asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has any figures to show the prices of commodities subject to duty under Part I of the Safeguarding of Industries Act before and after the imposition of such duties?

Statistics of price movements are not available for all the commodities comprised under the various headings of the Schedule to Part I of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, but such statistics as are available show that in many cases the movement has been downwards, and that the increases are infrequent.

Were these prices increased in anticipation of the putting on of duties?

I am not aware of that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any complaints that scientific apparatus essential for research work is difficult to obtain, owing to the operation of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, have reached his Department?

No complaints of the kind indicated have been made to my Department, but I understand that certain complaints have been received by the Department of Scientifc and Industrial Research, and that their validity is being investigated.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Board of Trade lays before the Committees dealing with Orders under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act statistics of the employment in the industries which would be favourably or adversely affected by the imposition of duties?

No, Sir. The Committees, of course, take the necessary steps to obtain any evidence that they may wish to consider, and the Board of Trade put at the disposal of the Committee any relevant information in their possession which the Committee require.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any Orders have yet been made under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act; and if he can explain the reason for the delay in bringing this part of the Act into operation?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any Orders have been made under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act; whether any inquiries have been instituted under this Part of the Act; and whether in any such cases, if any, the Committee have reported?

No Orders have yet been made, but 8 complaints have been referred to Committees constituted for the purposes of Part II of the Act. In one case the Committee have reported, and their report is under consideration. There has been no avoidable delay in bringing Part II of the Act into operation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what are the names of the members composing the Committee who are conducting inquiries under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act?

Five Committees have been constituted for the purposes of Part II of the Act, and I am having a list of the members printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the qualifications of the Members, as well as the names?

From my recollection of the names of the Members I think that my hon. Friend will appreciate their qualifications when he reads the names.

They are not known.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that pocket safety-razors made in Germany, and which are a copy of the Gillette safety-razor blade-holder, are sold, silver-plated and in a nickel box, at 1s. retail and 8d. wholesale as compared with 16s. 6d. retail for the Gillette production; and whether, under the Safeguarding of Industries Act, these articles of German production are subject to the 33⅓ duty for dumped goods?

My attention had not previously been drawn to the circumstances described in the first part of the question. It is, of course, open to the industry manufacturing these goods in this country to formulate a complaint to the Board of Trade under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act; and I am sending my hon. and gallant Friend papers showing the nature of the evidence which will probably in most cases suffice to establish a primâ facie case under Section 2 (1) (b) of the Act.

Have the industries taken advantage of this power in any large number of cases?

I could not tell without notice how many, but we have had a number of cases brought to our notice. As I have just stated, in answer to a previous question, 5 Committees have been set up to deal with certain cases.

What duty do these razors pay?

I cannot answer that off hand.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the total number of objections lodged with his Department as to articles alleged by the complainants to have been either included or excluded improperly from the lists issued by the Board of Trade defining the commodities dutiable under the Key Industries Schedule; how many of these objections have at present been laid before the Official Referee or Committees; how many have been disposed of; and what arrangements are being made for ensuring that the rest of the cases will be disposed of within a reasonable time?

The Board of Trade have received, under Section 1, Sub-section 5, of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, formal notices of complaint, in respect of the inclusion in the lists issued by the Board of some 380 commodities, of which about 360 are covered by complaints from 2 associations of traders. Complaints in respect of exclusion from the lists have been received in respect of some 160 commodities, of which about 150 are covered by a complaint from an association of manufacturers. I must point out, however, that it is not certain that all these complaints will be proceeded with, and that so far the formal statements required by the Referee as to the precise grounds on which the complaints are based have been furnished in respect of only 16 commodities. Of these, 3 have been heard by the Referee, and one is in process of hearing. I hope that it will be possible to expedite future hearings, and that when a comparatively small number of representative cases have been decided it may be practicable to determine the other eases rapidly.

Can the right hon. Gentleman estimate when the Referee is likely to hear these cases? Is it a matter of years.

I would not go so far as that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has fully considered the bearings of the judgment given by the Official Referee in the case of Santonine, which was held by him to have been improperly included in the lists issued by the Department under the Key Industries Schedule, and which was, in consequence, removed from those lists in the month of December; whether he is aware that the judgment given would similarly delete from the lists by implication a large number of other articles; whether he intends to put taxpayers of the country, as well as the complainants in the case of the other articles in question, to the expense involved in contesting numerous disputes already decided in principle by the judgment referred to; and what have been the total costs incurred in respect of the legal proceedings before the Referee?

In reply to the first two parts of the question, I would point out that the learned Referee specifically stated that he would not regard the principles mentioned by him in giving his judgment in respect of Santonine as binding him in respect of other cases. In these circumstances, it appeared necessary that a number of other cases should be decided before the Board could scrutinise the lists in the light of any general principle or principles enunciated by the Referee. As regards the last part of the question, I have no information as to costs incurred by parties other than the Board of Trade, whose expenses including the fees of the Referee, in respect of all cases heard up to date, amount to something less than £700.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the reason for the delay in putting into operation the decision of the Referee under the Safeguarding of Industries Act regarding the imposition of a duty of 33⅓ per cent. on gas mantles which contain certain commodities which are liable for duty?

The Referee has not yet made his award in respect of gas mantles, and consequently there has been no occasion for the Board of Trade to take any action.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Referee announced his decision nearly two months ago?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that rings and combines have a virtual monopoly of materials for house construction; that this monopoly is a menace to the community; that it is retarding the building of the houses so necessary to public health and inflicting a burden on the ratepayers; and whether he will give his attention to these facts, and also to the disclosures made in the Report of the Sub-Committee on Building Materials appointed under the Profiteering Acts, and in that of the Special Committee appointed by the Minister of Health which reported last July, and will redeem the promise made as long ago as November, 1920, by the then President of the Board of Trade, that the Government would bring in legislation dealing with trusts in trade and industry?

I am aware of the existence of trade combinations of various kinds in respect of building materials, but I would point out that neither of the Committees to which the hon. Member refers found that any such combination had acted unfairly. As to the concluding part of the hon. Member's question, I am not at present in a position to make a statement.

When will the right hon. Gentleman be in a position to make a statement?

I am afraid I could not answer that now.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to the protest made by the Committee which investigated the price of soap at the interruption of their labours?

That is not a building material.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the amount of money publicly subscribed for capital issues, other than Government loans, during the 12 months ended December, 1921, and how much of this has been invested abroad?

There are no statistics officially prepared, but I would suggest to the hon. Member that if he is particularly interested he should consult such journals as "The Statist" or "The Economist," in which figures are given from time to time.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the Newcastle and Gateshead Gas Company have made an application under Section 1 of the Gas Regulations Act, 1920; if so, on what date; whether the Board of Trade have made an Order under this Section; if so, on what date; what were the terms thereof, particularly in respect of Subsection 4 of this Section; whether the provisions of Sub-section 6 of this Section were complied with in respect of public notice being given; if so, in what manner; whether any objections were duly made; if so, by whom; whether any inquiry was held; and, if so, where, and by whom?

The Board of Trade received an application from the Newcastle-on-Tyne and Gateshead Gas Company on 12th February, 1921, for an Order under Section 1 of the Gas Regulation Act, 1920. An Order was made on 27th April, a copy of which I am sending to the hon. and gallant Member. The provisions of Sub-section 6 were duly complied with by advertisement of the application in the "London Gazette," and in a local newspaper, and by service of notice upon the local authorities. Representations were received from the Newcastle on-Tyne, Gateshead and Wallsend Corporations, the Felling-on-Tyne, Whickham, Newburn, Gosforth and Longbenton Urban District Councils, and from the North Eastern Railway Company. An inquiry was held at the Board of Trade on 30th March by the Director of Gas Administration, at which the Newcastleon-Tyne and Gateshead Corporations and the Whickham Urban District Council appeared and were heard in support of their objections.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his atten- tion has been drawn to the so-called bread war in Swansea; whether he is aware that the firm of Messrs. Jones decided to sell a quartern loaf for 8d. at a profit of 20 per cent. and that the Swansea Master Bakers' Association, whose price was 10d., prevailed upon the local millers to cut off supplies of flour from Messrs. Jones's establishments; and whether, since the action of the Swansea bakers appears to be, in the words of the Committee on Trusts, unlawful and against public policy, as public policy is understood by the English Courts, he will take steps to prevent similar occurrences in the future?

My attention has been drawn to the bread situation in Swansea, but I am not able to accept the statements contained in the second part of the question, which appear to be based solely on Messrs. Jones's version, as a correct representation of the facts. As regards the last part of the question I am advised that as the law stands to-day, and upon the facts as stated, no legal action can be taken.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in order to illustrate the value of Empire and foreign markets respectively, he will state what the Germans and Russians spent on the average per head on British goods in the last pre-War year as compared with the German and Russian; and what was the volume of purchases in each case?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the total value of the goods exported from the United Kingdom in 1913 to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Germany, Austria, Hungary, and Russia, respectively; and what was the value of such goods per head of the population in each country?

As the answer to these two questions involves a statistical table, I will, with the permission of the House, have it printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can give the tonnage and value of German goods imported into this country during 1913 of the following goods: manufactured cotton goods, manufactured iron and steel products, toys, electrical machinery, dyes and chemical commodities, cutlery, and crockery and earthenware?

The answer involves a statistical table which, with the permission of the House, I will have printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Prime Minister the names of the British representatives who will attend the forthcoming economic conference at Genoa; whether representatives from the British Dominions have been invited to attend; and whether the House of Commons will be given an opportunity of discussing the policy to be adopted by the representatives of His Majesty's Government at the conference before the conference assembles, as was done in the case of the Washington Conference?

The names of the British representatives have not yet been settled. The British Dominions have been invited. As for an opportunity of discussing the matter, a question must be addressed to the Leader of the House on this subject.

Is there any question of a postponement of the date last given by the right hon. Gentleman, or does that date stand?

Is it intended to invite technical or trade advisers outside the Civil Service?

Oh, yes, certainly.

Does the right hon. Gentleman expect the conference to meet on 8th March?

That is entirely in the hands of the Italian Government. It is not in our hands.

There is no postponement at present?

There is no postponement at present.

asked the Prime Minister if acceptance by Russia has been received of the invitation to the conference at Genoa on the 8th March; and whether the Soviet Government has accepted paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 of the Resolution passed by the Allies at Cannes on 6th January last?

Russia has accepted the invitation of the Italian Prime Minister. In the invitation sent to Russia, special attention is called to the paragraphs mentioned in the question. An acceptance has been received without any protest or qualification in respect of those paragraphs.

asked the Prime Minister whether Parliament will have an opportunity of discussing the terms of the Anglo-French Pact before any obligations are incurred in connection with it?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Prime Minister whether any agreement has yet been arrived at with France as to the division of the £50,000,000 already paid by Germany?

No, Sir. This question was discussed at Cannes, and a tentative agreement was arrived at, but no definite agreement had been made before the conference broke up, on Monsieur Briand's resignation.

If the £30,000,000 to £40,000,000 mentioned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in September last is not realised, there will be a deficit in his figures?

That is a hypothetical question.

asked the Prime Minister the amount paid by Germany by way of reparation in gold marks and also the value in gold marks of the amount paid in kind since the acceptance by her of the London ultimatum, and also the amount paid by her between the Armistice and the London ultimatum; and also the allocation as between the Allied Powers of the sums so paid?

With the hon. Member's permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement giving the information desired.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will now state the names of the members of the committee appointed to investigate the question of the German indemnity in 1918 which reported that Germany could pay the whole cost of the War; and whether he will now publish the Report of the committee?

It is the custom not to publish the names of the members of committees of the Cabinet or the Reports of such committees, and it is not considered that it would be proper to depart from the custom in this instance.

How is it that the Financial Secretary answers questions with regard to the Cabinet of which the Prime Minister is Chief. We have just had a discussion on this point. The hon. Gentleman who answered this question is not even a Member of the Cabinet. This deals with a Cabinet matter, and I am asking the Prime Minister. Why cannot the Prime Minister reply to his own questions?

Does the hon. Gentleman say that the Cabinet accept responsibility for the view that Germany can pay the whole cost of the War?

In answer to the first supplementary question, may I explain that I was answering this question on behalf of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. As regards the second, I do not think it arises out of the original question at all.

Will the hon. Gentleman not give the names of the Committee? He takes shelter behind the fact that it is a Cabinet Committee, and I ask does the Cabinet accept responsibility for this opinion?

I must have notice of that question.

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister won the last election on this decision, and will he give us the new facts and the real facts before he goes to the country again?

The hon. Gentleman is, as usual, inaccurate. If he will only refer to the statement which I made at Bristol during the election, he will find how inaccurate he is.

asked the Prime Minister how many tons of shipping have been handed over by Germany between 11th November, 1918, and 20th May, 1921; whether those ships are credited to Germany toward the reduction of the indemnity; whether £20 per ton has been the valuation credited to Germany; and whether he can state how many ships have been sold and the rate per ton at which they have been sold?

2,187,267 gross tons of shipping were handed over by Germany between 11th November, 1918, and 1st May, 1921; in respect of this shipping the Reparation Commission has credited Germany with approximately 660,000,000 gold marks, representing an average value of £20 per gross ton net at the rate of exchange current at the relevant period. 343 vessels (representing 1,528,938 gross tons) were delivered to Great Britain and realised a sum of £17,294,412 which is approximately £11·3 per gross ton. I am not in possession of figures as to the number of ships sold by other Powers and the amounts realised.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in consequence of these German ships being "pinched" a large number of British shipbuilders have been deprived of employment?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that, in order to divert attention from the crimes of German War criminals and to prevent the Allies from insisting on carrying out the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles as to the surrender and trial of these criminals, the German Government or some German organisation have published in various languages and circulated over the world more than a million copies of a document called the German Counter-list, accusing 400 French officers, non-commissioned officers, men, and doctors of crimes in regard to the treatment of German prisoners of war, and have also published and circulated a shorter document accusing the British of similar crimes; and whether, in order to prevent further evasion by Germany of their pledges to surrender German War criminals for trial and to put an end to their propaganda for assisting them in such evasion, the British Government will, in conjunction with France and in accordance with the Treaty, demand the immediate surrender of these War criminals for trial?

I have been asked to reply. I am not aware of the matters referred to in the first part of the question, except that I am informed that a list of French officers and men against whom accusations were said to be made, was published in the Press of Germany in May last. Any further action in the direction suggested in the question must be a matter for consideration by the Allies jointly.

Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman answer the latter part of the question regarding the prevention of further evasion by Germany?

I have answered that part. The second part of my answer related to that part of the question.

Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman make any statement as to the report of the committee of lawyers appointed to consider the Leipzig trials?

That is the subject of another question on the Paper.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will lay upon the Table the Memorandum which he circulated at the Paris Conference, dated 25th March, 1919, in view of the fact that part of that Memorandum has never been published by Signor Nitti?

We have always understood that it would be contrary to the engagement taken by the Allied Governments to publish—except by a previous ad hoc agreement—particulars of the confidential discussions of the Paris Conference. As most, however, if not all, the Memoranda circulated during the Paris Conference have been published either in France, America or Italy, the Government are considering whether it would not be desirable to publish these documents in this country. I hope to be able to give an answer soon.

I will repeat the question in a week.

Not before.

A fortnight?

Yes.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the statement made by the Liverpool coroner on 3rd February at the conclusion of an inquest on the bodies of four members of a family named Craig, who were found to have died from poisoning by carbon monoxide due to a defect in the gas fittings of their bedroom, to the effect that so long as this poisonous substance was allowed to remain in the supply of gas for illuminating and heating purposes it was dangerous for anyone to have a gas fire in his bedroom; and whether he will introduce such legislation as may be necessary to protect the public from this serious though avoidable risk?

I have been asked to answer this question. I am aware of the case to which my hon. Friend refers, but I have not seen any report of the pro- ceedings which contains the statement mentioned. The draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade, the effect of which is to prohibit the supply of any gas containing carbon monoxide unless it has a distinctive pungent smell, has been already approved by a Resolution of this House, and the Order will be made as soon as the necessary Resolution has been passed in another place.

When is it expected that that Resolution will be passed, as this is a very urgent public matter?

On a point of Order. Is this a question which ought to be addressed to the Prime Minister or to the Minister of Health?

I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman has raised a very proper point. Clearly it is a question for the Board of Trade. There is a custom growing up of trying to put all questions to the Prime Minister. In the interests of the House and of administration generally, many of them should be addressed to the Ministers in charge of the Departments concerned.

This question appears in my name. I always understood that questions asking whether legislation would be introduced were properly addressed to the Prime Minister?

I am responsible for gas.

May I suggest that that the Clerks at the Table ought to see that questions addressed to the Prime Minister are really questions for him, and, if they are not questions for the Prime Minister, to transfer them to the proper Departments?

Before a reply be given, may I say that on the first day this House met I carefully counted the questions put to the Prime Minister. There were 27, and there were only seven answered by the Prime Minister. It appears to me that some hon. Members put down questions to the Prime Minister in order to get priority.

I think that the hon. and gallant Member has performed a useful function in drawing attention to the matter. The responsibility is mine. Through my assistants, I will see that the rule is more strictly adhered to.

It is very difficult for Members to find out who is the responsible Minister to whom questions should be put.

There are Clerks at the Table to give advice on that point.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that a large number of public companies have given during the past five years bonus shares to their shareholders; and whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce legislation this Session to compel companies to declare their actual subscribed capital and to pay dividends only upon the capital so subscribed?

I have been asked to reply. The answer to the first part of this question is in the affirmative. An agreement has to be filed with the Registrar of Companies with respect to the allotment of all bonus shares, and such shares are included, in the next annual return of the company filed with the Registrar, among the shares which are allotted for a consideration other than cash. The shares issued for cash are shown separately in the annual return. I do not think there are any grounds for compelling a company to limit the payment of dividends to shares which have been subscribed for cash.

Would it not be in the public interest for general knowledge to be obtained of the actual subscribed capital of a company and of the actual dividends paid upon that subscribed capital? By the issue of bonus shares, does not the amount of dividend appear so reduced as to mislead the general public?

The dividend is easily calculated in the case of honest companies.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is intended to abolish the political office of Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland; if so, when will this be accomplished; what will be the anticipated saving to the Exchequer; and what are the present duties and functions of the Chief Secretary?

As regards the present duties and functions of the Chief Secretary, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply to a question addressed to the Prime Minister on the 9th February by the hon. Member for Chesterfield. The office will cease to exist when the duties and functions belonging to it are completed. The effect on the Exchequer of the change of regime in Ireland which is now being effected, and to which the disappearance of the office of Chief Secretary is incidental, cannot be estimated.

Are we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman now answering is, in fact, carrying out a great part of the duties of the Chief Secretary? Has he taken over any of the staff of the Chief Secretary?

That has already been answered by the Prime Minister.

Must there not be a Chief Secretary or someone to answer in this House for Northern Ireland, which is still under Great Britain?

I think that the arrangement, as stated by the Prime Minister, was that the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant during the next few weeks will continue to deal with the winding-up of the affairs of the Irish Office, that I should be responsible on behalf of the Prime Minister for general questions of policy and for the relations of the new Governments, and, so far as the Northern Irish Government is concerned, I understand that it is intended to have representation through the Home Secretary.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the new arrangements for the government of Ireland and the conditions now prevailing in that country, he will at the earliest possible opportunity bring in a Land Purchase Bill for Ireland?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply to a question on this subject which I gave on the 9th instant to the hon. and gallant Member for Maidstone.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in Southern Ireland there are, and have been for 18 months, organised strikes against rent, and that land has been illegally seized by marauders? Is he also aware that owing to the impossibility of executing the processes of law the landowners, especially the small ones, are in very great financial straits?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Irish Free State will be empowered to issue certificates of naturalisation to foreign applicants; whether such certificates, if issued, will apply to Irish local nationalisation only or will be valid for citizenship in the British Empire as a whole; and whether the Home Office will have any jurisdiction in the matter?

It is intended that when the Irish Free State attains the constitutional status contemplated for it in the Treaty between Great Britain and Ireland, it shall have the power possessed by the self-governing dominions mentioned in the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act, 1914, to adopt Part II of that Act, and thereupon, if it thinks right, to grant under the conditions specified therein, which are the same as those prevailing in Great Britain, certificates conferring Imperial naturalisation. The Home Office will have no jurisdiction in the matter.

Can the Irish Free State make British citizens of Lenin and Trotsky if they find Russia too hot for them?

I think that is covered by the answer I have already given.

asked the Prime Minister whether the embargo which applies to cattle from Canada will also apply to cattle from the Irish Free State?

I have no reason to think that the restrictions referred to will apply to cattle brought from the Free State, but the question as to whether legislation is necessary to remove any doubt on this point is now under consideration. In any case, the Minister of Agriculture's power to prohibit the landing of such cattle, should occasion arise, will not be affected.

asked the Prime Minister whether any pledge was given by the Government in connection with the negotiations which led up to the Treaty with Ireland that no alteration should be made in the boundaries of Ulster, as fixed under the Government of Ireland Act of 1920, except with the consent of Ulster?

The answer is in the negative. The boundaries fixed by the Act of 1920 were not themselves the result of such an agreement, though they were subsequently accepted, very reluctantly, I believe, by the representatives of Ulster. Our reasons for re-opening the question were stated in Debate.

That will not affect any question of giving the necessary assistance to Ulster in the event of a satisfactory conclusion not being arrived at with regard to the boundaries.

asked the Prime Minister who is at present responsible for the protection of the lives and property of His Majesty's subjects in Southern Ireland; and what steps are being taken to secure life and property in that area?

As regards the responsibility for the maintenance of law and order in Ireland, I would refer the hon. Member to the statement which I made in the Debate on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House on the 10th instant. His Majesty's Government is supporting the Provisional Government in their difficult task by all means in their power.

As His Majesty's Government are still responsible for law and order in Southern Ireland, will the right hon. Gentleman explain why troops have not been used to release the 60 Ulstermen who have been kidnapped and are still kept in durance?

I will make, at the end of questions, a brief statement on the Irish situation, and my hon. Friend may ask any question arising therefrom.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to say that the Irish Free State have power to hang a man for murder at the present time in Southern Ireland? Does not the power remain with the British Government?

They have no legal powers. The only powers which exist are those that have always existed.

Is that founded on "Alice in Wonderland"?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government yet have any information as to whether any of the arms, munitions, or equipment turned over to the Provisional Government by the Army authorities were used in the invasion of Ulster?

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of motors, motor lorries, and other vehicles, and the number of arms and rounds of ammunition, handed over to the Provisional Government of Southern Ireland by the British military authorities in Ireland; and on what terms the transfers have been made?

No transport of any kind, or arms or ammunition, have been handed over to the Provisional Government by the military authorities in Ireland. But, as I informed the House last week, 200 rifles, 5,000 rounds of ammunition and 21 motor-cars or lorries have been handed oved by the Police Authorities subject to a valuation. This transfer was made upon my authority with the express object of furnishing the new Provisional Government in a regular and proper manner with the means of equipping a small uniformed and disciplined force with which to maintain their authority. This force is now in training at Beggarsbush, near Dublin. I have been categorically assured by the Provisional Governrnent—and I accept their statement—that none of these arms, munitions or equipment has at any time been sent north of Dublin, or could possibly have been used in the recent outrages on the borders of Northern Ireland. The Irish Republican Army detachments in various parts of the country have, however, a certain number of British military rifles and of police cars, which were taken in the recent conflict, and of these, of course, I have no record

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication as to the time when the Irish Republican Army will cease to figure in the machinery of the Government of Southern Ireland?

It depends largely upon the rapidity with which the forthcoming Bill passes in Parliament, and upon the election that takes place in Ireland for the new Parliament.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know when it will cease to be called by Mr. Collins and Mr. Griffith "the Irish Republican Army"?

Are the Provisional Government taking any steps to restore to His Majesty's Government the arms and motors stolen from the police force?

asked the Prime Minister whether the office of Lord Lieutenant is still in existence, and what are its functions?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The functions of the Lord Lieutenant continue to be to represent His Majesty in Ireland. He will also act in accordance with the advice of responsible Ministers.

asked the Prime Minister whether beneficiaries having funds in the hands of the Public Trustee in Ireland will have an opportunity of transferring their property to the Public Trustee in London before the responsibility of the British Government for such funds comes to an end?

The position of funds now in the hands of the Public Trustee in Ireland is under consideration, and in whatever arrangements may eventually be made careful attention will be given to the full protection of the interests of beneficiaries concerned.

When is the decision likely to be arrived at?

I find it difficult to name a precise date at the present moment. The consideration is actually proceeding, and whatever precautions are taken will be taken in ample time.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has seen the statement issued by Commandant-General O'Duffy, chief of staff of the Irish Republican Army, regarding the raid in Ulster last week; and what steps His Majesty's Government pro-prose to take to punish the raiders and prevent similar raids in future?

I will deal with this in the general statement which I propose to make at the end of questions.

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any, and, if so, how many, persons kidnapped by the Sinn Fein forces last week have been released, and what steps the Government have taken to secure the return of these persons to their homes since the right hon. Gentleman last addressed the House? Also, if the right hon. Gentleman can give the House any information as to outrages which have occurred subsequent to Saturday morning; whether he has any information as to an American Press correspondent who has been, according to the information at my disposal, captured by Sinn Feiners; and, further, if the Government have met the wishes of the Cabinet of Northern Ireland, with reference to certain movements of troops which, I understand, the Northern Ireland Government have asked for?

We have been in constant communication with the Irish Provisional Government, and they have assured me that they are doing and will do everything in their power to secure the liberation of the persons kidnapped in the raids of last Thursday. We believe that such is their sincere wish and intention. The extent of their powers at the present time is much more doubtful. So far none of the 43 persons taken in the raids last week nor the six missing from Clones on Saturday have been set free.

The difficulty is that the so-called Irish Republican Army organisation in County Monaghan are incensed at the arrest and detention in prison of certain Monaghan men who were arrested in the territory of the Northern Government a month ago. These men were proceeding to play in a football match at Derry, but they were also identified as the commander and headquarters staff of the Monaghan division of the so-called Irish Republican Army. They were armed and were arrested by the Northern police on this ground. Papers were found upon them identifying them with the Irish republican organisation referred to. These men have been committed by the magistrates for trial at the Northern Assizes, which do not begin until the end of this month. The Prime Minister of Northern Ireland has written to Mr. Collins stating that if these men apply for bail it will not be opposed by the Crown. They, however, decline to apply for bail, as they will not recognise the jurisdiction of the Northern Government. In these circumstances the Government of Northern Ireland have not been willing to take any special action, and there the matter rests for the present.

On Saturday morning the Irish Provisional Government issued a declaration of oblivion and goodwill in respect of persons who had sided against them during the period of the rebellion couched in terms which were certainly very satisfactory. I therefore availed myself of the authority accorded me by the Cabinet some time ago to release the prisoners confined in Great Britain for offences committed from Irish political motives in Great Britain previous to the truce.

During Saturday, however, an event occurred which has greatly aggravated the situation. By what appears to have been an error of a subordinate, a party of Ulster Special Constables were sent to Enniskillen viâ Clones in the Southern Irish area instead of viâ Omagh in the North. A collision occurred between these men and a party of the Irish Republican Army at Clones Station, in the course of which a Mr. Fitzpatrick, described at Acting Commandant of the I.R.A. in Monaghan, in the absence of Mr. Hogan, now under arrest with the other Monaghan prisoners in the Northern area, was killed. Four of the Ulster Special Constables were also killed, two other constables being seriously wounded and others made prisoners.

On hearing this lamentable news His Majesty's Government telegraphed in strong terms to the Irish Provisional Government requesting them to do all in their power to apprehend the persons concerned and to prevent the repetition of such shocking events. On this the Provisional Government sent Mr. O'Duffy, Chief Staff Officer, to Clones yesterday, and they have now furnished us with the following account, which, as will be seen, is in conflict with other versions which have been received:—

"The train arrived at Clones at 5.10 p.m. containing a number of Special Police who went to the waiting room at the station. Although Clones is outside the six county area the Specials carried arms. Word was conveyed to the I.R.A. that these armed Specials were at the platform. When the I.R.A. troops got to the platform they discovered that the Specials had gone into the railway carriages but that the engine was not attached to the train. They called on the Specials to get out and put up their hands. This was refused and instead the Specials opened fire and shot Commandant Fitzpatrick through the head killing him instantly. The body was carried into the waiting room. The I.R.A. troops again asked the Specials several times to get out and surrender. They would not do so, but fired again. The I.R.A. then took up positions and opened fire on the carriages. After an interchange of shots there were four Specials killed and two badly wounded. A few civilians were slightly wounded. Five of the surviving Specials were taken prisoners to the barracks at Clones, from which they were subsequently removed under arrest."

Why did you trust them?

That is the account which I have received, and I give it to the House as I give all other statements as I receive them. His Majesty's Government also telegraphed to Sir James Craig assuring him that the troops in Ulster would be reinforced to any extent necessary to maintain peace and safety in the area of the Northern Government. We also appealed to him in the strongest terms, in virtue of the ample support which will he given to the Northern Government, to take effective measures to prevent anything in the nature of reprisals or irregular action on his side of the frontier. We have no doubt that this is being done.

The Provisional Government have expressed a desire for a meeting between the heads of the two Governments. We have conveyed these representations to the Government of Northern Ireland, but so far, in the present state of tension, it has not been possible to arrange a meeting. Such a meeting is most desirable if quiet is to be restored along the Ulster border, the whole condition of which must continue to be a cause of serious anxiety.

Can the right hon. Gentleman answer the question which I put as to whether Mr. O'Duffy, who was appointed to his present position by Mr. Griffith, actually arranged this raid in Fermanagh and Tyrone last week?. [An HON. MEMBER: "How do you know?"] Because he admits it.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's description of the very incomplete control exercised by the Provisional Government over the Irish Republican Army, will he give an undertaking that no further British garrisons will be withdrawn from Ireland until the Provisional Government are in a position to satisfy the Lord Lieutenant that they have every means by which they can ensure order and prevent any recurrence of these murderous attacks?

I think the rate at which troops are to be withdrawn from Ireland, and the places from which they are to be withdrawn, are matters which should be dealt with by the responsible executive Government of this country, and I am not prepared to answer questions about them at the present time; but I will deal with them when there is any general challenge of the policy we are pursuing.

Arising out of that part of the right hon. Gentleman's answer relating to the release of prisoners for pre-Truce offences, may I ask whether he has also released the officers who were serving in the Forces of the Crown and who were convicted by court-martial for exceeding their duty? There are several of them at the present time undergoing sentences, some with hard labour, at Liverpool, and there may be some elsewhere, and I want to know whether the same clemency is being extended to those who were endeavouring to serve the Crown as is being extended to those who were endeavouring to serve our enemies

My recollection is that this matter is a subject dealt with in a question standing in the name of the hon. Member for Canterbury (Mr. McNeill) for to-morrow.

As the right hon. Gentleman admits that the British Government are still responsible for law and order in Ireland, will he say why British troops have not been sent to release these Ulster men who are still illegally detained when it is known where they are being detained? [An HoN. MEMBER: "That would be civil war, which is what you want!"]

We are passing through a very difficult time, and we are trying to do our very best in the interim period. Until the Irish Government is equipped with proper constitutional powers, and is properly in the saddle, we cannot expect that they can have the control that is necessary and which every civilised Government has over its agents and forces. Therefore I do not think that we should judge them at this date by exactly the same rules by which we judge well established Governments. The question of the use of troops in the South of Ireland is quite different, and it is a very serious matter which might easily have the result of making things much worse than they are.

Does the right hon. Gentleman propose that these men who have been taken away from their homes and are kept in illegal custody are to stay there until the Provisional Government have made up their minds?

No, Sir; every effort is being made to secure their release, and I am satisfied that the Provisional Government are using the whole of their influence and authority, as far as it goes, to procure their release.

In view of the events which have occurred last week, would it not be possible to consult fully with the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland before any further troops are withdrawn from any part of Ireland, and with the heads of the former responsible Government in Ireland, in view of the temporary breakdown of the authority of the Provisional Government?

This matter of the withdrawal of troops from Ire- land is one of the most difficult questions which the Government have to solve, and I can assure my Noble Friend that we shall give careful consideration to every step taken in regard to that matter.

How soon will reinforcements be sent to Ulster to prevent a repetition of these attacks?

As soon as they are asked for and as rapidly as they can be dispatched.

Are we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman has assumed in this country the office of Home Secretary, by means of which he liberates prisoners convicted of offences in this country, and, if so, does he think it a convenient time after these outrages have been committed to have done this on Saturday just after these fresh outrages have been committed? Will not this give colour to the strong feeling that the Government have been intimidated and are still being intimidated?

Of course my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary was a party to the Cabinet decision, and I was entrusted with the duty of advising the Home Secretary as to the moment, and I exercised that function on Saturday. As to the question of out having been intimidated, that is really not the case. I have been most anxious to reach a stage where we should have broken with the evil past to which I have referred, and I thought a good moment had been reached for inaugurating this act of clemency when the Proclamation of the Irish Government was published on Saturday morning, in terms more satisfactory than any we had seen so far in their published announcements.

asked the Prime Minister whether he was aware that on Saturday last, when a party of Ulster Special Constables, who were travelling by train, arrived at Clones Junction, members of the Irish Republican Army, armed with rifles and machine guns, came on to the platform and opened fire on them, with the result that four of the Special Constables were killed; and whether he can state what steps, if any, His Majesty's Government proposes to take to prevent loyal subjects being attacked by armed men from the Free State?

I think, looking at it, that this and the other questions of the hon. Member have really been answered. I was not aware that the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for South Antrim (Captain Craig) was going to add to his Private Notice question, or I would have sent the hon. Member notice.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government intend to make any grant or loan to alleviate the famine in Russia?

I would ask my hon. and gallant Friend to refer to the answer which I gave on Thursday last to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull.

asked the Prime Minister how many notes, and on what dates, have been exchanged between His Majesty's Government and the Russian Soviet Government since the British note published in the London Press on the 21st September last regarding the breaches of the terms of the trade agreement by the Russian Soviet Republic; and whether His Majesty's Government is now entirely satisfied with the explanations which have been forthcoming from the Russian Soviet Government?

The reply of the Soviet Government to the Note of His Majesty's Government calling attention to violations of the Trade Agreement was received on 11th October. A further Note was despatched On 2nd November, in which His Majesty's Government reaffirmed the truth of their charges which the Soviet Government had sought to deny. His Majesty's Government are not satisfied with the explanations given, but they are looking to the opportunity afforded by the Genoa Conference for establing a more definite and satisfactory understanding.

Will the terms of these Notes be published?