asked the Minister of Agriculture how many county or local officers he is employing in the county of Sussex, and what are their respective descriptions, duties, and salaries; and does the Ministry contribute any and what part of the salaries of any and what officers appointed or employed by the agricultural committees of the county councils for East and West Sussex?

The total number of officers employed directly by the Ministry exclusively in the county of Sussex is 23, of whom only one is a whole-time officer, namely, an inspector of the Agricultural Wages Board (salary, £350 per annum inclusive). The remaining 22 officers are employed for part of their time; of these nine are crop reporters with salaries varying from £60 to £100 per annum inclusive; one is a market reporter (salary, £25 per annum inclusive); 11 are collectors of fishery statistics with salaries varying from £2 10s. to £60 per annum inclusive; and one is secretary to the Sussex District Wages Committee (salary, £160 per annum inclusive).

The Ministry also employs directly 19 officers, whose work is not confined to Sussex. Twelve of these officers are engaged in 15 other counties as well as Sussex in connection with agriculture, horticulture, dairying and small livestock, education, training of disabled ex-service men and general horticulture (including the Destructive Insects and Pests Acts): one of these officers receives a salary of £480 per annum inclusive; six receive basic salaries between £150 and £250; four between £300 and £400, and one exceeding £500 per annum. The remaining seven officers are a district commissioner (salary, £700 per annum inclusive), and two sub-commissioners (salaries, £540 per annum inclusive), employed chiefly on work in connection with land settlement; a divisional inspector on work in connection with diseases of animals (scale of salary, £400—15—£500 plus bonus); one livestock officer (salary, £500 per annum plus bonus); one assistant livestock officer (salary, £150 per annum plus bonus), and one horse-breeding officer (salary, £500 plus bonus). The district of the last-mentioned officer comprises 11 other counties.

With regard to the second part of the question, the Ministry has delegated to the Agricultural Committees for East and West Sussex certain powers under the Corn Production Acts, 1917 and 1920, relating to the enforcement of proper cultivation, and the Ministry will contribute a proportion, based on the amount of time devoted to the work, of the salaries of those officers of the committees who are engaged in carrying out these duties. It is difficult at the present time to estimate what proportion of the salaries of these officers and of the necessary clerical assistance will be repayable by the Ministry at the end of the present year, but it is probable that the total amounts in respect of these services will not exceed £1,650 for East Sussex and £1,300 for West Sussex.

In the case of the officers employed by the Agricultural Committees on agricultural education, the Ministry contributes a proportion of their salaries varying from 66f per cent. to 80 per cent. The salaries of the officers of the Agricultural Committees employed on land settlement work are a charge on the county councils' land settlement accounts, the loss on which will be refunded by the Ministry.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what was the appropriate cost of the administration of food control during the months of April and May; and what is the present strength of the staff employed?

I have been asked to reply. The expenditure of the Food Department was approximately £43,000 for the month of April and £39,000 for the month of May. Its present staff numbers 1,466. There will be a progressive reduction of staff as the work of liquidation continues.

asked the Secretary of State for War what are the duties of the Permit Office; and what is its staff, military and civilian, male and female, in London and abroad?

The duties of the Military Permit Office consist of the control of civilian passenger traffic to British occupied territory in foreign countries. The staff consists of a chief permit officer, who is a military officer; 3 civilian examiners; and 3 female clerical staff. Of these, one examiner and a lady clerk are under notice to leave on 30th June.

asked the Secretary of State for India the present rates of Income Tax and Super-income Tax levied in India?

The information asked for is as follows:

Rates of Indian Income Tax.

(I) When the taxable income is less than Rs.2,000—Nil.

(II) When the taxable income is Rs.2,000 or upwards, and

Rates of Indian Super-tax.

(1) In respect of the first lakh of rupees of taxable income—

(2) In respect of the first fifty thousand rupees of taxable income over one lakh of rupees—One-and-a-half annas in the rupee.

(3) In respect of the next fifty thousand rupees of taxable income—Two annas in the rupee.

(4) In respect of the next fifty thousand rupees of taxable income—Two-and-a-half annas in the rupee.

(5) In respect of the next fifty thousand rupees of taxable income—Three annas in the rupee.

(6) In respect of the next fifty thousand rupees of taxable income—Three-and-a-half annas in the rupee.

(7) In respect of all taxable income over three-and-a-half lakhs of rupees—Four annas in the rupee.

asked the Secretary of State for War what is the full pay, including all allowances, that is now received by general staff officers in the first, second, and third grades, respectively, serving in the War Office and in the Staff College?

The information required by my hon. and gallant Friend is given in detail in Appendix 1, page 140, of the Army Estimates. General staff officers at the Staff College receive the same rates of pay and allowances as other officers of the same grades outside the War Office.

asked the Secretary of State for War if an early decision will be taken with regard to the issue of war medals to those who served at Home on duty during the War, often under enemy fire, inasmuch as it would be a great satisfaction to many who would be entitled to the medal, if he so decide, to know that their services are going to be recognised, even although they will, under the circumstances, have to wait for the decoration?

As I stated on Tuesday last, in reply to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for Central Southwark (Mr. Gilbert), this question is now receiving careful consideration, and I hope a decision will not be long delayed.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether definite treatment is being given to all patients in the Ministry of Pensions hospital at Ewell; if not, on what grounds is it being withheld; whether suitable occupational treatment is available for all patients in this hospital whose relatives desire it; and, if not, whether it will be provided forthwith?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Appropriate treatment is given to each patient by a staff of eight medical officers. Occupational treatment is also available at this hospital, and is provided when a medical officer, having regard to the circumstances of individual cases, prescribes that form of treatment.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether men who enlisted in the Defence Force and who were Army pensioners forfeited their pensions under the Royal Warrant as long as they drew pay in the Defence Force, whilst men who enlisted in the Defence Force and who were Navy pensioners continued to draw their naval pensions while drawing their pay in the Defence Corps; and, if so, the grounds on which this discrepancy has been permitted?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. The rules at present in force in the two services differ in this respect. The present view of the Army Council is that Army pay and Army pension should not be drawn concurrently, and the Royal Warrant for the pay, etc., of the Defence Force was issued on this basis.

asked the Chief Secretary whether he has seen the statement of Miss Una Daly, of Limerick, that the furniture and property in her house was destroyed on 9th April by soldiers and police acting under orders, that 15 minutes' notice only was given, that £100 in gold was taken, that during the destruction insulting language was used, that when the destruction was already in progress an officer read a statement that the punishment was being inflicted on Miss Madge Daly because she did not give notice of an ambush in John Street on the previous day; whether he is. aware that Miss Madge Daly was in Dublin on the date in question, and that the house was over a mile from the scene of the ambush, with the river between; and what has been done with the £100 which was taken?

Miss Daly's house is one of three referred to in my reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) on 20th April. The house was well known to be a haunt of the rebel forces. The statement that £100 was taken has been thoroughly investigated, but no evidence was adduced in proof of this allegation.

asked the Chief Secretary: whether he has received a Report on the destruction by Crown forces, near Skibbereen, on the 9th March, of four houses belonging to persons named Connolly, O'Sullivan, McCarthy, and Driscoll; whether this was an official reprisal; if so, for what offences; and on what principle these houses were selected?

I am informed by the Commander-in-Chief that the houses of Connolly, O'Sullivan and McCarthy were destroyed by order of the Military Governor. There is no record of the burning of a house in this district, belonging to any person named Driscoll, but if the hon. Member will furnish fuller particulars of this case further inquiry will be made. The Military Governor had reason to believe that Connolly, O'Sullivan and McCarthy, who are now fugitives from justice, were guilty of murdering two loyal farmers.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the offices and printing machines of the newspapers "Kerryman" and "Liberator," at Tralee were destroyed by members of the Crown forces on the night of 19th April; whether this outrage is connected in any way with the threatening letter received in March by the editor of these papers from the Anti-Sinn Fein Society; whether shops and other houses were destroyed on the occasion; whether this destruction was officially authorised; and, if not, what steps have been taken to bring the perpetrators to justice?

As Tralee is in the martial law area, I asked the Commander-in-Chief for a Report on these allegations immediately they were brought to my notice. I regret that he has not yet been able to let me have that Report. As soon as I am in a position to do so, I will communicate with the hon. Member.

asked the Chief Secretary whether Mr. Thomas M'Grath, a farmer, was killed by a party of the Crown forces at Glandree, County Limerick, on 25th April; whether an inquiry has been held; and with what results?

The court of inquiry in lieu of inquest found that this man was killed by a bullet wound inflicted by a member of the Crown forces, who fired in the execution of his duty believing that the deceased had fired upon him and was endeavouring to escape. The court also expressed the opinion that the movements of the deceased before he was fired upon were such as to cause the utmost suspicion.

asked the Secretary for Scotland (1) whether there is any statutory obligation requiring the new greater Edinburgh authority to give terms as good to its employés in Leith as were given by the Leith Town Council;

(2) whether the Edinburgh Town Council is dismissing employés of the late Leith Town Council; and whether he has any power under the Edinburgh Boundaries Act to make an Order in respect to this matter?

The conditions under which employés of the late Leith Town Council may continue in the service of the Town Council of Edinburgh are set out in Part V of the Edinburgh Boundaries Extension and Tramways Act, 1920, to which I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend. I have no information as to whether the Town Council of Edinburgh is dismissing employés of the late Leith Town Council. I have no power to intervene in the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any decision has been arrived at as a result of the Forth Pilotage Inquiry?

As a result of the Report made to the Board of Trade by the Commissioners who held this Inquiry, certain Amendments have been made in the draft Pilotage Orders for the Forth, and I hope to introduce a confirming Bill in the course of the present Session.

asked the Minister of Transport whether seeing that certain agreements were come to in August, 1919, between the Ministry of Transport and the railway unions (Railway Clerks' Association and National Union of Railwaymen) respecting the conditions, salaries, etc., of the railway clerical and supervising staff, the terms of which were that the staff were to be classified according to the importance of their duties; that it was also agreed that if the members of the staff were dissatisfied with their grading they were to be allowed to appeal against the same; and that the whole of the railways, except the Midland, Great Western, and London and North Western, have completed their appeals, he will take steps, in view of the great dissatisfaction which prevails at the delay in publishing the results, to have those results that are complete published without delay?

The announcement to the persons affected of the result of the appeals referred to on those railways where all the appeals have been dealt with is now being made.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will restore the pre-War period of six months for return tickets over 300 miles, in view of the convenience to the public, the saving of labour in issuing return tickets as against two single tickets, and the probable gain to the revenue of the railways?

The alteration in the period of availability of return tickets was made by the companies in September, 1918. It was within their commercial discretion generally to do so before the War and will be after control comes to an end, and I do not propose to exercise any powers I may have in this matter between now and the 15th August.

asked the Minister of Transport what steps he proposes to take to remedy the variety of local regulations on the storage of petrol and to introduce some uniformity?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The desirability of giving power to a central authority to frame Regulations of a general character was recognised by the Departmental Committee, which reported shortly before the War, but legislation would be necessary for this purpose, and it has not been found possible as yet to deal with the matter.

asked the Prime Minister whether any communication has been received from the Government of the United States of North America with reference to a mutual limitation of naval armaments?

The reply is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether any proposal for a naval holiday has been received by His Majesty's Government; and whether the opinion of the premiers of the Dominions will be sought on the subject?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. Naval policy is one of the subjects proposed for discussion at the coming Imperial Conference.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the British Dyestuffs Corporation refuse to supply British export firms with synthetic indigo, on the ground that they have their own selling arrangements in the Far East, and that this decision tends to divert trade from this country to Germany, Switzerland, and the United States; and what steps does the Government propose to take in the matter?

I am informed that, under the arrangements made by the British Dyestuffs Corporation with their agents in China, the Corporation is precluded from making sales of its products to merchants in this country when it is known that the goods are destined for export to, and sale in, China. It is, however, open to merchants supplying the Chinese market to obtain their supplies in China through the agents of the British Dyestuffs Corporation in that country. I am informed that in all such cases the agents of the Corporation supply without requiring any information as to the ultimate purchasers. The Government is not responsible for the management of the British Dyestuffs Corporation, and the Board of Trade has no power to dictate to firms the terms of their agency agreements.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what quantities of cotton manufactures were exported from the United Kingdom in the years 1900 to 1903 and 1910 to 1913; and what proportion of such exports went to European countries other than Russia or Turkey, and to Russia, Turkey, India, the self - governing Dominions, Nigeria, Uganda, and Kenya, respectively?

The following tables give the information required:—

Statement showing (i) the aggregate quantity, and (ii) the aggregate value of cotton manufactures entered by the yard, and (iii) the aggregate value of all cotton manufactures (including those entered by the yard) respectively registered as exported from the United Kingdom to the

undermentioned regions in the periods specified.

[The particulars relate to exports of United Kingdom manufacture only.]

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give for the latest year available the gross income brought under the review of the Inland Revenue Department for profits mainly derived from business to compare with those for Schedule D in 1914–15 of £724,488,365, and for incomes mainly derived from salaries to compare with those under Schedule E in 1914–15 of £157,253,770?

For the year 1918–19—the latest year for which figures are available—the gross income brought under the review of the Inland Revenue Department for Income Tax purposes was, as regards Schedule D, £1,039,123,827, and, as regards Schedule E, £348,054,803.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give further details of Item J, described as Liquidation of Ministry Production, running expenses of national factories, purchase of stores for other Government Departments, etc., and amounting to £165,062,378 18s. 10d., and appearing on page 3 of the Ministry of Munitions Appropriation Account, 1919–20, ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 5th May, 1921 (White Paper No. 102); what is the amount of compensation payments due to the cancellation of contracts included in this item; what is the amount of expenditure under each of the described headings, Liquidation of Ministry production, running expenses of national factories, and purchase of stores for other Government Departments; and what is the amount of expenditure described under the head, etc.?

Owing to the fact that the record of expenditure in 1919–20 in the books of the Disposal and Liquidation Commission was not kept under the categories referred to in the hon. and gallant Member's question, it is not possible to furnish the information in the form required. An analysis of the expenditure has, however, been made from the information available, and a statement is appended giving the approximate expenditure under various sub-heads. I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to Command Paper No. 1055 (pages 8, 12, and 13), which deals with the progress of liquidation by the Ministry of Munitions.

The following is the statement referred to:

asked the Minister of Health whether the Hornsey Borough Council recently supplied a bituminous clinker mixture manufactured in their depot to the adjoining borough of Stoke Newington, which was laid in Manor Road and rolled by the Hornsey Corporation steam roller; whether he sanctioned the Council's action; and, if so, will he give his reasons for such sanction?

I have given no sanction in the case to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers, and have no information about it.

asked the Minister of Health whether he proposes, at an early date, to give effect to the Report of the Departmental Committee on approved societies' administration allowance; and, if so, whether in so doing he will consider favourably a reconsideration of the proposed allowance of 5d. per annum in view of the fact that, since that recommendation was made, the Government has imposed an additional charge of 2d. per annum on friendly and trade union approved societies whose business it is to despatch health insurance cards and record cards to insured persons through the post?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In making their recommendations the Committee proceeded on an assumption that a further increase in the postal charges would be made.

asked the Minister of Health, with regard to the application of Mr. H. S. Wellcome for a licence under the Housing and Town Planning Act, 1919, of the Langley Park estate at Beckenham, what are the safeguards and requirements referred to in the letter from the Ministry, dated 28th May, 1921, addressed to the clerk of the Beckenham Urban District Council; whether he is aware that Mr. Wellcome has expressed his willingness to comply with such safeguards and requirements; that the licence granted by the Beckenham Urban District Council specifically provided for the premises not being used for the purposes of trade, but only for private research; that Mr. Wellcome is the proprietor of the business of a manufacturing chemist, and the premises are required for the purposes of supplying such business; and, if so, what is the position of the Beckenham Urban District Council in the matter?

As my hon. Friend is aware, the facts of the case were considered at a public inquiry, at which full opportunity was afforded to all parties to make representations. The decision which has been conveyed to the council was arrived at after considering all the circumstances. I have already sent to the council a list of the conditions which it is suggested should be complied with in any development of this estate. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy. The legal position has been set out in the letter forwarded to the council, of which a copy has been sent to my hon. Friend.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the verdict arrived at in the inquest held at Stafford on 24th May to inquire into the death of Private Leonard Pritchard, who died at the infirmary at Stafford as a result of injuries received during a fracas with the police on the evening of 30th April; whether the two policemen who were concerned in this case in the first place gave a false report; whether they subsequently admitted they had made a false report; whether, between 30th April and 24th May, these policemen were still on duty; whether they are at the present moment still on duty; and what disciplinary action has been taken by the Chief Constable of Stafford in the case of these men?

The Chief Constable informs me that the facts are as stated in the first three paragraphs, but that the two police constables were suspended from duty as soon as their original report was found to be false. They were allowed to resume duty temporarily again on the 5th May in order that they might not be prejudiced while the matter was still sub judice, but ceased to be members of the force as soon as the inquest was finished.

asked the Home Secretary the result of his inquiries into the actions of the two chief constables in the Nuneaton case; and what steps he proposes to take to secure justice and reparation for Mr. Hunt on account of the action of the police?

asked the Home Secretary whether he is in a position to state the result of his inquiry as to the existence of any rule for the guidance of the police officers in dealing with the documents seized in the various raids made upon offices of organisations concerned in the printing and circulation of literature; whether his attention has been drawn to the circumstances surrounding the dismissal from his employment of William Henry Hunt, under-manager of the Haunchwood colliery; whether he is aware that this man some time ago wrote to the Bakunin Press, Glasgow, asking for a supply of certain literature which he desired to study; that subsequently he was called before his employers, confronted with a copy of the letter he had sent to Glasgow, and dismissed from his employment, and that just previously the offices of the Bakunin Press were raided and a number of documents, including Mr. Hunt's letter, seized; whether documents seized by the police in these raids are handed over to private persons; and whether he will ascertain how Mr. Hunt's letter came to the knowledge of his employers?

I have been asked to answer this question. As stated in reply to questions on the 26th May, this matter was dealt with entirely by the local police. I find on inquiry that when the Glasgow police searched the Communist headquarters they found a letter in which Mr. Hunt asked for literature and asked for secrecy on account of his "official position." The police quite properly sent this letter to the Chief Constable of Warwickshire, who thought it his duty to show it to the man's employers. The employers, I understand, dismissed Mr. Hunt after showing him the letter and giving him a month's salary in lieu of notice. The general rule is that the police should not show to private persons papers which come into their hands on seizure or arrest, but the proper action must depend on the circumstances of each case, and no precise instructions can be given. My right hon. Friend does not propose to take any steps as regards reparation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he has received a resolution from the urban district council of Twickenham urging him to remove the dog-muzzling restrictions in that district, as no case of rabies has occurred there; and when he proposes to do this?

The resolution in question has been received and acknowledged by the Ministry. Twickenham is included in the area to which the Muzzling Order was applied on the 9th December on acount of the outbreak of rabies at Acton. It is proposed to withdraw the Order about the end of the present month, if no further outbreak of rabies occurs in the scheduled district in the meantime.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the estimated expenditure of the port directorate of Basra, Mesopotamia, and the estimated revenue for the coming year; and the actual revenue for 1920?

I am at present without the information desired, but have telegraphed to Mesopotamia for it and shall communicate again with the hon. Member on receipt of the High Commissioner's reply.

asked the hon. Member for Newbury, as representing the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, whether he is aware that the twelfth century church of St. Mary the Virgin, Romney Marsh, Kent, is in danger of destruction by fire through the proximity of an inflammable tarred hut; that the proximity of this hut to the burial-ground is giving great pain to the relatives of those buried there; and whether the Commissioners will inquire into the possibility of having this hut removed to more suitable ground?

I assume the church referred to to be that of St. Mary the Virgin, Romney Marsh. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners are aware that a site adjoining the churchyard has recently been acquired by trustees for the erection thereon of an army hut for meetings of the parishioners for religious and social purposes. If the building has been erected the Commissioners have no information that it is either a source of danger to the church or annoyance to those interested in the churchyard, and the Commissioners have no power to deal with any question of its removal.