asked the Tinder-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to a letter from His Highness the Nizam of Hyderabad to the Viceroy of India setting forth a claim to the Province of Berar; and whether he can make any statement of the views of the Government and the Government of India in the matter?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the Nizam of Hyderabad's letter to the Viceroy of India laying claim to the Province of Berar; whether he can give any further information on this subject; and whether he will ensure that due weight will be given to the wishes of the inhabitants of Berar in this matter?

I have seen a copy of the letter referred to. The letter itself is understood to be under consideration by the Government of India, and I am not at present in a position to make any further statement on the subject. The representations contained in the letter cannot, of course, be taken into consideration by the Secretary of State unless and until they are received, in the constitutional manner, through the Government of India. An assurance has already been given that no steps in the matter will in any case be taken without giving to the people of Berar a full opportunity of expressing their wishes.

Can the hon. Gentleman give the House any information as to the reason why this matter has only now been raised?

I must ask for notice of that question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Indian Stores Department have accepted the tender of a German firm from Hanover for the supply of locomotives for the State-managed railways in India; and whether, in view of the great unemployment that exists to-day in the iron and steel trades in this country, he will take steps, either by amending the East India Loans Act or by other measures, to ensure that contracts for the Indian State railways are placed with British firms?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Government of India has placed an order for five locomotives required for the Indian State railways with a German firm; whether, seeing that a tender received from a British firm was very slightly higher than that of its foreign competitor, and in view of the pressing necessity for the provision of work for British workmen, he proposes to adopt measures to ensure that such orders may in future be placed in this country?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the Indian State railways are placing, or have placed, an order for five tank locomotives with a German firm, the Hannoversche Maschinenbau Aktion-Gesellschaft; and if he will take steps to amend the Indians Loan Act so as to prevent the occurrence of such action in future?

As the House is aware, the purchase of stores for the Indian Government is no longer undertaken by the India Office. Such purchases are made by the High Commissioner for India, who is directly responsible to the Government of India, and in accordance with Resolutions adopted by both Chambers of the Indian Legislature and accepted by the Government of India these purchases are, in the interests of the Indian taxpayer, made in the best market. That is to say, the High Commissioner, under his instructions follows the ordinary business principle of accepting the lowest satisfactory tender, regard being paid to quality, reliability, inspection facilities and promptness of 'delivery. I have ascertained from the High Commissioner that an order for five locomotives has recently been placed with a German firm, the lowest British tender being about 25 per cent. higher than that accepted. I am also informed that as a matter of fact British manufacturers are, under the competitive conditions laid down, able to secure the great bulk of the orders placed. My Noble Friend does not consider that it would be equitable to limit the discretion of the Government of India in this matter either by an amendment of the East India Loans Act or otherwise.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that last Session, when the East India Loans Act was passed, the Noble Lord opposite (Earl Winterton) successfully resisted on behalf of the late Government an Amendment such as is suggested in the question?

Yes, I am aware of that.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that large orders are being placed by the Indian railways on the Continent; whether these purchases are being made out of loans guaranteed by the British Government designed to relieve our unemployed; and whether he will take powers to insert in all future loans a condition to our guarantee that purchases must be given to British contractors?

No, Sir. During the last two years only a very small proportion of the orders for material required by the Indian State Railways has been placed on the Continent. As regards the second part of the question, no purchase of Indian railway material by the Government of India is being made from the proceeds of loans guaranteed by His Majesty's Government. The third part of the question does not, therefore, arise.

What is the "small proportion" to which the hon. Gentleman refers?

I believe that during last year about 97 per cent. of the orders were placed with British contractors.

In view of the unsatisfactory answer that has been given, I beg to give notice that I will refer to the matter on the Adjournment to-morrow night.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the Annual Police Administration Reports of the various Indian provinces lately published, in which the reductions forced upon the police department and the want of proper detective training schools are shown to have resulted in a great increase of crime; and if he can state what steps are being taken to restore the Indian police forces to their former strength and to give them adequate pay?

The latest reports received show that the hon. and gallant Member is generalising too widely from one or two facts. There was a general decrease in crime (in spite of a rise of crimes of violence in certain provinces), while the expenditure on police increased in most provinces, and the strength of the force had been on the whole maintained or increased. There have been subsequent reductions in Bengal, for instance, as the result of a retrenchment inquiry, and in the Punjab by the disbanding of additional police employed in 1922 for temporary purposes. And, though it is the case that financial stringency has retarded the introduction of some reforms, considerable increases of pay and allowances have been granted to the police generally in recent years, and it is clear that the Governments concerned are devoting to this branch of administration full attention, and as large funds as their resources permit.

Does the hon. Gentleman consider that the police in India are adequately paid?

I should like to have notice of that question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the recent announcement by the Government of India on the subject of the forfeiture of pensions by military pensioners engaged in seditious agitation applies equally to civil pensioners; and, if not, what are the penalties imposed upon the latter.

The particular announcement does not apply to ordinary civil pensioners. The rule as to them is contained in article 351 of the Civil Service Regulations, of which I will furnish the hon. and gallant Member with a copy.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India, whether he is aware that it has been computed that married British service officers, as well as married, quarter-masters, warrant officers, non-commissioned officers, and men, with children, are worse off in India than at home to approximately the following extent, viz., a married captain £22 per annum, a married lieutenant of over seven years' service £63 per annum, and under seven years' service £68 per annum; that married quarter-masters, whose pay depends on length of service as such, lose by service in India in every grade, and married warrant officers, noncommissioned officers, and men lose, respectively, about £49 14s., £20 12s. 6d., and £16 2s. 6d. per annum; and whether he will state what steps it is proposed to take to remedy the discontent brought about by this reduction of pay during service abroad in India.?

The pay of the British Army, as the hon. and gallant Member is aware, comes up for revision in July of this year, and full consideration will then be given to the position of married personnel of all ranks of the British Service in India. If the hon. and gallant Member will give me details of the data on which he founds the figures in his question, I shall be glad to look into them, and communicate the result to him.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India how many Moplah prisoners have been transported to the Andaman Islands, and are now detained there; whether they are treated as ordinary criminals; and whe5her any Moplah women and children are resident in the penal settlement?

In July last there were in all 1,235 Moplahs in the Andamans—all in Port Blair. Seventy-two were in the cellular jail, 12 in the adolescent gang, 40 agriculturists and self-supporters, and the rest in convict barracks. There were no special arrangements for segrating Moplahs from association with other convicts. They were treated like others, except that the initial period of cellular confinement was frequently shortened. The Government are willing to settle any who desire to stay, with or without their families; with this object agricultural and other tickets are issued freely, and the families of all who ask for them are sent to the islands at Government expense. Up to July, one family—a wife and four children—had been settled, and the settlement of three more was expected shortly.

What has happened since July last?

I must ask for notice of that question.

Will the hon. Gentleman get particulars and bring the information up to date?

I will, certainly.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India when the First Report of the Public Services Commission on India is likely to be published?

I am not in a position at present to add anything to the answer given by my predecessor to the hon. Member's question on this subject on 21st January. The Commission is still taking evidence.

Is the Commission inquiring into the covenanted service as well as the uncovenanted service?

I must ask for notice of that question.

Will the hon. Gentleman represent to the Leader of the House the desirability of having a Debate in the House on the Report of the Commission as soon as it is published?

I will do so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he can give any information with regard to the Indianisation of the Indian Army: and whether the experiment has proved a success?

Indianisation of the Indian Army was started in two Indian cavalry regiments and six Indian infantry battalions last year, and one Indian officer with King's Commission will be posted to each of these units each year in place of a British officer. It is obvious that it is too early as yet to gauge the prospects of success.

Has it already started?

Yes.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the municipal corporation of Bombay are issuing tender forms in which intending contractors are asked to note that the corporation have expressed the opinion that no articles manufactured in any part of the British Empire outside India should be used by any of the departments of the municipality or by any contractor, except when they are not available in any other part of the world: and whether he has received any information on the subject from the Government of India?

I have heard from the Government of India that the resolution was passed, but have not yet heard of any action taken on it.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that investors in England will not be content to send money to India if it is spent in buying foreign goods while their own people are out of work?

Do we understand that the hon. Gentleman is asking for further information?

That is so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the committee to he appointed by the Government of India to inquire into the proposed immigration law for Kenya Colony will also have power to inquire into the operation of the franchise law in Kenya, and to suggest, if deemed advisable, any modification thereof?

The committee to which my hon. Friend refers is the committee which is being appointed by the Government of India in accordance with the decision of the Imperial Conference. Its purpose, so far as Kenya is concerned, is not limited to the proposed immigration law. It will be open to it to make representations, not only on that subject, nut also on the operation of the franchise law, and to suggest, if it so deem advisable, modifications thereof.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government propose to recognise the Government of Mexico?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will take immediate steps to give full recognition to the Mexican Government?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Ministers propose to recognise the present. Mexican Government; and whether his attention has been drawn to the bitter complaints of the British Colony that it has been so long withheld?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any other countries besides Great Britain continue to refuse recognition to the Government of General Obregon in Mexico; and whether any special grounds exist which prevent Great Britain from recognising that Government immediately?

The recognition of Mexico raises complicated issues which cannot very well be dealt with by means of question and answer. His Majesty's Government has had the matter before it and will lose no time in coming to a decision one way or the other.

Is the position in Mexico more complicated than in the case of the Soviet Republic of Russia?

Very much more.

Would it not be advantageous to civilisation if the right hon. Gentleman were to ask the United States Government to take over Mexico? [HON. MEMBERS: Oh!]

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how many raids from Abyssinia into territory under British administration took place during last year; into what regions these raiders penetrated; what casualties were suffered by Abyssinians, British subjects, or British protected subjects, respectively; whether any, and, if so, how many, captives were carried away into Abyssinia; whether arms and ammunition bearing the Government stamp were captured from the raiders; and what action has been taken by His Majesty's Government in the matter?

With the hon. Member's permission, I propose to circulate a reply to this question in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the right hon. Gentle man aware that the British delegation I the Assembly last September repeatedly drew attention to the danger of this very thing, and will the information which he has promised to circulate be forwarded to the League of Nations?

Yes. I have no objection to forwarding the information to the League of Nations. The information to be circulated is purely matter of fact.

May we take it that the right hon. Gentleman is fully seised of the importance of this question, and that he will take steps to lay all the information in the hands of the British representative on the League, in order that he may be fully informed on this matter when he attends any future meeting?

As a matter of fact, he has now got it before him.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether it is proposed to continue the Ambassadors' Conference; if so, for what period; what is the annual cost of this Conference and its organisation; and what proportion of that cost falls upon Great Britain?

Owing to special work recently assigned to it, some misunderstanding exists as regards the Ambassadors' Conference. The Ambassadors meet in conference in the exercise of their ordinary diplomatic duties. These duties would, if the Conference ceased to meet, nevertheless remain to be performed by the Ambassadors and their staffs. No extra cost is, therefore, involved.

Is it the intention of His Majesty's Government to submit any other matter, that may arise to the consideration of the Ambassadors' Conference?

We have no such intention at present.

What precautions are his Majesty's Government taking to prevent a recurrence of such regrettable decisions as that participated in by the British representative at the recent meeting in regard to Corfu?

The hon. Member had better put that question on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the League of Nations passed at its assembly on 15th December, 1920, a. recommendation limiting the scale of expenditure on armaments, and that during the last meeting of the Council Viscount Cecil was instructed to inform his colleagues that Great Britain was not prepared to adhere to this recommendation; whether the British delegates had voted in favour of this recommendation at Geneva; and whether His Majesty's Government will consider what effective steps can be taken by Great Britain to give a more consistent lead upon the question of the limitation of armaments?

The position is not quite as suggested in the hon. Member's question. The recommendation to which he refers covered a definite period which expired last year. The last Assembly passed a new resolution, which was supported by the British delegation, requesting the Council to recommend members of the League, subject to certain reservations, not to exceed the expenditure on armaments provided for in their Budgets for the current financial year during the period necessary for the elaboration and adoption of the general scheme for the reduction of armaments. On examining this resolution the late Government felt that, although no binding undertaking was involved, it would, nevertheless, be invidious to support the issue of a recommendation with which, in view of the indefinite period covered by it, they or their successors might find it impossible to comply Viscount Cecil was, accordingly, requested to propose at de last meeting of the Council that further consideration of the matter be postponed till the next meeting. His proposal was adopted. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the statement which I made in the House on Tuesday in regard to the attitude of the Government towards League of Nations matters in general.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the total annual cost of the International Labour Bureau of the League of Nations; and what is the annual contribution towards this cost made by Great Britain and other Powers, respectively?

I have been asked to reply. The expenditure of the International Labour Organisation for the calendar year 1924 is estimated, at current rates of exchange, at £315,000. In addition, the sum of about £73,000 has been provided in the 1924 Budget as a temporary contribution to meet a deficiency in the accounts of the organisation at the end of 1922 occasioned by arrears of contributions. This makes a total provision: of £388,000. The contribution of the British Empire (excluding those Dominions who are independent members of the organisation and make separate contributions, namely, Australia, Canada, India, Irish Free State, New Zealand, South Africa) is based on the proportions established for the general expenses of the League of Nations, and is a little under 10 per cent. of the total. This amounts in 1924 to approximately £37,000. With the hon. Member's permission I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the proportion of the expenses of the organisation allocated to each country.

Will the hon. Member at the same time circulate information as to how many countries are in arrears with their payments?

Yes.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is his intention to appoint an. Under-Secretary charged with the special duty, under the general supervision of the Foreign Secretary, of dealing with questions affecting the League of Nations?

No, Sir. I do not think it necessary.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the French Parliament has yet ratified the Resolutions of the Washington Conference for the mitigation of the horrors of submarine warfare on shipping?

The answer is in the negative.

Can the right hon. Gentleman ascertain why these Resolutions are not submitted to the French Chamber, in view of the long delay that has taken place.

Has the Government any expectation that this ratification will be given?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, under the agreement lately entered into recognising de jure the Soviet Government, the Government is prepared to guarantee the sums that may become due to British firms for goods delivered to the order of Russian firms or subjects?

It has been arranged with the Government of the Union of Soviet Republics, as I stated last week, that the question of export credits should be considered, together with the other issues to which I referred, by the conference between representatives of this country and of Russia which is shortly to assemble in London

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the refusal of the Soviet Government to grant a passport visa to enter Russia to Dr. Davidson, the representative in Eastern Europe and Siberia of the British and Foreign Bible Society; and whether he will make representations to the Soviet Government with regard to it?

I have no information about this ease other than that which has appeared in the Press.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries in regard to this matter?

It is not my business to make inquiries. If there are any representations to be made I will consider them.

asked the. Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Foreign Office has any record of the number of Russian women that have married British subjects in Russia daring the last three years; how many of them have since come to reside in Great Britain; and can he give any comparative figures for the three years prior to the war?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what. republics constitute the Union of Soviet Republics?

The Union of Socialist Soviet Republics, as established by the Constitution of the 6th July, 1923, consists of the following four Republics:

The Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic,

The Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic,

The White Russian Socialist Soviet Republic, and

The Transcaucasian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information to show within what boundaries these republics claim to exercise sovereignty and what steps does he propose to take to ascertain whether the people within these boundaries do, to use his own phrase, acknowledge the authority of such sovereignty?

I must just take the circumstances as they are.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the authority of the government of the Union of Soviet Republics is recognised by His Majesty's Government as extending to Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia; and whether the de jure recognition extended by His Majesty's Government to the republic of Georgia on 27th January, 1922, the de facto recognition extended to the republic of Azerbaijan in January, 1920, and the de jure recognition extended to the republic of Armenia in August, 1920, have been withdrawn.

The answer is in the affirmative, inasmuch as the territories mentioned are understood to acknowledge the authority of the Union Government. Official recognition of Governments which no longer exist de facto naturally lapses when they cease to function.

Does the right hon. Gentleman remember the Chancellor of the Exchequer a very short time ago—only last July—suggesting to the last Government that it should be a condition of recognition of the Soviet Government that the independence of these people should be restored? Will he take steps to see that they are not left under the heel of the Bolshevik tyranny?

Obviously that question must be answered partly at least by the peoples of the countries themselves.

Has not the right hon. Gentleman himself personal knowledge of the position in Georgia, and is he not aware that the people of Georgia are against the Soviet Government and desire their own form of Government?

Is the right hon. Gentleman not also aware that the people of India want to be released—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]

Is it in order for an hon. Member of this House, in consequence of the recognition of the Soviet Government, to call them "Bolsheviks.?"

I am not sure whether that term implies a reproach or a compliment. I do not propose to give any ruling in the matter.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information regarding the reported arrest of representatives of British firms by the Soviet State Political Department at Tiflis; whether any of the persons so arrested are British subjects and what action is being taken by His Majesty's Government?

The Imperial Ottoman Bank have informed me that their Tiflis representative, who is a Turkish citizen, has been arrested by the local State Political Department. The British Chargé d'Affaires at Moscow has been instructed to make inquiries and, if he is satisfied that the facts reported are correct, to endeavour to secure the release of the bank's representative. No other such arrests have been brought to my notice.

Will the, right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of sending a Consul-General to Tiflis to look after the interests of British subjects?

asked the Prime Minister whether, in the negotiations between His Britannic Majesty's Government and the Soviet Republic, any claim will be put forward for consideration for compensation for those British subjects who were murdered in the revolution; and how many such victims there were?

Claims for compensation for British subjects who have suffered imprisonment or personal injury in Russia since 1917 have been included in the list of subjects for discussion at the forthcoming conference. Three claims for death resulting from disturbances during the revolution have been registered with the Russian Claims Department. There may, however, be others which have not been presented.

Is Captain Cromie amongst them?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can make to the House any statement regarding the, diplomatic relations existing between Great Britain and Lithuania; and whether there are any outstanding questions between the two countries which disturb the cordiality of relationship between them?

His Majesty's Government accorded de jure recognition on 20th December, 1922, to the Lithuanian Government. The establishment of full diplomatic relations is dependent on the settlement of the Memel question, which is at present in the hands of the League of Nations, and which His Majesty's Government trust may soon be brought to a satisfactory conclusion.

As the subject of Memel is purely a. diplomatic question, is there any reason why the Minister should not present his credentials, seeing that the relations between the two countries are cordial?

That is the situation I have found. I am quite willing to consider it further, if there be any pressing need for the steps suggested by my hon. Friend being taken.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is now able to make a, state- ment as to the Ruhr occupation and the reparations question; whether he has considered the propriety of raising these questions in the Council of the League of Nations; and, if so, what is his decision?

I can make no statement at present. The House will agree that His Majesty's Government must first consider the conclusions at which the Reparation Commission may arrive after receiving the reports, on which so much depends, of the Commmittees of experts set up by the Commission to investigate Germany's financial situation, and thereafter open negotiations with the Governments concerned.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how long it will be before we arrive at some satisfactory solution of this difficulty?

I am afraid I cannot. We are hurrying on as quickly as circumstances will permit.

Is it the policy of the Government to demand from Germany the payment of claims for pensions allowances?

There is a question on the subject later.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what are the general lines for the settlement of the Palatinate which have been agreed to by Great Britain and which were referred to in a communication from a Foreign Office official which was read in another place by the Lord President of the Council on 13th February; and when such agreement was come to and with what Government?

There is no formal agreement embodied in any one document, but, as a result of considerable correspondence between His Majesty's Government and the French and Belgian Governments, it has been decided to entrust to the representatives of the three Governments at Coblenz the task of supervising the gradual restoration of normal administration in the Palatinate and the disarming of all unauthorised persons. With the object of facilitating a settlement on these lines, the Rhineland High Commission has nominated an inter-Allied delegation which has proceeded to the Palatinate and is co-operating with the local authorities.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government are in favour of demanding payment of any reparations from Germany?

The answer is in the affirmative.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether, in that case, his policy differs in any way from that of the late Government?

The hon. Member must not take up time in that way. It is a matter of opinion for himself.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether he has had bequeathed to him by his predecessors any method of receiving reparations other than by goods or commodities, and, if not, will he continue taking ships?

This is not the occasion for such a discussion.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the exact nature of the commitment of the late Government to an agreement which might involve a certain small cession of territory; whether this refers to Jubaland; and whether the contemplated action in respect of this strip of territory has been public for a long time past?

On a point of Order. Is it not your ruling, Sir, that not more than three questions should stand in the name of an hon. Member, and may I call attention to the fact that the hon. Member has put down five questions for to-day?

I will deal with those extra questions when they are reached.

The exact nature of the commitment of the late Government in this respect is to be seen from Article 13 of the Treaty of London of 1915; the replies to the second and third parts of the question are in the affirmative.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will give an undertaking that, before embarking on any action in regard to the recommendations made by the Anderson Committee in reference to the pay of the public services, he will give an opportunity to the House for a full discussion?

The House will no doubt have ample opportunity of criticising in Supply any action the Government may take but I do not think that it would be reasonable to limit the freedom of action of the Government by giving so extensive a pledge as that suggested.

In determining the action of the Government, will the right hon. Gentleman take into account the promises which he is reported to have made during the General Election that any proposal made to reduce the pay of the fighting Services would meet with the uncompromising hostility of the Labour patty? [HON. MEMHERS: "Answer!"]

asked the Prime Minister (1) if it is the intention of the Government to introduce the Criminal Justice Bill and Administration of Justice Bill during the present Session;

(2) whether the Government intend to take steps during the present Session to consolidate the Law relating to real property?

Yes, Sir.

In reference to Question number 40, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Law of Property Act, passed two years ago, comes into operation on the 1st January next, and if the law be not consolidated in the meantime very serious inconvenience will result?

That is one of the reasons which I had in mind.

asked the Prime Minister if it is the intention of the Government to introduce a Measure during the present Session to secure to women the franchise upon conditions similar in all respects to those of men?

The Government have not yet had an opportunity of considering whether it will be possible to take any action in regard to this matter in the present Session.

asked the Prime Minister what arrangements he is making to enable Scottish Members to have the advantage of legal advice on Bills, etc., in Debate, in view of the fact that the Lord Advocate is not to have a seat in the House?

The Secretary for Scotland will deal with all legal questions in the House of Commons. If, however, hon. Members on any legal matter arising in connection with business in the House desire to have direct contact with the Law Officers for Scotland, arrangements will be made for their wishes to be met.

Will the Secretary for Scotland have any emolument for his legal advice?

How will the Secretary for Scotland be able to answer any legal questions arising on the discussion of Bills going through the Scottish Standing Committee?

My hon. Friend might just wait and see.

Will it be arranged as in the last. Parliament?

Will the Lord Advocate be in personal attendance when Scottish Members are meeting in Standing Committee?

Yes, I believe that that is the intention.

asked the Prime Minister whether he hopes to secure a Solicitor-General for Scotland who will have a seat in the House?

An announcement will be made without delay. It is not proposed, for the present, that the Solicitor-General should have a seat in this House.

Are we to understand that on the Scottish business which is to be debated on the Estimates in this House, we are not to have any of the advice that comes from the Scottish Law Officers who are usually associated with these affairs?

No.

Does not the Prime Minister remember his own and his party's opposition in last November to the continued absence of both Scottish Law Officers from this House, and does he, as the Leader of the Democratic party, think that it is fair to those of us who come from Scotland that we should have neither of our legal advisers in this House?

As I indicated in the reply to the question which I have just answered, the arrangement is for the present.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the prevailing conditions of unemployment, His Majesty's Government are prepared to favourably consider and afford assistance under the Trade Facilities Act and unemployment schemes generally to the construction of the Channel tunnel?

I have been asked to reply. Other issues besides unemployment are raised by the Channel tunnel project, and would have to be disposed of before the application to it of schemes for relieving unemployment could be considered.

Are the Government prepared to give favourable consideration to schemes put before them in connection with this matter?

As the Noble Lord knows, there are political and other difficulties connected with the Channel tunnel project. If those were removed, this is a scheme which undoubtedly would be submitted to the Advisory Committee on the Trade Facilities Act; but, of course, it would be entirely for the Advisory Committee to say whether it was to be assisted or not.

asked the Prime Minister whether he proposes to introduce legislation amending the Friendly Societies Act, 1896, so as to bring it in conformity with Section 4 of the Industrial Assurance Act, 1923?

I have been asked to reply. The Government propose to introduce in another place at an early date a Bill to deal with this matter?

asked the Prime Minister whether it is his intention to make a rule of always submitting treaties with Foreign Powers to this House before ratification, and of giving ample time for an examination of the implications of such treaties before they actually come before the House for discussion; and whether time can be given for the submission to the House of a Motion for making this practice the recognised usage of the House, and for ensuring that no diplomatic arrangement, or verbal or written understanding with a foreign State involving military obligations, shall he undertaken, or preparations for co-operation in war between the military and naval staffs and the military and naval staffs of a foreign State, shall be sanctioned without the express authority of Parliament?

This subject is at present being inquired into. In my speech on the 12th instant I made some reference to it, and I hope I may be in a position to indicate a little more fully the attitude of His Majesty's Government His the points raised when intoducing the Bill for carrying into effect the Treaty of Lausanne.

asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether he intends to take steps with a view to the suspension of the dismissal of competent ex-service temporary civil servants which are now taking place, or are about to take place, in various Government Departments; and whether he will ensure security of tenure to such men who have by their service proved their efficiency, and are now faced with the prospect of unemployment and want for themselves and their dependants?

I have been asked to reply. Any dismissals which are now taking place are the result of decrease of work. I regret that it would be impossible to justify the retention in the Government service of clerks employed on a purely temporary basis for whom work is no longer available, but the names of all ex-service men discharged on redundancy are notified to the Joint Substitution Board, and preference is given to such men in filling temporary appointments in other Departments. As I stated in reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Bilston on the 14th instant, the Government intend to give the fullest possible consideration to the claims of ex service men for preferential treatment. The claim that further opportunities should he given to ex-service temporary employés to qualify for such permanent appointments as are available will no doubt receive careful consideration from the Southborough Committee.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that there are a very large number of ex-service men engaged temporarily as civil servants; and whether, considering that in some thousands of cases these men have carried out their duties in an entirely satisfactory manner for periods ranging from three to five years, have proved their efficiency, and are fulfilling the same duties as civil servants who have passed the usual examination, he will give instructions that as large a number as possible of the competent officers may be transferred to the established list without examination as and when vacancies occur?

I have been asked to reply. As the hon. and gallant Member is no doubt aware, the recommendations of Lord Lytton's Committee on this matter have been carried out. The subsequent Committee under the chairmanship of Lord Southborough have not dealt with it in their two interim Reports. The question of what further action, if any, should be taken is under consideration.

May I ask if the hon. Gentleman does not think it unfair to these men, who have proved their capabilities for the last three or four years, that something should not be done to put them in a permanent position?

The hon. and gallant Member no doubt knows the difficulty, but I may tell him and the House quite frankly that during the past two weeks we have been considering the whole position, and I hope very soon to be able to make a definite statement on this and other points.

If I repeat this question this day week, will the hon. Member be able to give a further reply?

I am afraid that that would be too short a. time. There are very large Civil Service issues involved.

asked the Prime Minister if he can give an assurance that the Imperial airship scheme that was approved in principle by the late Government, and by the Defence Committee and Imperial Conference, will be laid before Parliament for approval without further delay?

I cannot give any such assurance until the Government have had time to examine the matter. It is now doing so.

asked the Prime Minister if he can now state whether it is his intention to adopt the shipbuilding programme of the late Government; and whether he is aware of the inconvenience being caused to shipbuilders and naval contractors, as well as the anxiety about further unemployment caused to their workers, pending a. statement of policy on this subject?

I have been asked to reply. I hope that it will shortly be possible to make the announcement referred to in my reply of 13th February to the hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness.

In view of the terrible unemployment in Barrow and on the Clyde, can no definite date be fixed for this announcement?

We are hastening forward this business as fast as we can, in order to be able to give an early reply.

Arising out of that reply, which is very kind, may I say that we want some definite date on a matter of so much importance?

Will the Admiralty have regard to the revival of mercantile shipbuilding in coming to a decision?

Is it intended to start these vessels before the House has had an opportunity of discussing the question?

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that the country is under the impression that the Prime Minister took office mainly to tackle the unemployment question? He has been in office two months, and has so far made no concrete statement as to his policy. The reply given to the hon. Member for Barrow (Mr. Somerville) dealt with unemployed relief policy.

All the factors raised today are being taken into consideration.

Will the House be permitted to discuss this matter before anything is done?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will introduce legislation to establish a system of referendum to form a part of our constitution, in order to save the country from the inconvenience and disturbance of frequent elections?

No, Sir.

Will the Prime Minister assure the House that the Government will behave in such a way that it will be kept in power for a reasonable time?

asked the Prime Minister whether the present Government endorses the documents adhered to by the two previous Governments that the fighting departments are to frame their estimates on the assumption that a great war is not to be anticipated for a specified term of years?

The hon. and gallant Member is no doubt alluding to the instruction of the then Government given in the year 1919 and referred to in paragraph 2 of the Report on National Expenditure that the Estimates for the three Fighting Services were to be built up on the assumption that no great war Was to be anticipated for the next ten years, although provision should be made for the possible expansion of trained units in case of an emergency arising. The present Government have not had occasion specifically to revise that instruction.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can see his way to give facilities for the Motion standing in the name of the hon. Member for Penistone? ["That the letter informing the house of the internment of Mr. Cahir Healy, a Member of this House, be referred to a Select Committee for the purpose of inquiring into the matters referred to therein, and of reporting whether they demand the further attention of this House."]

The imposition of Mr. Cahir Healy of the restrictions which are in question is not a matter within the jurisdiction of the Imperial Government, but I am in a position to state that the Northern Ireland Government., acting within their own powers, have released Mr. Cahir Healy, and have withdrawn the Order as to his entering a certain area in County Fermanagh. In these circumstances, there would appear to be no longer any necessity for giving facilities for the Motion standing in the name of the hon. Member.

Is the right hon. Gentleman perfectly sure that the prohibition has been withdrawn?

Yes, that is my information, my specific information.

In view of the fact that the internment and the prohibition raise general questions which may affect other Members of Parliament, does not the right hon. Gentleman regard it as advisable, in the interests of this House, to have a finding from a Committee on a matter of such important principles?

I think that the hon. Member had better put that question on the Paper. It ceases to be a question of immediate and pressing importance.

Will the Prime Minister state whether Mr. Cahir Healy now intends to come to this House, having got the opportunity?

asked the Primo Minister whether he proposes to introduce a Bill for the reform of the Upper House?

There is no present intention on the part of the Government to introduce such a Bill.

Will the Prime Minister consider bringing in a short Bill so as to make it possible for Ministers to speak in the other House?

Would the right hon. Gentleman not consider the advisability of introducing a Bill to enable the creation of life peers, so that a Labour Government may not be under the necessity of creating either bachelors or sterile people as peers?

asked the Prime Minister how he proposes to re-establish Agricultural Wages Boards; whether legislation and, if so, of what nature will be needed; whether these boards will possess compulsory powers and how they will be composed; and how the farmers are to be enabled to pay higher wages without any assistance to permit them to do so?

asked the Minister of Agriculture what steps he is taking to restore the agricultural wages boards to secure a living wage for the agricultural workers?

I will answer these questions together. I regret that I am not yet in a position to give details of the proposals for the better regulation of agricultural wages, which I hope to place before the House at an early date.

Can the right hon. Gentleman see his way clear to answer the last part of the question—"how the farmers are to be enabled to pay higher wages without any assistance to permit them to do so"? The Minister has simply swept the whole thing on one side.