim will be presented in due course under the Malicious Injuries Act. The Board of Works estimate the loss at some £2,000,000.

Can the Prime Minister say whether the loss, or part of it, or the contents of the building, were covered by insurance?

I cannot.

Are there any grants due to the city or county of Dublin from the British Exchequer which could be stopped in order to make good this loss?

I could not answer that question without notice.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to an article in the "Round Table "advocating that colonial autonomy should be granted to the North and South of Ireland and that the apportionment of the shares of the National Debt should be the subject of judicial arbitration; and whether, in order to put an end to the present state of affairs, he will adopt the policy herein put forward?

Even if Parliament approved such a policy, I have every reason to believe that it would not be accepted by the men who are responsible for violence in Ireland, but, on the contrary, that such a declaration would be regarded by them as a sign of weakness on the part of the Imperial Government, and thus encourage further violence.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the sum asked for between North and South is beyond Ireland's financial resources?

I do not understand the question.

Is it not a fact that it is agreed by both North and South that they cannot pay the sum asked for?

I certainly never heard of any conclusion of that kind being arrived at by the North and South. The South say they will not pay.

Is he aware the Belfast Chamber of Commerce passed a resolution to the effect that—

The hon. Member should put a question of that kind upon the Paper.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is intended to add to the strength of the Crown forces in Ireland?

It is proposed to strengthen the Crown Forces in Ireland. When the arrangements are complete, a statement will be made to Parliament. It is not intended to send any of the Reserves to Ireland.

When the right hon. Gentleman makes that statement, will he also say what is the annual cost of maintaining the war in Ireland?

Is he aware that the whole trouble in Ireland arises from the fact that the Government has treated the Irish question as a military, and not as a political question; and will not the sending of more troops only add to the trouble?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether, in view of the fact that the recent general election of Members of the Northern Irish Parliament was the first Parliamentary election to be held in this country under the methods of Proportional Representation, he has any information to give the House as to the success or non-success of this method of election?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the fact that inquiries have long since been completed, a definite date has been fixed for the establishment of a trade board in Ireland for the hairdressing trade; and whether the establishment of a trade board for the grocery and provisions trade in Ireland is being considered?

Before this question is put, may I submit that this is not a question which can be answered by the Minister of Labour, inasmuch as it deals with one of the subjects reserved to the Irish Government, and as there is legislation setting up a trades board in reference to hairdressers in Ireland, no question on the subject should be put here.

My understanding is that there have been proceedings with regard to setting up this trade board in Ireland, and it would be in order to ask if they have been brought to a termination.

We are preparing the ground with a view to taking definite action in the case of these two trades as soon as circumstances permit, but it is not possible to give definite dates for the establishment of the boards. My hon. Friend will appreciate that it is desirable for the future success of the boards to take the preliminary steps as far as possible with the agreement and co-operation of both employers and workers concerned.

rose —

I suggest that the hon. and gallant Member should put down a question whether this matter is not now one for the Parliament established in Ireland.

Have not the employers and the employed agreed to the establishment of this trade board?

I believe they have gone some way towards substantial agreement, but in these matters it is desirable to carry with one as many persons as possible before the board is set up.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Minister of Agriculture whether any further outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease has occurred in Ireland Since that reported from New Ross, county Wexford, on May 22nd; and if he will take the same precautionary measures with regard to this outbreak as he has done in the numerous recent cases in England, namely, by drawing a cordon around the affected area alone, and thereby permit the cattle trade from the rest of Ireland to resume its normal course?

I am informed by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland that on 28th May another outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease was confirmed at New Ross, county Wexford. The question of the conditions under which the cattle trade from Ireland may be resumed is under consideration.

Is it not a fact that a short while ago the right hon. Gentleman led me to understand, by way of question and answer, that if a case of foot-and-mouth disease occurred in Ireland, the same treatment would be meted out in regard to that case as he has done with regard to numerous cases that have occurred in England recently; and, if he will not mete out the same treatment, will he please tell me why?

Yes, I am quite prepared to adopt that policy, in the interest of British farmers as well as Irish farmers, as soon as I am satisfied of the whereabouts of outbreaks in Ireland. But the matter must be absolutely cleared up. I am not certain there may not be other sources of infection in Ireland at the present time. However, the whole matter is under consideration at the present moment.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to a statement, which recently appeared in the Press, that the English Ministry of Agriculture had concluded that there had been several unreported cases of foot-and-mouth disease in Ireland for many weeks; what grounds had the English Department of Agriculture for forming that conclusion; did they take any steps whatsoever to consult those upon the spot in Ireland with regard to these alleged cases; and, whether the Irish Department itself even was consulted in the matter before the statement was made?

Yes, Sir; we have been in consultation with the Irish Department right through, and we hold that our statement was perfectly correct. The Irish Department denied there was any foot-and-mouth disease in Ireland. Subsequently two cases were located at the very spot from which the cattle came, as shown in outbreaks in England after arrival. Under those circumstances, until I have got more definite information, I cannot permit the importation of stores from Ireland, but I hope to be able to clear up the matter with the Irish Department of Agriculture shortly, and I shall have the trade resumed as soon as possible.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state clearly what grounds he has for making this extraordinary and extravagant statement that many cases of foot-and-mouth disease are in Ireland at present unreported, and will he take this opportunity of withdrawing that statement, which must do such harm to this great cattle industry?

No, Sir, I cannot withdraw the statement—

It is unwarranted!

Quite a number of outbreaks have occurred in England, and in cattle which have come from Ireland, and from a particular part of Ireland. The Irish authorities denied altogether that there was any foot-and-mouth disease in Ireland. Subsequently they admitted that there had been an outbreak in that particular place. Under these circumstances, I can neither withdraw the statement nor take any further steps until I am satisfied that there is no foot-and-mouth disease in other parts of Ireland.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say—