asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give any information as to the imprisonment of German political prisoners from the Ruhr district at the French prison of St. Martin de Ré; whether he has any official information showing that they are to be transported to Cayenne or some French tropical Colony; and, if so, whether, in view of the provisions of the Versailles Treaty, representations will be made to the French Government on the subject?

My information is to the effect that there are no German political prisoners at St. Martin de Ré, but only persons convicted for criminal offences. It is further understood that the French Government have no intention of transporting them to Cayenne or elsewhere. The third part of the question does not therefore arise, but in any case my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister does not see that any provision of the Treaty of Versailles would warrant His Majesty's Government making official representations to the French Government on the subject.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what has been the average monthly delivery of coal and coke from the Ruhr on account of reparations since the cessation of passive resistance; what were the average monthly deliveries prior to January, 1923; and the average monthly deliveries during the passive resistance period?

I have been asked to reply, and, as the answer is a long one, I will, with my hon. Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if Captain O'Grady's appointment as British representative in Russia has received the sanction of the Soviet Government?

On a point of Order. Is it in order to refer to an hon. Member of this House by name, as is done in this question?

I think the hon. Member should have been referred to as the hon. Member for South-East Leeds.

I have nothing to add to the reply given by the Prime Minister to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull and to the hon. Member for Dartford on Monday last.

Has the name of the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for South-East Leeds ever been put before the Soviet Government? [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"]

I have nothing to add to the reply.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that there are six cottages at Tollesbury, four cottages at Burnham-on-Crouch, and six cottages at Bradwell-on-Sea, built in connection with the coastguard, which have been vacant for 12 months past; and whether, in view of the acute shortage of houses in these places, he will arrange for them to be let to private individuals?

The number of empty houses at the stations referred to is correctly stated, but they have not all been empty for 12 months, the last house at Bradwell having been vacated as recently as last month. Negotiations are in progress for surrendering the houses at Tollesbury, which are only held on lease, to the lessor. The other properties will shortly be offered for sale by public auction, due notice of which will be given in the Press, and it is not proposed in the meantime to let any of the houses.

Is it a fact that the four cottages at Burnham-on-Crouch have been vacant for 12 months?

No, Sir; I think that applies to only three of them.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if, in view of its importance to all shipbuilding centres, he can now state whether it is the intention of the Government to carry out the policy of the last Ministry with regard to expediting the carrying out of what is known as the cruiser programme, with the object of relieving unemployment in those districts where no other form of work is of any use whatever to the skilled men concerned; whether he is aware that in Barrow 1,000 more men will within a very short time probably be discharged owing to the completion of the gun-mounting work on which they are engaged; and whether he is aware that the towns engaged in shipbuilding and steel manufacture are among those where the depression is greatest at the present moment?

As regards the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to my reply of the 21st February to the hon. Member for Kingston-upon-Hull. I am aware of the position at Barrow and all relevant factors will be considered when orders for new naval work are placed.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any decision has been come to with regard to the balance of that naval programme, including submarines?

No decision has yet been arrived at on that point.

Will the hon. Member bear in mind the claims of those towns whose working population was largely increased owing to the War and which peace conditions cannot absorb?

rose—

We cannot go all round the dockyards.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he is aware of the serious amount of unemployment in Newcastle and on the Tyne; and if he will say what, proportion of the new Admiralty work it is proposed to allocate to this district?

I am aware of the position and firms on the Tyne capable of building a cruiser are being invited to tender. The allocation of the orders cannot be forecast, but, when Parliamentary approval to the programme has been given, will be decided after receipt of the tenders and full consideration of all relevant factors.

Will the hon. Member see that an effective promise is given with regard to the time, and will he bear in mind that every shipbuilding yard in Newcastle and on the Tyne is capable of building a cruiser?

Will the hon. Gentleman say whether the electoral pressure which can be exercised by the various parties is a relative consideration?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what is to be the displacement, speed, armament, and approximate cost of the five new light cruisers for which tenders are to be invited; and how many of these new light cruisers is it intended to build in the Royal Dockyards?

It would be contrary to the usual practice and not in the public interest to publish details of these vessels at present, but they will, of course, conform to the requirements of the Washington Naval Treaty. It is undesirable to give any estimated cost until tenders have been submitted and accepted, but the Admiralty expect the cost to be between 1½ and 2 millions. It is the intention that three of the cruisers should be built in His Majesty's Dockyards, namely, one each at Portsmouth, Devonport and Chatham.

Will the hon. Member state when these details as to size, speed, etc., will be published, and is he aware that before the War, when we were faced with a naval menace, these particulars were given in order that the public might be informed as to the strength of the Navy, and which will have to be given sooner or later?

Is it not a fact that before the War particulars were only given in the discussion on the Navy Estimates for the first time?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what additions to the personnel of the Navy the proposed construction of the five light cruisers will involve?

The effect of the building of the cruisers, if approved by Parliament, on the number of the personnel of the Royal Navy must depend upon the decisions come to on the replacement programme which is to be the subject of investigation by His Majesty's Government. The numbers of Vote A to be proposed to this House for 1924–25 will not include any additional provision for the cruisers.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty, with reference to the proposed programme of naval construction, whether it is the intention of the Government to carry out the plans of his predecessor and to lay down this year three submarines and a submarine depot ship, two destroyers and a destroyer depot ship, and two gunboats of a special shape for the Persian Gulf, an aircraft carrier, and a mine-laying vessel; whether he endorses the view of his predecessor that all of the above are necessary requirements most urgently needed for replacement; and to how many men the construction of the above-mentioned vessels would give employment, and what addition would it involve to the Naval Estimates in the coming year?

No, Sir. The Government have decided that, subject to the necessary Parliamentary sanction, five cruisers and two destroyers shall be laid down, and this House has already been informed that they have appointed a Cabinet Committee to consider the requirements of the Navy as regards the replacement of units of the Fleet. Had the full programme of the late Government been embodied in the Navy Estimates for 1924–25 and been approved by this House, the extra cost involved would have been approximately three million pounds in 1924–25, and the additional number of men employed about 14,000.

Are we to understand from the hon. Gentleman's answer that His Majesty's Government adhere to the principle of a one-power standard?

I think the Noble Lord had better not construe any more than is contained in the answer.

Are we to understand that two destroyers are being built in addition to five cruisers? [HON. MEMBERS: "Of course!"]

Yes, subject to Parliamentary sanction. That is in accordance with the statement which I made on Monday last.

As the Government are so solicitous about unemployment, does not the hon. Gentleman consider that it would be worth while to spend this extra £3,000,000?

That is a question for the Cabinet.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what is the estimated cost of building and completing the new cruisers of 10,000 tons as compared with the cost of the vessels they are to replace?

I have answered the first part of the question in my reply to question No. 20 by the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy). The total cost of a "County" class cruiser was approximately £950,000.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what will be the cost of maintaining in commission a cruiser of 10,000 tons as compared with one of those to be replaced?

The annual cost, at present prices, of maintaining in full commission in home waters a cruiser of 10,000 tons would amount to about £259,000, as compared with £214,800 for a cruiser of the "County" class which it is to replace.

Is not the cost increased on foreign service, and are not these cruisers designed for foreign service on trade routes?

The cost is increased chiefly in regard to provisions, wages, etc.

asked the Prime Minister what arrangements he has made for allocating the contracts for building the new light cruisers to areas where unemployment is most serious?

I have been asked to reply and would refer the hon. Member to the Prime Minister's reply of the 25th February.

Does the Prime Minister consider that the existence of unemployment is a reason for the increase of armaments?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that the Director of Naval Construction has recently resigned his appointment; and can he indicate why no fresh appointment has been made to this post?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. An announcement on the subject will be I made as soon as possible.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he will consider the advisability of taking steps to amend existing regulations in order that pensions may be paid to the parent, or parents, of sailors who lose their lives in the service of the country, when it can be established that such sailors were, at the time of their death, making allowances to their parents?

This question is now under consideration, but my hon. Friend will realise that the Admiralty is not the only Department involved.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he is aware that Mr. Stead, ex-able-seaman in the Royal Navy, No. J 43,310, who served through the late War and up till recently in the Royal Navy, has been discharged as unfit from defective vision; that the Royal Hospital, Chelsea, considers that, in spite of his service, his disability is neither due to nor aggravated by it; and will he endeavour to have his case reconsidered by the Royal Hospital, or, in view of his war service, by the Ministry of Pensions?

As this question deals with an individual case I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate the reply in the OFFICIAL EEPORT.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when it is expected that the uncompleted ships of the "Hawkins" and "Emerald" classes will be completed; and how long these ships have been under construction?

The uncompleted ships are "Frobisher," "Effingham," "Emerald" and "Enterprise." I will, with the Noble Lord's permission, circulate the details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

May we take it that the construction of these ships is to be pressed forward with all possible speed? Has not one of them been under construction for several years?

We will give consideration to that question.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when a decision will be given on Item 9 of 1922 Welfare Conference, relative to a second triennial increase of substantive pay to leading ratings passed for petty officer?

An Admiralty Fleet Order is being issued to the effect that it is not possible to accede to this request.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether a decision has yet been reached with regard to Item 52 of the 1922 Welfare Conference relative to the right of inventors to their own inventions, provided such inventions are of commercial value but of no use to the Board of Admiralty?

This matter is still under the consideration of the Government. It is already the usual practice of the Admiralty to allow the inventor the rights in the invention if it evidently is of no use to the Government.

Why is this matter still under consideration, because the same answer was given in June of last year?

I do not suppose that the facts have materially changed since June last.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he can inform the House whether the oil-carrying vessels supplying oil to His Majesty's Fleet are owned by the Admiralty; and, if the vessels are not owned by the Government, will he be prepared to advise His Majesty's Government to lay down oil-carrying vessels in the shipyards of the country, thereby assisting to reduce unemployment in the shipbuilding industry?

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

If the policy of the Government is to provide work for the unemployed, does he not think that the shipyards of the country could build oil-carrying vessels and not ships of war, and will he consider the advisability of putting down oil-carrying vessels?

While probably agreeing with my hon. Friend, we do not want any more, and therefore there is no reason for laying them down.

Do the Government accept the principle that unemployment is a reason for an increase of armaments?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that much dissatisfaction exists at the methods adopted for the preparation and cooking of the food under the general messing system at Portsmouth, which is helping to make an otherwise excellent system unpopular; and whether he will consider placing the preparation and cooking under the entire supervision of the naval cookery officers instead of officers of the paymaster branch?

The Admiralty has no reason to think that the conditions suggested by the hon. Member exist, but enquiries are now being made.

Is the hon. Member aware that the breakfast is cooked between the hours of 12 midnight and 4 a.m., and dinner between 4 a.m. and 8 a.m., and is heated when the dinner time arrives, with the consequence that, although the food is excellent, it is completely spoiled?

My hon. Friend will observe that inquiries are being made, and no doubt those facts will come to light.

As cooking is a skilled operation, is it not necessary that it should be done by trained cooks, instead of under the supervision of naval paymasters?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty when the last workmen were placed on the established list of Portsmouth Dockyard; and when it is likely that further additions to the established list will be made?

The last transfer of workman to the established list was on the first of the present month; nominations are about to be made for the establishment of about a dozen men in vacancies.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether it is intended to give the balance of pensions for the year to the widow of a naval pensioner in the event of the pensioner dying before he has completed one year as a pensioner?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply of the 19th February to the hon. Member for Sutton (Viscountess Astor), a copy of which I am sending him.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty how many boy artificers are appointed by the Navy annually; whether these boys are drawn from any particular class of school; whether any number is allocated to any towns or districts in the country: how many places are allotted to London; and if the education authority is invited to submit names for the vacancies?

As the reply is somewhat long, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether a new scheme for Government employés has yet been prepared for submission to the registrar which will bring the Government scheme into accord with the recent Workmen's Compensation Act; and will he see that it is made operative as from the date the new Act came into force?

The Government compensation scheme expired on the 31st December, 1923, but was re-certified by the Registrar of Friendly Societies for a further period of five years. The necessary changes were then made in the scheme by the Registrar, under the powers conferred upon him by the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, to bring it into accord with the Act. The scheme as thus revised has been offered to the workmen concerned, and, so far as can be ascertained, is being accepted by nearly all of them. It is not possible to apply the scheme as such to workmen who were injured between the 1st January, 1924, and the promulgation of the new scheme, but special arrangements have been made to meet any such cases which may arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the decreased employment in the Royal dockyards that must follow the policy of limitation of naval armaments, and the consequent distress involved to the men who have been trained for work in the Royal dockyards and for whom there is no alternative occupation, and in view of the wastage of the taxpayers' capital involved by the progressive disuse of the yards in question, he will take steps to appoint forthwith a Royal Commission which could be instructed to consider and report upon the possibility of utilising the dockyards for commercial shipbuilding?

I have been asked to reply. No, Sir. I have no reason for anticipating any cessation of the economical use of the principal Royal yards for necessary naval work. The possibilities of employing the Royal yards on commercial work were fully explored by the Colwyn Committee in 1919. The Report is contained in Command Paper 581 of 1920.

Will the Government consider the possibility, if they cannot utilise them for commercial shipbuilding, of breaking up obsolete ships of war by direct labour in their own dockyards, rather than allow it under sweated conditions to shipbreakers in the Dover area?

I think I had better ask for notice of that question.

What did the hon. Gentleman mean when he used the words "principal dockyards"?

It means those dockyards which are the principal dockyards.

Will the Government recognise that if the policy of limitation of armaments be followed, the consequent distress will be very much greater than that in the dockyards at present?

asked the Prime Minister whether the increase in the Mediterranean Fleet indicates a change of policy on the part of the Government; and, if so, whether he is in a position to state what that policy is?

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

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that the German Government refuse to allow import licences for British cotton goods, and that this is causing serious unemployment in Lancashire; is he aware that the prices charged in Germany for German cotton goods are in excess of world prices, and that the removal of the prohibition will enable large quantities of Lancashire goods to be exported to Germany; and will he make urgent representations to the German Government?

I have been asked to reply. I am aware of the difficulty, and if import licences were given more freely by Germany the Lancashire cotton trade might, no doubt, benefit. As regards the second part of the question, statements have appeared in the German Press, the effect of which is that prices of textiles in Germany are high in relation to world prices. As at present advised, I do not

Will the hon. Gentleman take into consideration that the 26 per cent. Reparation Tax is just about to be largely reduced; and will he make that a lever to obtain a corresponding advantage to British traders?

I cannot go into that question.

Have we no control over them?

Will the Government consider the possibility of using the claims that we have against the Germans as a means of obtaining freedom of trade for that country?

I do not think that that arises out of the question on the Paper.

Cannot the hon. Gentleman make it a condition of the 26 per cent.?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty what are the numbers of light cruisers built and actually building, respectively, and less than 12 years old, belonging to the British Empire, France, Japan, and the United States of America; and how many of these are in full commission?

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

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can supply information as to the number of battleships, battle-cruisers, cruisers, torpedo-boats, and torpedo-boat destroyers at present on the effective list

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he can state the latest known figures with regard to the light cruiser strength of the British, American, Japanese, and French Navies, classifying the cruisers into those suitable for Fleet work and those suitable for commerce, destruction, and protection?

The number of cruisers and light cruisers is as follows:

asked the Minister of Labour what provision, if any, is now made for the industrial or other training of boys leaving school at 14?

I have been asked to reply to this question. For boys who are willing to attend school full time after 14, junior technical schools provide instruction adapted to their future occupations. For boys who will not attend full time, a substantial provision of facilities for instruction in subjects related to industrial occupations is made in most of the larger towns in England and Wales, in day and evening part-time classes.

further asked the Minister of Labour the percentage of boys leaving school annually who become apprentices and, in particular, how many become apprentices in the building trade?

I regret that nothing like precise information is available as to the number of boys becoming apprentices annually. As the question speaks of boys leaving school, I should add that in many trades, including the building industry, boys are not ordinarily bound apprentices before the age of 16.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the Medical Research Council and the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research have recommended a course of research into questions of machine design, with a view to improving such design, so as to avoid unnecessary fatigue to the workers; and whether the Government propose to sanction such research and to provide funds for the same?

Arrangements for an inquiry into this subject have been made by the Industrial Fatigue Research Board of the Medical Research Council, with the co-operation of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research upon the engineering side. The investigation is at present limited in duration to one year, and it will not be necessary to make any addition to the usual financial provision for the work of the Departments concerned.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is prepared to set up a Minimum Wage Commission to fix legally binding minimum rates of wages.

I regret that I am not in a position at the moment to make any statement upon this matter.

asked the Prime Minister whether, and, if so, when, he intends to bring in a Legitimacy Bill, or does the Government intend to support and give time for the Legitimacy Bill in troduced by the hon. and gallant Member for Lewes (Colonel Campion)?

The Bill introduced by the hon. and gallant Member for Lewes is, I understand, similar in general outline to a Bill which has already been read a second time in another place. The Government expressed approval of the general principle of that Bill, and promised to confer with the promoters on the subsidiary questions involved in any legislation on this matter. If progress can be made with that Bill, it will not be necessary to proceed with the Bill introduced in this House.

When that Bill comes here, are the Government prepared to give it facilities, and so persuade the promoters of the other private Member's Bill to take that out of its path?

Perhaps the hon. and gallant Member will repeat that question when the Bill comes.

asked the Prime Minister if he has appointed a Member of the Government to represent the Charity Commissioners; and, if not, does he propose to do so?

Yes, Sir. My hon. Friend the Member for Houghton-le-Spring (Mr. Robert Richardson) has been appointed Parliamentary Charity Commissioner.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in any steps which His Majesty's Government may take towards securing a reduction in the present cost of living, an inquiry will be made into the operations in this country of the meat combination known as the American Beef Trust?

I have been asked to reply. The suggestion made by my right hon. Friend will receive consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government shortly to issue a daily news sheet reporting the operations of the Government Departments from day to day; whether the cost of the publication will be borne by public funds; and, if not, at whose charges will it appear?

Communications to the Press with regard to matters of public interest are made as necessary from time to time. Nothing is further from the intention of His Majesty's Government than to issue a daily news sheet of the kind indicated in the hon. and gallant Member's question. The latter parts of the question do not, therefore, arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government accepts the principle that Germany should pay reparations for material damage; and whether in that case he will consider the desirability of obtaining from that source further funds for the benefit of those torpedoed men of the British mercantile marine who lost everything in the War, and whose claims are now under consideration by the Reparations Claims Department?

The obligation which Germany undertook by the Treaty of Versailles was to pay reparation to the Allied Governments not to individuals. To meet exceptional cases where the losses of individuals had not been made good by insurance or by compensation granted by the Government during the War, the British Government allotted a sum of £5,000,000 to be paid out in awards on the recommendation of a Royal Commission. I do not think it would be justifiable to provide further funds for increasing the grants already made on the recommendation of the Royal Commission in the cases referred to in the question.

I could not hear a word of the answer.

asked the Prime Minister if he will give the names of the members of the special sub-committee appointed to examine and report on the Imperial airship scheme?

No, Sir. It is contrary to the established practice to give the names of members of Cabinet Committees.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the decision to reduce the levy under the German Reparation (Recovery) Act, he will give facilities for the discussion of a Motion for the suspension of the Act, as provided in section six.

We have no intention of suspending the German Reparation (Recovery) Act; and in these circumstances, and having regard to the amount of urgent business before us, I am not prepared to give facilities for such a Motion as the hon. Member suggests.

I beg to give notice that I will put down such a Motion to be taken after 11 o'clock.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the statement made by the Home Secretary to the effect that he would vote for the abolition of the entertainments duty; and whether this is to be regarded as an indication of the policy of the Government?

The proposals of the Government in regard to taxation in the forthcoming financial year will not be announced prior to the Budget statement, and the Home Secretary made it clear in the statement referred to that he was not speaking on behalf of the Government.

Then if this is not an indication of the policy of His Majesty's Government, is it an indication of the intention of the Treasury Bench to follow the example of the Liberal party and walk into different lobbies on all the main questions that arise?

May we assume, unless Ministers definitely state that they are speaking for the Government, that they are always to be taken as speaking individually?

Was it customary in the last Government for all its Members to speak with one voice?

They had no minds.

Does it mean that it is going to be left to a free vote of the House?

That is not so. I said that we should make no announcement on the question until the Budget statement.