asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the terms of the new Bill which is to be introduced shortly by the Government of India to municipalise the government of cantonments in India under the reform scheme; and whether under the changed conditions of service Indian Army officers in civil employment as cantonment magistrates will now be permitted to retire on proportionate pensions the same as other officers in similar positions?

There are not considered to be sufficient grounds for permitting cantonment magistrates to retire on proportionate pensions under present conditions, but if the Bill, which is at present before the Legislative Assembly, pass into law, their position may require further consideration.

Will the Noble Lord give that consideration?

Obviously, if I say it is going to receive consideration, it will receive consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether, considering that the majority of the Sikh community in the Punjab has refused to accept the legal solution of the Sikh religious differences provided by the Sikh Shrines Act passed into law last year by the Punjab Council, and that the hostile attitude of a large section of malcontent Sikhs has now led to serious disorders, threatening the security of many parts of the province and requiring the frequent calling out of troops to maintain order, resulting in a situation which is menacing the safety of the Punjab and reacting on other provinces, the Secretary of State will now consider the question of transferring the disturbed Sikh areas either to the adjoining Sikh native states or else of restoring some of the old Sikh states in those areas in the hope that the Sikhs themselves under Sikh rulers will be able to deal more effectively with the situation that has arisen from Sikh differences over Sikh religious affairs?

The reply to the hon. and gallant Member's question is in the negative.

Does the Secretary of State realise the danger of the situation in the Punjab, and the necessity for special measures to deal with it?

One may see certain dangers in the present situation without accepting the hon. and gallant Member's suggestion for dealing with it.

Can the Noble Lord give me an alternative?

I should be pleased to do so in debate.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Income Tax is charged on British soldiers serving in India at the rate of 5 pies on every rupee they earn, including marriage allowance, and that the more children he has the more Income Tax he has to pay; and will he make representations to the Government of India to fix the Income Tax payable by the British soldier in India on the same basis as is charged in this country and remove what is looked upon as a real grievance by the British soldiers there?

When the total income is below Rs. 2,000 per annum (say £133) no Income Tax is payable. From Rs. 2,000 to Rs. 5,000 the rate is 5 pies in the rupee. Marriage allowances in India are included in income for the purpose of assessment of tax. This is also the case at home; but the Indian Income Tax system differs fundamentally from that of the United Kingdom and contains no provision for personal or family reliefs. The introduction of the system now in force in this country would involve a revision of the principles on which Indian Income Tax is levied. My Noble Friend will, however, be glad to send a copy of this question and answer to the Government of India for their consideration.

asked the Under Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that a judicial officer of the Bombay Presidency has been appointed to the post of Judicial Commissioner of the Central Provinces; whether representations have been received from senior judicial officers of the Central Provinces on the subject of their supersession; and what are the reasons which have led to the appointment of an officer from outside the provinces instead of the promotion of the local senior judicial officer?

I am aware that the post of Judicial Commissioner is now held in the Central Provinces by an Indian Civil Service officer lent by the Government of Bombay, but I cannot say whether any representations have been made by any officers whose qualifications for the post may have had to be considered. It must be presumed that the Indian authorities were satisfied that the appointment made was most in accord with the interests of the province.

Can the Noble Lord give us a reason why the senior officers in the Central Provinces were passed over?

That is a question of administration, and it is rather inconvenient to raise it in answer to a question. The point is that the Government are quite entitled to go outside the province, if they so desire, in connection with this appointment.

Is it not very unusual to do so?

There have been other instances. At any rate, as the law and the rule stand, it is open to the Government to do so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India if he will inform the House of the stage reached in the negotiations between the Lahore Municipality and the Government of the Punjab regarding Lord Lawrence's statue; and, if the matter has not been determined, will he impress upon the Government of India the indignation that will be aroused throughout the country should the statue be removed?

The matter is still under consideration by the Indian authorities, and I am not able to add to the reply given to the hon. Member for Luton on the 4th June, except to say that no action will be taken without reference to my Noble Friend.

Has the Noble Lord's attention been called to the Black Hole Memorial in Calcutta, and the agitation that is now being raised?

I do not think that has anything to do with this question, which refers specifically to the Lawrence statue at Lahore.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies the number of African prisoners in Tabora gaol taken over from the Belgian Government when that part of Tanganyika Territory was transferred to British civilian administration; the number reprieved by the British authorities after reconsideration of their cases; the number who have served in full sentences inflicted by the Belgian courts; the number who have died while under sentence; and the number still serving sentences imposed by the Belgian courts?

I have no information in the matter, but an inquiry will be addressed to the Governor of the Tanganyika Territory with regard to it. The transfer of Tabora from Belgian to British occupation took place early in 1917, while military operations were still in progress, and before the civil administration was organised.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether among the alienated lands of the British South Africa Company, the value of which is to be deducted from the compensation due to the company, is a grant of 50,000 acres of Southern Rhodesian land to the Northumberland mining syndicate made in the year 1892; whether this grant was made more than a year prior to Sir Starr Jameson's invasion of Matabeland; by what right this concession was granted in a territory which at that time was in no respect under the British Crown; and what consideration was received by the company for this concession?

I am not in a position to add anything material to the information given in Appendix 5 to the proceedings of Lord Cave's Commission, beyond observing that further investigation showed that the greater part of this land grant was subsequently abandoned. As to the third part of the question, I may observe that the company had acquired the Lippert Concession early in 1892, and I presume it was thought at the time that they were acting in accordance with the terms of that concession. In any case, it is clearly not possible now to question the grants made by the company prior to the conquest in 1893.

Am I to understand that no consideration was received by the company for this concession?

I forget about that.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether communications, both individual and collective, have been received from the white inhabitants of Northern Rhodesia protesting against the land claims of the British South Africa Company in that territory; and if he will say what steps are being taken by His Majesty's Government to give these settlers an opportunity of stating their position before reaching any settlement with the Chartered Company?

I would refer the hon. Member, as regards the first part of his question, to Appendix I in the second Report of Lord Buxton's Committee (Cmd. 1471), and, as to the second part, to the answer which I have just given to the hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme.

I suppose that there is no question of the annexation of Northern Rhodesia to Southern Rhodesia?

Not that I know.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, seeing that Lord Cave's Commission fixed the amount conditionally due to the British South Africa Company and the means by which the net figure was to be reached, and that, when this Commission was proposed, Lord Milner received a written statement from the company in advance that they agreed to the request of His Majesty's Government for an assurance that the company would accept the recommendations as binding, he will say whether the company's attention has been drawn to this material fact in the present dispute, and with what result?

The correspondence with the British South Africa Company which led up to the appointment of Lord Cave's Commission, and the terms of reference to that Commission, are included in the Papers published in Cmd. 1129. It is the fact that the company, as well as His Majesty's Government, are bound by the award of the Commission, but the present discussions relate to the issues raised in the company's Petition of Right.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, seeing that Lord Buxton's Commission, whilst unanimously recommending the reference of the Northern Rhodesia land case to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, drew attention to the fact that there were interests other than the Colonial Office and the company to consider, he will say what steps His Majesty's Government is taking to meet the interests of the white settlers, the native people of Rhodesia, and of the Treasury?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer that I gave to the hon. Member for Bedford, Mid., on 13th June, in which I indicated that the interests of the natives of Northern Rhodesia were being carefully watched in the discussions with the British South Africa Company. The same remark applies to the other interests concerned.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether His Majesty's Government is proposing to include Northern Rhodesia in any grant of the letters patent promised for Southern Rhodesia; and whether the settlers in Southern Rhodesia have withdrawn their opposition to any arrangement which would involve Southern Rhodesia in any liability for the administration of Northern Rhodesia?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the negative; as regards the second, the draft letters patent do not contemplate any such arrangement as that suggested by the hon. Member.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that there has been great delay in restoring to their owners the arms and ammunition taken before the truce by the British Government from loyalists resident in Southern Ireland; whether the arms and ammunition so taken will be at once restored to those owners who are now living in Great Britain or Northern Ireland; and what steps should be taken by those owners who are still living in Southern Ireland to regain possession of their arms and ammunition so taken?

There is now no delay in dealing with applications for the return of arms now stored in this country, and a considerable number of these have in fact been returned to their owners. As regards those stored in the Irish Free State, my Noble Friend the Secretary of State has asked the Government of the Irish Free State to undertake the task of returning arms so surrendered to owners resident in Great Britain or Northern Ireland, and I am informed that arrangements are being made to have this done as soon as possible. The return of arms to persons resident in the Free State area must necessarily depend on the issue of permits for their possession by the Free State Government.

To whom should application be made for the return of these arms?

I think I gave the actual address in answer to a question a fortnight ago. I will look it up.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies why it is necessary for the Secretary of State to continue to employ a special adviser, who is not a member of the Civil Service, in connection with Southern Irish affairs; what are the special qualifications possessed by Mr. Lionel Curtis in this respect; what are the terms of the contract which has been made with him and on what date will it terminate; and if he will explain why there is no member of the Civil Service who is competent to discharge these duties and thereby save the State the expense of a special appointment?

My Noble Friend the present Secretary of State, like his predecessor, has found it necssary to strengthen the staff of the Colonial Office in order to assist him and the Department in all business relating to the Irish Free State. For such an appointment an officer was required who combined knowledge of the self-governing Dominions, as well as of the new conditions arising out of the Treaty settlement. These special qualifications are possessed by Mr. Curtis, who was formerly a member of the Colonial Service in South Africa; has visited all the self-governing Dominions and made a close study of their Constitutions; and acted as secretary of the British Delegation that negotiated the Treaty. Mr. Curtis is a temporary member of the home Civil Service and is paid at the rate of £150 a month. His appointment, which carries no pension rights, is terminable at three months' notice on either side. No permanent member of the Civil Service possessing comparable experience is available.

Why is this appointment kept on in the case of the Colonial Office when all similar Wartime appointments have been done away with? What are the special matters which require the advice of a special official, especially having regard to the fact that the Free State now has its own separate Government?

As I have explained, my Noble Friend, who had nothing to do with the settlement of the Treaty, requires the continuation of the services of somebody who had, and who knows all that was going on, and in view of the new constitutional relations between the Free State and the self-governing Dominions, and of the coming Imperial Conference, my Noble Friend was of opinion that it was advisable to retain one who is a recognised authority on Dominion Constitutions.

When will this gentleman's contract be terminated? How much longer will the country have to spend £1,800 on this official?

As I explained in my answer, if we get rid of Mr. Curtis it will be necessary to strengthen the Colonial Office by an additional staff, because we have taken over the whole of the Irish work in the Colonial Office which we have never had to do before. We are now carrying out the work of the Chief Secretary as well as other additional duties. We are already understaffed, and it will be necessary to get someone else in lieu of Mr. Curtis.

Meantime, is not the Colonial Office extremely fortunate in getting Mr. Curtis?

As we are now entering on a new period, would it not be better to get somebody who was not so closely connected with the Treaty relations for which this Government is not responsible?

That is not my Noble Friend's opinion.

rose —

The mattter cannot now be debated.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the fact that Mr. Clayton, who was the Royal Irish Constabulary representative on the Royal Irish Constabulary Tribunal, did not sit on the tribunal for five months after December, 1922, and that many cases were heard and decided by the tribunal in the absence of Mr. Clayton, and with only two members of the tribunal present, he will give directions that such cases shall be reheard before the full tribunal in cases where the person concerned desires it?

No, Sir. As I stated in the reply which I gave to the hon. and learned Baronet on 18th June last, I cannot admit that there is any foundation for the suggestion that the recommendations of the tribunal made during the temporary absence of one of its members are such as to require revision.

If a person make out a prima-facie case, showing that he has been enormously prejudiced by the absence of the Royal Irish Constabulary representative, will my hon. Friend get the case re-heard?

As my hon. and learned Friend knows, a deputation waited at the Home Office the other day, and they were invited to send in any specific case of grievance. If any specific case of grievance be sent in, it will certainly be considered.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies on what date His Majesty's Government will issue an. Order in Council extending the provisions of the Colonial Solicitors Act to the Irish Free State, admitting Irish solicitors to practise in England on the same terms as English solicitors are admitted to practise in the Free State?

In accordance with practice, His Majesty's Government will await a communication from the Government of the Irish Free State before taking any action in this matter; and it is believed that such a communication will shortly be received. It will then be necessary to consult the Law Societies in this country. I am not, therefore, yet in a position to say on what date it will be possible to issue an Order in Council.

Is it a fact that English solicitors can practice in the Free State, and are there any practising there now?

Perhaps my hon. and gallant Friend will put down a question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what are the qualifications for the franchise in each of the British Dominions for British subjects entering those Dominions from Great Britain or any other parts of the Empire?

In all the Dominions there is a residential qualification for the franchise, but when the prescribed term of residence has been fulfilled, a British subject entering a Dominion becomes qualified for the franchise on the same conditions as British subjects permanently settled in the Dominion. I regret that it is not possible to deal fully with the matter in detail within the limits of a reply to a question, but I shall be happy to furnish my hon. Friend with further information if he so desires and will communicate with me.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies the amount of the deficiency in the Budget accounts in Palestine during the past year; are the Arabs in Palestine paying taxes; and by whom are the taxes in Palestine levied?

The final accounts of the revenue and expenditure of the Palestine Government for the past financial year have not yet been received, and I am therefore unable to state what deficiency, if any, they will disclose. The answer to the second part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the last part, taxation is levied under ordinances made by the High Commissioner with the approval of the Secretary of State for the Colonies.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the accounts for Palestine for last year will be received; and, with regard to the last part of the question, is that strictly legal and according to the Mandate? Had it not to be confirmed by the Assembly?

No, the Assembly has nothing to do with the Mandate. The Council is final. It is certainly strictly legal. We conquered this territory with our troops and arms, and we have been collecting taxes ever since. With regard to the first supplementary question, I understand that the accounts are expected very shortly.

We conquered Palestine with our troops, but we are not collecting any taxes ourselves, and it is being administered by Jews and not by us.

That is quite untrue.

If it be untrue, I beg to withdraw it.

It is British administration. Because the High Commissioner was a right hon. Member of this House, to describe it as a Jewish administration is false.

I did not mean to insinuate that any one gentleman was responsible. I mean the Assembly, because the Arabs have now refused to have any part in the government of Palestine. I did not mean any individual.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if any progress has been made this year towards harnessing the latent water power in Palestine under the Rutenberg Concessions; and has any electrical energy been produced?

Yes, Sir. I am informed that considerable progress has been made under the Auja Concession, which, as the House is aware, is the only concession that has actually been granted. Power house, cables and transformers have been installed and net-work erected in Tel Aviv and Jaffa, where the current is now available. In anticipation of the supply, 225 applications for connections had been received in Tel Aviv and Jaffa up to 28th June, including many from Arabs. Supply of current began on 28th June.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the machinery was installed by British or by foreign firms?

It was installed by the Rutenberg Company.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Government intend to safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion, and intend to govern the country in conformity with the wishes of the majority of the population, or whether they still intend to make Palestine into a Jewish national home?

The Government certainly intend to safeguard the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, and to govern the country as Mandatory power in accordance with the terms of the Mandate. As defined in the White Paper submitted to Parliament last year, His Majesty's Government are charged with the duty of facilitating the development by Jews of a Jewish national home in that country, but the creation of a Jewish State or Government is no part of such a policy. As Trustee for the Holy Land, on behalf of the League of Nations, it is the object of the British Government and of the British Administration in Palestine to promote the harmony and development of all races and creeds in Palestine, and to prevent the domination of any one over any other.

Do the Government still adhere to the Balfour Declaration?

Yes.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what compensation, if any, has been allowed in respect of compulsory retirement or abolition of office to those officers in the Kenya Civil Service who have been retrenched before reaching the ordinary retiring age?

In cases where it has not been possible to find employment for retrenched officials in other Colonies, compensation allowances have been granted on the principles of the Superannuation Acts in this country, that is to say, of as many sixtieths of the officer's pensionable emoluments as he has had years of service, two years being counted as three in the case of European officers under the provisions of the Superannuation Act of 1876.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Secretary of State for the Colonies is setting up a committee to examine the possibilities of the provision of railways and other forms of transport in Africa by private enterprise; and, if so, who have been invited to become members of the committee?

Yes, Sir. My Noble Friend is setting up such a committee forthwith, but I am not at present in a position to state the composition of the committee, but I hope to be able to do so shortly.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether schemes of railway construction which may be planned as a charge on the funds of the Crown Colonies concerned are invariably first submitted to Parliament for its approval; and whether, in view of the difference of opinion as to the methods of railway construction in the Crown Colonies, he will arrange that in future this step will always be taken before any definite action is commenced?

No, Sir, but the schemes in question are submitted to the local legislatures which provide the funds to carry them out, and are the proper bodies to deal with them.

In view of the enormous cost of these railways, would it not be well to have an inquiry into the question of building them by private enterprise?

As I stated in answer to another question just now, my Noble Friend is setting up a committee forthwith, including, I think, some Members of this House, to go fully into this question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Report by Colonel Hammond regarding the future construction of railways in East Africa on the departmental system deals with the State management of the Uganda line; and if he can indicate the terms of Colonel Hammond's recommendations?

I regret that in the time at my disposal I have not found in Colonel Hammond's exhaustive reports on railway working in East Africa any expression of his view as between departmental or other construction of new railways, nor do his reports touch on the question of State versus private working of the Uganda Railway. Colonel Hammond's reports have been placed in the Library of the House.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the excessive cost and unsatisfactory results demonstrated during the last 30 years of carrying out railway and other construction in the British Protectorates and Crown Colonies departmentally, His Majesty's Government will consider the advisability of putting out all future construction work to public tender?

I have been asked to reply. I do not know on what facts the hon. and gallant Member bases the statement in the first part of his question, but I am unable to accept it. As regards the last part of it, future railways and other public works will be constructed either departmentally or by contract, as would appear to be the most economical or satisfactory course in any particular case. In the event of the decision being in favour of construction by contract, the question of putting out the work to public tender would be considered in each case on its merits.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is able to give the names of the delegates who will attend the Imperial Conference this autumn?

His Majesty's Government have not yet received full information as to the names of the representatives of the Dominions and India who will attend the Imperial Conference. It has, however, already been announced that most, if not all, of the Prime Ministers hope to be present.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the unsatisfactory results of carrying out public works in the Sudan by administration, it is the intention of the Ministry to carry out any further large works by administration either in the Sudan or in any other of His Majesty's protectorates?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave him on 7th June.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any selection of probationers in the Sudan political service has recently taken place; if not, if he will explain why some candidates have already been informed, prior to the first meeting of the Selection Board, that their names had not been included amongst those selected for such appointments; what was the total number of candidates for the recently advertised posts; the number of those to whom such notifications of their applications were sent and the reasons for such rejections; and whether the rejection of candidates before their applications had been considered by the Selection Board is authorised by any and, if so, what Regulation of the Governor-General or of His Majesty's Government.

I am unable to say whether the Board which sat on the 27th, 28th, and 29th June has yet made definite recommendations. Before the Board assembles a preliminary selection is made of candidates to go before the Board based upon the detailed information provided in the standard application forms. This procedure, which was laid down by Lord Cromer, has always been followed since recruiting for the Sudan service was first started. I do not possess the information requested in the third and fourth parts of the question, as the Foreign Office has never interfered with the Sudan Government's freedom of action in selecting the personnel for its service.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Chinese Government has shown any willingness to accept the principle of a specially organised force of gendarmerie under foreign officers to protect foreigners on the main railway lines; whether he is aware that the present condition of chaos in China is causing profound uneasiness among all foreigners; and whether His Majesty's Government would consider making proposals to America and Japan to take joint action under the League of Nations for the mutual support and protection of all foreigners, the expenses of such action to be deducted from allowances promised from the Boxer indemnity?

The demands for a settlement of the recent brigand outrage on the Tientsin-Pukow railway, which it has been suggested should include the establishment of railway police under foreign officers, are still being considered by the Powers concerned, and have not yet been presented to the Chinese Government. His Majesty's Government are well aware of the present disturbed conditions obtaining in China, and are doing all that is possible in the circumstances to secure better protection for British residents and trade in that country. The reply to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Will the hon. Gentleman use his influence to see that our garrisons in China are fully maintained, especially in Northern China, and, if possible, strengthened; and will he also use his influence to see that our flag is shown at the smaller outposts in China to reassure those of our people there, who may think they are being neglected or forgotten?

Those are suggested details in connection with policy, which I think are covered by my reply.

In view of the fact that China is a member of the Council of the League of Nations, will the hon. Gentleman see if that machinery cannot be made use of in the manner suggested in the original question?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government will instruct their representative on the Council of the League of Nations at its forthcoming meeting to propose that the question of the right of the Council to inquire into the administration of the Saar basin shall be referred, if necessary, to the International Court of Justice?

I do not consider that in existing circumstances any useful purpose would be served by my giving such an undertaking; nor am I aware that the right of the Council to institute such inquiry as they may think fit has been challenged.

If such rights were contested, would our representative be empowered to make the suggestion indicated?

I have said in reply to the original question that I am not prepared to say so; it is a hypothetical question, and can only be considered when it arises.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government will instruct their representative on the Council of the League of Nations at its forthcoming meeting to propose that Germany be invited to be represented on the proposed inquiry into the administration of the Saar basin?

No, Sir.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the number of British passports issued by his Department to British and naturalised subjects for the years 1920, 1921, and 1922?

The total number of passports issued at the Passport Offices in London and Liverpool during the years referred to was 1920 329,800 1921 255,539 1922 243,542 These figures do not include renewals.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether all British passports are issued only at the Foreign Office in London; whether there are any provincial departments, either in the North of England, Scotland, or Northern Ireland, where passports are issued; if so, will he state where they are; whether any staff of his Department are employed on this work and, if so, how many; and what is the approximate annual cost?

Passports for British subjects resident in Great Britain and Ireland are issued only at the Passport Office in London and the Branch Passport Office at Liverpool. The staff employed at the Liverpool office at the present moment is 45, but this total is varied in proportion to the volume of work. The estimated cost of the Liverpool office for the present year is £5,835.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his Department maintain any officials or staff at any of the seaports in this country in order to check or verify the passports issued to British subjects leaving or entering this country; if so, can he state how many persons are so employed and what is the approximate annual cost of such staff; and, if not, can he state if his Department issue any instructions to Customs or police on the matter?

The answer to the first and third parts of this question is in the negative. The point raised in the second part does not, therefore, arise.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the amount and approximate value in gold marks of the nitrate and other raw materials imported from Germany since the signing of the Treaty of Versailles by the Italian Government on account of reparations?

The total value of all deliveries in kind to Italy down to 31st December last will be found on page 25 of the "Statement of Germany's Obligations," published by the Stationery Office, on behalf of the Reparation Commission. I cannot say how much of this total was raw materials.

asked the Prime Minister if he can make a statement to the House as to the possibility of despatching a speedy answer to the German Note, in view of the fact that the protracted delay is a very serious matter owing to the increasingly dangerous economic situation of Germany?

I cannot make any statement at the moment. His Majesty's Government are fully alive to the gravity of the situation, and are doing what they can to expedite matters.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, if there is to be any further delay, he will consider the question of approaching these Powers which are now in occupation in the Ruhr, with a view to getting them not to take any further measures tending to cause the collapse of Germany?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can state the position with regard to the trade agreement between this country and Finland; and whether His Majesty's Government has under consideration the conclusion of trade agreements with Lithuania and Esthonia on the lines of the agreement with Latvia, signed on the 22nd June?

Negotiations for the conclusion of commercial treaties on the lines of the agreement with Latvia, signed on 22nd June, are still proceeding with Finland and also with Esthonia. Our commercial relations with these countries are at present regulated by agreements embodied in exchanges of Notes, dated 20th July, 1920, and 6th May, 1922, respectively. Negotiations for a definitive treaty with Lithuania have not yet been opened.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any proposals have been received from the French Government that the cost of maintaining the French army in the Ruhr should be placed to the account of the armies of occupation; and if he will define the attitude of His Majesty's Government to such a proposal?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative; the second part of the question does not, therefore, arise.

Does the hon. Gentleman not consider that he ought to make the views of His Majesty's Government known, not only because the statement referred to in the question was made by the French Prime Minister in the Senate, but also because—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]

Has the hon. Gentleman's attention been called to the fact that M. Poincaré stated that not only would these costs be charged to the reparation account, but would be given priority?

I do not think that is quite a correct rendering of what M. Poincaré said. The matter is not at all clear, but the answer which I have given to the question on the Paper is strictly accurate.

Could not the Government make an effort to discover what are the intentions of the French Government in this matter and whether they do claim priority?

Of course the Government can take steps to ascertain that, if they think it desirable to do so.

Is it not the case that the French Government do not trouble to reply to us now?

Is it the fact that the French Prime Minister stated that this action was taken on behalf of the Allies?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the Supreme Court of the United States, in their recent judgment, expressly laid down that the local sovereign, in this case the American Government, may always, out of consideration for public policy, forgo to exercise its jurisdiction in any matter, or exert such jurisdiction in a limited way without in any respect prejudicing or forgoing its sovereign rights; whether the attention of the United States Government has been drawn to this dictum of their Supreme Court, which entitles the American executive to forgo their strict legal rights should they desire to do so; and whether, having regard to the well-established principles of international law that a ship continues to be identified with its country of origin in foreign ports so far as its domestic affairs are concerned, and, and, if so, what, representations have been made to the American Government with regard to the seizure of spirituous liquors in British ships where such liquors have been placed in rooms specially sealed by the British Customs authorities and with adequate guarantees that such seals would not be broken while in American territorial waters, thereby precluding any possibility of the infraction of the American prohibition law while the ship was in the territorial waters of the United States?

My Noble Friend the Secretary of State gave in another place on 28th June a full explanation of the diplomatic action which His Majesty's Government have taken in this connection and the grounds on which their representations have been based. If, after reading that statement, there are any points on which my hon. Friend requires further information, I shall be happy to do my best to furnish it.

Having regard to the statement made in another place that the United States Government have full power in the matter, are we to understand their refusal to exercise that power is simply to bring pressure to bear on this country, in order to get us to extend the three-mile limit?

Are we to understand that His Majesty's Government have given the United States Government an absolutely free hand, to do what they like in this matter?

The second supplementary question suggests quite a false interpretation. In answer to the hon. Member for South Kensington (Sir W. Davison), I assure him there are particular factors in this question requiring consideration. For example, in his question, the hon. Member assumes that the American Government has sovereign power, but that would not be admitted absolutely as within the meaning of the decision of the Supreme Court, if he means by the American Government, the Executive, or the President.

Has not the President full sovereign power to act on behalf of the Executive in a matter of the kind, and, having regard to the decision of the Supreme Court, that the sovereign power has a right to act, surely the United States Government has the power to fulfil the request of Great Britain and allow liquor to remain under seal, when it will not be consumed in their waters?

Is it not the fact that a false statement of law has placed the United States Government—which means very well—in such a position that it has become the laughing stock of the world?

I wish to know whether the fact that a full statement on a question of policy has been made in another place absolves the representative of the Government from making a full statement in reply to questions in this House?

asked the Prime Minister whether he has any information with regard to the intentions of the United States Government that in future they intend to seize foreign ships coming into their harbours with liquor on board, under seal, and to arrest their captains; and whether he will consult with other European countries with a view to taking up retaliatory legislation against American shipping coming into European harbours, in order to induce the United States Government to abide by the international comity, which has always existed between maritime nations?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that new regulations are now to be made which will entail the seizure of the vessel and arrest of the captain in the case of ships carrying liquor within American waters, whether under the Seal of the British Government and whether flying the British flag or not; whether the Government are prepared to recognise the seizure of ships and arrest of their captains under such conditions; and whether His Majesty's Government will take steps to get in touch with the American Government on this question?

I have no official information with regard to the alleged intentions of the United States Government to which these questions refer My Noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs recently gave, in another place, a full explanation of the present position, and I hope that the Interdepartmental Committee, which, as he stated, is now considering the question, will before long make definite recommendations which will enable his Majesty's Government to determine their attitude.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the enforcement of this law by the United States Government is due to a desire to protect her mercantile marine and force foreign ships on to an equality—

We must not have an interpretation of the motives of foreign Powers.

Is it not about time for His Majesty's Government to declare that the interests of British trade and British shipping are of greater importance than are the alcoholic tastes of passengers on these ships?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether he is aware that the judging committee of the Rio International Exhibition has awarded 771 prizes to French exhibitors, 300 to Italian exhibitors, 252 to Belgian exhibitors, 246 to United States exhibitors, and 114 to British exhibitors; whether he can say if Great Britain has ever before stood, relatively with other nations, so low in prize awards at great international exhibitions; whether he can say why Great Britain has done so poorly at the Rio Exhibition; and whether he can see his way to issue some official comment, both for the benefit of traders in this country and British traders in South America?

The number of awards to British exhibitors at the Rio International Exhibition is 143, otherwise the figures are correct. The numbers reflect numerical strength, not importance of exhibits. Excluding 24 non- competitive awards to suppliers of building and decorative material, no less than 72 per cent. of British exhibitors obtained highest awards possible. In the absence of precise information as to the character of the awards to other nations, no fair comparison is possible, but although the number of British exhibitors was comparatively small, the high standard of their exhibits was clearly maintained and I do not, intend to issue any official Comment until the Report on the British section is published.

asked the Prime Minister whether, as the gross expenditure for the current year on the fighting Forces is nearly £60,000,000 above pre-War, exclusive of the recently announced increase of the Air Force, he will appoint a small Commission to ascertain whether there is waste in the Services; and whether the country is getting defensive value for the sums expended?

His Majesty's Government have at present under consideration the Reports which they have received on Army and Navy establishments. A Committee, under Sir Alan Anderson, is inquiring into the pay of Crown servants including the members of the fighting Services. The Service Departments have been asked to furnish provisional estimates for 1924–25. When these are received I will consider the method to be adopted for examining them. As at present advised I do not consider the appointment of a further Commission desirable.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a great deal of waste is now going on as a result of overlapping between the Services; and would it not be desirable to have a Committee or Commission to inquire whether the Services could not be co-ordinated, so that the country might get defensive value for the money spent?

That is one of the subjects which is now engaging the attention of the Committee of Imperial Defence. I am not so fond of Commissions as other hon. Members seem to be.

asked the Prime Minister whether, within the last year, the Soviet Government has officially made any request to His Majesty's Government for diplomatic recognition; and what answer, in that case, has been returned?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second part, therefore, does not arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that the deliberations of the League of Nations on the subject of the limitation of armaments, including air armament, have lasted for a considerable period and that during that period certain Powers represented on the Council and with knowledge of the League have largely increased their air armament and are continuing to do so, His Majesty's Government will take the initiative, in conjunction with the Government of the United States, to convoke a conference of all the Powers, both those which are represented on the League and those which are not, in order to restrict the construction of aerial war craft with a view to protecting the civilian population of all countries from the consequences of aerial farfare?

His Majesty's Government are not prepared to adopt the course suggested by the hon. Member.

In view of the very grave statement made in this House a few days ago, and the immediate response of the French, cannot the right hon. Gentleman give the House some further information as to why the Government cannot take this course?

In my view, it would be premature to hope for a successful issue to such a conference until a number of outstanding matters which remain unsettled in Europe to-day are settled.

In view of the impossibility of dealing adequately with this question by question and answer across the Floor of the House, will the Prime Minister be able to give a date on which a discussion on this most important subject could take place?

It is always open to discuss this question on the Consolidated Fund Bill, but I cannot think at the moment that a discussion would help us at all.

asked the Prime Minister if he has any confirmation of a statement that perturbation has been caused in the French Chamber at this country's proposals to increase its air forces, and that strong denials of any hostile purposes against Great Britain were made; and if he will at once propose to France a conference with the object of a mutual avoidance of wasteful expenditure, and the further object of securing a world understanding on the subject?

I have seen no report of any discussion in the French Chamber, though I have, of course, seen the comments of the French Press. They do not, however, appear to me to bear out the words used by the hon. Member. As regards the second part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I have given this afternoon to the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Morel).

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when it is proposed that the Washington Conference Treaty shall be ratified by the French Chamber, and whether we have any information on the question whatever?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now make a statement as to the Inquiry into the Regulations made under the Restoration of Order in Ireland Act?

I am not yet in a position to make a statement, but I will do so as soon as the Committee is constituted.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the Indemnity Bill was passed on the understanding that a revision of these powers would be undertaken by the Government?

Yes, and I am exceedingly sorry for the delay, which is because of the illness of the Lord Chancellor. I quite hope that in a few days it will be possible to proceed with the matter.

asked the Prime Minister what is the precise nature of the undertaking given by the Government to recognise and support the independence of the Arabs in Iraq, Transjordania, and the Arab States of the Arabian Peninsula?

I understand the question to refer to the Treaty under negotiation with the Hedjaz Government. As was stated on the 25th June by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, negotiations on this subject are still in progress, and it is not possible to say what precise form the Treaty, if concluded, may ultimately take.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has now obtained any information as to the authenticity of the document published last Sunday week purporting to be a report of the French Commissioner on the Rhineland High Commission; and whether the attitude of His Majesty's Government remains one of opposition to the policy of separating the Rhineland from the German Reich?

I have nothing to add to the reply on this subject which I gave to the hon. Member for Aberavon (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald) on 25th June.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the author of this Report is the Marquis de Lillers, delegate at Wiesbaden since 1921 of the Inter-Allied Rhineland High Commission, upon which Commission this country is represented?

I cannot pursue all the statements that are made in the Press on these subjects. I have no official knowledge of that at all, and I do not think any further discussion of that matter at this moment would be of the slightest use.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give the approximate date when he will be able to announce any decision with regard to the subject of legislation to deal with London traffic?

I have been asked to answer this question. I am not at present in a position to add materially to the answers which I gave to my hon. Friend on 25th June and to the Noble Lord the Member for South Battersea (Viscount Curzon) on the day following. The whole question of the better regulation of London traffic is receiving the closest consideration. I can promise the House to make an announcement on the subject as soon as I am in a position to do so, and in any case before the Recess.

Bearing in mind the enormous losses of the citizens of London every week, cannot the hon. and gallant. Gentleman promise to set up an expert Committee to deal with this subject at the earliest possible moment?

No. I do not think that is necessary.

What does the hon. and gallant Gentleman think is necessary? Nothing has been done at all.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department the terms of the agreement on which Mr. Wintour was originally employed by the executive committee of the British Empire Exhibition; and if there was any Clause providing for dismissal in the case of inefficiency?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department if he will give the names of the committee who made agreement with Mr. A. F. Wintour on behalf of the British Empire Exhibition?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department (1) if he will lay upon the Table a copy of the original agreement made with Mr. Wintour on his appointment to the British Empire Exhibition;

(2) if the amount of £14,000 paid to Mr. Wintour was paid as compensation for part loss of salary till the end of the British Empire Exhibition next year; if not, what was it paid for; will he say if the amount of the compensation was submitted to the members of the executive council and the general council for their approval before being settled; and, if not, will he state the reason?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department whether the £14,000 alleged to be payable to Mr. Wintour has actually been paid: can he give the names of those who personally negotiated the original contract of service with Mr. Wintour and the names of those who negotiated the new contract; whether they are still taking any part in controlling the administration of the British Empire Exhibition; and whether the Government intends to take any more intimate control of the disposal of the funds for which it is contingently liable?

A copy of the original agreement between the British Empire Exhibition and Mr. Wintour will be laid on the Table of the House. A sub-committee, consisting of Lord Morris, then chairman of the executive council of the British Empire Exhibition, Colonel Cole and Mr. Davis, was appointed to conduct the negotiations with Mr. Wintour for this agreement, and the draft was submitted to and approved at a meeting of the executive council on the 24th June, 1920. The agreement does not contain a clause providing for dismissal in case of inefficiency. I have already explained, in reply to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for the North Division of Leeds (Mr. H. Butler), the reasons for the cancellation of the original agreement, and I should like to make it clear that its cancellation does not reflect in any way on Mr. Wintour's efficiency.

The new arrangement with Mr. Wintour, has been concluded by the board to which the powers of the executive council have recently been delegated. The board consists of Sir James Stevenson, chairman; Sir Travers Clarke, deputy-chairman; Sir James Allen, representing the High Commissioners of the Dominions; Sir Henry McMahon, chairman of the management committee; and Sir Charles McLeod, chairman of the finance committee. As I have already stated, the proposed arrangement was submitted to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies as chairman of the executive council of the Exhibition, and was approved by him. The amount paid to Mr. Wintour was paid as compensation for loss of emoluments, but in assessing the amount it was necessary to take into account the fact that he had been engaged, not merely up to the close of the Exhibition itself, but also for the further period required for the liquidation of the undertaking. The amount agreed upon has been paid over to Mr. Wintour. The gentlemen concerned in the negotiation of the original agreement with Mr. Wintour and the members of the executive council who approved of it, are still members of the council, with the exception of one gentleman who has since died; and the board who concluded the recent arrangement with Mr. Wintour are still controlling, on behalf of the executive council, the business of the Exhibition.

The liability of His Majesty's Government is restricted to their guarantee of £100,000, whereas the total sum guaranteed amounts now to £1,200,000. The Exhibition has been organised from the first under private management, and it was on that basis that the guarantees were obtained. I do not think that it would be desirable for the Government to endeavour to interfere with the responsibility in financial matters of Sir James Stevenson and his colleagues, who are now in charge of the administration.

Arising out of that part of the answer which deals with my questions, has the Minister seen the minutes submitted to the executive council, where no mention whatever is made of the amount of the compensation; among the emoluments for which Mr. Wintour has been compensated, is there included that amount, and, if so, what is it, for the motor-cars provided for him for running round the Exhibition, and the various other luxuries?

In point of fact, has the award to Mr. Wintour been submitted at all to the executive council?

I have not seen the minutes. In regard to the amount paid to Mr. Wintour, when my hon. Friend sees the Paper that is to be laid on the Table, he will see the terms of the engagement, and he can then assess the amount of compensation for himself.

Has the executive council sanctioned the award?

I know nothing about that.

Is it not a fact that Mr. Wintour was appointed to this office six months in advance of the executive committee being appointed by the Government?

No, Sir.

Was it not, in point of fact on the recommendation of the Board of Trade that Mr. Wintour was appointed general manager of the Exhibition?

Is not this huge amount of compensation for a man foisted on us from the outside fixed on a scale totally different from that of the Civil Service?

asked the Minister of Agriculture the retail price per lb. of home-killed beef on 1st April, 1923, and on 1st July, 1923, of chilled beef on 1st April, 1923, and on 1st July, 1923, and of frozen beef on 1st April, 1923, and on 1st July, 1923; and whether he anticipates any future reduction in the price of meat owing to the introduction of Canadian stores?

I have been asked to reply, and as the answer contains a number of figures, I propose, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

In view of the promise of the Meat Trust that we should get our meat sixpence per pound cheaper if the embargo were removed, will the Ministry take some steps to see that the promise is carried out?

Following are the figures:

The official statistics of retail prices compiled by the Ministry of Labour for the purpose of calculating the index number of the cost of living of working-class families show that the average retail prices of beef per lb. on the 31st March and 1st June, 1923, were as follow: 31st March. 1st June. Beef, British. s. d. s. d. Ribs 1 5¾ 1 5¾ Thin Flank 10½ 10½ Chilled or Frozen. Ribs 10¼ 10¼ Thin Flank 5¾ 5¾ Figures for the 30th June are not yet available.

With regard to the last part of the question, it is not possible to forecast what may be the effect on prices of the admission of store cattle from Canada.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he can yet make a statement as to the proposed assistance to co-operative bacon factories and grading depots?

I have been asked to reply. It is understood that Lord Linlithgow's Committee on the Distribution and Prices of Agricultural Produce proposes to deal with the subject of co-operative bacon factories in the Report on Meat which the Committee is now considering, and my right hon. Friend thinks it will be well to await the receipt of that Report before making any statement on the subject.

Is it anticipated that bacon factories will get any help under the Agricultural Credits Scheme?

I am afraid I cannot answer that question, but I will communicate the point to my right hon. Friend.