asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information that the Constantinople branch of the Bank of Athens was lately seized by the Turkish authorities, the doors closed, and the coffers sealed; and, if so, what action was taken by the Acting British High Commissioner to protect the Allied interests involved?

The Turkish authorities closed the three branches in Constantinople of the Bank of Athens and sealed the strong rooms. The Acting High Commissioner at once made a protest to the Constantinople representative of the Government of the Grand National Assembly, and subsequently co-operated with his French and Italian colleagues in presenting a joint Note of protest to that representative. A reply has now been received expressing willingness to re-open the branches under Turkish control.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the Turkish authorities have issued a decree making compulsory the use of the Turkish language on shipping documents, such as bills of lading, captain's receipts, etc., at Turkish ports; and, in view of the serious effect of such a decree upon shipping interests in this country, what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The Allied High Commissioners addressed a joint note to the representative of the Government of the Grand National Assembly asking that the use of a second language on certain shipping documents be permitted, and received in reply a verbal assurance that this might be done.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Foreign Office has received any communications from the Board of Trade, the Department of Overseas Trade, or other public Department, or from any Chambers of Commerce or commercial firms, with regard to the consequences to British trade likely to be caused by any rupture of the Trade Agreement with Russia; and, if so, whether he will lay them upon the Table, or otherwise communicate them, or the purport thereof, to the House?

It is not usual to lay before Parliament correspondence passing between Government Departments on subjects of policy, but I may say that no such communication has been received I which indicates that a rupture of the Trade Agreement with Russia would in any degree injure British trade. A communication from the Association of British Chambers of Commerce is to the effect that the opinions of Chambers of Commerce throughout the country were recently sought by that Association on this question, from which it appears that the policy embodied in the Government's Note to the Soviet Government of Russia has been approved and endorsed by the Chambers of Commerce of Huddersfield, Hull, Leeds, Newcastle-on-Tyne, Wolver-hampton, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Sheffield, Leicester, Grimsby, Birmingham, and the Russian Section of the London Chamber. The majority of these bodies expressed the view that the Trade Agreement is of no value to British trade, and the same opinion has been expressed by the Association of British Creditors of Russia, and by the Russo-British Chamber of Commerce.

If the lapse of the trade agreement with Russia will cause no disadvantage to the trade of this country, what was the object of making it?

It was not made by the present Government.

Do I understand from that answer that the Government has determined to break the trade agreement, and is the hon. Gentleman not aware that that might be interpreted as a hostile act which might lead to very serious consequences?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is drawing an inference from my answer which is quite unwarranted. I merely replied to the question on the Paper.

Is it not a fact that the Trade Union Congress and a large number of trade councils and trade unions have sent in their opinion in regard to this trade agreement, and is their opinion not as valuable as that of the Chambers of Commerce?

The comparative value is a matter of opinion, but that is not the question which the hon. Member put upon the Paper.

Have the Government received any replies from Chambers of Com- merce expressing their regret at the possibility of the breaking of this agreement?

No, Sir. We have received no such resolution.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has received any representations from British commercial firms against the threatened termination of the Russian trade agreement; and whether the Board of Trade or the Department of Overseas Trade were consulted before the despatch of the Note of 8th May?

I would -refer the hon. Member to the answer I have given today to the hon. Member for Seaham. The answer to the second part of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can make any statement on the course of the negotiations between the Secretary of State and the representatives of the Russian Government in England; and whether His Majesty's Government have requested the Russian Government to recall its Ministers in Persia and/or Afghanistan?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, during the conversations lately held between the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and M. Krassin the question of compensation to British nationals who had suffered as the result of the Soviet revolution was mentioned; if so, what reply was made by M. Krassin, or what suggestions were offered by him; and, if the question was not raised, will an opportunity be taken of doing so, in view of the anxiety felt by the commercial community of the country?

I am still unable to add anything to the reply I gave to the hon. and gallant Member and to the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Wedgwood Benn) on 28th May.

Can the Under-Secretary give a denial to or an affirmation of the last part of my question?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman will find that question answered in the White Paper containing the recent Note to the Soviet Government.

Are we to understand that, in spite of the last conciliatory Note, we are not yet within sight of a settlement with Russia?

That would involve a statement in regard to the negotiations which are now taking place in reference to which I have already stated I am not yet in a position to make such a statement.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what are the amounts, respectively, of claims registered with the Foreign Claims Department of the Foreign Office; and the number of claimants in respect of properties of British subjects confiscated by Soviet legislation and of Russian State and municipal bonds, respectively?

I have been asked to reply. As regards the amounts claimed. I would refer to the reply which I gave on 5th March last to one of the hon. Members for Dundee. The total number of claimants who have registered claims in the Russian Claims Department may be put at 35,000, of whom probably three-quarters have claims in respect of bonds. It will be appreciated, however, that many claimants have a number of claims in different categories.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, considering the adverse consequences to British interests flowing from the judgment in the Sagor appeal case and from the grounds upon which that judgment was based, His Majesty's Government will consider the expediency of so restricting the recognition of the Russian de facto Government as to preclude their recurrence?

It is not proposed to take any steps of the nature indicated by the hon. and gallant Member.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in any negotiations for the continuance of the Anglo-Russian trading agreement, His Majesty's Government will insist upon the insertion of a clause providing for the restitution to British subjects of property or bonds confiscated by Soviet legislation, or for the payment of effective compensation in the event of non-return within a given period?

This matter is one of those the satisfactory adjustment of which will be, as has frequently been stated in the House, an essential preliminary to a full and final settlement with the Soviet Government. The Anglo-Russian trade agreement is merely a provisional instrument of limited scope, and I do not consider that any useful purpose would be served by the introduction of this matter into the present negotiations.

Is it not a fact that the Russian Soviet Government has expressed its willingness to discuss and come to a settlement of these claims once the British Government is willing to negotiate recognition of the Soviet Government?

I think that appears in the trade agreement itself.

Why do you not get on with that, so that these gentlemen may receive their money?

asked the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affaire whether he is aware that the "James Johnson" and "Lord Astor" trawlers have not yet been permitted to leave Murmansk; and what further steps he proposes to take to secure their early release?

Both these vessels have arrived at Honningsvaag in Norway.

Can the Under-Secretary assure us that the length of time these vessels have been detained will be taken into consideration in assessing the claims against the Soviet Government and that the matter will be expedited? Will he see that these claims are paid as soon as possible?

I think the hon. and gallant Gentleman may rely upon it that those factors of the case are being taken, into consideration.

Is it a fact that the "St. Hubert," one of the other vessels, has not yet been released, and will he bear that fact in mind?

That is quite true, but we have an assurance that it will be released very shortly. It is only detained in consequence of certain formalities.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what information he has about the Kolometzev family and MM. Babushkin and Karakhanian, referred to in the 11th paragraph of the Russian reply on 12th May to the British Note of 8th May; whether these persons were imprisoned in India; if so, for what periods, respectively, and on what charge; whether they were brought to trial; whether they were treated as political prisoners; and when and why they were released?

As regards M. Babushkin, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the Note appended to the Correspondence with the Russian Soviet Government published in White Paper Russia No. 1 of 1922, Cd. 1602. M. Karakhanian and the family of M. Kolometzev were arrested during the War in Teheran in similar circumstances about the same time, and interned in Mesopotamia until repatriated under the Anglo-Russian Agreement for the exchange of prisoners. To give the particular details of these cases selected by the hon. and gallant Member would be misleading without at the same time setting out their full history, which would not be possible within the limits of a reply to a question.

asked the Prime Minister if he is prepared to endorse, on behalf of the present Government, the statement made by the late Prime Minister on the 27th November last with regard to the recognition of the Soviet Government of Russia by the Government of this country, namely, that no recognition will be accorded to the Soviet Government of Russia until full compensation has been paid to our nationals and every just claim honourably met?

I presume that my hon. and gallant Friend refers to an answer given by the late Prime Minister to the hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) on the 29th November last. I fully endorse, on behalf of the present Government, the statement then made.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say if the statement attributed to the late Prime Minister in this question is in accord with the fact, namely, that there will not be full recognition of the Soviet Government until full compensation has been paid?

I am not aware of that. I was simply alluding to the question asked on the 29th November by the hon. and gallant Member whom I mentioned.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that considerable anxiety exists among large sections of opinion in this country in respect to the possibility of a rupture of relations with Russia, both as regards the loss of trade which would result and the political consequences which might ensue; and, in view of the conciliatory nature of the Russian Government's replies, will he take an early opportunity of signifying his agreement to the proposal that a conference be held between the two Governments in order that the differences between them may be examined in a broad and friendly spirit?

His Majesty's Government can claim to be well informed as to the views held by all shades of public opinion as regards Russian policy. As regards the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull on 28th May.

asked the Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs what States are represented upon the international body dealing with fishing rights and practices in the North Sea; what recommendations that body has made in regard to restricting fishing areas for trawlers beyond the three-mile limit; what States do not accept the three-mile limit for fishing purposes; what is the area beyond the three-mile limit for which it is sought to exclude foreign trawlers from the Moray Firth; what is the area beyond the three-mile limit from which the United States exclude British vessels from seal-hunting in the Behring Sea; and will he state within what distance of the Ceylon coast foreign pearl-fishing vessels are now permitted to operate?

So far as I am aware, no international body such as that mentioned by the hon. Member exists. The second part of the question therefore does not arise. A belt wider than three miles has been claimed for fishery purposes at various times by Spain, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Russia and Uruguay and in the French zone of Morocco. None of these claims are admitted by His Majesty's Government or have received general recognition. Trawlers belonging to nations signatory to the North Sea Fisheries Convention, 1882, are not excluded from any waters beyond the three-mile limit, as laid down in that Convention. The protection of fur-seals in the North Pacific Ocean is now governed by the Convention between the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Japan and Russia, signed at Washington on 7th July, 1911, under the terms of 'which the vessels of the signatory Powers are prohibited from engaging in pelagic sealing in that ocean north of the 30th parallel of north latitude and including the seas of Behring, Kanchatka, Okhotsk -and Japan, except within the territorial jurisdiction of one of the other Powers. It was not until Great Britain agreed to this Convention that British vessels could be excluded from seal hunting in the Behring Sea outside the territorial jurisdiction. As regards the last part of the question, pearl fisheries stand on a different footing to the ordinary kind of fishing in the waters of the sea, because the banks where the pearl oysters lie must be treated as part of the bed of the sea. For many centuries the pearl banks off the coast of Ceylon have been claimed as subject to the sovereignty of the rulers of the neighbouring territory and sub- ject therefore also to their control. Some of these banks are more than three miles from the shore, but where they are situated under the high seas the claim to sovereignty and control is limited in extent to the area of the banks, and does not affect the rights of navigation or of ordinary fishing in the waters over the banks.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether His Majesty's Government has decided upon the sum Germany ought to pay in reparations, and the modality of such payments; whether the French, Belgian, and other Allied Governments have been informed of the views of His Majesty's Government in this regard;

(2) whether negotiations are taking place between His Majesty's Government and the French Government with a view to ascertaining what is the total amount that the French Government is prepared to accept from Germany in reparations; and whether, if the views of His Majesty's Government do not coincide with those of the French Government on this question, His Majesty's Government will consider the elaboration of a reparations plan in conjunction with the other Allied Governments?

As the hon. and gallant Member is aware, His Majesty's Government submitted to the principal Allied Governments in January last a full and detailed plan for the settlement of the reparations question. That plan the Allied Governments, for reasons which they stated at the time, declared themselves unable to accept, and His Majesty's Government have no information to lead them to suppose that they can usefully take any further step at present.

In view of the recent financial collapse of Germany, does not the right hon. Gentleman think the situation is so changed that a further submission ought to be made?

No, Sir. My answer is in the negative.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty when the decisions on the requests advanced by the Inter-Port Welfare Conference, held at Chatham in May, 1922, may be expected?

It is hoped to promulgate the Admiralty decisions at an early date.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that before the Jerram Committee on naval pay made their report representative officers and men were heard in evidence; and if the same procedure will be observed before any reductions are made?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given by the late Financial Secretary to the Treasury on the 16th May, to which I have nothing to add.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Admiral Jerram derived great benefit from the fact that the men of the lower deck were allowed to give evidence before his Committee, and will he consider the advisability of following the same course in this case?

The Anderson Committee is investigating this question, and it must be left to the Committee themselves to determine what evidence they want to take.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if representations have been made to him regarding the inadequacy of the increase in wages recently granted to motor drivers in the royal dockyards; and if, seeing that the duties are similar to those performed by motor drivers outside the dockyards, he will see that the trade union rate is paid for that class of work?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The men employed as motor drivers are paid rates of wages which are equitably related to the wages of other classes of workpeople in the same establishments, and the suggestion that they should be paid the wages prevailing in the transport industry, which have no relation to shipyard wages, cannot be adopted.

asked the-Minister of Labour the reasons for which Mr. James Martin, of 134, Acciderry Place, Southwick Road, Dalbeattie, has been refused benefit under the Unemployment Insurance Acts; and whether he is aware that evidence has been produced by the chief magistrate of the borough, and other well-known residents, that Mr. Martin is continuously seeking whole-time employment?

I am informed that after this applicant had received 62 days' benefit the local committee, on the 10th January last, did not recommend further benefit, as they were not satisfied that he was making every effort to obtain employment. The committee adhered to this recommendation when the claim was reviewed in April. There is no confirmation that evidence on his behalf from the chief magistrate, or other members of public bodies, was ever submitted either to the committee or to the local Exchange. I have examined the case and can see no ground for not accepting the recommendations of the committee. I am informed that Mr. Martin is now in employment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware of the widespread feeling throughout the country at the way in which men are being victimised in this direction? Has not the time come to remodel the machinery?

That is a question which should be raised in Debate.

asked the Minister of Labour what are the modifications in the Regulations governing the issue of uncovenanted insurance benefit which he has been able to make as a result of his reconsideration of the Regulations existing at the time of the passing of the last amending Unemployment Insurance Act?

As I stated in the Debate on the Ministry of Labour Estimates on 26th April, two modifications have been made in the rules for the payment of uncovenanted benefit, namely, in respect of single persons over the age of 25 years and in respect of aliens (other than former enemy aliens) who had been resident in this country since the 1st January, 1911. These modifications are now in force, and I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the memorandum in which they were communicated to local employment committees.

Has the hon. Gentleman considered the possibility of additional modifications?

I can only refer the hon. Member to what I said in my speech on the Estimate, in which I indicated, broadly speaking, that I thought the Regulations and Directions were well conceived. Apart from those two modifications, I do not propose to make further alteration at present.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman agree to consider the case of the single woman? What has he done in that direction?

I have already indicated that as far as the question of age is concerned I have modified the rule for both sexes.

asked the Minister of Labour whether Mr. J. M. Bryce's Report on the Centres for Unemployed Boys has yet been received; and whether he can hold out any hope that these centres will continue to receive the Government grant?

This Report has not yet been received, but I hope it will be available shortly. On the question of the continuance of the Government grant, I am not at present in a position to add anything to the statement I made in the Debate on the Adjournment.

In view of the doubt which exists as to the intentions of the Government, will the right hon. Gentleman try to expedite the issue of the Report?

I cannot give any undertaking as to the date when the Report will be presented. I wish to deal with the matter at the earliest possible opportunity.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that, in accordance with a decision of the High Court in January, 1922, employment as cleaners of elementary schools was not insurable employment under the Unemployment Insurance Acts; that the Dorset County Council made application, as soon as possible after the decision of the Court, for a refund of all contributions paid in respect of school cleaners; and that the said application was rejected by the Ministry of Labour on the ground that it was not made within the time limit specified under Section 28 of the Act of 1920: and whether, in view of the fact that the said time limit had already expired at the time that the High Court decision was given, or left the county council with inadequate time for the completion of the claim within the prescribed limit, he will now make arrangements for the refund of the contributions paid by the Dorset County Council in respect of school cleaners prior to the decision of the High Court?

I am looking into this case, and will communicate with the hon. Member as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has yet considered the revised formula submitted to him on behalf of the representatives of necessitous areas, as a possible basis for making a special grant from the Treasury to meet the abnormal charges thrown upon them by exceptional unemployment in their districts, and, if so, with what result; and, if not, how soon will he be in a position to consider the same?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Rotherham last Monday.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the considerable anxiety among local authorities regarding the delay in this matter? Cannot he indicate when he will be able to issue the revised formulæ?

I have considered the revised formulae myself, but am not yet in a position to make a statement on it. I hope there will be no long delay.

Will the right hon. Gentleman represent to the Prime Minister that we want the same expenditure in this matter as was shown in the case of agriculture?

asked the Minister of Health whether he is now in a position to state the facts in connection with the prosecution by the Lewisham Board of Guardians of two labourers who were prosecuted by that board for neglecting to maintain their wives and children, such prosecution being based on the refusal of these men to accept ordinary relief work at less than trade union rates, both these men being capable competent workmen; and whether he is now able to say what advice or orders he proposes to issue to boards of guardians and other local authorities concerning the employment of efficient workmen on relief works?

I have received a report on the prosecution in question, and I understand that a case is being stated by the magistrate for hearing in a higher Court. I do not think that any action is necessary on the lines suggested in the last part of the question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a very large number of boards of guardians are adopting this policy, and would he inform the boards of guardians that his Department does not approve of relief work being dealt with in this fashion?

I am not quite sure what the policy is to which the hon. Member refers, but I am inclined to think that he is mixing up two different things, namely, the application of test work and the employment of people upon relief work. They are not necessarily the same.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the question raised is that relief work partly paid for out of national funds is degraded to the level of ordinary stone-yard test work by boards of guardians, and that that is what we want him to tell boards of guardians they should not do?

It is just what I thought. I think the hon. Member is mistaken. So far as I am aware, work of that kind, assisted out of national funds, is not used as test work.

Yes, I will send the right hon. Gentleman some cases.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the Edmonton Board of Guardians are demanding that able-bodied men shall do two days' work in return for whatever amount of relief may be paid them during the week, and that this relief occasionally works out at only 9s.; that the work is of such a character as would, under normal conditions, be paid for at trade union rates, and that men refusing to do the work in return for this small amount of relief are threatened with prosecution; that, in addition, the Employment Exchange authorities have informed the men that they are unable to demand a stamp to be placed on their insurance cards during the period they are at work; and whether he will take steps to inform boards of guardians that the schemes of work financially assisted out of national funds are not to be used as test work, but that men employed on such schemes, where they are efficient, must be paid the trade union rate of wages?

The answer to the first three parts of the question is in the affirmative, though the work referred to is work which would not ordinarily be done at the present time. I am not prepared to act on the suggestion in the last part of the question.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the Glasgow Corporation has recently accepted an American tender for the supply of steel furniture and fittings amounting to nearly £9,000, although the tender of Roneo, Limited, of Romford was very close, and although they afterwards offered to carry out the work at the same price as quoted by the American firm; and will he advise local authorities throughout the country that, owing to the vast amount of unemployment, they should endeavour to keep the work in this country?

I have been asked to reply. The circumstances of the particular transaction mentioned by the hon. and gallant Member have not been brought to my notice. My Noble Friend is issuing a circular urging local authorities, in the absence of special circumstances, to place their contracts in this country in view of present conditions.

Will the hon. Gentleman circularise the other Government Departments on this subject?

I am afraid I have no power to do that.

asked the Minister of Health if, in the interests of economy, he will consider the desirability of arranging for one annual registration of electors in place of the six-monthly registration which is required at present; and if he will arrange for county councils to be allowed to resume the power of making contracts for the printing of these registers?

I have been asked to reply. The subject first referred to was recently considered by the Government, but serious difficulties arise in connection with the proposal and the saving involved was not felt to be sufficient to justify its adoption. As to the latter part of the question, the Representation of the People Act, 1918, provides that one-half of the printing expenses shall be defrayed from the Exchequer, and in the circumstances it is considered desirable to maintain the existing arrangements in regard to printing contracts.

Is it not the fact that local authorities have frequently made contracts locally for the printing of the registers?

I think that the Stationery Office arranges the contracts, but I am not sure that it is not open to anyone to apply for them. I will make further inquiry.

asked the Minister of Health what proportion of the small-pox cases notified in the years 1921, 1922, and the first three months of 1923, had been vaccinated; and how many deaths had occurred in the same periods due to, or aggravated by, vaccination?

The proportion of cases of small-pox in persons who had been vaccinated at some time in their lives was 31·3 per cent, in 1921, 28·6 per cent, in 1922, and 19·5 per cent, in the first three months of 1923. The figures for the last two periods are subject to revision, but they tend to show that the bulk of the cases occurred in persons who had been vaccinated from 40 to 60 years previously. The numbers of deaths attributed to vaccination, off to some complication following vaccination, in the three periods were 8, 7 and 5, respectively.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the figures of the number of deaths from small-pox in the period mentioned?

I cannot do it without notice. Perhaps the hon. Member will put down a question.

asked the Minister of Health the number of people who have died this year up to the 30th April with small-pox; and, if any, what percentage of these were vaccinated and what percentage were unvaccinated?

No deaths hare so far been registered this year as duo to small-pox.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that the corporation of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, in their weekly examinations for tuberculosis in samples of milk sold for consumption in that city, found that of the highest proportion of positive samples was 10·4 per cent, in 1912, and that during the period of cattle shortage and general control by the Government of slaughtering it fell steadily to 3·6 per cent, in 1919, but that since that year it has risen again, and by 1922 stood at the relatively high figure of 7 per cent.; and whether, in view of the fact that tuberculous milk is one of the prime sources of the disease of tuberculosis in the population, he will take or propose measures for more efficiently dealing with herds in rural areas by transferring the duties in connection therewith from the small local authorities to combinations of these or to county councils?

I understand that the facts are as stated. The duty of taking measures to prevent the sale of tuberculous milk was placed on county and county borough councils by the Milk and Dairies (Consolidation) Act, 1915, but the commencement of that Act has been postponed till the 1st September, 1925, by the Milk and Dairies (Amendment) Act, 1922. I may, however, remind the hon. Member that Section 11 of the Act of 1922 provides for the transfer to the county council of the powers and duties of a district council under that Act or any other enactments, Orders or Regulations relating to milk and dairies, if the county council resolve that the district council have failed to exercise or perform any of those powers or duties and make complaints thereof to my Department.

asked the Minister of Health whether there are available data illustrating the average annual value of benefits received per worker among agricultural workers under the National Health Insurance scheme; and how this compares with the corresponding figure for workers in urban industries?

As agricultural workers are distributed amongst many thousand approved societies and branches which are not, in general organised on an occupational basis, it is impossible to give figures as to the annual value of benefits received by such workers throughout the country. An analysis of the figures of certain societies, whose membership consists largely of agricultural workers, shows a claims experience from 5 to 10 per cent, more favourable than that of societies generally, with the result that such societies have been placed in a position to provide their members with exceptionally favourable additional benefits.

Since, owing to the depressed state of agriculture, the earning power of the agriculturist is below that of other industries, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the question of reducing the contributions of the agriculturist, so that the contributions paid should be more in conforminty with the benefits received?

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of devising ways and means of increasing the wages, instead of reducing the contributions?

I think both those questions are too large to be dealt with now.

asked the Minister of Health (1) whether he has obtained the opinion of any representatives of the small approved societies on the proposed reduction of administrative expenses of such societies;

(2) whether he has received any representations against the proposed reduction of the administrative expenses of approved societies on the ground that small societies will not be able to efficiently conduct the work of National Insurance if the reduction is made; and whether he will arrange for an opportunity for Parliamentary discussion before such reduction is made?

Representations, to the effect referred to by the hon. Member have been received from some small approved societies, and I have also received expressions of opinion to the contrary effect, which are supported by the figures available as to the actual expenditure of such societies. With regard to the latter part of the second question, I would refer the hon. Member to the replies which I gave to him on the 9th and 16th May.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the grave anxiety on the part of some of these small societies that, if this allowance is reduced, they will not be able efficiently to administer the National Insurance Act, and will he give further consideration to this aspect of the matter?

Yes, Sir, I will give further consideration to it.

asked the Minister of Health whether any conferences have recently taken place between representatives of the doctors on the panel list and his own Department; whether any alteration in the terms of the panel service have been discussed; and whether it is proposed to revise the remuneration now being paid in respect of such service?

asked the Minister of Health what is the present payment made to doctors under the Health Insurance Acts; whether any negotiations are proceeding with the doctors for the purpose of reducing the amount now paid annually per patient; if he will state what the pro posed reduction amounts to; and if he can make any statement on the subject?

A conference has been held with the Insurance Acts Committee of the British Medical Association to consider certain modifications in the terms of service of insurance practitioners, but no discussion has yet taken place in regard to the rate of remuneration after the expiry of the present agreement, which fixes the rate at 9s. 6d., exclusive of payments in respect of drugs and mileage to rural practitioners.

When this conference has taken place, will the right hon. Gentleman be taking steps to see that, so far as it is possible to do so, the panel service is improved, having regard to the very many objections and complaints that are coming from all parts of the country at the present time?

Yes, Sir, that has been the subject of consideration.

asked the Minister of Health whether, under the Health Insurance Acts, there are any Regulations as to the number of patients who may be on the panel of any doctor; what is the maximum number of patients allowed to one doctor; whether there are any conditions as to the doctor having competent assistants in the case of a large number; and if any other conditions are made to the doctor as regards the proper treatment of those patients who are on his panel?

In reply to the first three parts of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply on the 14th March to the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Burgess). As regards the last part, the obligations of the practitioner are set out in the terms of service, of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy.

Would the right hon. Gentleman make it a condition with the doctors on the panel that similar treatment shall be meted out to the panel patients as is meted out to private patients, and that the queues that have to wait outside the surgery shall in some way be accommodated with shelter?

I think that will be one of the terms of service which have been under consideration.

asked the Minister of Health what remuneration is paid to chemists under the National Health Insurance Acts for the dispensing of panel doctors' prescriptions; whether it is proposed to reduce the amounts now paid; whether any conference has taken place recently on the matter; whether he can make any statement on the subject; and can he state how long the present agreement runs for?

The scale of fees paid to chemists for dispensing insurance prescriptions is set out in the Drug Tariff, a copy of which I am sending to the hon. Member. This scale was fixed under an agreement which expires at the end of April next, and negotiations for its revision have not yet begun. I am, therefore, not in a position to make any statement at present as to the revision of the scale.

asked the Minister of Health the number of cases in which the Ministry of Health requires local authorities claiming the housing subsidy under the Act of 1919 to furnish the Ministry with a copy of the minutes of the monthly or other meeting of the authorities claiming the subsidy; and will he give the aggregate number of copies of such minutes received during the period 1st December, 1922, to 1st June, 1923, inclusive?

No such requirement as is suggested by the hon. Member has been made in relation to the Housing Acts, but in 1919 some 300 local authorities were asked to furnish copies of their minutes of proceedings for the general information of my Department. The figure asked for in the last part of the question is 1,166.

What is done with these 1,166 copies of minutes that have been delivered?

I believe they are in pigeon-holes.

Would it not be more efficacious if the Ministry of Health left off asking for this wasteful form of expenditure, and contented itself with carrying out the terms of the Act of 1919, and paying the subsidy on an annual audit of accounts?

asked the Minister of Health if any inquiry is being held into the cause of the fever epidemic at Broxburn, West Lothian; whether the number of cases reported is abnormal; and whether the local authority has complained to the Edinburgh Corporation regarding the presence of a refuse dump in the district alleged to be the cause of the trouble?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The Scottish Board of Health have obtained a report from the county medical officer regarding the outbreak of scarlet fever and other infectious diseases at Broxburn, and are making further inquiries in the matter. The number of cases is large. The outbreak of scarlet fever has been definitely associated with a milk supply which was sold over a wide area. For some time past measles has been prevalent in the district, but I am informed that the number of cases is rapidly decreasing. I understand that the local authority complained to Edinburgh Corporation regarding the presence of a refuse dump in the district, but the medical officer is of opinion that this is not the cause of the scarlet fever.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware of the deep feeling existing in the country against being dragged into another war; and will he consider the desirability of calling together representatives of the whole of the churches, the chambers of commerce, the co-operative movement, and the Trades Union Congress so as to secure united action in favour of peace with all nations?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, which feeling, I may say, is equally shared by His Majesty's Government. As regards the last part of the question, I am not prepared to take the action suggested by the hon. Member.

Are we to understand that the Russian policy commenced by the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor, or rather, by his Government, is to be continued by his Government which he has just formed?

I do not think that that arises out of this question.

Does it not mean that if this be persisted in, we run grave risk of being dragged into another war?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is giving his own view.

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that the offices of Secretary for Scotland and Lord Advocate are not held by Members of this House, he will state what steps he intends to take to meet the desires and needs of Scotland in this respect?

I have no reason to believe that Scottish interests are not adequately represented on the Treasury Bench.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is widespread discontent in Scotland as to the treatment of Scottish affairs?

Is it the policy of the Government to continue permanently a gentleman who is not responsible to Members of this House because he has not been able to secure election to this Assembly, and would it not be desirable to select some person who could be here to answer legal questions in connection with Scottish affairs?

Will the right hon. Gentleman favourably consider reversing the roles of the Under-Secretary for Health, and the Secretary for Scotland?

All those questions shall have due consideration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider that the majority of the Scottish Members are discontented with the present state of affairs, and will he do something to satisfy them in this respect?

There was a time when English Members of this House were very discontented.

asked the Minister of Health if he will state the total amount of Government grants in the preceding completed financial year towards the cure of consumption, and the total amount expended by the local authorities of the United Kingdom during the same period?

The total amount paid from the Exchequer during the year ended the 31st March last in respect of the tuberculosis schemes in England and Wales, including capital grants in aid of sanatoria, was £1,985,042. The gross expenditure of local authorities in England and of the Welsh National Memorial Association during that year is estimated to amount to £2,945,155, exclusive of capital expenditure for which particulars are not yet available. With regard to Scotland, a question should be addressed to the Under-Secretary for Health for Scotland.

Arising out of the answer, which indicates a very large public expenditure which is preventible, and of the answer I received to my pre- vious question, that all the councils are unable efficiently to deal with tuberculous milk coming into their area until 25th September, will the right hon. Gentleman take measures to shorten the period in which local authorities like Newcastle may deal with their tuberculous milk?

asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of his Circular to local authorities, issued during the Recess, requiring them to place in this country all contracts in connection with public works for which they receive Government grants, he had regard to the effect such a condition would have upon those local authorities who, in order to break the British cement ring, have been making their purchases abroad at much lower prices than the combine demand; and will he either waive this condition where trusts and combines operate or make an extra grant to local authorities who have to pay higher prices in order to comply with the conditions of his Circular?

The condition will certainly be waived in any case in which it is shown that prices are being maintained at an unfair level.

Do we understand from that that in the case of cement local authorities buying from abroad at many shillings a ton cheaper than the combine price will be allowed to continue to purchase it abroad notwithstanding this circular?

If prices in this country are being maintained at an unfair level the waiving of this condition would be one of the weapons I should certainly use to bring prices down.

Are we to understand that if the price of foreign cement is lower than the price of English under the trust a local authority will still be able to continue its purchases of the cheaper cement abroad?

Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the very impure and non-comparable quality of foreign cement with English?

asked the First Com missioner of Works if he is aware that certain of the extra temporary workmen who were employed on Cumberland Green at a wekely wage of £2 13s. 3d. were discharged and re-engaged at a weekly wage of £l 19s. 3d.; and will he say whether these men are employed under the Ministry of Health's unemployment scheme?

Two men who were employed before the 31st March on this job re-engaged themselves at the 75 per cent, rate, in the circumstances explained in my reply to the hon. Member for Carlisle on Monday.

Is it not a fact that a number of the men who were originally engaged at the higher rate of wage have been taken on at the lower rate, which is far below the trade union rate, and is not the scheme being utilised for bringing down the trade union rate of wages?

No, the number of men who have been taken is two, and they specially asked to be taken on at this rate. The whole subject was explained at great length in the answer which I gave on Monday.

asked the President of the Board of Education if he will take steps to intervene in the dispute between the town council and the school teachers of Ossett, with a view to bringing the dispute to an end?

I have been inquiring into this matter, and am doing my best to promote a settlement of the dispute.

asked the Solicitor-General for Scotland whether he is aware that, under a warrant alleged to have been granted on Saturday, 12th instant, by the Judge of the First Division of the Court of Session, authorising the arrest and imprisonment of a number of landless ex-service men on the estate of Strathaird, in Skye, because of their failure to appear personally at the bar of the said Court, the said warrant has been put into execution and six ex-service men are now serving a sentence of two months' imprisonment; whether he is aware that no such warrant was signed or issued by any member of the said Court on the date which it bears; and whether he will have the circumstances inquired into?

rose —

Why cannot I have the question answered by the Minister to whom it is addressed?

The Minister will answer for the Scottish Office.

On a point of Order. This is a question that affects the law of Scotland, and the Under-Secretary is not a lawyer.

It is quite customary, where there are two officers representing one Department, to arrange for one to answer a question.

This is a legal question, and for that reason it is addressed to this particular Minister.

The hon. Member can postpone it, instead of asking it.

If it be postponed, is there any guarantee that the Minister in question will be here to answer it?

Ministers have many other duties to perform. It is impossible for them all to be here at all times.

He is never here at all.

Will the hon. Member ask the question, or put it down for some subsequent day?

The question is one regarding the action of the Lord Advocate, who is not here, for reasons we all know. But he has a second string, who should be here to-day.

Is not this an administrative matter resting within the discretion of the Secretary for Scotland, who will be advised by his legal advisers?

That is what I have already said.

I may say, in passing, that the Solicitor-General for Scotland is at present in Scotland discharging his official duties there. I am informed that no warrant for imprisonment was issued on or dated the 12th instant, but that on that day the respondents were due to attend in the Court of Session under an Order dated March last. They failed to appear, and accordingly a warrant for arrest was granted by the Court. On the 26th of May, the respondents being present in Court, sentence was pronounced and signed of two months' imprisonment for confessed and wilful breach of interdict. I thus see no ground for inquiry.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware of the intense indignation in Scotland at this brutal and scandalous sentence upon five men who have come back from the War wounded, to whom a pledge given by the Government has been deliberately broken?

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that these ex-service men at present in gaol applied for land under the terms of the offer made to ex-service men as far back as 1919, and they have never had any promise of land either in Skye or any other part of the islands of Scotland?

In view of the fact that there is considerable indignation in Scotland in connection with this matter, will the hon. Gentleman issue a statement pointing out whether these men are ex-service men, and for what reason the Board of Agriculture has not provided them with small holdings?

This question, obviously, contravenes the assertion of the hon. Member who asked the original question, that this is only a legal matter. That involves a question that I propose to deal with later.

Considering that these men have served their country, cannot a free pardon be granted to them, irrespective of the merits of the case?

asked the Undersecretary to the Scottish Board of Health if he will state the number of men from the Island of Skye who enlisted for service in the late War; the number of those ex-service men who made application for small holdings on their return; and the number of cases in which such applications have been granted by the Board of Agriculture for Scotland?

I am informed that the records of the Military Authorities do not include statistics for the whole period of the War of the number of recruits from individual counties or parts of counties, and the information requested in the first part of the question is, therefore, not available. The number of applications for small holdings by ex-service men in Skye is 461, of which 134 have been withdrawn. 83 of the applicants have been settled on small holdings, and schemes in progress will provide for the settlement of an additional number.

Can the hon. Gentleman inform us whether there is any indication when the others will receive their small holdings?

I am afraid I cannot give an exact answer. The schemes are at present in progress.

Will the hon. Gentleman inform the House of the number of men who will be put on the land through these schemes?

I must ask for notice of that question.

The question on the Paper, Mr. Speaker, asks for a definite statement as to the number of holdings that are being given. The hon. Member now says that he requires further notice before he can give an answer to the question.

The question is as to the number of applications which have been granted, and I have answered that.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the intense indignation in the Island of Skye at the delay in the settlement, and will he hurry up the work of settling these men on the land?

A large part of the Island of Skye is in the hands of the Board for the purpose of settlement, and I am very anxious to get the matter expedited as much as possible.

Can the hon. Gentleman inform the House why 131 of these men who expressly wished to be settled on their native soil have now withdrawn their applications? Is it not due to the fact that the Board of Agriculture has delayed granting the land and the men have got tired of waiting?

The right hon. Gentleman was himself in the last administration, and perhaps he can give an answer to that question himself.

Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether these 130 men voluntarily withdrew their applications, or whether it is the fact that they were struck off the list by the Board of Agriculture because the conditions attached to the granting of their holdings were too onerous.

In some cases they voluntarily withdrew, and in some cases, no doubt, they did not wish to take up the holdings under the conditions. A large number of men have taken up holdings under the conditions.

Is it a fact that they withdrew in these circumstances?

asked the Undersecretary to the Scottish Board of Health if his attention has been called to the fact that six ex-service men, John Grant, Alexander Mackinnon, John Nicholson, Alexander Mackinnon, Donald Mackinnon, and Aleck Robertson, all of Skye, were sentenced on Saturday last to two months' imprisonment for breach of an interdict obtained at the instance of Walter L. Johnston, of Strathaird, Isle of Skye; whether he is aware that these men had applied to the Board of Agriculture for small holdings and that, notwithstanding the lapse of time, none had been settled on the land; and whether he will put the matter before the Secretary for Scotland with a view of obtaining their immediate release and their settlement in small holdings at an early date?

asked the Undersecretary to the Scottish Board of Health (1) whether he has intimated to the ex-service men concerned in the Strathaird case that they are no longer eligible for holdings under the Statutes relating to land settlement in Scotland;

(2) whether, as recently suggested, a special inquiry will be made by the Government into the agrarian situation in the Scottish Highlands, so as to prevent the imprisonment or enforced emigration of the landless?

asked the Undersecretary to the Scottish Board of Health whether he is aware that six ex-service men have been sent to prison for two months for seizing land at Strathaird, Isle of Skye, for the purpose of marking out crofts; that five of those men were disabled in the War, and that those men, when discharged from the Army, made application to the Board of Agriculture for small holdings, but have not had any settlement of their applications; and whether he can give any indication when the applications of those men, and of others whose applications have been made for several years, will be favourably considered?

The six men mentioned were sentenced by the Court of Session on Saturday last to two months' imprisonment for breach of an interdict granted by the Court on the application of the owner of the estate of Strathaird. These men applied to the Board of Agriculture for small holdings, and, according to my information, four of them were in recept of disability pensions at the time of application.

A land settlement scheme for the benefit of the township of Elgoll to which these men belong was completed in 1919 and provided 21 new holdings. None of these men was included in that scheme, but they could have been considered for holdings on other lands which the Board have acquired in Skye but for their illegal action. As a result of that action, their names have been removed from the Board's list of approved applications in accordance with the instruction to the Board which was publicly announced about 18 months ago. The sentences which the men are undergoing have been imposed by the Court in vindication of its authority, and, that being so, the case is not one in which the Secretary for Scotland can intervene.

The work of land settlement in the Highlands is proceeding as rapidly as the financial and other conditions permit. So far as the Island of Skye is concerned, the land which the Board acquired in the Bracadale district has not been completely allotted, and qualified applicants from the Strathaird district are eligible for consideration for holdings there. With regard to the inquiry suggested by the hon. Member for Clackmannan and Eastern Stirlingshire (Mr. Weir), my Noble Friend does not consider that an inquiry would serve any purpose in expediting land settlement or otherwise.

In view of the wide spread indignation in Scotland [ Laughter. ] This is no laughing matter. It is a very serious matter. That is the sort of treatment we get from people over there. In view of the intense indignation in Scotland with regard to the treatment of these men, is the Under-Secretary prepared to make representations to the Secretary for Scotland in order that an inquiry may be made, and Members of this House may have an opportunity of acting on behalf of these men?

Having regard to the fact that these men, who have been struck off the list of applicants for land settlement, applied so long ago as 1919 for land, before the Board of Agriculture was prepared to give them land, and having regard to the fact that they have been driven by desperation to take a patch of land, will the hon. Gentleman recommend his Noble Friend the Secretary for Scotland to restore their names immediately to the list?

Will the hon. Gentleman consider making an inquiry into the circumstances which forbid wounded ex-soldiers from emigrating, and that each one of these men has been wounded, and therefore has not been allowed to emigrate? Will he look into the special circumstances of these poor men and see if their names cannot be restored to the list, so that they can get an allotment of land?