asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that it is impossible for officers in the Army in India to keep a horse on the charger allowance now granted to them; and what steps are being taken to put the recommendation of the Esher Committee Report on the subject into force?

I am sending my hon. and gallant Friend a copy of the Government of India's Orders in regard to the expense of maintaining chargers, which represent, I think, a liberal concession in the direction indicated by the Esher Committee.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the attention of the Secretary of State has been called to the speech of Sir William Marris, the newly appointed Governor, before the United Provinces Legislative Council on the 29th January last, in which he informed the Council of his decision to release the political prisoners convicted last year, and in which he is reported to have stated that he thought it perfectly possible that some of those who were let out of gaol might attempt to revive a campaign of dangerous encitement; that amongst these prisoners who were released were Jawaharlal Nehru, son of Pandit Motilal Nehru, and also Mr. Gandhi's son, Devadas Gandhi; that most of the released prisoners are reported to have stated that they would go back to their old policy of agitation; and whether he can now state what reasons have been adduced by Sir William Marris for letting loose all these agitators to add to the unrest in the country?

I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a copy of the Governor's actual remarks which answer the last part of my hon. and gallant Friend's question. Sir Harcourt Butler had previously released 166 prisoners convicted of political offences, and Sir William Marris released 107 more (including the sons of Mr. Gandhi and Pandit Motilal Nehru), none of whom had been found guilty of incitement to violence, and 73 of whom had been convicted of offences under the Criminal Law Amendment Act which had, in the meantime, been withdrawn from operation in the Provinces. I do not know the foundation for the assertion that most of the released prisoners declared their intention to renew agitation, but the Governor's speech warned them quite clearly what would happen if they did.

May I ask whether, in view of the reactionary questions put, the Noble Lord will communicate with Sir William Marris?

The hon. Member ought not to use adjectives in his supplementary question.

Has the Noble Lord read the report of the meeting of the agitators when they were let out, and will he tell me when he will be in a position to inform us what is the reason given by Sir William Marris for his action?

I have just informed the hon. and gallant Member that I am sending him a copy of this speech this afternoon. The only reason I do not read it out is because it is too long for an oral answer.

The reason I asked was the reason adduced by Sir William Marris to the Government of India.

Is there any means of preventing these most unfortunate questions being put on the Order Paper?

Is there any limitation of the powers of the Governor to release political prisoners?

As regards the question of the hon. and gallant Member for Melton (Sir C. Yate), I think he will find there is contained in Sir William Marris's speech all the reasons he had put forward for the release of these prisoners. I will, however, ask my Noble Friend the Secretary of State if a telegram can be sent for the information asked for, although I think it will be found in the speech. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Hope Simpson), it is impossible, within the limits of an answer to a question, to describe what the powers are, but, as I have said before, discretion is vested in the local government, not merely in the local Governor.

Following is the telegraphic report of speech by, Sir W. Morris:

I am, if possible, for policy of peace and quiet. I wish to say no word about distraction and excitements of past except this that I am heartily glad they are to great extent over. I hope Province has before it period of recuperation and quiet growth. In that hope my Government have decided to meet wishes of this Council as expressed in their recent Resolution, and to release political prisoners who Were convicted last year in time of excitement, with exception of one man, whose utterances amounted to an attempt to instigate murder. I do not disguise from myself one moment possibility that this decision may be misunderstood in some quarters, nor risks which it entails. I think it perfectly possible that some of those who are let out of gaol may attempt to revive campaign of dangerous excitement. Well, we have had our experience and our warning, and we ought to know what to do if such attempts are made again. But I desire to say nothing minatory. I rely not so much on vigilance of Government or on powers of law as en good sense of people whose representatives you are. I am told by many gentlemen with whom I have talked this matter, that ordinary villager is thoroughly tired of such excitement and is no longer likely to listen to those who tell him that Government is tyrannical and offensive body, and that with its disappearance, and that of European officers, there will ensue millennium, when people will pay no taxes and Lind will flow with milk and honey. I hope that advice I have received is sound. At all events, we are going to make experiment, and I trust results will be as happy as our intentions are sincere.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India what the percentage of British troops in the Indian Army has been for each of the last 10 years?

I assume that what the hon. Member desires to know is the proportion of British to Indian troops in India during the last 10 years. The answer is as follows: During 1913 and 1914, 1 British to 2·5 Indian. During the years 1915–18 it is impossible to say, owing to continual troop movements overseas. From 1919 to date the proportion has been, approximately, 1: 2·65.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the net military expenditure of India for each of the last ten years?

As the answer contains a number of figures, I will, if the hon. Member sees no objection, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

Taking the rupee, for purposes of comparison, at 1s. 4d. throughout the period covered by the question, the figures, including Marine expenditure, are as follows:

asked the Under - Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the provincial accounts of the Punjab, of Bengal, and of Madras show heavy and increasing deficits; whether retrenchments in expenditure have been effected, and, if so, to what extent in each case; whether these provinces have imposed additional taxation and, if so, with what result; and whether, in view of the serious condition of provincial finances in certain provinces, he will have the arrangements recommended by the Meston Committee re-examined by another Committee, in the light of experience gained, in the hope that some scheme may be evolved which will save the provinces from financial bankruptcy?

As regards the last part of the question, the whole subject of provincial contributions was debated in the Indian Legislative Assembly on 14th September last, when a motion in favour of a fresh Committee to re-examine the question was rejected by a substantial majority. It has been made clear in despatches recently published that this view is shared by the Government of India and by my Noble Friend the Secretary of State. As regards the first three parts of the question, the answers are, in general, in the affirmative, except that the deficits are decreasing rather than increasing, and Bengal was able, owing to temporary remission of the contribution to the Central Government, to budget for a small surplus in the current year. I am not in a position to supply up-to-date figures. I will, however, endeavour to obtain these from India, if the hon. Member wishes.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his Department pay any gratuities to homes in this country for Asiatic seamen, ayahs, and any other class of Indian labour; if so, how many homes do they so assist and what is the annual amount granted to each; and will he give the names of the homes and in what towns they are situated?

The following annual grants are made from Indian revenues to institutions of the kind indicated:

	£
Strangers' Home for Asiatics, London	200
Ayahs' Home, Hackney	10
Seamen's Hospital, Greenwich	105

The first of these is paid by the High Commissioner's Office, the other two by the India Office.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his Department has yet taken any further action as regards the housing of Lascars in British home ports is it intended to call a conference of British ship-owners who employ this kind of labour in order to consider this subject; and can he make any statement on the subject?

As representing the Secretary of State, I presided over a conference of representatives of the ship-owners concerned, who met last week at the India Office, where general assent was given to the proposition that Lascars in the United Kingdom should only be housed at places approved by the India Office. Detailed arrangements for giving effect to this decision are being made.

When this question of the housing of Lascars was under consideration, was consideration also given to the improved housing of British seamen?

That has nothing whatever to do with the case.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Government of India make any payments to British mail steamers which carry Indian mails; if so, what amount is paid annually and to which steamship companies: and for what term of years the agreement is in force?

I have been asked to reply to this question. I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the weekly mail despatched from India to Europe generally. A contribution to the contract payment made by the British Post Office to the Peninsular and Oriental Company for this service is receivable from the Government of India. I am unable to state the annual amount, as the matter is at present under discussion with the Indian Government. The contract is now terminable by two years' notice given on the 31st January.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether Indians convicted under Section 126 of the Indian Penal Code are debarred from standing for the Indian Assembly and Legislatures; whether this restriction upon the choice of electors is also being considered for revision before the elections; and, in particular, will he make inquiries from India as to whether C. R. Dass, Motilal Nehru, Lajpat Rai, Dr. Salijapal, Dr. Munshi, of Nagpur, and Jewhavilal Nehru arc debarred, and are to remain debarred, from standing for the councils next December?

I do not think that any of the gentlemen named were guilty of the offence with which the hon. and gallant Member seems to charge them, that of depredation on the territorries of a friendly Power. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is no doubt aware of the nature and scope of the restrictions on candidature arising from criminal convictions, which are imposed with the approval of this House. It is not proposed to abrogate this rule, and I see no ground for inquiry whether the persons named in the question are or are not debarred from candidature by its provisions.

Does that mean that the Noble Lord will not make inquiries as to whether they are debarred or not?

I informed my hon. and gallant Friend, in answer to a similar question last year, that I was not prepared to recommend to my Noble Friend that the removal of this bar should be effected.

But is the Noble Lord aware that conviction under certain paragraphs does not debar people from standing, whereas conviction under certain other Acts does debar them from standing, and are we to understand that the India Office will not make inquiry as to whether these very distinguished politicians are or are not debarred from taking part in the elections next December?

Before the Noble Lord answers that question, may I ask him if he is not aware that this matter was very fully considered by the Joint Committee of Lords and Commons, and was decided on the lines laid clown in Parliament?

I am fully aware of what my right hon. Friend says. That is one of the reasons why I have refused to take action. As regards the question put by the hon. and gallant Gentleman, if he wishes inquiry to be made of the Government of India by telegraph I have no doubt my Noble Friend will carry out the request. It seems to me it is a matter which the solicitors of these gentlemen in question can easily ascertain by looking up the Act.

Has there ever been a criminal conviction against Lajpat Rai, and, having regard to the fact that he has been convicted of political offences, is he to be debarred from standing for the Council next December?

If he has not been condemned under Statute which does debar him, then he will be able to stand. If he has been, then he will not be able to stand.

Will the Noble Lord find out?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India what is the total amount in sterling for which orders have, been placed for the supply of rails, rolling stock, and other materials for the railways in India; and what portion of the total represents orders given for the supply of articles manufactured in Great Britain?

In the case of the State-worked railways, the total amount for which orders for materials have been placed since the 1st April, 1922, is £1,735,000, of which £1,602,000 is in respect of materials manufactured in Great Britain. I am obtaining similar information with regard to the company-worked railways.

Is it not part of the policy of the Government to limit discretion in regard to these orders to British good only?

No, Sir. On the contrary, the position is that the High Commissioner has received instructions from the Government of India, not the Secretary of State, that the purchases should take place in the best market. These figures show that as a result of carrying out this order that in effect the vast bulk has been purchased in this country.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any action has been taken by the United States of America, following the Resolution of the House of Representatives on 13th December, 1922, in favour of a fresh Naval Conference to limit the construction of all surface and submarine ships and all naval and military aircraft?

I am not aware that the House of Representatives passed the Resolution adopted by the Naval Appropriations Committee. No communication based upon it has been received from the United States Government.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that Colonel Sir Edgar Bernard resigned his appointment last year as financial secretary of the Sudan Government after many years' public service, will he state the reasons for his resignation; and upon whose representations his successor, Colonel Schuster, was appointed?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In accepting with regret the resignation of Sir Edgar Bernard, whose long and distinguished services they greatly appreciated, the Sudan Government were impressed with the need of obtaining the advice of an expert who had recent experience of both Government and private finance in this country. The appointment of the present financial secretary was made after consultation with the Treasury and the Foreign Office.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Smyrna-Aid-in Railway Company has an admitted claim of £49,000 against the, Greek Government for services which the company, at the instance of the British Government, was compelled to render to the Greeks in Asia Minor; and if any steps are being taken to secure payment of this claim, the amount having been agreed to by the Greek authorities?

The services given by the Smyrna-Aid-in Railway Company to the Greek military authorities during the Greek occupation of Smyrna were not rendered at the instance of His Majesty's Government. The company were unavoidably forced by circumstances to render certain services to the Greek military authorities in order to avoid requisition of the railway. The claim of the company against the Greek Government for these services was understood to amount to £45,000 in September last, when His Majesty's Minister at Athens was instructed to press the Greek Government to settle it. Owing to the political and financial crisis in Greece, the representations made by His Majesty's Chargé d' Affaires have not so far proved successful. The claims are now understood to amount to £49,000 and His Majesty's Chargé d' Affaires is instructed to renew his representations.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether he is aware that the Smyrna-Aid-in Railway is the oldest railway in Turkey and the largest British industrial enterprise in Asia Minor; that it was built with capital raised exclusively in London: that the whole of the directorate and general manager are, and always have been, British; that upwards of £5,000,000 of British capital is invested in it; that many of the investors are persons of limited means; that it has always paid British Income Tax in full; in view of the fact that much damage and destruction has been wrought by the Ottoman Government, what means are proposed to compensate the owners of the company;

(2) what is the position of the Smyrna-Aid-in Railway Company in regard to claims for compensation for damages sustained whilst in the occupation of enemy forces; whether he is aware that the Ottoman Government seized, confiscated, and enjoyed the revenue of the line during the period of the late War; what tribunal is now dealing with these claims; whether such claims were considered at the Lausanne Conference if not, for what reason; if so, what decision, if any, was arrived at, and the reasons for same; whether he is aware that these claims were secured by Article 287 of the Treaty of Sevres; and what method of recovery is proposed in substitution thereof?

I am aware generally of the facts referred to in these questions. The Company's claims against the Turkish Government were considered with those of other Turkish Companies controlled by Allied interests at the Lausanne Conference, and in the draft Treaty presented to the Turkish Delegation, provision has been made for their settlement. The Blue Book on the proceedings of the Conference which is about to be laid will give the details of those provisions.

Will the hon. Gentleman reply to the other parts of Question 28?

I think my hon. Friend will see that my answer covers that point. If he will wait and see the Blue Book, he will have the full provisions, which he can consult for himself, set out.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, as part of the conditions which the Austrian Government is being required to accept in order to obtain an international loan of £26,000,000 under the scheme of the League of Nations, the legal eight-hour day, old age pensions, and sickness insurance are to be abolished in Austria?

The conditions accepted by the Austrian Government in connection with the League of Nations scheme are contained in the Protocols signed at Geneva, which were communicated to Parliament in Command Paper No. 1765 Austria No. 1 (1922).

Do the conditions laid down include one that the Austrian Government shall abolish the legal eight-hour day?

If the hon. Gentleman will look at the White Paper I think he will see that those conditions are not made.

Is it not the fact that the scheme was voluntarily adopted by a two-thirds majority of the Austrian Parliament.?

I believe that is correct.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Konigswinter has been occupied by coloured troops?

Konigswinter has been occupied by Moroccan troops which were part of the Bonn garrison.

Is it correct to describe Moroccan troops as "coloured"?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can make any statement as to the demand by the French section of the Railway Sub-Commission at Cologne for more accommodation; whether the demand has been granted; and what action has been taken on it by the German officials?

I have no official information on this point.

How often do the Foreign Office communicate with the Commission? Do they not hear of things until two or three days or a week after?

I think we usually hear within a few hours.

May I take it that there is no truth whatever in the report which has apeared in "The Times" and elsewhere as to the difficulty in finding accomodation at Cologne for this Commission?

I could not say.

asked the Prime Minister the present position of the British protest against the French taking the 12 milliard marks which were on their way to the Cologne area; has the money been returned; and is it clear that such supplies of currency will be safe in future on the road between Germany and Cologne?

I regret to be unable at present to add anything to the reply which the Prime Minister gave on this subject to the hon. and gallant Member for Lough-borough on 1st March, except that no part of the money was intended for the British Army of Occupation.

May we take it there is no truth in the statement in the Press that the French have refused to hand over any portion of this money?

I do not know that any request has been made to that effect.

Has every expression of opinion been given by the British authorities?

Not so far as I am aware, nor do I see any reason that there should be.

(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he has any information from our Embassy in Berlin or from any other source to show that the German Government is contemplating the rupture of diplomatic relations with France?

The answer is in the negative.

If it should prove to be so—

Hypothetical questions are not allowed.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Inter-Allied Rhine-land High Commission is exercising jurisdiction in the territory newly occupied by the French military authorities between the Mainz and Coblenz bridgeheads, and between the Coblenz and Cologne bridge heads, on the right bank of the Rhine; and, if so, under what provision of the Treaty of Versailles or of the Rhineland Agreement it is exercising such jurisdiction?

On the instructions of the French and Belgian Governments, French troops on 25th February occupied the strips of territory lying between the Mainz and Coblenz bridgeheads and the Coblenz and Cologne bridgeheads. The High Commission subsequently declared this territory to be under their own authority, but His Majesty's High Commissioner took no part in and disclaimed all responsibility for that decision. His Majesty's Government are advised that under no provision of the Treaty of Versailles or of the Rhineland Agreement can the High Commission claim to exercise jurisdiction over the territory in question. The attention of the French Government has been called to the matter.

In view of that answer, will His Majesty's representative on the Rhineland Commission be instructed to protest against this unlawful extension?

I cannot say whether he will or will not.

asked the Prime Minister whether the ordinances of the Inter-Allied Rhineland High Commission, from which the British representative on the Commission has dissented, are operative in the British zone of the occupied territory of Germany?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Prime Minister whether the French Government were approached before the papers relating to the Conferences at London and Paris on inter-Allied debts and reparations (Cmd. 1812) were published; and whether, in giving their consent to the publication, they insisted upon any modifications or deletions in the papers before their publication?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In regard to the second part of the question, the notes on the speeches of the French delegates were revised before publication by the French Government, as were those of the Belgian and Italian delegates by their respective Governments. Such modifications as were made were purely verbal and in the interests of accuracy.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary say whether the notes and conversations appear in the published papers?

I cannot answer that question without notice.

asked the Prime Minister whether the British Government has agreed to sentences of imprisonment passed by military tribunals in the occupied area of Germany being served in any cases in British prisons?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether any acceptance has been received from Germany of his named sum for reparations, or whether the Germans have communicated with the Government on this subject since the Paris Conference in January last?

The answer is in the negative.

Does not that infer that the Germans do not propose to pay any reparations unless they are compelled?

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that the United States of America have demanded a payment from the Allies of 241 million dollars for the cost of their Army of Occupation in Germany, and that this amount exceeds the total amount received by the Allies from Germany in respect of the cost of occupation of their armies, he will say what, under these circumstances, the Government propose to do?

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer can at present add nothing to the answer which he gave to the hon. Member for Penrith and Cocker-mouth (Mr. Collison) on the 26th February.

Will this amount be taken out of future payments from Germany, or from those which we have already received?

I think my hon. and gallant Friend will find that in the answer to which I have referred him.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government recognises the authority of the Franco-Belgian Commission set up by Ordinance No. 149 of the Rhineland High Commission to control the railways in the whole of the occupied territory of Germany including the British zone?

asked the Prime Minister if he has information to the effect that the French and Belgian High Commissioners have set up a French and Belgian civil administration of the whole of the railways of the occupied Rhineland; and, if this is so, does this place the railways in the British area under French and Belgian control in common with the rest of the Rhineland?

The answer to the first part of Question No. 71 is in the affirmative, but special provision has been made for the railways in the British zone, which will not come under the new administration.

Does this mean that the British zone has been exempted by the courtesy and during the pleasure of our French Allies, or that it has been definitely excluded from the sphere of the Ordinance?

I do not recognise the distinction between the two courses. It has been excluded by arrangement with the French.

Who controls the trains which run on the railways? Is it the Commission that controls the traffic?

If the hon. and gallant Member will put down a question, I will give full information as to the arrangements made.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the cases in Lord Emmott's Interim Report (1920) of the illegal imprisonment and maltreatment of British subjects in Bolshevist prisons, he can say when an explanation in regard thereto was demanded from the Russian Government; whether such explanation has been received by His Majesty's Government; if so, when; if not, what is the reason; and what steps are being taken to obtain compensation for those unfortunate people who, as a result of injuries sustained during their imprisonment, are unable to earn a living?

Cases such as those referred to by the hon. Member, when brought to the attention of His Majesty's Government, have been taken up singly with the Soviet Government with the utmost vigour, and the individuals affected have been informed at each stage of the negotiations. His Majesty's Government have consistently upheld claims of British subjects in all negotiations which have taken place with the Soviet Government. Unfortunately, it has been impossible to obtain redress in any single instance.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is able to state, approximately, the amount owed by the Russian Government to British investors in pre-War bonds guaranteed by that Government?

The answer contains a number of figures, and, with my hon. Friend's permission, I will have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does the term Russian Government apply to the Soviet Government or the Czarist Government?

I think the hon. Gentleman had better ask the hon. Member who puts the question.

asked the Secretary for Mines if the Government representative at the Plean Colliery inquiry ascertained the temperature at which coal dust was alleged, in part of the evidence, to have coked; and will he give the information to the House?

I have been asked to reply. Yes, Sir, the colliery chemist stated in evidence that he had found by experiment that the temperature at which coal from East Plean Colliery begins to coke is 628° Fahr.

If the coal dust was coked at the temperature stated, why were not the pit props burnt out?

I think I shall have to have notice of that question.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether on the day before the Plean Colliery explosion one of His Majesty's mine inspectors inspected the Plean Colliery; and whether the inspector's Report given on that date will be laid upon the Table of this House?

I have been asked to reply. Yes, Sir, an inspection at this colliery was made on 12th July. The inspector was called to give evidence in regard to it at the public inquiry which was held in October last, and a copy of this evidence will be sent to the hon. Member.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether or not he can procure the book that ought to have been signed by His Majesty's inspector, and will he bring that book to this House for inspection?

I will inquire whether it is available for the hon. Member to see.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he can give the productive capacity of metallurgical coke in this country in the years 1913, 1920 and 1922, and in the same years the amount consumed in blast furnaces in this country?

I have been asked to reply. I regret that I am unable to furnish particulars of the productive capacity of this country in metallurgical coke. The number of coke ovens in use and the quantity of metallurgical coke made in the years specified were as follow:

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what was the number of persons employed at the Foreign Office in administering the Consular Service prior to the transference of that Service to the Department of Overseas Trade; and what reduction in numbers has been effected as a result of the change?

The Consular Department of the Foreign Office, prior to its being placed under the direction of the Department of Overseas Trade, consisted of five officers under the Controller of Commercial and Consular Affairs. The latter appointment has now been abolished, but in view of the pressure of work, especially in connection with the re-organisation of the Consular Service, it has been necessary to increase the staff of the Consular Department itself from five to six officers. Two of these are consular officers who will in due course revert to posts overseas.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the fact that the amount for salaries alone for the personnel of the Passports Office and branch Passport Office represented 60 per cent. of the total received in fees in 1922–23, thus leaving only 40 per cent. for buildings, maintenance, office supplies, profits, and all other charges, so that this Department cannot be considered a profitable enterprise, and in view of the fact that the activities of this Department add nothing to the amenities of the lives of British subjects, whether he will consider coming to arrangements with foreign countries and taking action to enable this Department to be abolished at the earliest possible moment, and if he will state what he considers this moment to be?

The answer is in the negative. The figures quoted by the hon. Member, based upon the Estimates for 1922–23, are substantially correct, but the actual figures for the 11 months to the end of February show that the total expenditure for salaries will be lower and the receipts from fees considerably higher than was anticipated when the Estimates were framed. It was never intended that the Passport Office should be treated as a revenue producing Department, and it was agreed at the Paris Conference in 1920 that passport fees should not be considered as being of a fiscal character.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether an explanation and apology have been received from the Lithuanian Government since the arrest in that country of the British military attaché to Poland?

His Majesty's Government have demanded a full and adequate apology, but this has not yet been received.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, if he is aware that the last proposal of the Russian delegation at The Hague Conference, as recorded in the White Book on the subject (Cmd. 1724), was contingent on all the non-Russian delegations simultaneously referring it to their respective Governments; that the non-Russian delegation did not do so; that the fact that they did not was regarded by the Russian delegation as a definite refusal; and will he, in view of the answer given by the President of the Board of Trade on 27th November, 1922, to the hon. Member for Central Hull, clear up the misunderstanding which apparently exists.

I am not aware of any misunderstanding. The suggestion that the Russian proposal should be referred to the non-Russian Governments was answered by the terms of the resolution adopted by the non-Russian Commission which virtually accepted the Russian proposal.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Department of Overseas Trade what expenditure has been incurred to date on the British Empire Exhibition; what the total cost will be; what is the total sum now guaranteed; and if any estimates of receipts and expenditure have been framed as from the opening date of the exhibition?

I am informed by the Exhibition authorities that the total expenditure incurred to date on the British Empire Exhibition has been, in round figures, £750,000. The total gross expenditure to the close of the Exhibition is estimated at £2,435,000, and the total guarantees received to date are £1,203,000. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department what is the difference between the duties performed by the commercial diplomatic officers and those previously carried out by the commercial attachés?

Commercial diplomatic officers, in addition to their other duties, supervise the commercial work of consular officers, which was not part of the functions of commercial attachés. Apart from this, the difference lies less in the nature of the work done than in the method of its organisation. Under the present system, commercial diplomatic officers address their reports on commercial subjects direct to the Department of Overseas Trade instead of to the Foreign Office, and receive their instructions direct from the Department, of Overseas Trade.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether, in view of the fact that the overseas settlement committee is confining its efforts to the emigration of men settling on the land, he can state what steps, if any, his Department is taking to promote the interests of British trade between this country and the Dominions?

The sole purpose for which the Department of Overseas Trade exists is the encouragement of British export trade, and all its activities are directed to that end. In view of the paramount importance of stimulating trade within the Empire two additional trade commissioners are about to be stationed in India, and the trade commissioner service in Canada is to be strengthened by the opening of an office at Vancouver. Every effort is being made, consistent with the need for national economy, to enable the existing trade commissioners to carry on adequately their duties in the interests of British trade.

Where will these trade commissioners he located in India?

One will be located in Bombay and one in Calcutta.

Is it the intention to send representatives to Australia, South Africa or New Zealand?

We have trade commissioners at the present time in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can state the present position of the Empire development proposals; and whether he is aware of the keen interest aroused in this country and throughout the British Empire in the suggestion outlined in his election programme and his references made thereto in this House last Session?

asked the Prime Minister what is the present position of the arrangements for the forthcoming British Empire Economic Conference?

I gather that my hon. Friends are referring to the proposed Imperial Economic Conference. As I explained on the 1st March, in reply to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for Newport, communications are still proceeding with the Governments of the Dominions and India as regards this conference. I am not, therefore, in a position to make any definite statement on the matter.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department to what extent the provisions of the Trades Facilities Act, 1922, have been taken advantage of, and by whom and for what purposes?

Information as regards the guarantees which have been given under the Trade Facilities Acts, 1921–22, is contained in statements presented to this House quarterly. The statements already presented are House of Commons Papers Nos. 62 and 121 of 1922, No. 3 of the Second Session of 1922, and No. 4 of 1923. I understand that the Advisory Committee have before them at the present time a number of applications for a substantial amount, in respect of which negotiations have advanced to a considerable extent.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is intended that in future the proceeds of all loans raised with the assistance of a Government guarantee shall be used solely for the purchase of British goods and the employment of British labour?

If my hon. Friend refers to guarantees for loans for capital works under the Trade Facilities Acts, applicants are normally required to undertake to use none but British materials and employ none but British labour.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he will give a list of the people who were called as witnesses by the Committee on Agricultural Credit, with the organisations they represent; and whether co-operative banking and trade organisations were invited to give evidence?

The answer to the second part of the question is, I understand, in the negative, The hon. Member will appreciate that the Committee to which he refers was not a Departmental Committee but a Sub-Committee of the Cabinet. The proceedings were, therefore, both confidential and informal, and I am not prepared to create a precedent by publishing the names of witnesses from whom evidence was heard or who were consulted privately by the Cabinet Sub-Committee in the course of their deliberations.

Is Parliament going to be asked to adjudicate on the Report of this Committee and be kept in the dark as to the witnesses and evidence submitted on co-operative credit matters, whilst you entirely ignore the co-operative movement?

I do not think we are keeping them in the dark.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Government has accepted the recommendations of the Committee on Agricultural Credits; and, if so, what steps he proposes to take to implement these recommendations?

A Bill is being drafted on the lines of the recommendations of the Committee, and will be considered by the Government as soon as it is completed, with a view to presentation to the House.

Will that include Scotland, or will there be a separate Bill for Scotland?

I think it includes Scotland.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether the Government are going to present this Bill for agricultural credits without letting the House be aware of the evidence of the witnesses called by the Committee making the recommendations?

Yes, Sir, that is quite in accordance with precedent.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he will state the conditions under which cattle from Great Britain are now admitted into, Canada?

As the reply is rather long, I propose, with the hon. and gallant Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the reply:

At present, owing to recent outbreaks of foot-and-mouth disease, the import of cattle from England and Wales into Canada is prohibited. Cattle from Scotland are admitted provided the animals, are accompanied by the usual certificates and by an affidavit from the shipper that they have been in Scotland for 60 days immediately before shipment.

Cattle from Scotland must also comply with the following general Regulations in regard to animals coming from Great Britain:—

An import permit for cattle must first be obtained from the Canadian Ministry of Agriculture, and animals must be landed at Vancouver, Victoria, Quebec, St. John, Halifax or Charlottetown. They must be accompanied by (a) a veterinary certificate and (b) an export certificate-issued by the Ministry stating that the district whence the animals come has been free from cattle plague, contagious pleuro-pneumonia and foot-and-mouth disease for six months prior to shipment. The animals are examined on arrival and must then go into quarantine for 30 days. If six months old or over the cattle will not be discharged from quarantine until they have been submitted to the tuberculin test.

asked the Minister of Agriculture what was the estimated total number of quarters of barley grown in Great Britain in 1922?

The estimated quantity of barley produced in Great Britain in 1922 was 5,804,000 quarters.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the enormous drop in the price of barley and of the very great hardship it has involved to the farmers, and will he make representations to the Treasury that this must continue so long as the excessive Beer Duty is maintained?

I am quite aware— indeed, painfully aware—of the drop. I have heard rumours that representations on the subject of the Beer Duty have already been made to the Treasury.

Is the right Gentleman not aware that the enormous drop in the price of barley has not been reflected in the price of beer?

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Ministry is now demanding from local authorities which instituted allotments under the Cultivation of Lands Order, 1917, any credit balance arising there-from; and, if so, whether he can state on what grounds this claim is made?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and I am glad to have this opportunity of stating the grounds on which the claim is made. The local authorities in question have acted on behalf of the Crown in this matter, subject to certain limitations as to the expenditure to be incurred, and the credit balance in question are, therefore, claimed as moneys in the hands of agents of the Crown.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these allotments are being taken over by the local authorities, and are not the local authorities being involved in considerable expense? Will he not, in view of this, reconsider the decision?

That is a different question. If the hon. Member will put it down, I shall be glad to consider it.

asked the Minister of Agriculture the estimated number of men engaged at the present time as farm labourers?

The numbers of male agricultural workers in England and Wales on 4th June, 1921, as returned by occupiers of holdings of more than one acre in extent, were 612,000 regular workers and 131,000 casual workers. These figures do not include the occupiers, but include sons and other male relatives working on the holdings. It is not possible to give a trustworthy estimate of the numbers employed at the present time.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if the Government propose to introduce any legislation of a sufficiently drastic nature to enable the farmers to increase the present inadequate wage of farm labourers?

No direct legislation of the kind indicated by the hon. Member is contemplated, but. I hope that the Government may be able to propose measures for the relief of agriculture which will assist in making it-more profitable, and so enable higher wages to be paid.

Send them overseas!

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether, in view of the Order of the Minister, dated 5th January, 1923 (No. 1234), under which any power conferred upon a local authority under the Diseases of Animals Acts, 1894 to 1914, may now be exercised by the Minister or any inspector of the Ministry, he is aware of the fears of the local authorities that confusion may arise; and if he will state to what extent and under what circumstances it is the intention of the Minister to exercise such power?

The reply to the first part is in the negative. The Order in question merely confers on inspectors of the Ministry, as representing the central authority, similar powers to those possessed by veterinary inspectors of local authorities under the Diseases of Animals Acts. In a recent ease of suspected foot-and-mouth disease, in which it was considered necessary immediately to prohibit all local movement of stock, it was found that, in the absence of the inspector of the local authority, the Ministry's inspector had no power to act. It is intended that the powers conferred by the Order shall be exercised in cases of this kind, and it is not proposed to curtail the powers possessed by officers of local authorities.

Does not that give an inspector of the Ministry the same power as the local authorities have, and will the right hon. Gentleman see that there is no confusion between the two?

That is just what the question asks. It does.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether, for the convenience of agriculturists, he will introduce a Bill to consolidate all the Acts relating to agricultural holdings in England and Wales?

A Bill to consolidate the law relating to agricultural holdings was introduced in another place on Wednesday last, 28th February.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the disappointment felt in the Dominions at the delay in announcing the policy of His Majesty's Government in regard to wireless communication; and whether he can now state what that policy is?

The policy to be adopted with regard to Imperial wireless communications has recently been under review by the Imperial Communications Committee under the Chairmanship of the First Lord of the Admiralty, and the recommendations of that Committee have now been approved by the Government.

In view of developments in the science of wireless telegraphy and other circumstances which have arisen since the late Government decided upon the policy of a State-operated wireless chain, it is not considered necessary any longer to exclude private enterprise from participation in wireless telegraphy within the Empire.

The Government has therefore decided to issue licences for the erection of wireless stations in this country for communication with the Dominions, Colonies and foreign countries subject to the conditions necessary to secure British control and suitable arrangements for the working of the traffic

At the same time, the Government has decided that it is necessary in the interests of national security that there should be a wireless station in this country capable of communicating with the Dominions and owned and operated by the State. A station of this kind will therefore be erected as early as possible, and it will be available for commercial traffic as well as for service messages.

Will there be a station at Mitcham?

Will private enterprise be allowed to go ahead, without opposition from the State subsidised service?

asked the Prime Minister if he has completed his promised inquiry into the proposal to construct a Mid-Scotland ship canal; and, if he has done so, at what conclusions he has arrived?

I would refer the hon. Member to the replies on this subject given by my hon. and gallant Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport to the hon. Members for Dundee on the 15th February and the 1st March. If the advocates of the canal will put forward a definite scheme and estimates, they will be most carefully examined, but no evidence has been adduced that the proposed canal would pay its way commercially, and I do not think that the very heavy initial expenditure could be justified at the present time.

How can you arrive at a conclusion when no evidence has been submitted which justifies the rejection of a scheme unless the scheme has been submitted to the Government?

The Government is capable of forming an estimate.

Do I understand it is capable of forming an estimate without a scheme having been submitted to it?

Is the Prime Minister making inquiries as to the practicability of such a scheme?

The Government only make inquiries when a definite scheme is submitted.

Are we to understand that no scheme has been submitted at all?

Not, so far as I know.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a large number of local authorities in Scotland have petitioned in favour of the scheme proceeding, and does he think they would do so unless there was evidence in favour of it?

That is a question not of schemes but of local authorities.

Was not a good deal of evidence on this subject given before the Committee of Imperial Defence?

Is it not true that several schemes have already been submitted to the Government? Are they still under consideration, or have they been turned down?

The subject was considered by the Royal Commission on Canals. I have no information later.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has seen the resolution passed by the convention of Europeans in Kenya stating that if, through the ill-considered advice of His Majesty's Ministers, they are forced into action prejudicial to peace, then the responsibility will rest on His Majesty's Ministers; whether, seeing that this resolution is contrary to the relations which have hitherto existed between His Majesty's Ministers and Parliament on the one hand and settlers in Crown Colonies on the other, he will assure this House that no change in the established rights of this House will be made in response to threats from a body of settlers who constitute less than one-tenth per cent. of the population of the Crown Colony?

I have been asked to take this question. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has seen a Press report of the resolution referred to, but he has no confirmation of it. The only resolution reported to him officially is as follows:—

"That this Convention gives His Excellency the Governor an assurance that it will do all in its power to discourage and prevent any direct action being taken by European community during the progress of the negotiations in England on Indian question between His Excellency, the Convention Delegates and the Imperial Government provided that no attempt is made by the Imperial Government to force an issue during that period."

In the opinion of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State it would be a mistake to allow any resolution of the kind referred to in the hon. and gallant Member's question to prejudice the attempt which the Secretary of State is making to achieve a settlement by agreement. Clearly a resolution of such a character could not affect the responsibility of His Majesty's Ministers to the Crown and to Parliament.

May we take it from that that the Secretary of State has received threats of direct action from the Colony and that direct action is being withheld pending these negotiations? Is that a position considered by the Government to be consonant with their self-respect?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) what are the terms of settlement, confidentially laid by the Governor of Kenya before the European Convention and a large assembly of the ordinary public at Nairobi and whether, in the composition of the deputation which is to accompany the Governor to England in order to discuss details of a settlement with the Secretary of State, due care will be taken to ensure that all the interests concerned are represented;

(2) at what date the Governor of Kenya is expected to arrive in England to discuss questions connected with the status of Indians in that Colony; whether European and Indian delegates will accompany him; and whether any action will be taken with regard to the proposed restrictions on immigration, or amendment of the Constitution of the Colony, before the discussions in London take place?

The communication made by the Governor forms part of the attempt to attain by agreement a settlement of the various outstanding questions relating to the position of Indians in the Colony and, pending the Governor's arrival and the discussions which will follow, any statement as to the nature of the settlement proposed would, in my opinion, be prejudicial to the success of the negotiations. I understand that the Governor will be accompanied by two representatives of the settler community and an unofficial member of the executive council who is closely in tour, with municipal questions. Probably one missionary will also come, and it is understood that the Indian leaders intend, if possible, to send one or two members. The Governor proposes to leave Kenya early in April and will arrive early in May. Pending the discussions it is not intended to take any action with regard to immigration or the amendment of the Constitution.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the promises he made in Glasgow on 23rd December last, in reply to a deputation on unemployment, that utility schemes of road-making, new roads, etc., involving an outlay of £885,000 would be put in hand immediately, have not yet been carried out; that one of the schemes, namely, the Annicsland-Duntocher road, will not be started for some weeks yet as tenders arc only now being received from contractors for the work; and will he say if he can do anything to hasten the placing of these contracts so that work may be found for some of the 85,000 Glasgow unemployed?

No effort has been spared to further the preparations for these road works, and officers of the Ministry of Transport have been continuously engaged in assisting the engineers of the local authorities in the necessary surveys and other preliminaries connected with the working out of the schemes. The Director-General of Roads has himself repeatedly visited the area to attend conferences on the subject, and every possible step is being taken to expedite the placing of the contracts, but the hon. Member will appreciate that to start works of this magnitude without proper surveys and estimates might lead to great waste of public money.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that the Government sanctioned and supported the Dingwall and Cromarty Light Railway before the War; that on four and a half mites of it the rails were laid down; that these rails were taken by the Government for war purposes; and that all construction of the railway was stopped; and will he now, in view of the unemployment in the district and of the great advantage that this railway would prove to the industrial community, grant the necessary facilities to proceed with the work?

I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Minister of Transport. My hon. Friend is aware that this project was sanctioned and the work started before the War. During the War the permanent way materials were required for military purposes, but, as the right hon. Member has already been informed, the company were reimbursed for this material and for the cost of relaying. The conditions which it would be necessary to fulfil before the Government could consider the question of increasing its contribution have already been communicated to the promoters, but, so far as my hon. Friend is aware, the local financial support necessary before any grant could be considered is not as yet forthcoming.

I give notice that I shall raise this question on the Motion for Adjournment.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the early date of Easter this year he will consider whether it would suit the convenience of Members and of the Government to have only a week's Adjournment at Easter and a longer Adjournment than usual at Whitsuntide?

The hon. Member's suggestion will be borne in mind, but I am not in a position to make any announcement at present.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has as yet come to any decision on the question of whether the Royal Navy is to have the sole control and responsibility for its own air arm?

I have decided to appoint a Committee to inquire into the co-operation and correlation of the three Services from the point of view of national and imperial defence, of which the question will form a specific part.