asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he will state the number of persons now in prisons in India on account of political offences?

The total number of persons in gaol for offences connected with political movements is 1,112.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India, whether the order recently passed by Sir William Marris, Governor of the United Provinces, for the release of the political prisoners, with one exception, confined in the gaols of those provinces, received the approval of higher authority or was issued by him on the responsibility of his Government only?

I may refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on Thursday last to an identical question put by the hon. and gallant Member for Melton.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether, considering the great increase of crimes of violence in the Punjab during the past year due, as reported in the Indian Press, to political agitation and the preaching of contempt for law and order, he can state what action is being taken against these agitators and preachers?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to my answers given on the 4th and 13th December last, and may add that the latest reports indicate an improvement of the situation in the Punjab.

Will the Noble Lord answer the last part of the question as to what action is being taken against these agitators?

I answered all those points fully in the replies which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member last Session.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the report of the Inspector-General of Police in Bombay stating that, unless drastic measures are taken in the immediate future to improve the prospects of officers in the Imperial Police, the service, as at present constituted, will cease to exist, as officers are retiring at an alarming rate and fresh candidates are not coming forward; and what steps are to be taken in the matter?

Yes, Sir. The Royal Commission on the Indian Services will, of course, have to give special attention to the position in the police. Thirty recruits are required from England this year, and no difficulty in obtaining them is anticipated.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether Part I of the Inchcape Report has been handed to the Government of India; and whether he will lay a copy upon the Table of this House as soon as possible?

It is not proposed to publish separately the instalment of the Report to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers, and which will be embodied in its entirety in the Committee's Final Report. The Government of India propose to publish without delay the Final Report, which will probably be presented about the end of the month, and I propose that copies should be made available in this country at the earliest practicable date after receipt from India.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether Imperial trade is given any advantage over foreign trade in India whether through tariffs or through Government contracts?

A rebate on hides and skins imported into this country has been in force, but the value of this trade is inconsiderable, otherwise there is no specific advantage to Imperial trade in India. As regards the imports into India of stores purchased on behalf of Government, as I have already explained in previous answers, it is found that as a result of free competition by far the greater part is of British manufacture.

Is the Noble Lord aware that the Indian Stores Department have been placing very large contracts on the Continent, and can he take steps to see that English trades are given a preference?

My information is not that which has just been conveyed by my hon. and gallant Friend. The latest figures show that by far the largest part of Indian Government requirements are purchased in this country. As has been fully explained on previous occasions, the Indian Government, in making their contracts through the High Commissioner and the Trade Commissioner in this country, are bound by a resolution of the Assembly in India not to give a preference, but in effect by far the larger part of the purchases are made in this country.

In view of the fact that the taxpayers of this country pay for the entire naval defence of India, will the Noble Lord make representations that they should do more for the taxpayers of this country?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the amount of the accumulated funds of the Indian Civil Service Family Pension Fund on the 31st March, 1922; the amount of annual income; and the annual expenditure for the financial year ending on that date?

Accounts of the transactions under the Indian Civil Service Family Pension Regulations during 1921–22 have not yet been received from India. The figures for the year ending 31st March, 1921, are as follow:

When was the last actuarial valuation of this fund made?

I must ask my hon. Friend to give notice of that question. I think it has been made quite recently.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India what is the extra cost that has been entailed on the Government of India and the provincial Governments since the Government of India Act came into force owing to the losses caused to the revenue and the expenditure involved by demands for extra police and military owing to the action of non-co-operation revolutionaries?

It is not possible to give any estimate of this expenditure and loss of revenue. In February last year the Government of India stated in the Legislative Assembly that such an account could only be compiled with very great labour which they were not prepared to undertake.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the release of the 107 special class prisoners in the United Provinces, he will inquire how many of these special class prisoners still remain in gaol in each of the other eight provinces?

I am not sure whether the hon. and gallant Member understands that "special class" prisoners are not identical with persons imprisoned for offences in connection with political movements. The total number of the latter now in gaol throughout India is 1,112, as I have just learned from the Government of India. But I cannot say how many of those are treated in the "special class" as not having been guilty of incitements to violence, and I have not yet got the separate figures for the provinces.

Will the Noble Lord make inquiries as to the number of special class prisoners?

I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman is under a misapprehension.

I am not.

A special class prisoner does not necessarily mean a man who is put into prison for political reasons. I do not understand if the hon. and gallant Gentleman wants me to make inquiries as to the number of special class prisoners?

Yes.

I will do that. As regards the latter part of the question, what has happened in the United Provinces is merely the continuation of a policy which has already been put into operation.

Does it include the prisoners who are imprisoned at the present time?

Yes.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he can give any information as to how the Indianisation of the eight units mentioned by Lord Rawlinson in his speech to the Legislative Assembly last week is to be carried out?

In each of the eight units it is proposed each year to replace one British officer by one King's commissioned Indian officer, the British officer being, if necessary, transferred elsewhere. Thus in 1923 there will be 11 British and one Indian officer in each unit, in 1924 ten and two and so on up to 1927. In this manner in 1926 all the squadron or company officers in these eight units will be Indians. In 1927 it will have to be considered whether the senior Indian officer in each unit has yet shown the capacity and obtained the experience necessary to qualify him for squadron or company commander. It will only be after this stage has been passed that the fitness of any of these officers to become eventually second in command and commanding officer of their units can be considered. The evolution of this scheme will, I think, be watched with sympathetic interest in this country.

Has this step—which some Members think extremely foolish—been carried out with the sanction of the Government?

Yes, and I deprecate very strongly any criticism of the scheme which may have the effect of discouraging at the outset of their career several young Indian officers.

Will any British officer be "axed" at the expense of these appointments?

That is by no means a corollary of the scheme. The scheme is one of a gradual transfer of British officers from the eight units chosen to other Indian Army units and of Indian officers to those units.

Will the junior officers be removed first so that there will always be a senior British officer until they are all gone or will British officers be under an Indian officer?

No. It is the case that the scheme will commence at the bottom and the subalterns will be transferred first, and so on, upwards.

What units have been selected?

I cannot give the names yet, but I hope to do so in a short time.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why members of the Indian Volunteer Force who served in a military capacity outside India in 1914 or 1915 in areas which do not qualify for the 1914–15 star, or who, being in England in August, 1914, were mobilised with English Territorials on 5th August, 1914, and subsequently performed military service outside Great Britain, are denied a medal for voluntary service overseas; and whether he is prepared either to make them eligible for the Territorial war medals, or to institute a special decoration for them?

I am not aware that any members of the force in question have been denied any medal for which other soldiers who rendered the same service are eligible. So far as I know, no recommendation for the grant of the Territorial Force War Medal, or of any similar decoration, has been made on behalf of the Indian volunteer force.

If such a case is brought before the hon. and gallant Gentleman, will he give it consideration?

Yes.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War when it is intended to cancel the provisions of Army Order No. 291 of 1920, introduced as a temporary measure, and thereby allow certain officers to serve until they are qualified for a pension instead of retiring them on half-pay for five years with a gratuity; whether, considering the recent compulsory retirements of officers under the reduction scheme recommended by the Geddes Committee, there are still any Royal Garrison Artillery subalterns surplus to the establishment; if so, how many; and if he will say why it is considered necessary to dispense with the services of these war-experienced officrs at the age of 35, the great majority of whom have risen from the ranks, and still admit so many cadets each year from the Royal Military Academy?

The question of the cancellation of Army Order 291 of 1920 will be reviewed shortly. The establishment of the Royal Garrison Artillery is not yet fixed, and until it is fixed the number of surplus subalterns cannot be definitely stated. As regards the third part of the question, it was considered inadvisable to adopt the method suggested for reducing the surplus, since it would seriously prejudice the future efficiency of the Corps if the intake of cadets from the Royal Military Academy were stopped.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has decided to withdraw the cavalry from Dunbar barracks; and, if so, what use he intends to make of the premises?

Yes, Sir; the five cavalry depots of which Dunbar was one are being replaced by a Central Cavalry Depot at Canterbury, and the cavalry at Dunbar are being moved to Canterbury accordingly. The question of the future of Dunbar barracks is under consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any small-arms ammunition has been broken up since the War; if so, to what amount; and whether he has considered the need of a constant supply of free or cheap small-arms ammunition for the maintenance of rifle shooting as an important factor in any policy of national defence?

About 992 million rounds have been thrown up for destruction since the Armistice, either because they were unserviceable or because (in the case of a small proportion of the whole) the cost of transport was regarded as prohibitive. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War the number of general officers in the Department of the Director of Military Intelligence in 1918–19 on service outside the United Kingdom, and the grades of those offices; and the number of general officers serving outside the United Kingdom, and of what grades, on the strength of the present joint operations and intelligence directorate?

There were in 1918–19, and there are now, no general officers on the strength of the Intelligence Directorate on service outside the United Kingdom. If, however, the hon. and gallant Member is referring to military attacheships and special Missions, the figures are, in 1918–19, 19: now 4, of which one will lapse by 31st March next, and two others will cease to be held by General officers when the present holders vacate their appointments. The present holders are paid the normal rate for a military attache, which is a colonel's rate.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether any orders have been issued requiring officers or men to have their wives vaccinated if they are to remain in Army quarters, or whether any pressure, directly or indirectly, has been exercised to secure the vaccination of the wife of any officer or man under such or any other circumstances?

So far as I am aware the answer to both parts of the question is in the negative, but if the hon. Member will give me particulars of any case which he may have in mind, I will make further inquiries.

In view of the danger of the inhabitants of the barracks, cannot the authorities support some such measure as this?

Medical officers do all that is possible to persuade those in barracks to be vaccinated, but we see no justification for bringing pressure to bear to the extent of turning people out of barracks.

Why not?

This raises a very large question. No compulsion is applied in the Army in regard to vaccination after once men have joined and been revaccinated.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that a group of four building firms have formed an Aldershot and Farnham Master Builders' Association; that these firms do all the contract work of the Aldershot Command; that they pay their employøs 39s. per week, whilst the Alder-shot council, the largest employers of labour in the district, and other employers there pay a minimum wage of 48s. per week; and whether, seeing that these facts have already been reported to the Department, he will take the necessary steps to secure compliance with the Fair Wages Clause?

I am aware of the existence of the association but not of its membership, and I cannot identify the four firms referred to. During the past 12 months 12 different contractors have been employed in the Command. I am afraid that I cannot undertake to accept as a standard rates paid by municipal authorities. I am informed that the rates at present recognised as standard rates for the purpose of the Fair Wages Clause are, for labourers, 10½d. per hour in Aldershot town, and ll¼d. per hour elsewhere in the district. These rates are equivalent to 38s. 6d. and 41s. 3d. respectively for a 44-hour week. I am not aware of any representations that the Fair Wages Clause is not being observed by contractors at Aldershot, but if the hon. Member will furnish me with particulars of any alleged breach of this Clause, I will have full inquiry made.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman undertake to inquire whether as soon as a contract is let to either of these contractors at the then running rate, there is immediately a reduction in the rates of wages, which does not find a true reflection in the contract price? Is that a proper method of arriving at a figure which comes within the purview of the Fair Wages Clause?

I will inquire into that.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, whether he is aware that the ex-service men who received holdings in Caithness and Sutherland from the Board of Agriculture in 1919 and 1920 are now at a loss to meet their obligations for rent and interest charges, and that these, in many cases, amount to nearly double the rent which is being paid by their neighbours for holdings of a similar size and character; whether the representations which have been made to the Secretary for Scotland on this matter have been favourably considered; and what action it is proposed to take?

A number of the men in question have not met their obligations. I am informed that the rents are moderate, but that difficulty has arisen in connection with the unavoidably high charges for repayment of loans for buildings erected under War and post-War conditions. The Treasury have agreed in principle to the revision of the payments in certain classes of cases and the precise form of reference to the Land Court is under consideration.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that similar circumstances prevail in other counties in Scotland? Will these cases be taken into consideration at the same time as the Caithness and Sutherland cases?

Yes, they are being taken into consideration. There is a question later on the Paper which deals with the general cases under consideration.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that demands are now being made on these men for rent, and will he see that they are not pressed until the decision of the Treasury is announced?

The whole question is under consideration, and obviously nothing prejudicial to the interests of the men will be pressed while the subject is under the consideration of my Noble Friend the Secretary for Scotland.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman facilitate as much as possible the inquiry, seeing that, in common with English smallholders, these men are being ruined during the period they are waiting?

The question is actually under consideration at the present moment, and a decision will be arrived at very shortly.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that there are a considerable number of ex-service men in this country now unemployed who came from the Dominions and elsewhere in the War, and who failed to take advantage of repatriation under the War Office scheme within the period allowed; and whether he will consider the question of extending the period for repatriation with a view of enabling these men to return to whatever part of the world they came from?

I have been asked to answer this question. The repatriation scheme was kept open until 31st January, 1921, and the widest possible publicity was given to it in the Press. I regret that it cannot now be reopened. To take this course would involve much expenditure and many complications, for which neither funds nor staff are now available.

Will my hon. and gallant Friend look into this matter, and is he aware that there are a large number of men who want to get back where they came from and have no means of so doing and are suffering great hardship?

A great many men in the last two years have gone back at their own expense and, if the question were now reopened, we should have to consider their applications for a refund. This class of case involves a great deal of correspondence, and I am informed it would mean the creation of a special branch at the War Office.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the large number of cases of great hardship among the Lytton entrants in the Civil Service; and whether he is now prepared to recommend steps being taken to remove these hardships?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave on the 15th February to the hon. Member for Barnstaple and the hon. Member for Barnsley.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, whether he is aware that the revival of the fishing industry on the northern coasts of Scotland is being hindered by the inability of the fishermen to replace their worn out and damaged gear, and that this capital depreciation is increasing, unemployment amongst fishermen; and whether the representations already made to the Secretary for Scotland in favour of loans through some Government institution, such as the Unemployed Grants Committee, to fishermen for the purpose of replacing their damaged gear, have been favourably considered?

My Noble Friend is informed that in some cases fishermen are unfortunately experiencing difficulty in replacing their gear, and are in consequence handicapped in the prosecution of their calling. The representations referred to in the question have been considered, but it is impracticable to give effect to them, as the scope of the Unemployed Grants Committee's functions does not include the making of loans for the purpose of replacing gear.

Will some other means be considered?

Obviously that is a separate question. I should prefer to have notice of it.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, whether he is aware that grants from the Unemployment Relief Fund have been refused for the purpose of improving the harbours of Eyemouth and Cockenzie; and whether, in view of the employment such work would give, its utility, and the benefit to be derived by the fishing community, he will cause the decision to be reconsidered?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. My Noble Friend is informed that the reason for the inability of the Unemployment Grants Committee to entertain the Eyemouth application was that the contemplated works would occupy a period of at least four years and the preliminary work some 18 to 21 months, whereas the funds at the disposal of the Committee are intended primarily for the relief of unemployment during the present winter. In the case of the Cockenzie application the Ministry of Labour were unable to regard the volume of unemployment in the district covered by the application submitted as sufficient to justify the issue of the necessary certificate and the Unemployment Grants Committee were accordingly unable to assist. As the necessary conditions are not satisfied the Unemployment Grants Committee are unable to modify their decisions.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these works would give employment in this district? Why cannot they be undertaken?

The regulations laid down by the Government regarding the application of this money are not fulfilled by the conditions which have been submitted.

Can the regulations referred to be placed before the House?

The regulations governing this question of certification and so on are of course public property and hon. Members can have access to them.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, if he will state the progress of the negotiations between the various local authorities interested in the construction of the proposed new road from Glasgow to Edinburgh; whether the Government propose to render financial assistance and to what extent; and if, in view of the provision of work for the unemployed arising from the same and the industrial development of the districts through which the proposed road will pass, it is intended to press on the local authorities the desirability of immediately proceeding with the scheme?

I have been asked to answer this question. Local conferences have been convened, surveys of the route are approaching completion, and a full explanatory report is being issued to all the local authorities concerned in order to ascertain what financial support they are prepared to give. When the various reports are received, I shall be in a position to consider what assistance can be given from the Road Fund, due regard being given to the other commitments of the Fund.

Can the Department give any indication as to when the report which the local authorities have been asked to supply will be furnished to us?

I am afraid I cannot press the local authorities further. The actual date at which the information can be supplied must rest with the local authorities themselves.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the Prime Minister, when he received a deputation of the unemployed at Glasgow recently, promised to expedite matters, and therefore an obligation rests on the Government to do something immediately?

I am fully aware of the Prime Minister's statement, but we are doing all we can. We cannot move the local authorities to quicker action.

Is it not the fact that the Government will not give assistance to the local authorities, and that employment is consequently being kept back?

I think the hon. Gentleman is misinformed—

I am not.

The Government are actually assisting the unemployed.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, whether his attention has been directed to complaints made by fishermen as to the injurious effect of gun-firing upon the fisheries in the Firth of Forth and in other waters along the Scottish coasts; and whether he is prepared to make representations to the Admiralty as to gun practice being carried out wherever practicable at such times and places as may be least injurious to the fishing industry?

The matter referred to by the hon. and learned Member has been engaging the careful attention of the Fishery Board. The Board are in close touch with the Naval authorities in regard to gun practices, and those authorities have made every endeavour to co-operate with the Board in meeting local objections so far as the exigencies of the Naval service permit.

Special instructions have been issued by the Naval authorities with regard to the Firth of Forth, and during the winter herring fishing there the practices are reduced to the minimum, no full calibre practices being permitted within the Firth.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, whether his attention has been directed to complaints received from fishermen as to the practice of illegal trawling in the Firth of Forth and other waters along the coasts of Scotland, and to the inadequate sentences which have been imposed upon offenders; and whether he is prepared to introduce legislation providing for the imposition of severer penalties, especially in the case of a second and third offence?

My Noble Friend's attention has been called to complaints of the kind referred to in the question. He is not satisfied that the existing statutory powers as to penalties are inadequate, and on the information before him it does not appear that they are fully exercised.

Will the hon. Gentleman take an opportunity of pressing home on those concerned in passing these sentences the inadequacy of the sentence in many cases?

Obviously it would be very inappropriate for me to promise that the Scottish Office will interfere with the Courts of Justice in Scotland. That, I think, would be a very unjustifiable undertaking.

Is it not the fact that the Scottish Office has made representations with regard to sentences passed by the Courts in Scotland?

The Secretary for Scotland has only power to reduce sentences. He has no power to increase any sentence whatever.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, if the sentence of five years' penal servitude passed on the youth Arnott, and which has been altered to Borstal detention, will mean five years in that institution; and will the question of the placing of the lad on probation owing to his previous good character be considered?

Arnott has been transferred to Polmont Borstal Institution. Instead of serving five years' penal servitude, he will be detained in a Borstal Institution for a period not exceeding three years—exactly as if the original sentence had been one of three years' detention in a Borstal Institution. My Noble Friend has no power to substitute a period of probation for a sentence imposed by a Court.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, whether the Secretary for Scotland is aware of the growing unrest among crofters in the crofting counties owing to the risk of having their crofts sold over their heads and thus losing their homes; and whether he can state what steps, if any, the Government intend to take to remedy the present condition of affairs?

My Noble Friend has received representations on this difficult subject, and he is considering carefully whether any steps for dealing with it are practicable in the present Session.

Is it intended to include crofters in any assistance given to agriculture?

I must have notice of that question.

Will the Government consider introducing legislation to get round this difficulty?

That is the point that the Secretary for Scotland is considering. He is considering whether any steps for dealing with it are practicable in the present Session.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the Government have been considering this question for a year? When shall we have a decision on the subject?

It was not a Government of which I or the Secretary for Scotland formed part.

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, if he will state the total sum which local authorities in Scotland have borrowed and will borrow for the relief of unemployment during the last and present financial year?

The estimated amounts of the loans raised, or to be raised, by Local Authorities in Scotland for the purpose of carrying out relief works approved by the Unemployment Grants Committee are:

asked the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health, Scotland, if any complaints have been received from local authorities in Scotland regarding the grant of £30,000 being inadequate to meet the problem of slum clearance in Scotland; and what action it is proposed to take to increase the amount?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, I would point out that the amount referred to is an annual grant in aid of loan charges, and will be available each year during the period of repayment of the loan, which will usually be sixty years in the case of new houses, and probably thirty years in the case of reconstructed houses. It accordingly represents a considerable capital expenditure. The applications of the various local authorities for a share in the grant are at present under consideration, and it is not proposed to take action with a view to the amount of the grant being increased.

Has not the hon. and gallant Gentleman seen the statement of the Minister of Health during his bye-election that the Government intend to take more active steps to deal with slum areas?

Yes, but this is a question of a specific grant, announced some time ago, to the local authorities in Scotland, regarding the allocation of which we had a conference with them.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that this annual grant of £30,000 is not sufficient to tackle the problem of Glasgow slums, not to speak of Scottish slum areas in general; and will he take into account the representations made by responsible local authorities with a view to increasing that amount?

Will he also consider getting some method whereby the present owners of insanitary property in the city may be prevented from having the power to take twice the price of new property before the nuisance can be got rid of?

That does not arise now.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the apprehensions and dissatisfaction of many tenants who are now protected under the Rent Restriction Act at the suggestion contained in the Majority Report of the Departmental Committee of withdrawing such protection; and whether he can make any statement on the matter?

I am aware that the proposals of the majority of the Departmental Committee on the Rent Restriction Act for the decontrol of houses by stages have aroused considerable controversy. The Reports of the Committee are still under the consideration of the Government. I may say, however, that it is not proposed to decontrol houses protected under the 1920 Act in June, 1923.

Inasmuch as the right hon. Gentleman has only indicated the intentions of the Government concerning those tenants who will be evicted in June next, can he make any statement as to whether it is the present intention of the Government to introduce decontrol by stages in any form?

I am not prepared to make a statement at present.

Is the right hon. Gentleman's policy the same as that of the Minister of Health as announced at the by-election?

Yes, as I understand it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether His Majesty's Government has sanctioned the remission of the British share of the Boxer indemnity; and, if so, can he state the conditions, if any, which accompanied such remission?

His Majesty's Government has decided, in principle, to devote the proceeds of the British share of the Boxer indemnity to purposes mutually beneficial to China and Great Britain. The question as to what steps should be taken to give effect to this decision is under consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether any, and, if so, what decision has been come to regarding the future disposition of the railways in Iraq; and whether the British taxpayer is to be relieved of the burden of maintaining them?

No decision has yet been reached as to the disposal of the Iraq railways, but the matter is receiving the consideration of His Majesty's Government. It is their intention to relieve the British taxpayer of the burden of maintaining these railways at the earliest possible moment, and it is anticipated that, should any further charge in this respect be incurred after the close of the current financial year, it will be on military grounds alone and not on account of the ordinary working of the railways.

Does that mean that we are going to cut our loss right away?

The personnel on these railways has been drastically cut down, and they are now paying their ordinary working expenses.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) what was the strength of the British forces, divided into British and Indian, and the Royal Air Force, respectively, in Iraq on 1st January, 1923; and what is the respective cost a month, including that of followers, of forces of those strengths;

(2) what was the strength of the Iraq army and the Arab levies in Iraq on 1st January, 1923; and how many British officers were serving with these forces, respectively, on that date?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what are the numbers of men and officers, respectively, comprising the Iraq army, as apart from the local levies; whether any and, if so, how many British officers or men are employed with this Army; and what Reports, if any, he has received from the representatives of the British Government in Iraq as to the morale and efficiency of the army and local levies, respectively?

I have been asked to reply. It would not be in the public interest to give this information at present.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Treaty signed on 10th October, 1922, with the Government of Iraq will be submitted to Parliament before ratification; and, if so, when?

The hon. and gallant Baronet may rest assured that the Treaty will not be ratified without prior reference to Parliament. I am not in a position to say anything more.

Will the Government refrain from committing acts of war in defence of this Treaty until it has been ratified?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the British South Africa Company has made proposals for withdrawing from its obligation to accept as binding the recommendations of Lord Cave's Commission; and if he will lay upon the Table of the House any proposals made by the company for this purpose?

The hon. and gallant Member's question refers to issues involved in the company's Petition of Right, and, in the circumstances, I am not in a position to make any statement, or to lay Papers.

The question asked is whether they have made any proposals to the Colonial Office for a settlement, in lieu of having their claim estimated as laid down by Lord Cave's Commission?

No, Sir, they have not made such a proposal.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, seeing that Lord Cave's Com- mission fixed the administrative deficits of the British South Africa Company at £4,400,000, subject to two deductions to be made by valuation, that one of these deductions was for land alienated by the company to itself for commercial purposes, that the land so alienated exceeds 15,000,000 acres of the best lands of Rhodesia, that the Chartered Company values such alienations at £330,000, and that the company's published records establish an average value of 7s. 6d. per acre for Rhodesian land, he will, in view of the fact that upon this basis the total value of land alienated by the company to itself exceeds £5,000,000, appoint without further delay a Valuation Commission as recommended by the Lord Chancellor?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Derby on the 15th instant. I would point out, however, that the area of land appropriated by the company for commercial purposes is not fifteen million acres, but approximately three-and-a-half million acres, and that though His Majesty's Government have not accepted the valuation placed upon these lands by the company, it is not probable that the result of an independent valuation would exceed the company's figure by a sum which would be large in proportion to the total amount of the award of Lord Cave's Commission.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies how much money is now due from the Irish Free State to the British Government; whether the Free State have yet paid the British Government for the guns, arms, ammunition, aeroplanes, motor vehicles, and other munitions of war handed over by the British Government to the Irish Free State; what is the approximate value of the articles so handed over; whether the British Government have supplied the Irish Free State and Provisional Government with any money since the Truce and to what amount; and whether any of such moneys have been repaid?

The amount now due from the Free State under the various agreements concluded from time to time cannot yet be precisely stated. Payments on account, amounting to approximately £1,100,000, have been made during the current financial year and, apart from the adjustment of attributable revenue which will fall to be made at the end of the year, the estimated balance is inconsiderable. The settlement in respect of munitions of war transferred to the Free State Government will form part of the ultimate financial settlement. It is not possible, and I do not think that it would be desirable, at the present moment to state the estimated amount under this head. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative, and the last part does not, therefore, arise.

Would my hon. Friend consult with the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to publishing some sort of balance sheet which would show the amount due from us to the Provisional Government and due from them to us respectively, with a view to informing the public how far the Provisional Government are indebted to this country?

I will mention that suggestion to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any moneys are paid by the Imperial Parliament to the Government of the Irish Free State; and, if so, whether he will circulate a White Paper setting out the financial relations of the two countries since the Free State Government was established?

No payments have been made out of moneys provided by the Imperial Parliament to the Government of the Irish Free State, but certain expenditure has been incurred by the British Government on account of Irish services, the cost of which is being recovered from the Free State Government.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Government have yet made arrangements with the Free State Government for the return to the loyalist residents in Southern Ireland of the arms and ammunition which were compulsorily surrendered by these men by the British Government in 1918 and the following years; in whose custody these arms and ammunition now are; whether the arms have been carefully looked after and preserved; and whether, if the British Government is unable to give back these articles to their rightful owners, they will pay them their value?

In reply to the first part of the question, it is a matter within the discretion of the Free State Government whether they shall permit persons resident within their jurisdiction to possess arms, but arrangements are now being made for the return of surrendered arms to all persons, wherever resident, who produce due authority for the possession of arms, and, as I stated yesterday in reply to a question addressed to me by the hon. Member for South Kensington (Sir W. Davison), I hope to be able to make a statement on this subject at an early date. In reply to the second and third parts of the question, some of the arms are in military custody in this country and some are in the custody of the Free State Government. They have been looked after and preserved as carefully as circumstances have permitted. In reply to the fourth part, compensation will be paid in cases in which it is found impossible to return a surrendered weapon to an owner who produces due authority to possess it, and information on this subject will be included in the statement referred to above.

In those cases where arms have been forcibly taken from loyalists and have been lost, will not compensation be paid whether they are given authority to get them back or not?

If my hon. and learned Friend will read the last part of the answer, I think he will see that it is pretty clear.

Will the hon. Gentleman see that arms in the custody of the British authorities are returned to their owners as soon as possible, as they have not been for many months, if not years?

As I said yesterday, I am communicating with the War Office on that subject.

Will compensation be paid by the Free State when they have lost the arms, or by this country?

As the case may be. If the arms were taken by the British authorities and lost by the British Authorities, I presume they will pay; if the arms were taken by the Free State and lost by them, they will pay.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that men who were employed in the War Department barracks and buildings in Ireland are practically the only class of Government employøs whose position has not yet been dealt with arising out of the establishment of the Irish Free State; and whether, in view of the fact that these men are now out of employment after serving the country during very perilous times, some compensation for length of service and loss of employment will be awarded them?

Such unestablished War Department employés in Southern Ireland as have qualified for gratuities and have been discharged on reduction have been submitted to the Treasury for the usual awards as prescribed by Statute.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will state what sums of money have been advanced to date by the British Government to the Government of the Irish Free State for payment of decrees or awards for compensation for pre-truce damage or injury;

(2) whether any arrangement has been come to, and, if so, what, in connection with the payment by the British Government to the Free State Government of money due on account of pre-truce damage in Ireland by agents of the British Government?

I have been asked to reply. As I think the House is aware, it was agreed in the early part of last year between the two Governments that all awards made by the Compensation (Ireland) Commission should in the first place be paid by the Free State Government, and that the British Government should refund to the Free State Government so much of the total amount so paid as was in the opinion of the Commission attributable to damage done by the Forces of the Crown or their supporters. It has now further been agreed that the Commission shall report at the end of each quarter in respect of the awards made by them during that quarter in what shares the aggregate amount of these awards is apportionable between the two Governments, and on the basis of that report the British Government will refund quarterly to the Free State Government their due share of the payments made by the Free State Government during the preceding quarter. The first report by the Commission will be made as soon as possible after 31st March next in respect of all awards issued up to that date. No payment, therefore, has as yet been made by the British Government nor will any payment fall due to be made during the current financial year.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether excisable goods from the Irish Free State are admitted into Great Britain; and whether the tax is collected here or in the Free State?

Excisable goods from the Irish Free State are admitted into Great Britain, the duties being in some cases paid in the Free State and in others in Great Britain.

asked the Prime Minister what was the earliest date that France intimated her intention to occupy the Ruhr Valley, even if the unanimity mentioned in the Treaty was not secured; and what was the date she put this intention in force?

At the Conference in London in August last the French Delegation submitted a scheme which included the control of the Ruhr. Although His Majesty's Government were unable accept this proposal, the French Government continued to insist that it was essential both at that Conference and at the Conferences in London in December last and in Paris last month. The first official intimation that the French Government were about to take action against Germany in the Ruhr was conveyed to His Majesty's Government by the French Ambassador on the evening of 9th January: this notification was confirmed in writing to His Majesty's Ambassador at Paris the following day. The actual French advance into the Ruhr began on 11th January.

If instead of a policy of friendly neutrality the right hon. Gentleman had strongly opposed the action of the French, would they have pursued the policy they have done?

asked the Prime Minister, seeing that the action of France in occupying the Ruhr without the co-operation of all the Allies is hardly in accordance with their legitimate, powers under the Versailles Treaty, and in view of the expressed opinions of Senator Borah, whether His Majesty's Government will discover the views on this subject of the United States Government with a view to the adoption of a common policy?

Seeing that the United States are not parties to the Treaty of Versailles, it would not be proper for His Majesty's Government to initiate a discussion with them as to whether French action in the Ruhr is or is not in accordance with that Treaty.

Seeing that they were partly responsible for the Treaty of Versailles, is it not all the more important that we should get into touch with them with a view to a modification of the Treaty?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the German Government has carried out the terms imposed on it by the Reparation Commission on 21st March, 1922, and, in particular, whether he will state how much of the £36,000,000 in cash, which was to be paid during the year 1922, has been paid by Germany, and how much of the £72,500,000 deliveries in kind to be made during 1922 have been made; and what effective steps have been taken by the German Government to carry out the guarantees they then gave as to levying additional taxation, preventing the flight of capital abroad, and other matters?

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

Following is the answer:

The obligation of the German Government to effect cash payments in 1922 to a total of £36,000,000 was modified by the decision taken by the Reparation Commission in August last, under which the last five monthly cash instalments were payable in the form of six-monthly Treasury Bills. This obligation, has, I understand, been punctually fulfilled up to the present date.

The obligation with respect to deliveries in kind was not to make deliveries of the definite value of £72,500,000, but to make deliveries within that limit of value (£47,500,000 being the limit for deliveries to France and £25,000,000 being the limit for the other Allies), in so far as France or the other Allied Powers or their respective nationals might call for such deliveries.

Precise figures of the value of deliveries in kind called for by the different Powers are not available, but in the case of France the total demanded is estimated by the British Delegate to the Separation Commission not to have exceeded £13,750,000. The deliveries actually effected amounted:

In the case of France, to £10,453,204.

In the case of other Powers, to £24,455,519.

With regard to the prevention of the flight of capital, I am informed that the German Government substantially fulfilled its obligations as defined by the Agreement of 18th July with the Committee of Guarantees. Very considerable increases in taxation have also been imposed.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can state the number of emigrants who have been placed in the Dominions and Colonies under the Empire Settlement Act?

The total number of persons who have been approved for the grant of assisted passages under the provisions of the Empire Settlement Act is as follows:

In view of the ever-increasing number of British emigrants, will my hon. Friend make every effort to speed up the machinery and so enable the many thousands who also want to go out?

We are doing that as far as we can. Our machinery at this end is complete. A delegation is going to Australia at the end of next month.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, as the emigration of whole families has often proved more satisfactory than individuals as settlers in the Dominions or Colonies, he will give instructions that preference wherever possible be given to families who desire to take advantage of the Empire Settlement Act, particularly in view of the housing shortage prevailing in this country?

There is general agreement that the ideal form of migration is the migration of whole families. His Majesty's Government are considering, in conjunction with the Dominion Governments, how this form of migration may best be facilitated, and every effort will be made to assist such form of migration. I should, however, be misleading my hon. Friend if I did not make it clear that the migration of families presents great difficulties, owing to the high cost of maintaining them during the necessary training for land work overseas.

Will my hon. Friend communicate through the Canadian Government with the Imperial Reunion Bureau of Canada with a view to ascertaining whether they are continuing their good pre-War work?

I will take that into consideration.

Is the Rhondda Valley in particular being taken into consideration because of the housing shortage?

Does the hon. Gentleman consider that emigration is now to be considered as a means of solving the housing problem, as indicated in this question?

No, certainly not.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government will consider means for speeding up the machinery for the emigration of individuals or families who are desirous of settling in the Dominions or Colonies?

The extent to which migration from this country can be encouraged and accelerated is necessarily dependent upon the openings available overseas, and the arrangements made for receiving new settlers, training them and placing them upon the land. Negotiations are in progress with oversea Governments, with a view to extended cooperation in agreed schemes which will increase and facilitate such settlement overseas.

Will my hon. Friend consider the advisability of calling a meeting of all the High Commissioners and discussing the matter with a view to simplifying the machinery now in existence?

We are in close touch with all the High Commissioners and Agents-General on the matter. Really this is a matter which depends very largely on the policy of the Dominion Governments and State Governments at the other end.

Will the hon. Gentleman inquire at the Scottish Office for a list of those who are willing to work on the land on this side of the seas, and is he aware that there has been land scheduled for over 50 years as suitable for agriculture in Scotland?

That does not affect the Secretary of State for the Colonies.

Is it not the case that very few of those who go out to the British Dominions ever wish to return?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the complicated machinery at present existing retards the furthering of schemes under the Empire Settlement Act, particularly in cases where the Overseas Settlement Committee, the Overseas Trade Department, the President of the Board of Trade, and the Treasury have each individually to be consulted; and whether he will consider the advisability of appointing a Minister, with or without remuneration, but having Cabinet authority, to deal with such matters?

I am not aware that the existing machinery in connection with the Overseas Settlement is unduly complicated. The Overseas Settlement Committee, of which the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies is Chairman, and the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour is Deputy-Chairman, has on it a representative of the President of the Board of Trade, and also a representative of the Treasury. All activities of the Committee are now co-ordinated at the Overseas Settlement Office, 4, Clements Inn, Strand

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether he could make one Department exclusively responsible for all these questions?

I do not think that would be satisfactory.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is his intention to recommend the adoption of the Report or the Overseas Settlement Committee (White Paper Cmd. 1804) that juvenile emigration, which is the most suitable for most of the Dominions, should be assisted by schemes based on grants, and not loans, from this Government?

His Majesty's Government are in agreement with the view that assistance towards the cost of the passages of juvenile migrants should be given as far as possible in the form of grants rather than loans, and they are making representations in this sense to the Dominion Governments.