asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is now in a position to announce the result of his consultations with the companies engaged in running passenger steamers on the Clyde on the question of the excessive hours of labour of the empoyé;s on these steamers?

I am pursuing this matter, but I am sorry I am not yet in a position to give the hon. Member the information for which he asks.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these railway companies are working their engineers up to 90 hours a week, and will he do nothing to prevent these sweaters from continuing this state of things in the midst of extraordinary unemployment?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is months since this question was first raised in this House and that, with the holiday season on, the proportion of hours has increased? I hope he will not think he can treat this question in a flippant fashion.

Is there only one railway company concerned?

No, two.

There are two railway companies running these steamers on the Clyde. In answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling (Mr. T. Johnston), I feel with him that this is a serious matter, but I am bound to say that the railway companies have not yet been able to give us a definite answer. They have been communicated with, and we have received an acknowledgment, but sufficient time has not elapsed to warrant us in complaining of any delay on their part in replying to our communication. The matter will not be lost sight of, but I must remind the House that the Board of Trade has no power to require any reduction of the hours of labour.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been called to a publication, entitled "Sox Knowledge," which is on sale at the Proletarian Book Store, 39, Shuttle Street, Glasgow; and whether he proposes to institute a prosecution to restrain the sale of the same as an indecent and obscene publication?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the last part of the question, the matter is under consideration.

asked the Secretary for Scotland the amount of money that was available for Scotland, under the Corn Production Act or other Acts, for assisting agricultural education and research for the last three years, respectively; what were the sums granted to authorities or governing bodies for the years 1922–23 and 1923–24 and the amounts granted or promised to the respective authorities or governing bodies, and the dates when same were paid or promised; if all the moneys promised have been paid; and, if not, what amounts are outstanding and what was the balance at his disposal when he took over office?

As the answer to my hon. Friend's question is long, I propose, with his permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he can say if it was upon instructions from the Lord Advocate that the police authorities prohibited the annual Corpus Christi procession in the village of Carfin, Lanarkshire; is he aware that this procession has taken place for the last nine years; and why on this occasion the procession has been prohibited?

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he has inquired into the circumstances in connection with a procession which was to have taken place at Carfin, Lanarkshire, on Sunday, 22nd June, but was banned by the authorities; if he is aware that processions of a similar character have been held on many occasions during the last few years without interference; and if he can now state whether he will take steps to see that the right to hold the processions is restored?

I have inquired into the circumstances of the case. The procession was not prohibited on instructions of the Lord Advocate. It is the case that the procession has taken place for a number of years past, but I am informed that it was not until last year that it attained dimensions which caused serious traffic difficulties, when the procession resulted in a complete obstruction of the public thoroughfare which lasted for a considerable time. I understand that the police authorities this year informed the priest responsible that if the procession on the public roads were repeated the matter would be reported to the Crown Authorities. The result was that the public roads were not used, but the procession took place in private grounds to which the general public had access. I may add in reply to the last part of the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan), that the public right in roads and streets is a right of passage only, and one which must be exercised by members of the public with due regard to the similar rights possessed by other members of the public.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the police invoked the Catholic Emancipation Act, 1829, and informed the priests concerned that they would be prosecuted for wearing their vestments in public, as is laid down in the Act? Is the Secretary for Scotland aware that under the same Act any person joining a Catholic religious society is liable to banishment, and if he does not accept banishment within 20 days he is liable to deportation for fife, according to His Majesty's pleasure; and does the right hon. Gentleman intend to enforce that part of the Act?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is a deliberate falsehood to say that these people have never marched in procession for nine years? Behind all this is the selling of holy water in order to raise money.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that processions of this kind are regularly allowed by the local authorities all over Scotland and in England, and that with proper regulations they never interfere with the traffic; and is it, not a fact that no complaint has ever yet been made by the people who use the roads against these processions—

The hon. Member's question is too long.

Is it not a fact that similar processions, and even worse from the point of view of public traffic, are held annually in the same place by students from the universities, without objection being taken, and can not this law, which is as dead as Queen Anne, he ignored in the future?

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the House who stopped the procession?

Is it not the case that this procession was prohibited in London some time ago, and that it is got up for the Irish who will not pay their rents or obey the law?

Apparently this is a matter of sonic delicacy, and I had better see these questions.

I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Scottish Estimates.

I beg to give notice that at the end of Questions, I shall ask leave to move the Adjournment, in order to call attention to this matter.

Hear, hear, and loud cheers!

asked the Secretary for, Scotland whether, in view of the fact that the Scottish crofters and smallholders are not provided for in the new Housing Bill, he will take steps to arrange for building loans to crofters and smallholders at a reduced rate of interest, and thus help to raise the standard of housing, especially in the Highlands?

I am carefully examining the suggestion made in the question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that under the Financial Resolution it will be impossible to make provision for a larger subsidy for crofters?

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that the crofter is not penalised under the housing legislation merely because he is a crofter?

I have already informed the hon. Gentleman that I am making careful inquiries into that phase of the question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Scottish Office was consulted at all before the Housing Bill was introduced?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in every Housing Bill there has been special provision for this class of men?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he can state the interpretation put by the Scottish Education Department on the expression, not more than 60 pupils habitually under the charge of one teacher, in the code for day schools; and whether the same interpretation is to be applied to the expression, the present provisional maximum of 60 pupils per class, employed in the prefatory memorandum attached to the Regulations for the Training of Teachers, now upon the Table of the House?

The expression "habitually under the charge of one teacher" has been in use in the code since 1899, and the Department have always interpreted it to mean that not more than 60 pupils should be present as a regular thing in any class taught by one teacher. For a time the state of the accommodation has made it difficult to enforce this rule in certain cases, and the sentence in the prefatory memorandum to which the hon. Member refers is intended as an intimation to education authorities that the rule will henceforth be strictly enforced.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the representations received from the Fife Education Authority as to the need for the institution of an experimental farm and farm school in Fife, he is prepared to secure the allocation of a money grant towards the objects in order that the scheme may now be proceeded with without further delay?

I would refer the hon. and learned Member to my reply to the question on the same subject asked by the hon. Member for Peebles and Southern Midlothian (Mr. Westwood) on Tuesday last.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why so much delay has occurred with regard to the consideration of this question, and will he state definitely to the House that he has been in consultation with the Treasury and is now prepared to make a grant towards this purpose, which he himself advocated last Session?

Would not such action on the part of the Education Department be a grave interference with the duties of the Board of Agriculture, with which the Education Department has nothing whatever to do, and would not such an experiment be directly against the best educational interests of Scotland?

The funds for such a purpose as that mentioned in the question would require to be got by special grant from the Treasury, and in my reply last week to the hon. Member for Peebles I informed him that, in the meantime, I have no money available for this purpose.

Can we have the assurance of my right hon. Friend that Fifeshire will not be considered in a more favourable way than other important agricultural counties in Scotland?

Will the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that he is prepared to take action in order to secure the necessary grants for pursuing this end?

Is it not the fact that the reason why the Secretary for Scotland cannot take action lies in the action taken by his predecessors in office?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware of the growing dissatisfaction amongst the procurators fiscal, sheriff clerks, and Sheriff Court staffs in Scotland owing to the prolonged delay in carrying out the recommendations of the Blackburn Committee as to the institution of pensions and the improvement in the rate of remuneration and of the conditions in these services; and whether, in view of the urgency of securing a settlement which will be acceptable to all the parties interested, he is prepared to make further immediate representations to the Treasury on the subject

I have no doubt that the officials concerned are anxious, as I am, that the matter should be disposed of. I have communicated with my might hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who has promised to receive representatives of the associations concerned. The representatives will, I understand, be received as soon as possible, but, owing to the many pressing demands upon my right hon. Friend's time, it is not yet practicable to indicate a definite date.

Would the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to secure the arrangement of an early date, in order that these officials, who have now been kept waiting for many years for the settlement of this matter, may have the question considered at once?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what has become of the £228,000 of extra fees which the Government have collected during the last three years for this purpose, and will the scheme be made retrospective?

I will make in the proper place the representation suggested by the hon. and learned Member for East Fife (Mr. Millar). As to the point put by the hon. Member for Banff (Sir C. Barrie), no doubt my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will consider it.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, having regard to the keen competition for farms and agricultural holdings in Scotland and to the limited number at present available, and to the growing practice under which the same tenant becomes the occupier of two or more farms or holdings, he is prepared to institute an inquiry as to the number of plural farms and agricultural holdings in Scotland, and to consider as to what steps ought to be taken to prevent the accumulation of a number of farms or agricultural holdings in the hands of the same tenant?

I am not satisfied that there is any necessity for a special inquiry on this subject, in view of the ordinary inquiries which are already made by the Board of Agriculture in connection with land settlement and other operations. As the hon. and learned Member is aware, the Board has powers under Section 7 (16) (a) of the Small Landholders' (Scotland) Act, 1911, to subdivide "led" farms if suitable and if required for the purpose of land settlement.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ascertain through the ordinary channels what is the number of plural holdings in Scotland, in relation to the larger holdings as well as to the small ones?

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in the case of a county valuation roll being prepared by local assessors and such valuation being used by the Government for Income Tax purposes, he is prepared to recommend that a proportion of the cost of preparing such roll should be borne by the Government?

I have been asked to reply to this question. I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ross and Cromarty (Mr. Macpherson) on the 23rd June. I am sending him a copy of that reply.

If I produce several instances in which the valuations of the local assessors are accepted for Income Tax purposes, will the hon. Gentleman reconsider his answer?

I shall be delighted to receive the cases, but I am afraid I can hold out no hope of a change in the policy, because, in fact, these results are not generally accepted by the Government.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the Committee appointed to inquire into the Severn barrage scheme has reported, and what is its nature?

The informal Committee, whose constitution and functions I stated in an answer to the hon. and learned Member for East Islington (Mr. Comyns-Carr) on the 3rd June—a copy of which I am sending to my hon. Friend—has now presented a Report indicating the nature of the detailed investigations which must be undertaken before any definite judgment can be formed as to the practicability of a barrage scheme, and the probable cost of those investigations. The Report is under consideration, and I hope to be able to make an announcement on the subject at an early date.

If I put a question down for this day week, does the right hon. Gentleman think that then he will be prepared with an answer as to the policy of the Board of Trade in this matter?

Will the House be given an opportunity to discuss this matter?

I must remind the House that all that is in question is undertaking a scientific investigation in order to see whether or not the scheme is practicable. I think the hon. Member for North Bristol (Mr. Ayles) may rely that I shall be able to give information as to that point, as to whether or not we are proceeding with this investigation, before the House rises, but the question as to whether the scheme will be undertaken is a matter for a much later date.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state who was the engineer who made the Report?

There were three experts, engineers and others, whose names I have already given to the House, but I have not got them in my hand at the moment.

Is there any probability of this scheme providing any considerable amount of employment for those who are out of work?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in the event of the grant of£300,00 towards the belated claims of the victims of enemy damage proving to be inadequate when these claims have all been received and examined, he will recommend the Government to make an increased grant so as to put the belated claimants in the same position as the earlier claimants?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to the hon. and learned Member for East Fife (Mr. D. Millar) on the 5th May, a copy of which I am sending to him.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not consider that the measure of compensation should be the justice of the claim, and not the amount that the Government propose to distribute?

Has not a suns exceeding this amount been received from Germany, and can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it will be applied to the settlement of these claims?

The question of the solatium which is given—for it is only a solatium—is altogether separate from the claim of the British Government on the German Government. Whatever is paid by the German Government has to cover a very much larger field than these particular individual claims. If it is sug- gested that these individual sufferers are to take the whole of the receipts from the German Government, I am afraid I can only refer that to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Were not these men promised the first call on what was paid by Germany?

Does the right hon. Gentleman deny that these claimants have the first claim on the reparation payments made by Germany?

I am not prepared to admit that. In so far as these claimants are members of the mercantile marine, as many of them—perhaps most of them—are, they have already received compensation to the extent of something like£11,000,000, and what is now in question is merely a matter of a final solatium.

Does the right hon. Gentleman regard the £300,000 as a final settlement of these claims?

I can only say that my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury has said that it was a final payment by His Majesty's Government in respect of these claims.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can now state when those who have put in claims, which have been classified as belated claims, to the Royal Commission on Suffering and Damage done by Enemy Action, will be informed of the decision come to with regard to their claims?

An endeavour is being made to have the examination of all the belated claims completed within four months, and the payment of claims would then be promptly begun. Claimants whose claims are entertained will be notified of the decision come to at the same time as payment is made. Claimants whose claims cannot be entertained are being communicated with as soon as possible after their claims have been examined.

Do I understand that we shall have another three or four months to put in claims?

In the case of belated claimants whose claims have been turned down, will the claimants have another appeal against the decision?

It is the fact that some 35,000 claims have to be dealt with, and this can hardly be done under four months. There has never been any provision for an appeal. With regard to the first supplementary question, the last day for the receipt of claims was the 1st of June last, and new claims were put in right up to that date.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the payments made to civilians on account of impairment to health during their internment at Ruhleben during the War are final, seeing that the amounts so paid are only about two-fifths of the sums at which the claims were assessed by the Department concerned?

I would refer to the answer given by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to the right hon. and learned Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Rawlinson) on 23rd June, a copy of which I am sending to the hon. Member.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that recently 25,000 crates of cheeses were held up in London stores awaiting higher prices and have become heated and unsalcable; and whether, in view of this withholding of food supplies from the consumer, he will take steps to introduce legislation to restrict the operations of interests which control large supplies of foodstuffs?

I am informed that early arrivals of New Zealand cheese were this year more plentiful than and that it was decided to place the immature cheese in cold store, in order to provide a reserve for the autumn months. I am not aware that any appreciable wastage of the cheese has taken place, but if my hon. Friend has any detailed information in the matter, perhaps he will be good enough to send it me.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us how it is that cheeses in cold storage can become overheated?

That is beyond my knowledge.

Will the right hon. Gentleman pursue it?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to a resolution proposed in the United States Senate early this year demanding information from the United States Shipping Board on the alleged discrimination by the Board of Trade against American shipping; whether there is any discrimination made by His Majesty's Government against American ships in favour of British ships; and, if so, if he can state the nature of the discrimination?

My attention has been called to the resolution to which the hon. Member refers, and also to many such statements in the United States Press. There is no truth in any of these suggestions. His Majesty's Government do not discriminate in any way against foreign shipping in favour of British shipping. Vessels of all flags enjoy perfect equality in the ports of the United Kingdom.

Can the President of the Board of Trade tell us how it is that these rumours are getting abroad to such an extent as they are?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that consignments of fancy glass bangles drawn from solid glass rods have been declared by the officers of his Department to be dutiable under the Key Industries Schedule as lamp-blown glass-ware, in spite of declaration as to the process of manufacture, which indicate that lamp-blown glass-ware cannot be used for snaking these articles; and whether, in view of the inconvenience which is being caused to the trade by the prolongation of a dispute over the liability to duty and no similar goods being manufactured in this country, he will take steps to get the decision rectified without delay?

The question of the liability of the goods mentioned has been under discussion. The Board of Trade and the Commissioners of Customs have taken the view that they are liable to duty under the heading "lamp-blown ware," as that heading has been consistently interpreted since the passing of the Act. If the importers still desire to challenge that view, it is open to them to have recourse to an independent referee, in accordance with Section 11 of the Act.

Would the right hon. Gentleman just say what is the difference, and whether the Board of Trade takes the view that everything, glass-blown or otherwise, of this sort is liable?

Also for the sake of clarity, is it not obvious that it is the duty of the Board of Trade to protect British manufacturers against the foreigner?

Could not the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that the Government will take an early opportunity of repealing this ridiculous Act?

That is a matter for debate.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received an application from certain British firms of gas-mantle importers to refer under Section 9 of Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act the revocation of the Order of 9th October, 1922, to a Committee for further consideration in view of the fact that the British£is now only worth18½gold marks: and whether he proposes to grant the application?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The applicants have been informed that on a review of all the circumstances the Board of Trade are not prepared to refer to a Committee the revocation of this Order, which, I may remind the hon. Member, automatically lapses on 19th August.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the military authorities are approaching boards of guardians with a view to securing lads between 14 and 15 years of age for military service; whether he will state the conditions of service these lads will be called upon to perform; and under what regulation the officers of his Department have the power to recruit lads of these ages?

I am not specially aware that recruiting officers have approached hoards of guardians, but all recruiting officers have general instructions to bring to the notice of authorities concerned in the welfare of boys the scheme for enlisting boys and training them as tradesmen. Such enlistment is, of course, voluntary on the boy's part, and the consent of his parent or guardian is also required. The boys are enlisted for as long as may be necessary to give them 12 years' service from the date of attaining 18 years of age; for instance, a boy enlisted at 16 would serve for two years to 18, and for 12 years more, or 14 years in all, four years of which might be spent in the Army Reserve. The authority is Section 76 of the Army Act, and the Recruiting Regulations. I am sending the hon. Member a paper stating the conditions of service in further detail.

When boys enlist or offer themselves for enlistment, is a birth certificate required, seeing that it is practically certain that they enlist under age

Do these youths of 15 really understand the obligations they enter into on enlistment?

asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the publication of the names of the witnesses whose evidence Lieutenant C. H. Glendinning wishes to be taken on his behalf in support of his allegation of false imprisonment in India in the year 1917; and whether he proposes to take the evidence of these witnesses, subject to cross-examination?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the latter part, I would refer the hon. Member to my reply yesterday to the hon. Member for Bow and Bromley.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is about to make any further discharges from the. Royal Carriage Department or any other Department at Woolwich Arsenal?

As regards the Royal Carriage Department, on which recently received a deputation representing the men, the amount of work available is such that some reductions of strength are necessary. I am hopeful that the majority of the redundant men can be absorbed in other departments of the Ordnance Factories at Woolwich, but in the case of certain skilled men this will probably be impossible unless the men concerned find themselves able to accept semi-skilled or unskilled work. As regards departments of the factories other than the Carriage Department, no general measure of discharges is in prospect.

Will the Financial Secretary say what steps he proposes to take to find employment for those men who are unable to take advantage of the suggestion he has made?

I am not in a position to make any statement on that matter at the moment. I think I ought to say that the minimum staff is 6,600, and the present number is more than 2,000 over that.

Is it the policy of the Government to provide employment by putting skilled men on unskilled work?

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of recruits who have been liberated from the colours within the last year, either through purchase or on compassionate grounds, to enable them to take employment offered them?

During the year ending 31st May last, the number of soldiers who purchased their discharge was 1,097, and the number who were discharged on compassionate grounds was 755; making a total of 1,852. Out of the 1,097 men discharged by purchase, 341 were recruits who exercised their statutory right under Section 81 of the Army Act, but I am not able to say how many of the men discharged on compassionate grounds were recruits. A condition of discharge on compassionate grounds is that employment is available for the man.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he will reconsider his decision not to press His Majesty's Treasury to reopen the case of Mr. Mark Segal, who was employed at the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich, from November, 1917, to November, 1920, as deputy assistant inspector of armaments, seeing that he received no increase of pay after May, 1918; that other similar classes received war bonuses dating from 1st July, 1919; that his claim for a bonus to meet the cost of living was first preferred in September, 1920, and that no decision regarding that claim was communicated to him by the War Office until September, 1921; that his claim was subsequently submitted through the recognised channels by the staff side of the War Office Out-stations Administrative Council; and that after nearly four years' delay lie has been informed that the lapse of time is such that His Majesty's Treasury cannot be called upon to reopen the matter?

I am having this case further investigated, and I will communicate with the hon. and gallant Member in due course.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether his Department refuses to advise contractors of the result of tenders submitted; and whether, seeing that it is in the interests of the public that the information so far as it affects the amounts of the tenders and not the names of the tenderers should be made public, and that, by this practice of publicity, firms would be able to judge as to how their prices compared, he will consider a change of policy in this respect?

It is the invariable custom of the Department to advise contractors whether their tenders are accepted or declined, but I regret that I am unable to agree that it would be in the public interest to sanction a departure from the long-established practice of the War Office under which particulars of tender prices are regarded as confidential.

In view of the fact that the tenders are published for all public buildings, what is the objection to publishing a list of these tenders for War Office work?

There is a considerable number of objections which have been noted from time to time, and the matter has been investigated over the course of many years. It is necessary to safeguard the Department making contracts against arrangements for the making of rings, which the publication of the prices would facilitate.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether he will undertake, when coming to any agreement to let War Office property to municipalities for the purpose of relieving the housing shortage, to stipulate that those for whom the accommodation is ultimately intended shall in no case be required to pay a rent in excess of that which is current in the district for working-class lodgings;

(2) whether, in considering the terms upon which the War Office will let certain Government property to the municipality of Plymouth for the purpose of relieving the housing shortage in Devonport and Plymouth, he will undertake only to let this property to the municipality upon an undertaking being given that no rent shall be charged to the tenants for whom it is ultimately intended in excess of that current for working-class lodgings in the worst districts of Devonport?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my right hon. Friend's reply to him of the 25th ultimo, which represents the general policy of the Department.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman undertake to see that the rents are not in excess of those charged for municipal houses?

That is not the business of the War Office. It is the duty of the local authorities. The rents have to be settled by the local authorities who take over the houses.

If the War Office have an opportunity of making the terms, will the hon. and gallant Gentleman see that these houses are only let on condition that the tenants get the full benefit of this Government property?

Is the Under-Secretary aware that the Government have over 80 houses in their possession which they refuse to let and want to sell? Can nothing be done to insist upon letting them, in view of the housing shortage?

asked the Secretary for Mines the number of Departmental Committees in connection with his Department, and the names of those comprising the Committees; and whether Reports of their findings are published?

My hon. Friend will find full information on this subject in the appendices to the Annual Report of the Secretary for Mines.

asked the Secretary for Mines in which districts colleries are at present working short time; whether he is in a position to state the number of men paid off and working short time, respectively, in each district affected; and what number of men were on full-time work in these districts during May and the first two weeks of June, 1923, as compared with the same period this year?

The answer to this question can only be given in statistical tables, which I will have circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.