asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will consider bringing preserved manufactured milk, which is being imported, within the scope of the Safeguarding of Industries Act?

Preserved manufactured milk is not covered by any of the headings of the Schedule to the Safeguarding of Industries Act, and is consequently dutiable only in so far as it contains added constituents which are themselves dutiable. Articles of food and drink are expressly excluded from the operation of Part II of the Act.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, which deals with the collapsed exchanges and dumping, has yet been brought into operation; if not, will he state the reason for the delay; and is he aware that the complaints which have been made as to the administration of the Act are mainly by persons who are engaged in importing German goods and who by reason of the Act are deprived of some portion of their profit?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, but no Orders have yet been made. I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave him on this subject on the 13th February. As regards the last part of the question, which presumably relates to Part I of the Act, the great majority of complaints under Section 1 (5) have come from associations of traders, and complaints as to the general administration of the Act have also come mainly from persons engaged in the import trade.

Can the right hon. Gentleman now state the reason for the delay, or whether he intends to make any Orders under Part II?

I do not think there is any undue delay. The making of an Order requires a great deal of careful consideration.

Is not the consideration given on the Committee stage of the application?

That is not so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the approximate cost of the proceedings of the hearing of the complaint that cream of tartar has been wrongly included in the Board of Trade list of articles chargeable with duty under Part I of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, which has now occupied seven sittings; if he is aware that Mr. Percy Ashley, accompanied by a number of the Board of Trade officials, Government and other expert chemists, and counsel are present at these proceedings; what arrangements are made for carrying on the normal work of his Department during the absence of these officials; can he state the total number of counsel and chemists present at these hearings; and has he any idea of the total cost involved in the holding of this inquiry?

I am not in a position to give the estimate asked for by the hon. Member, as I have no information as to the costs incurred by the complainants or by the companies allowed by the Referee to appear in opposition to the complaint. But, so far as the Board of Trade are concerned, the only costs incurred (apart from the the fees of the Referee) are the fees of one junior counsel representing the Board and the cost of the shorthand notes. No officers of other Departments have been present, and as regards the attendance of officers of the Board at the hearings, which have hitherto been either on Saturdays or on other days from 4 to 6 p.m., as a general rule only one officer is present for any length of time, and I am satisfied that the normal work of the Department is not being impeded, since, as is usual in times of pressure, the staff is working overtime, for which extra remuneration is not entailed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this bundle I hold in my hand are the shorthand notes of the parties concerned in only one of these cases, and that they cost over £500 to take? How can the right hon. Gentleman reconcile that with the statement that only one official in his spare time is doing the work from the Government point of view?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the British Cellulose Company, Limited, made an application for an Order to impose a duty of 33⅓ per cent, on imported carbide of calcium, at the same time requesting that their name might not be disclosed; whether he has acceded to this request for secrecy and, if so, on what grounds; whether he is aware that this company, the Board of Trade, and various firms interested in carbide of calcium each briefed leading and junior counsel to represent them at the hearing; can he state the period of time occupied in dealing with this case and the number of sittings held by the Referee; and can he give any idea of the total cost of this inquiry, including Referee's fees, solicitor's charges, shorthand notes, fees for chemistry experts, etc.?

The Board of Trade were not requested to withhold the name of the applicants in the case to which the hon. Member refers, and in fact the name was published in an official notice issued to the Press on the 9th November and appearing in the "Board of Trade Journal" of the 10th November. The Board of Trade briefed only one junior counsel, though complainants and others interested briefed leading and junior counsel; no solicitor's charges were incurred by the Board of Trade, and no expert witnesses were called or paid by them. There were 10 sittings of the Referee in all. I am unable to state the total cost of the inquiry, as I have no information as to the expenses incurred by the complainants or the other interested parties who appeared by permission of the Referee.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any complaints have been received under Part II of the Safe- guarding of Industries Act in respect of agricultural machinery, implements, or fertilisers; and if, in the event of such complaints being investigated by a Committee appointed under the Act, such Committee will be required to take into consideration the fact that foodstuffs produced in this country are not safeguarded by the Act?

I think there are objections to publishing information regarding the nature and scope of any particular complaint prior to the decision whether to refer it to a Committee. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative.

Will the Board of Trade take into consideration the great depression in the agricultural industry at the present time and see that they are not further hampered by this Measure being put into force against them?

Certainly.

asked the President of the. Board of Trade (1) whether ho is aware that among the witnesses appearing in opposition to the application of the British fabric glove manufacturers for a protective duty under the Safeguarding of Industries Act, Part II, were representatives of the Bolton spinners, employing upwards of 3,000,000 spindles in the manufacture of yarns for export to Germany for the manufacture of Saxony fabric gloves; and whether he will give due weight to this opposition in considering any recommendation which the committee of inquiry may have made;

(2) whether his attention has been drawn to the proceedings recently conducted under the Safeguarding of Industries Act, Part II, in respect of an application for a duty to be imposed upon gold leaf imported from Germany, and especially as to the extent to which the particular type of gold leaf purchased from abroad is a primal necessity for decorative purposes in such important British industries as printing, bookbinding, etc.; and whether he can assure the House that due consideration will be given to the evidence of these very important home industries;

(3) whether he is aware that in connection with the glass-ware inquiry recently conducted at the instigation of his Department under the Safeguarding of Industries Act, Part II, the British manufacturers' application for a duty was strongly opposed in the mounting glassware section by silversmith and electroplating manufacturing interests in Sheffield, London, and Birmingham, in whose industries the imported glass-ware constitutes a very important raw material; and whether he is taking steps to satisfy himself that these important British manufacturing interests will be adequately safeguarded in any action which he may decide to take as a result of the inquiry?

I am aware of the representations made to the Committees with regard to the matters referred to, and the hon. Member may rest assured that full weight will be given to all relevant considerations in deciding what action, if any, should be taken by the Board of Trade. I do not understand what the hon. Member means by saying that the glassware inquiry was conducted "at the instigation" of my Department.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the recent declaration by the Lord Privy Seal on this matter, these inquiries will not be held up and the duties will not be put on until the Government has decided what its policy is?

I will study that declaration, which I have not yet seen.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many persons are now employed in connection with the Registration of Business Names Act; whether this Department is now being run at a loss; if so, of how much annually; and whether, should there be a loss, he will consider the possibility of either discontinuing the Department or increasing the fees to make it self-supporting?

The number of persons, including messengers, employed in the Registry of Business Names is 43. The deficit for the calendar year 1921, ex- clusive of rent, rates, stationery and postage, amounted to £2,305 7s. 2d. The fees were increased as from the 1st July, 1921, to the maximum authorised by the Registration of Business Names Act, 1916; and the estimated deficiency for the year 1922 is £1,500. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative, but the adoption of either course will require legislation.

Is it considered still necessary to continue the registration of business names? Is it worth while?

That is probably the reason why the whole matter is now being considered.

asked the Financial Secretary to the. Treasury whether the present daily hours of employment in Government offices for the clerical grades are from ten to five; and, if this is so, whether he will, with the object of economising in the number of employés, and consequently in expenditure, consider the desirability of establishing an eight-hour day in these offices?

The normal hours of attendance for the general clerical classes employed in London headquarter offices are seven a day, but as I have stated in reply to previous questions these hours are frequently exceeded without extra payment. In provincial offices generally, where a large proportion of the clerical staff is employed, the normal hours of attendance are eight a day. As regards the second part of the question, decision must await action on the recommendation made on page 157 of the Third Report of the Committee on National Expenditure.

Is the hon. Gentleman making full inquiry into the whole matter to see if it is not possible to arrange that the large number of officials of the lower grades do perform eight hours work per day?

Why not the higher grades too!

I think I replied to that question in the latter part of my answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will institute an inquiry as to whether the high retail prices of tobacco and the large profits earned by the combine which dominates the tobacco trade have been maintained by means which operate in restraint of trade?

A Sub-committee was appointed by the Standing Committee on Trusts under the Profiteering Acts to inquire into the existence of a trade combination in the tobacco industry, and into the effect which its operations has on prices and on the trade generally. The Sub-committee reported on 13th December, 1919, and the Report was published as Cmd. 558 (1920). In these circumstances, I do not think that a new inquiry would serve any useful purpose.

Has the Tight hon. Gentleman observed that while costs have gone down prices have gone up since that date?

No, I have not.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give the imports from Japan into India and China during the years 1919, 1920, and 1921, of cotton goods, general textiles, general manufactures, cutlery, toys and fancy goods, and of semi-manufactured articles, respectively?

The reply to this question involves a statistical statement which, with the permission of the House, I will have printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the statement:

Complete information under all the heads mentioned in the question is not available, the classifications shown in the official statistics of the trade of British India and of China, respectively, not including groups of "manufactured articles," of "semi - manufactured articles" or of "fancy goods" imported.

Imports into British India consigned from Japan during the years ended 31st March, 1920, and 31st March, 1921, respectively.

Imports into China from Japan during the year 1919 and 1920.

The published figures for the first 10 months of the year show that aggregate exports from Japan to China were less in value in those months of 1921 than in the corresponding period of 1920 by about 35 per cent., and the value of exports to British India fell off by about 59 per cent. Later figures are not to hand.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give the imports into this country and France from Germany of coal; raw material generally; cottons and other textile fabrics; manufactured articles and semi-manufactured articles; foodstuffs of various descriptions; toys; and crockery and fancy articles?

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

The following is the statement:

The available returns do not enable a statement to be made of the imports of each of the classes of goods mentioned in the question. The following table contains such of the desired particulars as can be shown:

Imports into the United Kingdom, consigned from Germany, registered during the year 1921: £ Coal 39,000 Raw materials and articles mainly unmanufactured (except coal) 1,100,000 Cotton yarns and manufactures 439,000 Yarns and manufactures of other textiles materials 1,090,000 Food and drink 645,000 Toys and games 1,375,000 Porcelain, chinaware and parian, and general earthenware semi-porcelain and majolica 314,000 Fancy goods 292,000 Total of articles wholly or mainly manufactured 18,482,000

Imports into France from Germany during the year 1921: 1,000 Francs. Total imports 2,476,446 Coal, coke, and manufactured fuel 1,344,231* Cotton yarns and fabrics 13,149 Yarns and fabrics of other textile materials (except silk) 3,698 Grain, flour and malt 10,888 Animals for food 3,722 * Coal from the Saar Coalfield is not included.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of imports into the United Kingdom from Holland, Denmark, and Germany, re spectively, during the years 1913, 1920, and 1921, respectively; and the value of manufactured and partly manufactured articles, respectively, included in the values referred to in this question?

The answer involves a statistical Table which, with the permission of the House, I will have printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I am unable to show separately the value of manufactured and semi-manufactured articles, but the Table gives particulars for 1913 and 1920 of the classes of goods described in the Returns as "raw materials and articles mainly unmanufactured" and

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any British ships traded with Russia during the year 1921; and, if so, can he give the number of ships and their tonnage entering Russian ports and the number of ships and their tonnage entering British ports from Russia during last year, also the total value of British exports to Russia and the imports from Russia to Great Britain during last year?

The answer can be given most conveniently in a statistical table which, with the permission of the House, I will have printed in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the table:

1. Movement of shipping between the United Kingdom and Russia in 1921:

( a ) Vessels cleared from United Kingdom ports for Russia: No. With cargoes. Net tonnage. British vessels … 44 69,491 Foreign vessels … 95 86,256 Total … 139 155,747

"articles wholly or mainly manufactured" respectively.

The following is the Table:

( b )Vessels entered at United Kingdom ports from Russia: No. With cargoes. Net tonnage. British vessels … 29 41,145 Foreign vessels … 171 145,167 Total … 200 186,312

2. United Kingdom trade with Russia, registered during the year 1921: £ Value of imports consigned from Russia 2,701,000 Value of exports of United Kingdom produce and manufactures consigned to Russia 2,173,000 Value of exports of foreign and colonial merchandise consigned to Russia 1,210,000

NOTE.—These figures relate to Russia exclusive of Finland, Esthonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and the part of Poland formerly Russian territory.

asked the Prime Minister whether the import duties on British fish entering France have been or are about to be considerably raised and that this will cause the French market to be closed to the British fishing industry, with consequent unemployment in the latter industry; and what steps the Government proposes to take to secure the interests of our fishing industry in this matter?

I have been asked to reply. Import duties on British fish entering France have not been increased, but the French Government is being strongly pressed by the trawler owners to increase them. The fish merchants in France are strongly opposed to any increase. The matter is one which rests with the French Government who are well aware of the views of British fishing interests.

Are we to understand there is no proposal to increase this? The trade has been informed that it is going to be increased by 55 francs per 100 kilos?

I have said the French Government are being pressed by the French trawler owners to increase the duty, but the matter has not yet been Settled.

If this proposal is made, will the British Government make strong representations to the French Government that it should not be carried out?

Certainly. I think representations have been made.

How can the Government do so when this is merely a reprisal for the not very bright example set by Coalition legislation? [HON. MEMBERS: "The Safeguarding of Industries Act!"]

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has yet had an opportunity of investigating the; prices now being charged for beer to the public; and whether thin Board of Trade has any proposal for protecting the public if the charges of profiteering against the brewers are substantiated?

I am causing inquiries to be made, but I cannot anticipate speedy results in view of the pressure on my staff. I do not think that a renewal of official control is desirable.

What is the use of holding an inquiry if the Board of Trade propose to do nothing in the case?

We cannot decide whether to do anything or nothing until we have made the inquiry.

Does the Board of Trade intend to take any action if the charges mentioned in the question are substantiated?

It depends entirely upon the result of the inquiry.

I sincerely hope the Government will make inquiries, and if they find the brewers are profiteering they will prosecute them—and I am a brewer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, as a result of the liquidation of the Taxi-cab and Motor Finance Company, Ltd., over 600 depositors, the majority of whom are ex-service men, have lost their deposits, amounting to upwards of £23,000; that at a meeting of the creditors, held on the 28th October last, the Official Receiver promised to make a full investigation of the affairs of the company; whether such investigation has yet been made; if so, with what result; and whether the Board of Trade will cause a full inquiry to be made into the affairs of the company, with a view of ascertaining the causes of the liquidation and if there is a case for the prosecution of the promoters of the company and others responsible?

The answer to the first part of this question is in the affirmative. A report has been received from the Official Receiver that he has made a full investigation, the result of which will be embodied in his observations to be issued to the depositors in the course of about a week. It does not appear that any of the deposits received have been misapplied, and on the facts at present before the Official Receiver there are no grounds which would justify an allegation of fraud against the promoters or officials of the company.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how much of the stores and property under the charge of the Disposal Board in Ireland has been looted or lost in the last six months; what is the value of that which is left; under whose care is it; and what steps are being taken to protect it for the British taxpayer?

With the exception of two vacant aerodromes and a small quantity of unserviceable stores, the Disposal Board had no property in Ireland under its charge until 17th January last, when the evacuation of the Army began; since that date a certain amount of looting has taken place, but the value of the stores so lost has been very small. It is not possible to state at present what is the total value of the property which will become surplus to requirements on the completion of evacuation. In reply to the last part of the question all property not remaining in the custody of the Army or the Police is handed over as evacuation proceeds for safe custody to the Provisional Government.

Is not the Irish Republican Army under the sole control of Southern Ireland, and what safe custody is the right hon. Gentleman going to secure for the property?

Are we to understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that he is handing over stores for safe custody to the Irish Provisional Government and the Irish Republican Army?

Yes, Sir. Handing over stores, but not munitions of war— stores and Government property as the troops have withdrawn from the country —to the Irish Provisional Government. I do not know what other course the hon. and gallant Gentleman would suggest.

What means have the Provisional Government for protecting these stores?

The so-called Irish Republican Army is under the orders of the Provisional Government and is obeying the orders of that Government.

Some of them.

In almost every county in Ireland they are strictly obeying the orders of that Government. The Minister of Defence of Dail Eireann is also the Minister of Defence of the Provisional Government, and it is through him that authority is exercised upon this Army.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Imperial Government propose to take steps to protect the interests of such of His Majesty's civil servants who may be absorbed in the service of the Irish Government, and will guarantee the pensions payable to existing civil servants in the event of such pensions not being forthcoming from Irish sources?

I cannot answer this hypothetical question further than by referring to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Canterbury on the 15th instant.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Civil Service Committee under Section 56 of the Government of Ireland Act 1920, has been set up; if so, whether they have laid down Regulations for the statutory conditions of retirement of civil servants under the Eighth Schedule of that Act; and whether the Imperial Government will take steps to amplify Article 10 of the Treaty of 6th December, 1921, relating to civil servants who are discharged by the Free State Government or who retire in consequence of the change of Government by the re-enactment of all the sections and schedules of the Act of 1920 relating to the Civil Service?

In reply to the first two parts of the question, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Canterbury on the 16th instant. In view of the explicit terms of Article 10 of the Treaty, which are embodied in the Bill at present before the House, it does not appear that any advantage would arise from the adoption of the suggestion contained in the third part of the hon. Member's question.

If the right hon. Gentleman is referring to the Treaty, is there any guarantee under the Treaty to be compared with the guarantee which the civil servants possessed under the Act of 1920, which gave them not only the resources of the Joint Exchequer Board but the security of the residuary share of the joint taxes, which ensured the payment of their just claims and pensions?

All these matters will have to be subject to discussion and negotiation during the next few months. In the meantime there is no advantage in my going beyond the statement I have made.

asked the Prime Minister whether under Article 10 of the Agreement for a Treaty the judges, officials, and other public servants will, on the passing of the Irish Free State (Agreement) Bill, have the option of retiring on a pension, and within what period must that option be exercised; whether the Irish Free State Government or the Provisional Government will be entitled on the passing of that Bill, or at any time thereafter, to discharge all such persons without cause assigned; and whether the pensions of the persons so retiring or discharged will be guaranteed by the British Government, both in the case where their salaries and pensions are charged on the Consolidated Fund and in the case where these salaries are not so charged?

The matters referred to in the first two parts of the question are at present under discussion between the representatives of His Majesty's Government and of the Provisional Government, and I can say nothing further than that Article 10 of the Treaty entitles the persons concerned to treatment not less favourable than that laid down in the relevant provisions of the Act of 1920. In reply to the third part of the question, I would refer the hon. and learned Member to the reply which I have just given to the hon. and gallant Member for Bury St. Edmunds.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that when this matter is discussed the option for retirement in two years, which was given by the Act of 1920, will be conferred upon these people on terms at least as favourable as those in that Act?

Was not the option of retirement only in those cases where civil servants were offered the occupation of a lower grade than before, and is it not necessary, under present conditions, to give them a wider option?

asked the Prime Minister whether the roll of Irish peers is to be closed when the Treaty with Ireland comes into force, or whether the Crown will thereafter be able to create Irish peers; and whether, pending the reform of the Second Chamber, any alteration will be made in the status of Irish peers in the Imperial Parliament?

The position of the Irish peerage can only be altered by legislation. Legislative sanction will be sought in due course to deal with this matter in the light of the changes that will follow the final establishment of the Irish Free State. It is not, however, possible at this stage to indicate the nature of the changes which will be necessary.

asked the Prime Minister whether the payment of old age pensions in Southern Ireland will cease to be a charge upon the British Exchequer after the conclusion of the arrangements bringing the Irish Free State into existence?

The answer is in the affirmative. The Provisional Government have undertaken to make the payments.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that orders have been issued by the competent authority of the Irish Republican Army that under pain of severe punishment the auction or sale of military hutments, equipment, stores, or buildings is not to be undertaken by those who generally undertake such sales; and whether, in consequence, such military material has had to be handed over to the Irish Republican Army or their friends on nominal terms or by way of free gift?

I am informed that a notice was recently issued by a person styling himself a brigade commandant of the Irish Republican Army prohibiting the purchase by members of the public of certain army hutments and stores that were being offered for sale. This person was not acting under the authority of the Provisional Government. The stores and hutments in question were subsequently handed over by the Army authorities, acting as agents of the Disposals Board, to a representative of the Provisional Government, subject to a valuation and to their being taken into account in the ultimate financial settlement between His Majesty s Government and the Government of the Irish Free State.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that numbers of people like myself, who have had houses burnt, want to get these huts to live in, and is he aware that we take the risk of being shot?

Have any steps been taken to punish this officer of the Irish Republican Army who wrongfully issued this order? That is what we want to know.

I must have notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister why the material and stores of the military camps at Kilworth and Moorpark, in County Cork, were not put up to auction, but handed over to the Irish Republican Army; and what. has been done with the large extent of land which was bought not so many years ago for the purposes of forming an important training area for the South Irish military district?

The military authorities in Ireland, acting as agents of the Disposals Board, have handed over the material and stores in the military camps at Kilworth and Moorpark to representatives of the Provisional Government, subject to a valuation, which will be taken into account in the final financial settlement between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the Irish Free State. As regards the land, the Provisional Government have undertaken to hold it subject to whatever agreement may be arrived at between the two Governments as to its future ownership, or as to the terms of its acquisition in the event of the ownership passing finally to the Government of the Irish Free State.

Have these stores and so on been handed over to the Irish Republican Army, and, if so, to which branch of the Irish Republican Army—de Valera's or Collins'?

I never used the words "Irish Republican Army." I said "representatives of the Provisional Government."

Are not those who have possession of these stores and so on entitled to sell them at a fair price?

Yes, certainly. We have all the proprietary rights of private property.

Does it not come to this, that valuable property belonging to the British taxpayer is being handed over on no better security than the credit of the Irish Provisional Government?

I think it is undoubtedly true that large quantities of property which cannot otherwise be safeguarded, now that our troops are leaving the country, are being handed over to the Provisional Government, end the credit of the Provisional Government is responsible for the proper adjustment of the accounts.

Is the right hon. Gentleman sure he is not handing over these valuable stores for the benefit of a Republican Government?

That is a matter for argument.

You will never see a sixpence for them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can make a statement in regard to the position in Ireland?

I think it may be convenient to make a full statement in regard to the position in Ireland. Last week it was very difficult to tell from the reports which appeared in the newspapers and from those which we had received what had actually happened at the meeting of the Sinn Fein party in Dublin on Wednesday last. We therefore thought it better to invite the Irish signatories to the Treaty and Irish Ministers to come over here and discuss the position with us, and, in the meanwhile, to defer any statement. Mr. Griffith, Mr. Duggan and the legal adviser of the Irish Provisional Government, Mr. Kennedy, accordingly came here on Friday night, and a series of conferences has taken place.

The result of these conferences has been both satisfactory and reassuring.

To whom?

The Irish Ministers have in no respect receded from the Treaty or weakened in their determination to carry it through in its integrity. Their opposition to the Republican party continues unabated. At the meeting of the Sinn Fein representatives, however, a very strong demand was put forward that the Irish people should have the Constitution before them as well as the Treaty when they are called upon to give their votes at the election. To this demand the Irish Provisional Government has deferred.

Their opponents have, I understand, promised that, in these circumstances, the election shall be facilitated and that the Provisional Government shall not be hampered either by the Dail or by the supporters of Mr. de Valera in the interval.

The result of this agreement will be to delay the election for six or seven weeks, and it is now expected to take place in the early part of June instead of in April. There is nothing in this change which affects the position of the British Government or which touches the Treaty in any way. All that is needed is a simple Amendment in the Bill before the House providing that instead of the election taking place as soon as may be, it shall take place within four months. In the meantime a technical committee appointed by the Provisional Government is understood to be at work in Ireland upon the Constitution. The Constitution will be framed in Ireland. The Constitution will be submitted to the Irish people by and with the authority of the Provisional Government, and not by and with the authority of the Dail Eireann. The Provisional Government recognise that they will have to take steps to satisfy themselves that the Constitution so framed is of a character that the British Government can accept as fulfilling the Treaty.

Both sides are now engaged in preparing their electoral and party machinery for any appeal to the Irish electorate. It is believed that the method which has now been adopted will enable that appeal to be conducted by constitutional methods, and will reduce intimidation to a minimum.

In these circumstances there is clearly no reason whatever for any change in the policy we are pursuing here. The evacuation of the British troops will continue stage by stage, and the Debate on the Irish Free State (Agreement) Bill will be resumed at the earliest convenient moment. I understand that my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House is prepared to assign Thursday and Friday to these discussions.

Are we to understand that the Government have abandoned the position that the Treaty cannot be altered?

No, Sir; there will be no question of any alteration of the provisions of the Treaty except by agreement on both sides.

Is the House to understand that the Irish Constitution is to be drafted by Dail Eireann, which is a Republican assembly?

As far as it is possible to use the English language as a vehicle for thought, I have endeavoured to assure my hon. Friend that that is not the case.

Will an opportunity be given to the House of discussing the newly drafted Constitution before the Government gives its assent to it?

No, Sir. The Constitution will come before the House, as was explained by my right hon. Friend, when the final Bill dealing with these matters is introduced into this House. That will be the time for it to be discussed.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how it will be possible for this House to express its opinion on the Constitution drafted by the Irish Government before the Irish elections are held?

Do I understand the Dail Eireann is not to meet during the next six or eight weeks, as has been confidentially stated by statements in the Press?

I do not know anything about that.

In view of what occurred in the Ard Fheis on the 22nd instant in Dublin, and the grave position which has thereby arisen, will the right hon. Gentleman suspend the withdrawal of troops from Southern Ireland and the disbandment of the Royal Irish Constabulary?

I have dealt with that in the general statement which I have made to the House.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state by what methods he proposes to secure the authority of Parliament for the payment of the contribution in respect of criminal injuries in north-east Ulster which it is proposed to make to the Northern Parliament, and when he proposes to make a statement on the matter?

The necessary provision will be made in the Estimates for 1922–23 and 1923–24, and can be discussed in the ordinary course.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has approved of the action of the Dyestuff Advisory Licensing Committee in demanding from applicants for licences to import dyes highly confidential business information, such as the name of the foreign manufacturer, the purpose for which the dyes are required, and the name and address of the applicant's customer in this country; and whether the rules for the administration of the Dye-stuffs (Import Regulation) Act can be revised so as not to compel applicants to disclose confidential information to business rivals who are members of the Committee?

I am aware that the Dyestuffs Advisory Licensing Committee have thought it advisable, for the efficient discharge of their duties, to ask for information of the kind indicated from applicants for licences. I see no reason for interfering with the exercise of their discretion in this matter, which, so far as I am aware, has not been a cause of complaint by users. As regards the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the provisions of Section 2, Sub-section (5), of the Dyestuffs (Import Regulation) Act.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any satisfactory reasons why one firm should be compelled to disclose the names of their customers to their competitors?

No complaints have reached me on the subject yet.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that it is the practice of the Dyestuffs Committee, when an application is made for permission to import certain German dyes not made in this country, to advise the applicant to apply to Swiss agents for the same; and can he give any reason for such proceedings?

I understand that in accordance with the strong wish of the dye-users generally, in consequence of the assistance rendered by the Swiss dye-makers to the textile industries during the War, such advice has been given.

Does that mean that if the applicant does not want to go to Switzerland he would not be allowed to import the dye at all?

I do not say that that follows.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is prepared to immediately institute an inquiry on the working of the Dyestuff Advisory Licensing Committee and to hear evidence of specific cases of injury to industries consuming dyes caused by the continual refusal of the Licensing Committee to grant licences for specific dyes not obtainable from home sources of supply?

No, Sir. I have no reason to suppose that there is any serious dissatisfaction among dye-users generally with the operations of the Committee, on which the users are strongly represented and which is discharging a very difficult task with great care and ability.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that certain branches of industry in Scotland are seriously hampered by the dye-stuffs policy of the Government?

If so, representations can be made before, the Committee.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of the most important firms in England are also similarly hampered?

If the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to set up a committee himself, will he make inquiries into this matter with a view to ascertaining the facts?

Is there any appeal whatever from this Committee in case of necessity?

I should want notice of that question. With regard to the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh (Mr. Raffan), I am in touch with this Committee, and I see them whenever they desire to see me on any matters affecting their work.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of applications received by the Dyestuffs Committee for permission to import special dyes from Germany for the reason that such dyes are not procurable in England; and the number which have been granted and the number of similar applications to import dyes from Switzerland?

The numbers of licence applications granted and refused could not be given without going through the files, as no record as to numbers is kept, and they would not, I think, be of any appreciable significance; but as regards quantities during the year ended the 31st December last, applications to import 671,032 lbs. from Germany were granted, and applications to import 771,109 lbs. were "refused. During the same period applications to import from Switzerland were allowed in respect of 1,796,754 lbs., and refused in respect of 502,579 lbs.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the royalty rent per ton of coal and minerals and wayleaves in the county of Durham by the various royalty owners for the years 1913 and up to the present, including the Ecclesiastical Commissioners and Dean and Chapter and the Commissioners for Woods and Forests, stating the amount received each year; and what portion, if any, went to the local rates?

The average amount paid for rent, royalties, and wayleaves per ton of coal raised in the county of Durham from 'the latter half of 1917 (the earliest period for which information is available) was as follows:

1917, July to December … 6¼d. 1918, January to December … 6¾d. 1919, do. … 7d. 1920, do. … 7¾d. 1921, January to March … 7¾d.

Particulars for the second and third quarters of the year 1921 are not yet available. I regret that the remainder of the information asked for is not in the possession of my Department, but it would appear from the Reports of the Inland Revenue Commissioners that the variation between 1913 and 1917 in the United Kingdom as a whole was small. It is understood that none of the royalty rent for the county of Durham was paid to local rates.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many claims the Grants Commissioners (Air Raids) have examined and how many remain to be examined; and whether any awards have yet been paid to those unfortunate victims who have had their homes destroyed or damaged some six years ago?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the statement which I made on this subject on the 23rd instant in connection with the Supplementary Estimate for Grants for Compensation for Damage by Enemy Action. The Royal Commission on Suffering and Damage by Enemy Action have not yet made recommendations to the Treasury as regards any of the cases submitted to them, but, as explained in the statement referred to, they expect to present an Interim Report dealing with specially necessitous cases very shortly.

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?

As I stated on Wednesday last, the Government are considering the desirability of issuing a Blue Book containing Memoranda circulated during the Peace Conference. I am not in a position to give a more definite reply at present.

I postponed this question, which was addressed to the Prime Minister a fortnight ago, in order to get a decision to-day. When may I put down a question so as to get an answer?

Since the hon. Gentleman put down his question we have been considering the matter, and in reply to some other" questions asked last week I said we have been considering the question of publication. In that case this memorandum will of course form part of the publication, but I am afraid that I cannot indicate when the hon. Gentleman may put down a question.

Will that publication contain a complete record of all that went on at the Versailles Conference?

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government proposes to exercise the discretionary power conferred under Article 297B of the German Peace Treaty to charge the movable property in this country of expatriated citizens of German birth not habitually resident in Germany, and over whom the German Government neither exercises nor claims to exercise authority or control; and whether His Majesty's Government will give directions that the right of expatriation conceded by the Government of the United States of America in favour of citizens who had withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the country of their birth prior to the War, with the settled purpose of throwing in their lot with their adopted country, should be conceded in this country to citizens domiciled in neutral countries claiming not to be continuing German subjects?

I have been asked to reply. The property of persons who had lost their German nationality through absence from Germany is being released to them.

asked the Prime Minister to give the figures of the taxation per head of the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Russia, and the United States; and whether any representation has been made to Germany to increase her taxes in order to provide funds towards reparations?

With the hon. Member's, permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement containing the information asked for in the first part of the question. In reply to the second part of the question, partly as the outcome of representations made by the Reparation Commission, the German Government has submitted to the Reparation Commission a full statement on the subject of taxation in Germany and on the comparative burden of taxation in Germany, England and France in relation to taxable capacity. I understand that this statement is being carefully examined by the Reparation Commission.

What is the relative taxation per head in Germany and in this country?

asked the Prime Minister what proportion of the German Empire is afforested; what proportion of the population of Germany is employed directly or indirectly in connection with the German forests; what is the total value of the unmanufactured wood and timber annually imported into this country; and what arrangements have been made for securing the supply of a substantial part of such wood and timber imports from Germany in discharge of her liabilities to Great Britain under the Treaty of Versailles?

I have only just seen this question, but the answer, I take it, refers to Germany as constituted before the War. Of the territory in Europe which belonged to the German Empire, about a quarter was covered by woods and forests. The number of persons employed in connection with forestry and hunting in Germany was, in 1907, about 126,000 or rather less than one-half of one per cent, of the persons occupied in industry in Germany in that year. The total value of unmanufactured wood and timber imported into the United Kingdom from all countries during the year 1921, was £30,000,000. Arrangements for the supply of timber on reparation account are now the subject of discussion between the Allies and the German Government.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider this matter seriously having regard to the fact that in 1921 we imported nearly £30,000,000 of raw wood?

I have said that the matter is now the subject of discussion

I am getting that information.

The following is the statement:

between the Allies and the German Government.

Would not the necessary effect of this proposal upon the home timber trade be that a number of people would be thrown out of employment?

asked the Prime Minister what action has been taken by the Allies in connection with the breach of the Peace Treaty on the part of Germany in manufacturing since the Armistice large numbers of howitzers of large calibre and concealing the same, in contravention of the terms of the said Treaty; what is the total number of such howitzers discovered; whether the Inter-Allied Commission have recently discovered full returns of the strength of the German army at the time of the Armistice which were stated to have been lost; whether these returns have since again disappeared; and what action has been taken in this matter, as well as in respect of many other like breaches and evasions of the Peace Treaty on the part of Germany?

asked the Lord Privy Sea] whether the guns discovered at the Rockstroh works at Heidenau, in Saxony, some time after the issue by the War Office in September, 1921, of a statement that only 102 guns were left to be dealt with under the Versailles Treaty, have been destroyed; whether these guns were manufactured after the Armistice and under the supervision of a representative of the German Government; whether invoices were dis- covered, endorsed with instructions from the German Government, to keep the howitzers at the factory instead of sending them in the usual way to the Spandau arsenal; and if he will state what explanation has been furnished by the German authorities of this serious breach of its Treaty undertakings?

I have been asked to reply to these questions, and I would refer my hon. Friends to the reply given to the hon. Member for Consett on the 23rd instant. As regards the case at the Rockstroh works, most, if not all, of these howitzers have already been destroyed. Before the ratification of the Peace Treaty Germany was under no legal obligation to cease manufacturing war material, and the representations made to the German Government have been on the subject of the concealment of these howitzers. As the result of these representations the manager and directors of the Rockstroh works are to be prosecuted, but I am not in a position to add anything further to my previous replies regarding this case at present. With regard to the last part of Question No. 31, the Inter-Allied Military Commission of Control have not discovered full returns of the strength of the German Army at the time of the Armistice. The remainder of the question, therefore, does not arise.

Is it not a fact that very full returns were discovered, that they were put under a guard, and that next morning they had disappeared?

I have no information on that subject.

Are the directors and manager concerned under arrest, or can they get out of the country?

I must ask for notice of that.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the persistent and deliberate evasion by Germany of the provisions of the Peace. Treaty as to the destruction of war materials existing at the time of the Armistice and the discontinuance of the manufacture of further supplies, steps will be taken to strengthen the Allied military commission of control and to increase the powers of inspection and investigation vested in the Commission?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the deliberate and systematic evasion in Germany of the Treaty obligations in regard to disarmament; and if the attention of the Government will be immediately directed to this grave menace to the peace of the world?

I am aware that there has been evasion on the part of individuals, including minor officials, in Germany, but in our opinion it would not be true to say that there is persistent and deliberate evasion on the part of the German Government. Exhaustive reports on the progress of disarmament and cases of evasion are forwarded regularly by the Inter-Allied Military Commission of Control in Germany to the Allied Military Committee of Versailles which brings such matters as it considers necessary to the notice of the Ambassadors' Conference, or the Supreme Council, with a view to suitable action being taken. The powers of the Commission are laid down in the Treaty and cannot be altered.

Does my right hon. Friend think there is nobody in high places who knows that these various guns are still being maintained in secret spots and that they will be concentrated for utilisation against some of us at some future time?

I said that in our opinion it would not be true to say that there has been persistent and deliberate evasion on the part of the German Government, though there has been evasion on the part of individuals, including minor officials.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that an enormous number of documents were found—two rooms full of them—that they were supposed to have been placed under guard, and that when we went for them the next day they had all been removed? Was that done by minor officials?

I have no knowledge of that, but I thought it was denied by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary for War earlier in the afternoon.

It has not been denied.

asked (1) the Prime Minister whether the committee of lawyers which was appointed by the Supreme Council to report on the trials of German war prisoners at Leipzig has now made its Report; whether that Report finds that certain of those war criminals have been acquitted who ought to have been condemned, and that even in cases where the accused have been found guilty the penalty inflicted has, not been adequate; whether the Report unanimously recommends that, in accordance with the Treaty, Germany should be required to deliver up the accused to the Powers concerned; whether the Report will be forthwith presented to Parliament; and what steps are being taken in pursuance of that Report;

(2) asked the Attorney General whether his attention has been called to the fact that Lieutenant Boldt and Lieutenant Ditmar, who were sentenced in July last by the Leipzig court to four years' imprisonment for their action in connection with the sinking of at least two of the boats containing survivors from the British hospital ship "Llandovery Castle," torpedoed and sunk by the Germans, have escaped from prison; whether the British Government have made any inquiries of the German Government as to the circumstances under which these criminals escaped; and whether they have since been rearrested?

I have been asked to reply. As to question 38, I must refer my hon. and learned Friend to the answer I gave to a similar question put by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Dulwich on the 20th day of this month. As to question 126, the answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As to the second part, the British Government has addressed inquiries and a strong protest to the German Government, who have given assurances that they have taken every possible step to secure the re-arrest of these officers, but up to the present no information has been received that they have been re-arrested.

In view of the fact that I never did put a similar question to Question No. 38, will my right hon. Friend tell me what the answer was?

My hon. Friend must not have heard me correctly. I said a similar question was put to me by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Dulwich (Sir F. Hall). It appears in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does the Government intend to confine their action to protest?

I am not in a position to answer that question. As the right hon. Baronet is, I think, aware, this matter is in the hands of the Supreme Council to whom a Report has been addressed.

Was not the Report to which reference is made in Question No. 38 partially published abroad, and will the right hon. Gentleman see that, representations are made to the Supreme Council to allow this Report to be published fully in this country?

I understand that in some French newspapers there appeared paragraphs which purported to give the substance of this Report. It is not for mo to say how far, if at all, these paragraphs were accurate. At any rate, I am not at liberty to publish the Report, nor do I think it is any part of my functions to address to the Supreme Council such a request as has been mentioned. No doubt the matter will be considered by those whose duty it is to consider it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think the Report of these lawyers is inconsistent with the Report made by the Solicitor-General to this House when he came from Leipzig, and can he explain how it comes that the British representatives signed this Report?

No, Sir, I cannot imagine that the report of a committee of jurists was inconsistent with the advice given by my right hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General.

What is the motive of the Supreme Council for concealing this Report?

I must not accept the word "concealment." I do not know what the motive for their conduct is.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can yet give the House the names of the British delegates to the proposed conference at Genoa; whether there has been any alteration in the date for the proposed Genoa Conference; and, if so, what is the reason for such alteration?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The Italian Foreign Office have informed the Governments invited to participate in the Conference that, owing to the prolongation of the Ministerial crisis, it is necessary to postpone the Genoa Conference for a short time. Preparations for the Conference are being continued without interruption, and as the result of the agreement arrived at with the French Premier the Italian Government is being asked to call the Conference for 10th April.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the recommendations made in the Geddes Report, it is proposed to introduce a Bill at an early date to abolish the Mines Department?

I would ask my hon. and gallant Friend to await the statement which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes to make on Wednesday with reference to the intentions of the Government regarding the recommendations of the Committee on National Expenditure.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the large public expenditure on education and the various opinions expressed as to the results achieved, he will consider the advisability of appointing a Royal Commission to inquire into the whole question of education, including systems and administration?

I think that Parliament already has sufficient material before it to form a judgment, and that no advantage would be derived from the appointment of a Royal Commission.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether it is proposed to reduce the mobilisation stores of the transport section of the Mercantile Marine Department as recommended by the Geddes Committee?

This is a question of military policy, which is under consideration by the Committee of Imperial Defence.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the census of production proposed to be taken next year will be postponed, as recommended by the Geddes Committee?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Prime Minister whether the extent to which Ministers and heads of Departments are prepared to agree in the reductions recommended by the Geddes Committee will be announced by them to the House?

As my hon. and gallant Friend is aware, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes on Wednesday to make a general statement on the intentions of the Government regarding the recommendations of the Committee on National Expenditure.

Will the right hon. Gentleman speak for all these Ministers?

I cannot anticipate the form of my right hon. Friend's speech.

asked the Prime Minister whether the original group of London financiers who were invited by the Greek Government to negotiate the raising of a loan of £15,000,000, to which His Majesty's Government accorded their consent under the Agreement of 1918, have withdrawn from the business, having referred the proposed loan to the Trade Facilities Act Committee, which refused the loan on 5th January last; and whether, in view of his statement that the application of the Greek Government is before the Advisory Committee, under the Trade Facilities Act, he will explain whether the Committee are reconsidering their decision, or whether this is a fresh application, or what is the exact position?

I am informed that the application of the Greek Government to the Advisory Committee, under the Trade Facilities Act, which was referred to in the reply given to the hon. Member by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on the 20th instant, has now been withdrawn and that no application by the Greek Government is now before the Committee.

asked the Lord President of the Council whether the League of Nations' Court of International Justice will have compulsory jurisdiction where two States at variance agree to accept compulsory arbitration in questions of international law; whether such jurisdiction will exist only in respect of the particular difference in regard to which the intervention of the said Court is invited; and whether it is clear that petty States without navies will not be able to obtain decisions from the Court which might compromise the position of great nations dependent for their existence upon sea power and its undiminished rights, privileges, and opportunities?

The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. The answer to the second part depends entirely on the nature of the agreement by which the two States at variance resort to the arbitration of the Permanent Court.

The answer to the third part of the hon. Member's question is supplied by Article 59 of the Statute for the Permanent Court, which provides that "the decision of the Court has no binding force except between the parties and in respect of that particular case."

Is it quite certain that the lessons of the Declaration of London will not be forgotten and that no compromising or dangerous decisions will be given under these Articles?