asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether any arrangements have been made for the return of sporting weapons to those in Ireland who delivered them up at the command of the Government; whether these weapons are returned in the districts in which they were surrendered; and whether their owners are required to go long distances to secure their property?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply given to a question on this' subject asked by the hon. and learned Member for York (Sir J. Butcher) yesterday.

asked the Chief Secretary when the disbandment of the Regular Royal Irish Constabulary is to commence; will it start simultaneously in Northern and Southern Ireland; and when is it intended to complete the process of disbandment in both areas?

The disbandment of the regular Royal Irish Constabulary in the South has already begun. Its commencement has been deferred for a short time in the counties of Northern Ireland. It is, however, intended to complete disbandment in both areas by 31st May next.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the state- ment in the Geddes Committee Report that only 46 naval posts of £2,000 and upwards exists, seeing that in a statement supplied by him on 22nd February he gives the names of 50 persons occupying naval posts of this value?

The statement which I sent to the hon. Member on 22nd February is correct. The figure given in the Geddes Committee Report, to which he refers, was not supplied by the Admiralty.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the recent orders contained in A.F.O. 484/1922 for Foreign service, and the directions laid down in Articles 20 and 21 of the drafting regulations for sea service, Admiralty approval has been given for local naval drafting authorities to reduce the normal period of sea service in the Atlantic Fleet for any ratings, excepting those required to qualify or re-qualify for non-substantive ratings below the standard period of two years?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty in what manner the Admiralty reply to Item 57 of the 1919 general requests to the welfare committee has been carried into effect consequent on the issue of Admiralty Weekly Order 2,513/20; and whether the Admiralty intentions with regard to this request can be properly interpreted by the various local naval authorities from, the general terms of the reply given to Item 57 in Admiralty Monthly Order 2,359/20?

The Admiralty have no reason to doubt that their reply to Item 57 has been given effect to in a satisfactory manner, but no reports on the subject were expected, and none has been received.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is aware that Edward Dawson, Royal Corps of Signals, while serving recently for two years in India, was entitled to pay at the rate of 4s. a day, of which he received during the whole of that period 3s. a day only; that he was further entitled to 9d. a day as from the 27th June, 1921, when he qualified as a wireless operator, which has never yet been paid; that he was sent home on 28 days' leave, pending discharge, on the 15th February, 1922, with a fortnight's pay and ration allowance, and was assured that the remaining fortnight's pay and allowance, together with all back pay, would be forwarded to him within 14 days; and, in view of the fact that six weeks have now elapsed without these payments or any part thereof having been paid, will he state what has occasioned this delay, and give instructions that all payments due to Dawson shall be discharged forthwith?

No. 1859070, Signaller E. Dawson, Royal Corps of Signals, was discharged on 15th February, 1922, under paragraph 392 (xxi) King's Regulations. He disembarked from India on 21st November, 1921, from which date he was taken on pay as no last pay certificate had been received. Pay at 4s. per diem (Pioneers rate) was credited to 13th January, 1922, which was reduced to normal rates applicable to the Royal Corps of Signals from 14th January, 1922, in accordance with Army Council Instruction 447!21 as the trade of pioneer was obsolete for that Corps. On 22nd March a postal draft for £6 18s. 11d. was sent to him to the address given on discharge, namely, 20, St. Peter's Grove, Canterbury. This represented the balance of pay due on the account opened in this country. An application was made for his last pay certificate on 3rd January, 1922, and a cable has now been sent to expedite despatch. The question of arrears of pay and pay as wireless operator has also been taken up with the authorities in India, and immediately the required information is to hand the account will be finally adjusted.

asked the Secretary of State for War the reason for reducing the establishment of officers of Territorial Forces from 28 to 21 provided not more than 21 go to camp annually; whether it is essential to have a full complement of officers to run companies in a battalion at other times than at annual camp; and whether the extra seven are any expense to the State?

The reduction in question was made in the interests of economy. It is not considered essential, though it might, no doubt, be desirable, that the establishment should exceed 21, whether for the purpose of the annual camp or otherwise. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that the decision of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal, in the case of Mr. Joseph S. Heath, of 13, Francis Street, Rhydyfelen, Pontypridd, is contrary to the facts recorded on his medical sheet; that this ex-service man contracted an injury to the knee whilst on active service; that a medical board held in 1919 decided that this injury was due to service; whether it is ultra vires for the Pensions Appeal Tribunal to overrule, three years afterwards, the findings of a medical board on a question of fact; and, if not, whether, in view of the existence of a large number of cases such as the above, he will consider a revision of the statutory powers of this tribunal by this House.

The Pensions Appeal Tribunals were expressly estab- lished by statute as independent bodies, to decide finally the questions of fact involved in the rejection by the Ministry of a claim to pension on the ground that the disability claimed was not connected with war service. I may add that in the case referred to by my hon. Friend the facts of this man's medical history during his service were very carefully considered by the Ministry before the claim was rejected.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that the pension enjoyed by Edward Martin, of 5, Crawshaw Street, Chorlton-on-Medlock, Manchester (ring paper S.F.B. 93,246, reference 3!MN!6,276), for malaria and defective eyesight caused by military service in the Royal Army Service Corps has been terminated; and what is the Ministry's decision with regard to this ex-soldier?

As regards the defective vision, the Pensions Appeal Tribunal have confirmed the decision of the Ministry that that disability is neither attributable to nor aggravated by service, and the matter cannot, therefore, be reopened. The malaria has been accepted as attributable to service, but no disablement is now considered to remain. If, however, the condition has become worse since the man was last boarded a further application, if lodged with the Local Committee at once, can be considered on the ground of deterioration.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether a decision has been reached in the case of Mrs. A. E. Hall, 7c, Barton Street, West Bromwich, whose late son, Private Joseph Thomas Lunn, No. 146,672, Machine Gun Corps, died after discharge?

I am glad to inform my hon. Friend that, as a result of further investigation, it has now been found possible to accept the circumstances of this soldier's death as coming within the conditions of Article 11 of the Royal Warrant. If Mrs. Hall be otherwise eligible, the appropriate award will be made under Article 21 of the Royal Warrant, and steps are being taken to settle this aspect of the case at an early date.