asked the Secretary of State for India whether the Standing Order disallowing discussion on the Budget in the Council of State is still in force?

As far as I am aware, the answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether the Committee to examine the conditions of Indians in the United Kingdom has reported, or what is the present position in this behalf?

The Committee appointed under Lord Lytton's chairmanship to examine the question of Indian students in the United Kingdom is still sitting. It will report on the results of the evidence which it has so far been able to take in this country. I shall be glad to send my hon. Friend a copy of correspondence on the matter between Lord Lytton and myself, which has already been communicated to the Press.

asked the Secretary of State for India what positions, if any, are occupied at present by the Bolsheviks in or near the borders of Bokhara and Afghanistan.

The posts held by the Bolsheviks in a military sense are, as far as is known, the same as those originally held by Czarist Russia, such as Khushk, Termez, Kalla-ba-Panjà, etc. Bokhara itself is normally independent, but has become, as the hon. Member is doubtless aware, part of the Russian Soviet Federation.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he has received any communication from the Government of India in reference to the proposals made in the Legislative Council at Simla for an extension of self-government to India before the period of 10 years contemplated by Section 41 of The Government of India Act, 1919, has elapsed?

The resolution reported by Reuter as having been passed by the Legislative Assembly has not yet been officially communicated to me.

Having regard to the extreme seriousness of this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of utilising the Joint Select Committee on Indian Affairs, which has been set up for this very purpose?

Certainly, the Joint Committee can consider any question it desires, and particularly this question. I am not aware of anything in the Statute which would prevent the appointment of a Commission. The view I have always taken on this matter was expressed by me in the Debate on the Government of India Act.

That is to the effect that it is not desirable to deal with this matter until after the Commission which has to go out to India has reported, after 10 years have elapsed?

In my view it will not be possible to consider amendment of the Government of India Act until a Commission has visited that country.

asked the Secretary of State for India which were the local governments in India who expressed the opinion, recorded in the Report of the Committee appointed by the Government of India to examine the Indian Press Acts of 1867, 1908, and 1910, that the retention of the Act of 1910 was desirable in the interests of law and order; for what reason the Government of India propose to repeal these Acts, and in the case of seditious documents confiscated by order of the local government to allow the right of appeal, and to put the onus of proof that the document is seditious upon the local government instead of putting the onus of proving that the document is not seditious upon the owner or author; why the prescribed term of imprisonment is to be reduced; and why the Government of India desires to divest itself of the safeguards it now possesses against the spread of sedition just at the present time when sedition is so rife in India?

I fear I could not give my hon. and gallant Friend the information for which he asks within the compass of an oral reply. I am therefore having a full statement prepared, and will circulate it when complete in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the statement mentioned:

All the local governments (except Madras and Bombay, which favoured repeal of the Press Act and the provision of safeguards of another kind) advocated the retention of the Press Act in some form. But, as stated in the Committee's report, there was considerable divergence of opinion between them as to the nature of the modifications which should be made.

It is not proposed to repeal the Act of 1867, and the repeal of the Act of 1910 is to be accompanied by the re-enactment, with certain modifications, of some of its provisions. One of the provisions to be retained is the power to order the forfeiture of seditious documents, and along with this it is also proposed to retain the right of appeal against such an order to a special bench of the High Court, which is allowed by the Act of 1910. The proposal to place on the Government the onus of proving the seditious character of documents seized, is based on the general principle that the burden of proof lies on the prosecution and on the consideration that documents—the seditious character of which the Government is not in a position to prove—may reasonably and in general be assumed to be documents which do not seriously offend against the law of sedition.

As regards the third part of the question, the offences in respect of which it is proposed to reduce the maximum term of imprisonment from two years to six months, are not offences against the law of sedition, but breaches of the provisions of the Registration Act of 1867, such as failure to comply with the requirement of declaration of publishers' and printers' names and to display those names on published works. Such offences (which are commonly punished by fine and not by imprisonment) would seem to be adequately met by the reduced term of imprisonment when imprisonment is ordered.

As regards the last part of the question, the reasons for the proposals were given at length by the Committee, whose views the Government of India have accepted.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he has now received the recommendations of the Government of India regarding the adjustment of the pay and pensions of those officers of the Indian Army who were retained in the Army on account of the War beyond the date on which they became due to be placed on the retired list; and what decision has been arrived at?

The views of the Government of India on this subject have not yet been received. I have asked that I may have them at an early date.

Shall we have the information before the end of the Session?

That I cannot say, but I hope so.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he can state the effect of Mr. Ghandi's agitation in favour of the boycott of British-made cloth; what effect this agitation has had on employment in the Lancashire and Cheshire cotton mills; whether he can make any general statement upon Mr. Ghandi's machinations; and if it is the intention of His Majesty's Government in' India to arrest and deport this agitator?

As regards the first two parts of the question, the Government of India have informed me that they see no reason to believe that the movement for the boycott of European goods is receiving, or is likely to receive, effective support from any large purchasing section of the community. As regards the last two parts of the question, I do not think that there is any general statement which I can make. Mr. Ghandi's proceedings are being closely watched by the Government of India, and they will decide whether, and when, any action should be taken in respect of them.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that his reply will still further add to the agitation, and will it not lead people still further to think that this fellow is a Mahatma?

All that I have said in my reply is once more to announce the sound constitutional doctrine that it must be for the Government of India to decide when and how they will deal with these matters.

asked the Prime Minister whether, considering that the Moplah rebels are reported to be out for a general and merciless campaign of murder, looting, and forcible conversion, the Government will advise the Government of India not to proceed with their proposed Bill for the immediate repeal of certain repressive Acts that are now on the Indian Statute Book and thus to divest themselves of the powers to repress this or any other rebellion that they now have, especially as the Viceroy has ex- pressed himself as conscious that the need of special powers may again arise in the future?

I am in correspondence with the Government of India on the matter, and I can make no statement at the present time. I would say, however, that I do not accept my hon. and gallant Friend's statement that the proposed Bill, if passed, would divest the Government of India of their powers to repress rebellion; and that the opinion he attributes to the Viceroy is in fact that of the Government of Behar and Orissa, as shown in paragraph 28 of the Repressive Laws Committee Report.

Having regard to the position of the English people in India, would the right hon. Gentleman arrange that this matter also should be referred to the Joint Select Committee on Indian Affairs, in order that they may consider whether it is desirable, in the interests of this country, that the legislation should be carried out?

Has not a specially appointed Committee recently reported on this matter, and did it not recommend the retention of some of these repressive Acts, or at least of one of them?

I believe that the hon. Baronet is accurate, but I do not see how that affects the question which was put to me. With regard to the supplementary question put by the hon. Baronet the Member for Twickenham (Sir W. Joynson-Hicks) about the Joint Committee, I never undertook, when asking Parliament to agree to set up the Committee, that it should assist in the administration of India.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider it advisable that the Government should divest themselves of all powers of repressing rebellion?

Was not this legislation intended to deal with intelligenzia, and not with Moplahs?

asked the Prime Minister if he will give the names of the members of the Sub-committee of Imperial Defence, to whom the question of the strength of the Army in India has been referred?

No, Sir. As has already been stated, it would be contrary to the usual practice to announce the membership of a Committee of this nature.

Does the right hon. Gentleman say that, when a great Imperial matter of this kind is referred to a Sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, there is no precedent for announcing the names? May the House of Commons not know who is to report on the vital question of the Army in India?

I did not say that there was no precedent. I said that it was contrary to the usual practice. I believe that that practice has only once been departed from. In the opinion of the Government it is contrary to the public interest that they should be asked to disclose the names of members of the Committee of Imperial Defence or of Subcommittees of that body.

Is the Committee now sitting?

asked the Secretary of State for India what action has been taken with regard to that high military official who was responsible for the ill-fated East African expedition in 1914, which was undertaken against the advice of the Commander-in-Chief in India and for which Colonel Aitken was allowed for so long to bear the blame?

I am sure the hon. and gallant Member understands that these military operations were undertaken on the orders of His Majesty's Government at the time. This being the case, no question arises regarding the responsibility of any particular official.

Is it not a fact that General Aitken, as he was at that time, was removed from his command, and has been unemployed ever since that date, although his immediate subordinates have been raised to extremely good positions in the Government?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman asks me what action has been taken with regard to the high military official responsible for what he describes as "the ill-fated East African expedition in 1914." His Majesty's Government were responsible, and nobody else.

The responsibility was fixed on General Aitken at the time for this failure. Can the right hon. Gentleman state who was responsible for this expedition and whether any action has been taken?

I have said that the responsibility rested with His Majesty's Government.

Can the right hon. Gentleman do anything to reinstate Colonel Aitken?

There is another question on this subject.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that it is now a year since Colonel Aitken, commander of the East African expedition in 1914, was completely vindicated: that he then promised that steps would be taken at an early date suitably to recompense this officer; that he is suffering an unnecessary delay in the payment of his full pension; and nothing has been done by way of recompense?

I regret the delay, but am now expecting a reply from the Government of India which will enable me to announce a decision.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be able to give an answer before the House rises?

I hope so. I expect to have the information to-day. If not, I will telegraph for it.

I will put my question down again next week.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that, in response to the request for supplies of messages and signals forms, some public school, officers' training corps, have received parcels containing 5 cwts. and 2¼ cwts. of Army Form C2121, which, after allowing for a liberal usage for legitimate purposes, it is estimated will last 57 years; and whether, in the interests of national economy, a more useful scheme can be devised for getting rid of Army stationery?

The forms referred to were not issued in response to indents, but are part of a surplus of obsolete war stocks, which were of no commercial value, and were taking up expensive storage since surrendered. They were printed on one side only, and were, therefore, distributed to units as scribbling paper. By a stupid error, far too much has been distributed. I am having inquiries made, in order to fix the responsibility.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many retired, Special Reserve, Territorial, and temporary officers were still being employed on 1st October, 1921?

The total number of retired, Special Reserve, Territorial, and temporary officers still employed by the War Department on 1st October, 1921, was 2,266, a reduction of 1,334 in the course of this financial year.

asked the Secretary of State for War when it is intended to cancel the provisions of Army Order No. 291, of 1920, re compulsory retirement of Royal Artillery subalterns, and thereby allow certain officers to serve until they are qualified for a pension instead of retiring them on half pay for five years with a gratuity; and whether the number of cadets commissioned from the Royal Military Academy and posted to the Royal Garrison Artillery has been on the increase since the Armistice?

Circumstances do not permit of the cancellation of this Army Order at present, and a definite date for its cancellation cannot be decided upon until the future establishment of the Royal Artillery has been settled and approved. The number of cadets commissioned from the Royal Military Academy into the Royal Artillery has not increased since the Armistice, although a reduction in the number posted to the Royal Field Artillery has resulted in a corresponding increase in the number posted to the Royal Garrison Artillery.

asked the Secretary of State for War what steps, if any, have been taken to clear the war material and hut refuse from Bostall Heath, as promised some months ago; and whether he is aware that this would allow the ground to be used by the public and, in doing so, would provide employment for many men?

I understand that the contractor who is being employed on this work has already removed the material, and is proceeding to level the site. It is hoped that the work will be completed very shortly.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that hundreds of valuable lathes, planing machines, milling machines, and machinery of every description are lying exposed to the weather outside empty workshops; whether machinery already in position is being uprooted and placed outside; and if he will consider the utilisation of unemployed men and women to clean and grease this machinery and have it placed under cover until required?

The hon. Member has not indicated to what machinery or workshops he refers, but no War Department machinery is left long in the open unless it is only fit for disposal as scrap. Any machinery moved out-of-doors temporarily, for instance, during reorganisation of a workshop, is greased, kept clean and comes to no harm.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the case of practically every workshop in Woolwich which is not at present occupied by workmen, valuable machinery has been placed in the open air by somebody's orders and is deteriorating every day in this inclement weather?

I am not aware of that.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that continual discharges are taking place from Woolwich Arsenal; that there are thousands of unemployed workmen in Woolwich alone; that the discharges are due to some extent to the practice of allowing individual men to work on a piece-work basis; and whether, in view of the fact that the work is not of an urgent character and that by the abolition of piecework employment could be found for a larger number of men and further discharges possibly avoided, he will consider the possibility of suspending the practice in question during the present emergency?

I am fully sensible of the difficulty of providing full work for Woolwich Arsenal; but the hon. Member's suggestion is open to the serious objection that by encouraging the reduction of individual output it would increase the cost of production and so defeat itself by leading to reduction of orders and consequent further discharges.

If there is not an immediate prospect of another war, and thousands of men are working on a piecework basis, and there is a limit fixed upon jobs, as everyone well knows, is it not possible by a temporary—and merely a temporary—cessation of the piece-work practice to prevent the continuous and automatic discharge of 300 men every week at a time when the local authority are rushing to bankruptcy?

The only way we can prevent discharges is by giving plenty of work at Woolwich Arsenal.

If the Members of the Government who are concerned with the gravity of the situation in Eastern Europe will consider the relationship—

This is not the time to debate the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the high charges for pay and allowances of the military staffs of divisions and brigades, Territorial Army, can be saved by abolishing all or most of the appointments, seeing that these officers only deal with drill and discipline, and that there is practically no concentrated drill except yearly in camp; is he aware that these officers have practically nothing to do except routine correspondence, which could be carried on by one staff officer in each command direct with the units, and thus expedite matters and save a great deal of expense at present incurred by the filtration of correspondence through several unnecessary channels; and will he say what was the cost per head to the State of each efficient Volunteer in the year 1906 and what is the cost to the State of each Territorial in 1921, inclusive of the overhead charges for salaries and allowances of divisional, brigade, and regimental staffs?

As regards the first part of the question, the whole matter is under consideration. As regards the second part, the cost per head of each efficient Volunteer in 1906, including all overhead charges and cost of regular establishment (other than non effective), was approximately £7 10s. a year. The corresponding figure for the Territorial Army in 1921 is approximately £36. The latter figure excludes certain initial expenditure on clothing, but it is higher than the normal owing to the fact that, while the numbers are not yet complete, the overhead charges are little less than those that will be required for the full establishment.

With regard to the first part of the question, does the right hon. Gentleman know whether the Geddes Committee have power to inquire into these appointments with a view to their reduction?

That Committee will make any inquiries it thinks proper from the War Office, but that is not what I refer to in my answer. The matter is under the consideration of the War Office.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give a pledge that, whatever saving is brought about in the Territorial Army, there will be no reduction in the training?

I cannot give any pledges on that subject, at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether any and, if so, how many conscientious objectors are now being employed by the War Office; and how many ex-service men have been discharged from service with the War Office since the Armistice?

The answer to the first part of the question is none, and to the second 740. The latter figure includes cases of voluntary resignation and of transfer to other Government offices, as well as discharges due to reduction of work.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware that Mr. Thomas Imrie, 173, Pollok Street, Glasgow, an ex-service man, claimed an education grant to assist him to complete his university course of medicine, which was refused on the grounds that the claim was submitted two months beyond the time limit; that Mr. Imrie was sent overseas in 1918 under 19 years of age, and was unable to send in his application earlier, as owing to his Army service he had not previously been able to fulfil the required qualifications; what were the qualifications required of a candidate for a grant; why they were imposed; why a date was fixed as a time limit which excluded some candidates from obtaining the necessary qualifications; and whether the waiving of the time limit in regard to the man's age, when sent overseas, entitles him to any special consideration in regard to the time limit placed on the grant?

I am aware of the circumstances connected with Mr. Imrie's application for the grant in question and of the grounds on which it was refused. One of the principal conditions of eligibility for the grant was that the candidate should be accepted by the university or college authorities as qualified by previous education to commence an approved course. A rule fixing a time limit for applications had to be made in order to give some finality to the Training Grants Scheme; and it was not part of that scheme to offer higher education to ex-service men who could not fulfil the conditions of eligibility within a reasonable period after demobilisation. The circumstance mentioned in the last part of the question was duly considered, but I regret that I must answer in the negative.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether any and, if so, how many conscientious objectors are now being employed by the Ministry of Pensions; and how many ex-service men have been discharged from service with the Ministry of Pensions since the Armistice?

No conscientious objectors are employed by the Ministry. Discharges of ex-service men since the Armistice are estimated at about 400, the number due to causes other than inefficiency or misconduct being very small. During the same period the total number of ex-service men employed has risen by about 12,000.

asked the Secretary of State for War under what specific provision, either paragraph of Royal Warrant, Section of any Act, Rule, or Order, the Ministry of Pensions is empowered or the Pensions Appeal Tribunal is competent to take direct cognisance of cases involving questions of military discipline and military duty alone which have not formed the subject of any action by the competent military authority, for the purpose of rejecting, within the meaning of Section 8 of the War Pensions (Administrative Provisions) Act, 1919, a claim for disablement; and whether, in the event of the existence of such specific authority, proceedings thereunder are subject to the rules governing the administration of justice according to the law of the land generally and to the provisions of the Army Act in particular?

I have been asked to reply to this question. Under Article 1 of the Royal Warrant a pension is only pay- able if the disablement is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is not due to the man's serious negligence or misconduct. The determination of these questions of fact rests, not with any military authority, but with the Minister of Pensions, from whom an appeal lies, under the War Pensions (Administrative Provisions) Act, 1919, to a Pension Appeal Tribunal. The decision of the tribunal is declared by the Act to be final.

asked the Minister of Pensions why Mr. D. F. Gillman, who is not an ex-service man, is retained in the position of secretary of the County Dublin War Pensions Committee, considering that he is a whole-time officer of the County Dublin Agricultural and Technical Committee and a paid official of the Institute of Civil Engineers in Ireland; whether the staff of the County Dublin War Pensions Committee are engaged on work of the County Dublin Agricultural and Technical Committee and the Institute of Civil Engineers, to the detriment of pensions work; and what steps he proposes to take to have this injustice remedied and instal an ex-service man as secretary to the County Dublin War Pensions Committee?

I understand that Mr. Gillman performs certain duties for the County Dublin Agricultural and Technical Committee and the Institute of Engineers, occupying in all about one hour of his time each day, but that he devotes considerably more than the recognised official hours of his duties as Secretary to the War Pensions Committee. The remainder of the staff of the War Pensions Committee are engaged exclusively on pensions work. Local committees have been urged to apply the recommendations of the Lytton Committee to their staffs, but until the Ministry assumes direct control of local offices under the provisions of the War Pensions Act, 1921, the initiative as regards substitution still remains with the local committee.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that Henry Angel, 25, Parmiter Street, E., late private, No. 75640, Labour Corps, who lost his wife during his war service and placed his children in the care of the Church Army after her death, has been refused payment of allowances for those children at motherless rates while he is undergoing treatment; that this refusal is stated to be based on the fact that Angel has not contributed to the maintenance of these children since May, 1920; whether, since Angel has been on treatment allowances from 3rd April, 1920, to 1st February, 1921, and again from 5th February, 1921, to the present date, he is aware that it would have been impossible for the man to contribute when he is expressly debarred from earning whilst drawing treatment allowances; that these children will have to be handed over to the care of the guardians unless the allowances to which their father is entitled are granted; and whether he will take steps to have this obvious injustice remedied?

My right hon. Friend is considering this matter.

May I put the question down for Thursday?

Please.

asked the Secretary of State for War why the general officer commanding the Allied forces at Constantinople has forbidden the circulation or publication of the Labour newspaper in Constantinople while allowing capitalist organs to circulate?

Inquiries will be made, but the General Officer Commanding the Allied Forces is now in London and informs me that he has not forbidden the circulation or publication of the labour or any other newspaper in Constantinople during the past year. The question of censorship and the control and publication of newspapers generally is one that is dealt with by the Allied High Commissioners, and not by the General Officer Commanding the Allied Forces of Occupation.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any, and, if so, what steps have been taken to meet the demands of the people of Trinidad and Tobago for representative government?

I propose to look into this question during my forthcoming visit to the Colony, and meanwhile I have no doubt that the hon. Member will not expect me to make any statement on the subject.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Government is in a position to make an authoritative statement regarding the seriousness of Bolshevist agitation and activity in this country; what is the Government policy; and what does it propose to do?

I am not in a position to make such a statement. The Government are watching the situation very carefully.

What steps do the Government intend to take to stamp out this virus, which is poisoning the life of the nation?

I am not so sure that it is having that serious effect.

asked the Home Secretary if he is in a position to state what is the weekly income and expenditure of the organised Communists in this country; from what source they derive the money to carry on an active and pernicious agitation; if he can say how much per week is subecribed by the labouring members of such Communist clubs; and if his attention has been called to the exceptionally large number of criminals identified with the movement?

I cannot give precise information as to the income and expenditure of the Communist organisation. Their sources of income are members' subscriptions (3d. a week from each member of the Communist party), collections at meetings, sale of papers and pamphlets, and such subsidies as they may receive from abroad. Several of the Communists who have been organising trouble among the unemployed have previous convictions for criminal offences.

Has the right hon. Gentleman carried out any investigations as to the source of payment of those gentlemen who broke up the British Empire Union meeting?

There has not been time to do that.

I hope the right hon. Gentleman will not forget it.

asked the Home Secretary if his attention has been called to the increasing activity of the Communists in this country; if he is aware that two or more active Russian Bolshevik revolutionaries are attached to the majority of the Communist clubs; if recruiting for an armed force is in progress, and that secret orders are issued prior to every unemployed demonstration to resist the police and create as much disorder as possible; and what action, if any, is being taken by the police to arrest and deport all alien mischief makers who are following no usfeul employment but are being well paid for the activity they show?

I have given much attention to this matter. There are many persons of foreign extraction connected with the Communist groups, but I cannot give the numbers, and most of them, though of alien parentage, are British subjects. There have been attempts to recruit for a Red Army, but they have had little, if any, success. In some cases the unemployed have been incited to resist the police. Aliens who can be proved to have incited to violence or have committed other offences against the law are deported if this course is practicable.

Has any action been taken in the case of the battle of Shaftesbury Avenue?

I am afraid my history is defective.

Has any action been taken in connection with the Communists who tore down the Union Jack at the meeting at the Central Hall on Friday last?

That is one of the questions I have just answered.

Could not the children of aliens who the right hon. Gentleman says are British subjects have their naturalisation papers cancelled?

It is not a question of naturalisation papers.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the action of the police in stopping whist drives in certain localities; why this is done in one place and not in others; why the game of whist is singled out; and whether he can undertake to promote legislation to revise and amend the Gaming Acts in the light of experience gained?

My attention has been drawn to some such cases. The matter is one in which the police authorities of different districts act on their own responsibility according to the circumstances, which vary widely. Whist drives are not singled out, but they are more common than other games of cards. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware it is announced in the papers that the police at Woking have taken action to stop a whist drive there. If a whist drive is illegal at Woking, and perhaps legal in London, would it not be well to have a rule regulating the action of the police all over the country?

Circumstances vary widely in different places.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman legalise whist drives once and for all?

In the circumstances of a particular case, it might mean the keeping of a gaming house.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the particular case of Woking, and see if that amounted to a gaming house?

If a whist drive were arranged by Communists for the purpose of organising propaganda, would that be stopped?

When is a whist drive not a whist drive?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the wooden footbridge across the River Elchaig, which was built with money granted by the Government some 25 years ago, is dangerous to the Camuslanie school children, who have to use this bridge to go to school at Killalan, Kintail, West Ross-shire, their only means of getting to school when the river is in spate; that the education authorities of Kintail threaten to bring the parents of children at Camuslanie before the sheriff for non-attendance; that when the Elchaig is in flood carts for Camuslanie have to wait for days to ford the river, the only access to Camuslanie township; that even when the river is low the children have to ford the river in all weathers to get to school; and, in view of these facts, will he take steps to have a traffic bridge made across the Elchaig and, employ the unemployed in that parish to do this work during the coming winter, seeing that there will be considerable unemployment in Kintail this winter and this matter is very urgent?

My right hon. Friend has not received any representations as to the condition of this footbridge, or as to its effect on the attendance at school of the children of the district. The question of inaugurating suitable works of public utility for the relief of unemployment in any district is one for consideration by the appropriate local authority to whom instructions as to procedure in this matter have recently been issued.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware that the County Council of Ross-shire consider it is not their business to repair the foot bridge across the River Elchaig, Kintail, West Ross-shire, near the school house, Killalan, seeing that this bridge is not connected with a county road, it being a quarter of a mile from the Ardelve-Killalan county road, and about three miles from the terminus of the county road at Bundaloch; that the present foot bridge has been kept in repair by the south-western district sub-committee of the County Council of Ross-shire, but that they now decline to do so, as the bridge does not terminate with a county road; will he consider the question of employing the unemployed this winter to continue the county road from Bundaloch to the footbridge and to Camuslanie, seeing that the County Council of Ross-shire would be willing to take this road on the county provided a traffic bridge was built; and is he aware that the expense would be light, material available being at hand, including larch trees, and the advantage to the whole district would be very considerable, seeing that the only means at present of crossing Loch Long is by ferry at Dornie, which causes much delay and is a great hindrance to the development of the West Coast, seeing that it is the only road available from the South to Lochalsh and to Kyle, the port for the island of Skye, and that this footbridge was originally built by order of the chairman of the school parochial board some 25 years ago with a grant from the Government?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, but my right hon. Friend will consider any representations which may be addressed to him on the subject. With regard to the latter part of the question, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the latter part of my reply to the preceding question.

What has it cost to print these two questions?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the unemployment obtaining at present, he is satisfied with the powers possessed by Scottish county councils to undertake operations in rivers or riverbeds for the improvement of drainage or other purposes; and, if not, whether he will apply such portions of the English Drainage Acts to Scotland as may be necessary to enable Scottish county councils to give employment by schemes of this kind?

County councils in Scotland have no statutory powers to undertake the operations referred to. In connection with the relief of unemployment, proposals are under consideration for offering financial inducements to persons interested to undertake field drainage and land improvement. I am afraid I cannot promise legislation on the lines suggested.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the powers of burgh councils in Scotland for the acquisition of land for reclamation or drainage in order to give employment are declared to be deficient; and whether, in view of the usefulness of this form of employment, he will empower the Scottish Board of Agriculture or other authority to acquire such land, and thereafter by lease or otherwise to enable the burgh council concerned to operate upon it, or take such other steps as may seem advisable to remove the difficulty indicated?

No representations, in the sense suggested in the first part of the question, have reached my right hon. Friend, but, in any case, he has no authority to confer additional powers upon the authorities mentioned.

Can the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of my question?

I think the point is covered by the answer. The Secretary for Scotland has no power to do this under any Statute.

May I give an instance of a burgh which has given employment by reclaiming all its own land and all the land it can buy? I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman he should undertake to enable that burgh to borrow in order to purchase further land and thus deal with the question of unemployment.

I will put that case to my right hon. Friend for consideration, but I do not know of any statutory power under which an Order of that kind could be made.

If any such arrangement is made, will it provide for due compensation for the Scottish landlords who are being taxed and rated to extinction?

That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he is aware that the Highland stallion pony which travelled this season in Kintail and the surrounding district is light of bone and small and his stock is not considered suitable for that mountainous district, and that consequently his produce does not fetch remunerative prices; and will he consider the question of sending a stronger Highland pony to travel in that district next season?

I have been asked to reply to this question. I am informed that the stallion referred to was considered suitable for the purposes of the small farmers in the Kintail district, and that no representations to the contrary have been received by the Board of Agriculture for Scotland. Provided the Highland Pony Breeding Scheme is continued next year, the Board will endeavour to supply an animal of a heavier type if the people in the district so desire.

Is the right hon Gentleman aware that the Highland stallion pony does not breed stock capable of carrying a 15-stone pack down a hill?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to criticism by county agricultural committees of the administration of the Scottish Small Holdings Acts; and whether he will consider the advisability of setting up an expert committee to investigate the whole question?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the latter part, my right hon. Friend does not consider that the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry is necessary.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that throughout Scotland at present, and particularly in Caithness, Sutherland, Ayrshire, and Islay, proprietors of land on which there are small holdings are offering their estates or individual holdings for sale; that this is causing alarm amongst smallholders, who are confronted with the alternative of enforced purchase of their holdings or being faced by applications for resumption by the new proprietors of their holdings; that the Scottish Land Court in their last Report have called attention to the large numbers of applications for resumption; that the procedure for resumption now being resorted to by the landholders, under the Small Landholders Act of 1911, is resulting in defeating fixity of tenure, which it was the purpose of that Act to secure; and whether legislation will be introduced to deal with this urgent matter?

With regard to the first part of the question, my right hon. Friend has no detailed information as to the position in the areas mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend, but he is aware that in their last Report the Scottish Land Court referred to a gradual increase in the number of applications by landlords for authority to resume small holdings for the purpose of personally residing on and cultivating the holdings. The number of such cases, however, appears to be comparatively small. This right of resumption has existed since the institution of the crofters' tenure, and I am not prepared to say that a, case for legislation to modify or remove it has been made out.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that criticism of the kind referred to requires an answer?

That criticism was answered by the Board of Agriculture in a letter published in the Press last September.

Has not the number of these cases increased enormously during the last year or two, and has not a new situation arisen?

I think that my hon Friend is misinformed as to the facts. There are only a few such cases altogether.

Has not the Land Court report said that there was a large number?

Is it not utterly unreasonable to charge against these Scottish landowners, who are reluctantly driven to sell, that they are thereby persecuting smallholders?

I do not think that there is any foundation for the suggestion that the landowners are persecuting smallholders.

Is it not due to the fact that there is a number of War profiteers buying the land in these parts for sporting estates?

asked the Post master-General the number of cities on the Continent which are directly connected with London by air post; and what are the possibilities for a further extension of this important service?

There are direct air mail services between London and Paris and between London and Amsterdam. The service between London and Brussels is at present suspended in consequence of a fire which took place at the Brussels aerodrome at the end of September. The Post Office and the Air Ministry are working together with a view to developing the air post wherever practicable.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to make enquiries as to the possibility of connecting the Paris mail with the regular daily air mail which goes from Paris to Prague and Warsaw, as it would be a great convenience from the point of view of carrying letters to the middle of the Continent?

Yes, Sir. A number of enquiries covering other places besides those mentioned by my hon. Friend are now being made. I will give particular attention to the point to which he refers?

Do these services pay their way, or are they a charge on the taxpayer?

They are no charge on the taxpayers. The use of them made by the public is, I regret to say, very limited, but we get from the public all the charges we have to make.

Does it involve a loss?

No.

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the fact that Messrs. Gooch, Limited, of Brompton Road, Kensington, despatched a parcel to a customer in Paris on the 28th July last in respect of which they paid a fee for postage, insurance, etc., of 6s. 1½d.; whether this parcel was returned to Messrs. Gooch on the 3rd August with an intimation that the said parcel was returned as it had been ½d. overstamped; whether the parcel was reposted the same day, a new receipt for 6s. 1d. instead of 6s. 1½d. being given; whether the parcel has never since been heard of; whether, after months of delay and correspondence, Messrs. Gooch have been unable to obtain any satisfactory explanations or information in the matter; and what action he now proposes to take?

I cannot trace any correspondence with the firm who posted the parcel referred to, but if they will supply me with further particulars I will have full inquiries made.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that not only has the Post Office been officially communicated with several times in this matter, but that he himself has had personal letters addressed to him from the firm; and will he explain, apart from the facts as stated in this case, why in this case and in many others there is this enormous delay in dealing with complaints by the Post Office—often lasting for several months?

I am afraid I am getting very sceptical with regard to charges made against the Post Office, but I can say in this case that if my hon. Friend or the firm in question will let me have the papers, I will see that inquiries are made, and they shall be made by me personally.

Thank you.

asked the Post-master-General whether he is aware that frequently postal packets containing drugs for medicinal use are held up for over a fortnight when the same are urgently required by hospitals, general practitioners, and the public generally; and if he can promise any assistance to accelerate delivery of medicinal goods required urgently for public health?

I understand the hon. Member to refer to packets from abroad. If the hon. Member will give me details of any particular cases I will have inquiry made.

asked the Postmaster General whether, and at what rate, he would be willing to guarantee a ton of mail matter per week from London to Australia in the event of a firm, or combination of firms, of sufficient standing and repute being prepared to run a weekly aeroplane service in organised stages from London to Australia, the entire distance to be covered in, say, five days?

If a weekly aeroplane service can be established from London to Australia, I shall be prepared to consider the question of employing it for the conveyance of mails. The quantity of mails available, and the price to be paid for their carriage, would depend on the amount of the extra fee which would have to be charged for the service, and on its speed and reliability, which it would, in present conditions, be difficult to determine beforehand.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be willing to consider the matter and give some sort of approximate idea of the amount of mails he could guarantee?

I should like to see something like a definite undertaking that it is possible to carry out anything like the service which my hon. Friend suggests. If he can give me that information, I shall be glad to consider it sympathetically.

asked the Prime Minister what the Yugo-Slav debt to this country is, and if any part of it has been paid?

The debt of the Serb-Croat-Slovene Government to His Majesty's Government is £22,265,142, together with interest from 1st January, 1920, in respect of War advances; and £1,857,827, together with interest, in respect of reconstruction advances. No part of these debts has been repaid.

Is it not a fact that something like 90 per cent. of the Yugo-Slav budget goes to the upkeep of their army, and also that they are attacking the neutral country of Albania; and cannot this Government make the suggestion that they should begin to pay their debts instead of destroying other people's territories?

Part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question is argumentative, and the other part is not relevant.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to recommend the appointment of a Royal Commission, or summon a national industrial conference to consider the whole question of unemployment insurance, particularly with regard to the relation between contributions and wages and profits, and the average amount of unemployment in each industry?

I have been asked to reply. The period since the commencement of the first Unemployment Insurance Act has been so exceptional in its character, consisting as it does to a large extent of the War period and the three years since the Armistice, that I do not think it would serve any useful purpose to adopt my hon. and gallant Friend's suggestion at the present time. The present rates of contributions are abnormal, and it would be desirable to know the effect of the normal scheme over a period before attempting to draw any definite conclusions with regard to its operation.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the unfair operation of the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1921, in respect to the six days continuously being off work; does he know that while one pit, which has three days worked in two weeks and eight days off, would get no relief or payment, another pit, which works five days in two weeks, could get one week's pay under the Act; and, if so, will he see that the payment is put on a better principle of equity?

I would draw my hon. Friend's attention to answers on previous questions on this subject, copies of which I am sending him. The provision to which he refers is contained in the Unemployment Insurance Acts themselves, and I have no power to modify it. The statement of the cases as given in the question is too incomplete to enable me to say how much benefit would be payable—but I shall be glad to make inquiry if my hon. Friend will supply further particulars.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one man may have 50s. for five days and another man only 40s., and that the man who gets 50s. gets 15s. benefit?

If cases of that sort are not covered by the answers to the previous questions, which I am sending to the hon. Member, perhaps he will bring them to my notice, and I will see how far it can be done under the Acts.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the provision laid down in the Act in regard to these matters is having a very serious effect in the districts where there is continuous short time, but not sufficiently continuous to warrant coming within the provisions of the Acts?

asked the Minister of Health whether he has received any representations regarding the unemployment existing in the Westbury district of Wiltshire; whether he is aware that the urban council are anxious to start a sewerage scheme which would provide employment for a number of men, but owing to the state of their finances, declare that it is utterly impossible for them to proceed; and whether consideration will be given to the scheme in question, with a view to some financial assistance being rendered to enable the local authority to put the work in hand?

The most recent information which I have received was that the position as regards unemployment in this area was not such as to warrant the Ministry of Labour certifying the district for a grant. I am, however, making further inquiry, and will communicate again with the hon. Member.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Minister of Health whether the second paragraph of sub-heading II of the memorandum accompanying the Supplementary Estimates, dated 19th October, means that local authorities will receive for approved public works of a non-revenue producing character 65 per cent. of the annual interest and loan repayment charges for the full period of the loan provided the loan period does not exceed fifteen years, and if so, will he advise local authorities accordingly?

No, Sir. The Government grant towards non-revenue producing works will be paid for a period not exceeding half the period of the loan, but the grant will not in any case be paid for more than 15 years.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the memorandum issued on the Supplementary Estimates there is no reference whatever to half the period of the loan?

The memorandum may not be quite clear, but I think that the circular issued by the Department on the instructions of the Cabinet is quite clear.

asked the Prime Minister if, in view of the likelihood that purely commercial matters will be directly or indirectly affected by the diplomatic discussions at Washington, he will state the name and functions of the trade adviser in the British delegation?

Sir Hubert Llewellyn Smith is attached to the British Empire Delegation at the Washington Conference, and his functions will be to advise the Delegation regarding the economic aspects of questions that arise at the Conference.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will take into consideration the desirability of legislation to ensure that in any election, either for Parliament or for local authorities of any sort, an agreed on and fixed percentage of voters, say, 70 per cent. of the electors, shall be required to vote at the poll before such election is recognised as valid; and whether he will consider the appointment of a Select Committee to discuss this matter as well as the principle of the compulsory vote?

No, Sir, I do not think that the adoption of my hon. Friend's proposal is desirable.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the distress existing among the repatriated British refugees from Russia whose property has been confiscated by the Bolshevik Government, and many of whom are consequently in a state of destitution; whether he is aware that such refugees are now being referred by the British Refugees Relief Committee to the local boards of guardians, and that many who occupied good positions and possessed ample means before the Russian revolution will be compelled to enter the workhouses unless some provision is made for them; and whether, when arranging for the relief of the famine-stricken districts of Russia, he will consider the claims of these British subjects for whom the British Government is unable to obtain redress from the present Russian Soviet Government?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The funds at the disposal of the British Refugees Relief Committee only permitted them to assist a few of those refugees who landed in this country before 31st March last. No further funds will be available after the present financial year, and the Committee have, therefore, been obliged to inform the refugees that they must apply to the guardians for relief. As regards the last part of the question, I regret that I can add nothing to the reply which I returned to the hon. and gallant Member for South-port (Lieut.-Colonel White) on 27th October.

Does the hon. Gentleman suggest that the nation owes no duty to these people who have suffered in Russia? Are we to leave them absolutely destitute?

I do not think it is a question of national obligation.

Will these unfortunate people not get some grant out of the Red Cross Fund, which is being subscribed to for the relief of Russians at the present time?

I do not think so, but I could not give an answer on that point without notice.

Will the hon. Gentleman inquire into that matter and see if anything can be done?

The hon. Baronet cannot be allowed a supplementary question every time.

asked the Prime Minister if he can give the House any information as to the progress of the famine in Russia; if the Soviet Government has interrupted, and is now interrupting, the grain and other food sent by the Allies and sympathisers with the victims generally; and if he can give the death rate from starvation or give any indication as to the efforts being made by the supply of seed, etc., to cultivate the land?

According to the latest information, based on reports made to the All-Russian Executive Committee in Moscow last month, the Soviet Government proposes to devote 160,000,000 poods of grain, raised from European Russia and the Ukraine, to the feeding of the famine areas. They calculated that in order to provide sufficient food for the whole of the famine stricken, an additional 60,000,000 poods must be obtained from abroad within the next six months. The answer to the second part of the question is, so far as His Majesty's Government are aware, in the negative. As regards the last part, I have no reliable information to give the House. Judging from accounts received from reliable sources, it appears that the Soviet Government has imported a quantity of seed, which has been distributed to the peasants and actually sown by them.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the number of Russian refugees in Egypt has been reduced in the last three months; and what is the cost of retaining them per annum to the British taxpayer?

Seventy Russian refugees have left Egypt during the last three months. The total cost of the maintenance of Russian refugees in Egypt and the dependent camps in Cyprus is at the rate of £120,000 a year.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the promotion of Empire overseas settlement by means of assisted passages, etc., is not likely to prove successful in the present and near future on account of the measure of unemployment which exists in the overseas Dominions, his attention has been drawn to the record of the proceedings of the Conference on State-Aided Empire Settlement held in February, 1921; whether he will give earnest consideration to the desirability of adopting the proposals put forward by Senator the Honourable E. D. Millen, made on behalf of the Australian Government, recommending a scheme for establishing 20,000 British settlers on certain selected areas to be financed by a Commonwealth loan of £20,000,000 to be raised in five annual instalments, His Majesty's Government's assistance to take the form of a payment for five years of half the interest of each instalment of the loan, and the comprehensive settlement schemes to be promoted there under to include the work of the opening up of areas by railways and roads, the construction of other public works, and the clearing of land, etc., which would provide employment for many of the intending settlers, and, in addition, give employment to many workers in this country in the manufacture of the necessary materials and steel rails, etc., required in connection with such schemes; and whether, whereas 60,000 settlers have already been settled overseas since the War, there are another 60,000 applicants awaiting settlement in the Empire?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The proposal put forward by Senator Millen goes beyond the scheme sanctioned by the Resolution of the Prime Ministers' Conference. Fresh proposals have, however, been under discussion recently in Australia, similar to those put forward by Senator Millen, and it is understood that further proposals of this kind are likely to be made. His Majesty's Government have under consideration the steps that can usefully be taken by them in order to implement the Resolution passed by the Conference; and, in deciding their general policy in this important problem of Empire settlement, careful regard will be paid to all such proposals as those referred to above. The Government do not doubt that larger numbers of persons would be glad to avail themselves of increased opportunities for settlement overseas if, in concert with the Dominion Governments, the necessary arrangements can be made.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, after all, this form of emigration is by far the most practical form, having regard to the conditions in our overseas possessions as well as here, and that every man established abroad under these conditions is a potential purchaser of British goods to a far greater extent than when he is in this country?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the Government are entirely alive to all those considerations, and, as I said in my answer, the fullest consideration will be given to these proposals when they are brought forward.

Are the Government also alive to the fact that people in this country would rather remain here with their friends and relations?

Is it not a fact that there are 60,000 more applicants to go overseas?

All that I aimed at pointing out in my answer was that the Government were fully aware, as I think the House is aware, that if people in this country desire opportunities of going overseas, those opportunities should be given them.