asked the Minister of Pensions whether, under Article 21 (1) (a) and Article 21 (1) (c) of the Royal Warrant, it has always been possible where a parent has been in receipt of a pension in consequence of the death of a son to have the pension transferred in the case of death of either parent to the surviving parent; whether it has now been decided that such transfer cannot be made; whether any Amendment to the Regulation or Royal Warrant has been made to this effect or is contemplated; and whether Parliament will have an opportunity of discussing the matter before this alteration becomes operative?

The Government decided, as my hon. Friend will remember, that while all existing pensions granted under the two paragraphs of the Article referred to should continue, all claims to pension made, after due notice, on and after 1st April last should be dealt with on the basis of need under Article 21 (1) (b) of the Warrant. In a case such as my hon. Friend refers to, the surviving parent has the full right to claim and be awarded pension based on need, if such exists, and steps will be taken to see that no break occurs.

Does it not say in the original Warrant that on the death of one parent payment may be transferred at once to the other. Is that altered, and have instructions been sent up to the pensions officers to this effect?

I am not quite sure. The fact now is that the two Subsections are sacrificed in order to bring the pensioner under Sub-section (b) instead of (1, a) and (1, c), and in most cases the pensioner is benefited.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these instructions have been sent out, and that no public notice has been given of this in any Amendment of the Warrant, and that I hold in my hand the instructions sent out by the pensions officer?

Perhaps the hon. Member will give me the information.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether, notwithstanding the undertaking given in Parliament in 1916 that no temporary grant from a local fund should be taken into account in fixing a need pension, instructions have been issued by the Ministry whereby the aged mother of a deceased man who is receiving temporary help from a local voluntary fund is called upon to surrender part of her pension whilst in receipt of this voluntary gift; and, if so, will he take steps to cancel this order so that the undertaking given in 1916 shall be strictly observed?

Occasional assistance of a purely temporary character is disregarded in the award of pension to dependants based on their need, but regular income, from whatever source derived, has always been taken into account. If my hon. Friend has any case in mind in which a claim has been dealt with in a different manner from that indicated, I shall be glad if he will communicate with me so that inquiry may be made into it.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is satisfied that the words "removal from duty" in the Royal Warrant are rightly interpreted when applied to the first time when a man was in hospital from a disability, although he subsequently returned to duty; and will he see that in future these words only apply to an effective, and not to a temporary, removal from duty?

asked the Minister of Pensions if widows of deceased soldiers are being refused pensions on the grounds that they were married subsequent to confinement in hospital on account of the disability of a similar nature to that of which the soldier eventually died, even although the said soldier actually served in the Army after his marriage and was awarded a pension as a result of disability caused or aggravated by subsequent service?

Article 11 of the Royal Warrant, in its reference to removal from duty, was framed on the same lines as the corresponding article in the pre-War Warrants, with the object of giving compensation by way of pension to those widows only who had been married before their husbands sustained the injury or disease which ultimately led to their death. It is clearly not a reasonable liability for the State to be required to give compensation, in the event of death, where the man had married when he was manifestly not in a condition to undertake, with any security, the obligation of support involved by his marriage.

At the same time, it has been fully recognised that there are a few cases in which aggravation of the pre-marriage disability has been caused by subsequent service, the man having, in such cases, contracted his marriage when, to all appearances, he had recovered from the effects of the original disability. Cases of this class, in which it is clear that the man, after marriage, was returned either to general service or to service of such character as did not clearly indicate that he was permanently and seriously in a worse physical condition than before the original disability was sustained, the Ministry are empowered to meet, and do meet, where aggravation by subsequent service is shown.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that James McFarlane, care of Reid, 31, White Street, Govan, Glasgow, had the degree of his disability assessed at 6 to 14 per cent. for more than a year; that he was awarded a final allowance of 7s. 6d. for 70 weeks; that on his appeal McFarlane was awarded a final gratuity of £10, from which was deducted the amount of £6 as payment already made under the previous award, leaving Only a cash balance of £4 to be handed to him; and that great dissatisfaction prevails among pensioners at the decisions of Appeal Boards, and that a general feeling exists that the lower awards are made as a deterrent to others; and whether, in view of this, he will give this case reconsideration?

This man appealed to a Medical Appeal Board against the assessment of his disablement, and, on that Board reporting that a lower assessment was appropriate, the award was correspondingly reduced in accordance with the accepted conditions of the appeal. The award has now been declared to be a final award, and the man has lodged an appeal to the Assessment Appeal Tribunal. As regards the last part of the question, I may inform the hon. Member that the result of all appeals to Medical Appeal Boards during the last six months shows that in over 31 per cent. of the cases the assessment was increased, and in 58 per cent. no change was made.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that Thomas Ryding, who served four years seventeen days in the War, has been refused treatment allowance by the medical referee; that the parish doctor and his own panel doctor examined him and both reported him as suffering from valvular disease of the heart and general debility; whether the medical referee, on examining him afterwards, marked him fit for work and to receive treatment from his panel doctor on the 15th June, 1922; whether two days later his panel doctor examined him and confined him to bed suffering from valvular disease of the heart, and requiring special treatment at the hospital; whether on the same day he again applied for a medical referee and, though confined to bed, received a form stating that he had to attend at the Adelphi Hotel, Argyle Street; whether he is aware that the medical referee examined him at his house on 19th June and marked him fit for work and treatment by his panel doctor; whether his panel doctor examined him on 19th June and again marked him unable to work and recommended him to the parish authorities for special treatment in hospital; whether he is aware that application was made to the parochial authorities on 20th June, and the parish doctor, after examining him, also marked him unable to work suffering from valvular disease of the heart and requiring hospital treatment; whether Ryding sent a medical certificate to the local war pensions office and they refused to send a medical referee to see him on the 23rd June; whether this man was admitted to the parish hospital in Stobhill on the 26th June suffering from the disability for which he was discharged from the Army; and whether, in view of these circumstances, the Minister is prepared to have an inquiry into this and similar eases in Glasgow that are being certified as fit for work and who are compelled to throw themselves on the Poor rates, either by treatment by the parish doctor or treatment at the parish hospital?

This man was instructed to attend at the Cardiac Clinic for examination on the 19th June. Information was, however, received on that day that he was confined to bed and, on a domiciliary visit being made on the following day, the man was found to be not at home. There was no later application for treatment, but on learning that the man was in Stabhill Hospital the Ministry had him examined there by a medical officer of the Department who found that he was not in need of any treatment for his service disability. I understand that he left this hospital of his own accord on the 8th July. I cannot accept the hon. Member's statement that men who are examined by medical officers of my Department in connection with applications for treatment are certified as fit for work. That is directly contrary to official instructions which have been carefully observed in this case.

Is the statement correct that this man was out when the medical officer called? My information is that the man was in bed, and that he was examined by the medical officer, who marked him fit for work. Will the right hon. Gentleman cause further inquiries to be made into this case in order that the points which have not been answered may be cleared up, and we may know whether or not the statements are correct?

I thought that I had answered my hon. Friend. I am quite prepared to inquire further.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether it is proposed to close the Lonsdale House, Poynders Road, Clapham; whether he is aware that this home provides for the care of 32 permanently paralysed soldiers incurably paralysed by wounds received in the Great War who have lived together in this house for nearly four years; that the lease of the house has been given free of charge for 14 years, and all rates and taxes guaranteed by voluntary subscription; whether it is now proposed to break up this community and scatter the paralysed patients among various wards of different hospitals and homes; if so, whether on grounds of humanity and in response to the unanimous wishes of the patients, he will reconsider such a decision, if any; and whether, before any action is taken, he will receive a deputation of Members of Parliament and others interested in maintaining the continued existence of this home?

I am glad to be able to assure my hon. and gallant Friend that this hospital is not being closed. Arrangements are being made under which my Department will have the use of it on a capitation basis. Perhaps I may be permitted to express my sincere appreciation of the generous and helpful attitude taken by those interested in this home.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that cases of hardship resulting from the time limit prescribed in Article 11 of the Royal Warrant are now beginning to arise, inasmuch as widows are now being refused pension because their husbands died more than seven years after discharge, although death was directly attributable to the wound, injury, or disease admitted as due to service; and whether he will amend the Royal Warrant by extending the period of eligibility so as to prevent such cases of hardship arising?

I am giving this matter my personal consideration, but, as at present advised, I do not see my way to recommend the removal of the time limit from Article 11 of the Royal Warrant.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that employés at the new issue office at Acton are finding the greatest difficulty in obtaining living accommodation in the neighbourhood of their work; and whether he will consider what measures are possible to overcome this difficulty and recommend them to the proper quarter?

I regret that the answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. But I am afraid that I cannot usefully add anything to the answer which I gave to my hon. Friend on 29th June.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that many of these girls who live at far distances from Acton are put to immense expense during the year in fares, and cannot he do anything in the way of recommendation to any other Ministry to see that housing accommodation is supplied in one of the healthiest districts round London?

Is it not obvious that the girls will continue to live where their parents already live, and will not necessarily remove to Acton?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it has been found possible to dispense with the services of the extra 25 temporary higher division clerks and junior assistants, at a cost of £10,000, as recommended by the Geddes Report?

The actual recommendation of the Committee was to the effect that, in view of the increase in the authorised staff of the Foreign Office, the continued employment of temporary higher division officers should not be necessary. This recommendation was based on a comparison between the present authorised establishment of 75 and an establishment of 43 "before the War." But the latter figure represents the staff before the South African War and not immediately before the War of 1914–18. Some confusion appears to have arisen between the two wars. I have no doubt that the hon. and gallant Member will appreciate the difficulty of carrying out a recommendation based on a comparison of this kind. The higher division staff just before the War of 1914–18 numbered 54. The present authorised staff, therefore, represents an increase of under 40 per cent., while the increase in the work of the Foreign Office since 1913, as indicated by the number of papers dealt with, is over 140 per cent. So long as the volume of work continues to be of this magnitude owing to the present activity and complication of international affairs, some temporary addition to the higher division staff will probably be necessary; but the possibility of effecting reductions will be kept in mind, and it is in fact anticipated that some diminution of the temporary staff may be possible during the current financial year.

asked the Prime Minister what is the reason for the appointment of an additional Assistant Under-Secretary in the. Irish Office for the year 1922–23; is he directed by the Colonial Secretary or the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant; what is the reason for the additional staff at a cost of £14,500, and under whose control are they: does the Chief Secretary visit Ireland; and what staff in Ireland is under his control?

A second Assistant Under-Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant was appointed in June, 1921, and this is not, therefore, a new appointment for the current year. Of the two Assistant Under-Secretaries, one is in Dublin, and one is head of the Irish Office staff. As their title implies, both these officers are under the direction of the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, but, as my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House explained yesterday in reply to a question by the hon. and gallant Member, both of them also assist the Secretary of State for the Colonies in dealing with such Irish matters as are within his jurisdiction. The item £14,500 in the Irish Office Estimate is to cover the cost of any additional staff which it may be necessary to appoint during the financial year. And as regards the necessity for such additional staff I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply given on the 5th instant by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department on behalf of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a question by the hon. Member for Kirkdale. It is anticipated that there will be a substantial saving on this item. The hon. and gallant Member will observe that the. Estimate provides for a decrease in the current financial year of no less than 60 per cent. in respect of salaries, etc., for the Chief Secretary's staff. The Chief Secretary does not now visit Ireland, but is quite ready to do so, if necessary. The staff under the Chief Secretary's control in Ireland consists of an Assistant Under-Secretary and a Principal Clerk, in addition to the staffs engaged in the administration of certain of the reserved services in Northern Ireland, and certain of the services in Southern Ireland which have not been transferred to the Provisional Government.

Can the Chief Secretary give us any idea of when he himself is likely to be functus officio?

At the earliest possible date, I hope.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, on his visit to Ireland, organise some power of control over the Special Constabulary in Belfast?

And also over the politicians.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been called to the statement of a high official of his Department, quoted in the Report of the Select Committee on Estimates, to the effect that the higher staff of his Department should be capable of reduction; and what effect is he giving to this expression of opinion?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for the Frome Division of Somerset (Mr. Hurd) on the 10th July last, a copy of which I am sending to him.

May I press my right hon. Friend for a reply to the last part of the question, "what effect is he giving to this expression of opinion"?

It is obvious that the process of reduction must be gradual.

What reductions have been made, may I ask?

In view of the Reports submitted on the general question of economy, has there been any general investigation into the various Departments and offices as to the possibility of reducing the higher staffs?

I have made a close investigation into my Department and have come to the conclusion that reductions can be made, and they are being made. In the previous answer to which I referred the hon. Member I said that reductions had been made.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he can state when the actuarial Report on the Constabulary Force Fund Benefit Branch, which was promised some time since, will be ready; and whether he will place a copy of the Report on the earliest possible occasion in the Library of the House?

I would refer the hon. and learned Member to the reply given to him on the 3rd instant by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in which he was informed that this Report would not be completed for some considerable time. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ask them to accelerate the publication of this actuarial Report, which was promised two months ago?

I am doing my best.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies who is now in possession of the shot-guns and rifles which were taken charge of by the Royal Irish Constabulary in Southern Ireland; whether the British Government, who took the arms, are responsible for their return to their owners or, in the alternative, will compensate them for their loss; and who is the person to whom applications should be addressed?

In reply to the first part of the question, these arms are now in the custody of the military authorities. In reply to the second part, the question of the return of such arms to owners resident in Ireland or of compensation in the event of loss cannot be considered unless and until the Irish authorities remove the present embargo on the possession of arms by private persons. Applications for the return of arms to owners resident in England should be addressed to the War Office. I am in communication with the Treasury on the subject of compensation in the event of the loss of arms belonging to persons resident in England, and any communications on this subject should be addressed to the Irish Office.

What are the authorities to whom he refers as having the custody of these arms?

The Imperial military authorities.

Are the arms now transferred to England, then, or where are they?

Some of them are in Northern Ireland, some in Southern Ireland, and some in Great Britain.

My question refers to Southern Ireland, and as to whether those arms have been taken from Southern Ireland?

In reference to these specific arms, they are under Imperial military custody in Southern Ireland, and some are in Great Britain.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how many guns and rifles, respectively, have been handed over by the British Government to the Free State Provisional Government in Ireland and what amount of ammunition; what is the limit of the number of men that may be enlisted by the Free State Government in Ireland under the terms of the Treaty; and whether that number has been exceeded under the present call to arms by the Free State Government?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the replies which I gave on the 13th instant to two questions addressed to me by the Noble Lord the Member for Aldershot (Viscount Weimer).

Has the limit of 30,000 rifles, which he then said had not been exceeded, still not been exceeded?

Still not been exceeded.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of my question?

I think I did. I said the last time that under the Treaty an army of between 30,000 and 40,000 men might not be in excess of the provision which Ireland is entitled to make and that that had not yet been exceeded. At the same time, if special circumstances warranted the need of a larger force to suppress the present condition of disorder, the Government would feel themselves perfectly at liberty to consider that matter.

asked the Home Secretary under what statutory power he orders the deportation of Irishmen to Ireland, and directs that they shall reside within the area under the jurisdiction of the Irish Provisional Government; and are such powers exercised in consultation with the Provisional Government?

The Restoration of Order in Ireland Act, 1920, and the Regulations made thereunder, give power to issue Orders to the effect indicated in the first part of the question. I have exercised that power in one recent case, and, as far as that case is concerned, the answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Were the powers exercised in consultation with, and with the assent of, the Provisional Government?

I have answered that question by saying that they were not in that particular case.

asked the Home Secretary whether the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act is still being carried out; and whether it is being used to deport Irishmen from Great Britain?

I have recently made an Order under the Act named and the Regulations thereunder requiring an Irishman who was in England to proceed to Ireland for the purpose of residing there.

Will this Act automatically come to an end when the Constitution is ratified?

I am afraid I cannot answer that question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any undertaking that he will not act under this Act without consulting the Provisional Government?

No, I cannot give any such undertaking.

Was not the Act intended to apply to anyone in this country, and is it to be left on the Statute Book indefinitely and used against Englishmen?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has any information with regard to the appointment of investigators to carry on the work of Lord Shaw's Commission during the suspension of its sittings; and, having regard to the fact that these investigators will be granted full powers to arrive at a settlement with those who hold decrees granted in the Irish County courts, will he say if the second interim Report of the Commission on the work it has been able to do will be published for the guidance of those who hold decrees and will now be called on to settle their claims with the investigators?

The sittings of the Commission have not been suspended, but are being carried on during Lord Shaw's absence by the two other Members of the Commission, who have full power to act and to make decisions. The investigators referred to, of whom five have already been appointed, are not empowered to effect settlements with claimants or to limit the discretion of the Commission by making decisions. Their functions are merely to investigate and to report to the Commission, who hold themselves free to accept, reject, or modify their recommendations. The reasons suggested by the hon. and gallant Member for the publication of the Commission's reports do not therefore exist, and on this point I have nothing to add to the reply which gave to the hon. and gallant Member on the 18th inst.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the last answer he gave me was that he asked me to put this question down again, and may I further ask who is appointing these investigators? Is it the members of the Commission, the Provisional Government, or the British Government?

The Commission themselves are appointing the investigators. With regard to the last answer that I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend, my memory is clear that it was quite a lengthy answer, and I pointed out to him that the Commission had the power to continue their sittings and to act.

Is there any truth in the rumour that the Commission is going to be abolished?

No truth whatever.

Is it not possible to revert to the ordinary courts?

It would certainly not be possible to revert to the ordinary courts in the existing circumstances. If we wish to get the matter settled within a reasonable period, reversion to the ordinary courts will be absolutely out of the question.

Will ordinary workmen, hundreds of whom have lost employment in consequence of disturbances in Southern Ireland, receive compensation as a consequence of the report of this Commission?

Perhaps the hon. Member will put that down. It does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can give the names and residences of the 10 holders of decrees for damage in respect of property whose cases Lord Shaw's Commission war; able to examine before the suspension of its sittings, together with the amounts for damage in each case as awarded by the Irish courts and the amounts as re-awarded by the Commission?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply on the subject of the publication of the Commission's Reports which I gave him on the 20th instant. It is not proposed to publish details of the Commission's findings in the thousands of cases which will come before them, and I see no ground of public interest, unless the House specially desires it, for singling out the first 10 cases for publication.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Lord Shaw himself said that on those 10 findings the great mass of the other findings would be based?

Yes, but merely to publish the names of the 10 persons in regard to whom these findings have been made would not be helpful, without publishing all the details of the cases.

I asked in my question whether that could not be done.

I say that I am advised that there is no special reason for singling out these 10 particular cases and that it would be objectionable to the parties themselves, in all probability. At the same time, if there is a general wish on the part of the House that the labour and expense of printing should be undertaken and an invidious selection made—if I receive evidence of that desire, I shall be glad to consider it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in the 10 standard cases of decrees for malicious injuries to property adjudicated on by Lord Shaw's Commission, there has been inserted, in the case of a private residence, any conditions that the reduced sum as awarded shall be applied to the rebuilding and re-equipping of the property destroyed?

The answer is in the negative, nor should the hon. and gallant Member assume that every award made by the Commission is less than the amount previously awarded by the Courts.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been called to the circumstances under which three young men, John Gore, James McAllister, and John Hill, were killed in Cushendall, County Antrim, on the night of Friday, 23rd June last, by members of the Ulster special police, who arrived in the village with British soldiers in motor lorries and Crossley cars; whether he is aware that the Northern Government has issued an official statement to the effect that these men were killed in an attempt to ambush a party of specials; that overwhelming testimony is forthcoming from eyewitnesses that there was no ambush or attempted ambush on the occasion; that the killing was deliberate and unprovoked; that on arrival in Cushendall the specials opened fire on the people who were standing in the streets, and when these scattered and fled to shelter, the specials entered houses where John Gore and John Hill were, and, after asking these men what religion they were, shot them on learning they were Catholics; and that the specials had arrested James McAllister when he was cycling along the country road to his home in Glenariffe, and brought him in a motor to Cushendall, where they shot him dead under revolting circumstances; and whether, in view of these facts, he will appoint an impartial commission to inquire into the matter, or, otherwise, send an independent representative to investigate the facts on the spot and report to the Imperial Government?

Yes, Sir; His Majesty's Government have decided to institute an inquiry into this case, and Sir James Craig, while not desiring himself to initiate the inquiry, has intimated his willingness to give all possible facilities. Pending this inquiry, I am unwilling to accept or discuss the allegations made in the question.

What form will this inquiry take?

I have not actually settled the composition and the method of the inquiry, but if a further question is put down in a day or two, I can give an answer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also order an inquiry into the murders of British soldiers and police in Southern Ireland?

asked the Secretary of State for Air if any naval officers have been seconded to the Air Force during the last 12 months for training as pilots; and whether any difficulty has been experienced in getting naval officers for flying training?

Seven naval officers were seconded to the Royal Air Force in 1920, since which date no others have been seconded, in spite of the earnest desire of the Air Ministry to secure volunteers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman correct in using the expression "seconded"? Is he aware that the Navy have no power to second officers, and is he aware that the officers themselves have a great disinclination to serve in another Service at a critical time of their career?

I am giving an answer to a question put by another hon. and gallant Friend.

I put a specific question to the right hon. Gentleman. Is he correct in saying that these officers were "seconded'? Would it not be correct to say that the officers volunteered, and were not seconded?

In my reply I used both terms, "seconded" and "volunteered."

In view of the importance attached to this matter by the Admiralty, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether a certificate of aviation has been made one of the qualifications for promotion in the Navy?

asked the Secretary for State for Air whether the Air Ministry have under construction a super flying boat; whether he can give any details with reference to it; and, under present conditions, will the Admiralty or the Air Ministry provide the crew for this craft?

I assume that my Noble and gallant. Friend has in mind the recent statements in the. Press to the effect that a large flying boat is being constructed for the Air Ministry by the Supermarine Aviation Company at their Woolston Works. The position is that this firm has in hand an order for a large flying boat hull, but I do not consider that it would be in the public interest to give any information as to its details. The crew will be supplied by the Air Ministry.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what is the number of marine craft maintained by the Air Ministry; where are they built and where are they repaired; how many men are required to man them; and where do they obtain their nautical knowledge?

The answer to the first, question is that. the establishment of marine craft maintained in use in connection with the operation and salving of aircraft is as follows:

Power-driven craft	35
Pulling boats	21
Barges, etc.	3

There is also a surplus of War stocks of marine craft which is held as a reserve and for replacement. These craft were, for the most part, taken over by the Admiralty on the formation of the Air Force in 1918; to the second, that the information as regards building is not in all cases available, but the craft have mainly been built by Messrs. Thornycroft, Messrs. Cox and King, and Messrs. Gibbs. The repairs are carried out by direct contract; to the third, that the answer is 127; to the last, that training is for the most part carried out in the Royal Air Force units to which the boats belong and also at a small marine training establishment at Calshot.

Do the figures just given include any craft which are maintained on the Tigris?

I think not. I will look into it.

Is it a fact that the Navy has not enough room on its carriers for the number of machines already supplied to it by the Air Ministry?

I am afraid that I could not give the answer to that question.

Does the right hon. Gentleman regard the details which he has given as consistent with the public interest? Is it right that these things should be made public and copied into the stunt Press for some purpose, we know not what?

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he can give any details as to the new Air Force Reserve; whether it is intended to provide out of this Reserve for the requirements of the Navy; whether any of the pilots provided under this scheme would be able to fly on and off an aircraft carrier or off a flying platform; if not, how long would be required to train them and how many carriers would be required for the purpose; whether observers are included; how long would be required, to train them for their duties; and whether it is considered that the annual training provided for under the scheme is sufficient to train pilots and observers to carry out their duties in the squadrons of the Royal Air Force attached to the Royal Navy?

I am glad of this opportunity of correcting a misapprehension which has arisen. The statements which have appeared in the Press recently to the effect that a new Air Force Reserve was being created are not quite accurate. The position is that officers who were granted short service commissions in 1919 for a period of three years' service on the active list, followed by a period in the Reserve, will commence to pass into the Reserve this year. The first officers will be transferred in September. The Reserve is intended to provide for the requirements of the Air Force at a time of national emergency, including the duties of the Air Force in connection with the Royal Navy. A number of the pilots who are at present serving on short service commissions, and who will in due course pass into the Reserve, are fully trained and experienced in naval work. The Reserve also includes observers. It is considered that the annual training provided for under the scheme will be sufficient to keep pilots and observers in training to carry out any Air Force duties which they may be called upon to perform, including duties in the squadrons of the Royal Air Force attached to the Royal Navy.

What is the proposed period of training, and what will the training be for the officers employed on these duties?

I take it that a study of the Regulations governing the training would supply the information.

Can the right hon. Gentleman correct me if I suggest that it is 12 months?

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that any information which he does not like to give across the Floor of the House of Commons shall be sent to Shoe Lane, to the "Daily Express"?

I cannot carry in my mind the figures which the hon. Gentleman desires, but it is a reasonable course.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether, seeing that the House is to adjourn for three months, he can state if his Department will have the necessary funds to enable it to give orders to aeroplane and engine mauu- facturers, and so enable those selected to keep their works going and their staffs together during the period until the House meets again?

I fear I am not yet in a position to make any statement such as that suggested by my hon. Friend, nor can I promise to make an announcement on this subject before the House rises. The possibility of giving further orders to the aircraft industry beyond those already budgeted depends upon the decisions of the Committee of Imperial Defence.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise the necessity for doing something in this matter? Is he in a position, the money having been already voted, to do something before the House rises?

asked the Prime Minister whether representations have recently been made to him concerning the state of the Air Force and of civil aviation; and what action His Majesty's Government intends to take?

asked the Prime Minister what decision the Government has made with regard to air defence?

The answer to the first part of Question 39 is in the affirmative. The whole subject is now being considered by the Committee of Imperial Defence, but no decision has yet been taken.

Are we to have any statement before the House rises? Shall I put down a question in the meantime?

I understood from the Prime Minister, in answer to previous questions, that a decision would certainly be come to before the end of this month. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House that, on this matter, which has now been so long delayed, he will be able to give a decision definitely, in the course of the next day or two?

I need not impress on my right hon. Friend how very important is the decision which has to be taken, or how controversial is the problem. There is not complete agree- ment among those who are in favour of increasing the efficiency and strength of the force. There have been various suggestions, and it was only on last Friday we were able to arrange to hear those rival views. They have to be very carefully considered, and we have to take into account the whole of the suggestions put before us. It would be very rash of me to endeavour to fix the date of coming to a decision, but I can assure my right hon. Friend that we are fully alive to the gravity of the problem. We are considering it very carefully, and are having regard to the importance of the, subject.

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken into account the possibility of the question of air disarmament arising in discussions on reparation and debts?

In the event of the right hon. Gentleman not being able to announce a decision before the House rises, and if the Committee of the Cabinet does then arrive at a decision, can that decision be enforced without waiting for the reassembling of the House?

Yes.

asked the Secretary of State for Air if he can make a statement as to the proposed constitution of the Territorial Air Force; and what will be the cost?

The constitution of the auxiliary or Teritorial Air Force will in general be similar co that of the Territorial Army, except in so far as differences in regard to service, training and material in the two arms make a divergence necessary. As stated in my reply to my hon. and gallant Friend, the Member for East Lewisham, on 10th July, it is uncertain when the Bill for the Auxiliary Air Force can be proceeded with, the whole question of home defence, with which this is bound up, being under consideration by the Committee of Imperial Defence. The cost will depend on the size of any such force it is decided to raise.

Is it proposed to take the cost out of the battleships which are now being built?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the commercial convention which has recently been concluded between France and Spain; whether this convention confers preferential rights over or prejudicial to British trade interests; and, if so, in what respects?

I am happy to be able to assure the hon. Member that British imports to Spain are enjoying and will continue to enjoy all reductions conceded to French goods by the recently concluded Franco-Spanish commercial treaty.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the present martial law in Egypt is under the Proclamation of the 2nd November, 1914; and whether there is any precedent for the maintenance of martial law by one independent state in the territory of another when the two are at war?

The reply to both parts of the question is in the affirmative.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question? Is it compatible with Section 11 of the Proclamation and Section 10?

If my hon. Friend wishes to ask about actual incidents, perhaps he will put down a question.

I was invited to put down this question last week, and now it is put aside and I am asked to put down another question.

The Under-Secretary has answered both parts of the question.

My object was to elicit information. It is not given and it is put aside again.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in what Section of the Declaration to Egypt of 21st February, 1922, the answer to the question of whether it is His Majesty's Government or the Egyptian Government which is responsible for the continuance of martial law can be found?

I will read the relevant Section, which constitutes the second of the three principles laid down in the Declaration of His Majesty's Government to Egypt—

"So soon as the Government of His Highness shall pass an Act of Indemnity with application to all inhabitants of Egypt, martial law as proclaimed on the 2nd November, 1914, shall be withdrawn."

Is it not a fact that it is impossible to have the indemnity until there has been an election, so that the Parliament may decide it? Was it not presumed, when the Proclamation was issued, that martial law would be raised, and how can it he raised unless there is an election?

I am sorry that I cannot satisfy my hon. Friend's thirst for information. I have given him all the facts for which he asked.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a number of members of the Wafd (Egyptian delegation) have been recently arrested; whether this arrest was made under British martial law; what are the offences for which the arrest was made; and whether, in view of Lord Allenby's promise to the King of Egypt to suspend the application of martial law so far as it affects the free exercise of the political rights of Egyptians, he will take steps to secure their release?

The reply to the first and second parts of the question is in the affirmative. The persons alluded to were arrested for appending their signatures to a manifesto which Lord Allenby described as a direct incitement to violence which cannot be tolerated. The promise mentioned in the last part of the question only referred, as was explained in my reply to the hon. Member for Barnard Castle on 27th March, to the holding of elections in Egypt and does not, therefore, arise in this connection.

Is it not a fact that the document which they issued and for which they have been arrested, consisted of a question put in this House by the hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Mills) and the answer given by the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs?

No, I cannot accept that description of the document.

Is it not a fact that this document contains direct incitements to anarchy, murder, and even other crimes?

Lord Allenby described it as a "direct incitement to violence."

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any progress has been made in the settlement of claims for reparation made by British subjects against the Turkish Government on account of damage done and property confiscated or requisitioned by the Turkish Government during the late War?

The competent Departments of His Majesty's Government are considering this matter sympathetically, and a Royal Commission has recently been set up to secure that such action as may be possible is taken without any avoidable delay in respect of the claims of really necessitous British subjects who have suffered damage and loss through enemy action in various countries. Claims of British residents in Turkey are filed with the Reparation Commission and are being dealt with as quickly as circumstances permit, but it is clearly impossible to accord them preferential treatment over those of British subjects in other countries. It must, moreover, be borne in mind that the funds available for the settlement even of the most urgent claims are extremely limited.

Do I understand that nothing has been done and no claims have been paid?

I am not sure whether any claims have been paid.

Is there any property of Turkish nationals in this country which would be available for the payment of these claims, and, if not, would the British Government make some advance in cases of great distress?

That is a question which ought to be addressed to the Department concerned.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to make any statement on the subject of German reparation and the heavy fall in the German exchange; and when the next meeting of the Supreme Council will take place and where?

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether the French Government are seeking to obtain the agreement of His Majesty's Government to proposals that we should cancel the debt owed by France to Great Britain; that the restoration of the devastated areas should be a prior charge on reparations instead of the costs of the Army of Occupation coming first, and that a loan should be made to Germany of which some proportion, even a half, should go to France for this prior charge; have any such proposals been entertained by His Majesty's Government;

(2) whether he will see that any question of the cancellation of the French debt is made dependent on the cancellation of armaments, particularly of all aeroplanes and submarines, weapons of offence which might be used against this country and involve us in heavy expense to counter?

I understand that the question of reparation and that of inter-Allied debts is to he raised on the Appropriation Bill next week, when the Government will make a statement in reply.

May I have a reply to the last part of my question, as to the next meeting of the Supreme Council, particularly in regard to M. Poincaré's visit. Is he coming here, and, if so, when?

A difficulty has arisen in consequence of the ministerial crisis in Italy. Otherwise M. Poincare would be here next week. I cannot say when that crisis will he solved. The date will depend entirely on that fact.

When this question comes up next week, will the Prime Minister open the Debate with a statement dealing with these various points? Has the Prime Minister considered or received from the French Government any suggestions such as are mentioned in the first of my questions?

My hon. and gallant Friend is just asking what I would rather defer answering until the discussion takes place. It is very difficult by question and answer to make a full, clear and satisfactory statement, especially when you are dealing with matters which affect foreign countries, and which are, therefore, capable of misinterpretation unless you explain them very fully. Therefore, I would rather not make a statement until then. With regard to the first question of my hon. and gallant Friend, I prefer taking part in the Debate after hearing what is said by all sections of the House.

It is almost impossible to debate questions unless we know what negotiations have gone on and what the attitude of the Government is towards the negotiations. Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that, usually, when we have a Debate of this character we have some Papers before us showing what has taken place? Unless we can get answers to such questions as are on the Paper to-day it is impossible to conduct an intelligent Debate.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the country is looking for some authoritative statement, and is not interested in a debating match?

Will the right hon. Gentleman arrange with the Foreign Office for the issue of Papers, as they have been issued in the past, in connection with these matters, and then we may know what is going on?

I really do not know what are the Papers which would be of the slightest use for the Debate. Whatever documents there may be are supplemented so much by interviews—the Reparation Commission and so forth—that I do not think they would be very useful.

asked the Prime Minister what steps the Cabinet are taking to consider the question of employment during the winter months?

As I informed the hon. Members for Newcastle East and Westhoughton on the 10th July, a Cabinet Committee has the whole question of unemployment during the coming winter under consideration, and is expected to report at an early date. A Cabinet Committee has also been appointed to review the whole position of trade and employment. Meantime steps have been taken to circularise local authorities with a view to the submission of schemes of public work, which might be undertaken during the autumn and winter with Government assistance, should circumstances then appear to justify such schemes being put into operation. In addition it may be mentioned that many of the schemes, for which grants have been sanctioned, will be in operation during the period in question, while the maximum sums which may be guaranteed under the Export Credits and Trade Facilities Acts Schemes have not yet been reached. As regards the provision of relief generally, the hon. and gallant Member will be aware of the Unemployment Insurance Scheme, modifications of which have been made from time to time to meet changes in the situation as far as possible.

Is the Prime Minister satisfied that the Measures which he contemplates will be sufficient to deal with any emergency?

I sincerely hope so. It is a very grave demand on the public purse, but we are doing our best to meet the situation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the difficult financial position of the local authorities, on whom the chief charge for maintaining the unemployed rests under these schemes?

I am fully alive to the grave position of affairs in some areas, but it is not accurate to say that the main burden falls upon the local authorities. It is quite the reverse.

Will the right hon. Gentleman cause further consideration to be given to the question of foreshore reclamation on the Wash?

And on the Humber.

I am speaking from recollection and without notice, but I rather think that there is a sum set aside for the purpose of reclamation under the Government schemes.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that private schemes of foreshore reclamation have been launched, and that there is no doubt about the schemes being perfectly economical and well worthy of consideration?

As to unemployment insurance, the House is not expected to reassemble until 14th November, and does not the uncovenanted benefit under the latest Act cease to operate towards the end of October? Have the Government taken that fact into consideration in connection with their schemes to ameliorate the lot of the unemployed?

I would rather not answer without notice a question of that kind, but I will bear in mind what the hon. Member says.

May we expect the decision of the Cabinet in the matter before the House rises for the Adjournment?

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken into consideration the fact that a large number of banks are giving notice to local authorities that they cannot permit any further overdrafts?

I know that there are some areas which have been exceedingly hard pressed, and I have no doubt at all that, if they communicate with the Ministry of Health, some arrangements will be made.

They have done so, and the result has not veen very satisfactory.

asked the Prime Minister whether, pending the issue of the Report of the proposed Royal Corn-mission on the Distribution of Honours, there will be no further recommendations?

I hope that the Royal Commission will have reported long before the next list is due.

In the event of the Committee not reporting soon, what will be done in the meantime?

The House will meet before then, and will be sitting for six weeks.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government is at present in negotiation with the French Government for the conclusion of a commercial treaty; and, if so, whether this is likely to materialise at an early date?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second part, therefore, does not arise.

Yesterday the French Ambassador expressed his sympathy. In view of that fact, will the British Government approach the French Government in the matter?

asked the Prime Minister whether the conclusion of a defensive alliance between Great Britain and France against any future German offensive is still under consideration; and what the position now is in regard to this matter?

Yes, Sir; but I am not in a position at present to add anything to the reply given to the hon. Member for Leyton East on 4th July.

May we take it that there will be no decision on this question until the House has met again and the matter has been put before the House?

I do not think that I can give that guarantee. Before any arrangement of this kind can be effected, it must be sanctioned by the House. What the policy of the Government is has been made quite clear from time to time.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the vote of the House upon the Canadian cattle embargo, the Government will take immediate steps to remove such embargo?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the acceptance by this House of the Motion for the removal of the cattle embargo against Canada and in order to promote good feeling between ourselves and the Canadian people, he will intimate to the Canadian Prime Minister that His Majesty's Government desires to enter into personal conference with Canadian Ministers so as to devise arrangements regarding the cattle embargo and other outstanding commercial questions which will conduce to the best interests of both countries and encourage a spirit of mutual helpfulness; and whether he is aware that the Honourable Mr. Robb, Canadian Minister of Trade and Commerce, is now on his way to this country upon a Canadian official business visit?

asked the Prime Minister what steps he proposed to take to put into effect the decision of the House on the removal of the cattle embargo?

asked the Prime Minister if it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Bill during the Autumn Session to remove the embargo on Canadian cattle, and to carry out the expressed wish of the House of Commons?

The Government accept the decision taken by the House of Commons on Monday last as a Mandate to deal at the earliest possible convenience with the problem on the lines of the Resolution adopted by the House. His Majesty's Government, therefore, hope to take the decisions reached by this House and the House of Lords into consideration at a very early date, and to decide what action they require. Legislation would, of course, be required to give effect to the change of policy which the House approved.

Will the right hon. Gentleman he able to make a definite statement as to the intentions of the Government before the House rises?

Can the right hon. Gentleman answer my question? Is it not desirable to enter into personal conference with Canadian Ministers, some of whom are coming over here?

That is one of the questions which we have under consideration. I think it is very probable that would be desirable. But that would make it difficult for me to make a statement for a few days.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that the Resolution of the House, and the view's expressed would he satisfied by the imposition of a quarantine, which would be equivalent to an embargo?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that certain hon. Members here are openly stating, and it has also been stated in another place, that they will so manæuvre matters that no Bill will be introduced in this House this year?

Does the right hon. Gentleman not consider it desirable to take into consideration the views of other Ministers of other Dominions in addition to Canada?

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer my supplementary question as to whether he can make a statement before the House rises?

if my hon. Friend will put down a question next week, I may then be in a better position to give an answer. Obviously, consultation is necessary. A Resolution of a different character has been adopted in another place and we have to take that into consideration, and there are other matters which will require to be taken into account.

In taking action on this matter of the embargo, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the question of imposing a quarantine?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government intends to appoint a woman as delegate, alternative delegate, or technical adviser to the Assembly of the League of Nations?

The Government has decided to appoint my Noble Friend the Lord President of the Council and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education to represent them at the next meeting of the League of Nations.

I am not yet in a position to make any announcement as to the third representative, but the suggestion in the question will be considered among others.

Thank you.

asked the Lord Privy Seal whether, in view of the importance of the Measure to agricultural interests, he will afford the short time necessary for the further consideration of the Railway Fires Bill?

No, Sir. As I stated on Tuesday last, I regret that I cannot grant any facilities for the discussion of Private Bills duuring the remainder of this portion of the Session.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the machine-gur belt invented by Mr. W. de C. Prideaux was almost exclusively used by our Air Force and that of our Allies in the Great War with complete satisfaction and the saving of many lives; that Mr. Prideaux made a claim against the American Government in May, 1918; that this claim was admitted, but, under the terms of the Bolling Agreement, became a liability on the British Government; that Mr. Prideaux has since 1918 made repeated attempts to get his case settled and the money paid which is due to him; that he sacrificed the whole of his professional practice and other resources to do this important work for his country and her Allies; and that his health has completely broken down; will he say when the case will be heard and disposed of by the Royal Commission on Inventions; and, seeing that it is not disputed that a large sum is due to him, though the actual amount is not yet fixed, will he arrange to pay Mr. Prideaux some substantial sum pending a final settlement?

The answer is a long one, and, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.