asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been called to the massacres of Moslems and the destruction of Moslem villages in the district of Yalova, on the Sea of Marmora, by the Greeks since the Greek captain, Dimitrius Pappagrigoriou, took command of the district some seven weeks ago; that an effort to evacuate the survivors by the representatives of the British, French, and Italian High Commissioners at Constantinople on 24th May was obstructed and partially prevented by this Greek officer; that a general extermination of the Moslems in the Karamursal Peninsula is taking place with the apparent connivance of the Greek General Leonardopoulos, commanding the troops in this area; and what steps His Majesty's Government is taking or has taken to put a stop to these massacres and persecutions?

The attention of His Majesty's Government has been called to reports of excesses committed by Greeks in the Yalova district, of which Moslems were the victims. An Allied Commission of Inquiry proceeded to that district in May and its report substantiates the fact that grave excesses occurred. Repre- sentations based on the report have been made to the Hellenic Government.

Can the Government do anything further to make representations and put on pressure to stop these massacres?

Do the Government appreciate how deeply Mohammedan feeling is stirred by the outrages perpetuated by the Greeks in Asia Minor?

I am aware that excesses against Moslems always excite Moslem opinion in India, but I would point out the fact that an Allied Commission was sent to investigate this matter shows that his Majesty's Government attach importance to it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the question of the recognition of the Mexican Government has progressed since he last gave information to the House; whether that Government has yet begun to fulfil its President's promises to honour its obligations to British holders of the Republic of Mexico Loans, and other pre-1910 claims of various natures against the Mexican Government by British investors and traders who have placed British capital in undertakings in Mexico, such as railways; whether he will, should the Mexican Government not yet have fulfilled its promises and obligations, take steps, either by sending a special commissioner, or otherwise, to ascertain from the Mexican Government what they are doing towards honouring their obligations; and whether he will inform the Mexican Government that until that Government proves its good faith there must be a postponement of further consideration of the question of recognition by Great Britain?

There have been no recent developments in this matter, and, so far as I am aware, the Mexican Government have not yet made any payments to meet the obligations referred to. The Mexican Government are fully aware of the attitude of His Majesty's Government in this question, and I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by sending a special commissioner to Mexico at present.

Does the hon. Gentleman think it would be wise for our traders to do any business with Mexico while the existing condition of things continues?

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

Has the hon. Gentleman seen the report in the Press that the Government of the United States has proposed a treaty of amity and commerce with Mexico, and can he give the House any information?

I have seen the report referred to, but I cannot, at the moment, add anything to what I have said.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what information he has as to the position of affairs in Vladivostok and Eastern Siberia; whether a royalist or counter-revolutionary Government has been set up under Japanese protection; whether certain of the survivors of General Baron Wrangel's army are being transported from Turkey to Vladivostok; and whether His Majesty's Government is using its good offices to prevent further attacks on the Government of Russia?

Vladivostok and Nikolsk have been taken by troops who formerly served under the late General Kappel, and are now commanded by General Verzhbitzky. As a result of this movement the Chita Government have sent troops to form a front on the Ussuri Railway at Imampo. A Government has been established at Vladivostok under M. Merkuloff, representing all parties except the Communists and the followers of General Semenoff. This Government has dissolved the National Assembly of the Maritime Province, and new elections are to take place at the end of this month. The answers to the second and third parts of the question are in the negative. With regard to the last part, His Majesty's Government do not propose to interfere in any way with the internal affairs of the Far Eastern Republic or of Russia.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty how many sister ships of H.M.S. "Hood" had been contracted for at the time of the Armistice with Germany; whether any work had been done on them; and what sums were paid to the contractors as compensation for the cancelling of the contracts?

At the time of the Armistice with Germany three sister ships of H.M.S. "Hood" had been contracted for, and work on all three had actually commenced. No sums have yet been paid to the contractors as compensation for the cancellation of the contracts, but claims on this account are being investigated.

Can the hon. Gentleman inform me what is the total amount being claimed?

As far as construction has gone, can the hon. Gentleman say to what use the hulls will be put? Will they be broken up?

Perhaps my hon. Friends will give me notice.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to a resolution recently passed by the Council of the British Chamber of Commerce in Brazil (Rio de Janeiro)and sent to his Excellency the British Ambassador in Brazil, the right hon. Sir John Tilley, K.C.M.G., C.B., and also the resolution passed by the Council of the British Chamber of Commerce in Uruguay, and sent to His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires in Montevideo, in which the Councils of these two bodies expressed their utmost concern at the decision of His Majesty's Government to withdraw the British Squadron from South American waters; and whether this decision will be reconsidered by His Majesty's Government in view of the fact that such a policy is considered by those well qualified to know to be detrimental to the prestige of the British Empire, and, therefore, very prejudicial to British trade interests on the continent of South America?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty how many ships he proposes to maintain in South American waters; and what type of vessels they will be?

The answer to the first part of the question by the hon. Member for Plymouth (Sir A. S. Benn) is in the affirmative. As announced in the First Lord's statement, explanatory of the Navy Estimates, the Government have decided for reasons of economy on the temporary withdrawal of the South American Squadron. This decision does not exclude the possibility of visits of His Majesty's ships from other stations to South American waters, and the desirability of arranging for such visits from time to time will be kept in view.

Do the Admiralty realise the importance which is attached by British subjects resident in the South American Republics to the visit either of a squadron or a ship at all times, and whether this withdrawal will not leave the impression that the British Government take little, if any, interest in their subject residents out there?

Will the Admiralty seriously consider maintaining at least one good ship in those waters, on the ground that British residents in those countries know that trade follows the flag, and it will be very serious if a minimum of one ship is not maintained?

Was the withdrawal of this squadron considered by the Committee of Imperial Defence before orders were given for the withdrawal of the squadron?

I should like to have notice of the last question. I sympathise with the desire that our flag should be flown in all waters, and not least in regions where there is a large British community whose prestige counts for a great deal. On the other hand, considerations of economy are of paramount importance.

Is the expense not about the same, whether the ship is kept in commission out there or in home waters?

Certain squadrons are necessary in order to maintain Imperial defence. Temporarily, at any rate, the South American Squadron was not considered as essential as certain others.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can give a list of the main headings of documents to which Sir Julian Corbett has access for the purpose of compiling the Naval History of the War; whether the gentleman referred to is bound by any oath of secrecy to keep such documents confidential; whether all documents relating to the naval war are filed in the Admiralty archives; whether any documents, reports, or despatches have been or are to be destroyed; and whether any important reports, despatches, or documents have been lost?

I have already stated that Sir Julian Corbett has access to all Admiralty papers. The main headings of the documents in question are given by Sir Julian Corbett in the preface to the first volume of the Naval History of the War. All documents are or will be recorded in the Admiralty archives. None has been or is to be destroyed. No important reports, despatches or documents are known to be missing. It was not considered necessary to administer an oath to Sir Julian Corbett.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when it is anticipated a reply will be given to Item 65 of the General Requests contained in Admiralty Monthly Order 2,359, of 1920, as the lower deck consider the present method of assessing their ability as most unsatisfactory; and whether he is aware that there are cases where men have received the award of exceptional for ability continuously since its inception and yet have not received a single day's accelerated promotion?

This question is still under consideration, and I regret I cannot at the present moment promise a reply on any specific date. The question will, however, be settled without any avoidable delay.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when the Fleet laundry in His Majesty's Ship "Assistance," which according to a recent official notice is equipped with modern machinery and managed by a committee of ships' officers, was installed in that vessel; and under what Vote in the Naval Estimates was the cost of installing the laundry approved?

The installation of the laundry was completed in the autumn of 1919. The cost of installation formed a charge to Vote 8.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty how many Directors-General of various branches there are at the Admiralty; when they served afloat last; and whether an up-to-date and personal knowledge of the personnel whom they direct is considered essential for the efficient performance of their duties and the contentment and welfare of the ratings of their respective branches?

There are two officers at the Admiralty holding the rank of Director-General; the Medical Director-General and the Paymaster Director-General, whose last service afloat was in April, 1919, and in October, 1914, respectively. The reply to the latter part of the question is in the affirmative.

Are those the only Directors-General?

Yes.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the war services of the yard craft tugsmen have not yet been recognised; and whether, in view of the number of lives and the amount of property saved by their assistance, he can see his way to give this branch of the service some recognition?

The Board are fully appreciative of the loyal and often arduous services rendered by the crews of the dockyard craft during the War; but where all sections of dock- yard employés have carried out their duties, each in their own province, in a satisfactory manner, it would be invidious to single out any individual section for exceptional recognition. Members of yard craft crews will in all cases, provided they have served a cumulative period of twenty-eight days at sea during the War, be entitled to the award of the British War Medal; and due and regulated recognition-has been given for special services. The question of granting, in addition to the regulated payments, special pecuniary awards to yard craft men, in respect of their services during the War, has also been under consideration, but the Board have decided that the circumstances do not warrant this being done.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this matter has been under consideration for a long time, possibly 18 months?

Yes. My answer explains that point.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that men at Lambley Colliery, Northumberland, near Carlisle, got 14 days' notice on 26th February, 1921, and were paid unemployment benefit until 1st April, and that they then applied for a continuation of unemployment pay and were refused; is he aware that the workmen applied to the court of referees sitting at Carlisle and were allowed the further payment: has he been informed that the umpire for the court of referees has refused to pay the men any further allowance; and will he inquire further into the case?

I have made inquiries with regard to the claims of the men referred to by my hon. Friend, and am informed that there were no men at the Lambley Colliery, Northumberland, who were unemployed before the 31st March. I am, however, sending my hon. Friend a copy of the decision given by the umpire respecting workmen employed at the neighbouring White Cuts Colliery, which appears to be the case he has in mind. The umpire reversed the finding of the court of referees for reasons set out in his decision. Under the provisions of the Act the decision of the umpire is final and conclusive, and I have no power to reopen the matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman under the impression that none of these men were unemployed before the 31st March?

I said that there were no men unemployed at the Lambley Colliery before the 31st of March. There is another colliery which is probably the case which my hon. Friend has in mind, but perhaps he will consult me on this matter and I will give him all the information I can.

Yes, I will. I know both these collieries well

asked the Minister of Labour whether any sum of money has been ear-marked to be given to women entering domestic service, and, if so, what is the total amount involved; whether each applicant is to have an outfit up to a maximum cost of £10, with the sole condition that the applicant has obtained a situation, but with no guarantee that the applicant will remain in domestic service for any definite time; whether the sum to meet this expenditure is met from the Vote for the Ministry of Labour, and, if not, from what fund it is derived; whether, seeing that the only outfit needful for a worker entering domestic service consists of the necessary working clothes, such outfit could be provided at less cost that the maximum of £10 per head; in what proportion of cases the maximum allowance is granted, and whether the fixing of the maximum at so high a figure as £10 provides an opening for fraud on the part of the applicant and extravagance on the part of the committee through which these grants are made?

I am informed that the Central Committee on Women's Employment and Training, in order to enable suitable unemployed women to take up resident domestic service, have arranged to supply outfits to applicants approved by the Local Employment Committee, who have accepted a definite offer of employment. Half the outfit is supplied at the address of the mistress where the applicant has taken up work, and the other half when she has been in residence a week. The outfit becomes her property after three months' residential service. The nature of the outfit is decided in each case by the Local Committee. The maximum expenditure is £10; the average expenditure, so far, has been about £6. No money is paid to the applicant herself. The cost does not fall in any way upon Ministry of Labour funds. The expenditure on outfits comes out of the General Fund of the Central Committee, which, as my hon. Friend probably knows, derived its resources from a grant by the National Relief Fund.

asked the Minister of Labour the total number of unemployed men and women at present registered in the Borough of Southwark; and what the approximate cost of the weekly payments made to them amounts to?

I regret that I am unable to give figures covering the exact area of the Borough of Southwark. The number of persons, however, who were registered as unemployed on 27th May last in the area of the Borough Employment Exchange, which most nearly coincides with the area of Southwark, was 16,007, of whom 10,823 were males and 5,184 were females. In addition to these there were 2,172 persons claiming unemployment benefit in respect of systematic short-time working. As part of the Unemployment Benefit paid to these persons was paid through associations of which they are members, I have no record which will show the exact amount of benefit. It was probably in the neighbourhood of £13,000 for the week ending 25th May.

asked the Minister of Labour how much of the money allotted to Lord St. David's Committee has been spent up till now in grants for unemployment work; if he can state, approximately, on what kinds of work it has been spent, and the totals on each head; and if he can state what number has been employed on the various kinds of works?

As the answer is a long one, and contains a number of detailed figures, I will, with my hon. Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the answer: —

The total amount of the grants allocated by the Unemployment Grants Committee from the inception of their work on 20th December, 1920, up to and including the 6th June, 1921, is £1,693,705.

The classes of works in respect of which grants have been allocated are as follows:

The number of additional unemployed men expected to be taken on for the purposes of these works is 51,783.

The sum actually paid out by the Committee to date is approximately £170,000, but inasmuch as payments are only made on verification and in arrear the progress made must be substantially greater than is indicated by this figure.

asked the Minister of Labour if he can state the present position of the Unemployment Insurance Fund; whether it is proposed to amend the Act in the direction of reducing the benefits and increasing the contributions; and whether he can state fully the Government's proposals on this matter.

I propose to make a statement on these points in connection with the Unemployment Insurance Bill, which I hope to introduce this afternoon.

asked the Minister of Labour how many ex-service men have now applied under the Government scheme for employment in the building trades; and how many are now employed?

17,123 men have applied for employment. About 200 are either at work under the scheme or are recorded as having, been allocated to employers for employment under the scheme. My Noble Friend will, of course, recognise that the industrial situation is hampering very seriously the building employers in their efforts to make good the undertaking which they have in hand; and that satisfactory progress can only be secured when an improvement in that situation enables building activities to be fully resumed.

Can the right hon. gentleman say what is the attitude of Trade Unionists towards this question, generally speaking? Has he heard of the case which has just occurred at—

Notice should be given of that question.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) whether the trainees for political agents applied for this particular form of training or whether the Unionist organisations applied for trainees;

(2) what is the amount paid as a training grant to the four men employed by the Central and National Unionist associations; where they were employed prior to their War services; and is he aware that other political organisations pay their own officials whilst in course of training without resort to a Government subsidy?

A certain number of ex-service men applied for this particular form of training. Political organisations were accordingly approached, and the Unionist organisation was the only one which agreed to offer the required training. Two of the gentlemen in question receive £144 a year, one having been formerly a medical student, and the other an employé in the Land Valuations Department. The latter of these two having drawn his allowance for just over three months, was given a definite post on trial for three months, the allowance being suspended meanwhile. If he makes good it will, of course, not be continued. The third, a married man, is in receipt of a grant at the rate of £200 a year for a period of six months. He was formerly a lecturer with the National Unionist Association. The fourth, a married man with four children, receives a grant at the rate of £272 a year for 12 months to be reviewed in 6 months' time. He was formerly in business on his own account.

Are these men being actually trained, or are they only employed as clerks by local Unionist associations?

It is part of the scheme that they have to be trained so as to earn a decent living hereafter.

Does their curriculum include the "Life of George Washington"?

asked the Secretary for Scotland if his attention has been called to the correspondence which has passed between the Fife education authority and the Ministry of Munitions Disposal Board regarding the sale of machinery installed by the Ministry of Munitions at the Fife training school, Cowdenbeath; whether the machinery is now being used for the training of disabled ex-service men; whether the education authority has expressed a desire to acquire the machinery for the regular training of students in mechanical engineering, and has made an offer, based on an independent valuation, to hire or purchase the plant; whether the offer has been refused, and if this refusal took account of the fact that the use of the machinery in question, with other machinery supplied by the Fife education authority, effected considerable saving to the Government during the War; that the Fife mining school staff gave their services free of any charge in the training of munition workers and ex-service men during the War, and that the authority practically provided the building free of any charge for the said training; and whether he will use his influence to secure the acceptance or reconsideration of the local authority's offer?

A copy of correspondence which has passed between the Fife Education Authority and the Ministry of Munitions Disposal and Liquidation Commission has just been submitted to the Scottish Education Department by the Authority. From this it appears that the Authority have made an offer of £500 for machinery which the Disposal Commission value at £1,250. The Department are in communication with the Disposal Commission on the subject, and I understand that the Commission are willing to give the matter further consideration.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the answer given by him on the 16th March to the effect that it was proposed to set up a Trade Board for the fruit, flower, and vegetable distributive trade, he can now state on what date the arrangements for setting up this Board will be completed?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to state definitely the date on which the Boards will be established, as I am still carrying on negotiations with a view to securing the co-operation of all the interests concerned in the necessary arrangements. At the same time, inquiries are proceeding for the purpose of obtaining candidates to represent the trade in the smaller towns and rural districts.

asked the Minister of Labour whether, in view of the time that has elapsed since the proposal to set up a Trade Board for the boot and floor polish trade was put forward, he can now state on what date the arrangements for setting up this Board will be completed?

I am not yet in a position to fix any definite date.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman assure me recently that it was only a question of a short time before the Board would be set up?

I am not aware that I said a "short time." Inquiries were needed as the situation developed, and I cannot at the moment fix a date.

asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been drawn to the disregarding of the provisions of the Trade Board Act in the fixing of the rates paid to the workers in the clothing trade, and particularly to the women outworkers in the East End of London; and whether, in view of the injustice to the workers and the danger to public health entailed by making clothing under sweated conditions, he will cause inquiry to be made into the circumstances at present prevailing in this trade?

I have received a number of complaints that certain employers in the clothing trades of East London are not complying with the provisions of the Trade Boards Acts. Inquiries have been, or will shortly be, made in all these cases. If, however, my Noble Friend has further cases to bring to my notice I will arrange for an investigation to take place with the least possible delay.

Is it not the duty of the right hon. Gentleman to see that the findings of Trade Boards are observed?

Perhaps the Noble Lord will be able to assist me in that direction.

It is not my duty to help the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Labour whether new rates of wages have been submitted to him for confirmation by the Grocery and Provision Trade Board; whether when those rates were agreed upon by the Board the cost of living was 175 per cent. above that of 1914 but has now fallen to 128 per cent.; and whether, seeing that if the proposed rates were confirmed it would mean an increase in the cost of food to the public, he will, in these circumstances, refer back the rates to the Trade Board for further consideration?

asked the Minister of Labour (1) if he will refer the rates of wages back to the Grocery and Provision Trade Board, in view of the fact that when these rates were first agreed by the Board the cost of living was 175 per cent. above 1914, whereas at this time, when the Minister is asked to confirm them, the whole cost of living has fallen to 128 per cent. above 1914;

(2) if his attention has been called to the distress in Cornwall through the closing down of the tin mines owing to the heavy cost of coal and low price of tin, and that increasing unemployment and greater distress are occasioned through the introduction of wages increases at this inopportune time by the Grocery and Provision Trade Board, which the employés of the interests concerned neither desire nor expect; and will he give instructions to defer action until at least trade prospects improve?

asked the Minister of Labour whether the Grocery and Provision Trade Board have proposed to immediately increase the wages to all sections of workers in the food distribution trades; whether he is aware that if such increase be confirmed an immediate rise in the cost of food will take place to the general public; and whether the rates can be referred back to the Board for reconsideration in view of the fact that the cost of living has fallen from 175, when the rates were first agreed to 128 at the present time?

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the rates submitted to him by the Grocery and Provision Trade Board, England, were carried by the votes of the appointed members against the unanimous votes of the employers' side; and, seeing that these rates were first proposed when the cost of living was 161 above pre-War level, and that although this figure has fallen to 128, the appointed members refused to consider the employers' request for a reduction to meet this situation, will he reconsider the matter?

asked the Minister of Labour what action he proposes to take in regard to a recommendation by the Grocery and Provision Trade Board for an increase in wages; and whether, seeing that when these increases were considered the cost of living was 175 per cent. above 1914, whereas it is now only 128 per cent., he will refer the proposed rates back for reconsideration?

The Grocery and Provisions Trade Board have submitted to me the minimum rates of wages for certain classes of male and female workers, and I am now giving close consideration to the question whether I should make an order bringing these rates into statutory operation. In reaching my decision I shall take into account all the relevant factors. Full statements of the views of employers in certain out-lying districts, including Cornwall, have already been made by deputations received by officers of my Department, and I am tomorrow hearing personally the representations of the employers' side of the Trade Board, and on the following day the workers' side.

Would it not be better to leave matters to employers and employed?

I have to administer the Act of Parliament.

In giving further consideration to this question will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the point of view of the consumer, and see that the cost of food is not increased by anything he does?

As I have said, I shall take into account all relevant matters.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that these rates will increase the cost of food to the public? When the Trade Board arrived at the minimum rate of wages did not the representatives of the employers take an entirely different view from those of the employed, and were not the members nominated by the Ministry the people who virtually decided the question?

Is it not the fact that all these advances secured by the most sweated trade before the War were granted owing to the cost of living?

That last point is dealt with in Question 23 as to the action taken by the appointed members. I am, as I have said, meeting representatives of the employers tomorrow and of the workers the next day, and I shall then consider what is the proper course to pursue.

asked the Ministed of Labour whether he will give a rough estimate of the cost to the taxpayer of a trade board; what is the number of officials who are attached to a trade board in a whole-time or part-time capacity; what remuneration is drawn by members of a board; and what is the present number of trade boards actually functioning in the United Kingdom?

The average total annual cost of a trade board, excluding the cost of services rendered by the Stationery Office, Office of Works and General Post Office, is £1,150, but the actual expenditure varies in proportion to its membership and to the frequency of meetings. The total secretarial and clerical staff, including typing and Registry staff, attached to the 61 trade boards in the United Kingdom is 65. No remuneration is payable to members of the boards other than the appointed members. Chairmen receive £5 5s. per day and appointed members £3 3s., both inclusive of subsistence allowance. The representative members receive travelling and subsistence expenses on a scale sanctioned by the Treasury.

What is the gross total of all these subsistence and travelling allowances, &c.?

If the hon. and gallant Member will put down a question I will get the information.

asked the Minister of Labour if officials employed in the employment exchanges are allowed to hold additional remunerative appointments in connection with trade unions or other organisations?

The general principle governing the tenure of non-official appointments by officers of the Ministry of Labour is that no officer may accept any office or other employment in respect of which he is liable to be called from duty during official hours. So far as permanent civil servants are concerned, the question is governed by Order in Council dated the 10th January, 1910, which provides that no officer shall be allowed to accept any part in the management of any society, or any trading, commercial, industrial, or financial firm or company which would require the attendance of such officer at any time between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. I am unable to find that any officers at present serving in the Employment Exchange Service hold appointments such as those referred to by my hon. Friend. If, however, he will furnish me with particulars of any such cases, I will have further inquiries made into the matter.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland (1) whether the statements in the early numbers of the "Weekly Summary" that the Government maintained that unrestricted murder on the Sinn Fein side must inevitably lead to acts of revenge and reprisal on the other side had his sanction;

(2) whether the statements in an early number of the "Weekly Summary" that reprisals were bound to happen, and describing them as legitimate and defensible acts, had his sanction;

(3) whether the paragraph in an early number of the "Weekly Summary," expressing the hope that reprisals would still go on until their purpose had been accomplished, had his sanction?

My right hon. Friend is not aware of any statements in the "Weekly Summary" that could be interpreted in the manner suggested in these questions.

How is it that the right hon. Gentleman is able to state that these statements are inaccurate, when he has already told the House repeatedly that he has no copies of the "Weekly Summary"?

I did not say that the statements were inaccurate; I said that my right hon. Friend was not aware of any such statements having been made.

Then the right hon. Gentleman is not in a position to deny that these statements were made?

No, Sir.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the execution of men captured while taking part in ambushes is intended to be a deterrent; and whether, in view of the great increase in the number of such ambushes, he has any evidence that this purpose is being attained?

The execution of men found after fair trial to be guilty of a capital offence is primarily an act of justice. To what extent it is also a deterrent to others must be a matter of opinion.

Which are the murders, and which are the reprisals?

asked the Chief Secretary what is the total number of houses burnt down or wrecked, and what is the number in which furniture has been destroyed by official orders since 1st January last; how many of these houses were occupied solely by women; and how many were outside the martial-law area?

I regret that I am not yet in possession of all the information asked for by the hon. Member, and I shall be glad if he will repeat at a later date his question, of which I only received notice yesterday morning.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state the amount of the new semi-nickel coinage which has been issued during the last year in the Colony of Nigeria, as it is not mentioned in the Colonial Report, No. 1,064, upon that Colony; and whether the new money is willingly accepted and approved by the native traders?

I assume that my hon. Friend refers to the new alloy coins, although they are not semi-nickel coins. The issue of these coins began in the summer of last year, and the total amount issued in Nigeria up to the present time is just over £1,000,000. It is understood that the coins are willingly accepted by native traders in Nigeria. If my hon. Friend is referring to the silver coins of 500 fineness issued last year, I should add that the issue of these coins was suspended in the autumn of 1920, the new alloy coins being issued instead.

As I have never heard about these alloy coins, may I ask what they are?

I am afraid I cannot pass an examination in the alloy coins, but if my hon. Friend will put down another question, I shall be very pleased to deal with it.

Is it not a fact that these alloy coins are merely the used-up business ends of the cartridges used during the War?

Why is it that this Colonial Report No. 1,064 is so extraordinarily poor compared with the ordinary Colonial Office Reports?

I received that inquiry privately from my hon. and gallant Friend yesterday, and I wrote to him at once saying that I would make inquiries.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether contracts entered into by East African merchants and producers in Kenya Colony in rupees can now be completed in existing 50-cent pieces having an exchange value of 6d., or two-fifths of a rupee; and whether the intrinsic value of the silver in the 50-cent coins now current in the Colony exceeds two-fifths of a rupee?

I would invite my hon. Friend's attention to the statement circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT of the 2nd June, from which he will see that the sterling exchange value of the existing 50-cent coins in Kenya and Uganda is 1s. When sufficient supplies of the new currency are available, these coins will be called in and replaced by the new shilling. Until demonetised by Proclamation, the existing 50-cent piece is legal tender in Kenya and Uganda for amounts not exceeding five florins, or ten shillings, so that ten of these existing 50-cent pieces can be used to pay off a rupee debt of five rupees. The intrinsic value of the silver in the existing 50-cent piece is 5½d., at the present price of silver.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the recent decision to double the face value of the smaller ten- and five-cent coins now current in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanganyika was arrived at after consultation with the local currency board in Kenya Colony and with the Government of India; and whether the alteration of the value of the East African cent is expected to have an appreciable effect on the exchange value of Eastern African currency in India or elsewhere?

The effect of the recent decision with regard to the currency in East Africa is to halve the face value of the one-, five- and ten-cent coins. It does not apply to Tanganyika, where those coins are not current. The decision was taken after consultation with the Governor of Kenya, who had consulted the local Currency Advisory Board in the matter. The Government of India was not consulted. With regard to the second part of the question, the rate of exchange between Kenya and India depends on the success of the East African Currency Board in maintaining the sterling purity of the East African shilling and on the fluctuations of the London—Bombay Exchange. There is no reason, therefore, to suppose that the alteration in the value of the smallest local coins will affect the exchange.

Am I to understand from that answer that these new subsidiary 5- and 10-cent coins are to be circulated in Kenya but not in Tanganyika territory, and, if so, what is the subsidiary coin in Tanganyika?

As my hon. Friend knows, at the present time the subsidiary coinage in Tanganyika territory is the German Heller. The problem of replacing it by an alternative subsidiary coinage has not reached a point when it is possible to make any statement.

Is there sufficient of the German currency still being used in Tanganyika territory to meet all the requirements of that territory, and is it not proposed to withdraw all the German currency as soon as possible?

I understand that at the present moment the German currency is still circulating. I am not in a position at the moment to state what action it is proposed to take.

In view of the supreme importance of this question, and of the confusion which exists on the subject, would it be possible to defer putting into operation this decision of the Government until this House has had an opportunity of considering the matter in the Debate which is shortly to take place on the Colonial Office Vote?

I was not aware, until the Noble Lord spoke, that there was confusion in the matter. There is no confusion in my mind.

rose —

Any further questions should be put down.

Is that because it is so confusing, Sir?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the agreements entered into between the British and Australian Governments regarding the employment of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company for investigating the oil resources of Papua extends to ex-German New Guinea; and whether, in the case of the latter, the Australian Government, as mandatory power for the ex-German territory, have exclusive rights to the possession and development of the oil and other mineral resources of the territory?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the negative. With regard to the second part, I must refer my hon. Friend to the terms of the Mandate.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether the Aeronautical Inspection Department is at liberty to issue air-worthiness certificates for machines built and owned abroad if the owners of those machines desire a British certificate in addition to a certificate from their own country?

Certificates of air-worthiness are not issued by the Aeronautical Inspection Department, but that Department is responsible for ascertaining the manner in which certain of the conditions of issue are carried out by the owner or constructor, and making recommendations thereon to the Civil Aviation Department, which is responsible for the issue of the certificates. A foreign aircraft owner is not debarred by our Regulations from obtaining a British certificate of airworthiness for his aircraft. The conditions upon which such certificates are issued, however, include certain requirements in regard to supervision during construction, which could not be fulfilled in the case of aircraft constructed abroad.

Would it not be a great advantage, for this country at any rate, if we could induce the foreign aeroplane people to accept our certificate as a standard of quality, in the same way in which they take a Lloyd's certificate for shipping?

Yes, Sir; that point is fully appreciated, but the difficulty of foreign manufacturers obtaining a certificate in this country is clear, owing to the fact that the machine would have to be inspected during several stages of its construction.

Are foreign machines allowed to carry British passengers without being inspected by the British authorities?

I think that in this stage the responsibility in that case must rest with the passenger who selects the service he prefers.

asked the Prime Minister whether the 94,090 tons of coal delivered by Germany as reparation to France and Belgium, which has been imported into this country since the lockout in the mining industry, has paid the imports duty under the German Reparation (Recovery) Act?

I have been asked to reply. No, Sir; articles delivered by Germany to any Allied or Associated Power by way of reparation are exempted by an Order (No. 7) made on 28th April, 1921, in accordance with Section 5 of the German Reparation (Recovery) Act.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps, if any, have been taken to prevent the undue exploitation of the consumers of coal by the vendors of coal throughout the country; and whether he is aware that the poorest people, who buy in quantities of 28 lbs., are being charged £4 per ton?

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of 12th May to the hon. Member for Walthamstow. The cost of buying and distributing coal is now so heavy that a price of £4 per ton to the consumer cannot necessarily be regarded as excessive.

Is the light hon. Gentleman aware that Continental Governments, including the Spanish Government, during the last great coal strike passed emergency legislation forbidding anyone to charge more than a certain price?

I am not aware of that.

asked the Prime Minister whether an opportunity can be given to discuss the question of the expenditure of public money by the Government before such expenditure has been sanctioned by Parliament?

It is open to my hon. Friend to raise the question on any of the following occasions:

Any Consolidated Fund Bill.

Any Adjournment Motion, when not made on a specific question.

The discussion of the Estimate ultimately required for any of the alleged anticipations of Parliamentary authority.

The general Finance Bill discussions, and, in particular, on the Civil Contingency Fund Clause in the present Bill.

Would it not be possible to raise this on the Vote of the Minister without Portfolio, and, if so, would it not meet the convenience of the Government to put that Vote down at an early date?

Yes, Sir, I should be very glad to put that Vote down at the earliest possible moment, for other reasons. I do not like having the position of a Member of the Government challenged and the decision of the House not immediately taken. The selection of the Estimates to be discussed, however, scarcely rests with me. It is customary to follow the wishes of the House, as far as we can ascertain them.

What is preventing the Government from putting down the salary of the Minister without Portfolio?

The demand of the House for other subjects before it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman seriously consider that this single salary should take up the Supply time of the House?

In that matter I defer to the wishes of the House. If that is the matter in Supply that the House first wishes to consider, I shall give it the first place on the Paper, but, so far, other matters have been regarded as more urgent.

How did the right hon. Gentleman find out the wishes of the House? Surely, the wishes of the House are that this Vote should be discussed at the earliest possible moment.

I find out through the usual channels which have been in force ever since my right hon. Friend and I have been in the House, and long before.

Will the right hon. Gentleman seriously consider the practice of spending money before the sanction of the House has been given, except in cases of very great emergency?

Yes, certainly, that is done.

As a matter of fact, has not some of the salary of the Minister without Portfolio been paid already?

Yes, Sir.

Then are not they paying money without the consent of the House?

As one of the representatives of what are called the usual channels, will the right hon. Gentleman accept notice from me that we should like the first available Supply day?

I really must ask that a communication should pass in the usual way. We take the Post Office Vote on the first Supply day, in pursuance of a promise made to the House. We take the Colonial Office Vote on the second Supply day, in pursuance of a promise made to the House, and I have been urgently pressed to find an opportunity for a discussion of the agenda of the forthcoming Imperial Conference before that Conference meets. I do not think that is possible, but I was proposing to try to find a Supply day for that. If the House would prefer to have the Vote of the Minister without Portfolio, of course it shall be put down.

asked the Prime Minister whether, before the next meeting of the Council of the League of Nations, he will instruct the British delegates not to incur financial liabilities on behalf of Great Britain without having obtained the previous consent of Parliament?

The expenditure of the League is decided by the Assembly and not by the Council. In cases of exceptional urgency the Council may, however, decide that certain measures which may involve expenditure should be taken at once. In such cases the approval of the Assembly would eventually have to be obtained. Before agreeing to any such exceptional expenditure the British memmer in the Council would no doubt obtain the sanction of His Majesty's Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain how it was that £50,000 liabilities were incurred by the British representative at the League of Nations before Parliamentary sanction was obtained?

It was incurred by my right hon. Friend after consulting His Majesty's Government, who, in view of the international and our own national interest in stamping out disease, agreed to submit to Parliament a Vote for that amount if a contribution to a satisfactory amount could be obtained from other parties.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that was done concurrently with other nations having pledged themselves to us?

An undertaking was given on behalf of His Majesty's Government that they would propose to Parliament to vote this sum if other nations would also contribute to this great international object.

Why have obligations amounting to £77,000 been incurred for this year, as compared with obligations only £40,000 last year? Is the League of Nations twice as useful as it was last year?

That is matter for a fresh question. It does not arise out of this one.

Is it not a fact that £50,000 to stop the spread of disease in Poland was voted unanimously by this House without the protest of a single Member of the Anti-Waste party?

rose —

On a point of Order. If an hon. Member asks a question which makes a misstatement is not that a proper occasion to allow another hon. Member to ask a subsidiary question?

What the hon. Gentleman calls a misstatement may be a difference of view.

Can it be reckoned a misstatement when a reduction of the Vote is put down on the Paper? I gave notice of a reduction of the Vote, and the hon. Member said no protest was made from this side of the House.

There was no Division.

The matter had better be decided elsewhere.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether Captain-Lieutenant Neumann, who was charged at Leipzig with the crime of torpedoing the hospital ship "Dover Castle," was acquitted partly on the ground that such action is justified in the case of a ship used for the conveyance of soldiers wounded in a land battle; and whether, in view of the gravity of the position which this decision creates by legalising such an act of inhumanity, the Government proposes to take steps for the question to be considered by the League of Nations, with a view to an international agreement being come to on the subject?

This question was to be answered by the Attorney General, who, I believe, is engaged in Court.

May I put the question on Thursday to the Attorney-General, and will he be here to give me an answer then?

My right hon. Friend at the moment is engaged in an important criminal trial. That is what has prevented him being here to-day. This is pre-eminently a question which should be answered by him, and I should be obliged if the hon. and gallant Gentleman would put it down for some day when the Attorney-General can be present to answer it.

I will put it down for tomorrow, and if the Attorney-General be not here, I will postpone it to a date when he can first come here.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether the Inland Revenue have yet determined what average of expenses is to be allowed to Members of the House of Commons in calculating their taxable income?

My hon. Friend's question is apparently based upon a misapprehension. It is not for the Inland Revenue to determine any average of expenses for Members, nor have they ever done so. A flat rate deduction of £100 was allowed by the Treasury many years ago under the provisions of the Finance Act, 1913, and this allowance is unaltered; but it is open to any Member whose expenses exceed the sum of £100 to claim a further deduction, so that if the facts warrant it he may be allowed the full amount of the expenses wholly, exclusively, and necessarily incurred in the performances of his duties as Member, subject, of course, to a maximum of £400, the amount of his salary. A form of expenses claim is being prepared, and will shortly be issued to Members.

Are the expenses of the return included in this amount?

As to the character of the expenses which would be admissible deductions I can add nothing to the statement I made in the Debate the other day.

Why should it be confined to £400 if the expenses exceed that amount?

Because the salary is £400, and you cannot deduct from £400 more than £400.

I quite admit that, but I desire to ask whether the deduction may not be from the total income, and not merely from a Member's salary.

This is a deduction for expenses incurred in earning a particular salary. We cannot deduct from that salary more than the amount of the salary.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) whether an unmounted commissioned officer who, owing to the lack of accommodation, is compelled to live with his wife and family some distance from where his unit is stationed is entitled to deduct from his assessment for Income Tax the cost of keeping a motor car or other conveyance to enable him to perform his duties.

(2) whether the recent decision that a Member of Parliament holds an office of profit, and is entitled to deduct from his assessment for Income Tax all expenses necessary to perform his duties, including the cost of travel to and from his place of residence, equally entitles a clerk in a banking house in the City of London and resident in Finchley to deduct from his assessment the cost of his daily travel and all other expenses necessary to perform his duties?

The travelling expenses of a Member of Parliament which are allowable as a deduction in the assessment of his salary for Income Tax pur- poses are those wholly, exclusively and necessarily incurred in the performance of the duties of his office, i.e., the expenses of travelling between Westminster and his constituency, the two places at which his duties as a Member are performed. Similarly, if a bank clerk were required to perform duties at two branches of his bank, and were, moreover, required to meet out of his own pocket the cost of travelling between the two branches, he would be allowed a deduction for Income Tax purposes in respect of the expenses so incurred by him. It would appear from the terms of his question that my hon. and gallant Friend is under a misapprehension. The expenses to which I have just referred are quite distinct from the cost of travelling between the taxpayer's place of residence and the place of performance of his duties; no deduction for the latter expense is allowable under the provisions of the Income Tax Acts to a Member of Parliament or to other taxpayers.

Does that mean that if we travel from here to our constituencies, say, to open a flower show, we can deduct the expense, but if we travel from our homes very day we cannot deduct the expense?

Each particular case of expense will be subject to review by the Paymaster-General. I do not pronounce on any particular item which my hon. and gallant Friend puts, but the general principle remains the same. The expenses of travelling to and from home in the performance of ordinary duties have never been allowed, but the case of visiting one's constituency is different.

Where the Member's residence is in his constituency and he goes every week between two places in both of which duties are performed, seeing that both constituency and home are involved, surely he would be allowed the expenses.

No. Upon each occasion the Member would be required to declare that he was at the place because it was his constituency and not because it was his home, and that he went there to discharge duties in connection with his constituency.

If he interviews his constituents on the occasion of his being at home, his business is in the constituency?

It does not mean that, because expenses are not allowed for a visit home. They can only be allowed because the Member goes home in connection with his duties to his constituents.

What about those persons who live between this House and their constituencies? Are they to come to this House to get a proper standpoint from which to visit their constituencies in order to get the allowance?

The ordinary law will rule all cases, as in the case of the ordinary individual taxpayer.

Will these conditions be restrospective?

It is very unfair to be kept in ignorance.

The law remains as it has been. It may be, and, I suppose, is the fact that many Members have not made a claim though they might have done. The ordinary rule of law will apply, and any Member who has had this expense which he has not deducted will be entitled to make a claim for a period of three years.

Where is the economy?

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether there is any general rule as to the amount of leave given in the Government Departments; whether the scale of leave has recently been increased in some Departments from 24 to 42 or more working days; whether such extended period of holidays involves the employment of extra official help; and, if so, what is the estimated cost?

I have been asked to reply. The amount of annual leave allowed, subject to the exigencies of the service, to the staffs of Government Departments, varies according to class and length of service, but does not vary as between Departments where the same class is employed in two or more Departments. I am not aware of any class whose annual leave has recently been increased from 24 to 42 or more working days a year. Such a change would only be authorised in quite exceptional circumstances. The remaining parts of the question, therefore, do not arise.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what is the maximum payment in Government Departments for unskilled work and purely clerical work; whether the Treasury endeavours to ensure that its rates of pay are in some relation to those prevailing in private offices for precisely similar work; whether it has received any objections to this course from the staff affected; and, if so, what action it proposes to take in response to these representations?