asked the President of the Board of Trade whether a contract for the supply of meat to the Army has been given to an Argentine meat trust: and whether he can state its terms?

I have been asked to reply. No contract has been placed with an Argentine meat trust, but a special purchase of Argentine frozen meat to the value of about £30,000 has recently been made from a British firm. The purchase was urgently necessary in order to replace meat unexpectedly drawn by the Navy from Army stores in the Mediterranean. I am satisfied that no other firm could have supplied to time. The case was quite exceptional, and the circumstances are unlikely to recur. With regard to the last part of the question, the conditions of contract were normal and the prices fair and reasonable, but it is the invariable practice to treat contract prices as strictly confidential.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case of William Milne, of Kirkwall, who when called up for medical examination at Inverness in July, 1916, fell in a fit and cut his head and remained in camp without medical attention until the next day, when he was removed to hospital, where he died; whether he is aware that the sum of £4 18s. allowed to the father towards the expenses of the removal of the body and interment in Orkney amounted to less than a quarter of the cost; and whether, in view of the above circumstances and the poverty of the father, who is in receipt of an old age pension, he is prepared to pay the whole cost of the removal and interment of the body?

The hon. Member will realise that after a. lapse of seven years it is very difficult to reopen a case of this kind, but I am inquiring into it, and will communicate with him in due course.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if Park Hall camp, Oswestry, has been disposed of privately by the War Office; if he is aware that this property consists of nearly 400 acres of land, with several good houses on it, close to the town, and was equipped with railways, roads, sewers, Liverpool water, electric light, and sewage disposal works, at a cost of many thousands of pounds to the taxpayers; and if he, will state why the property was not offered for sale publicly by auction or public tender?

The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative, with the qualifications that the sale was effected by the Disposal and Liquidation Commission and that. part of the property is still occupied by the War Department as an ordnance depot—the continuance of that occupation, at a rental of £178 per annum for 89 acres so long as required, being one of the conditions of sale. This rental is decidedly favourable to the Commission, taking into account the buildings situated on the land. In the case of sales of landed property, it is impracticable to adopt a general rule of sale by public tender, sales by private treaty having in many instances resulted in better prices being obtained. In this particular case it was presumably common knowledge that the property was for disposal; and, after examination by experts, the sale was considered an advantageous one from the point of view both of conditions and of price.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that a great many reputable bodies bid for this valuable property, and the whole thing was disposed of out of hand to people who were of no substance, and no one knows where they got the money?

I can only say that enquiries were made, and that a highly gratifying price was received.

Is it not a fact that this sale is not finally closed, and will the hon. and gallant Gentleman look into the matter to see whether a better price is not obtainable locally?

With the qualification I have given.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War the cost, during each of the last six weeks, of the British Army in Germany and Constantinople and how this charge will be provided for in the Estimates in each case, seeing that no money is forthcoming either from Germany or Turkey to pay for it?

The current weekly costs are: Troops in Germany, £34,000, exclusive of accommodation and other services provided free by the Germans. Troops in Turkey, £82,000. These figures show the total cost. I regret I have been unable to ascertain the extra cost due to troops being stationed in Germany or Turkey instead of elsewhere. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to pages 31, 202 and 203 of the Army Estimates. The estimated receipts from Germany are shown on the latter pages.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that the barracks at Dunbar are now empty and in charge of a caretaker, he has decided what use is to be made of the premises?

It is not yet clear whether these barracks will or will not be required in future, and in the meantime it would be imprudent to dispose of them.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the British and French authorities are proposing to exhume the bodies of soldiers buried in the Proyart communal extension cemetery; whether he is aware that parents who have visited this public cemetery, and have made local arrangements to have the resting-place of their sons cared for, are anxious that their resting-place should not now be disturbed; and will he have their wishes respected?

The French are converting this mixed cemetery into a purely German one of 21,000 graves, and it is therefore necessary to re-inter the British dead at Harbonnières. The reburial will be carried out with due reverence, and I can assure my right hon. Friend that the Imperial War Graves Commission are fully alive to the considerations to which he refers.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman see to it that parents whose sons are buried there are duly notified of the removal of the bodies?

I am sure that will be done. I will draw the attention of the War Graves Commission to the matter.

Will this be done at our expense, or at the expense of the French or Germans?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the case of Lance-Sergeant E. Ford, late of the Welsh Guards, who served throughout the late War, was transferred to the Reserve with a good character after 18 years and 300 days' service, was an instructor in drilling, bombing, and gas, and qualified for first-class proficiency pay, which he has not yet received; if he is aware that his proficiency pay has been withheld because he gave evidence at a court-martial in 1916; and will be institute inquiries into this case?

I have already inquired into this case at the hon. Member's instance, and I should be glad if he would furnish me with any evidence in support of the suggestion that first-class proficiency pay was improperly withheld. My information is that Lance-Sergeant Ford never qualified for such pay.

I will endeavour to do so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that James Keefe, of 43, Fisher Street, Bentley, Doncaster, who joined His Majesty's Forces in 1920, after having spent seven months in Ireland and eight months in Germany, was sent back to England and discharged on 24th November, 1922, as suffering from pulmonary tuberculosis; that the medical boards have decided that Keefe's disability is in no way connected with his military service, hut that previous to entering the Army his health record was excellent; that his own doctor who has known him for years declares that Keefe must have contracted his disease during his two years' service and that Keefe has since his discharge only received a gratuity of £12, and being totally unable to work is entirely dependent upon his relations for his maintenance; and will he have further inquiries made into this case?

I am having further inquiries made into this case, and will communicate with the hon. Member.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can make a statement as to the route of the new Pacific cable; in what way will it be linked with the American cable to Honolulu; and when it is to be put in hand?

I have been asked to reply. The Pacific Cable Board are now laying new cables between Suva (Fiji) and Auckland, and between Sydney and Southport (Queensland). No decision has yet been taken regarding the duplication of the cable north of Fiji.

asked the president of the Board of Trade the amount of spirits cleared from Nassau, Bahamas, to St. John, New Brunswick, to St. Pierre Miquelon, and to Tampico, Mexico, in the years 1913 and 1922, respectively?

Will the hon. Gentleman make representations as to the desirability of linking the route with Honolulu?

I will certainly see that the representations are conveyed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the amount of spirits imported into the Bahamas and Barbados in the years 1913, 1920, 1921, and 1922, respectively?

The answer contains statistical tables, and perhaps the hon. Member will allow me to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I regret that I am unable to furnish these particulars.

Is it a fact that no liquor was exported to these ports before 1922?

I do not think that that is accurate.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that orders for 1,820 tons of ship plates were placed by Messrs. P. M'Callum and Sons, Limited, of Greenock, with firms in the Ruhr district of Germany, and that, owing to the French authorities' action, this material, much of which is rolled and has been ready for shipment since February, cannot be transported to this country, with the result that the Blythswood Shipbuilding Company, Limited, of Scotstown, owing to the non-delivery of the plates, have been forced to suspend the building of several vessels and wholly close down their yards, which otherwise would have been employing 1,200 workmen; and what steps he is prepared to take to remedy this situation?

I have been fully informed of the position by the two firms mentioned by the hon. Member. I would refer the hon. Member to the statements which the President of the Board of Trade made on the 28th of March and the 12th April, showing the steps which His Majesty's Government have taken, and are taking, to secure the delivery of these and similar goods.

Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to take such steps as will enable those plates which are ready for shipment to be shipped at once?

If the hon. Member will look at the OFFICIAL REPORT to which I have referred, he will see that my right hon. Friend is taking the most active steps open to him. The difficulty at the moment rests not with the French Government, but with the German Government.

Is there any reason why these plates should be made abroad, when men are out of employment at home?

Is it not possible for the President of the Board of Trade to take immediate steps to deal with this difficulty, having regard to its effect on employment in the Clyde district?

Will the Labour party in this country advocate adequate protection for British industries?

My right hon. Friend is making the most energetic representations he can, but it does not lie in our power at present to press the German Government.

Do not the German Government offer to allow these goods to come if the French will waive their rights?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the question of the disposal of the money collected by the French Customs posts in the Ruhr district on British goods entering the occupied territory has yet been settled; if so, in what way; and, if not, what steps are being taken by His Majesty's Government to pursue the question?

No settlement of the question has yet been arrived at. It is understood that the French and Belgian Governments intend very shortly to make certain suggestions in regard to the matter, which can, however, be finally regulated only as part of a general resettlement of the reparation accounts.

Does the Government realise that in the meantime British merchants are being deprived of their money, and cannot we do something to hasten this part of the question being decided?

I think the Government realise all these matters to which the hon. and gallant Member refers.

Does not the Government think we have some claim on these duties which are exacted from British merchants?

The Gov ernment recognise all these matters.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the value of goods imported into the country from the occupied area of Germany since the 5th January last; whether he is aware that it is part of the policy of the French authorities to prevent exports from this area; and whether he has received representations from the British representatives in the occupied area as to the injury resulting to British trading from this policy?

No statistics are available with regard to the imports into this country from the occupied area, but I have reason to believe they are very small. It is no part of the policy of the occupying authorities to prevent exports from the area to this country. Indeed, they have taken steps to facilitate them, but exportation is rendered practically impossible by the attitude of the German Government in refusing to allow firms to deliver goods under licences issued by the constituted licensing authorities. I have had representations from British exporters in the area as well as from firms in this country as to the injury to British firms resulting from the present situation.

Has the Noble Lord seen the statement in the Press to-day that British traders in Cologne take an entirely different view?

Does the Noble Lord consult the British officials in Cologne before answering questions in this House?

Yee. We are in the closest touch with our officials.

Is the Noble Lord not aware that British officials in Cologne make statements very different from that of the Noble Lord?

No, Sir.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any proposal has been made by the German Government offering to relinquish control of trade in the occupied area, provided that the armies of occupation would follow the same course; whether such a proposal has been considered; and. if so, with what result?

The proposal of the German Government that they would in certain cases relinquish the export duties which they were not in a position to collect, if the French and Belgian Governments would also relinquish all claim to such duties in the areas of which they were in occupation, was rejected by His Majesty's Government for the reasons which the President of the Board of Trade gave in the Debate on the 12th April.

If the proposals had been accepted, would it not have been of great advantage to British trade?

No. I think that the result of our acceptance of those proposals would have been for us to side definitely with Germany in this matter.

I am not asking the Noble Lord about Germany, but whether the acceptance of these proposals would not have done something to assist these traders?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now state whether the German Government has refused to refund the 26 per cent. reparation duty on goods bearing Bad Ems permits; and whether German goods shipped to this country pay 36 per cent. duty as against 10 per cent. payable on such goods shipped to other European countries?

I have seen allegations that the German Government refuse to refund the 26 per cent. reparation duty on goods exported from the occupied territory to the United Kingdom under Inter-allied licences, but no specific case of such refusal has been brought to my notice. I am, however, having some further enquiries made on the subject.

Since the Noble Lord is in closest touch with Cologne, has he seen the sworn certificate of the Chamber of Commerce there that this reparation is denied?

I have seen the statement of the Chamber of Commerce, but no specific case has yet been brought forward.

Is the Noble Lord aware that the German Government have definitely and officially announced that they will not make this reimbursement? Is not that sufficient for the Board of Trade?

We have not been officially informed by the German Government and specific cases have not been brought to our attention.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the damage inflicted on British interests by the French occupation of the Ruhr, the Government will protest against such actions of the French authorities as the eviction of large numbers of German workmen and their families from their dwellings and the wholesale imprisonment of German subjects, as calculated to prolong the dispute and hinder British cooperation in the settlement of the reparations question?

I cannot give any such undertaking, as I do not think that the action proposed by the Noble Lord would serve the purpose he has in view.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the British Government will feel itself at liberty to assert British ideals and uphold and defend British interests?

Will the hon. Gentleman assure us that the British Government will not take any action which might be construed as hostile action towards France?

is not the real reason that the Germans have failed to perform their duty under the Treaty of Versailles?

His Majesty's Government will, on every possible occasion, uphold British interests, but they have no intention whatever of pursuing a pinprick policy towards France.

Who is responsible for giving M. Loucheur the impression that this country is favourable to the Ruhr policy of France?

Answer, answer'

On a point of Order. Hon. Members are asking me to answer. I should be glad to do so, but, unfortu nately, I could not hear a word that my Noble Friend said.

The question was not one that could be answered at Question Time.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the weight of cotton yarns imported into this country from Belgium for 1922, and the latest. available figures for 1923.

The aggregate weight of cotton yarns imported into the United Kingdom and registered as consigned from Belgium, amounted to 2,836,593 lbs. during the year 1922, and to 1,049,807 lbs. during the first three months of 1923.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the quantities and value of foundry coke and pig-iron exported during the years 1920, 1921 and 1922?

As the answer contains a table of figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the Noble Lord aware that, owing to the exports of coke and pig iron, large numbers of foundry workers in this country are working short time, while the commodities are being exported to Germany and other countries, and what steps will be taken to retain a sufficient supply for home consumption?

I am aware that that has been the case in the past, but I understand that the producers are taking steps by which they hope that very shortly the supply will equal the demand.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether ho is aware that small toy printing sets have been held up under the Dyestuffs Act, on account of the small pads being damped with ink which could not be made without the use of dyestuff material; and whether licences have now to be obtained from the Dyestuffs Committee at Manchester before the London Customs authorities will admit goods of the class in question?

An open general licence covering these articles was issued in January last. The answer to the second part is in the negative.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the quantity and value of dried milk powder exported from Great Britain in the year 1922?

During 1922 the exports from the United Kingdom of milk powder of home manufacture amounted to 1,020 cwts., valued at 5,602. The re-exports of milk powder of foreign and colonial manufacture during the year amounted to 10,910 cwts., valued at £36,052. These figures are provisional and subject to revision.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the extent to which the steel pen industry in this country is suffering in consequence of the large volume of imports of steel pens from the United States into this country; and whether, seeing that the United States is this only country from which steel pens are imported into Great Britain, and that therefore there would be no breach of the convention of commerce involved, he will impose a duty of 6d. per box of 144 pens?

I have had no recent complaints as to the effect of competitive imports on the steel pen industry in this country. With regard to the latter part of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the Budget statement made yesterday.

Is the Noble Lord also aware that the original introduction of the Edison phonograph has simply ruined the Birmingham jews-harp industry?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the amount and value of fruit and vegetables, respectively, grown outside the United Kingdom and re-exported from British ports during last year; the amount and value of British-grown fruit and vegetables exported during last year; and whether he has considered the effects of the Merchandise Marks Bill now before Parliament on this re-export trade?

As regards the first and second parts of the question, I am having a statement printed in the OFFICIAI, REPORT. As regards the last part, I am not clear how the obligation to mark cases of fruit or vegetables with the word "imported" can prejudice the interests of the British exporter in the markets to which the produce is sent.

Will the Department of the Noble Lord draw the attention of the Minister of Agriculture to the enormous volume of these imports and the practical difficulty of marketing without extra expense?

The Board of Trade is satisfied that no injury to the export trade will result.

Have the Board of Trade consulted the great importers?

Yes. The Board of Trade have been in close touch with the commercial community on this matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the Report of the senior official receiver in the matter of the National Benefit Assurance Company; will he say what was the justification for allowing this trading company to be incorporated under the name of the National Benefit Trust and in what way it was national or a national benefit; and whether he will take power to refuse in future to permit the registration of limited companies with the word national in the title or description?

The answer to the first part of this question is in the affirmative. Under the provisions of the Companies Acts the Registrar has no power to refuse to register a company on the ground that the word "national" is included in its title, but the question whether legislation should be introduced to confer greater powers upon the Registrar will be noted for consideration. The Registrar reports that about 700 companies have been registered whose titles include the word "national"

Will the Noble Lord take steps to have the matter put right, seeing that the word "nationa" is very often used as a catch to obtain money from the poor, and to defraud them?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the estimated number of lapsed industrial insurance policies which occur each year, and the average amount involved?

The information is not in the possession of the Board of Trade, but I would refer the hon. Member to paragraphs 10, 18 and 41 of the Report of Lord Parmoor's Committee on industrial Assurance (Cmd. 614) and Table IV which is appended to that Report, which give information as to the Industrial Assurance policies lapsed during the year 1913.

In view of the Importance of the question which is to come before a Committee of this House. can the Noble Lord get more recent information, seeing that information dealing with this matter has been given already in the other Chamber?

The Board of Trade have no power to obtain the information for which the hon. Member asks.

is the Committee expected to deal with this matter without any official information or guidance as to the facts?

It is not in the power of the Board of Trade to obtain this information.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the maximum and minimum percentage amounts incurred in expenses by industrial insurance companies in the last completed year for which these figures are available?

According to the Returns made to the Board of Trade, under the Assurance Companies Act, 1909, for the year ending December, 1921. the maximum percentage of the annual premiums received in respect of industrial assurance business which was applied by any one company in management expenses was 60·5 and the minimum percentage was 36·9.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give the number of occupied persons un employed in the United States of America at the time at which the fordney tariff came into operation; and the number unemployed at the present date?

I have been asked to reply. Since the United States Government does not publish periodical returns of Lumbers unemployed in the country as a whole, I regret being unable to supply my hon. Friend with the figures he desires.

Will the President of the Board of Trade have inquiries made of the British Consul-General in New York so as to get definite information on the subject?

Is it not a fact that unemployment in the United States has practically ceased?

With regard to the first supplementary question, I will certainly convey the suggestion to the President of the Board of Trade.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the notices posted by his Department at Robin Hood's Bay and the vicinity forbidding the removal of sand, stone and shingle without the written consent of the Marine Department of the Board of Trade in London; if he is aware that these materials are essential in an outlying district to farmers for the upkeep of roads and repair of farmsteads and to the local building trade; and if he will take immediate steps for the removal of unnecessary restrictions which give rise to great local resentment and affect a privilege which has been enjoyed for the last 50 years?

Reports were recently received from the Board's local officers that the removal of materials from the foreshore below high water mark in Robin Hood's Bay was likely to cause erosion of the coast. As the foreshore is Crown property under the management of the Board of Trade, whose consent was therefore necessary to the removals, the notices to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers were issued. In view of the representations made, I propose to instruct one of my professional officers to inspect the locality at an early date, confer with the local interests concerned, and make, a report to me on the subject.

Is the Noble Lord aware of the great amount of coast erosion that has taken place, because of the removal of sand and shingle from the beach?

It is for that reason that the Board of Trade has to be very careful in the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the representatives of the sea coasting trade have been consulted in the preliminary discussions which led up to the introduction of the Bill to amend the laws relating to the carriage of goods by sea; and whether, in the present state of trade in this country, he will reconsider a scheme which sets up complicated machinery which will handicap the coasting trade?

The discussions which led up to the Sea Carriage of Goods Bill took place mainly outside the Board of Trade, and there was no question of the Department consulting particular sections of shipowners or of any other interest concerned. The question whether it is necessary or desirable to make some special reference to the coasting trade in the Bill is one which could be dealt with on the Committee stage of the Bill.

Will the Noble Lord consult the coasting trade to ascertain their views on this very important question?

The history of this Bill is a series of international and trade conferences. Throughout, the Board of Trade has done its best to bring the parties together and to adjust differences. But we have not been in the position of drafting a Bill and consulting the various interests.

Will the Noble Lord realise the importance of this matter to the people in the coasting trade, in view of the competition of the railways?

We do fully realise it, and we are now awaiting representations from, the interests concerned as to the modifications they would desire to see made in the Bill to meet their case.

Is it not a general fact that this Government is pledged absolutely against any sort of measure of Protection? [HON MEMBERS: "No!"]

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the number of officers employed at the War Office has been reduced in accordance with the promise of reduction by the 1st of April, 1923, given on 5th December, 1922; and whether he can now inform the House of the basis of further reduction to reduce the officers so employed to at least a pre-War level?

I regret that my estimate of 5th December last has not been entirely realised, but a reduction of 20 officers has been made since that date, and further reductions will be carried out as opportunity offers during the year.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury when the disposal of surplus War material will be completed; and will he tell the House what is the difference in personnel, if any, between the Disposal Board and the Liquidation Board, which were dissolved on 31st March last, and the Disposal and Liquidation Commission, which is still functioning?

As the answer to this question is of some length, I propose, with my hon. Friend's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the pledge given before Easter be carried out?

If my hon. Friend will allow me to do as I suggest., and circulate the answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT, he will find that that is the case.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport when the Ministry of Transport shall cease as a separate Ministry and its functions be transferred to the Board of Trade, as recommended by the Committee of National Expenditure?

I am not able to state whether the existing arrangements, by which the First Commissioner of Works acts as Minister of Transport without additional salary, will be altered in favour of the transfer to the Board of Trade, as recommended by the Committee on National Expenditure.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in view of the dissatisfaction in Territorial units that marriage allowances are only granted to men of 26 years and over, he can see his way to extend the allowance to men under that age?

I much regret that, after very full consideration, it has not been found possible to adopt this proposal, which would cost about £35,000 a year.

asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health the number of classes in State-aided schools in Scotland which have on the register more than 60, 70, 80, and 90 children, respectively?

As I have previously informed the hon. Member, the information asked for could only be obtained by means of a special inquiry. My Noble Friend the Secretary for Scotland has, however, consulted the chief inspectors of schools, who are satisfied that there is no appreciable contravention of the Regulation which provides for not more than 60 children being habitually under the charge of one teacher.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that in at least one case under the Glasgow Education Authority it is reported that there is a class of 93 under the charge and in the care of one teacher, and, further, is his Department keeping trace of the effects of their economies?

Perhaps the hon. Member will put that question down.

asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health if he is aware that considerable trouble has arisen owing to the confusion caused by the Scottish Education Department approving of expenditure by local education authorities and subsequently maintaining that such approval does not include approval for purposes of grant; and if he is prepared to revert to the former usage of the Department, namely, that approval connoted approval for purposes of grant?

Grants to education authorities in Scotland are not now based upon expenditure, and the conditions referred to in the question no longer apply. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the present Regulations.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the old Regulations do hold, so far as retrospective payments are concerned, and that they are very prejudicial to some of the authorities, in estimating for the present year?

It seems to me that this question was dealt with in the answer already given. The question of retrospective effect is scarcely one upon which I can enter at the moment, but I shall be glad to discuss it with the hon. Member.

asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health whether he is aware that Mr. Matthew Harkins, who occupied one of the small-holdings at. Parkhead, Linlithgow. in 1921, had his crops destroyed by -water as a result of boring operations by the Board of Agriculture; that Mr. Harkins instituted proceedings for compensation, which were rejected on the ground that the Government could not be sued; and whether, in view of the circumstances, he will advise that Mr. Harkins should be compensated for the actual damage done?

I am informed that the holder concerned did not suffer any damage from the boring operations except the temporary loss of the use of a small area of cultivable ground. In proceedings instituted by the Board of Agriculture for the recovery of a sum due by the holder after he had abandoned the holding he made a counter claim for compensation which was repelled by the Court on the ground stated in the second part of the question. The Board offered as compensation a sum of £1 which was deemed by the Court to be ample. It is not proposed to increase the amount so offered.

asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health whether he is aware that the Linlithgow education authority have been informed by the agents for the Marquess of Linlithgow that the title deeds of Ecclesmachen school and schoolhouse were not in existence, and that therefore the property belonged to him; whether he is aware that a claim has also been lodged in respect of rent for the past four years if he can state whether any title deeds for this property are in existence; and if he will ask the Marquess of Linlithgow to produce any title deeds which arc in his possession for examination before the property is taken out of the hands of the education authority?

The answer to the first three parts of the question is in the negative. With regard to the last part, my Noble Friend is not aware of any authority under which he could take the action referred to.

With regard to the first three parts of the question, is it not the case that a communication has been sent by the agent of the Marquess of Linlithgow to the education authority, on the lines indicated; and, having regard to that circumstance, will the hon. and gallant Gentleman give the matter immediate attention?

The agent has not notified the Scottish Office of such a communication and neither has the Education Department, therefore we are without official knowledge of the facts to which the hon. Member refers.

If the facts are as stated, having regard to the effect on the education authority, will the hon. and gallant Gentleman take steps to put the matter right?

That is a hypothetical question. The hon. Member should first get the facts.

asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health whether it is proposed to make a new Order incorporating the Parliamentary Burgh of Leith with the City of Edinburgh; whether such an order requires Parliamentary sanction; and, if not, whether the decision of the House will be invited on the matter?

There is no power to make an Order of the nature mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend. What he probably has in view is the Order made by the Secretary for Scotland on 19th March last under the powers contained in Sub-section (16) of Section 43 of the Representation of the People Act, 1918, fixing Edinburgh as the place of election for the Parliamentary Burgh of Leith. Orders under the Sub-section referred to do not require Parliamentary sanction.

May we take it that the ancient burgh of Leith will remain an independent Parliamentary burgh?

This Order in no way effects the existence of Leith as a separate and independent Parliamentary area.

asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health whether the General Superintendent of the Poor for the Northern District has been transferred; whether it is the policy of the Department to delegate his duties to the local officers of the National Health Insurance Commissioners, now merged in the Board of Health; and whether he is aware that any such delegation of important Poor Law administration to officials who have no skilled knowledge of Poor Law administration is causing disquiet in the minds of those interested in such adminstration, and is contrary to the views expressed by the Royal Commission on the Poor Laws and Relief of Distress, 1909?

It is the case that the General Superintendent of Poor for the Northern District has been transferred to another district and that the District Inspector of the Scottish Board of Health for Health Insurance purposes resident in Inverness has been appointed General Superintendent for the Northern District; he will also exercise supervision over the insurance work in the district. I am aware that representations have been made against, this arrangement by several bodies interested in Poor Law administration in Scotland, but in making the appointment, as a result of which a considerable economy will be effected, the Board considered most carefully every aspect of the question and they were satisfied that the special qualifications of the official appointed, his knowledge and experience of the district, his acquaintance with a considerable part of the worn of the General Superintendent for the Northern District, and his knowledge of Gaelic made him particularly suitable for the post.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the group I represent here are satisfied that if it was necessary to make this appointment no better man could have been appointed than Mr. Beaton: but is the Department satisfied it was wise to go against the views expressed clearly in the Report of the Royal Commission of 1909?

Yes, Sir, the Board had the Report under very careful consideration before making the appointment.

asked the Under-Secretary to the Scottish Board of Health whether, in view of the difficulty experienced by Scottish fishermen, after three years of depression in the industry, during which they have been unable to make provision for capital depreciation in replacing their lost and damaged gear, the economic loss to the country if available boats and crews are not employed, and the cost to the national Exchequer and the local funds for relieving the consequent distress, the Government will select some method, either by an extension of the powers of the Unemployment Grants Committee or under the Trade Facilities Act, or under Section 32 of the Crofters Holding (Scotland) Act, 1886, by which loans may be granted in time to enable fishermen to tide over this crisis and to engage in the summer fishing?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my reply on the 27th February to his question regarding loans under the Crofters Holdings Act. I can hold out no prospect of the provision of loans for the purchase of gear either through the Unemployment Grants Committee or under the Trade Facilities Act.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that since he gave the answer to which he refers the position is very much worse? The storms that have occurred in the spring have swept away a great deal of the gear of these men. Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman not consider putting into force the powers that he has under existing Acts of Parliament?

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that on Saturday last more than 200 persons left the Hebrides for Canada, many by means of Government assistance, because they found themselves unable to make a living in their own land?

I quite agree that the position of the fishermen whose gear has been swept away in storms is a very serious one, but if the Government is to take action to repair the damage caused by storms they would have claims extending far beyond those of the fishing industry.

But are there not funds available for this particular purpose.?

No; certainly that is the difficulty. So far there were funds in which we- could have exercised those powers, they have been exhausted.

Owing to the very unsatisfactory reply I beg to give notice that I shall call attention to the matter at the first opportunity on the Adjournment.

asked the Prime Minister whether our representative in Constantinople protested against, or joined in any protest against, the prohibition of the sale of, alcohol in Constantinople in accordance with Turkish law; and, if so, whether that protest was made- on instructions from His Majesty's Government?

The Allied High Commissioners at Constantinople recently caused a verbal notification to be made to the Turkish authorities to the effect that, pending the ratification of the Treaty of Peace whereby economic matters will he definitely settled, they could not admit of any interference by the Turkish authorities with the existing rights of subjects of the occupying Powers in matters of this nature. The action of the British High Commissioner in this matter has the approval of His Majesty's Government.

May I ask why His Majesty's Government objects to the prohibition of the sale of alcohol in Constantinople?

I did not say the Government objected to the prohibition of the sale of alcohol in Constantinople. What I said was that they could not admit any infringement of the rights of the occupying Powers, pending the ratification of the treaty of. peace.

asked the Prime Minister if he is a-ware of the increasing number of cases of ex-service men being disallowed by the pensions appeal tribunals, notwithstanding the fact that many of them were passed fit for active service by the Army medical officers at the time with the knowledge that the germs of a disease existed in the men, and was aggravated by Army service, which required treatment in the hospitals until pre-War normal physical conditions were restored; that on their return to civil life after demobilisation the aggrava- tion owing to reduced stamina and necessary physical exertion in their ordinary industrial occupation again developed, and in consequence of which their appeal for pensions or allowances have been disallowed, as in the cases of ex-Privates Pownall, Sam, and Hewitt, of St. Helens, Lancashire, and from which there is no appeal; whether he is aware that these appeal courts are held locally in most provincial cases and not by the central tribunal, House of Lords; and, if under these circumstances, he will consider the advisability of a complete revision of the constitution of such tribunals?

I am not aware that there has been any material increase in the number of appeals disallowed by the pensions appeal tribunals for England and Wales. Aggravation of pre-War disabilities is not necessarily of a permanent character, and it does not follow that a recurrence after the War of a pre-War disability is due to aggravation during War service. It is the duty of the tribunals to hear the evidence on the question, and to decide upon it, and this has been done in the cases of ex-Privates Pownall and Hewitt. In the case of ex-Private Sams the Ministry of Pensions held that his rheumatism was attributable to service and a final award was made. He appealed against the amount of this award to the pensions appeal tribunals who upheld the assessment of the Ministry. The pensions appeal tribunals sit in such places as the Lord Chancellor, after consultation with the Minister of Pensions, determines, and the places of sitting are arranged so as to meet, so far as possible, the convenience of the majority of the appellants. The central office of all the tribunals for England and Wales is at the House of Lords. The constitution of the tribunals is laid down by Act of Parliament, and it is not proposed to revise it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider cases which I submit to him, if I produce new evidence showing that the disease which the man had previous to joining up has developed since his demobilisation owing to service? Will he consider such cases, which have been turned down by the tribunal?

Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer, even if he does not take such steps as he has indicated, at least consider cases in which the appellant can produce fresh evidence—evidence which has not been heard by the appeal tribunal? Seeing that the appeal tribunal is a final tribunal, will the right hon. Gentleman, where such fresh evidence is produced, have the cases re-opened?

I will look into the point. Hon. Members will recognise that this is a subject with which I am not very familiar.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) whether, seeing that His Majesty's Government has had to pay large sums to British patentees for the use of their patents by the United States of America after the United States had entered the War, he will say approximately what sums were and will be so paid; whether the United States will refund to this country such payments;

(2) whether the British Government has been called upon by the United States of America to pay for the use of aircraft patents which were taken out in America before the United States entered the War; and whether he is aware that the British Government, to assist the United States, informed them that they could use any British patents which would assist them in the War?

After the entry of the United States of America into the War in 1917, it was found necessary, in order to increase the common output of aeronautical material, to manufacture in America certain types of British aeroplanes, engines, and accessories. This course involved the disclosure to American manufacturers by British aircraft firms of certain patents, designs, and specifications, and also the supply of technical information and assistance. The War Cabinet decided that His Majesty's Government should be responsible during the War for any consequential financial arrangements to be made with the British manufacturers, the United States Government accepting financial liability arising in respect of post-war production in that country. The total sum paid and payable by His Majesty's Government under this arrangement is approximately £105,000, which is no; recoverable from the United States of America. Only a trifling proportion of this amount., approximately £300, is for the use of aircraft patents taken out in America before the United States of America entered the War.

also asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether there are now pending large claims for royalties in respect of alleged infringement by the British Air Force of patents owned by the Curtiss Aeroplane Company, which is an American company; and whether the United States of America have undertaken to pay any compensation which may be given against the British Government for the use of such patents?

The Curtiss Aeroplane Company presented, but subsequently withdrew, a claim in respect of the use of their patents; they have, however, now made a claim for an ex gratin award in respect of the use of their designs of flying-boats and of services rendered by them. The claim relates substantially to the early part of the War, 1915–16, before the United States became a belligerent. There is no ground upon which the United States Government could be asked, nor has that Government undertaken, to repay any compensation which may be payable by the British Government to the company.

May I ask whether the British patents being used during the War in America came under the protection of the American patent laws or remained under the protection of the British patent laws?

I think that has been answered in reply to Question No. 49.

No, it was not.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) whether he can give the total sum in arrear and the number of individuals who have failed to meet their obligation with regard to the annuities payable to the British Exchequer in respect of moneys advanced for the purchase of farms by their holders under the various Irish Land Purchase Acts; what method the British Exchequer adopts to recover annuities due by citizens of the Irish Free State who fail to make payment;

(2) whether he can give the total sum in arrear and the number of individuals who have failed, during the past financial year or other convenient period, to meet their obligation with regard to the annuities payable to the British Exchequer in respect of moneys advanced for the purchase of their farms under various Land Purchase Acts; and will he say what method he intends to adopt to recover annuities due by citizens of the Irish Free State should they make default?

The total arrears due to the Irish Land Commission at the 21st March, 1923, in respect of land purchase annuities payable by tenant purchasers in the Irish Free State was £502,920, but it is not at the moment possible to state the number of persons who contribute to this arrear. The deficiencies caused by these particular arrears, in the case of all advances made under the Land Purchase Act of 1891 and subsequent Acts, have already been made good from the Irish Land Purchase Guarantee Fund created for this purpose under the Land Purchase Act of 1891. As from the 1st April, 1923, the Free State Government have undertaken to pay to the appropriate British fund the full amount of the annuities accruing due from time to time, making themselves responsible for the actual collection from the tenant purchaser. The British Exchequer will, therefore, not be affected by any failure on the part of a citizen of the Free State to make the payment due on account of his annuity.

Have we any guarantee or any method of assuring that the Free State make these payments to the British Exchequer?