asked the Secretary of State for India, how soon the Indian Finance Act, 1923, will be laid upon the Table?

I hope that the Papers will be laid on the Table and copies available for distribution within a few days.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he can state the steps that have been taken to apprehend the murderers of Mrs. Ellis and the two officers recently killed on the Khyber Pass; and how far have these efforts been successful?

The supposed murderers are in both cases outside British administered territory. In the Kohat case, tribal pressure was brought to bear at the earliest possible moment, and it was reported some time ago that the guilty parties and their associates had already been attacked, and had suffered some casualties. In the Landi Kotal case there is reason to think that the murderers have sought refuge in Afghanistan, and the British Minister at Kabul has taken the matter up with the Afghan Government. I have no doubt that every possible step is being taken to bring the guilty parties to justice as speedily as possible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the residents of Islamkot (Taluka, Mithi, District Ihar and Parkar, Sindh) have petitioned His Excellency the Governor of Bombay for immedite and adequate protection against the frequent and unchecked raids of the dacoits upon their territory and property; whether he is aware that these unarmed people live in constant terror of plunder and violence; and whether he will communicate with the Governor of Bombay, or other appropriate authority, with a view to giving the protection asked for?

I have seen no reports upon this matter. If, as the question states, it has been brought to the notice of the Governor, the hon. Member may be sure that the steps that are necessary and practicable have been taken.

Will the Noble Lord wire to the Government of Bombay and see if any action can be taken?

I rather deprecate sending a wire, which would mean considerable cost to us and to the Government of India, but if the hon. Member wishes a wire sent I will consult my Noble Friend the Secretary of State.

Has the Noble Lord not seen the petition about this particular question?

I have seen a petition which has been sent round to Members of this House, but that petition, I think, relates to events which took place some time ago.

Is it not the case that the Legislative Council have done their best to cut down the police forces in India, despite all protests, and that it is to their action in this matter that the people referred to are deprived of the protection now asked for?

That hardly arises out of the question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India how the new scheme for the Indianisation of certain units in the Indian Army is progressing; whether volunteers are coming forward; and how many applications he has already received?

I regret that the information for which my hon. and gallant Friend asks is not available. The Indianisation of eight units of the Indian Army was announced as recently as 17th February, and while the measures taken will be watched with the greatest interest, I venture to hope that results will be awaited without impatience.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies in which Colonies it has recently been considered necessary to amend the Ordinances regulating medical practice in order to enable persons not holding qualifications registerable in the United Kingdom to practice medicine; and whether this modification of the standard required for registration or licensing of medical practice has the approval of the Secretary of State for the Colonies?

The only three Colonies in question (including Dependencies) are British Honduras, Turks Islands, and St. Vincent. His Majesty has not been advised to disallow the Ordinances in question, but in two of the three cases the Governor has been instructed not to use the power conferred upon him without previous reference to the Secretary of State, except in emergency. The Secretary of State attaches great importance to the maintenace of a high standard of professional qualification in the Colonies, but he recognises that there may be circumstances in which rigid adherence to the rules in force in the United Kingdom are impracticable in some of the poorer or less developed communities.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps are taken by the Colonial Office to ensure that communications addressed to the Secretary of State through the ordinary official channels shall not be subjected to an unreasonable delay locally before transmission to him?

The Colonial Regulations require Governors to forward communications addressed to the Secretary of State with all reasonable despatch, together with such report as their contents may appear to require. If a Governor failed to comply with this requirement, his attention would be drawn to the Regulation.

If communication takes place for nine months, and no reply is received, what is the practical effect of any such recommendation?

I should be glad to have particulars of any such rather unaccountable delay.

asked the Prime Minister if he will state what are the numbers of the personal secretariat of the Prime Minister and the cost thereof to the public Exchequer; and how the numbers and charge compare with those in 1913 and in 1922?

As the answer is in tabulated form, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The total staff borne on public funds during the years mentioned, including clerks and typists, and the cost to the public Exchequer, are as follows:

In 1913, four, costing at the rate of £1,017 a year.

In 1922, for the first quarter, 20, costing at the rate of £9,318 a year; subsequently reduced to 13, costing at the rate of £6,024 a year.

In 1923, 11, costing at the rate of £5,283 a year.

asked the Prime Minister what is the total staff of the Cabinet secretariat and the cost thereof to the public Exchequer; and how the numbers and cost compare with 1918 and 1922?

With the hon. Member's permission, I will circulate the reply in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The Cabinet secretariat with the Committee of Imperial Defence constitutes for staff purposes a single unit. The total staff and cost at the present time and at the corresponding dates in 1918 and 1922 are as follows: —

The historical section of the Committee of Imperial Defence, which is a separate entity, is excluded throughout.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies when the elections for the constituent assembly of Iraq will be held; whether a bull has been issued forbidding Shiahs to vote; and whether the protocol signed between the British and Iraq Governments must be ratified by the constituent assembly before becoming effective?

For the first and last parts of the question I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the hon. and gallant Member for Hull on the 9th May. A fatwa was issued on the 8th Novmeber, 1922, by three Shiah divines to the effect that participation in the elections was unlawful. One of the three signatories qualified this prohibition by adding the words "at the present moment." The hon. and gallant Member will observe that the fatwa was issued some months before the recent declaration of policy by the British and Iraq Governments.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the Constituent Assembly will be held within a reasonable time, and, if not, what becomes of the Treaty and our position?

The Treaty has been agreed to by the Iraq Government and ourselves. We shall act under the new Protocol as the declared policy of the British Government. The Assembly will meet when it can.

Is it not the fact that the Protocol has to be ratified by the Constituent Assembly? If the Assembly never meets, as seems to be likely, what will happen to us?

We shall not be asked to ratify until they ratify. We shall carry on.

In that case, the safeguard of evacuation in four years' disappears, and we shall remain longer?

No. The pervious Treaty, fixing 20 years, has not been ratified. The hon. Member completely misunderstands the position.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what payment has been made to the medical officers in the West Indian Colonies who have carried out treatment of yaws on an intensive system during the past four years; and what saving to the revenue has been effected by closing the hospital in Granada, owing to the success of this treatment?

The Medical Officers in Grenada undertook to perform this work without additional remuneration; but as the Committee appointed to inquire into the Windward Islands Medical Service have recommended that some special allowance should be granted, the matter, together with the other recommendations of the Committee, is receiving consideration. The Yaws Hospital was closed at the end of 1921. The cost in that year was £902; but as a certain amount of treatment is still being carried out, I am unable to say what proportion of this sum represents a saving.

Is "Yaws" a disease or a people?

A disease.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) whether there are any Crown lands reserved in Rhodesia or whether they all belong to the British South Africa Company; if the latter, does he propose to take any steps to meet the needs of Rhodesian ex-soldiers in the direction of land settlement;

(2) whether he has had any official request from the British Empire Service League, Bulawayo, Rhodesia, that ex-service men now residing in Rhodesia should have an opportunity of a land settlement scheme on similar terms to those which have been given in other Dominions and Crown Colonies?

Although the unalienated lands in Southern Rhodesia belong to the Crown, the disposal of the lands rests with the British South Africa Company so long as it continues to administer the territory, and the company is entitled, under the Privy Council judgment, to look to the proceeds of these lands for the reimbursement of its past administrative deficits. The company after the War set apart 500,000 acres of land (half in Southern and half in Northern Rhodesia) for the purpose of making free grants to ex-service men from this country or elsewhere overseas, but the scheme did not extend to returned Rhodesian soldiers, as the company came to the conclusion that there were administrative difficulties which made this impossible. Representations on this point were received subsequently from branches of the Comrades of the Great War in Southern Rhodesia, but the company did not feel able to alter their decision.

Will the hon. Gentleman re-open the matter and see whether, in view of the great anxiety displayed in Rhodesia by ex-service men, some method of settling these ex-service men on the land could not be arrived at?

At the present time we have no power. These lands are under the control of the British South Africa Company, and the Secretary of State has no power of interference. When the chartered company's administration terminates it will be a matter for the responsible Government of Southern Rhodesia.

If representations are made, would it not be possible to get the British South Africa Company to reconsider the matter?

I would advise my hon. Friend to make representations to the British South Africa Company.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether an amendment of the pension rules is contemplated to cover the case of transfer of an officer from a West African to an East African Colony, so that the pension may be calculated solely on the basis of the total number of years served and the emoluments of the office held at the time of retiring?

A proposal for dealing with pensions for service in different Colonies is under active consideration. The possibility of devising an arrangement which will, as between West and East African Colonies, have substantially the effect indicated by the hon. Member is not excluded.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether His Majesty's Government have taken steps to alienate lands in the low lands of Kenya; and whether, seeing that this proposal, if carried out, is a contravention of definite written pledges by both the local government and by Mr. Churchill, the Government will delay action in the matter until the question has been further examined?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. With regard to the second part, the Acting-Governor has reported that no action in the direction of alienating land in the lowlands will be taken without the permission of the Secretary of State. It is understood that he is reporting on the matter by mail.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies the amount raised by taxation in Kenya Colony during each of the last two years for which accounts have been received; and the expenditure on education of the native races of the colony during each of those years?

For the year 1920–21 the general taxation amounted to £1,257,242, and the expenditure on native education to £10,931. For the next financial period, namely, the nine months ended the 31st of December, 1921, the figures were £896,567 and £21,029.

How much of that taxation is paid by the natives?

A very considerable proportion.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, (1) the area of Crown lands in Kenya Colony still remaining in Government ownership; whether it is intended to alienate these lands; if so, on what conditions;

(2) the area of Crown lands in Kenya Colony hitherto alienated to individuals; the number of grants made; the number of individuals who have benefited by these grants; and the conditions under which the grants have been made?

I regret that I have not the information necessary to answer the hon. Member's two questions, but inquiry will be made of the Acting Governor of the Colony, and I will communicate with the hon. Member as soon as a reply has been received.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies the cost of the under-mentioned departments of Tanganyika territory in the years 1919–20 and 1920–21; His Excellency the Governor, secretariat, printing office, district administration, treasury, customs, legal department, police and prisons, and railways?

As the answer is necessarily in tabular form, and contains a great many figures, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate the answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

In explanation of these figures, it may be stated that the Civil Administration of the Tanganyika Territory was not placed on a regular basis until the latter part of the year 1919–1920, after the signature of the Treaty of Versailles. Until the decision to place the country under British Mandate was taken, only a provisional organisation was in existence, and the arrangements for providing the whole machinery of government for this large territory took a considerable time to carry out.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what was the actual cost of the Governor's palace at Dar-es-Salaam, including fixtures and furniture supplied by the Government; and if a zoo is now being added thereto?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what was the actual cost of the Governor's palace at Tanganyika, including new furniture and fittings: whether a zoological collection is now being formed; and, if so, at what cost and at whose expense?

As regards the cost of Government House at Dar-es-Salaam, I would refer to the reply which was given on the 7th of May to the hon. Member for Wells. The sum of £54,000 is understood to include the cost of the building (the ground floor of which is devoted to Government offices) and fittings. The cost of furniture was £3,000. I have no information regarding a zoological collection, except that no money has been provided for such a pur- pose from the funds of the Tanganyika Territory.

Is not the figure given a mere estimate of the cost of this palace? Could we not have the actual figure of what it has cost?

It is very improper to describe it as a palace. It is a Government office. Most of the buildings are nearly completed, but not quite. The payment is spread over three years. This is the last year, and the exact amount will not be known until the end of the period referred to.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the ss. "Lord Milner" is kept primarily for the use of the Governor of Tanganyika Territory; whether, when not required by him, a special suite on her is kept locked, with the result that passengers who are willing to pay first-class passages cannot be carried; and whether the cost of this is borne on public funds?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that a special train was constructed last year for use on the Central Railway, Tanganyika, exclusively for, the Governor and, if so, at what cost; that the steam yacht "Lord Milner" is primarily reserved for His Excellency the Governor to the exclusion of other passengers; and will he consider the advisability of discontinuing such expenditure at present?

No special train has been constructed for the special use of the Governor of the Tanganyika Territory. The s.s. "Lord Milner" is a Tanganyika Government vessel employed in carrying mails, cargo and passengers between the coast ports of the Territory. It is only occasionally used by the Governor, and I have no evidence or reason to suppose that the ship has been utilized by him to the exclusion of other passengers.

In the interests of the mandated territory, is there any reason why the Governor should not use the ship?

It is necessary when he is visiting different parts of the Colony that he should use the ship, as it is the only means of getting to certain parts of the Colony.

Is there any reason why special accommodation should be reserved to the exclusion of other passengers when the Governor is not on board the ship?

No, but when he has occasion to use the ship it is necessary that the Governor should have the right to this accommodation.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the actual aggregate expenditure in Tanganyika for the years 1918–19 to 1922–23, inclusive, and the revenue for the same period?

The aggregate figures for the five years in question are as follow: —

Will the hon. Gentleman tell the House what benefit the British taxpayer may expect from the extraordinary difference between the expenditure and revenue?

We shall have established good government, and we shall have discharged our national obligations as the mandatory Power under the League of Nations.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the nation has an obligation towards the people resident in this country?

That is constantly borne in mind. We are endeavouring to carry on this trust for the government of 4,000,000 natives in a in a large and difficult country with the utmost economy that is consistent with decent administration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what was the cost of the Commission of Inquiry into the liquor trade in Nigeria in 1909; and whether this fell, either in whole or in part, upon the Colony of Nigeria or upon the Mother Country?

The cost of the Committee of Inquiry was borne partly by the Colonial Services Vote and partly by the Southern Nigeria Government. The amount charged to the Colonial Services Vote was £460 3s. l0d. I am not aware how much the Committee cost the Southern Nigeria Government. In addition to the cost of the Committee itself, expenditure on printing the Report and Evidence was incurred. This was borne by the Stationery Office.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that, under the Government-assisted scheme of emigration for boys to Australia, no adequate system of supervision exists whereby an independent and sympathetic welfare officer visits the lads from time to time, giving them advice and necessary assistance, and generally acting in loco parentis; and whether he will arrange with the Commonwealth or the various State Governments for the introduction of a scheme similar to that which obtains in Canada whereby every juvenile immigrant is visited, advised, and reported upon to the home authorities at regular intervals?

I have been asked to take this question. I am in complete agreement with the hon. Member as to the importance of supervising the welfare of lads and indeed of all land settlers who have received Government assistance to proceed to Australia. The question how far the existing system of supervision is adequate and in what respects, whether by the appointment of special welfare officers or otherwise, it requires improvement will be considered by the delegation from the Oversea Settlement Committee, which has now arrived in Australia, in consultation with the local authorities.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that these lads are met on the landing stage, welcomed, and taken to a hospital for rest and refreshment, and are subsequently sent into training, and thereafter all official connection with and supervision of them ceases for good?

That is not in accordance with my information.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman give special instructions to the delegation in Australia to give special attention to this particular matter?

That is one of the terms of reference to the delegation.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that there are men in Australia who look after these boys extremely well?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that there is a steady and increasing return flow of emigrants back to this country from Australia; that Mr. Hughes, the late Premier, recently commented publicly on the number of persons he had observed on departing boats; that the immigration department of the Commonwealth Government has failed or refused to publish definite statistics as to what has become of immigrants, as to how many have gone on to the land, how many have flocked to the cities, how many have migrated from the country to the towns, and how many have left Australia; that the recent electoral redistribution on a population basis showed an increase in the city constituencies and a decrease in rural areas; and that the latest available figures, published in December, 1922, showed that while 87,938 immigrants arrived in Australia in 1921, no less than 72,422 returned to this country; and whether he will issue a warning that none but men accustomed to agricultural work and prepared for a life of hardship should contemplate emigrating under present conditions?

The hon. Member's question is based on a misapprehension, and I, therefore, do not deal with it in detail. The figures which he quotes relate to emigration and immigration between Australia and all other countries, including foreign countries. The Board of Trade returns for 1921 show that in that year 27,751 British subjects migrated to Australia from the United Kingdom with a view to permanent residence in the Commonwealth, whilst 8,861 came from Australia to this country. Careful inquiries show that the majority of those who return from Australia do so for the purpose of temporary visits.

Is not the last line of the question, to one who knows Australia, hopelessly misleading and incorrect?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that Mr. Travers R. Blackley, under-sheriff of County Cavan and a Southern Irish loyalist, was murderously attacked at his residence near Cavan on the night of 8th April, 1922; that he succeeded in driving off his assailants, and that this gentleman has consequently been obliged to leave Ireland and relinquish his business, in respect of which he has not received any compensation; and whether, in this and similar cases, the British Government intend to use their influence with the Government of the Irish Free State in order that their injuries shall be included in the Damage to Property Compensation Bill?

I understand that the facts of this case are generally as stated in the first part of the question, but that arrangements are being made by the Free State Government which it is hoped will secure the continuance of the payment of Mr. Blackley's salary as under-sheriff. I regret that any other losses arising out of Mr. Blackley being compelled to leave Ireland are not such as lie within the scope of the Damage to Property Compensation Bill.

Is it not a fact that this man, when gallantly defending his home, killed two of his assailants and had to leave the country, and can we allow him to starve?

I gather that he has been already helped substantially by the Free State Government.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies (1) if he is aware that persons resident in England who have received awards from the Irish Compensation Commission for substantial sums have, on applying to the Irish Grants Committee for advances over £1,000, been refused; what steps the Government intend to take to enable these people to get a more substantial advance pending their payment from the Free State Government;

(2) whether, in view of the fact that some of those who hold awards from the Irish Compensation Commission in respect of injuries to property suffered more than three years ago, and with whom the Free State Government are unable at present to settle, are urgently in need of obtaining an immediate advance on a portion of their award, and also to the fact that these awards carry interest at 5 per cent., he will consult the British Treasury as to advancing a substantial portion of the award, and charging the holder of the award 5 per cent, interest until the total award is met by the Free State Government?

The Irish Grants Committee is empowered to recommend such advances in the cases referred to as the circumstances of each case appear to warrant, and the terms of reference to the Committee impose no restriction upon the amount of the advances they may recommend on these awards. These arrangements were intended to mitigate the hardship arising out of the unavoidable delay in the payment of compensation, and my Noble Friend is not aware that these arrangements are in fact proving inadequate.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the latter part of the question?

That question does not come within the province of the Colonial Office. It is entirely a matter for the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the establishment of the Irish Free State as a Dominion, and in order to avoid a confused state of mind in His Majesty's subjects, the Government will introduce legislation prescribing a corrected designa- tion of the State as at present comprised, with appropriate alterations in the design of the Union Jack, assigning to Ireland her legal and constitutional status as a Dominion and a Free State?

I have been asked to answer this question. His Majesty's Government are not aware of any sufficient reason for the changes proposed by the hon. Member.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will make a statement as to what comment there has been from the elected members in Fiji regarding the reply of the Secretary of State to the recent situation in the Legislative Council?

The Governor has forwarded a further communication from elected members, which reached the Colonial Office on Saturday, and will receive consideration forthwith.

May we know at an early date what the communication is?

It is one of the longest telegrams I have ever seen, and it will require consideration. If my hon. and gallant Friend will later consult with me, I will endeavour to meet his wishes.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information regarding the position of the officers and men of the "James Johnson"; whether he has any further information regarding the ship herself; whether the British Note to the Soviet Government has been received by them and, if so, whether he can give the terms of the Note; and whether any time limit is attached to it for a reply?

I have good reason to hope that the master and crew of the "James Johnson," with the vessel herself, will be allowed to return to this country very shortly. In answer to the second part of the question, I would refer the Noble Lord to Command Paper No. 1869, which was laid upon the Table last week.

Is it a fact that the ship and crew are to be released only on payment of a sum of money? Is that payment to be made?

Is it not the case that the "James Johnson's" captain and crew are already well on their way home and that the vessel is to be released when a small sum is paid?

I cannot say whether or not that information is strictly accurate.

Does His Majesty's Government propose to recognise the payment of this sum of money to piratical people?

I would rather not answer a question of that sort at this moment.

Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to take similar steps with hon. Members of this House who break the law?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any further information with regard to the arrest of the steam trawler "Lord Astor" by the Russians and as to the fate and safety of the crew, and as to the result of the steps which the Government are taking in the matter?

I have good reason to hope that the "Lord Astor" and her master and crew will be allowed to return to this country very shortly.

Would the hon. Gentleman assure us that the case of the "St. Hubert," which was a vessel captured before the "James Johnson," and also compensation for the "Magneto," will not be lost sight of by the Government?

Certainly, I will give that assurance.

Is there any payment to be made in these cases?

I cannot say that.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what action has been taken since the conferences at the Hague and Genoa to secure the recognition of the rights of or effective compensation to British nationals in respect of property confiscated by the Soviet Government; whether he proposes to take any further steps; and whether, failing any satisfactory settlement, the sufferers from Soviet legislation may look to His Majesty's Government for compensation?

I have frequently stated that His Majesty's Government intend to pursue British claims against Russia by all the means open to them. I cannot usefully say more at this critical moment. The reply to the last parts of the question is in the negative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the repeated statements of His Majesty's Government that recognition of the Soviet Government must be preceded by recognition of debt and return of properties or payment of effective compensation to British nationals dispossessed by Soviet legislation, the Government will consider fixing a time limit within which the Soviet Government must comply with these conditions; and whether he will consider the advisability of making the continuance of the Anglo-Russian trade agreement dependent upon the acceptance of and performance within a stated period of those conditions?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the Note recently sent to the Soviet Government, and bearing in mind the losses sustained by British nationals as a result of the Soviet revolution, His Majesty's Government will make the payment of adequate compensation for such losses a direct issue with the Soviet Government; and whether, in the event of no satisfactory steps being taken by the Soviet to settle this matter, His Majesty's Government will itself accept responsibility for such compensation, and make subsequent arrangements to recover the amounts from the Soviet Government under the terms of the final Treaty of Peace, as foreshadowed in the Trade Agreement?

I do not think the objects which these questions contemplate would be secured by adopting the course suggested. The reply to the second part of No. 37 is in the negative.

Can my hon. Friend state any alternative course which would have that effect?

That will be debated before long.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government will consider the granting of advances to companies and persons suffering from the action of the Soviet Government in confiscating their property, such advances being secured upon the claims against the Russian Government for losses through confiscation of property which have been lodged with the Foreign Claims Department?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the judgment given in the Sagor and Kenesta appeal case, His Majesty's Government propose to take any steps for altering the law whereby goods confiscated from British nationals can be legally dealt with by the Soviet Government in this country; and whether in any prolongation of the Russian Trade Agreement the rights of owners of such goods will be protected?

His Majesty's Government have come to no decision on either of the points raised in the question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that His Majesty's Government, through their representatives, agreed with the representatives of the non-Russian Powers at the final plenary session at The Hague on 20th July, 1922, that they would not assist the acquisition by their nationals of the property of foreign nationals confiscated since 1st November, 1917, and that this recommendation was subsequently made by the Governments represented at The Hague to all Governments not so represented, he will say whether any decision was arrived at jointly with those Governments?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs which States have recognised the Russian Government de facto and de jure, respectively?

So far as His Majesty's Government are aware, the following countries have extended de jure recognition to the Soviet Government:

Afghanistan,

Esthonia,

Finland,

Germany,

Latvia,

Lithuania,

Persia,

Poland,

Turkey (Government of the Grand National Assembly).

De facto recognition is understood to have been given by the following countries, in addition to Great Britain:

Austria,

Czecho-Slovakia,

Denmark,

Italy,

Norway.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a reply has been received from the Russian Government on the question of fishing in territorial waters in answer to our previous note (that is the note before the most recent one); what is the nature of this reply; and whether it will be laid before Parliament forthwith?

His Majesty's Government still await the Soviet reply, of which they have, up to the present, received only a telegraphic summary. The remainder of the question does not, therefore, arise.

May we have the telegraphic summary on this question, which affects my constituency?

A telegraphic summary is always subject to a certain amount of inaccuracy. I think it would be much better to wait until we get the whole reply.

May I ask whether, in the course of negotiations with the Russian Government, the hon. Gentleman will remind them that while Soviet trawlers can trawl in the Moray Firth, near the three-mile limit, our trawlers cannot, and that our trawlers are not allowed to get within 13 miles of the Russian coast?

Perhaps my right hon. Friend will take an opportunity of bringing that before the House to-morrow.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state what the attitude is of His Majesy's Government towards the recent request of the Chinese Government to the Consortium for advances to meet current expenditure; and whether His Majesty's Government is prepared to make a general announcement of policy with respect to new Chinese loan obligations?

His Majesty's Government have been unable to support the request made by the Chinese Government to the Corsortium representatives in Peking. The declared policy of the Consortium has always been not to grant loans for administrative purposes except to a unified China, and the present moment seems inopportune for modifying this policy. The situation in China is too uncertain to permit of any rigid declaration of policy in regard to future loans; but, in general, His Majesty's Government would not favour any proposals for the creation of fresh obligations until effective steps have been taken towards the consolidation of existing unsecured or inadequately secured obligations and the provision of suitable security for that purpose. The four banking groups which constitute the Consortium are, with the approval of their respective governments, about to examine the question of the consolidation of these obligations.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in view of the recent legislation passed by the state of New York repealing the prohibition law in that State, if he has any information as to the present attitude of the United States of America with regard to the carrying of alcoholic beverages on the high seas outside the territorial waters of the United States of America?

I have not yet received the full text of the Supreme Court's decision, but I understand that it laid down that the prohibition amendment does not preclude United States ships from carrying liquor outside territorial waters. I am unable to say what action the United States Government intend to take in pursuance of this ruling.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what are territorial waters in this connection?

The three-mile limit has been accepted by the United States Government.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any information about the reported murder of Monsieur Varovski, the head of the Russian Trade Delegation to Italy, at Lausanne, and the attempted murder of two of his staff; and whether the effect of this crime on public opinion in Russia will be taken into consideration in our immediate negotiations with the Government of Russia?

Sir Horace Rumbold's report of this abominable crime confirms the main facts reported in the newspaper. The reply to the second part of the question is in the affirmative.

Can the hon. Gentleman say why no public expression of regret was made to the colleagues of this gentleman after the murder?

Is it in order for the time of this House to be wasted in discussing the murder of one Russian by another Russian in Switzerland?

That is not a point of Order. The supplementary question seems to raise a new matter, and it had better be put on the Paper.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the murder of the chief representative of the Russian Government at Lausanne, he can say if he has received information showing whether the protection accorded to the delegates of other States at the Conference was withheld from the delegates of the Russian Government?

I have received no information on this subject.

Will the British representatives express the regret of this country; in conformity with the action of the Italian Government and other Governments? [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?" and "Why not?"]

I do not know to what action the hon. Member is referring.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the secretariat of the Conference at Lausanne informed the Russian Government that its delegates would not be admitted unless it agreed to sign the Straits Convention drawn up by the Allies?

The Secretary-General of the Lausanne Conference, acting on the instructions of the inviting Powers, informed M. Vorovski on 12th April that, since the Turkish Government had accepted the draft Straits Convention as agreed on between the Turkish delegation and the delegations of the Allied Powers on 1st Feburuary last, there was no question of reopening the discussion of the question of the Straits. He added that if the Soviet Government should reconsider its decision not to sign that Convention, it would be given due notice of the date of signature. The attitude of the inviting Powers towards the participation of Russia in the resumed conference at Lausanne was clearly explained in the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut. -Commander Kenworthy) on 18th April.

Was there a Clause in the original invitation to Russia, when the Conference first met, limiting her right to participate until the Straits, question was settled?

The hon. Member will find that all very fully explained in the answer to which I have referred him.

Do not all those points refer equally to Rumania? Surely the interest of Russia is greater than that of Rumania in this question?

Perhaps the hon. Member, if he has any particular information with regard to Rumania, will put a question on the Paper.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will set up a Commission to inquire into Dominion and other systems of arbitration and conciliation in industrial disputes, with a view to the adoption of some means that will tend to lessen loss and suffering and promote peace and prosperity in industry?

The legislative action taken by other countries to minimise industrial disputes is under the constant attention of His Majesty's Government. As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the experience which had been gained by the working of legislation in the Dominions was utilised in framing the provisions of the Industrial Courts Act which was passed in 1919. I do not think that a further inquiry is necessary at the present time.

asked the Prime Minister when a decision will be announced in reference to the establishment of a company to run airships; and what Department of State will control such a contract?

As stated in the reply given on the 7th May, negotiations are proceeding with the parties interested and no decision has yet been arrived at.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say when a decision will be reached and whether it has been decided what Department of State will be responsible?

That has not been decided. I do not anticipate a Very early decision.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government intend to grant facilities for the Bill to provide for the supply of liquor on all vessels carrying passengers in British waters introduced by the hon. and gallant Member for the Rye Division of Sussex last Wednesday?

I am at present not in a position to make a statement as to facilities for any private Bills. It would not appear desirable to do so until all opportunities for the discussion of such Bills in the time allocated to private Members has passed.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the great hardship and loss suffered by tenants of shops and other business premises through having to remove from their premises after the usual form of notice, he is prepared to introduce legislation providing compensation for unreason able disturbance on the lines of the Town Tenants (Ireland) Act, 1906, and also security of tenure under conditions which would safeguard the interests of both landlord and tenant?

I would refer the hon. and learned Member to the reply which was given to a similar question by the hon. Member for the Elland Division of Yorkshire on the 14th March last.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in the promised legislation affecting the extension of the Rent Restrictions Act until 1925, the Government will give special consideration to the cases of small owners who bought with a view to occupation, many of whom are ex-service men?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department if he will request the British commercial secretary in Berlin to furnish an estimate of the present amount of German-owned foreign credit balances and securities held abroad on German account?

I would refer my hon. Friend to page 18 of the Report on the Economic and Financial Conditions in Germany to March, 1923, by the Commercial Secretary to His Majesty's Embassy at Berlin, which has just been published by my Department. Mr. Thelwall states that the figure usually mentioned in German industrial circles as representing the total value of German otsh and securities abroad is £50,000,000. He adds that account should also be taken of sums standing in the names of non-German persons and holding companies, which are in reality German-owned. The current view in Germany is that even with this addition the total is not likely to exceed £200,000,000.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether the Dominion of South Africa grant any preference tariff on British goods imported into that Dominion from Great Britain or other Dominions; and can he state what the preference amounts to in each case?

Customs preference is accorded in the Union of South Africa to most classes of goods produced or manufactured in the United Kingdom. In most cases goods are subject to ad valorem duties, and in such cases the preference amounts to a rebate of 3 per cent, ad valorem. The preference thus accorded to goods the produce or manufacture of the United Kingdom is extended to similar goods the produce or manufacture of Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether all or any of the British West Indian Islands give any preference on their tariffs on British goods imported into the islands from Great Britain; and can he state approximately how much the preference amounts to on duties imposed?

All the West Indian Colonies, except Bermuda, grant a preference to goods produced or manufactured in and imported from the United Kingdom. The amounts of this preference are fixed in most cases by the Canada-West Indies Trade Agreement of 1920, as the preference granted to Canadian goods by the various West Indian Colonies under that Agreement have been extended in each case to similar goods produced or manufactured in this country. Bermuda refused to ratify the Agreement. The preference amounts roughly to 50 per cent, of the duties levied on foreign goods in the case of Barbados, British Guiana, British Honduras and Trinidad; to 33½ per cent. of these duties in the case of the Leeward and Windward Isles; and to 25 per cent. in the case of Jamaica and the Bahamas.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether, having regard to the fact that the Agriculture Tribunal has made a set of proposals of which agricultural wages boards are an essential part, he will state for what reasons relief is proposed to be given to the farmer alone while, despite the recommendation of the Tribunal, relief is withheld from the farm labourer?

I am not prepared to admit that the proposals of the Government will bring relief to the farmer alone. In my view, the only sure means of improving the position of the labourer is to increase the prosperity of the industry as a whole, and in the opinion of the Government the establishment of wages boards would not have that result.

Is the right hon. Gentleman keeping in mind the fact that when agriculture was at its highest level of prosperity in the last century, wages were at their lowest?

Is this a decision of the Government arising out of the Report of the Agriculture Tribunal, which recommended wages boards and a fixed minimum?

It is a decision of the Government.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Canadian representatives who discussed the question of the embargo came to a definite arrangement with the British Government under which Canadian breeding cattle would be admitted into this country; and, if so, what were the precise terms of that arrangement and when and by whom, on behalf of the British Government, was it made?

The answer to the first part is in the affirmative. The arrangement referred to was made by my predecessor at the Conference with the Canadian representatives held on 14th, 18th and 20th October last, and the terms of the agreement reached were announced in my reply to the question addressed to me on 30th November, 1922, by the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardine and Western.

Is the right hon. Gentleman's reference to the answer which he gave on 30th November limited to that part in inverted commas—the terms of the agreement?

I am afraid I should have to look at the answer to see where the inverted commas are.

If the right hon. Gentleman makes such an Order, will it be laid on the Table, so that the House will have an opportunity of discussing the introduction of Canadian breeding cattle?

Yes, certainly.

Was the agreement between Sir Arthur Boscawen and the Canadian representatives reduced to writing; and, if so, will it be published?

The agreement was published. The terms of the agreement were included in the answer to which I have referred given by me on 30th November.

Was it not understood that the agreement would apply only to highly qualified breeding cattle and not to breeding cattle as a whole?

The hon. and gallant Member asks was it understood. The whole question is by whom it was so understood.

Was it not understood that the bargain with the Canadians was that they were to have no less favourable conditions than we give to Southern Ireland?

That is not so; not as regards breeding cattle.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he has any intention of imposing any restrictions on the importation of Canadian cattle other than such as are calculated to prevent the spread of disease or other than such as are applied to imported animals from Ireland?

I understand the hon. Member to refer to the Regulations under which the admission to this country of breeding cattle from Canada will be allowed, and as these are under consideration, I cannot at the moment make any statement on the subject.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that certain county agricultural committees grant certificates of the necessity of the occupation of cottages for agricultural purposes on the application of the landlords and without giving the tenants the opportunity of stating their cases, and that magistrates on hearing cases of ejectment accept such certificates as conclusive evidence of the fact of necessity without hearing the tenant thereon; and whether instructions will be issued so that the tenants in these cases may have an opportunity of appearing and stating their cases before such committee?

I have no information as to whether the facts are as stated in the first and second parts of the question. County agricultural committees act in this matter under statutory powers conferred directly upon them, and I have no power to issue any instructions upon the subject. I may add, however, that where, in a county borough, the Ministry itself has to deal with an application for a certificate, it is the invariable practice to hear the views of the occupier before coming to a decision.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he will furnish statistics showing the respective quantities and values of the imports into the United Kingdom during the years 1921 and 1922, in respect of the following: eggs in shell, eggs not in shell, liquid and yolk, albumen, and dried?

As the reply is in the form of a statistical statement, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the Ministry considering any steps by which we might possibly increase the use of home-produced eggs in this country and rather discourage the use of foreign imported eggs?

The hon. Member should put that question down.

Following is the statement:

The quantity and value of eggs imported into the United Kingdom in the years 1921 and 1922 were as follows: