asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will take steps to expedite the publication of the Statistical Abstract so that it shall appear not later than June?

The Statistical Abstract for the United Kingdom is a collection of summaries of statistics compiled by various Government Departments, and, consequently, it is not possible to issue the Abstract until those Departments have completed their statistics for the preceding year. In normal circumstances before the War, the Abstract was published in August, or, at latest, September, and it is hoped that in future years it may become practicable to re-establish that practice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that a very large crop of clover seed was grown in the Eastern Counties last season; how many tons of it were exported since harvest to the United States of America; whether he is aware that a duty was there levied upon it; and can he say how much the duty was per cwt. and when the duty was imposed?

The answer is somewhat long, and my hon. Friend will perhaps permit me to have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

I am informed that there was a plentiful crop of red clover seed in the Eastern Counties and elsewhere in this country during last season. The exports of clover seed registered in the six months, September, 1923, to February, 1924, as consigned to the United States of America, amounted to 33,848 cwts. I am unable to state the quantity of each description of clover seed included in this total, or to say how much of it was produced in the Eastern Counties. The United States of America import duties on clover seeds per cwt. are as follow:

Alsiki clover and red clover, $4.48; white clover, $3.36, crimson clover, $1.12; clover not specially provided for, $2.24.

These duties were imposed by the United States Tariff Act, 1922, which came into operation on 22nd September of that year.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what quantity of chilled meat, acted upon by formaldehyde as a preservative, is being imported into this country by the s.s. "Kent," or any other ship; if the medical officer of health at the port where this experimental consignment arrives is satisfied that the meat thus preserved with formaldehyde is fit for human consumption; is the meat on this consignment to be placed on the market; and what will be the functions in this matter of the Departmental Committee which is now sitting?

I am informed that the quantity of chilled meat being imported on the s.s. "Kent" is 463 quarters, and I am not aware that any arrangements have been made for further consignments of meat treated by formaldehyde. If the port medical officer of health is satisfied after examination of the consignment that the meat is fit for human consumption, it will no doubt be placed on the market in the usual course. I understand that the Departmental Committee on Preservatives in Food propose to arrange for the inspection of the meat and investigation of the process for the general purposes of their inquiry.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that formaldehyde is thought by the medical profession to be a very dangerous preservative? Will the right hon. Gentleman state definitely is the consignment going to be placed on the market and the public experimented upon?

The hon. and gallant Member will appreciate that that is a question on which I should require to be guided by my competent advisers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that a French Committee are at present engaged in drafting a set of rules applicable to general average; and that there is a British Committee at present independently sitting to draft rules for a similar purpose; and whether, in view of the desirability that there should be the same general average rules applicable to, and applied by, all countries, he will take steps to obtain an international agreement on the matter?

I understand that the question of general average is at present being considered by the interests concerned in this country and on the Continent, but I have no official information, and there is no question of any action being taken by the Government in the matter.

Is it desirable in the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman to have general agreement about this? If it is will he take steps to get the views of other countries with regard to it?

I believe that there is no question at present of the Government being invited to take any steps. Of course the Board of Trade will be very glad to give any assistance that can be given. Hitherto agreements have been made without Government intervention.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give any information as to the protection that will be afforded to the trade marks of British firms under the new Chinese trade-mark law and, in particular, as to how far the owners of marks actually now in use will be protected against registration of such marks by others?

I am sending the hon. and gallant Member a copy of the law in question. Owners of trade marks registering their marks under the law will be entitled to the exclusive use of such marks in accordance with the provisions of the law. Rights of owners of trade marks now in use are safeguarded by Articles 3, 4 and 28 of the law.

asked the President of the Board of Traded whether he can give the figures of the total exports from Great Britain to the United States for the years 1922 and 1923, respectively, and the total imports into this country from the United States for the same years; and if he can explain the increased balance of trade in favour of this country?

The answer is somewhat long, and my hon Friend will perhaps agree to it being circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The total declared value of exports from the United Kingdom consigned to the United States of America (including the value of re-exports and of bullion and coin) was £103,898,000 in the year 1922 and £118,572,000 in 1923. During the same years the values of imports into the United Kingdom, consigned from the United States (including bullion and coin) were £225,882,000 and £216,836,000, respectively. These figures show that the excess of imports over exports decreased from £121,984,000 in 1922 to £98,264,000 in 1923. Whether this decrease is to be attributed to a single dominant cause it is impossible to say, and I should not care to venture upon a speculative explanation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can give any information as to the export from this country of live hares?

I am unable to state, for any period, the number or value of live hares exported from the United Kingdom, but I believe that such exports are inconsiderable.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that Messrs. John Young (of Radcliffe), Limited, Red Bank Dye Works, applied for a licence on 5th March, 1924, for 120 lbs. of Geigys safranine superfine double B; that they were referred to British Dyestuffs Corporation, Limited, Messrs. L. B. Holiday and Company, Limited, and the North British Chemical Company for identical products; that they obtained L. B. Holiday and Company's safranine and dyed up bulk shade, and it appeared to be all right; that the goods were sent to the customer woven and finished; that the customer complained that they did not stain off correct shade; that the firm reported to the Dyestuffs Licensing Advisory Committee, who informed them they must try the British Dyestuffs Corporation and the North British Chemical Company and fall with their products before a licence could be obtained; that, although an interview was sought with the director, it could only be obtained on 26th March, 1924; and whether, in view of such a waste of time when orders are so badly needed, he will consider doing away with the licensing system and replacing with a definite import duty, so that customers can purchase their requirements at once under known conditions?

The application to which the hon. Member refers was made on the 5th March, and the applicants were immediately referred to three British makers. On the 18th March they stated that they had tried the product of one British maker and found it unsuitable for a particular purpose, though quite satisfactory for ordinary dyeing purposes. In reply to an inquiry on 20th March, as to trying the products of other makers, the applicants sought an interview on the 26th March, and on further information being given, a licence was immediately issued. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can state the import price of German leather and German paper on 1st February, 1924, and 1st March, 1924?

The answer is rather long, and the hon. Member will perhaps allow me to have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The answer calls for only two figures, as far as I can make out.

Following is the answer:

I am unable to state the prices of German leather or paper on the 1st February or 1st March of this year. The most important import of leather consigned from Germany in January and February, however, consisted of box and willow calf leather, of which the average declared value was £19 1s. 5d. per cwt. in January, and £27 5s. 7d. in February. Among the various descriptions of paper consigned from Germany, the imports of glazed and machine-glazed packing and wrapping paper were the most considerable, and the average declared value of paper of this class was £1 1s. 2d. in January, and £1 2s 5d. in February.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many British motor-tyre factories are closed down; how many are working not more than half their capacity; how many workers normally employed in this industry are out of work; what is the percentage of imported tyres to the total used in this country; and whether he is now prepared to advise that in the McKenna Duties a motor-car tyre should now be considered an accessory of a motor car?

I regret that no official information is available which will enable me to answer the first four parts of the question, but I understand that statements have been received from certain of the interests concerned as to the depressed state of the industry. As regards the last part of the question, I am unable to anticipate my Budget statement.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries and find out what are the facts in this case?

My hon. Friend the Financial Secretary received a deputation upon this subject to-day. I stated in my reply that we had not sufficient information, and I am afraid that it would be very difficult to get it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question also affects the cotton industry and other industries, and will he take that fact into consideration?

I shall take all the relevant facts into consideration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will appoint a Committee of three Members of the House to examine the staffing and methods of the British Clearing House for Enemy Debts?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the total amount already paid by British creditors by way of commission to the British Clearing Office for Enemy Debts; and whether it is proposed to run this Department on more economical lines?

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he is prepared to reduce the staff of 800 persons occupying ranges of offices in Stamford Street, S.E., and the adjoining streets for the purpose of winding up the balance of the business now in the hands of the British Clearing Office for Enemy Debts, as so large a number is no longer necessary?

The staffing and organisation of the Clearing Office are constantly under review by the Establishment Departments of the Treasury and the Board of Trade, and I doubt whether in the circumstances any further investigation is required. As to the staff, the numbers are being continually reduced as the condition of the work permits; but there is still a large volume of claims to be dealt with, and it would not be economical to reduce the staff below the number needed to deal expeditiously with the outstanding work. Regarding commission, the amount paid by British creditors to the Clearing Office, up-to- date, is £1,371,442; this commission is charged, under the Treaty of Peace, not only to defray the expenses of the Office, but also to indemnify the Government against loss, arising from any failure to collect debts owing by British nationals, whose solvency is guaranteed under the Treaty.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state approximately what is the amount due and expected to become due and still remaining unpaid to British nationals in respect of compensation under Articles 296 and 297 of the Treaty of Versailles; whether the property of German nationals which, by the Treaty of Versailles and the Orders in Council made thereunder, stands charged with the payment of this compensation is sufficient to meet these payments; and, if not, what is the amount of the anticipated deficiency?

Article 296 of the Treaty of Versailles deals exclusively with pre-War debts and does not relate to compensation. The amount of compensation due to British nationals under Article 297 depends upon awards made by the Mixed Arbitral Tribunal, and I am unable to give any reliable estimate of the ultimate result of the clearing procedure as it depends upon circumstances outside the control of the Clearing Office.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of times that the first division of the Anglo-German Mixed Arbitral Tribunal sat during January and during February last, and the number of cases settled, and their total amount, in each of those months?

The answer contains a table of figures, and perhaps I may be allowed to have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is the Government satisfied that this tribunal is doing all the work that can reasonably be expected of it?

The tribunal is not under the control of the British Government nor of any Department of it, but I understand that the question is receiving attention.

Although the tribunal is not under the control of the British Government, is not the President of the Board of Trade the representative of the British taxpayer and the British Treasury in the matter, and should he not look after their interests?

Following is the answer:

During the months of January and February the first division of the Anglo-German Mixed Arbitral Tribunal sat on 11 days. During those two months the first division disposed of 21 cases by judgments after trial and gave five costs awards. In addition 94 cases pending, before the tribunal were settled by consent judgment, or otherwise disposed of, upon terms agreed between the parties. The amount of the cases decided by judgment after trial is as follows:—

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many of the 716 cases settled before the Anglo-German mixed arbitral tribunal were consent judgments and how many were withdrawals?

Of the 716 cases referred to, 240 were disposed of by consent judgments; 385 were withdrawn, having been admitted through the Clearing Office and paid, and 91 were abandoned by the claimants.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state how many cases still remain to be decided?

I must ask for notice of that question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that cases dating as far back as 1921 still remain unsettled, and is there any hope of expediting the proceedings?

I can say only that there is considerable improvement in the way of expedition since November last. I would not like to criticise anything before that date.

Is it not a fact that the German Government are making opposition on practically every single question, and will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to see that cases of a similar nature are dealt with?

I am afraid that the figures do not quite bear out the hon. Member's suggestion. A number of cases are being dealt with satisfactorily.

Why should not another court be set up?

It has been set up.

A third?

That is under consideration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of fresh cases lodged with the Anglo-German mixed arbitral tribunal between 15th March, 1923, and 1st March, 1924, and the number disposed of during the same period?

Between the dates mentioned 669 new cases were lodged. During the same period 105 were disposed of by judgment after trial, and 501 by consent judgment or withdrawal.

Do not the figures given by the right hon. Gentleman mean that the actual number of cases dealt with has increased during the year?

That is true, but 669 new cases were brought forward. So long as new cases continue to be brought forward, it is difficult to make very much progress towards a settlement.

Arising out of that admission, does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that it becomes vital to see that a third tribunal is established?

Why did the right hon. Gentleman opposite not set it up?

Considerably greater progress is now being made than was made last year, and I can assure the House that the matter is receiving attention with the view of still greater progress being made.

Is not the greater progress due to the fact that we established a second tribunal?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the dissatisfaction existing amongst numbers of insured people; and if he is prepared to call for a return from the insurance companies of the number of lapsed policies, together with their duration and the amounts paid in?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given on the 25th March to the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the steamship "Majestic" has been granted a certificate of seaworthiness despite the fact that the annual overhaul of this vessel was not completed?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the steamship "Majestic" has been granted a certificate of seaworthiness despite the fact that the annual overhaul of this passenger-carrying ship has been neglected and abandoned; and will he consider cancellation of the certificate pending examination?

It is expected that the whole of the survey, with the exception of the inspection of the vessel's hull in dry dock, will be completed before the vessel sails. As there is not a dry dock in the United Kingdom capable of accommodating this vessel, the dry docking must be done at Boston, U.S.A. A short term passenger certificate is being issued to enable the vessel to proceed to that port for survey in dry dock.

Is this another case in which work has been lost to this country owing to a trade dispute?

I would not say that. The dry dock is due, and ought to be presently in position in Southampton. I hope that it will be available for the summer traffic this year.

Has a certificate of seaworthiness been issued? If so, is it liable to be cancelled owing to the pressure of the trade unions?

asked the President of the Board of Trade why he has no later figures of the Asiatics employed in British home-trade ships than the figures of June, 1921; if he is aware of the increase in the numbers of these Asiatics employed in our home trade; whether he can obtain figures from the shipping lines flying the British flag, showing the numbers of Asiatics employed, British subjects and others, respectively; and whether he can take any steps to check the increase in the numbers of Asiatics employed in home-trade vessels?

The agreements of British ships deposited with the Board of Trade give particulars of the men employed on those ships, but the classification and tabulation of these particulars involves so much labour that a census is only taken once every five years, and the last census day was 19th June, 1921. I am unable to confirm the statement that the number of Asiatics employed in the home trade has increased, and am not in a position to propose action on the matter.

Could not my right hon. Friend ask for a return of British ships in reference to this matter? Could not a table be easily made up? Are we not entitled to the information?

I am afraid that the number of British ships is a considerable number, and it is not so easy to deal with the matter. Inquiries are being made and the results so far as they have gone do not confirm the notion that there is any actual increase.

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to accompany me to Hull and explain to the seamen who are out of work there why he cannot do anything for them?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the different rates of freight charged by the various British lines, belonging to the conference, from Continental ports and from British ports to the same destinations, and that in certain cases the freight charge from the Continent by British ships is considerably less than that charged from British ports by the same British steamers; is he aware, as an example, that the freight quoted for Manilla rope from Antwerp to Callao was 17s. 6d. a ton in January last and 45s. a ton for the same goods from London to Callao, and that, although the rates from the Continent have now been increased to 32s. 6d., this is still considerably below the rate from British ports to South America charged to British shippers by the same British ships; and whether any steps can be taken to bring pressure to bear on the British companies in the combine with a view to preventing them from exercising discrimination against British ports?

This answer is somewhat long, and the hon. and gallant Member will, perhaps, permit me to have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The attention of the Board of Trade has frequently been drawn to the differences between the freights charged from Continental ports and those from British ports to the same destination. The example given in the question is substantially correct. The reason given is that Continental lines are able for various causes to carry at a lower cost than their British competitors, and British lines have to carry at the Continental rates if they are to secure any of the business from Continental ports. The matter is watched carefully by the Department, but there is no power to regulate freights or to require Continental rates to be charged from British ports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, following the settlement of the recent dock dispute, the Port of London Authority have raised their charges for landing and discharging from 55 per cent. above the pre-War rate to 100 per cent.; and if he proposes to take any action to prevent the practice of passing on to the consumer not only the addition consequent upon a wage increase but a further margin ostensibly to provide increased profits?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that the Port of London Authority have increased their dock dues for grain by 100 per cent., and for working grain out of ships by 42½ per cent.; and whether the proposals to impose the increases were submitted to him during his recent interview with representatives of the Port of London Authority?

I am aware that the Port of London Authority have announced their intention of increasing certain of their charges on and after the 1st April. Representations have been made to me by the London Corn Trade Association, and I am in communication with the Port of London Authority on the subject.

Has the hon. Gentleman any powers to investigate an increase of charges of this description, and, if not, will he consider the advisability of representing to the President of the Board of Trade the desirability of obtaining such powers?

As I have stated, I am in communication with the Port of London Authority.

Does the hon. Gentleman carry in mind that this increase which has been put on by the Dock Authorities will more than cover the cost of the extra pay which they are giving the men?

That is one of the matters which I am trying to find out.

Are the staff of the Authority satisfied with their conditions?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether claims made by British subjects resident in France and Belgium whose furniture and personal effects were lost or destroyed as a result of hostilities or of German occupation of territories in those countries during the late War fell within the terms of reference of the Royal Commission on Compensation for Suffering and Damage by Enemy Action?

The answer is in the affirmative, in so far as the damage was caused directly by acts of the enemy.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the sum of £300,000 is sufficient to pay compensation to belated claimants at the same rate as has been paid to claimants receiving awards under the Reports of the Royal Commission; and, if not, will the Government provide such further sum as may be necessary in order to pay bona fide claimants at the same rate?

I would refer to the answer which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for the Central Division of Hull on 18th March.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the sum of £300,000 to be awarded to belated claimants for compensation has been fixed so as to give these claimants the same amount of compensation they would have received if their cases had been provided for in the Reports of the Royal Commission, or upon what other basis this sum has been fixed?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether it is intended that the £300,000 additional compensation money shall be divided among all persons who have suffered loss or damage and who have made belated claims; or, if not, will he state for the information of claimants what conditions he proposes to lay down in order to determine whether a belated claim should rank for compensation or not?

I will reply to these questions together, and would refer to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for West Lewisham and the hon. Member for North Newcastle-on-Tyne on 25th March.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in none of the answers which he has given has he yet stated with what conditions the claimants have to comply?

That has already been stated, in reply to questions in the House, and the conditions are exactly the same as those which were laid down by the Commission on previous occasions. It is merely the belated claims that are being dealt with, which were rendered under the conditions laid down by the Commission.

How is it possible that the same conditions are to apply as applied to the findings of the Royal Commission, when the belated claims have themselves been turned down by the Royal Commission?

The belated claims were set aside by the Royal Commission and have now been accepted for consideration.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman say that the amount of these claims was only £22,000? What is the difficulty, under these circumstances, in making the answer?

The number of the claims is between 21,000 and 22,000. There is no question of amount; it has not yet been ascertained.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that persons in many parts of the country are receiving small sums of money in final settlement of their claims submitted to the Royal Commission on Compensation for Suffering and Damage by Enemy Action without any intimation being given to them of the figures at which their original claims were assessed and audited; and will he look into this matter?

I would refer to the answers which I gave to the hon. Member on 25th March, 1924.

May I request the right hon. Gentleman to make his answers more audible?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what the cost of building and equipping a ring spinning cotton mill with 6-inch spindles and 1¾-inch gauge was in 1914; and what would be the cost at the present time?

I am not in a position to give precise figures, but I understand that the cost at the present time would be approximately twice the pre-War cost.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the scheme which on 26th February had been approved for providing additional accommodation for the Yorkshire Hussars at Middlesbrough has now been abandoned; if not, when it is hoped to start upon it; and what additional accommodation is to be provided by it?

The scheme has not been abandoned, but perhaps my answer of 26th February was not sufficiently explicit. The present accommodation is shared by the Yorkshire Hussars and some other units, including No. 2 Company, 50th Northumbrian Division Signals; and the scheme to which I referred in my previous answer is for the provision of a separate headquarters for the signal company, so as to set free additional existing accommodation for the other units, including the Yorkshire Hussars. I understand that the building of these separate headquarters has already begun. I regret that in the present conditions I am not in a position to contemplate the erection of entirely new headquarters for the Yorkshire Hussars.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the absolutely inadequate nature of the existing accommodation; and is he prepared to let the present conditions continue for another year?

I cannot say anything except that we hope the new accommodation for the signal company will enable additional existing accommodation to be made available for the remainder.

asked the Secretary of State for War if it has been definitely decided to close down the central ordnance depot at Chilwell, Notts; if so, what it is intended to do with this depot; and whether alternative employment is to be provided for the 800 men who will be thrown out of employment by such action?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The depot will be gradually reduced, but this will probably take some years. The workmen affected are mainly labourers to whom no continuity of employment was or could be promised, but their cases will be dealt with in the best manner possible as they arise.

Will men who are so displaced receive priority of treatment if any vacancies arise at other depots under the control of the War Office?

I should say, without tying myself down to any definite method of treatment, that the last part of my answer has been carefully thought over and the cases of these men will be dealt with in the best manner possible as they arise and as the circumstances present themselves.

When will the depot close?

I have already said the depots will be gradually reduced and it may take some years.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many officers are still serving in the Army on temporary commissions; what are their ranks and how are they employed; and what steps are being taken to train Regular officers to take their place?

The number of non-Regular officers employed at present under the War Office is 346, mainly captains and subalterns. This figure includes not only "temporary officers" proper but certain Militia and Territorial officers. They are employed mainly on war aftermath and in Germany, Palestine and Iraq. The question of training Regular officers to take their places does not at present arise.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the importance of launching his scheme for assistance to fishermen in the replacement of lost and damaged gear in time to enable the greatest possible number of boats and crews to participate in the summer fishing, he is yet in a position to make an announcement of its terms?

My right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to say whether any such scheme will be adopted, but he will intimate the decision reached as soon as practicable.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this is an extremely urgent problem, and will he report to his right hon. colleague the Secretary for Scotland the urgency of the case?

The Secretary for Scotland is aware that it is an urgent question and will be glad of any information from any hon. Member in any direction that will be helpful in solving it.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that eight or nine Scottish Members representing fishing constituencies, recently interviewed the Secretary for Scotland and pointed out the urgency of the case, as the fishing season starts in May or the beginning of June?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the retail price asked for fish in big towns like Glasgow is eightpence per pound out of which the fisherman only gets one-halfpenny per pound; and is there not sufficient to pay for gear and everything else, if the fishermen got it?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the cost of transfer of land in Scotland is, in some cases, more than the actual value of the property; and whether the Government proposes to introduce legislation to facilitate and cheapen the transfer of land in Scotland?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. With regard to the second, the improvement of the law of conveyancing in Scotland in the direction of simplification and reduction of cost has been under the consideration of a Committee whose recommendations are embodied in the Bill recently introduced by the hon. and learned Member for South Aberdeen (Mr. F. C. Thomson).

Will the Government give facilities for that Bill?

I cannot say.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his information must be wrong, because I have at least one case in which the selling price was £20 and the transfer fees £22.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the single transfer system, where one signature includes all?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that emigration from Scotland in the coming season is likely to be exceptionally heavy; and, in view of the fact that Scotland, particularly the Highlands and Islands, are losing many of their best men, what steps the Government propose to take to solve this problem?

It is obviously difficult to obtain particulars on this subject in advance, and my right hon. Friend is not aware that emigration will be greater in the ensuing season than in the past year. It is impracticable to deal with the wide and general topic of emigration within the limits of a reply to a question but, with regard to the Highlands and Islands, my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland is examining the question of the best utilisation of the natural resources.

Will the hon. Gentleman who is assistant to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Scotland represent to the Secretary for Scotland the advisability of at once setting up a Commission of Inquiry into this scandal, which has continued for so many years and which threatens to leave us without any population in the Gaelic-speaking districts?

I think it would be better if my hon. Friend would put that question down for the Secretary for Scotland himself to answer.

On a point of Order. Are not the questions now being answered by the hon. Gentleman questions which were addressed to the Secretary for Scotland?

asked the Secretary for Scotland how many Irish political prisoners convicted of offences committed in Ireland are at present detained in prisons in Scotland; what is the nature of the offences charged against such prisoners; what is the character of the punishment these persons are subject to; what is the length of sentence already served; for how long a period the prisoners are still to be detained; and will he consider asking the Irish Government responsible for these prisoners to either take them back to Ireland or sanction their release?

A number of prisoners serving sentences imposed by the Courts of Northern Ireland are at present detained in Scotland, but my right hon. Friend has no information as to the motives underlying their offences, nor are prisoners classified as "political" or otherwise according to the motive of their offence. Any question regarding the future disposal of these prisoners is a matter not for my right hon. Friend, but for the Government and Parliament of Northern Ireland.

asked the Secretary for Scotland the school population of Scotland in the year 1923–24, and the estimated school population for the year 1924–25?

The latest returns of education authorities show that the total number of children of school age in Scotland at 31st July, 1923, was 800,030, a decline of over 29,000 from the preceding year. A further decline in 1924–25 may be anticipated.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if the new draft Regulations for the training of teachers have been circulated to education authorities, provincial committees, and teachers' organisations for their consideration; and if sufficient approval has been forthcoming to warrant the passing of these Regulations in their present form?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The time allowed for the lodging of observations and suggestions will not expire until 2nd April.

Can the hon. Gentleman state if, so far, any organisation or local education authority has approved of these draft Regulations?

I am sorry to say that I cannot.

Can the hon. Gentleman state how many authorities have urged objections to the Regulations?

I cannot.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the disadvantages arising from elections being held in the month of November, he would favourably consider an amendment of the law so that municipal elections in Scotland would take place in June?

My right hon. Friend has no evidence of any general desire for the change suggested such as would justify consideration of legislation at the present time.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not consider there would be advantages to the people in being able to attend meetings more easily and more cheaply?

Does not the hon. Gentleman's own experience in the city of Glasgow give him sufficient evidence on this matter?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that any such change would disfranchise a number of people who take holidays at that time?

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware that in March, 1922, the Scottish Board of Health intimated to the county council of East Lothian and the town council of Haddington the intention to make a survey of Scottish rivers as regards pollution and sewage disposal; and what has been done in the matter?

I am aware that the Scottish Board of Health is collecting information regarding the pollution of rivers in Scotland. The returns obtained are being tabulated, and it is proposed that the Scottish Board of Health and the Fishery Board for Scotland should confer together, after the tabulation is completed, to consider the whole matter of river pollution in Scotland.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware of repeated complaints having been made to the Scottish Board of Health of fish poisoning by sewage in the River Tyne, and that, on the 21st instant, a large number of trout were found dead in the Tyne extending over a stretch of half a mile below the outfall of the town of Haddington drains; and will he cause immediate inquiry to be made regarding the matter?

Two complaints of fish poisoning in the River Tyne have been made to the Scottish Board of Health. The Board are causing inquiry to be made into the drainage arrangements of the burgh of Haddington, and I shall inform the hon. Member of the result of this inquiry.

Is the hon. Member aware that the Tyne is one of the cleanest rivers in Great Britain, and offers some of the finest salmon fishing in the world?

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware that on 22nd March Inspector Robertson and a force of police raided the United Services Club, Coaltown, of Wemyss; can he state if the police had a warrant to carry out their raid; on what information did they take such action; and did they discover anything detrimental to the good management of the club as the result of the raid?

My right hon. Friend is making inquiry into this matter, and he will communicate with the hon. Member thereafter.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the exceptional economic conditions prevailing in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, he is now prepared to consider the appointment of a Commission to investigate and report as to the best methods of developing the resources of the Highlands and Islands?

My right hon. Friend is collecting information as to the possibilities of economic development from the Departments under his control. He will be largely guided by the result in his further consideration of the question of appointing a Commission.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware of the urgency of this question? While the Highlands of Scotland are being depopulated of Scotsmen, who have been brought up there, Poles are coming into Lanarkshire and Stirlingshire who cannot speak the English language, let alone the Scottish language; and will he take steps to inform his chief that this matter brooks no delay, and that a Commission should be set up at once?

This is not the time for a speech.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the decision of the Government to refuse to allow local authorities to accept the lowest tender for materials required for public relief works, when of foreign origin, imposes an extra burden on their local rates; and will the Government in such cases make an equivalent grant from the Treasury to the local authority so that its ratepayers shall not be penalised by carrying out the Government's policy of Protection?

Where the Government are giving considerable financial assistance to schemes of this character in order to provide work for the unemployed in this country, it is not, I think, unreasonable to impose a condition to secure that this object is, in fact, attained, and I see no justification for an additional Exchequer subsidy on this ground.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the particular necessitous districts which have the heaviest number of unemployed are penalised by his system in order to relieve other districts?

If there be any loss for the reasons stated in the supplementary question, surely it is balanced by the gain of finding men work.

Is this the accepted Government method of breaking the rings and combines, which the Prime Minister announced as the first policy of the Government?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that litigation is now pending involving contingent liabilities on the Government of upwards of £30,000,000; what is the nature of this litigation; whether it will prevent the Attorney-General from performing his Parliamentary duties; and what steps he proposes to take to secure that more than one of the Law Officers of the Crown shall be a Member of this House?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answer given yesterday by the Prime Minister in reply to a question by the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Remer).

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that answer was no answer, and can he say if there is any precedent for there being only one of the available four Law Officers of the Crown present in this House?

I should be glad to welcome from any quarter of the House any helpful suggestions.

In regard to the last part of the question, may I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is not aware that there are no fewer than four Bills dealing with rent restriction, and does he not therefore think the Minister of Health will require some more legal assistance?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the annual cost of abolishing all fees for officer cadets and cadets at the training colleges for the Royal Navy, His Majesty's Army, and the Royal Air Force?

The annual cost would depend on certain assumptions as to the numbers of cadets and the categories of fees and other payments affected, but may be put at about a quarter of a million pounds.

Is my hon. Friend going to recommend to the Government that this money should be given to the people, so that poor boys may have an equal chance?

My hon. and gallant Friend asked me the cost, and I have given that, but he is now referring to the policy.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether ex-Royal Irish Constabulary pensioners will be included within the scope of the Pre-War Pensioners Bill which the Government intend to introduce immediately after Easter?

I fear that I cannot undertake to announce the proposals of the Government in detail before the introduction of the Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great hardship from which pensioners of the Royal Irish Constabulary are at present suffering?

The Government are extremely anxious to get this Bill forward, but it appears to be impossible to find time before Easter. I have no doubt the earliest possible opportunity will be taken for the introduction of the Bill.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not sympathetically consider the inclusion of the ex-Royal Irish Constabulary pensioners?

I can only repeat the answer I gave to the previous question, namely, that I cannot answer in detail before the introduction of the Bill.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the total sum, in money or in kind, paid as reparations by Germany under the Treaty of Versailles up to the present time; and in what proportions the respective Allied countries affected have participated in such reparations payment?

With the hon. and gallant Member's permission, I will circulate the answer, which contains many figures, in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will those figures show that this country has received the same proportion of reparations as France has done?

When the hon. and gallant Gentleman is in possession of the figures, he will be able, I think, to find an answer to that question.

Following is the reply:

1. The total sums received by the Reparation Commission under the Treaty of Versailles up to 31st December, 1923, amounted to £421 million, namely, £95 million cash, £198 million deliveries in kind and £128 million ceded property. Of the £421 million, £284½ million has been distributed and the balance mainly in respect of German ceded properties is undistributed or in suspense.

2. The following table gives the distribution among the various Allied Powers and the difference in the case of each Power between the gross amount received by it and the amount required to reimburse the charges which have priority over reparations, namely, reimbursement of coal advances to Germany and costs of Armies of Occupation and Commissions of Control. The figures represent millions of £.

3. These figures have been taken from a communique issued by the Reparation Commission on 24th March, gold marks being converted to sterling at the rate of 20 gold marks to the £. The Reparation Commission statement concludes with the following passage:

"This table is highly condensed, does not pretend to give more than a general indication of the position of the respective Powers and omits minor complications which would necessarily be introduced into a formally exact statement. It should also be added that the figures given are not final but approximate."

4. The above figures refer only to payments by Germany for Reparation (and Armies of Occupation) and do not include payments for other Treaty charges such as Restitution, Clearing Offices for Pre-War Debts.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the then holders of perpetual pensions were at any time invited to commute their pensions, in accordance with the terms of the Treasury Minute of 19th July, 1888; if those terms were refused; and, if so, whether the fact of the refusal was reported to the House, as directed by the said Treasury Minute?

Yes, Sir. The terms then contemplated were 26·945 years' purchase. No offer to commute a pension on these terms has been definitely rejected by the holder, but in 1890 when the High Court of Justice refused to approve the commutation of Lord Rodney's pension on those terms the circumstances were reported to the House in accordance with the Treasury Minute.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the terms at that time were 27 years' purchase, and that it was the direct statement of the Treasury at that time that an explicit offer should be made, and, if refused, the terms of the refusal should be reported to this House?

The hon. Member, of course, understands that I am not responsible for what took place 40 years ago, and I can only give the information which we have in our possession as to what was done in regard to previous offers. The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that, following on the Report of the Committee in 1888, eight of these perpetual pensions have been commuted. I have gone rather fully into this matter in order to satisfy my hon. Friend, and the only case that I can find where possibly the matter might have been reported to the House was in regard to the Nelson pension. Twice the Treasury have offered to commute this pension, but the negotiations have never assumed a very definite form, and I understand that the Treasury at that time did not consider, seeing that the negotiations had been in a sense informal, that it was necessary to report the matter to the House of Commons.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will inform the House as to the date when Lord Nelson was last invited to state the terms on which he was willing to commute the pension which has been paid since the year 1805?

Certain communications passed in 1904, but they never advanced beyond preliminary inquiries.

Is it the policy of His Majesty's Government to accord with the previous declaration of policy, made many years ago, that these pensions should be commuted and on terms representing a substantial saving to the Treasury?

That precisely represents the attitude of the present Government.

In the event of any of those holders or receivers of perpetual pensions not accepting the desire of the Government to commute their pensions, are the Government in favour of introducing legislation to stop those pensions altogether?

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform us what service this gentleman has rendered, is rendering, or is likely to render for this money?

That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

I will put a question down for this day week.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what date he proposes to introduce the Budget?

I propose to open the Budget on the 29th April.

The first day after the Easter Recess?

indicated assent.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what action, if any, the Treasury took to prevent the further issue of war bond policies by the Prudential Assurance Company; when such action was taken; the total number and value of war bond policies issued by the company; how many have lapsed; and the total loss incurred thereby to the policyholders?