asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state, in Dutch florins, the published value of imports from Germany into Holland of manufactured and partly manufactured goods for the years 1913, 1920, and 1921; the similar figures with regard to the same category of imports respectively into Switzerland, stated in Swiss francs; and for Denmark and Sweden, in kronen, for the years above mentioned?

As the answer involves a statistical table, I will, with the permission of the House, have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPOBT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the value in pounds sterling of German imports and exports for each of the last six months, the value in sterling being calculated from the internal value of the mark in each of the months concerned?

As the answer to this question involves a statistical statement, I will, with the permission of the House, have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has had further consideration given to the difficulty experienced by colour and paint manufacturers owing to the obstacles placed in the way of their obtaining supplies of lime green from abroad; and if he is aware that the lime green produced in this country costs nearly twice as much as foreign lime green and is of inferior quality, and that orders and trade are still being lost to British manufacturers of paint and colours owing to these hampering restrictions?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answers given to him on the 6th March, to which I have at present nothing to add.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on the 6th March he stated that there was not much difference in the price of the English lime green, and that it was just as good as the foreign; and is he aware that that is entirely wrong, and he has been misinformed? The price is nearly double that at which it can be bought abroad, and is inferior in quality. What has the right hon. Gentleman to say?

I would remind the hon. and gallant Member that the technical committee which investigated this matter was quite satisfied that there was no serious ground for complaint on the part of his friends.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when the Government propose to introduce the Bill to deal with merchandise marks?

I cannot yet commit myself to any definite date, but I hope that the Bill may be introduced without undue delay.

Does that mean before Easter?

My hon. Friend will realise that there is very little time before Easter for any Debate on a Bill of that kind. If I can introduce it before Easter, I shall be glad to do so.

Is there any reason why it should not be introduced in another place?

That is worthy of consideration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total value of imports of foreign-manufactured goods into this country for the months January and February of 1920, 1921, and 1922, respectively; and can he give the tonnage figures of the corresponding periods?

The total values of goods classed as wholly or mainly manufactured registered during the months specified in the question as imported into the United Kingdom were as follow:—

			Month of January.	Month of February.
			£	£
1920	…	…	31,528,390	33,042,020
1921	…	…	30,467,084	23,394,362
1922	…	…	17,709,981	16,575,746

These figures are exclusive of manufactured articles of food, drink, or tobacco.

I am unable to state either the tonnage figures corresponding with the values stated, or how much of the values are accounted for by imports from foreign countries and from British Possessions respectively.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the considerable dissatisfaction which exists as to the methods adopted by the Dyes Advisory Committee in the granting or refusal of licences, he is prepared to consider the desirability of setting up some tribunal of appeal, similar to the Court of Referees established under the Safeguarding of Industries Act, which shall be free from Government control and empowered to arbitrate finally in cases of dispute?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the complaints by dye users that they are being compelled to use British dyes which are not fast and thus are losing trade, he can see his way to set up some form of appeal from the decisions by the Licensing Committee?

I would refer to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Leyton West (Mr. Newbould) on the 6th March, to which I have nothing to add.

But, since then, complaints have been growing every day, and they come from Glasgow and Belfast. Surely some action should be taken.

The hon. Member has seen the answer which has been given. I am quite satisfied myself with regard to the competence and impartiality of the Committee, and I am sure that if there were a general desire for such a court of appeal as he suggests, I should have many representations made to me direct from the trade. I have not yet had such representations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that these complaints are of a trivial character—of no importance whatever?

Does the right hon. Gentleman see the objection there is to people complaining against an appeal committee who are likely to hear complaints from themselves later on?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the estimated value of German reparation dyes handed over for sale to the Central Importing Agency for the 12 months ending 31st December, 1921; the amount realised for the same; and the amount of profit or commission made by the agency in question?

The estimated value of German reparation dyes handed over for sale to the Central Importing Agency for the 12 months ended 31st December, 1921, was £75,000. I am unable to state what these particular dyes realised, but accounts will be prepared in the ordinary course as at 31st March, 1922, and these will be available later. A commission of 3½ per cent. on realisations, which includes charges for freight, storage, and distribution, is paid to the agency.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what are the names of the members of the Committees set up under Section 2 (3) and Section 2 (6) of the Dyestuffs (Import Regulation) Act, 1920; what are the salaries or allowances received by them; how many meetings each Committee has held; what is the average attendance; and how many form a quorum in each case?

I will circulate a list of the members of the two Committees in the OFFICIAL REPORT. NO salaries and allowances are paid to members of either Committee. The Licensing Committee has held 36 meetings and the Development Committee five meetings, and in both cases practically all the members have attended regularly. A quorum for the Licensing Committee consists of one independent member, one dye-making representative and two consumer representatives. No quorum has been fixed for the Development Committee.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, whether the current exchange with Germany on 13th March, 1922, was 1,120 to 1,145 marks to the £ sterling; whether he can state the number of marks required to purchase in Germany the same volume of commodities as could be purchased by the £ sterling in Great Britain; and whether the Board of Trade will publish in its "Journal" each month in future, a statement showing the internal and external values of the German mark?

The range of quotations on 13th March, 1922, for exchange between Berlin and London, as stated in the "Times," was as given in the first part of the question. With reference to the second part of the question, the answer would probably vary considerably with the choice of commodities selected for the comparison proposed, but I am having circulated with the OFFICIAL REPORT, in reply to the hon. Member's last question, index numbers of wholesale prices in Germany, which convey a general idea of the position. I will have these index numbers published periodically in the "Board of Trade Journal."

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can report any progress in his investigations into the price of beer charged to the public; and whether he is looking into the profits made by the majority of brewery companies during the last few years in the course of these investigations?

The inquiry has not yet been completed. So far as it has gone, and subject to any corrections which may be necessary as the consequence of further inquiries, the results include the following:

The margin between the cost of brewing beer, including the duty, and its cost as delivered to consumers by retailers has, since the Armistice, been about 50 per cent. greater than it was before the War. Considering the general increase in the cost of goods and services, I do not regard the increased margin as excessive. There was a decrease in the cost of brewing materials to the brewer in 1921, as compared with 1920, but, owing to the greater gravity of the beer brewed in 1921, the increase of duty per bulk barrel more than offset the reduction in cost of materials. With regard to the last part of the question, the investigation is proceeding.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any idea when the final Report will be laid, or his final conclusions arrived at?

I would not like to name a date, but I do not think it will be long.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the pledge given by the Government during the period of food control, he can now give an assurance that the necessary legislation to give permanent statutory effect to the provisions of the Sale of Food Order safeguarding the consumer with regard to the sale of bread by weight, the sale of tea by net weight, and the labelling of imported produce, will us introduced without delay?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to add anything to the reply which I gave to my right hon. Friend on the 23rd February.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is now in a position to state the action which the Government propose to take to bring into operation Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act in regard to industries where the Reports of the Committees have been received?

This matter is still under consideration.

When does the right hon. Gentleman think he will be able to give an answer to this question?

I said, in reply to a question the other day, very shortly, and I still hope very shortly.

Will that be before Easter?

Oh, yes; certainly.

Has not a Minister declared that the policy of the Government is full-blooded Free Trade?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the recent meeting of the Central and Associated Chamber of Agriculture in London, when a resolution urging the repeal of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, in so far as it relates to agricultural implements and other requisites, was passed; if so, whether he has given it consideration; and what decision has been arrived at in this matter?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The question whether agricultural implements should be excluded from Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act was fully debated by this House last August, and I am not prepared to recommend the reversal of the decision then taken.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, at the inquiry recently instituted by him to consider unemployment in the fabric glove industry, it was stated that, whereas this industry had 12,000 people employed in 1919–20, there were only 1,750 now employed, of which many were on short time; whether he is aware that the Minister of Labour states that on the 28th February there were only 609 glove makers (including fabric, leather, wool, etc.), registered as unemployed and 507 as working short time; and will he bear this in mind before he makes any Order imposing a duty on imported fabric gloves?

I am aware of the evidence regarding unemployment which was given before the Committee and also of the statement by the Minister of Labour, which is referred to in the question. The discrepancy is no doubt largely due to the fact that the official figures do not cover out-workers, to which class I am informed a large proportion of the total number of persons employed in this industry belong. The hon. Member may rest assured that all relevant considerations will be borne in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the total emolument paid to Mr. Wintour, as general manager of the British Empire Exhibition; and what were the previous salaries paid to this gentleman when he was associated with, respectively, the Food Controller's Department and the Inter-Allied Trade and Banking Corporation?

With regard to the first part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to the hon. Member for Islington North on the 10th May last. As regards the second part of the question, Mr. Wintour's salary at the Ministry of Food was £1,750 per annum. I do not know what salary was paid to Mr. Wintour by the company referred to in the last part of the question.

Is the figure the right hon. Gentleman mentioned also the one he mentioned in the previous reply to the hon. Member for North Islington? Were those salaries free of Income Tax?

I know of no salaries paid free of tax.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what the item of £125,000, set down as from concessionaires, in the statement published in the Press on 16th December was for; if the concessions in question were open to competition; whether the whole or part of the amusements section has been either given, or promised to Mr. L. Hart; if according to the memorandum of association, any member of the executive council or of any committee of the exhibition may derive benefit from the exhibition provided he discloses the same; and whether any of the guarantors have been given or promised any quid pro quo whatsoever in exchange for having guaranteed a certain sum?

I am informed that the item of £125,000 included in the list of British Empire Exhibition guarantees published in the Press related to a guarantee given by Sir Robert McAlpine and Sons, the firm to whom the building contract was awarded. Lord South-borough, the chairman of the finance committee, has, in a letter to the "Times," dated 17th February, of which I am sending my hon. Friend a copy, explained fully the terms on which the executive council awarded this contract after opportunity had been given to other firms to quote. No concession has been given or promised to Mr. L. Hart. The memorandum of association of the British Empire Exhibition (1924), Incorporated, provides that no member of the executive council or of any committee can receive any remuneration or other benefit in money or money's worth from the exhibition, with the exception of the repayment of out-of-pocket expenses and the payment of interest on loans. The memorandum contains the usual provision that the association are not to be debarred from making payments to railway, gas, electric lighting, water, cable or telephone companies of which a member of the council or committee may be a member, or any other company in which a member of the council or committee holds not more than one-hundredth part of the capital. No quid pro quo whatsoever has been given or promised to any individual guarantor in consideration of his having contributed to the guarantee fund, but it is the intention of the council, as far as practicable, to accord preference in the allotment of exhibiting space to those who have supported the exhibition by contributing to the guarantee fund. The allocation of all contracts and concessions will be decided solely on the merits of each case. The primary consideration in determining their award will be to secure the best possible services on the best possible terms, which in some cases will quite properly include a contribution to the guarantee fund.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that the Board in December last cut down and limited, with out warning, admissions to the London Day Training College, and that in this manner many would be teachers were suddenly deprived of the chance of completing their training although qualified therefor; and whether such cases can be reconsidered in order to avoid heavy financial loss to poor people?

The recognised accommodation of the London Day Training College was originally 350 providing for the admission of about 90 students yearly Since 1918 the Board have allowed an excess of admissions, largely to meet the needs of ex-service students; but in August last they found it necessary to check the continuous increase in the size of the College and to warn the Council that the number of students accepted for September, 1922, must be restricted. After discussion this number was, in December, 1921, provisionally fixed at 130, which is still considerably above the number of admissions before the War, and will leave the College with a total roll of about 750.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are a lot of students who have qualified for entrance to this College, and they now find themselves stopped in mid-career, and will he look into the possibility of financial consideration?

I am afraid there is some hardship involved in these restrictions, but I do not see my way to go beyond my answer.

asked the President of the Board of Education in view of the fact that the London County Council in curred a charge of £2,945 for taking children of the council schools to the play, whether his Department has under preparation any Regulation which will render impossible in future expenditure of public funds for such a purpose?

I may refer the hon. Baronet to the answers which I gave on 9th and 16th February to the hon. and gallant Member for Bromley (Lieut.-Colonel James).

Is any action going to be taken to render a repetition impossible?

I said that I did not propose to recognise for grant expenditure of this kind by Local Education Authorities.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it would be much better to leave the matter to the discretion of the London County Council Education Committee?

Hear, hear—

No.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that no further money will be spent for the purpose without the sanction of Parliament?

asked the President of the Board of Education, if, from the points of view both of national economy and of educational efficiency, he has considered the advantage of handing over the duty of the inspection of schools to the university authorities in each locality as regards education and to the local sanitary authorities as regards sites, buildings, and medical matters; and, if not, will he invite a small Committee of Members of this House to investigate the feasibility of such a change?

I have considered the hon. Member's suggestion, but I do not see my way to adopt it.

Can the right hon. Gentle man say why he refuses to effect economy and increased efficiency by some such method?

So long as Parliament grants money for the support of the schools of the country it is clear that there must be some means of inspecting the schools.

As a matter of fact is it not a fact that a part, if not the greater part, of this money does not come from this Parliament but direct from the local rates?

No, Sir; it is the reverse of that.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether, in the proposed revision of the teachers' pension scheme under the Superannuation Act, 1918, he will consider the claims of directors and secretaries for education and inspectors under local education authorities to be included on a similar contributory basis to that of teachers?

For the purpose of the immediate legislation which is contemplated to give effect to the decisions of the Government on the recommendations of the Committee on National Expenditure, it will not be possible to extend the benefits of the Act to persons who are not at present within its scope.

Is there any truth in the assertion that a promise was given by him through his secretaries that whenever the scheme came up for modification they would be included in it?

The object of the Bill is to reduce the charge on public funds, not to increase it.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the report that the Soviet Republic have acquired a further set of offices to Soviet House, in the City of London, in addition to the offices already bought by them for £350,000; whether the sum of £35,000 was paid for these further offices; whether he can indicate the source of the moneys which are being expended on luxurious premise3 in this country by the Soviet Government; and can he state why these moneys are not being applied by that Government in relief of the starving population of Russia?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The points raised in the other parts of the question are not subjects on which I have any official information, but I would refer my hon. and learned Friend to the answer that I gave on Wednesday last on this subject.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether these offices are being acquired for the purposes of revolutionary propaganda?

I have no information that leads me to suppose so.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has refused permission to Russian children from the famine area to be received in this country, although a party of Russian boys has been admitted to France; and, if so, on what grounds this decision has been taken?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. His Majesty's Government gave very careful consideration to the application for permission to bring to this country a party of Russian children; but, in view of the risks to public health that would be involved, even if the strictest precautions were observed, they decided, with regret, that permission could not be granted.

Did not the Minister of Health say that if certain precautions were taken admittance could take place under the same conditions as to France and other countries?

Yes, but these precautions were only in case the Government decided that the children could be brought here. That is far from indicating any consent that they could come.

asked the Prime Minister if he has any official information to the effect that since October, 1917, there have been executed by the Soviet authorities in Russia 28 bishops, 1,215 priests, 6,775 schoolmasters and professors, 8,800 physicians, 54,650 officers, 260,000 soldiers, 10,500 police officers, 48,500 soldier police, 12,950 landowners, 355,250 intellectuals, 193,350 workmen, 815,000 peasants, a total of 1,766,118 executions; and, if so, does he intend to make representations on this subject before the Genoa Conference?

His Majesty's Government have no information as to the numbers executed by the Soviet authorities. The second part of the question, therefore, does not arise.

Will the Government make inquiries into these very serious allegations?

Perhaps my right hon. Friend will advise me how to set about it.

Who makes these allegations?

I do not know.

The "Morning Post."

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to a speech recently made by M. Krassin to a mass meeting of Red Army soldiers in Russia, in which he is reported to have said that in every British working man's house the royal portraits have been replaced by portraits of Lenin and Trotsky; whether he will take steps to ascertain whether such report is correct; and, in the event of its proving to be correct, whether he will deprive this alien of the passport facilities which he has hitherto enjoyed?

I have no knowledge of the report referred to, but if the hon. and gallant Member will provide details I will cause inquiries to be made. The third part of the question does not arise.

asked the Prime Minister if his attention has been called to the recent statement of General Smuts to the effect that Bolshevist activity is responsible for the serious situation on the Rand, and to the piratical action of the Soviet warships against British fishing craft on the high seas; and, in view of these breaches of faith on the part of the Soviet Government, will His Majesty's Government retract the invitation given to that Government to be represented at the Genoa Conference?

asked the Prime Minister whether any responsibility for the deplorable outbreaks on the Band has been traced to Russian Bolshevists?

I have no official information on the subject of the allegation that has appeared in the Press that the recent outbreaks on the Rand have been traced to the activities of Russian Bolshevists, nor have I seen any statement of General Smuts to that effect. As regards the second part of my Noble Friend's question, I am not in a position to add anything to the reply given by the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on the 13th March in reply to questions on this subject, and as regards the last part I would refer to the answer given by the Prime Minister on the 13th February last.

When considering this question will the right hon. Gentleman also remember the admitted statement of the late Secretary of State for India that Bolshevist propaganda was one of the four causes responsible for the unrest of that country at the present time?

Is it not the fact that several of the men arrested in Johannesburg could only speak Russian?

I have no more information as to the happenings on the Band than is open to every Member of the House through the daily papers.

Did not General Smuts make a statement to the effect that the troubles on the Rand was due to the extremist leaders, and if it is proved that there were Bolshevist agencies will that affect the attitude of His Majesty's Government towards Russia?

That is quite an hypothetical question.

asked the Prime Minister when the Government intend to introduce the promised Resolutions for the reform of the Second Chamber?

I am not able to fix a date for the introduction of these Resolutions.

Can the right hon. Gentleman fix a date between now and Easter?

In my answer to my hon. Friend I say that I am not yet in a position to fix a date.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether, independently of any Resolutions in another place for the reform of the Second Chamber, this House will be given an early opportunity of discussing the present constitutional relations between the two Houses?

I do; not consider that it would be helpful, even if time permitted, to discuss in this House the question raised by my hon. Friend until the Resolutions embodying the proposals of the Government have been introduced.

Do the Government intend to pass a Bill through this House dealing with the relations; between the two Chambers before the dissolution of Parliament?

If my hon. Friend will give me precise particulars of the date of the Dissolution, I could answer his question with greater confidence. It is my desire that we should make definite progress with this Bill before we have to go to a Dissolution.

Is the right hon. Gentleman able to say unreservedly that the Government intend to pass this legislation before they dissolve?

I say that if we have time, we shall pass it.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a statement made by Sir James Craig, as Prime Minister in the Parliament of Northern Ireland, that the release of the Derry prisoners by the Lord Lieutenant before trial or sentence was not on the advice nor with the consent of the Government of Northern Ireland; if he will inform the House on whose advice the Lord Lieutenant, as representing His Majesty the King, acted in this matter; and, if on the advice of His Majesty's Ministers in the British Parliament, will he say why they departed from constitutional precedent in order to tender advice to His Majesty's representative with regard to the release of prisoners in an area which has its own duly constituted Government which is responsible for the administration of law and order within such area?

In reply to the first part of the question, Sir James Craig, as Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, informed the Lord Lieutenant through me that the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland had issued instructions to the Crown Solicitor that the prisoners referred to were not to be prosecuted. His Excellency thereupon directed the release of the prisoners. The second and third parts of the question do not arise.

That is not a reply to my question at all. I asked if there was any constitutional precedent for His Majesty's representative not acting on the advice of the Parliament in the area where an independent Parliament had been set up; I should like a reply to that part of the question—it is on the Paper.

Circumstances in Ireland at the present time are very peculiar.

Why, under the circumstances, is the only constituted Government of Northern Ireland continually flouted by His Majesty's Ministers, whilst the slightest suggestion from the Provisional Government receives the most instant attention?

I believe that to be a complete misrepresentation of the actual situation.

If the prisoners were not prosecuted or convicted, why was it necessary for the Lord Lieutenant to act at all?

The position was this: that the prisoners were in gaol. They had been called to the Assizes, which were not due to begin for some weeks. The Northern Attorney-General arrived at the conclusion that there was no ground for prosecuting these men—on a calculation of the evidence and on general grounds. He instructed the Crown Solicitor for the county of Tyrone accordingly. In the ordinary course those men would have been admitted to bail, brought up formally at the next Assizes, "No Bill" would have been presented, and they would have been immediately discharged. These men, however, refused to apply for bail. [An HON. MEMBER: "Why?"] I am only stating the fact. Apparently it was their intention to remain contumaciously in gaol, for some reason, at the public expense— The upshot was that the Lord Lieutenant took the action he did in directing their release, and they were accordingly ejected from gaol.

Why was the Government of Northern Ireland not consulted before these men were ejected from gaol: it was at the expense of the Northern Government that they were kept there?

The Government of Northern Ireland were frequently consulted, but their responsibility in the matter was limited to authorising their Attorney-General to instruct the Crown Solicitor not to proceed with the case.

Is there any precedent for this—

called upon Lieut.-Colonel Guinness to put Question No. 32.—(See col. 28.)

asked the Prime Minister when it is proposed to introduce the Irish Free State Constitution Bill; whether the House will be given an opportunity of amending any of the Clauses of the Constitution which have been drafted by the Provisional Government of the Irish Free State, or whether the said Constitution will be embodied in a schedule to the Bill which it will be necessary for the House to accept as a whole or to reject?

The Government have endeavoured to make it clear, both IB. reply to questions on the subject and in the course of the recent Debates, that in accordance with precedent the terms of the constitution will be formulated in Ireland by the Irish Provisional Government. His Majesty's Government must, of course, be afforded an opportunity of satisfying themselves that the Constitution is in conformity with the Treaty. The Constitution and the Treaty will be submitted by the Provisional Government to the Irish people at an election. It will be open to either House of Parliament, immediately the Constitution is published, to challenge the intentions of His Majesty's Government in regard to it. After the Irish people have at an election accepted the Treaty and the Constitution, a Bill will be introduced in this House confirming the Constitution and completing the ratification of the Treaty. Nothing can deprive Parliament of its right to reject or to amend to any extent legislation which is placed before it, but His Majesty's Government will not be able to accept any amendment in conflict with Treaties or agreements which they have concluded with other Governments.

Has the British Parliament, which is giving a constitution to Southern Ireland, not a right to know the terms of the constitution which it is giving before that constitution is submitted to the electorate of Southern Ireland?

Obviously, they have that right.

What is the use of the House of Commons challenging the constitution if the Government has already given its assent to it? Is it not according to precedent, as in the cases of Australia and South Africa, for the constitution to be presented to the House before the Government gives its assent to it?

No, Sir. The House has to give its formal assent to the constitution by a Bill which completes the process of ratifying the Treaty. The House exercises its authority by ratifying or amending as it chooses. The powers of Parliament are absolutely unlimited.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware of the atrocities committed upon helpless members of the Royal Irish Constabulary in St. Bride's Home, in Galway; and whether he can state whether the Government propose to take any steps to give protection to their servants and to the loyalists in Southern Ireland, and to take any steps to put a stop to such outrages?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can give the House any information with regard to the murder in St. Bride's Home Hospital, Galway, on Wednesday, the 15th March, of Sergeants Gibbons and Gilmartin, of the Royal Irish Constabulary; and if he will state what steps the Government propose to take, beyond the exchange of friendly communications with the Provisional Government, to ensure the punishment of the murderers?

I will answer these two questions, and a question of which the hon. Member for Kensington South (Sir W. Davison) has given me private notice, together. I have as yet no information as to the circumstances of these terrible and atrocious murders beyond that which has already appeared in the public Press. The two sergeants and Cassidy were deliberately shot dead in bed by four masked men. Both sergeants were seriously ill at the time, and one of them was not expected to recover, while Cassidy was suffering from wounds inflicted upon him a short time previously by unknown men. All three were powerless to offer any resistance. The coroner's jury found a verdict of wilful murder by persons unknown, and expressed sympathy with the relatives of the victims. This exhibition of savagery has aroused universal horror and indignation in the neighbourhood, and, indeed, I believe, throughout the greater part of Ireland, and it has been condemned in the very strongest terms by the Bishop of the diocese and by the local clergy in sermons preached on St. Patrick's Day. The Provisional Government, I am assured, are making every endeavour to trace and apprehend the criminals, and in this they are receiving support and assistance from the inhabitants of the district; but I regret that it has not yet been possible to make any arrests. I need hardly add that all information in the possession of the police and the British authorities has been placed at the disposal of the Provisional Government, but it does not at the moment appear that there is any further assistance which can be rendered to them.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give an answer to the last sentence of my Question No. 76?

And to the last part of No. 77?

Will the right hon. Gentleman also answer that part of my question in which I ask what steps the British Government are taking to prevent the recurrence of such outrages, and protect the lives and property of forces of the Crown and law-abiding citizens in Southern Ireland?

We are endeavouring to consolidate and secure the authority of the Provisional Government and to afford it legal sanction, and to equip it with the means of enforcing its authority in all parts of the country.

Are we to understand that the Government have now abandoned all their servants and these loyalists in this area?

Is there any precedent for a great nation such as this abandoning the government of a country for which they have for years been responsible, before another Government is in a position to take it over?

We must not have a Debate on the matter.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can now announce the arrangements that have been made for restoring the arms and ammunition taken from loyal subjects during the past two or three years by order of His Majesty's Government for safe custody by the Government; whether he can give an assurance that these arms and ammunition will be handed over to their lawful owner by officials of His Majesty's Government without passing through other hands; and whether compensation will be made to the owners for any of this property which has been stolen or lost while in the custody of the Government?

This matter is under consideration, and I hope to be in a position to make a statement on the subject shortly. Perhaps the hon. and gallant Member will repeat the question on Thursday of next week.

Will the right hon. Baronet bear in mind that for farmers and others who have to kill wood pigeons, rooks, and other things during their sowing season it is very important that this matter should be dealt with at once?

Can I write to the Provisional Government if I want my gun sent across carriage forward?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the report of the speech recently made by Mr. Michael Collins in Dublin, in which he stated that it had not been possible to beat out the British by force, so the republican ideal had been temporarily surrendered, but that when the British had been driven out by the Treaty the republican ideal would be restored; if any steps have been taken to ascertain whether this report is substantially accurate; and whether it is the intention of the Government, at whatever cost, to prevent the establishment of a republic in Ireland?

My attention has not been specially called to this statement, nor do I propose to make the inquiry suggested. As was stated by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House in reply to a question by the hon. and learned Member for Dublin University on 16th February last, His Majesty's Government are not prepared to interpret statements made in the course of controversial debate on the other side of the water on the subject of the Treaty. They take their stand on the Treaty and will proceed in full reliance on the determination of their Irish co-signatories to do the same. In reply to the third part of the question, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave to a similar question addressed to me by the hon. and gallant Member for Epping on the 6th instant.

Does the Government consider it of such little moment that a man of Mr. Collins' standing should make such remarks as that he still intends to set up a Republic?

rose—

On a point of Order.

called upon Mr. Rendall to put Question No. 63.—(See col. 39.)

asked the Prime Minister how many meetings of the Committee of Imperial Defence and of its Sub-committees, respectively, took place during the year 1921?

The Standing Defence Sub-committee of the Committee of Imperial Defence, which, under the chairmanship of my right hon. Friend the Lord President of the Council, has provisionally been performing the functions of the Committee of Imperial Defence, held 19 meetings between its inception in May, 1921, and the end of the year. Apart from this, 103 meetings of Subcommittees of the Committee of Imperial Defence were held in 1921. To these should be added the following meetings, which dealt with matters closely connected with the work of the Committee of Imperial Defence and with which members of the Committee and its staff were accordingly associated:

Did the Committee of Imperial Defence ever meet as such under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister?

I do not think it met under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister during the year 1921. In consequence of the pressure of work, the Standing Committee was created under the presidency of the Lord President of the Council (Sir A. Balfour).

Who is on the Standing Committee?

I do not think I ought to be asked to say that. All Committees of Imperial Defence are treated as confidential. I do not think there has been more than one instance where the names have been given.

asked the Prime Minister whether the cost of the British troops in Silesia is chargeable to Poland and Germany, or does this country have to bear the cost of these troops; and who is responsible for the delay in settling the administration of the industrial area in Silesia which prevents the withdrawal of these troops?

The cost is chargeable to Poland and Germany under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The troops will be withdrawn as soon as the frontier is fixed and notified to the interested Governments, after the ratification of the economic agreement between Germany and Poland now being negotiated by a mixed commission under the presidency of a chairman appointed by the League of Nations.

What is the use of charging this to Germany when she is not paying the bill?

We hope that Germany will pay the bill.

Will the British troops be withdrawn simultaneously with those of the other Allied troops?

I shall require notice of that question.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has seen the reports of the debates in the American Senate on the Pacific Treaty and the argument urged against the Treaty that in the event of a Russo-Japanese war, in which Russia would seek to recover Saghalien, Eastern Siberia, and her outlets on the Pacific Ocean, the Powers signatory to the Treaty would be diplomatically bound to take a favourable view of the Japanese case; and how this country would be affected under the Pacific Treaty should such a war ensure?

I am awaiting the full reports of the discussions in the United States Senate, and, until I have had the opportunity of examining them, I am unable to express any opinion on the force of the argument to which the hon. Member refers.

When are we going to get a copy of this Treaty, which has already been discussed?

It has not yet been received.

asked the Prime Minister whether any and, if so, which Government Departments are still in possession of any and, if so, how many private houses which were requisitioned during the War under the Defence of the Realm Act; and what, if any, rent is being paid for the same?

I have been asked to reply, and will hand the hon. Member a list from which he will see that the Admiralty still retain two requisitioned private houses, one of which will be surrendered at the end of this month and the other probably within the next six months. The number held by the Office of Works in London is three, two of which will be surrendered during the next few weeks. The last return prepared by the War Office, in August last, showed that 26 private houses were occupied, involving a total rental of £3,600, but this number has since been reduced.

Do those figures include hotels?

asked the hon. Member for the Pollok Division of Glasgow, as representing the First Commissioner of Works what sum has been realised during the last 12 months by the sale of wood, bricks, and other material from the Government temporary buildings which have been demolished; what extent in acreage has been cleared; and whether the material so disposed of has been sold by public auction or by private contract?

I have been asked to answer, as these transactions are carried out by the Disposal and Liquidation Commission. I assume that the question refers to Government offices within the London area. These buildings, together with fixtures and fittings, but excluding all furnishings, have been sold on sealed tender to demolition contractors on condition that everything, including the foundations, is removed by certain dates specified in the contracts. The contractors also have to clear the sites and reinstate ground except only in so far as top soil is concerned. At present work has only been completed in respect of three buildings, namely, the buildings in Victoria Tower Gardens, His Majesty's Office of Works' Stores in Regent's Park, and the Admiralty (Annexe) Buildings on the Mall, St. James's Park. This represents a total area cleared of approximately six acres. It is not in the public interest to disclose the prices which have been obtained.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport whether, seeing that the majority of Scottish railway companies have realised the paralysing effect on trade of high transport charges for coal, coke, and byproducts, and have in consequence altered such charges with immediate benefit to industry in that country, and seeing that similar benefit might be felt in England and Wales, where high railway rates are at the present time seriously hampering the coal trade and all industries dependent on it, he will consider the desirability of bringing pressure to bear upon English railway companies in order that substantial or efficacious reductions of their charges may be brought about?

The hon. and gallant Member appears to overlook the fact that the rail- way companies in England and Wales made reductions in respect of coal, coke, and patent fuel operative at an earlier date and on a wider basis than did the Scottish companies. I would also refer him to my reply to a question by the hon. Member for Hamilton on the 9th instant, of which I am sending him a copy.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, whether, seeing that the maintenance of high transport charges represents an attempt on the part of the railway companies to preserve their position without loss under the prevailing industrial and commercial conditions of this country, he is prepared to support the demands of industry generally that the railway companies should bear their share of the common trade adversity; will he take steps to facilitate the reduction of transport charges and particularly those connected with the flat rate and the percentage increase on pre-War rates; and whether such percentage increase might be reduced immediately to 50 per cent. above pre-War rates without material loss to the railway companies?

The hon. and gallant Member will be aware that the Government possession of the railways ceased in August last, and that the Minister has no longer any jurisdiction over railway rates. Some reductions have already been made by the companies, who are, I understand, considering what further concessions can be made. It is, however, open to traders, under Section 60 of the Railways Act of last Session, to apply to the Railway Rates Tribunal for reductions in these rates.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport whether the powers granted to the Ministry under the Railways Act, 1921, to obtain statistics from the railway companies are to be insisted upon in view of the expense and trouble the production of such information involves upon the companies, who, having some knowledge of the management of railways, have no need for such information themselves and desire to curtail all needless expenditure?

As I have already reminded the hon. and gallant Member, the obligation of supplying these statistics was imposed upon the companies by Parliament so recently as last year, and it is not proposed to make any change in the statutory requirements. I am unable to agree that the companies have no need for these statistics. They constitute a general guide to the efficiency of the operation of the railways and, as such, they are of service to the railway managements, which are bound to maintain statistics of this or similar nature for their own purposes. They are, in my opinion, also essential to the work of the Rates Tribunal and as a means of enabling traders and the public generally to avail themselves of their rights in regard to railway charges conferred by the Act.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is the cost of providing these statistics?

I could not say without notice.

Will the Minister of Transport, in view of the fact that the reorganisation of the railways is taking place, realising the difficulties of the railway companies in supplying these figures which are of no use to the companies, reconsider the details of the figures asked for?

The supplementary question is based on a hypothesis with which I cannot agree. The railway companies are of opinion that the figures are of great use.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport if English railway companies are still insisting on fish being paid for in advance for its transport instead of carriage forward; that Scottish railway companies are accepting fish for transport carriage forward; if he is aware that English fish merchants and trawler owners are penalised in consequence in comparison with Scottish merchants and owners; whether prepayment was insisted upon during the War under Government control; and whether the Government have taken any steps to endeavour to have this war-time disability on the fishing industry removed?

The general practice of railway companies is to require prepayment of charges for the transport of goods (including fish) by passenger train. The exception whereby the Scottish companies accept fish with carriage "to pay" was made primarily to meet the small fishermen in the Western Highlands. I am not aware that the English merchants and trawler owners are prejudiced thereby. The railway companies, who were asked to review the question in November last, replied that they could not see their way to revert to the old practice in view of the considerable addition to their staff which would be necessary.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that as long as the railway companies get their money before handling the fish they do not care whether it arrives to time or not, and therefore the English fishing industry is prejudiced as compared with the Scottish?

I think two totally different questions are being intermixed. The question of prompt delivery does not seem to me to bear any strict relationship to prepayment.

Is it not the fact that the arrangement was made on account of representations by the railway companies that it would save a considerable amount of labour during the War and that the restriction could afterwards be removed.

That may be so, but the difficulty remains that to alter the existing practice would involve the employment of a substantial additional staff, without any increase of revenue for it.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport whether, to carry into effect the proposals recently made public with regard to the abolition of the speed limit of mechanically-propelled vehicles in favour of more drastic and better-defined penalties in the case of reckless or dangerous driving, legislation will be necessary: if so, can he say if such, legislation will be introduced this Session; and will such legislation include a provision that no person shall be allowed to drive a mechanically-propelled vehicle who has not passed a reasonable test in' skill, physical fitness, and eyesight?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Legislation dealing with the regulation of motor vehicles is under consideration. I cannot say, however, whether it will be possible to introduce a Bill during the present Session, nor do I think it desirable to make any forecast as to its provisions.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport whether the railway companies are considering the granting of facilities to enable poor schoolchildren to go to the seaside for one day's excursion during the coming summer; and, if so, whether the fares will be made sufficiently reasonable as to be within the reach of the really poor children?

It is understood that the railway companies propose to grant reduced fares this year in connection with the annual outings of organised parties of juveniles on a similar basis to that obtaining last year.

Can there not be a further reduction on the rates obtaining last year? Will the hon. Gentleman get into touch with the railway companies and see if they cannot make a further reduction?

I understand they have reconsidered the matter, and think not.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport the nature of the statutory sanction under which the Edinburgh tramway inquiry is to be held; and whether, having regard to such sanction, the question of amenity can or cannot be included within the scope of the inquiry?

Under the terms of the Edinburgh Corporation Acts and Orders mechanical power can only be used on the tramways with the consent of, and according to a system approved by, the Minister of Transport, whose consent is also necessary to any alteration of the position of the tramlines in the roadway. The purpose of the inquiry is to elicit such information as may be necessary to enable a correct decision to be arrived at. The safety of the public is, of course, the primary object, but the Minister does not appear to be precluded from taking other matters into consideration.

Will the hon. Gentleman say definitely whether or not the question of amending can be included within the scope of the inquiry?