asked the Minister of Pensions if he is aware that Ernest Herbert Langfield, deceased, who served seven years and 175 days in the Army prior to 1914, again joined up on 1st October, 1914, and was transferred to the Army Reserve on 13th January, 1919; that he was suffering from malaria when demobilised, but endeavoured to carry on without a pension until he broke down in health; that later he applied for a pension under Article 9, but this was still undecided when the man died at the, coal face on 12th January, 1920 that the coroner's certificate is signed cause of death syncope following malaria; and that an appeal to the Pensions Tribunal by the widow on 22nd September, 1921, was rejected, because the man remained at his post and was demobilised without complaining of malaria; and, in view of the fact that the family are dependent on Poor Law relief, will he have the case reconsidered in the light of medical evidence and the coroner's certificate?

This widow's claim to pension was very fully and carefully considered, but the Ministry were unable to regard the cause of death as connected with service. That decision has been confirmed on appeal by the independent Pensions Appeal Tribunal, who had before them all the available evidence, and is now, therefore, final.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all the medical evidence justifies the belief that the death was actually due to war service and since the coroner's certificate supplements that view, does he not think that when a doubt exists, the widow and children should get the benefit of it?

Clearly if there is any doubt, the benefit of it should be given to them but this case has been considered by an independent body and decided. I will go into it personally, but I must- say, in view of the decision of the Appeals Tribunal, I am afraid it is not possible to do anything.

Is there not, a great conflict of evidence between the medical referees and the local practitioners who are in constant attendance on these men?

Is it a fact that from the time of this mart's application for pension until the day of his death, no medical evidence whatever was in the hands of the Ministry and the only medical evidence available was evidence which justified the view that death was due to war service?

I should be happy to see the hon. Member about the case afterwards, but I am bound to point out that I am not hopeful of doing anything, in view of the decision I have just mentioned.

asked the Minister of Pensions if he will examine the case of Mrs. Bedford, of 59, Thurnscoe Road, Bradford, widow of the late Horace Bedford, No. 25,646, Durham Light Infantry; is he aware that Bedford, who had had 21 years' service with his regiment before the War, re-enlisted at 42 on 3rd September, 1914, and was sent to France, classed Al, developed deafness and heart trouble from shell-shock, and was discharged on 4th April, 1917, with a pension; that his nerves were so shattered that he could not resume his work as a commissionaire, and that his mental faculties were so unstrung that he finally committed suicide on 7th July, 1920; that, notwithstanding a certificate from Dr. M'Culloch, of 1, Hallfield Road, Bradford, that his mental and physical condition was the result of his war service, and that his widow holds his discharge certificate which says he served with honour and was disabled in the Great War, the Pensions Office at Westminster has informed Mrs. Bedford, 1st January, 1923, that the cause of her husband's death was not connected with his military service, and that the pension was stopped at the time of his death?

After full consideration of all the circumstances, the Ministry were unable to regard the cause of the late soldier's death as being connected with his service or with the ear trouble for which he was receiving pension, and that decision, having been confirmed, on appeal, by the Pensions Appeal Tribunal, is final.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not look at this man's disablement discharge document, upon which, on the authority of His Majesty the King, it is stated that his disablement is due to his war service, and does that not in itself constitute sufficient evidence to account for the state of mind and for the untimely death of this man?

I shall be happy, if the hon. Member will come to me afterwards, to show him the actual reason for this man's death, and the evidence at the inquest. I would prefer not to give it to the House, but I am prepared to do so if necessary.

Would it be regarded as evidence if the certificate and opinion of the man's doctor were handed in?

All evidence is taken into account, but I have seen the account of the inquest, and I can see no connection whatever between the original trouble and the actual reason on account of which this man committed suicide.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that Lieut. F. W. Garley, O. Air/S4787, having volunteered in 1914, was demobilised last May; that for a considerable time before discharge he has received treatment for ear trouble, and in the absence of an English military ear specialist had to be attended while on service in Berlin by a German specialist; that since November last he has been certified as unfit for work and put to considerable expense; and whether, under these circumstances, the Ministry will speed up the consideration of his claim for a disability pension which has now been lodged for a prolonged period?

I am glad to inform my hon. Friend that the ear condition has been accepted as due to service, and that this officer's disability retired pay has been increased to include compensation for that disability. I may explain that the delay which has occurred has been mainly due to inquiries which resulted in the Ministry being able to admit the claim.

asked the Minister of Pensions if he is aware that William Ernest Williams, late No. 20,511, West York Regiment, residing at 9, York Street, Abertillery, now in receipt of a pension of 8s. per week, has made an application for a commutation of his pension to enable him to enter a drapery and millinery business of which he has had training and experience, and that the commutation of the pension has been refused and no reason given for the refusal; and will he have the case reopened, and, if satisfied of the bona fides of the applicant, will he have the pension commuted as requested by Williams?

An application for commutation was received in 1920, and was refused. No reasons why commutation was desired were given. No further application appears to have been made, and I am afraid that as the amount; of the award is below the non-commutable minimum a renewed application could not be entertained.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether, in view of the fact that many ex-service men and their dependants are unable to afford to pay the expenses of securing assistance when making their appeals before the House of Lords tribunal and are unable themselves to do justice to their own cases in a court of that character, he will further consider the desirability of placing an official of his Ministry at their disposal, so that their claims shall not suffer from inadequate presentation?

Appeals to the Pensions Appeal Tribunal are made, in accordance with the Lord Chancellor's regulations, through the local offices of the Ministry, and it is the duty of the local official to advise an appellant how to prepare his case, and to inform him that, if he so desires, he may secure the assistance of a member of the War Pensions Committee or other person in connection with his appeal. I understand, moreover, that the chairmen of the tribunals give appellants every assistance in presenting their cases to the best advantage. I do not think that I should be justified in adopting the suggestion in the last part of the question.

Are not these appellants, in actual practice, seriously handicapped, because they are unable to provide means to pay travelling expenses, let alone expenses of legal assistance? Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the matter, as, from personal experience of two courts, I realise how the appellants are handicapped?

I am very anxious that everything should be done which will bring out the case fully, but I am not personally in favour of an arrangement which would be something in the nature of the employment of counsel on both sides—one for the Ministry and the other against. I prefer that the whole of the case should be put up and decided by the tribunal.

Do I understand that in practice the area officer affords every possible assistance to the man to present his case to the tribunal and gives him all the requisite information?

Yes, it is clearly the duty of the Ministry officials to do everything to bring out the whole facts.

Is it not the fact that in numberless cases people who wish. to appeal go to county councillors and borough councillors and Members of Parliament., imploring them to find someone to present the appeals? I do not know what the area officers are doing.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the matter further consideration? Is he not aware that we are continually finding people who cannot really present their cases properly?

I have been personally going into the question of the way in which the evidence goes up to these tribunals and taking definite examples. Anything we can do to bring the evidence out more clearly, we shall be delighted to do. I cannot accept the suggestion that the State should pay advocates on both sides, when, as a matter of fact, it should be the duty of the State to put the whole case fairly.

But it does not.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether there are any cases on record where appeals have been allowed by the Lords Tribunal and yet no award whatever made by the medical boards to appellants not in receipt of a pension?

Decisions of the Pensions Appeal Tribunal in favour of the appellant are invariably accepted by my Department. Where the appeal is on entitlement a finding by the tribunal in favour of a man riot in receipt of compensation is always followed by an award from my Department; but, as I explained to my hon. Friend last Thursday, decisions of assessment tribunals setting aside final awards do not necessarily imply that the man is, at the time, entitled to further compensation.

asked the Minister of Pensions if he is prepared to set up or recommend machinery whereby cases which have been dismissed by the House of Lords Appeal Tribunal, and which are supported by weighty independent medical evidence, can be reviewed?

This matter has been very carefully considered by the Government but they are advised that the course suggested is not practicable in view of the provisions of the War Pensions Acts. In this connection I would draw the hon. Member's attention to the answer I gave on the 22nd February to the hon. Member for Middlesbrough West (Mr. T. Thomson), of which I am sending him a copy.

asked the Minister of Pensions what it would cost to continue for another year the bonus on need pensions which it is proposed to withdraw at the end of the present financial year?

The concession as regards certain need pensions which fell to be reduced last year was of a purely temporary nature made with the object of enabling the pensioners affected gradually to adjust themselves to altered circumstances, and had no relation to a general bonus based on the cost of living. I have no authority to continue a temporary concession of that nature made in favour of a limited section and for a particular purpose, the cost of which for another 12 months would amount to £70,000.

asked the Minister of Pensions if, in cases where need pensions are reduced, he will give instructions that the pensioner be informed of the reasons for the reduction at the time notice is given of such reduction?

I shall be glad to consider very carefully the hon. Member's suggestion and, if I find it practicable, to give effect to it.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether the terms of the new Article 17 have been announced; if not, what is the cause of delay; whether cases for consideration under the new Article have bean reserved; and, if so, what is the number of these cases?

I am sending the hon. Member a copy of art announcement on the subject which was given wide publicity in the Press on the 7th January last, Cases which have arisen are being dealt with under the new provision.

asked the Minister of Pensions what is the number of applications under Article 9 of the Royal Warrant in which the Ministry has held that the claim was barred from consideration by reason of the date of the first removal from duty being more than seven years?

I presume the hon. Member intends to refer to Article 11, which deals with claims by widows. I regret that the records of my Department do riot enable me to state the number of the particular class of case referred to, but I may explain that all claims affected by the time limit in Article 11 are being dealt with under the modified interpretation of that Article and the amended provisions of Article 17 announced in the public Press on the 7th January. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of that announcement.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether an applicant for pension under Article 9 of the Warrant, whose conditions renders it necessary for him to receive treatment in an institution or otherwise, is entitled to allowances on the usual scale pending a decision on his claim to pension; and, if not, will he state Ns hen this privilege was withdrawn, and for what reason?

Cases of this kind are not entitled. to grant or allowance under the Royal Warrants until their claims are settled. But, as a special concession it is, and has been for some time, the practice to grant the usual family allowances to those claimants to pension under Article 9 of the Royal Warrant who, on the ground of urgency, have been provided with treatment by my Department while the merits of their applications for pension are still under consideration.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether a man's unfitness for work was regarded as justifying the payment of allowances during a period of treatment; whether this has now been altered to unfitness for work in consequence of the treatment; and, if so, will he state the date on which the change was made and the reasons for it?

Article 6 of the Royal Warrant clearly provides that treatment allowances are payable only where, in consequence of a definite course, of treatment deemed necessary in the man's interests, he is unable to provide for the support of himself and his family. There has been no change in this principle, but some three years ago when it was found that misapprehension had arisen, the attention of all concerned was drawn to the matter.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether, in consideration of claims for maladies alleged to have a War-service origin, the Ministry take into consideration and accepts at its face value the fact that the applicant was, after medical examination, passed into the Army classed as A1?

The man's medical classification on enlistment, along with all other facts of the case, is fully considered in dealing with any claim to pension.

How can the medical referee certify that a man is suffering from some ailment contracted prior to his service, when a medical board has 'sassed the man as A1?

The hon. Member cannot argue the question.

If a man was classified A1 on enlistment, is not that primâ facie evidence that, he was not then suffering from any disease?

The subject cannot now be debated.

asked the Minister of Pensions the approximate number of men, women and children pensioners under his Department in the County of London at the present time; and if there has been any great decrease in the number during the last year?

I regret that I have not this information. The County of London is not treated as a separate unit in the records of my Department.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether any pensioners under the charge of his Department are at present patients in any of the London County Council mental hospitals; if he can state, approximately, what number of patients there are; what arrangements are made for payment; if any part of the men's pensions are deducted towards the cost of hospital maintenance; and if he will state what amount?

There are approximately 800 service patients in the mental hospitals of the London County Council. Payment for the cost of their maintenance and treatment is made by my Department direct to the medical superintendents of the hospitals. During treatment pension is suspended, and the allowances authorised by Article 6 of the Royal Warrant are granted.

asked the Minister of Pensions what is the reason for the Regulation which prevents him from commuting low percentage pensions; and, in view of the number of applications from holders of such pensions for commutation with a view to raise funds to emigrate, whether the Government will relax the Regulation so that some small outlet may be opened for idle ex-service craftsmen?

This Regulation, which is common both to my own Department and to the Service Departments, was made with the object of ensuring that the man should not be entirely destitute in the event of failure involving complete loss of capital. Experience has shown the necessity for this rule. I may add, however, that an advance of 26 weeks' pension can generally be arranged when a pensioner is about to emigrate to a British possession.

asked the President of the Board of Education the number of certificated and uncertificated teachers (men and women separately), and of supplementary teachers, employed in public elementary schools on 31st March, 1920, 1921, and 1922, respectively?

I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the figures asked for by my hon. Friend. The

asked the President of the Board of Education if he is aware that on 16th October, 1922, the county borough of West Ham Education Committee interviewed a number of candidates for appointment as an instructor of handicraft, and selected Mr. W. H. Rose, who at that time was serving as a teacher of handicraft at the Haslingden secondary school, Lancashire; that Mr. Rose possesses the first-class teachers' certificate of the City and Guilds of London Institute, obtained in 1914, and other qualifications; that the committee decided to fix his salary at £337 10s. per annum, with an annual increment of £12 10s., to a maximum of £425; that a letter was sent to the Board of Education giving particulars of Mr. Rose's services, and stating that the committee proposed paying him the salary as stated; that on the 1st December the Board of Education notified that Mr. Rose had not been recognised as a teacher of handicraft, and on 8th December another letter was sent to the Board giving all the particulars asked for; that Mr. Rose resigned his position on the staff of the Haslingden secondary

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave the hon. Member of Stratford (Mr. Groves) on the 7th March.

Does the reply given to my hon. Friend apply to exactly the same case?

Yes, it applies to the case of Mr. Rose, and I think that, if my hon. Friend will look at it, he will see that it meets his case. If not, I hope he will perhaps take the opportunity of consulting me personally about it

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us any reason why he disallowed the services of this particular man from 1st December to 8th January?

asked the President of the Board of Education whether he will take steps to see that, in carrying out the instructions contained in a recent Circular issued by the Board to secure economy in the administration of special and blind schools, local education authorities do not reduce the standard of teachers employed by engaging unqualified teachers or by increasing the number of children in these classes?

I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the Board's Circular 1297; in that case I may refer him to the reply I gave on the 1st Mardi, to the hon. Member for North Tottenham (Mr. Morrison).

asked the President of the Board of Education whether, in view of the fact that many local education authorities framed their estimates for the current financial year on the understanding that the Board would continue to contribute 50 per cent. of their approved expenditure under the School Teachers (Superannuation) Act, 1918, he will suspend the enforcement of Circular No. 1,285 until the end of the current financial year and so prevent an additional burden being placed without due notice upon the ratepayers which has previously been borne by the State?

I think that the hon. Member is under a misapprehension as to the meaning of the Circular referred to. The words "whether within the scope of the School Teachers (Superannuation) Act, 1918, or not "in the last paragraph of that Circular refer not to expenditure but. to teachers. The only expenditure incurred by local education authorities under that Act is expenditure on administration, and such expenditure is recognised for the purposes of calculation of grant.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether, in view of the unemployment amongst teachers, it will be possible to allow earlier optional retirement, at the age of 55, on a lower pension, for women teachers, thus affording employment to the teachers at present out of work and at the same time relieving the financial situation of the local authorities, as the majority of the older teachers are at the maximum scale?

The suggestion of the hon. Member would require legislation, which I am unable at: present to undertake.

Are the Board by administrative action encouraging local authorities to retire teachers at an earlier age than the statutory date?

I was asked a question two days ago about that, to which I gave rather a careful reply, and to which I would refer the hon. Member.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether he has yet been able to fix the date for the delayed acting teachers' examination, in view of the large number of students who have spent both time and money in preparation for this examination and are left stranded in an uncertain position?

I propose to hold the examination in November, 1924, and as at present advised I am disposed not to hold it again, at all events on the present lines.

asked the President of the Board of Education the total number of students provided for by the Dudley Grammar School, and the fees paid per student?

The number of pupils in attendance at the Dudley Grammar School on the 1st October, 1922, was 379. The ordinary fee is now £15 a year.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether, under Circular 1,297, a class of blind pupils being educated in institutions receiving State aid will be increased from 15 to 18: and, if so, whether he will reconsider the matter in relation to the teaching of the blind?

I may refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on the 1st March last to the hon. Member for North Tottenham (Mr. Morrison).

asked the President of the Board of Education what were the amounts of Government grants per student paid to denominational training

asked the President of the Board of Education if he is prepared to review the present system of supervising and inspecting schools, having regard to the unnecessary overlapping which at present occurs and the heavy cost of administration?

I share the desire of my hon. Friend to reduce as far as possible the cost of administration and inspection, and I have lately been making investigations with that end in view. On the facts at present before me. I am of opinion that the degree of duplication and overlapping between the inspectors of the Board and the officers of local education authoritiesis

As the answer is of a statistical nature, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT,

Is it not a fact that a considerable number of local authorities have already- discharged a large portion of their inspectorial staff, and that there is no need for any further investigation?

Might not the whole of the inspection take place either by the local authority or by the central authority, so that there should be no overlapping?

I think the question of overlapping is exaggerated, and although these officers are called by the same name, they do in fact very different tasks.

asked the Secretary of State for Air the number of officers on, and attached to, the Air staff in Iraq?

I have been asked to reply. The answer is: Royal Air Force officers employed on Air staff, administrative, technical and medical duties, 60; Army officers attached for special staff and intelligence duties and for liaison work with the British and Indian troops, 12.

asked the Secretary of State for Air how much has so far been spent upon the new Royal Air Force base at Hinaidi, in Iraq; and whether, in view of the necessity for economy, orders will be given for the complete and immediate cessation of work on this base?

My right hon. Friend yesterday circulated to the right hon. Member for South Molton (Mr. Lambert) an answer to his question of the 6th March, and he would refer my hon. Friend to the information contained therein.

Is the and gallant Gentleman aware that the future of the Government of Iraq is by no means settled, and was it not rather a foolish policy to start this expensive work before the question was settled?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the cost per question of preparing Answers to Questions submitted by hon. Members of this House, and if any considerable saving to the national Exchequer would be effected if questions were not asked at all; and, if so, how much?

I am unable to give an Estimate, but it is no doubt true that considerable expenditure of time and money is involved in answering Parliamentary Questions. It would not, however, be in accordance with the wishes of the House, so far as I can judge them, that the Government should take steps to curtail Members' rights to question Ministers.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what it cost to answer the Question in question?

Is there not a great deal of exaggeration in regard to the alleged cost of these Questions? Are not the officials there in any case, and would they not be doing very little if they had not to answer them? Is it not a fact that a Parliamentary Question is one thing and—

The hon. and gallant Member is giving his own views.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government to promote legislation in regard to leasehold enfranchisement?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff Central on the 28th November last.

asked the Prime Minister when the Industrial Assurance Bill will be presented: and if he can indicate the approximate date of its Second Reading?

Perhaps my hon. Friend will await the statement on Business which I pro-pose to make after Questions.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the readiness in some quarters to waive the economic and financial claims put forward by this country to Turkey for acceptance, he will, before taking any such action, inquire the opinion of the various chambers of commerce and trading organisations of this country?

The suggestion made by my hon. Friend has already been anticipated. Before the opening of the Lausanne Conference steps were taken to obtain the views of representative trading and other groups on matters affecting their interests.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received any communication from the German Government respecting the Franco-Belgian occupation of the Ruhr; and whether the German Government has shown any disposition to accept the sum that he named at Paris as a reasonable reparation payment?

A number of protests have been received from the German Government on matters arising out of the occupation of the Ruhr. As regards the second part of the question, no proposal on the lines suggested having been made to the German Government, there has been no question of German acceptance.

Would my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister welcome such an offer by the German Government if they were really willing to pay a reasonable reparation payment?

f do not think that is a question that arises at this moment.

Did the Prime Minister make any effort to get into touch with the German Embassy in Paris during the Paris Conference to hear what they had to say or to receive the proposal which, it is said, was made?

No; it is open to the German Government to submit any proposal if they desire to do so.

Is it still open to them to do so?

Yes.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the Canadian desire, as expressed to the Colonial Office, in favour of the independence of Eastern Galicia; and will he communicate to our representative on the Ambassadors' Conference the undesirability of his being a party to any sacrifice of the independence of Eastern Galicia?

I am aware that the Canadian representative raised the question of the status of Eastern Galicia at the Third Assembly of the League of Nations, but no communication un the subject has been received by His Majesty's Government from the Canadian Government since the close of the Assembly. Certain organisations representing Canadians of Ukrainian origin have, I under stand, expressed themselves in favour of the independence of Eastern Galicia, but His Majesty's Government do not consider ibis expression of opinion sufficient to justify them in adopting the course suggested by the hon. and gallant Member.

Is the answer of my hon. Friend affected by the decision taken at Paris yesterday?

No, Sir, it is not affected by that. What my hon. and gallant Friend refers to is in an unfinished stage at present.

Are we to understand from the Under-Secretary that the Conference yesterday postponed the consideration of this question for further evidence?

No, I am not aware that they did that.

What have they done? Does the representative of the Foreign Office in this House know what decision was come to In the Ambassadors' Conference yesterday in Paris?

Yes, but. I think the decision was only a provisional one.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the total amount received in respect of the 26 per cent. reparation duty during the calendar year 1922; and what is the number of payments comprised in this total?

As stated in my reply to the hon. Member for Greenock on the 1st instant, the net receipts under the provisions of the German Reparation (Recovery) Act, during the year in question amounted to £6,847,000. The information as to the number of payments cannot be obtained without considerable labour and consequent expenditure, which I regret I am unable to sanction.

Is this duty being imposed by the French Customs Is it being reimbursed by the German Government?

Can the Chancellor of the Exchequer say what has been the cost to Great Britain of recovering this amount?

I think that question should be put down.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, with regard to dividends due to Germans from British businesses which are still under a War provision payable to the Public Trustee, he will state under what conditions, and when, it is proposed to resume normal arrangements?

I have been asked to reply. Under the Treaty of Peace Order in Council, 1919, all property, rights and interests within His Majesty's Dominions belonging to German nationals on the 10th January, 1920, the date when the Treaty of Peace with Germany came into force, are charged with payment of the amounts due in respect of claims by British nationals. The Public Trustee is realising as quickly as possible the interest which German nationals held in British businesses on that date. Any interest acquired by a German national in a British business after the 10th January, 1920, is not subject to the charge, and the dividends from such businesses can be paid to the German owner.

asked the Prime Minister whether there is any likelihood of the Government's housing proposals being announced before Easter?

It is unlikely that it will be possible to make an announcement before Easter.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, with a view to restoring credit to the building industry, and allowing the citizen in need of a house the opportunity of having a house built which shall he his freehold property, he will establish a national housing bank empowered to make advances to builders or potential owners of houses approved by the local authority at the same rate of interest as is paid on the war loan, with an added percentage which will repay the advance in 25 years?

No, Sir. I cannot undertake to embark on banking operations of the nature suggested. I have no reason to suppose that the existing facilities are insufficient.

asked the Minister of Health whether the revaluation of house property for the purpose of taxation has been completed, and when notices of new assessments will be served upon owners; whether revaluations include an increase of 40 per cent. in respect of houses affected by the Rent Restriction Act of 1920; and what time will be allowed to property owners to appeal against such revaluations?

I have been asked by my right hon. Friend to answer this question. The work of revaluation of property for Income, Tax and Inhabited House Duty purposes is now being completed, and it is anticipated that the notices of the new assessments of annual value will for the most part be ready for issue by the end of April. A person wishing to appeal against an assessment has to give notice of his objection in writing to the inspector of Taxes within 21 days after the date of the notice of assessment of annual value. In practice, however, no objection will be raised to a reasonable extension of this period, when the circumstances warrant it. Where a house is let to a bonâ-fide tenant, and the rent has been fixed in accordance with the Rent Restriction Act, 1920, that rent is normally being adopted as the basis of the annual value for Income Tax and Inhabited House Duty purposes.

asked the Prime Minister, whether M. Krassin, when last in London as representative of the Russian Government, requested a meeting with some Member of the Government; whether this request was refused; and, if so, for what reason?

Since the conclusion of the Russian Trade Agreement, it has been the practice for the head of the Russian Trade Delegation to be received by the official in charge of the Department of the Foreign Office principally concerned, rind this arrangement has proved adequate for the transaction of business. When M. Krassin in January last proposed a different arrangement, as indicated in the question, the reply was returned that it was thought better to adhere to the existing procedure.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the request was made because of the change of Government in this country, and that previously M. Krassin had been received by the Prime Minister and by other Cabinet Ministers of the old Government? Why was he treated in this way by this Government?

I think the answer which I have given holds good to the question.

May I press the hon. Gentleman about this? What object is there in either the Secretary of State or himself refusing to see the representative of another Government? What good does it do? May I have an answer?

Yes, certainly, if the hon. and gallant Gentleman will resume his seat. It remains true that the answer which I have given covers the question of the hon. and gallant Gentleman.

May I ask further if the hon. Gentleman is aware that the only result has been that our representative at Moscow is labouring under very great difficulty and is refused access to responsible Ministers in the Russian Government?

I think that raises an argumentative point which cannot be pursued at Question Time.

I will pursue it at the earliest opportunity.

(by Private Notice) asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information respecting the arrest of the Catholic Archbishop of Petrograd and 14 priests and who are now in prison in Moscow pending their trial on a charge of refusing to hand over certain church property to the State, being forbidden to do so by their ecclesiastical superiors in Rome. Whether there is any channel by which friendly representation can be made to the Russian Soviet Government in this matter, and, if so, will those offices be undertaken by His Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs with a view to the release of the prisoners?

The ecclesiastics referred to by the hon. Member were arrested on 10th March and conveyed through the streets in a military truck under armed guard. The trial was to begin on 14th March. Every effort has been made to save their lives. The British Agent at Moscow unofficially represented to the Soviet Government, early in the proceedings, the lamentable impression which would be caused on public opinion abroad by such action when no longer excusable on the ground of revolutionary necessities, and a further telegram has been despatched to him to-day to continue his efforts in the same direction. The Russian Trade Representative here has also been asked in a friendly way to do anything he can to avert a disastrous sentence. Besides this, knowing the active interest which is being taken by the Pope in the matter, a telegram has been addressed to His Majesty's Minister at the Vatican to enlist the continued sympathy and support of His Holiness.

Will the Under-Secretary request the law officers of the Crown to put. at the disposal of the Soviet Government all the details of the manner of dealing with similar persons during the English Reformation?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider a substantial reduction in the Beer Duty, which would not necessarily mean a loss to the Exchequer but would be of great advantage to agricultural districts by encouraging the production of barley?

My hon. and gallant Friend's suggestion, in common with all other relevant suggestions, will receive due consideration in connection with the forthcoming Budget.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many suggestions he has received during the last two months?

That would need the suspension of the Eleven o'Clock Rule.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider the exemption from the Entertainments Duty of agricultural shows where a band is engaged to play, as no material profit arises from the employment of a band at such shows?

I am unable to adopt my hon. and gallant Friend's suggestion.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware of the feeling against the Entertainments Duty being charged against agricultural and horticultural shows; and if he can see, his way to suspend. this tax at shows which are run purely of agricultural and allied industries?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 20th February to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Market Harborough.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the approximate saving in interest charges that will accrue to the Treasury by cancellation or repayment of Government debt during the current financial year, against issue or re-issue of Government securities, excluding debt to the United States of America., bearing interest at rates lower than those payable on the retired obligations.

I must ask my hon. friend to wait until the financial year is over, and I can deal with these matters in the Budget. Statement.

Shall I put this question down again, or will he deal with it in his Budget Statement?

I think I shall probably deal with it in my Budget Statement.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) which are the sinking funds or repayment charges on Government debt that have not been in operation from April. 1922, to April, 1923; what sum will be required to restore their operation in full, excluding debt to the United States during 1923–24?

I hope my hon. Friend will not press me for details which would more properly be given in the Budget Statement. The amount of sinking funds and similar charges not provided from revenue in the current year's Budget was estimated by my predecessor at approximately £30,000,000.

Will the right hon. Gentl1eman be able to give me specific answers to those two questions in his Budget Statement?

I hope so.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the settlement and repayments for Excess Profits Duty are being held up: and if he will expedite the outstanding cases?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the negative. If my hon. Friend will furnish me with particulars of any case in which it is alleged that undue delay has occurred, I will cause inquiry to be made in the matter.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will give an undertaking that, at any rate in all those eases where claims for repayment of Excess Profits Duty have already been sent in, the taxpayer shall not be prevented from recovering such duty by any legislation which may be introduced in the forthcoming Finance Bill?

In the event of my proposing any such legislation, I should bear in mind my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the serious diminution of the quantity of jam manufactured in this country owing to the high Sugar Duty; whether he will consider a reduction of this duty in order that more home-grown fruit may be utilised; and whether he can make any pronouncement at once on this subject with a view to reassuring the fruit growers in regard to this year's crops?

I have received representations in the sense suggested. As regards the last part of the question, I am unable to anticipate the Budget Statement.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amonnt of the receipts from Super-tax during the present financial year up to 10th March?

The receipts from Super-tax during the present financial year up to the 10th March, inclusive, amounted to £56,435,000.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has received any representation on behalf of off-licence holders that people of small weans are subjected to great injustice under the present regulation that no smaller quantity than a full bottle of spirits can be purchased; and whether he will consider amendment of regulation, so as to enable purchasers to obtain a half-bottle of spirits, if required, to be held in case of sickness?

I am aware that representations have been made from time to time in the sense mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend, but I am unable to adopt his suggestion, which would involve an alteration of the law.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in addition to the sum of £1,821,516 which is borne on the Estimates for the next financial year in respect of the Irish Land Commission, he will say what is the total liability of the British Exchequer in respect of the Irish Land Commission, and by what date will this liability be finally liquidated?

I am not sure that I understand the hon. and gallant. Member's question. Land purchase in Northern Ireland remains under the Government of Ireland Act, 1920, a reserved service for which the Imperial Exchequer is primarily liable. Moreover, the British Government remains liable for the completion of pending cases under the existing Land Purchase Acts both in the North and in the Free State. It is impossible to say how many years it will be before these liabilities are finally liquidated or to make any accurate estimate of their cost.

How much of that one million applies to the Northern State and how much to the Free State?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the present amount of Excise Duty paid in Southern I reland on beer and spirits during the past year; whether the whole amount of this has been paid to the Free State Government; and can he state approximately how much of this after 1st April will go to the Free State Government and how much to this country?

The net amount collected in the Irish Free State on account of Excise duties on beer and spirits during the 11 months ended 28th February last (the latest date up to which figures are available) is £14.630,000. In accordance with the law, these and all other Customs and Excise duties collected in the Free State during the financial year 1922–23 are being provisionally paid into the Irish Free State Exchequer, pending the necessary adjustments which have to be made in respect of duty-paid commodities removed from the Irish Free State to Great Britain and Northern Ireland and rice rersâ. The accounts relating to these adjustments are not yet complete, and I am unable to furnish the figures requested in t he last part of the question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say roughly what proportion of these drinks are consumed in Ireland and what proportion come to this country, so that we may know in future what the Irish Exchequer is likely to get out of it?

I cannot say without notice.

Will the liquor produced in Ireland pay duty to the English or the Irish Exchequer?

asked the Chancellor of the what proportion of the expenditure of the Board of Customs and Excise estimated' for the coming financial year is attributable to the setting up of the Customs barrier against the Irish Free State?

It is not yet possible to give a figure, but it is anticipated that the cost will he no more than a small fraction of the whole Customs and Excise expenditure.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether R. B. Leahy, of 14, Ling Street, Edge Hill, Liverpool, who has been de- ported to Ireland, is now detained in Mountjoy Prison, Dublin; if so, whether he has been brought before any judicial authority; and, if not, what steps are being taken to secure a speedy and proper trial with full legal facilities for the deportee?

I have been asked to reply to this question. Yes, Sir, this man is at present lodged in Mountjoy With the other persons just, sent over to Ireland. As I have already explained to the House, the statutory safeguard provided in these cases, if an internee desires to appeal, is reference to the Advisory Committee presided over by a Judge or ex-Judge, and facilities are being given for internees to communicate with their legal advisers and to interview them in connection with any such appeal.

As the Government have accepted full responsibility for the deportations, will they accept equal responsibility for the return of these people to their homes, if the Advisory Committee recommend their release?

Will these men have the right if they desire to appear personally before the Advisory Committee?

That is a matter on which I have another question.

(by Private Notice): I beg to ask the Home Secretary whether he can now say who the third member of the Advisory Committee under the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act Order is to be, and whether he can also now state what procedure the Committee is to adopt regarding personal interviews with nose who have been deported?

I have just learned that the gentleman whom I had invited to act as third member is engaged on other public work which may prevent him from joining this Committee, but there will be no delay in making an appointment. As' regards the second part of the question, their procedure is a matter for the Committee. I will, however, represent to them that they should, as suggested yesterday by the right hon. Member for Spen Valley, follow the practice adopted during the War under a similar regula- tion of giving an opportunity to the person interned to be seen by the Committee if there is reason to do so.

Assuming that there are any innocent persons, in view of the continued inconvenience and injustice done, could the right hon. Gentleman give us guarantees that this Committee will meet without delay?

Yes, certainly I am very sorry it, is not already set up. I wrote several days ago, and I only a few minutes ago got an answer from this third gentleman.

Arising out of that answer, if it is proved that any of these persons are completely innocent, and have suffered any monetary loss or loss of situation, will the Home Secretary grant any compensation to them for the injury done?

I will certainly consider that, if they are entitled to it.

Can the Home Secretary say exactly what is meant by the words, "if there is reason to do so "? Does it mean that the accused person, if he desires, will have to provide adequate reason?

I was merely quoting the words used by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Spen Valley yesterday, in the question he asked me then. I mean, and I think he meant, if the Committee—to whom I cannot dictate in this matter—think there is reason.

May I ask whether the Home Secretary has ascertained from the learned judge who, I think, presided over the Committee during the War, whether it is not the fact that he constantly did see applicants?

Yes, that is what I meant when I stated that this Committee would, I believe, follow the practice adopted by other Committees which were administering similar Regulations.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of returning to the country of their birth English-born men and women who have been taken to Ireland, and of putting them on trial in the ordinary way for any offence which may be alleged against them?

rose—[Interruption.]

Do not laugh. This is a serious business. I know what it is to be deported.

I was merely putting a question to the right hon. Gentleman. I wish to ask if in case a Member of this House can produce evidence with regard to a British-born subject—I will submit it to the right hon. Gentleman, evidence in regard to one who has been known to me from boyhood, and all his associations—if that is done, will it be accepted as evidence that he had no connection with the revolutionary party?

The proper course in that ease would be to appeal, and for the hon. Gentleman to give all the information he has got to add to this appeal before the Advisory Committee. With regard to the question of bringing a charge against British-born people in this country, I do not quite understand whether the hon. Member for Silvertown (Mr. Jones) means that he wishes that British-born people or British-domiciled people—I do not know which he said—

British-born. I have sent you two cases to-day.

Well, I have not got them. The hon. Member asks whether a British-born person should appear in person before this Committee?

No, I deny the right of this Committee to try English-born people.

Will the Home Secretary provide me with facilities to see Glasgow deportees, in their places of internment., during the coming week-end?

No notice has been given of that Question. That is a Supplementary Question.

I put it to you, Sir, that you should not protect the Home Secretary.

rose—

The right hon. Gentleman was going to answer it.

The hon. Member (Mr. Kirkwood) must not stand at the same time that I am standing.

Am I in order, Sir—since the Home Secretary is not in a position to give me these facilities—in applying to the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Scotland and in asking if he will see that I have an opportunity of seeing my constituents at the week-end in Dublin?

:I think it is obvious to the whole House that it is quite impossible for me to give a decision on a question like that, at 15 seconds' notice, such as I have had to-day.

Arising out of that answer, have we not had a pledge from the right hon. Gentleman that the legal advisers of these deportees and their friends are to be allowed to see them?

I think I gave that; answer yesterday.

Will the right hon. Gentleman appoint a Committee of Members of this House, who are interested, to go and see them?

Can I take it, Mr. Speaker, from the reply of the right hon. Gentleman, that "legal advisers and friends" includes Parliamentary representatives, and would apply to me in this particular case?