asked the Secretary of State for India if he can now state how many of the 32,000 men proposed for the Indian Auxiliary Force were voluntarily recruited up to 31st March last and, if the required numbers were not completed, what steps he proposes to take in the matter; and what was the maximum strength attained by the Indian Defence Force under the Compulsory Service Act?

Up to the 31st March, 22,603, and up to the 30th April, 23,925 men were attested in the Auxiliary Force, India. These totals exclude men who are enrolled but have not yet attested. The maximum strength attained by the Indian Defence Force, according to the records available, was 33,451 in October, 1920.

What steps does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take to bring the numbers of the Auxiliary Force up to the numbers of the old Defence Force?

I do not propose to take any steps. The matter is entirely in the hands of the Indian Government, who will make such recommendations as they may think fit, in view of the numbers enlisted.

Is there any time limit for voluntary recruitment, or does it go on indefinitely?

My hon. and gallant Friend will remember that we decided in the first instance to try voluntary enlistment. If voluntary enlistment be not a success, at any moment that the Government of India think that it is not, they may make recommendations for an alternative scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether, despite his assurance that no further reductions would be made in the Indian Army pending the inquiry into the military requirements of India by a Sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, the Indian cavalry are being reduced from 39 regiments of four squadrons each to 21 regiments of three squadrons each, and orders are now being issued for the disbandment of the 35th Sikhs, 42nd Deoli Regiment, 43rd Erinpura Regiment, 44th Merwara Regiment, the 108th Infantry, and other pre-War regiments of the Indian Army; and whether he will countermand the orders for these reductions pending the result of the inquiry by the Sub-committee?

As regards the cavalry, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answer given in this House to his question of 3rd May on the same subject. In the case of the 44th Merwara Infantry, I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave on May 10th. Of the other infantry battalions mentioned, two are still serving overseas and two in India. As I stated in replying to a question by my hon. and gallant Friend on April 6th, reductions of units no longer required will take place as opportunity offers, but no reductions which would bring the Indian Army below the proposed post-War strength of 21 Indian cavalry regiments and 132 infantry and pioneer battalions will take place pending consideration of the whole matter by the Sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence. Which particular units should be disbanded on becoming surplus to requirements is a question which must be left to the Government of India.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman agree that no pre-War regiment should be disbanded until after the Committee had reported, and these are all pre-War regiments which are now being disbanded, much to the disappointment of the men in India?

If my hon. and gallant Friend will refresh his memory, he will see that there is nothing inconsistent in anything which I have previously said with the answer that I have just given. The only regiment which I have described as being disbanded is the 44th Merwara Infantry. If he will refer to my answer of the 10th, he will find that explained.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware of the Burmese opposition to the Local Self-Government Bill now before the Burma Legislative Council; and whether he will have this measure postponed, as in most provinces of India, till after the grant of dyarchy to Burma, when local government will become a transferred subject?

I have not yet received the proceedings of the Legislative Council relating to this Bill, and have seen no evidence of popular opposition to it.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman get the Burmese papers, and has not he observed the opposition?

I have not observed any popular opposition to it. If my hon. and gallant Friend has any observations to make, I shall be glad to receive them.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he will lay Papers showing the correspondence between the Government of India and the India Office concerning the Burma constitution, which has been published in the Burma newspapers of 30th April?

I am not quite sure what correspondence the hon. and gallant Member has in mind, but I gather that the correspondence recently published in Burma is that which was presented to Parliament on 11th March as Cmd. 1194.

Can we have the subsequent correspondence between the Government of India and the India Office published, to complete the series of papers?

I am afriad that I must look to see what correspondence there is before I can give any assurance.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he has yet any news to give as to the restoration of the west stepway to the trustees of the Shwedagon Pagoda, which has been so long under the consideration of the military authorities in Burma?

I am informed that the relinquishment of the portion of the outer Pagoda precincts occupied by the military authorities is an integral part of a comprehensive scheme for the removal of the Cantonment of Rangoon to a site some 15 miles away. Definite proposals to this end are now in progress between the Government of India and the local authorities, but negotiations for the exchange of land are likely to take longer than I had anticipated. I am in communication with the Government of India on the subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question has now been under discussion for nearly three years. Can he give some assurance to the people of Burma that the Government do contemplate the earliest possible relinquishment of that site?

I have already given an assurance on the matter to the House, but it is part of a larger scheme, and I am afraid that I cannot act until the scheme is complete.

asked the Secretary of State for India when he will be able to state what steps are to be taken to remedy the present condition in India under which the rupee rates of pay of British service officers in India are less than the home rates of pay and allowances converted at the current rate of exchange?

The question presents many difficulties. I regret to say no decision has yet been reached.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to get into communication with the Indian Government to see if some alteration cannot be made, seeing that the present position is so hard on British officers serving in India?

I am in active communication with the Government of India, and a telegram from them is now under the consideration of my Council. I will do my best to get special consideration.

If I put down a question in a fortnight, will the right hon. Gentleman be able to give me an answer?

I very much hope so.

had given notice of the following question: To ask the Secretary of State for India if he can state for what reason demobilised officers in India, who have been detained for so many weeks past at Deolali pending transport to England, have been compelled to sign a declaration that they would not hold the Government responsible in the event of accidents occurring out of the trooping season owing to hot weather risks; whether this declaration applies to the wives of the officers concerned and what compensation is to be given to those officers who have been kept long after the expiration of their contract date at personal loss to themselves?

Sir Charles Yate.

Question No. 10 is postponed. If I put down the question again in a fortnight, will the right hon. Gentleman be able to give me an answer?

I will telegraph to the Government of India. If my hon. and gallant Friend will put down the question in a fortnight and I have not a complete answer then, perhaps, he will be good enough to repeat it.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he has now received a report from the military authorities in Constantinople regarding the alleged seizure of goods by the British military authorities; and, if so, what is the nature of this report?

I am informed that, as far as can be ascertained by local inquiry, the following property has been requisitioned from the Turkish Government by the military authorities at Constantinople:

Royal Engineer stores of various kinds to the approximate value of £57,000. Of this, building materials have been incorporated in works services, and machinery is either in use or in Royal Engineer store.

Signal stores to the approximate value of £850. Two wireless stations were also taken over in situ, and are used by the British Authorities in conjunction with the Allies.

A number of motor vehicles were requisitioned, but these were returned in 1919. There are still with the British Naval Base four motor cars which were requisitioned.

It is impossible to say whether any of the property belonged to the Young Turk party.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will give the personal record of service in the Army of Brigadier-General Crozier, lately commanding the Auxiliary Division, Royal Irish Constabulary?

As the answer to this question is of a detailed nature I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the right hon. Gentleman willing to give the personal record of any other officer whose name is put down on the Question Paper?

If a question be asked, I will answer it.

Was the personal record given to the Government of Ireland when General Crozier was appointed?

I believe that the official record was given, but I am not absolutely sure.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to insure that when the Irish Office consults him as to the suitability of officers for police employment he will give them not only the official record but also the personal record of the officers concerned

I can give the official record. That is all I can give. I cannot give personal records. It would be impossible for a Minister to give personal records which are complete and reliable. All I can pretend to do is to give the official records.

Was the information which the right hon. Gentleman is going to give this House in his possession when he recommended General Crozier to this appointment?

I did not recommend him. The official record, of course, was in the possession of the War Office and that is all I am giving. I am not giving any personal record. I am giving an official record.

Is the whole of the trouble not due to the division of responsibility between the Adjutant-General and the Director of Personal Services? Will the right hon. Gentleman see that in future appointments, where the personal suitability of a man apart from War service is most important, the Director of Personal Services is consulted?

I think that is rather a matter for argument. As far as the facts are concerned I am giving the official record, and of course I give the official record whenever I am asked for it in respect of an officer who is about to be employed.

The following is the answer referred to:

The official record of the services in the Army of Brigadier-General F. P. Crozier is as follows:—

Born, 9th January, 1879.

Served as Lieutenant in 4th Battalion, Middlesex Rifle Volunteers, 1896.

Served as Lieutenant in Militia, 1897, and as a corporal in Thornycroft's Mounted Infantry in the South African War.

Obtained a commission as 2nd Lieutenant in the Manchester Regiment (from ranks of Local Military Forces, Natal), 19th May, 1900.

Lieutenant, Manchester Regiment, 13th July, 1901.

Employed with West African Frontier Force from 3rd June, 1901, to 17th September, 1905.

To half-pay, 31st March, 1908.

Resigned commission, 17th June, 1908.

Commissioned as Captain, 3rd Battalion, Loyal North Lancashire Regiment, 17th June, 1908.

Resigned commission, 22nd May, 1909.

War, 1914–1919.

Commissioned Temporary Captain, Service Battalions, September, 1914.

9th Service Battalion (West Belfast), Royal Irish Rifles.

Temporary Major, Second in Command, 4th September, 1914.

Temporary Lieutenant-Colonel whilst Commanding Battalion, 8th January, 1916.

Temporary Brigadier - General, General List, 20th November, 1916.

Commander, 119th Infantry Brigade.

Relinquished appointment and temporary rank of Brigadier-General, 15th April, 1919.

Lieut.-Colonel F. P. Crozier, temporary to Command 3rd Reserve Battalion, Welsh Regiment, 24th April, 1919.

Ceased to Command 3rd Reserve Battalion, Welsh Regiment, 22nd July, 1919.

Relinquished Commission and granted honorary rank of Brigadier-General, 31st July, 1919.

Unofficial. — Attached Lithuanian Delegation, Paris. General Major Lithuanian Forces.

War Services.

South African War, 1899–1901.—Relief of Ladysmith, including action at Colenso; operations of 17th to 24th January, 1900, and action at Spion Kop; operations of 5th to 7th February and action at Vaal Kranz; operations on Tugela Heights (14th to 27th February). Operations in Natal, March to June, 1900, including action at Laing's Nek (6th to 9th June). Operations in Orange River Colony, May to 28th November, 1900, including actions at Wittebergen (1st to 29th July), and Caledon River (27th to 29th July).

Operations in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony, 30th November to December, 1900.

Operations in Cape Colony, December, 1900, to January, 1901. Queen's Medal with seven clasps.

West Africa ( Northern Nigeria ), 1903.—Kano-Sokoto Campaign. Medal with clasp. Sokoto-Burmi operations.

The War of 1914–19.—Despatches "London Gazette," 4th January, 1917; 15th May, 1917; 11th December, 1917; 20th May, 1918; 20th December, 1918; and 5th July, 1919. French War Cross, C.B., C.M.G., D.S.O.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when it is proposed to return the documents, pictures, etc., seized at the offices of the Irish Self-Determination League of Great Britain and the Gaelic League of London at 182, Shaftesbury Avenue, London?

The documents, etc., are being examined, and such as it may be proper to return will be handed to the Irish Self-Determination League and the Gaelic League in due course.

asked the Home Secretary how many Irish men and women have been recently arrested by armed detectives from Scotland Yard; how many of the persons arrested have been released and how many deported because no evidence was forthcoming on which they could be charged or tried; and whether it is proposed to apply the Deportation Regulation to all sections of the population of this country, or whether it is to be exclusively applied to persons of Irish birth or descent?

Fifteen men and five women were detained by the Metropolitan Police as persons who were believed to be concerned in the outrages on 15th May. Eight of the men and the five women have been released, and seven men have been interned under the Restoration of Order in Ireland Regulations, because it was found that they were closely concerned with the persons and the organisation responsible for outrages. In one case the arrest had been authorised before 15th May, as the man was already known to be concerned in the organisation which had planned the earlier outrages. The Regulation under which internment is ordered is being applied impartially to persons of every nationality, but hitherto there has been no need to intern any persons not of Irish birth or descent.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say if there was proof against these persons why were they not brought before a competent court in this country when the offence was alleged to have been committed in this country? Are we to understand that anyone may be arrested in this way?

No, Sir. These persons were arrested properly in accordance with the Regulations.

Does that imply that it is competent for the right hon. Gentleman to arrest persons without warrant in this country, under the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act?

Is there anything to prevent these men being brought before a civil court in this country?

No, the real danger is getting old men and women to give evidence.

Does the right hon. Gentleman inform the House that the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act applies also to this country, and that the terms of the Act can be applied to any individual here?

If that individual is concerned in creating disorder in Ireland, he can be arrested in this country for that crime in Ireland.

When offences are committed in this country, why is the person not tried in this country?

That question does not really arise.

In the case of people who have been released from imprisonment, after being kept for days without any charge preferred against them, are they going to receive compensation for loss of employment?

No, Sir.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether the beating of prisoners was reprehended by the Judge Advocate in the Limerick trials, and what steps the Government has taken to put a stop to it?

This arose in the martial law area. I am informed by the Commander-in-Chief that the ill-treatment of prisoners was disclosed at two separate trials by court-martial at Limerick. In one case the Court gave it as their opinion that the ill-treatment of the accused by the police on this occasion was detestable, and very damaging statements made by the accused shortly after their arrest were not admitted as evidence. In the second case the constable admitted on oath striking an accused man in the absence of his superior officers, and the Judge Advocate, summing up, pointed out that this was the second occasion on which the police were alleged to have beaten an accused man after arrest. He further remarked that he would not admit any statements taken in evidence from accused persons a few minutes after they had had a sound beating, and ruled that a statement made by the accused shortly after his arrest was not admissible against him. The statement of the Judge Advocate were immediately brought to the notice of the Commander-in-Chief and the Divisional Commissioner of Police and orders were at once issued that the allegations of the ill-treatment of the accused were to be made the subject of further and strictest inquiry, and severe disciplinary action taken against the persons found responsible. The inquiry into the conduct of the police referred to is proceeding. Naturally the Government reprobates any such ill-treatment, and every step possible will be taken to prevent any recurrence and to punish every offender. I am circulating the statement of the Judge Advocate throughout the police forces in Ireland.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have given him chapter and verse of this sort of occurrence month after month and can he tell me why it is that only when the matter receives publicity from the excellent action of one of his officers he is taking the necessary steps?

I agree with the hon. and gallant Member in what he says as to the excellence of the action of the Judge Advocate. The House knows that this gentleman is the legal adviser to every court-martial. He is himself a trained lawyer, and I think it is a confirmation of the courage of this officer and of officers like him that they bring to the notice of the Government any breach of discipline or crime by the forces which may come under their notice.

What else would you expect a British officer to do?

I can only assure the hon. and gallant Gentleman that every case brought to my notice is searched and probed to the bottom. There is no matter of greater interest to the Government than to preserve unblemished the discipline of the police and other forces.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly say of what the Judge Advocate stands in fear when he speaks in that fashion?

The only persons the Judge-Advocate or other officers of the Crown stand in fear of in Ireland are the assassins of the Irish Republican Army.

I do not think that that is relevant to the matter which we have in hand.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether officers who, on being called up in the Army Reserve, merely registered without being given any military duty have been receiving pay of their rank since the Reserves were called up; whether this arrangement was only for a certain period or continues up to date; and whether he can give any idea of the expense involved by the failure to discriminate in pay between officers of the Reserve actually called up for work and those who were immediately allowed to return to civil life?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given on 12th May last to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Portsmouth North. I regret that it is not possible to give an estimate of the amount of pay issued in such cases.

Are officers paid for full time if they are not doing full time?

If my hon. and gallant Friend will look at the answer, I think he will see.

How many men at present in camp are leading an absolutely idle life at the country's expense?

That does not arise out of this question.

Apart from the answer given the other day, is it not a fact that a lot of men have received money for doing no work whatever? If necessary, will the hon. and gallant Gentleman alter the provisions of the Royal Warrant so as to secure that in any future emergency of this kind only those Reservists need be called up for whom work is available?

For a short time it was so officers were receiving pay when they were not doing any work. The question of altering the Royal Warrant is under consideration in case any emergency should arise in future.

Apply the principle all round!

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that Article 496 of the Royal Warrant for Pay provides, inter alia, that in the case of retired officers compulsorily recalled to service they shall receive the same rates of pay and allowances as officers of corresponding Army rank in addition to any retired pay of which they may be in receipt and, seeing that this provision was in force for many years before the outbreak of War and was therefore until its suspension last September a condition on which officers accepted service with the liability to be recalled to service in time of national emergency under Article 518, will he say whether there is any precedent or justification for a retrospective variation of such a contract of service in the interests of one party and without the consent of the officer concerned?

The operation of this Article was duly suspended by Royal Warrant, and I cannot admit that that action was in any way ultra vires.

Is it not a fact that officers who joined the Army with a Reserve obligation had the expectation for many years before the War that they would have certain advantages in case they were called up, and apart from this new arrangement being ultra vires is it not a matter of injustice that the conditions should be changed without the officers being consulted?

As a matter of fact this condition did not arise until 1907.

asked the Secretary of State for War what was the number of staff officers of the instructional staff at the staff college, and the staff grading of each on 1st May, 1914, and on 1st May, 1921; and, if there is any rise in the numbers on a higher grading with consequent increase of cost on the latter date as compared with the former date, what is the reason for such rise and increase?

As the reply to the first part of the question is somewhat long, I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. The figures show an increase in the number of higher gradings. This is due to the fact that, as the whole of the students for the last three courses have been specially selected officers who have held high rank in the field, both in command and on the staff, the courses have been of an advanced nature and necessitated instructors whose position and seniority require higher gradings than those of the previous staff. The present establishment is temporary, and a reduction in the numbers and in the gradings of the staff is at present under consideration, as the future courses will probably be composed of more junior officers.

Does the answer include the comparative cost for 1914 and 1921?

I do not think that was asked in the question. I have given the numbers and the grading at both periods.

The following is the reply:

The number and gradings of staff officers of the instructional staff at the Staff College on 1st May, 1914, were as follows:—

1 Commandant.

2 General Staff Officers (First Grade).

10 General Staff Officers (Second Grade).

2 Deputy Adjutant and Quarter Master Generals.

The corresponding figures for the 1st May, 1921, are as follows:—

1 Commandant.

4 Colonels on the Staff.

10 General Staff Officers (First Grade).

2 Assistant Adjutant Generals.

2 Assistant Quarter Master Generals.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether any decision has yet been come to as to the issue of a Home-service medal to all officers, noncommissioned officers, and men who came under hostile fire in the United Kingdom during the war years; whether this question has now been under consideration since 1919; and whether, in view of the age of many of the men who served at Home stations and who are desirous of obtaining such a recognition of their war services, he can state when such a medal would be ready for delivery if it is decided to issue one?

As explained by the late Secretary of State on more than one occasion, it was impossible to deal with this question until the preparation and issue of the War medals were well advanced. The question is however now receiving careful consideration, and I hope a decision will not be long delayed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake not to promise the issue of any more War medals until outstanding questions relating to the Territorial Force medal have been cleared up?

I am trying to avoid any promise.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also bear in mind that if many more of these medals are issued, the value of the medal will be completely gone?

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether the value of the service is not the true measure?

Both of those and all other considerations are taken into account.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that men who served get proper designations on their medals? Men who have received the medal have on it a wrong designation, and they cannot get it altered.

If the hon. Gentleman will give me particulars, I will look into the matter.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the assistants at Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, are paid the dockyard town rates; and, if not, if he will see to it that such rates be paid from October last, when the Alexandra Hospital came into the borough of Portsmouth?

I am in communication with my hon. and gallant Friend regarding the civilian employés at the Alexandra Hospital, Cosham, who are not at present paid dockyard rates of wages. Local inquiries are in progress, and as soon as these inquiries are complete I will communicate further with my hon. and gallant friend.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will publish a White Paper showing in detail the military and civilian staff of the War Office, section by section and department by department, at the present time and in July, 1914?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will grant a return of officers, warrant officers, and soldier clerks, giving ranks, monthly cost, and how much of the increase in cost is attributable to increases of pay and allowances, of those employed in the War Office and its detached departments on 1st August, 1914, and 1st May, 1921; a similar return for each separate command; and a return of civilians and ex-officers not included in the above employed in the War Office and separate commands, with the monthly cost, on 1st August, 1914, and 1st May, 1921?

I think that my hon. and gallant Friends will find the information for which they ask in the printed Estimates for 1914–15 and the current year. The references are Army Estimates, 1914–15, pages 27, 89–99, 124–127 and 177, and Army Estimates, 1921–22, pages 100–102, 148–158, and 160–169.

Does the reference cover the details for which I ask about various sections and sub-sections? Do I understand that in these Estimates every employé of the War Office, whether temporary or permanent, civilian or military, is included?

I ask my hon. and gallant Friend to look at the reference. I have tried to make it as easily as possible. If that does not give him the information, as I have nothing to hide, I will see whether a return cannot be made giving more precise information, but I want to avoid that labour in the Department if I can.

Does that answer apply to my question?

It does. I hope my hon. and gallant Friend will find that I have completely answered him, but if not I will give another return, though it will take a long time to prepare.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether disabled ex-service men, now under notice of discharge from the Royal Gunpowder Factory, Waltham Abbey, will be absorbed in the vacancies caused by the retirement of men who have reached the age limit?

I regret that the position at the Royal Gunpowder Factory, Waltham Abbey, is such that a number of discharges are necessary, owing to reductions in establishment, notwithstanding vacancies caused by retirements, etc.

Has an order been issued for a reduction of the age limit from 65 to 60?

I could not answer that question without notice.

Did I understand the hon. and gallant Gentleman to say that ex-soldiers would be allowed to fill the vacancies?

That is done.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any area of the estuary of the St. Lawrence or Gulf of St. Lawrence situated further than three miles from the nearest land is regarded by the Government as being within territorial waters?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the High Commissioner of Baghdad has reconsidered the case of men that were recruited for the railways in Mesopotamia with regard to the continued fall in the value of the rupee; whether he is aware that since their engagement the value of the rupee has fallen from 2s. 6d. to less than 1s. 4d. and, in view of the hardship imposed on these men, who have to maintain their families at home, will he have immediate inquiries made into this matter?

The promise to reconsider the case of these men in a few months was made by the High Commissioner as recently as the 10th of February, and I have no doubt that the undertaking will be fulfilled, though no report that the matter has been reconsidered has yet been received. I am aware of the fall in the value of the rupee since the men were engaged, and have recently asked the High Commissioner to consider the position of those employés who have to make remittances to their families.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what is the estimated total expenditure in Mesopotamia during the present year, exclusive of military expenditure, but including the cost of road and railway construction, building operations, administration, and transport; how much of this money does he anticipate will be raised out of the local revenues; and who will bear the cost of the deficit, if any?

I am awaiting final figures of the local revenue and expenditure of Mesopotamia during the current financial year. Such charges as are to be met from Imperial funds will be included in the Supplementary Estimates to be taken on Thursday.

Did the administration of Mesopotamia produce any estimate of what they expected to spend during the present year, or were they given a completely free hand?

Of course, they made their Budget calculations, but there are still some items, as between the two systems, which have not yet been finally determined. I shall be prepared to go into the matter fully later on.

My question asks for an estimate of the total expenditure. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I applied several times to the India Office when they had charge of this matter, and they could give me no information at all, and can he do nothing?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether in any foreign rubber-producing countries the Government has granted a subsidy or made an allowance to rubber planters under its jurisdiction; and whether he has considered the application of this policy to similarly situated British Colonies?

I understand that in some foreign countries such a subsidy is granted, but I have no definite information, and I would suggest reference to my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. So far as I am aware no similar action is contemplated in any of the Colonies.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what reply he has made to the petition of the Colony of Grenada for the substitution for Crown colony government of some system based on popular representation?

The petition has been considered, and it has been decided to introduce an element of elected representation into the Legislative Council of Greneda. The Governor has been informed accordingly, and has been instructed to appoint a Commission or Committee to report on the details of the proposed change.

Does this in any way prejudice the federation of the West Indian islands?

I must ask for notice of that question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think the time has come for an inquiry into the cases of the Grenada and all other West Indian Constitutions?

I must also ask for notice of that question.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if the Grenada Legislature has taken any, and, if so, what action upon his recent despatch concerning Transatlantic steamship communications what other Colonies have taken action in the matter; and what are the prospects of an early improvement in this respect?

The Legislative Council of Grenada decided that, subject to certain conditions, the Colony would make a contribution of £1,500 for a combined Transatlantic and inter-Colonial service, or £500 for a fortnightly trans-Atlantic steamship service. The Colonies of British Guiana, Barbados, St. Lucia, and the Presidency of St. Kitts Nevis are, I understand, also favourable in principle to a contribution to the cost of a Transatlantic service. The question whether His Majesty's Government will contribute a subsidy to enable a satisfactory service to be resumed is now under consideration.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether that consideration would not be assisted if some such inquiry were made?

That has nothing to do with the question on the paper.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Mr. W. H. Hunt, who on 22nd March was called into the general office of the Haunchwood Colliery Company whether he is aware that it is alleged that the chairman of directors of that company read a copy of a letter to Mr. Hunt which Hunt himself had sent to a printing firm in Glasgow that the contents of this letter were merely a request to send on publications issued by that firm that Hunt was dismissed without being given any opportunity of explaining the matter and that the publishing firm, the Bakunin Press, were raided by the police and letters as well as publications taken away; if he will say whether a copy of Hunt's letter to this firm was supplied by the police to his employers and, if so, whether this is to be accepted as the general policy of the authorities?

I have nothing to add to the reply I gave on Thursday last to questions about this case.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question as to the general policy of the authorities in this country?

I have already answered that.

Prussian methods!

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the recent case in the Court of Appeal in which Edward Reid, a quay foreman, of Shadwell, employed by the British and Irish Steam Packet Company, Limited, claimed compensation for injuries received in the course of his employment, and Lord Justice Scrutton, overruling the decision of the County Court Judge, held that Reid was not entitled to compensation on the ground that he was earning over £250 a year, but added that £250 now was a very different thing from £250 before the War; and whether he will consider the propriety of amending the Workmen's Compensation Act so as to meet cases of this character?

I have seen a report of the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the case mentioned. The recent Departmental Committee on Workmen's Compensation recommended that the income limit of £250 a year, which, I may observe, applies only to non-manual workers, should be raised to £350 so as to restore the pre-War position. This recommendation will be carefully considered when amending legislation is undertaken.

Will the limit be increased to meet this, in the case of manual work, in view of the decreased value of money?

This limit does not apply to manual workers.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the increasing popular resentment against the continuance of the existence of the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic), he will take steps to forthwith abolish the Board?

The Government have already stated that they cannot undertake legislation on this subject during the present Session.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a very large number of the Members of this House desired to debate and vote upon the Liquor Control Board as a simple issue that they sent in a requisition signed by between 100 and 200 asking for a day; that they balloted for a day and got a day, but that the election of Mr. Speaker to the Chair coming up upon that day caused them to lose their chance? Will he not now give the Members of this House an opportunity of debating and voting upon the question of this Control Board as a simple issue in which the public are very much concerned?

I have heard of some of the facts mentioned by my hon. Friend.

Why do the Government desire to burk any inquiry into this matter, and why will they not allow discussion in the House?

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the question?

I have answered it already.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered. We can never get an answer.

I propose at the conclusion of Questions to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House in order to raise this matter.

asked the Home Secretary whether the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, who is chairman of the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic), is in the latter capacity entirely independent of the Home Office; and, if this is the case, is there any vote in respect whereof the Control Board's actions may be discussed?

The answer to the first paragraph is in the affirmative: the answer to the second paragraph is that the Vote for the Central Control Board itself is the Vote upon which the Board's actions may be discussed.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, as chairman of the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic), if he can state in what respect the restrictions on the sale of fermented and spirituous liquors are modified in certain favoured districts; and will he give the list of those districts and explain the reason for this differentiation?

On the assumption that the question refers to the areas which have never been scheduled under the Defence of the Realm (Liquor Control) Regulations, 1915, the answer is that no restrictions have ever been applied to them by the Central Control Board. No modification of their position has therefore been made by the recent Orders of the Board, which apply in substantially identical terms to the scheduled areas of Great Britain generally, i.e., to the districts which are defined in Article 1 of each of the Orders.

asked the Home Secretary what is the number of aliens at present resident in this country who are suspected of being concerned in the numerous Communist plots which have recently come to light; if he will state why these undesirable persons have not been deported; what is the number of aliens who were sent out of the country in the 12 months to 30th April, 1921 and if he will publish a statement from time to time giving particulars of the persons so expelled, in order that the public may be enlightened as to the prominent part played by these aliens in the Sinn Fein and Communist conspiracy as well as in the industrial troubles that have originated in those movements?

It is impossible to say how many aliens are associated with the Communist movement in this country. If any alien commits or incites to the commission of an offence against the State or public order, I should not hesitate to deport him if his removal to his own country is practicable. Up to the present one alien has been convicted—on 12th April last—of such an offence, and I shall deal with the question of his deportation at the end of his sentence. Many persons bearing alien names are, however, British subjects, and cannot be deported. The total number of deportation Orders made against alien for all causes during the year ending 30th April was 533. I do not think the publication suggested in the last part of the question would serve the object the hon. and gallant Member has in view.

If the right hon. Gentleman's Department have this matter clearly before them, have particular instructions been given with regard to those aliens who can be traced in any way as having, or are suspected of having, any connection with these outbreaks, and will steps be taken at once in order that they may be deported?

I have said that is being done.

In the event of it not being practicable to deport an alien to his own country, could he not be interned for the moment in this country?

We have no internment camps.

Cannot we have them? In the case of undesirable aliens the right hon. Gentleman has the power to revoke their certificates of naturalisation.

I am not talking of naturalised aliens; I am talking of British-born British subjects.

Whatever action he takes, will he undertake that it will also apply to counter-revolutionary agents in this country from other countries?

I think that would be a question for Parliament.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in any revision of the Ceylon Constitution, he will give an undertaking that the advisability or inadvisability of extending the franchise to women on the same terms as men be left to the decision of the Ceylon Legislature in the same manner and subject to the same safeguards as this question has been left to the legislative councils of the eight major provinces of British India?

In such a matter I should certainly give the fullest consideration to the views of the Legislative Council. As, however, my hon. Friend will be aware, the analogy between the Ceylon Government and that of the provinces of British India is not sufficiently complete to justify the adoption of any policy in Ceylon on the ground that it has been adopted by provincial Governments in India.

asked the Prime Minister whether Prince Christopher of Greece is proposing to come to England; whether, as his brother King Constantine has not been recognised by His Majesty's Government, residence in England will be allowed; and, if so, what guarantees will be required as to the prevention of any intrigue arising out of such visit or residence?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The other parts do not, therefore, arise.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether the annual financial and statistical reports of the Scottish universities for the year ending 30th September, 1920, as required by Clause 30 of the Scottish Universities Act of 1889, have been received by him; whether they will be made available for Members of the House; and whether the tables contained in the Returns from universities and university colleges just issued by the University Grants Committee is intended to take their place?

I have received statistical reports for the Session 1919–20 from two Scottish universities. The question whether the tables contained in the Returns from universities and university colleges issued by the University Grants Committee and presented to Parliament shall take the place of the two reports issued separately for each of the four universities, is under consideration.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give me any idea within what time that matter will be determined?

I hope there will be no delay. I think the matter comes before the Universities Committee of the Privy Council.

About a fortnight?

I hope so.

asked the Prime Minister what is the cost to the country of the United Kingdom being one of the League of Nations; and if he will consider, with a view to economy, at a meeting of Prime Ministers of the Empire next month, the desirability of withdrawing from the League, as the United States of America is not a member?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the provision made in the Estimates for the current financial year for Civil Services (Class V, Vote 5) in respect of the cost of Great Britain's membership of the League of Nations. The answer to the latter part of the question is in the negative.

What is the gain to this country of belonging to the League of Nations?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of his statement in this House on 21st July, 1920, on the subject of reparations, that it would obviously make a very great difference to Germany's capacity to pay if the important coalfield of Upper Silesia was torn out of Germany and handed to Poland, and in view of the possibility that part of this coalfield would be awarded to Poland, any arrangement has been made to secure a corresponding deduction in the payments or deliveries to be made by Germany?

The hon. Member will have observed that the Schedule of Payments prescribing the time and manner for discharging Germany's reparation obligations which has been accepted by the German Government lays down that Germany shall pay in each year (in addition to £100,000,000 gold) a sum equivalent to 26 per cent. of the value of her exports or, alternatively, an equivalent amount fixed in accordance with any other index proposed by Germany and accepted by the Reparation Commission. The amount of the payments required from Germany in each year is governed therefore by her capacity to pay.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what advantage accrues to this country from collecting the German indemnity under the German Reparation (Recovery) Act instead of under the general scheme of the exports tax, as agreed on at the London Conference?

In the opinion of His Majesty's Government it is desirable that the German Reparation (Recovery) Act should remain in force at any rate until experience of the working of the levy on German exports laid down in the Schedule of Payments prescribed by the Reparation Commission has been obtained.

Would the hon. Gentleman kindly answer the question on the Paper; what is the advantage; does he say that we shall get more money this way than from the application of the exports tax?

The advantage that accrues by continuing to work the scheme under the Reparation Act is that of experience.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman to answer the question: is it for the financial advantage that we shall get?

Is it not the fact that we would get an increased indemnity under the German exports scheme, and that an increase under this Act will prevent German exports to this country, and so reduce the indemnity?

Undoubtedly, that is an argumentative question.

Then does the hon. Gentleman say that the Act is being continued more in order that we may gain experience?

Perhaps my hon. Friend will read the reply to the original question, and I think, if he considers it, to cover his question.

Are not the Customs officials applying the Act in a way that Parliament has not sanctioned, and is not that a trend of it?

I could not say on the spur of the moment what the practice is in all the cases; perhaps the hon. and gallant Gentleman will give me notice.

Is it not a fact that German goods, imported from France, Belgium, Holland, or through Switzerland, do not come under these Reparations in any shape, manner, or form, while if imported direct they pay Reparations?

That hardly arises on the question.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the appeal to the Moscow Soviet for funds published in the "Workers' Dreadnought," and to the statement in the same issue of the journal that it is constantly receiving money from foreign parts and whether the Government will take steps, by legislation or otherwise, to stop this subsidising by alien organisations of newspapers established for the purpose of spreading sedition?

I doubt if the article in the "Dreadnought" of 21st May, to which the hon. and gallant Member no doubt refers, can be construed as containing an appeal to Moscow. The "Dreadnought" having quarreled with the Communist party, it is not believed that it has received money recently from Russia. I can add nothing to my recent replies with regard to legislation to prevent the importation of money for propaganda purposes.

Do we understand that the Government practically shuts its eyes to the importation of money from foreign countries, which is undoubtedly used for the purpose of inciting trouble in our own country?

I do not know what my hon. Friend understands.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that what we desire to find out is what the Government understand, and does he recognise the difficulty we have in getting replies?

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to a sentence of 6 strokes with the birch, to be followed later by a further 6 strokes, imposed upon a boy of 9 years of age by a justice of the Grimsby bench; and whether, in view of the probability that this child is suffering from some mental or moral defect, he will introduce legislation making it obligatory to submit such children to examination by mental experts in order that in future juvenile delinquency may be treated in a more reformative manner?

Yes. My attention was called to the case and I decided to advise the remission of the second sentence. I am informed that the county medical officer who examined the child recently is of opinion that he is a moral imbecile and is endeavouring to arrange for his admission to a suitable institution. Courts have power to order a medical examination, and in a recent circular to magistrates I called attention to the importance of exercising this power in cases of juvenile delinquency.

In these cases where magistrates order birching, would it not be possible to ensure that the magistrates who give the order should be present at the birching? Would not that act as a check?