asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the figures of the population of India, by occupations, taken at the census in India, of 18th March, 1921, have been published, and when the Report of the Census Commissioner for India is likely to be issued?

The figures of the population of India, by occupations, at the 1921 census, have not yet been received. There is no information available here as to when the Report of the Census Commissioner is likely to be issued, but inquiry will be made of the Government of India if desired.

asked the Under-secretary of State for India whether the Government of India intend to take any action on the opinion expressed by the Judges of the Allahabad High Court, when disposing of the appeals in the Chauri Chaura case, to the effect that the police, who were overpowered and butchered by a mob of from 4,000 to 5,000 persons, had neither sufficient ammunition nor suitable arms to deal with a mob of that size?

I have not yet seen an authorised report of what the High Court said in its judgment. But the question will be brought to the notice of the Government of India.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the communication issued by the Government of the Central Provinces on the question of the hoisting and carrying in procession of the Swaraj flag was issued with the assent and approval of the Government of India and the Secretary of State?

The communiqué published in the Press of the Central Provinces Government, dated the 5th May, is, as stated therein, an explanation of the local Government's policy. My Noble Friend has been and is in communication with the Government of India on the whole subject.

May I ask for an answer to my question, namely, was the communiqué issued with the assent of the Government of India and the Secretary of State?

I would point out that this is a matter within the competence of the local Government. They were entitled to issue an explanation of their action, which they did.

Has this explanation been followed by an excrudescence of this Swaraj flag flying, and an enthusiasm for the flag that did not exist before?

Not so far as I know; not in an illegal sense.

asked the Under-secretary of State for India what decision has been taken in the consideration of the Committee's Report on the Amendments to the rules in connection with the elections for the Legislative Assembly and provincial councils in regard to the question of a deposit being required from each candidate for election, to be forfeited if the candidate fails to get the required proportion of votes, in the some manner as in elections in the United Kingdom?

My noble Friend has recently sanctioned an amendment to the rules for all councils requiring a deposit of Rs. 250 in the case of provincial councils, and Rs. 500 in the case of the Indian Legislature, as a condition of nomination for candidature. The deposit is to be forfeited if the candidate fails to obtain one-eighth of the votes polled (or one-eighth divided by the number of members to be elected, in the case of constituencies returning more than two members), or if the candidate, having been elected, fails to take his seat and the Oath. Papers connected with this and other amendments will in due course be presented to Parliament.

asked the Under-secretary of State for India whether, having laid upon the Table the Viceroy of India's despatch giving his reasons for the certification of the Indian Finance Act, 1923, he will now circulate as a White Paper the petition to this House from the members of the Indian Legislature protesting against the certification, together with the names of the petitioning members?

The hon. Member's question appears to be addressed to me in error. The matter is one entirely for the Public Petitions Committee of this House.

Could we not have copies of the Viceroy's despatch in the Vote Office?

I will attend to that matter.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he will state the nature of offence proved against, and date and term of sentence passed on Lala Lajpat Rai, president of the first Trade Union Congress of India, whether the Lala is now reported suffering from tubercular trouble, and whether, bearing in mind this disease, his age, and his past great services to India, the Government will grant remission of the remainder of his sentence?

Lala Lajpat Rai was sentenced on the 9th March, 1922, to one year's simple imprisonment under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, and to one year's rigorous imprisonment under the Seditious Meetings Act, the sentences to run consecutively. I have no information beyond that which has appeared in the Press as to his state of health. With regard to the last part of the question, my Noble Friend is not prepared to make any representations to the authorities in India on a matter the decision on which is within their competence.

Will the Noble Lord make inquiries as to the state of health of this man?

Out of courtesy to the hon. Gentleman, I shall discuss the matter with my Noble Friend the Secretary of State; but I am bound to point out the difficulty in the way. If inquiries are to be made into the health of any one prisoner, there is no logical reason why they should not be made into the health of hundreds of others, and that would impose an intolerable burden upon public funds in this country and India. There is no reason to believe that the authorities in India are not carrying out their duties in looking after the health of this and other prisoners, and I am disinclined to agree with the suggestion made in the question.

Is it not the case that this man has repeatedly been in collision with the laws of the country, has been convicted and condemned before, and has been a source of trouble for many years?

The only ground on which I permitted this question was the allegation as to the prisoner's serious state of health.

Is the Noble Lord aware that prisoners in good health, and in exactly the same position as Lajpat Rai, have been set free in the United Provinces; and will he make inquiries as to the man's health and find out whether in this case similar clemency will not be shown?

As I promised the hon. Gentleman, I will discuss this matter with my Noble Friend, but I feel bound to point out the difficulties, and I can see no reason for making an exception.

Will the Noble Lord consider that a sentence of one year's penal servitude or simple imprisonment should not be permitted to be converted into sentence of death, if the state of the man's health is as reported?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the suggestion published in the Rhodesian Press that the administration surplus of revenue over expenditure, subsequent to the issue of the Report of the Judicial Committee, will be retained by the Chartered Company for the benefit of its shareholders; and whether His Majesty's Government will take steps, as suggested by Sir Charles Coghlan, so that these surpluses will be secured and retained by the new Government of Rhodesia?

The Secretary of State has now considered the message from the elected members referred to in my reply of the 4th June. Under the terms of the Report of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council the British South Africa Company is entitled, on the termination of its administration, to have secured to it the reimbursement of any outstanding balance of aggregated advances made by it for necessary and proper expenditure upon the administration of Southern Rhodesia. This balance can only be determined by taking into account, on the one hand, the total administrative expenditure incurred by the company during its administration and, on the other, the total revenue received. In these circumstances, His Majesty's Government are not in a position to require the company on the change of Government to relinquish the balance of the surplus accrued in one particular year of the company's administration. A reply to this effect has been sent to the elected members.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the British South Africa Company alienated to De Beers Consolidated Company over 200,000 acres of land for considerations other than cash; what was the nature of these considerations; what is the estimated value of this alienation; and whether both the initial value and the proceeds are to be deducted from the gross amount awarded to the company by Lord Cave's Commission?

This was a free grant made by the British South Africa Company in 1894 in consideration of certain advances received by the company from the De Beers Consolidated Mines, Limited. The amount with which the company subsequently proposed to credit the Crown in respect of this grant is based on a valuation of 9d. an acre. The cash receipts on account of the quit rent on these, as on other lands, were taken into account in the award of Lord Cave's Commission.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the paragraph in my question which asks what is the estimated value of this alienation?

Is it not a fact that the whole of Rhodesia has been reclaimed from the wilderness by the chartered shareholders, who have not received a penny in dividend?

It is not quite correct that they have not received a penny in dividend. I understand that the estimated value of this land was gone into and taken into account by Lord Cave's Commission.

Is not the value of these 200,000 acres to be set off against the deficit referred to in the answer given a little time ago by the hon. Gentleman?

Not its present value. It is the valuation at the time it was handed over.

Another lot of robbers!

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies the numbers of male and female voters on the existing electoral roll in Kenya, and of them how many are officials or wives of officials; and the average number of voters for each electoral division?

I regret that I have not the information required, but I will consult the Acting-Governor and communicate with the hon. Member in due course.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what is the amount of penalty to which a French or Italian trader in Tanganyika will be liable if he keeps his books of account in his own language after the close of the present financial year?

Traders of all nationalities may keep their ordinary accounts in any language they please, but for the purposes of the Trades Licensing Ordinance they will be required to submit evidence in a form intelligible to the licensing authority, sufficient to show the amount of their profits and to enable their financial position to be readily ascertained. The accounts necessary for this purpose must be in English or Swahili in English characters, and the maximum penalty on conviction for contravention of this provision is 2,000 shillings. It is not intended that proceedings should be taken in cases where the accounts are intelligible to the licensing authority without strict compliance with the letter of the law. I may add that an amendment of the section concerned is contemplated.

Will the amendment of this section free the Indian traders from the necessity of keeping these accounts in English?

Certainly not all. The Amendment is designed to deal with small accounts. The big firm that before the War had to present its accounts in German or Swahili will have to present them in English or Swahili.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can state, with regard to cotton goods imported from Great Britain into Tanganyika by a British importer, sold by him to an Indian dealer, retailed by the Indian to an African trader, and sold by him to a native purchaser, the number of duties and taxes payable and of licences necessary before the transaction can be completed; and if he can state the approximate percentage added thereby to the c.i.f. price of the goods at the port of importation?

The only payment to the Government involved in such a transaction would, so far as I am aware, be the payment of Customs duty, which in the case of unbleached cotton piece goods amounts to 40 cents of a shilling for lb. weight.

Is it not a fact that many of these traders would have to take trading licences, and pay profit duty?

I am not quite sure about that; I will look into the point.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies who is responsible for the direction of irrigation policy in Iraq; what are his qualifications for the post; what is his salary; and what is the total sum spent in Iraq in irrigation during each of the years ending the 31st March, 1921, 1922, and 1923?

The direction of irrigation policy in Iraq is under the control of the Ministry of Communications and Works of the Iraq Government, which is entirely responsible for the qualifications and salaries of the officials employed and paid by it. With regard to the last part of the question, the Estimates of the Iraq Government for 1921–22 show a total expenditure of 40 lakhs of rupees, and for 1922–23, a total of 38½ lakhs.

Does the hon. Gentleman mean that he has no power to change the present policy if he be not satisfied with it?

Only with the concurrence of the Iraq Government.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the Criminal and Malicious Injuries (Amendment) Bill, 1923, has now passed all its stages in the Parliament of the Irish Free State; whether he is aware that the provisions of the said Act deprive British citizens of rights which they possessed under decrees obtained while Great Britain was still responsible for the Government of Southern Ireland and fail to provide the compensation in respect of damage to life and property which was agreed to between the Irish and British plenipotentiaries at the time of the signing of the Treaty; and what action the British Government are taking to safeguard the interests of British subjects in Southern Ireland, which are gravely prejudiced by the terms of the above Act?

In reply to the first part of the question, I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the Bill which as amended in some important respects, has become the Damage to Property (Compensation) Act, and has received the Governor-General's assent on behalf of His Majesty. As regards the second part of the question, it was always contemplated by His Majesty's Government and by the Provisional Government that so soon as the Compensation (Ireland) Commission was established by agreement between the two Governments, that Commission should be the sole tribunal for the assessment of compensation in respect of damage to property arising during the period covered by its terms of reference, and that proceedings or decrees in respect of such damage taken before or issued by any other tribunal should be void. As regards injury to the person during this period, His Majesty's Government assumed liability for the payment of compensation to their own supporters, and no statutory provision on this subject by the Free State Parliament is therefore necessary. In reply to the third part, the understanding between the two Governments was that in respect of injury to the person or to property arising after the truce, equitable compensation should be paid. In reply to the fourth part of the question, I can assure my hon. Friend that this matter is continuing to engage the close and earnest attention of His Majesty's Government.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how an Act of Parliament passed by any Parliament other than this can take away from a British citizen the rights he has obtained under a decree of a British Court?

The Irish Free State can repeal any Act passed by this Parliament—I mean any Act under the powers given to them. It has the constitutional power, if His Majesty assents to it, under the powers given by the Home Rule Act passed last December.

Do I understand my hon. Friend to say that there is no Parliamentary legislative supremacy in the Imperial Parliament?

Yes, certainly—Parliamentary supremacy to repeal that Act. I want to make it clear that the power under which the Irish Free State Parliament has passed this Compensation Act is the power conferred upon it by Parliament in December last.

Does that mean that the British taxpayer is to be responsible for the damages done by Irishmen to Irishmen in Ireland?

No.

As this is a very important matter, may I ask whether, under decrees obtained in British Courts by British citizens in Ireland prior to the Treaty, they are not entitled to claim enforcement unless an Act is passed in the British Parliament to the contrary?

The definite understanding between the late Government and the then Provisional Government under the heads of the agreement was that the undefended decrees which had been dealt with before the county councils should come up for review. Defended decrees were regarded as final, but the undefended decrees had to come up for re-examination by the Committee.

Are we to understand that a decree granted by the proper authority in Ireland before the passage of the Irish Free State Act is to be declared null and void by the Free State Government?

I understood that it had been made clear long before I took office that these undefended decrees would have to be examined before a tribunal. I have always understood that. The defended decrees are final and are not re-opened under this Act.

By what Parliament or Statutory authority are the decrees of the Courts set aside? Is it only an understanding between the two Governments? If so, in what documents is the agreement set out?

I will inquire into that and find out what is the case. That is the situation as I found it.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this question again at the earliest opportunity.

Where the Irish Free State Government passes a Bill gravely prejudicing the rights of British citizens who have obtained decrees under the authority of British Courts, is it not proper that these cases should be reserved for the assent of His Majesty?

I am afraid I cannot answer that question. I think it should be addressed to the Prime Minister.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he has any information as to whether the Australian Government is about to substitute private management for the present State control of the Commonwealth line of steamers which at present compete with British lines trading to this country?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if his attention has been drawn to the torturing of a Chinese citizen by beating and burning at the hands of the Shanghai Municipal Council's police; and whether he will inquire into the matter?

I have seen in the Press a reference to the case which is at present the subject of judicial proceedings in the Supreme Court at Shanghai.

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this question again in the House at the earliest available opportunity.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will ascertain from our representatives in China whether there is any evidence that the habit of opium smoking is lessening in certain places and amongst certain peoples in proportion to the spread of the habit of cigarette smoking; and whether he will take steps to test the feeling amongst Powers interested in China in favour of a tobacco monopoly that would serve the double purpose of placing Chinese finances on a stable footing and of counteracting the opium evil?

I have never heard of any evidence in support of the theory advanced in the first part of the hon. Member's question, but His Majesty's Minister at Peking will be asked to furnish a report. In regard to the second part, there is already in existence at Peking a Wine and Tobacco Administration charged with the control of the taxation of tobacco and cigarettes throughout China. Apart from treaty and other objections to the creation of monopolies, it may be found that better results can be reached by the strengthening of this Administration than by the establishment of a new organisation.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the present state of anarchy in China and the powerlessness of the Central Government, he will take steps in collaboration with the other Powers to raise a force of Chinese gendarmerie, officered by Europeans, in order to protect the railway lines and to maintain order, such force being paid for out of the proceeds of the Chinese Customs?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps the Government are taking to protect the lives and interests of British subjects and traders in China in view of the most serious con- dition of things now prevailing outside the area of the Treaty Ports; and has he any news as to the release of the Europeans and Americans who were recently captured as a result of the outrage on the Tientsin-Pukow Railway?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the present position of the 14 British and Amercan citizens reported to have been captured on 6th May last by bandits who wrecked and looted the Tientsin-Pukow railway train in China; what is the main cause of the delay in obtaining release of the British prisoners; and has His Majesty's Government grounds to believe that bad faith on the part of the Government at Peking is one of the contributory reasons of the above outrage or of the delay in the restoration of the captives?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware of the alarming state of affairs in China, and the consequent danger to British lives and property in that country; have the negotiations for the release of the British prisoners been brought to a satisfactory conclusion; and what steps are being taken to protect the large number of British people resident in China?

As a result of the bandit outrage on the Tientsin-Pukow railway on the 6th May, one British subject named Joseph Rothman was killed and five British subjects named Reginald Harry Rowlatt, Frederick Elias, Edward Elias, Theodore Saphiere and William Smith were captured. The last three have since been released; the first two are still in captivity. The diplomatic body immediately made strong representations to the Chinese Government, who expressed profound regrets and gave assurance that everything possible was being done to secure release by all means and at any cost; military operations against the brigands had to be suspended in view of the danger to the lives of the captives. Negotiations are being conducted by the Chinese authorities with the brigands and, according to the latest report from His Majesty's Minister, are proceeding fairly satisfactorily. Consular and military representatives of the principal powers have been sent to the spot to investigate and watch the local military situation. The captives are being made as comfortable as possible by the despatch of supplies and are daily in communication with their Consuls and the relief party.

In regard to the question of measures to prevent the recurrence of such outrages, His Majesty's Minister at Pekin has been authorised to press for the establishment of a railway police force under foreign officers, and for greater foreign control, over the railway revenues in order to ensure that the railway police will be properly paid; and he has been instructed to consult with his colleagues with a view to secure joint action on these lines by all the powers concerned. His Majesty's Government have no reason to attribute bad faith to the Government at Peking.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is able to state whether the subject of Empire wireless is to be considered at the forthcoming Imperial Conference?

It is contemplated that the question of wireless communications within the Empire should be considered in the first instance at the Imperial Economic Conference, any questions of principle requiring the attention of the Imperial Conference being referred to the latter.

Why does the hon. Gentleman say that, "in the first instance," we have to wait until the Imperial Conference takes place? Is he not aware that this question has been under the consideration of this and previous Governments for the last 13 years?

The hon. Member asked me in his question whether this subject would be considered at the forthcoming Imperial Conference, and I replied "Yes." I said, "in the first instance," it will be considered at the Economic Conference, as distinct from the Imperial Conference.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will table for discussion at the forthcoming Imperial Conference the question of the desirability of Australia, Canada, and South Africa according to the subjects of the Chinese Republic full and equal travelling and trading rights in their respective territories, seeing that His Majesty's Government demands similar privileges from the Chinese Government for British merchants and travellers in all parts of China?

I do not anticipate that this particular question will be among the subjects discussed at the forthcoming Imperial Conference.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has information to the effect that the governing Commission of the Saar Valley maintains an office in Paris; and, if so, what are the purposes for which this office is maintained and who pays for the cost of its upkeep?

The Governing Commission of the Saar Valley has the use of a room in the building occupied by the Secretariat-General of the League of Nations in Paris, the cost of which is defrayed out of Saar revenues for the purpose of preserving liaison with the French Government in the numerous matters in which they and the Saar Governing Commission are jointly interested.

Are there similar facilities with other Governments?

No, Sir, because the Saar Government has not the same interrelations with other Governments.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what reply France has made to the Note expressing the intention of His Majesty's Government to move for an inquiry into the administration of the governing Commission in the Saar Valley?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any communications have taken place with the French Government, and has the French Government expressed any views on the question of the investigation of the method of administration in the Saar Valley and the alleged grievances of the inhabitants by a Commission to be appointed by a competent authority?

I must refer the hon. and gallant Members to the reply given by me on the 6th instant to the hon. Member for Penrith and Cockermouth.

In view of the fact that an apparently authentic statement by the French Prime Minister has appeared in the Press, can we not have further information of an official character?

A certain specific question was put on the Paper, and I cannot go outside that. The reply to that question will be found in the answer to which I have referred the hon. Member.

asked the Prime Minister what action the Government is now taking to secure for Great Britain a just share of German reparation payments and the payment of Allied debts?

I am unable to say more than that the subject is engaging the attention of the Government at the present moment.

Will the Government bear in mind that the only bargain made until now is that Britain is to pay, and may we have a bargain made by the government that Britain is to receive reparation?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that it is considered necessary to retain at Madrid a commercial secretariat of five persons in addition to a consular secretariat of four persons, he will state the increase in the volume of trade between this country and Spain since 1914, when there was no commercial secretariat in Madrid and the consular duties were performed by one honorary consular officer?

British exports to Spain represented in 1913, 1·49 per cent. of the total export trade of the United Kingdom; in 1921, 1·92 per cent.; in 1922, 1·66 per cent.; and in the first quarter of 1923, 1·67 per cent. I can supply the hon. and gallant Member, if he desires it, with figures showing the value of our exports to Spain in each of these years, but owing to the wide fluctuations in the level of prices, they will not afford a basis of comparison. I may add that changes in the volume of our export trade with any particular market do not appear to me to afford, especially in the disturbed conditions of the last few years, a satisfactory criterion of the utility of our commercial diplomatic officers and their staffs. As regards the consular staff in Madrid, I would point out that a Consular officer, in addition to his commercial work, has other duties to perform, the bulk of which has largely increased since the War, especially in respect of passports, payment of pensions, registration of British subjects, etc.

In countries where we have lost trade is that not an additional reason for appointing another commercial attaché?

Yes, if we can afford it.

In view of the extraordinary increase of cost——

That does not arise here.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether an invitation has been received from the Royal Danish Government for a delegation to attend an international congress against alcoholism to be held in Copenhagen in August; whether the invitation has been accepted; and whether it is proposed to defray the cost out of public moneys?

The answer to the first and second parts of the question is in the affirmative. In reply to the third part of the question, it is not anticipated that any expense, chargeable on public funds, will be incurred.

Who will be sent on the delegation to represent this country?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the number of persons now employed at the Foreign Office and the number so employed in July, 1914?

The numbers are as follow:

asked the Prime Minister what Government Department is responsible for the organisation and operations of the Passport Control Service; what is the number, the duties, and the salaries of the officials employed in this service; whether their reports are restricted to passport matters; and, if so, whether, in the interests of economy, the service could be placed under the control of the diplomatic and consular officers?

I have been asked to reply to this question. The Passport Control Service is under the Foreign Office. The number of officials employed at home and abroad is 42. Their duties consist in dealing with applications for visas from aliens desirous of visiting the United Kingdom, the Dominions and the Colonies, and with correspondence relating thereto. Their salaries, with the exception of that of one officer who receives £1,400 a year, vary between £1,000 for certain chief passport control officers and £350, which is the normal rate for examiners. Their reports are restricted to matters relevant to the proper discharge of their duties. At certain posts, where the passport control work is not too heavy to conflict with their normal duties, it has already been placed in charge of His Majesty's consular officers, and this process is being continued so far as is compatible with the efficiency of both services.

asked the First Commissioner of Works if there is a rule that the heating of Government offices is to cease on 1st May; and, if so, taking into consideration the variability of the English climate and the recent extreme cold, he will cause the rule to be so altered as to permit of discretionary powers in regard to the date of cessation of heating?

The answer is in the affirmative. It is proposed that in future the period during which Government offices are artificially heated shall be governed by the actual climatic conditions prevailing, rather than by the calendar.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that a French commercial mission is now visiting Russia; if he can state what is the composition of that mission and what are the industrial and financial organisations it represents; and if His Majesty's Government is being kept informed of its activities by the British agent in Moscow?

I have no official information on the subject.

Instead of worrying about what the French are doing, would it not be better if the British Government also sent a commercial commission to Russia?

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the propriety of making inquiries as to whether that is the case or not?

I am sure that reports will be sent if our agent considers the matter to be sufficiently important.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if His Majesty's Ambassador at Tokio has reported upon the reception recently accorded to the envoy of the Russian Government to Japan; and whether His Majesty's Government has reason to believe that the de jure recognition of the Russian Government by Japan is probable, if not imminent?

My information is that M. Joffe, who is the Soviet representative at Peking, arrived in Japan early in February in a private capacity. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a reply has been received from the Russian Government to the Note from His Majesty's Government of 29th May; if so, what is the nature of the reply; and when both the Note and the reply will be laid before Parliament?

The reply of the Russian Government has been received this morning, but I am not yet in a position to make any statement.

Will the right hon. Gentleman try to put the reply on the Table of this House before it appears in the public Press?

I cannot say. I am not quite sure as to the procedure for putting these things on the Table, but I suppose the hon. Member will desire that the answer should be made known as soon as possible. If he will put the question down to-morrow, I may be able to give him an answer.

May I take it that the Trade Agreement with Russia will not be broken off without the previous sanction of the House of Commons?

The hon. Gentleman must not take anything of the sort.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Russian Government has confirmed the concession to a Norwegian subject, named Christiansen, granting him certain fishing rights within the 12-mile limit in the northern waters of the Russian Socialist Federated Soviet republics from 51 degrees to 67 degrees latitude; and whether an effort will be made to negotiate a similar agreement on behalf of British fishermen?

A report to this effect has been brought to my notice, but I am not yet able to state how far it may be correct. Pending the outcome of the present discussions with the Soviet Government, I am unable to make any statement on the issue involved in the last part of the question, except that His Majesty's Government are unable to admit the right of the Russian Government to grant concessions of fishing rights in the high seas outside territorial waters.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what steps are being taken to prevent the sale in Great Britain of property belonging to British nationals or British companies in Russia which has been appropriated by the Russian Soviet Government and in respect of which no compensation has been paid to the owners?

I gave my hon. Friend all the information possible on this subject in reply to his question on the 7th May.

Does the hon. Gentleman not think it a very grave scandal that facilities should be given in this country for the sale of British goods stolen in Russia?

That is a matter of argument.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the pronouncement of the late President of the Board of Trade on 22nd December, 1920 (vide OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 136, cols. 1874 and 1877) as to Russian liability for debts and as to the impossibility of abrogating in favour of Russia the rights of British citizens of protection by British Courts; and, in view of the fact that some £180,000,000 is claimed by the British creditors of Russia for bonds and for properties confiscated in 1917 and subsequently, he will make representations to the Soviet Government that a continuance of trade agreement must depend upon an immediate recognition of debts and a return of confiscated property?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for South Hackney (Captain Erskine-Bolst) on the 30th May.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many vessels of British or Canadian registry are at present detained by the American Government because of alleged offences against the liquor laws of the United States, and the period of such detention; whether any British or Canadian officers or men are at present detained as prisoners; if so, what is the period of their detention; how many of the ships seized by the American Government were captured outside the three-mile limit; and will he lay all the papers connected with the subject upon the Table of the House?

So far as His Majesty's Government are aware, one vessel fully registered in Canada is at present detained by the United States authorities on the grounds mentioned. It has been detained for over a year. No British subject is to our knowledge detained as a prisoner. In the large majority of the cases referred to in my reply to the hon. Member of the 6th June, the vessel concerned was seized outside the three-mile limit. No useful object would be served by laying Papers.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the exports of alcoholic liquors from Great Britain to the Bahamas in 1914 consisted of 27 imperial gallons of whisky, 59 proof gallons and 1,472 dozen quarts of whisky, and 9,425 gallons of ales, porters, and stouts; that in the month of January 3,000,000 quarts of miscellaneous liquors, mostly Scotch whisky, were imported at the Long Quay at Nassau from Great Britain; that most of this is intended for the illicit running into the United States; and will he consider what steps will be taken to prevent the continuance of such action?

I have been asked to reply. I have no official figures regarding the whisky imports of the Bahamas for last January. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer to my answer to the similar questions of the hon. Members for Bermondsey West and Hull Central on the 7th May, and also to those of the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to the questions of the hon. Members for Taunton and Bodmin on the 11th and 16th April.

How is it the hon. Gentleman cannot give the information when I have been able to get it from the official publications of the particular Departments in the United States?

We have not had the figures for the Bahamas. That is why.

Is it correct to say that the quantities of liquor referred to are less than 1 per cent. of the pre-prohibition American drink bill?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the vessels which clear from British ports with cargoes of spirits ostensibly for the Bahamas never arrive there?

I have heard rumours to that effect. The Bahamas possess a Legislature with an elected majority over which we have no control, and they would very much resent any interference by us with their legislation.

Have the British Government no control over bogus ships' papers?

Do not the majority of these ships hail from Glasgow?

Can this Government interfere with the legislation of the American Government?

All these questions are matters for argument.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government will consider the advisability of taking up the question of applying retaliatory measures to American ships arriving in British and other harbours in order to induce the United States Government to modify their views on what have always been regarded as matters of international comity, and in view of the new regulations that are being enforced on foreign ships that sailed for the United States ports after 10th June?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer I gave him on 5th June, in which I stated that representations had been made to the United States Government. The operation of the new regulations on British ships is being carefully watched, and the question whether it may become necessary, in defence of important British interests, to resort to special measures designed to counteract the injuries inflicted on them by American legislation will receive due consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the visit of the chief of the general staff, Lord Cavan, to Warsaw and the military inspections which he carried out there were undertaken with official approval and with the knowledge of the Foreign Office?

The answer is in the affirmative. The object of Lord Cavan's visit of courtesy to Warsaw was explained by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for War, in answer to a question by the hon. Member for North Norfolk on the 30th May.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the present charge for a British passport; what was the pre-War charge for same; and whether it is proposed to reduce the existing charge?

In 1914 the charge for a British passport was 2s. On 1st February, 1915, when passports of the modern type were introduced, the fee was raised to 5s. In 1920 the fee was increased to 7s. 6d., which is the present charge. There is no present intention to reduce the existing charge.

Is there any idea of increasing the life of the passport, say, from two years to five or ten years?

I do not think I have heard that suggested.

Will the hon. Gentleman inquire into that question?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to what extent the French occupation of the Ruhr extends beyond the actual mining district; whether towns in Baden and Bavaria have been occupied; and can he state how many such towns are now in French occupation and give their names?

So far as I am aware, the French occupation of the Ruhr is confined in general to the mining and industrial districts. The principal towns occupied in Baden are Karlsruhe (part), Mannheim, Appenweier and Offenburg. No Bavarian towns are in French occupation, other than those in the Bavarian Palatinate, which lies within the territory occupied under the Rhineland Agreement.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is able to make any further statement with regard to the situation on the Ruhr?

I cannot make any statement at the moment.

Will the Prime Minister be able to make a statement prior to the Debate in another place which, I understand, will be heard to-morrow?

I am not aware that a Debate will take place to-morrow. It would be better to put a question down.

asked the Prime Minister if he can give the names of the British representatives at the next meetings of the Council and Assembly of the League of Nations?

I am not yet in a position to make any statement.

If I repeat the question this day week, will the right hon. Gentleman have found the nominees for this service?

I could not say, but there would be no harm in putting the question down.

This day week, Sir.

Will the Prime Minister, in considering this matter, consider whether the delegation should not be made more representative of the nation as a whole by selecting either delegates or substitute delegates from one or other of the parties in opposition?

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government that the Lord Privy Seal shall in future represent this country at meetings of the Assembly and Council of the League of Nations; whether it will be part of his duties to devote special attention to the relations of this country with the League at such times as the Assembly and Council are not in session; and whether he will answer questions regarding the League in this House?

asked the Prime Minister if the Lord Privy Seal has been appointed Minister for the League of Nations; if he will represent Great Britain on the Council of the League; and if questions relating to the League should be addressed to him?

May I ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, on a matter of precedence? I handed in my question, No. 50, a week ago, for answer last Wednesday, and, at the request of the Prime Minister, I postponed it. As soon as the notice of my postponement appeared on the Paper, Question No. 46 appeared, which, as I think you will agree, is in almost identical terms with my question, and I would ask why it has been given precedence of my question?

I agree that, if the facts are as stated by the hon. Member, the postponed question ought to have appeared first. I must inquire as to when the other was handed in.

I shall answer Questions Nos. 46 and 50 together. There is no such appointment as Minister for the League of Nations. The Lord Privy Seal will represent His Majesty's Government on the Council of the League in precisely the same manner as the Earl of Balfour did formerly. Questions relating to the League necessarily concern the conduct of foreign affairs, and should, therefore, be addressed to the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and not to the Lord Privy Seal.

Did I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say that the Lord Privy Seal would represent us on the Council of the League, and, in that case, why was I refused that information on the previous question? May I have an answer, Mr. Speaker?

I cannot answer that question.

May I put it to you as a point of Order? When the Government refuses information, we must take it as being in good faith, and here we have a case where the information asked for, while refused me, is given to a supporter of the Government in answer to a subsequent question. May I ask for your protection in that matter?

I apologise to the hon. and gallant Member. I am afraid that by an oversight the word "Council," in the hon. and gallant Member's question, was not noticed, and my attention was entirely directed to the word "Assembly."

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the purpose of His Majesty's Government to give constant support to the League of Nations and to avail itself to the fullest degree of the League of Nations machinery as an instrument for the execution of its foreign policy?

His Majesty's Government will, in the future as in the past, give constant support to the League, and they will continue to refer to it questions suitable for settlement through its instrumentality.

May we have an answer to the second part of the question, as to whether the Government proposes "to avail itself to the fullest degree of the League of Nations machinery"?

That, of course, requires the co-operation of other nations.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the public interest and importance of the question and the necessity of finding employment for ex-service officers and men, the Government will give facilities for discussing and voting on the Motion standing on the Order Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley.—[" To call attention to the number of persons employed temporarily and permanently in many Government Departments who, in addition to the receipt of large salaries, amounting in some cases to over £1,000 per year, are also recipients of pensions paid out of national, Colonial, or Indian funds exceeding £250 a year; and to move a Resolution. "]

I regret that it is quite impossible, in view of the state of Parliamentary business, to grant facilities for the discussion referred to.

Would the right hon. Gentleman ask one of his assistants at the Treasury to go into the question, and is he aware that some ex-officers who are in receipt of large pensions are actually doing work upon which ordinary workmen should be engaged?

I have no objection at all to looking into it, but I fancy that to a certain extent the question is exaggerated by the hon. Member.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House the authority for that statement?

We cannot discuss that now.

asked the Prime Minister how much money has been advanced or guaranteed during the present year under the Trade Facilities Act, and when there will be an opportunity of discussing these guarantees or advances?

The Act does not authorise advances. The hon. and gallant Member will find particulars of the guarantees given down to 31st March last in the quarterly Statements presented to the House, the last of which is House of Commons Paper 49 of 1923. Since that Return nearly £3,000,000 has been guaranteed. The granting of guarantees under the Act could be discussed on the Vote for my salary.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the Board of Inland Revenue have, during the past two years, transferred to the inspectors of taxes large powers and responsibilities which by Statute are within the province of the Commissioners for the general purposes of the Income Tax; and, seeing that on previous occasions Parliament has not thought fit to sanction such transfer, is it his intention to give the House the opportunity of expressing an opinion on a matter of immediate concern to the taxpayer?

No, Sir. The suggestion that the powers conferred by Statute upon the General Commissioners of Income Tax have been transferred by the Board of Inland Revenue to the inspectors of taxes is entirely without foundation.

Will instructions be given, in this year of reassessment, that the Board of Inland Revenue should keep strictly within the terms of the Income Tax Acts?

I will look into that point.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on several occasions during the last 50 years this House has refused to grant to the Board of Inland Revenue powers——

The hon. Member appears to be beginning to make a speech on the subject.

asked the Prime Minister if he will introduce legislation prohibiting trawling within a 14-mile limit around the Scottish coast?

I have been asked to reply. My Noble Friend the Secretary for Scotland has recently appointed a Committee to inquire and report on the present legislative position as to beam and otter trawling off the coasts of Scotland. Pending the Report of the Committee, he thinks it would be premature to consider whether any further restrictive measures are desirable and practicable.

Is not the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that, particularly in the Island of Lewis, about 30,000 of the population at this moment are on the verge of starvation as a result of the method of trawling that is going on in and around, particularly the northern, coasts of Scotland?

That is a matter for debate.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he will give figures showing the amount of the advances made by the State under the Improvement of Land Act, 1864, and the Settled Land Acts, 1882 to 1922; and the amount of loans issued under those Acts for drainage, reclamation, afforestation, farm buildings, dwellings, and other purposes?

The State does not and cannot make any advances under the Acts specified in the question. The money is advanced by the companies authorised by private Acts to make advances for such purposes or by individuals. I am sending the hon. Member particulars of the loans issued.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware that, though he invited the Gloucestershire Agricultural Committee to nominate cer- tain persons to serve on that body, the Department has ignored the nominations which have been made, and that other persons have been nominated by the Ministry of Agriculture, some of whom have attended only one meeting during the year; and whether, of the 16 persons nominated by the Ministry of Agriculture, only two are Labour representatives?

I cannot agree with the suggestion contained in the first part of the hon. Member s question. The Gloucestershire Agricultural Committee submitted for my consideration the names of all the members whom I had previously appointed, together with two additional names. As it was clear that all the persons whose names were submitted could not be selected, I decided to re-appoint the members whom I had previously appointed, as there appeared to be no adequate reason why they should not be re-appointed. Moreover, their attendances seemed to compare favourably with those of other members of the committee. In reply to the second part of the question, the 16 members appointed by me include three Labour representatives, as well as a representative of smallholders.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he is aware that the Notts Commissioners of Sewers have levied a rate in Leicestershire under a scheme sanctioned by the Ministry; and will he, in future schemes of this kind, see that all the bodies affected by any such rate are represented on the body imposing it?

The Ministry has not instituted the levying of any rate by the Notts Commissioners of Sewers, and, indeed, has no power to interfere in any way with the exercise by a Commission of Sewers of their statutory duties in the matter of the levying of rates. I understand, however, that the Notts Commission have levied a rate to enable them to refund to the Ministry one-quarter of the-cost of certain work which has recently been carried out, the whole cost of which would normally have fallen upon the ratepayers concerned but for the financial benefits afforded by the Ministry's drainage programme for the relief of unemployment. With regard to the last part of the question, the qualifications of Commissioners of Sewers are laid down by Act of Parliament, but, generally speaking, such representation as my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind is provided for.