asked the Under-Secretary of State for India if he is aware that it is the intention of the Swaraj party that now controls the Legislative Council of the Central Provinces to introduce a Bill in that Council to remove the disabilities against the candidature of political convicts, as laid down in the electoral rules under the Government of India Act; and, if so, what action he intends to take in the matter?

I am not aware of this intention, and I may observe that a Provincial Council has no power to override rules made under the Government of India Act.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he will consider the amendment of the present composition of the Legislative Councils, which is limited to the few English-speaking members of the population, by adopting the proposal of Sir Prabashankar Pattani to recast the provincial distribution on a linguistic basis, the guiding principle as far as possible being one language one province?

I invite the attention of the hon. and gallant Member to the observations on a proposal of this nature in paragraph 246 of the Report on Indian Constitutional Reforms. My Noble Friend does not propose to initiate a redistribution of provincial areas.

Considering that the Indian Continent is, practically speaking, of the same size as Europe without Russia, with an equal population and similar divergencies of races and languages, does not the hon. Gentleman think that these races and languages should have a chance of working out their own self-government, instead of being all mixed up together as at the present moment?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the reason why Professor Gidwani is still kept in prison, although the sentence of imprisonment has been cancelled by the Government of India?

Dr. Gidwani is serving a sentence of 2½ years' imprisonment which was passed on him in September, 1923, after trial at Nabha on charges of entering the State against the orders of the Administrator and of joining an unlawful assembly. The sentence has not been cancelled by the Government of India., but it was suspended so long as Dr. Gidwani absented himself from the Nabha State, which he was ordered to leave when the sentence was pronounced. As he thought fit to return in February last, in the company of the first Shahidi Jatha, he was rearrested in Nabha territory, and committed to prison to serve the original sentence.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the total amount expended out of Indian revenue during 1918–21 for military expenditure in Iraq?

No additional expenditure has been debited to Indian revenues in consequence of military operations in Iraq, In accordance with the Parliamentary Resolutions of 1914, Indian expenditure on oversea operations has been limited to the normal charges that would have been incurred had the troops remained in India.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India if he has any information as to unrest in the educational centres in Amritsar as a result of the dismissal of Professor Chatterji, of Khalsa College; and if he will ascertain the reason of such dismissal?

The Khalsa College is not a Government institution, and I have no information beyond the Press reports. It appears from these that Professor Chatterji was dismissed by the responsible governing body.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India when the Secretary of State intends to carry into effect the recommendations arrived at in the Lee Commission Report?

I would refer the hon and gallant Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Hope Simpson) on the 16th June.

May I ask what was that reply?

We cannot have it. again.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether all liquor shops in Calcutta have been removed from those wards of the city in which the principal colleges and schools are situated; and, if so, can he state whether the removal was due to the action of the authorities or to the action of the owners, and if the former, can he ascertain the grounds for their action?

The matter is one for which responsibility rests with the Governor of Bengal acting with his Ministers, and I have no information on the subject.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether there is in India any equivalent, and, if so, what, to the Dangerous Drugs Act; whether, if there is no such Act, in view of the increased consumption of opium and cocaine in the Punjab, as revealed by the Annual Report of the Excise Administration for 1922–23, the Government propose legislation to deal with the matter; and, if so, when it will be introduced?

The drug trade in India is regulated by the Opium Acts of 1857 and 1878, the Excise Act, 1896, a number of Provincial Acts, and Rules under these Acts. The provisions of these Acts and Rules are not identical with those of the Dangerous Drugs Act, but they enable the Government of India to fulfil her obligations under The Hague Convention. The consumption in the Punjab in 1922–23, though greater than in the previous year, was only 25,494 grains, or about 1 grain per thousand of the population. This is very greatly below the rate of consumption in European countries.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the consumption of opium as a drug has been steadily increasing in Assam; whether he can state what the consumption per head was in 1903 and in any recent year; what income is derived by the Government from such consumption in both years; and under what Regulations is the sale of opium conducted?

The consumption per head was 85 grains in 1902–1903, and 525 grains in 1922–1923. During the year 1912–1913 the consumption per head was 1075 grains, but there has been a steady decline since that year. The Regulations are described in a pamphlet of which a copy is being sent to my hon. Friend.

Will the hon. Gentleman kindly answer the second part of the question, with regard to income?

That part of the answer contains a number of figures, and I will, therefore, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the total expenditure retrenched in the transferred and reserved Departments, respectively, in the different provinces in India?

The information asked for is being collected, and I will supply it to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether His Majesty's Government contemplates the taking of any steps to improve within a reasonable period the pay, prospects, and general conditions of the provincial and subordinate services in India on lines similar to those recommended by the Lee Commission for the superior civil services in India?

As my hon. Friend is aware, no decision will be taken on the Lee Commission Report until after the September session of the Legislative Assembly. The question of extending any of the recommendations to provincial services will be dealt with at the earliest practicable date in consultation with the local governments, who are the authorities primarily concerned.

May I ask what that date will be?

Is it the intention of the Government of India to set up a Commission similar to the Lee Commission?

I cannot answer that question at the present moment.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the site of the new Government airship station has yet been selected; and, if so, where it will be located?

I have been asked to reply. The site has not yet been selected.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India how many ships at present constitute the fleet of the Royal Indian Marine; how many officers and men are borne on the books; what is the present position of the service; and whether any decision has yet been reached with regard to its future?

The fleet at present consists of 10 vessels, excluding steam trawlers, small steamers and launches. There are 48 executive officers, 32 engineer officers, 57 warrant officers and 1,170 men. No change has taken place in the position of the service, except that the troopships are being disposed of. The future of the service is still under consideration.

The hon. Member says that warships are being disposed of. Are they being disposed of to any private interest, and has any communication taken place with the Admiralty on the subject?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the security of the bondholders under the Decree of Muharrem?

The hon. Member will find the information he requires in the texts of the Decree of Muharrem itself and of the Annex-Decree of 1903, which were laid before Parliament as Command Paper 5736 (Turkey, No. 1, 1911) and Command Paper 2407 (Turkey, No. 1, 1905), respectively.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the consent of the Irish Free State has been received for the ratification of the Treaty of Lausanne; if not, what is the stated reason for the hesitation of the Free State to consent to ratification; what other reasons there are for failure to ratify by His Majesty's Government in view of the fact that it has been ratified by Italy, Japan, Turkey and Greece; and if he is aware that the delay is having a bad effect on British relations and trade with Turkey?

As regards the first and second parts of the question, correspondence is still proceeding between His Majesty's Government and the Government of the Irish Free State on the matter, which, it is understood, will come before the Irish Free State Parliament early this week. In reply to the third part of the question, there are no other reasons why the Treaty has not yet been submitted to His Majesty for ratification. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

Can the Prime Minister inform me, as asked in the second part of the question, whether there is a reason that he can give to the House why the Free State in this matter hesitate to consents?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Irish Free State has not been able to have its own Treaty, made with this country 2½ years ago, carried out yet?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state how many German political prisoners and persons not yet tried, but under detention for similar charges, are at present imprisoned at the instance of Allied, authorities in Germany; whether any steps have been taken for their release; how many deportees, including women and children, are still under sentence of expulsion; and what steps have been taken to permit their return to the Ruhr and Rhineland?

The French Government have ordered the immediate release of German prisoners, and given permission for the return of expelled persons, in large numbers. I cannot at the moment give precise figures as to persons still detained.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any proposal has been made to the French Government that the condition that the period of occupation by Allied troops of portions of German territory only commences to run from the time when Germany observes the terms of the Treaty of Versailles should be waived and the territories evacuated without insistence on the observance of the treaty?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister how long it is proposed to maintain the Ambassadors' Conference; and whether it is the intention of His Majesty's Government that questions dealt with by it shall, as soon as possible, be handed over to the League of Nations?

I would once again refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Hackney North on the 25th February, to which I have nothing to add.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied with the results?

Perhaps the hon. and gallant Member will proceed to his next question.

asked the Prime Minister what questions have been referred to or dealt with by the Conference of Ambassadors during the month of May; and how often this body met during that period?

The Ambassadors' Conference met three times during the month of May. The following questions were raised: Military control in Germany, Austria and Hungary; the Memel Convention and establishment of full diplomatic relations between the Allied Governments and Lithuania; the Albanian frontiers; Polish-Czecho-Slovak frontier; Hungarian-Jugo-Slav frontier; the expenses of the German-Czecho-Slovak Boundary Commission; registration with the League of Nations of documents issued by the various boundary commissions; the allowances of members of the German-Polish Boundary Commission; the allowances of members of the Military Control Commission in Germany; disposal of funds derived from the Upper Silesian Plebiscite Commission; sale of German war material in Holland; costs of armies of occupation in Bulgaria; distribution of Anglo-Hungarian rolling stock; the accession of the Dutch Government to the modifications made in the Mannheim Convention by the Treaty of Versailles; organisation of the Inter-Allied Commission at Sofia; repatriation of Ukrainian emigrants: disposal of a powder depot in the occupied territory; rights secured by the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg by Article 41 of the Treaty of Versailles; archives of the territory of Eupen and Malmedy: the share of the German Government in the Dansig Bauernbank; claims of certain Allied nationals on the gold owned by German banks and seized in Turkey by the Allied Governments, and similar very interesting subjects.

Was anything settled as a result of these discussions?

In practically every one of these cases a settlement was arrived at.

Are we to understand now that the Prime Minister has revised his view of the usefulness of the Ambassadors' Conference?

Not at all. I stand exactly where I stood in that respect. The Ambassadors' Conference is charged with the winding-up of a variety of small matters that issue from the application of the Treaty of Versailles, and it will be strictly confined to that business.

Are there any of these matters that could not be dealt with just as well by the League of Nations?

When the Ambassadors' Conference is wound up, undoubtedly they could be dealt with by the League of Nations.

Did the Prime Minister say that the Conference has dealt with the question of military affairs in Austria?

They have dealt with the question of military control in Germany, Austria and Hungary. There are certain matters arising out of military control in these countries that have to be reported to the Ambassadors' Conference.

May we take it from the reply of the Prime Minister that no more great questions will be referred to the Ambassadors' Conference?

I do not say that. I said that no great questions of an independent character have been referred to it. Questions referred to the Ambassadors' Conference have all arisen out of the practical working of the Treaty of Versailles. They all arise owing to the unsettlement of affairs left by the Treaty of Versailles.

Is it not a fact that this Conference has done extremely useful work?

It has.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is in a position to make a statement to the House on the progress of the Conference with the delegates from the Russian Soviet Government?

I have nothing to add to the second part of the reply which I gave to the hon. Member on the 16th June.

Surely the Prime Minister could indicate to the House some idea of the progress that is being made with these negotiations?

Does the right hon. Gentleman still disapprove of secret diplomacy?

I am rather surprised to hear a responsible Member use that argument. As I am sure the right hon. Gentleman knows, when negotiations are in progress the negotiations go on till a point is reached when it is profitable and useful to make a Report.

Are we to understand that the Prime Minister is surprised that any responsible Member of this House still believes in the idea of open diplomacy?

asked the Prime Minister what committees and sub-committees of the Anglo-Soviet Conference have been instituted; what is the subject matter of each of them; and which of them, if any, have completed their work?

asked the Prime Minister the date of the last meeting of each of the committees and sub-committees formed under the Anglo-Soviet Conference, and the dates for which the next meetings, if any, have been arranged, of the committees and sub-committees, respectively?

As the reply is somewhat long, I shall, with the permission of the hon. Members, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Prime Minister whether the draft articles, mentioned in the official communiqué of 27th May of the proceedings of the Anglo-Soviet Conference, containing the British counter-proposals have been communicated to the Anglo-Soviet Conference or to any committee under the Conference; if so, whether they have been agreed to by the Conference: and, if not, what are the reasons for the delay in presenting them?

asked the Prime Minister whether the Soviet delegation adhere to the position that the claims will not be admitted of those who subsequently to 12th March, 1917, had taken an active part against the Soviet Government; whether any definition has been obtained as to what action constitutes taking an active part; by what tribunal will the quest on be decided whether individuals have taken an active part: and what is the attitude of the British Government towards this position taken up by the Soviet Government?

I would refer the hon. Members to the second part of the answer which I gave on the 16th June to the hon. Member for Moseley.

asked the Prime Minister whether full opportunity will be given to the House of Commons for discussing the results of the Anglo-Soviet conference or for considering such results as may have been achieved up to date before the House adjourns for the Summer Recess?

I believe the House would wish for an opportunity for such a discussion before adjourning, and I propose to make a statement.

Are there any results to discuss?

Yes.

Will a Motion be put down, or will it be discussed on the Consolidated Fund Bill?

The Noble Lord had better wait and see what circumstances arise in the meantime.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government propose to comply with the request of the Soviet delegation for the repeal of Article X of the trade agreement of 1921?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Chertsey on the 23rd June.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government has yet opened negotiations with the Egyptian Government regarding the independence of the Sudan as an integral part of Egypt under Egyptian administration; and, before doing so, whether he will take into consideration the fact that large investments of British capital in the Sudan have been influenced by pledges that the Sudan should never again be governed by an Egyptian administration, and that such negotiations would jeopardise British enterprise, particularly in cotton growing?

I have been hoping that the questions still outstanding between an independent Egypt and ourselves might have been settled in the calm conditions of personal negotiations between Saad Zaghloul Pasha and myself when, by facing the realities of the situation, we might have come to an agreement which recognised the interests and responsibilities of both countries. It is essential, if this hope is to be fulfilled, that both His Majesty's Government and the Egyptian Government should, in the meantime, honourably and rigidly observe the status quo. I regret that statements have been made to the Egyptian Parliament, and action taken to create trouble in the Sudan, which can only be explained as an attempt to force my hands and deprive Zaghloul Pasha of liberty to negotiate.

I was looking forward both with pleasure and expectation to a meeting with Zaghloul Pasha and a discussion with him of the best interests and the accepted responsibilities of our respective countries, and I have desired to say nothing which would have limited the freedom of discussion which we ought to claim; but, in view of what has happened, it is necessary that I should make it clear to all concerned that I do not believe that this House would accept any arrangement which would break our pledges given to the Sudan or jeopardise the present administration and development of that country. I believe that hearty goodwill between Egypt and ourselves is of the utmost importance to both of us, and I still trust that those responsible for the governments of both countries will refuse to countenance impossibilist demands which will destroy the prospects of such an understanding.

Are we to understand that this is a definite guarantee for the safety of British investors in the Sudan?

Will the right hon. Gentleman be kind enough to define what are the pledges given to the Sudan—by what Government and when?

Is it not a fact that in 1899 a definite agreement was come to between the English and Egyptian Governments in regard to the Sudan?

In a matter of this kind further questions must be put on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the statement made by M. Karakhan, the Soviet envoy in China, promising Russian support to any steps that might be taken by the Chinese Government, with a view to the abolition of the special treaty rights of Great Britain and other Powers in China, whether any protest has been made; and if he will indicate what is the attitude of the Government on the question of the retention of the treaty rights?

A report to that effect has reached His Majesty's Government, but it has not been considered necessary to take notice of it. The attitude of His Majesty's Government in support of existing treaty rights in China remains unchanged.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when he hopes to make his statement on the attitude of the Government towards the draft treaty of mutual assistance to be discussed by the League of Nations; and whether the House will have an opportunity to discuss the statement?

I regret that it is impossible to reply at present.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs when Mr. Cummins is expected to arrive in this country; and whether he has any information as to what has happened in the case of Mrs. Evans?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give any information as to the present situation of Mrs. H. E. R. Evans, last reported as with her servant, defending themselves against attack by irregulars at her hacienda in Mexico; whether the assistance promised by the Mexican Minister of War has been sent to her relief; and whether any and what steps are being taken to obtain compensation for the loss of, and injury to, her property?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give any further assurances to the House concerning the safety of Mrs. Evans, a British subject in Mexico?

I am unaware of the precise date of Mr. Cummins' arrival here, but he is on his way home. I am still awaiting information with regard to Mrs. Evans. One of the officials of His Majesty's Legation at Mexico City has been instructed to proceed to her farm to report on the situation there. The case of Mrs. Evans will be considered when I am in possession of all the facts.

What is the last news the right hon. Gentleman had from Mrs. Evans?

I communicated to the House the last news I had.

Are any units of the British Navy in the vicinity for the protection of British interests?

It is very difficult to get units of the British fleet in the neighbourhood of Mexico City.

Has the right hon. Gentleman decided when the Hohler Mission is to start For Mexico?

Obviously the Mission cannot start until we get a report from Mr. Cummins and know exactly what has happened.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the statement made by Dr. Dillon in yesterday's Press, which throws a considerable amount of fresh light upon this question?

No, I have not seen these statements; but I can assure the House that if they are in any way in conflict with the statements I have made regarding what the Foreign Office has done they are not accurate.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are hundreds of Nationalists interned in Northern Ireland, and has he taken any similar steps to protect their interests?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress has been made by the British administrator of Hungarian property in his negotiations with the Hungarian clearing office about the payments due to the British administrator by the Hungarian Government; will he state the probable date of a distribution upon admitted British claims; and will he, prior to the impending issue of the Hungarian loan in London, publish a White Paper on the negotiations regarding the unsecured Hungarian bonded debt and the secured Hungarian debt, with particular reference to the secured debt British claims for the period between July, 1919, and the date of the Treaty coming into force in 1921?

I have been asked to reply. In reply to the first part of the question, the position in regard to the payment of the balances due from the Hungarian clearing office is as indicated in the reply which I gave on the 18th June to questions by the hon. Member and by the hon. Member for Fulham West. A first dividend of 1s. 6d. in the £ upon admitted British claims was made in June, 1923, and I hope it may be possible to make a further distribution before the end of the present year. As regards the last part of the question, relating to the admission of claims in respect of the State debt, I doubt whether any useful purpose would be served by the action suggested by the hon. Member. The important point is that in the last few weeks these claims have been admitted to the extent of some £1,300,000 out of £2,000,000, and further admissions are coming in regularly. The question regarding the interest on the secured debt between 1919 and 1921 is under discussion between the clearing offices.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has requested the British administrator of Hungarian property to notify the Hungarian Government that unpaid overdue payments due to the British administrator by the Hungarian Government must be made good out of the proceeds of the new Hungarian loan about to be issued in London?

I have been asked to reply. No, Sir. Under the modified arrangements already agreed upon there are at present no payments overdue; and, as stated on the 18th June, in reply to a similar question by the hon. Members for Farnham and West Fulham, I see no reason whatever to anticipate that the Hungrian Government will fail to make the payments as they fall due.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the Report submitted by Miss Yeppe to the League of Nations, in which it is stated that in the region of Aleppo there are still over 30,000 Armenian women and children detained in Moslem houses; and whether His Majesty's Government propose to take any steps towards securing their release, either by direct representations to the Turkish Government or through the Council of the League of Nations?

Although the form of the question is somewhat misleading, His Majesty's Government are aware of this Report. Every effort was made during the Lausanne Conference to provide for the continuance of the work of reclaiming forcibly Islamised women and children, which had been successfully carried out since the Armistice by a League of Nations Commission in Turkey. I regret, however, that the Allies failed to obtain any satisfaction on this point on that occasion, and I see no prospect of success if the question were reopened at the present moment.

In what respect is it misleading?

In two or three respects. For instance, there is the expression "in the region of Aleppo." The Report does not say that. It says, "in the region reached by Aleppo," or "through Aleppo," or something indicating a very much wider area than the area of Aleppo.

Did not the minority provisions of the Treaty of Lausanne offer any assistance in dealing with this?

Yes, but the hon. and gallant Gentleman will observe that we have hitherto not been able to ratify the Treaty of Lausanne.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will now provide facilities for the Summer Time Bill?

Yes, Sir. The Government have decided to adopt this Bill, which they desire to see passed into law this Session.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman give facilities to this Bill, and refuse them to the Merchandise Marks Bill, which is much more important?

I understand that we are committed to this Bill by an international agreement.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there is very great resentment felt against the Bill, particularly in the agricultural and mining districts?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Bill is a boon to City workers?

asked the Prime Minister whether, following the example of other countries, His Majesty's Government proposes to give financial assistance in support of a national opera?

The answer is in the negative at present.

Why is this interesting suggestion thrown out by a Minister of very high authority?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to set up a Royal Commission to inquire into the differences between the cost of producing articles of consumption and the price at which those articles are sold to the consumer, and to make recommendations thereon?

The whole subject is under investigation, but I feel sure that a Royal Commission would not be the most effective way of attaining the object desired.

What does the Prime Minister think would be the most effective way of getting the desired result?

That is a matter to be considered.

In setting up any Committee to deal with this question, will the right hon. Gentleman secure the representation of those employed in the retail distributing trade upon the Committee?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will give an assurance that existing workable wireless plant in this country shall not be handed over to foreign private companies?

I have been asked to answer this question. It is not my intention to sell any workable wireless station in this country to any company which is not registered in Great Britain; and in the event of any station being sold, it would be on terms which would adequately safeguard the interests of the State.

Is that company registered in Great Britain to be a British company controlled by British capital?

Is it the intention of the right hon. Gentleman to sell any Government plant to private companies, British or otherwise?

Does the right hon. Gentleman, by "British company," mean controlled by British capital or a company which, though registered in this country, may be controlled by foreign capital?

I do not think it has quite reached a singe where any very definite statement can be made.

Will my right hon. Friend reply to my question?

The Donald Committee made a certain recommendation with reference to some wireless stations.

Are the Government bound by the Donald Committee's Report?

Not at all.

asked the Prime Minister if the Reparation Committee agreed to the salving of the German warships at Scapa Flow; what price the warships were sold for; and who receives the proceeds?

I have been asked to reply. The Reparation Commission have not been consulted. It is not the practice to publish prices offered by firms. The proceeds will be appropriated in aid of Navy Votes.

Has the hon. Gentleman carefully considered what effect this will have in regard to the metal trade of this country?

Yes. All those facts have been taken into consideration.

Does not the hon. Gentleman consider that it would be a great advantage to this country, in the light of economic suggestions, that the Germans should sink a few more of her ships?

After raising these ships, will they be taken to the foreshore where erosion has taken place, and be sunk again in order to provide a barrier?

Does the hon. Gentleman not think that this is the proper place for warships to be?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the important proposal that some arrangement might be made with the Dominions to have the Dominion export of foodstuffs brought to this country at cost price and distributed or sold to the British people with the lowest possible margin to cover expenses; whether this proposal has been accepted by His Majesty's Government and is being submitted for discussion with the Dominion Governments; and whether, in view of the beneficial social and Empire-strengthening effects of such a proposal, he will see that its further elaboration is expedited in every possible way?

asked the Prime Minister if he intends to enter into some arrangement with the Dominions by which the foodstuffs we require to-day may be obtained solely from them by bringing them into this country at cost price and distributing them with the least possible margin?

I presume hon. Members are referring to the suggestion made by the Leader of the Opposition in the course of the debate on the 18th June last. In this connection I have nothing to add to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in reply, except that His Majesty's Government are in communication with the Dominions as to the establishment of the Economic Committee to which he alluded.

In view of the possibility of securing a national policy in this respect, will the right hon. Gentleman, having come to an agreement with the Leader of His Majesty's Opposition, come to an agreement with the Leader of the Liberal party, and so have a united policy?

asked the Prime Minister if he can give any indication as to the date it is proposed to adjourn the House for the autumn recess?

I cannot at present indicate a date, as this must depend upon the progress of essential business which the Government must ask the House to pass before adjourning.

asked the Prime Minister for what reasons a Government publicity officer has been appointed to act under the instructions of the chief Government whip; what the duties of this officer will be; what are the terms of his appointment; and whether he will be paid from public funds?

No Government publicity officer has been appointed and there will be no charge upon public funds.

Is the report in the Press, which has been widely circulated, absolutely without foundation?

I have not seen such report. What I am saying is exactly what has happened, irrespective of any newspaper reports coming from anybody.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if the Government has prepared any schemes for emigration to the Colonies; and, if so, when they will be presented to this House?

The hon. Member will find a statement of the schemes at present in operation in Appendix II of the Report of the Overseas Settlement Committee for 1923 which was recently issued as a Command Paper (No. 2107). I am glad to be able to inform the hon. Member that, since the Report was in preparation, a scheme has been arranged with the Canadian National Railways for the settlement of families in groups on land belonging to the railways; and, as I informed the House in the debate upon Empire Settlement which took place on the 28th ultimo, the Government have made proposals to the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia for a comprehensive scheme of settlement. These proposals are now under discussion with the Commonwealth Government.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that complaint is made in the Report of the Bagdad Assembly of the number of British officials employed in Iraq, the salaries of whom are alleged to be a burden on the country; and whether he will state the number of officials and the aggregate amount of their salaries?

I know Of no Report by the Bagdad Assembly containing such a complaint. The hon. Member is perhaps referring to a Report drawn up by a Committee of the Assembly, not by the Assembly itself. Under the terms of the British Officials Agreement, which has been accepted by the Iraq Assembly, and which was published in Command Paper No. 2120, the posts specifically reserved for British officials number 18 only. The aggregate annual salaries of these posts amount approximately to £34,000.

Who pays the cost of the officials?

The Iraq Government.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether there has been any fighting or other disorder in Iraq since the present Government took office; whether His Majesty's Forces have been engaged and, if so, on what occasions; whether any bombings by aircraft have taken place since the beginning of this year; if so, on how many and what occasions; and what was the fighting and air-raiding which recently cook place at Sulimaniyah?

I have been asked to reply. In answer to the first and second parts of the question, a few disturbances occurred in Iraq during the period mentioned. The only one of seriousness was that which took place at Kirkuk on the 4th May in the circumstances explained by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies in his reply on 12th May to the hon. Member for Kidderminster. There were slight disturbances at the end of March in the Sulimaniyah region, where a chief defied the Iraq Government, but withdrew after air action on a small scale had been taken. There has also been some unrest in the Afaj district, where three native policemen were killed on 25th April. Slight air action was then taken and the leaders of the offending tribes surrendered. As regards the last part of the question, an effort was made by a disaffected chief to stir up trouble following the Kirkuk incident. No fighting took place, but as the chief refused to surrender, his head quarters were bombed after a warning had been given. The situation there again has since been normal.

What does the hon. Member mean by "slight air action"?

Possibly one aeroplane not dropping any bombs, but merely warning notices.

Is not the hon. Member carrying out identically the same policy as that which we carried out in this respect, and does he now repudiate the statements made by hon. Members behind him against the policy which we carried out?

We communicated with our military and air headquarters in Iraq in regard to the whole situation of bombing operations, and I cannot honestly say that we have made any change in the policy of the late Government.

Will the hon. Gentleman, when he tells us of the possibility of air warnings, tell us that no bombing has taken place in any of these operations and that there have been no casualties?

No, I cannot say that no bombing has taken place, but to the be; it of our information no casualties have taken place.

Will the hon. Gentleman's Department get information as to how many casualties have taken place and whether we are teaching the natives of this part of the world the blessings of the Sermon on the Mount?

Were the warning notices which were dropped signed by the Under-Secretary?

That is what the Germans did with us, and we called them Huns and ours are Christian soldiers.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the trawler "Lady Luck," owned by Messrs. Chapman and Lanfear, of Ramsgate, was recently boarded by an Irish Free State fishery cruiser; that the executive officer of the cruiser informed the skipper of the trawler that his craft was just inside the Irish fishery limit though outside the three-mile territorial limit; that in quiries have been made for the address of the skipper, with the assumed intention of prosecuting him; that some 30 prosecutions are pending against skippers of trawlers belonging to Milford Haven, two of whom were recently fined £115 each; and will he approach the Government of the Irish Free State with a view to abstaining from prosecutions in regard to trawling pending the settlement of the present Constitutional question at issue between the two Governments?

I must refer the hon. Member to the statement made in reply to a question on this subject by the Noble Lord the Member for Fleetwood on the 23rd June.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the amount of the grant-in-aid, if any, payable under present arrangements, during the current financial year, by His Majesty's Government to Transjordania?

His Majesty's Government have made no provision for any grant-in-aid to Transjordania during the current financial year?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the amount of the Grant-in-Aid, if any, payable under present arrangements during the current financial year by His Majesty's Government to Palestine?

£265,000 has been provided in the Middle Eastern Service Vote as a Grant-in-Aid of the Gendarmerie in Palestine during the current financial year.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if the Palestine Government has made provision for the payment of a grant-in-aid during the current year to Transjordania?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether in the appointment of the Permanent Economic Committee for the Empire, he will consider the inclusion of representatives from the Crown Colonies who have had actual administrative and business experience; and when he will be in a position to inform the House of the personnel of the Committee and its duties?

As I explained in this House on 17th June, the appointment of the Committee is subject to the wishes of the Dominion Governments, and I am still in communication with them. If the Committee is appointed, it is proposed that it should include representatives of the Colonies and Protectorates and the hon. Member's suggestion will be borne in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies how and in what terms he is conveying to the various Dominions concerned the decision of Parliament with respect to the Imperial Preference proposals put forward at the last economic conference?

I sent an official despatch to the Dominion Governments on 19th June, forwarding the Official Report of the Proceedings in this House on the two preceding days.

Will the decision of the other House also be communicated?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Kenya Legislative Council authorised the negotiation of the loan of £3,500,000 floated in this country for the benefit of that colony; whether the Government of Kenya is in any way pledged to find the interest and service of the loan: and, if not, what steps His Majesty's Government proposes to take to safeguard British capital involved?

The matter did not come before the Legislative Council of Kenya in the first instance because it was essential first to secure the consent of this House to the Vote of £3,500,000. The loan will be regularised by legislation in Kenya and Uganda at the earliest possible date, and no difficulty is foreseen in passing the necessary ordinances.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Kenya Colony Legislative Council have refused to sanction the loan of £3,500,000 granted by the House of Commons; whether there is any agreement with the legislative council as to the rate of interest to be paid upon the loan; and whether there is any security that the expected interest will be paid when it becomes due?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I have just given to the question of the hon. Member for Moseley. The discussion in the Legislative Council of Kenya, which has given rise to these questions, arose entirely out of a point of procedure which that council, in its regard for its own privileges, was perfectly entitled to take. There need be no doubt as to the security for the loan or the liability for interest at the rate demanded by the House and its punctual payment when it becomes due.

Will the interest and capital be guaranteed by the British Government?

It will be in precisely the same position as all other loans in this country.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, when considering the serious Report which he has received from Mr. Palmer upon the situation of the Takoradi harbour, he will take into consideration the advisability of removing the construction of these works from the Department concerned and call for tenders from private contractors?

Until I have received and considered Mr. Palmer's final Report, I am unable to say what action I shall take in regard to the future construction and completion of the harbour works. I shall certainly not neglect to consider any of the alternatives which appear advisable.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration the further fact that this is the third harbour scheme, which has been a fiasco, conducted by the local Department?

I will take all the facts into consideration, and I may say that I was so dissatisfied with this scheme that I ordered an inquiry to see if my suspicions were well founded.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the suggested alienation of 63,000 acres of land in Kenya Colony is land which is at present occupied by the Masai tribes: to whom is it proposed that this alienation shall be made; and whether the Commission which is about to make an inquiry into the position of the Masai in Kenya Colony will have included within its terms of reference any matters arising out of or affecting the proposed alienation?

I have no information that there are any natives on the land in question and it is extremely unlikely that any natives who are there are Masai, in view of the transfer of the northern Masai to the extended Southern Reserve in 1910–11. The third part of the question does not therefore, in my opinion, arise. With regard to the second part, the proposal is that Lord Delamere should surrender 21,000 acres of farming land close to the Uganda Railway in exchange for 63,000 acres of sheep-grazing country in a more remote situation. The areas are stated to be of approximately equal value, and while the larger area, although it has been marked out for sub-division, is stated to be suitable only as a large grazing proposition, the smaller area can be broken up into a number of smaller holdings. I have already stated that this proposal has not yet been approved. The position of scattered natives on land which has been intended for alienation to non-natives has been brought to the notice of the Governor and it will no doubt also come within the scope of the Land Committee which I propose to set up.

Is it not a fact that Lord Delamere is Chairman of the Commission that is making these proposals?

Is it not a fact that Lord Delamere has done an immense amount of pioneer work in that part of the world?

If the natives do not agree, shall we send a bombing expedition there?

It is quite true that Lord Delamere has great interests in the country. The very fact that I have not approved the proposal is at least the best indication that I am having it considered further. Surely, when I ask for further information, I ought not to prejudice it by a statement in this House?

Is Lord Delamere Chairman of the Commission?

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiry as to other tribes, apart from the Masai, some of which have considerable numbers in that territory?

My hon. Friend is aware that that is one of the questions which I am asking the Committee to consider.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether reports have been received from the Federated Malay States of a system similar to that of the Mui Tsai of Hong Kong; whether his attention has been drawn to the ill-treatment of a little girl at Kuala Lumpur; whether he has evidence showing that in this case the child had only been allowed out of the house once during a period of three years; that she was compelled to begin work at five o'clock in the morning and did not finish until late at night, and that she was continually and brutally beaten; and whether any reports received by His Majesty's Government will be laid upon the Table of the House?

Mui Tsai are to be found among the Chinese population in the Federated Malay States, and the High Commissioner has promised to submit proposals for dealing with the situation. I have no information as to the case of ill-treatment referred to, but I will call for a report.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is yet in a position to announce the names of the members of the African Commission?

I regret that I am not yet in a position to give the names of the members of the Commission which is to visit East Africa. The House will probably wish me to take this opportunity to announce the constitution of the East African Committee, as far as it has yet been completed. I am still in communication with two or three hon. Members whose assistance I hope to obtain. I am glad to say that all parties are represented:

• The Right Honourable Lord Southborough, Chairman.
• Mr. R. N. Barclay, the hon. Member for the Exchange Division of Manchester.
• Captain R. Berkeley, the hon. Member for Nottingham Central.
• Mr. John Harris, the hon. Member for North Hackney.
• Mr. T. E. Harvey, the hon. Member for Dewsbury.
• Sir Sydney Henn, the hon. Member for Blackburn.
• Mr. E. D. Morel, the hon. Member for Dundee.
• The Honourable William Ormsby-Gore, the hon. Member for Stafford.
• Mr. H. Snell, the hon. Member for East Woolwich.
• Dr. Andrew Balfour, Sir Henry Birchenough, Mr. C. Roden Buxton, Sir Hugh Clifford, Sir H. Rider Haggard, Lieut.-Colonel F. D. Hammond, Mr. W. H. Himbury, Mr. J. H. Oldham.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will give an assurance that legislation on the lines of the Contagious Diseases Acts will not be reintroduced into Singapore, and that the segregated brothel areas in Hong Kong and Singapore will be abolished?

I would invite reference to the reply given on the 23rd of June to the hon. Member for North Hackney (Mr. J. Harris).