asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that extensive orders have recently been placed with armament firms in this country for the prompt delivery of war supplies in the Balkans; whether strained relations exist between certain of the Balkan States which may result in war in the near future; and whether His Majesty's Government has offered any suggestion to the Powers concerned for settlement of existing differences?

It is the fact that orders have recently been placed in this country for military material, but these orders are not of a nature to justify the alarmist interpretation placed upon them by the hon. Member. The Balkan situation is passing through one of its recurrent periods of tension, but His Majesty's Government are carefully watching the situation and will exercise their good offices with a view to promote an equitable settlement of any difficulties which may arise.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that during the Naval Review certain guests of the Government entertained on the train and on various steamers were supplied with refreshments free of charge on the boats, but that part of the cost of the refreshments was demanded from these visitors when travelling by train; and whether he will explain why this differential procedure was adopted?

No differential treatment was extended to any of the Government guests at the Naval Review. All the guests were supplied with meals, including liquid refreshments, free of charge on board the vessels, and dinner free of charge on the return train journey. But in the latter case funds did not permit of the supply free of charge of liquid refreshments, and consequently guests had to pay for what they desired in the way of drinks.

Was any warning given to the Press representatives before they ordered their drinks on the train that they would have to pay for them?

No more warning was given to them than to others.

Why need my hon. Friend worry if he does not drink?

Are we to understand that alcoholic liquors were provided free by the Government?

Yes.

It is disgraceful.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he is aware that it is not the practice to give sick pay to gun examiners in the inspection of naval ordnance employed in the Royal Arsenal, although skilled examiners employed in the carriage inspection department and viewers employed in the Royal Gun Factory receive such benefits for a period of 10 weeks in any 12 months after a qualifying period of six months; and whether he will give this matter his early consideration with a view of placing this grade of employés upon an equal footing in regard to sick pay?

As far as the practice in the Department under the Admiralty is concerned, the answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; as regards the last part, I am going into the matter with a view to seeing whether any modification in the present practice can be adopted.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty upon what grounds the recent 5½ per cent. reduction of the retired pay of officers is made upon the whole pay and not upon the amount added to meet the high cost of living only?

It is not the case that in 1919 additions were made to the pre-War scales of retired pay to meet the high cost of living only, but entirely fresh scales, which for officers of considerable service were appreciably higher than the old scales, were then introduced, and it was decided by His Majesty's Government that 20 per cent. of the new scales should be regarded as due to the high cost of living in 1919. The fall in the excess cost of living over the pre-War figure since July, 1919, was approximately 27½ per cent. at the time the decision regarding the reduction was taken, and consequently a reduction equal to 27½ per cent. of the variable element of 20 per cent. or 5½ per cent. of the total retired pay has been made.

Does the index figure to which the hon. Gentleman alludes take any account of rates and taxes?

The index figure dealt equitably with all classes of the community.

May I ask for a reply. Did it deal with rent, rates, and taxes?

No. I have said it dealt with the necessities of life.

Is it not a fact that the index figures of the cost of living have reference to 13 articles only, and conse- quently have very little reference, indeed, to the general expenss of such a class as is referred to in the question?

The index figure has reference to all workers' wages.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty on what basis the cost of living has been computed in determining the reduction of the retired pay of naval officers by 5½ per cent.; and whether he is aware that, in the case of such officers, the cost of the main items of necessary expenditure is rather increasing than decreasing?

The basis on which the cost of living has been computed in determining the reduction of the retired pay of naval officers is the ordinary basis adopted by the Minister of Labour in computing the index figure for the cost of living.

Do we understand that this reduction will not reduce the pensions of officers below pre-War rates?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Committee have agreed to the payment of the withheld retired pay of naval officers; whether he is prepared to make any statement; and whether he can take steps to render the evidence given before the Committee available to Members?

I would refer the Noble Lord to my reply of the 29th July to a supplementary question by the hon. Member for North Portsmouth. It is not proposed to publish the evidence which was not included in the report forwarded by the Committee.

As we are to separate in a day or two, cannot the hon. Gentleman tell us whether the Government accept the Report of the Committee or not?

I am afraid I cannot say that. It is a matter obviously for the Cabinet.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that, although the naval rates of retired pay have now been granted to those pre-War pensioned marines who served as temporary Army officers, the rates appropriate to higher rank than that of captain have been withheld from those officers who attained and held field rank; and if he will state why the Lords of the Admiralty, who in all other matters connected with retired pay and pensions affecting ratings and marines have shown consideration for services rendered, should, in the case of marines who served as Army field officers, decline to fulfil the Regulations and grant the retired pay of the rank?

The intention was to grant these officers the rate of retired pay which they might reasonably have been expected to receive, had they been granted temporary commissions in their own corps and not in the Army. In such a case, they would not have risen above the rank of captain, and to give them a higher rate of retired pay than that of captain would accord them preferential treatment over other marines, which could not be justified. They have already received much more favourable terms than have been accorded to pre-War Army pensioners granted temporary commissions in the Army. It is incorrect to state that the Admiralty declines to fulfil the Regulations in these cases, as the Regulations are applicable only to pensioned Royal Marines who served as temporary commissioned officers in their own corps.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if the Maltese crew which is to recommission the "Maine" is to be made up of ex-service or active ratings?

The men of the R.F.A. "Maine" are mercantile marine ratings and the crew is selected by the master of the vessel.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if he can give the composition of the Admiralty Selection Board before which candidates for special entry and paymaster cadets must appear?

For special entry cadets the Committee consists of a carefully selected admiral and a captain, Royal Navy, and one of the First Lord's private secretaries. For paymaster cadets the Committee consists as for special entry cadets with the addition of the Paymaster Director-General.

The hon. Gentleman cannot give me the names?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if it is proposed to abolish the separate messing accommodation in the Portsmouth depot authorised for naval shipwrights by Replies to Requests Nos. 12 and 23 of the 1922 Welfare Class Request; and if he will inquire into the matter?

In view of the fact that extensive alterations have been made in the chief petty officers' block and an up-to-date bar and lounge fitted, it has been proposed that chief petty officers of all branches except engine room artificers, and possibly the regulating branch, should mess together. This will improve the accommodation at present provided for shipwrights. Another advantage will be that if the shipwrights vacate their present accommodation in the seamen's block it can be used to provide recreation and reading rooms for the junior ratings which are considered most desirable.

Will this mean a reversal of the Admiralty decision, taken in consequence of the Welfare Committee's request?

No, that is not quite the position. The reply to which the hon. Gentleman refers merely stated that separate messes for shipwrights have already been provided at home ports except the Chatham Depot, where the shipwright ratings expressed a preference for the existing arrangements.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty can now state if they have been able to reconsider the question of affording the people of the capital of the Empire an opportunity to see and welcome back the officers and men of the squadron now engaged on the world cruise upon their return?

His Majesty's Government have reconsidered this matter, and have decided to adhere to the previous decision.

Is that because the men can go straight home to their wives?

Yes.

That is what they want.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the urgent demands of the men engaged in the yardcraft service of the Admiralty for improved conditions, he will consider the setting up of a committee to inquire into and report on the position of the yardcraft service?

So far as known, there are no circumstances which would warrant the expenditure involved in setting up a committee to investigate the subject referred to by my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will consider the question of making a lodging allowance to men who are compelled to work away from home and where they cannot get housing accommodation to remove their families?

I regret that I have no power under existing Statutes to authorise the payment of lodging allowances in the cases mentioned.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to get power?

I will reconsider the question, but I cannot promise to ask for power.

Will my right hon. Friend make inquiries what the other Governments did?

I do not need to make inquiries. I know.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that Mr. J. Harding, of 33, Pease street, Lingdale, Brotton, Yorkshire, had his unemployment benefit stopped for three weeks because he was forced to give up a job away from home by reason of the fact that the wages were only 37s. 2d. per week, which wages were insufficient to keep him and his family; that the Court of Referees disallowed this man's appeal against the stoppage; and whether he will consider introducing legislation to prevent stoppages under similar circumstances?

I am having inquiry made into this case and will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of men employed in the motor industry at the end of June, 1923, and at the end of June, 1924, respectively?

There are no statistics showing separately the number of persons employed in motor-car construction, either in 1923 or in 1924. The only available figures relate to workpeople insured against unemployment in a group of trades covering the construction and repair of motor-cars, motor lorries, motor omnibuses, motor cycles, pedal cycles and aircraft. These work-people numbered, approximately, 193,100 in Great Britain in July, 1923, 159,900 being men, 18 years of age or over. The corresponding total for 1924 will not be available until after the annual exchange of unemployment insurance books, which is not yet completed. I may add that in this group of trades the number of insured workpeople unemployed, which is ascertained monthly, was 18,118 at the end of June, 1923, and 13,470 at the end of June, 1924.

Does the right hon. Gentleman remember saying last week that there were more people in employment in the motor-car industry at the end of June than in January of this year? If statistics were not available, on what did he base his statement?

On the ground that unemployment is less now than it was at the beginning of this year, which was the statement I made.

If the right hon. Gentleman has no statistics of those engaged in motor-car construction, have his figures any relevance; and would it not have been wise to ascertain the facts before he made his statement?

I did not make a statement about motor-car construction. What I said was that there were more people employed in the motor trade now than at the beginning of the year.

Before making his statement last week, did the right hon. Gentleman take steps to find out what had happened in the motor-car industry?

Before I made the statement I took the greatest possible care to ascertain the facts.

In saying that more men are now employed, did the right hon. Gentleman include all the various men engaged in washing, garaging, etc.?

asked the Minister of Labour in which week he caused the number of 40,000 to be added to the unemployment figures issued by his Department?

The alteration in method was first made in respect of the numbers who were unemployed on 10th March last. A detailed explanation of the change was given in my reply to the hon. Member for Aberdare on 19th March, of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the whole of the 40,000 were added in one week?

Yes.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state the actual week when the 40,000 were added?

Yes. The 10th March.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in order to relieve the lack of employment in British ship-repairing yards, he will consider any proposals to give Empire shipping a preference in home ports providing that only Empire subjects are employed on board, and that all possible repair work and orders for new ships are entrusted to British shipyards or, alternatively, what does he intend to do to increase employment in these necessitous areas?

The particular remedy which the hon. Member suggests is open to the grave objection that it would introduce the principle of flag discrimination, which would be very prejudicial to British shipping. The problem is part of the general problem of unemployment, and cannot well be dealt with separately.

Can I have a reply to the second part of my Question, with regard to the alternative?

I would refer the hon. Member to the statement made by the Minister of Labour on Monday, and to the previous answer on the subject.

Will the Board of Trade devise a scheme for the relief of unemployment in shipbuilding centres?

What is the difficulty about making a discrimination in favour of Empire shipping?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that the American shipping companies are fined and taxed if they have repairs executed outside their own country?

It is not a matter that can be discussed by question and answer. It has been examined thoroughly and dealt with by the Imperial Economic Conference, and if the hon. Member desires to raise it further it can be raised in Debate.

asked the Minister of Labour how many workers are likely to be affected by the light refreshment and dining room part of the catering trade for which he is proposing to set up a Trade Board?

The occupational classification of the 1921 Census returns indicates that 140,346 persons are engaged in restaurants, catering, eating and coffee houses. Until, however, the investigation referred to in my reply to the hon. Member on Monday last has taken place and a case disclosed for applying the Trade Boards Acts to the dining room and light refreshment trade, I am unable to say how many persons will be covered by any board that may be set up.

Can the right hon. Gentleman define what he means by the dining room and light refreshment trade? Will the Board include Soho restaurant workers who badly need protection? Will it also include the workers in the refreshment club here—or are our refreshments too heavy? Further, does he not think it a mistake to divide a trade in which all the workers need protection, especially in view of the fact that a previous Minister tried to set up a Trade Board three years ago and failed for this reason.

The Trade Board itself will make the definitions. I am afraid that if I had to attempt to make them in answer to a question there would be protests from other parts of the House.

Will the Trade Board cover the waitresses employed by the A.B.C. and Isaacs' fish shops?

Would not the number of employés in light refreshment shops be greatly increased if the D.O.R.A. restrictions which tie them down were taken away?

Can I have an answer?

I have already said that the definitions would be decided after the inquiry has been concluded. I cannot speak definitely on the point.

asked the Minister of Health if the demands of the building operatives are conceded, what it is estimated will be the extra cost, respectively, of a parlour and non-parlour house built under the State-assisted housing schemes?

The demands of the operatives are not uniform throughout the country, but where the demand is for ½d. an hour, it is estimated that the average increase in cost of a workmen's house entailed thereby would be about £4. As regards the further demand for payment for lost time, sufficient information is not at present available to enable an estimate to be given.

Has the right hon. Gentleman taken into account the demand in regard to hours, and does he not think that will have a serious effect upon his scheme?

I have tried to give all the information I have.

Order, order!

On a point of Order. A newspaper is being read on the Front Bench.

Can we be told what newspaper it is that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Webb) is reading?

The "Daily Mail." [HON. MEMBERS " Daily Herald! "]

asked the Minister of Health whether any local authorities have, in respect of their housing contracts, conceded the terms demanded by the building operatives in the present dispute; and what action he is taking in the matter?

The terms of engagement of building trade operatives would primarily be a matter between the operatives and contractors concerned, and I have no knowledge whether, in connection with a contract for a local authority's housing scheme, the claims put forward by the operatives have been conceded. As I informed the hon. Member on the 16th instant, I propose to take no steps favouring one side or the other in the dispute.

Inasmuch as the central authority is already doing this, would the right hon. Gentleman make some com- munication to them in order that there may be some definite understanding amongst the authorities up and down the country?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether he agrees with the terms of the men's demands?

Yes. Why not?

asked the Minister of Health what steps will be taken to enforce the payment of the surcharges of £3,699 recently made by the auditor against the Poplar Guardians?

I have received appeals against the auditor's decision from all the guardians surcharged, and am informed that statements of the grounds of appeal will be submitted to me in a few days' time. The appeals will then receive consideration.

Is not the Minister of Health going vigorously to pursue this matter during the Parliamentary Recess? Will he give an undertaking that he will not allow this matter to slide whilst we are having our holidays?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers, may I ask him whether in the OFFICIAL REPORT to-day he will give particulars of this surcharge and the period that it covers? Is he aware that that period is 18 months and the expenditure £1,500,000, thus disproving the statement made by—[ Interruption. ]

Hon. Members opposite do not want to hear the facts.

asked the Minister of Health whether he has received a resolution, passed unanimously at a largely attended meeting of ratepayers in the borough of Redcar, in the North Riding of Yorkshire, supporting the action of the council in proposing to lease four acres on the foreshore for the purpose of a pleasure park; and whether, seeing that it is intended to provide pleasure for large numbers of people, he Will give an early and favourable answer to the petition of the council, especially having regard to the fact that it is so largely supported by the public?

I have received the resolution. A local inquiry into this application is being held to-day, and I hope that it will be possible to give a decision immediately.

asked the Minister of Health whether the Regulations which he proposes to make, providing for the inspection of meat at the time of slaughter, include a provision that occupiers of slaughter-houses shall give notice of their intention to slaughter to the medical officer of the local authority; if so, whether he is aware that in many cases such notice will be ineffective; whether he will consider the advisability of making provision for the notice to be given in all cases direct to the officer whose duty it will be to make the inspection; and whether, before coming to a contrary decision, he will accede to the request of the Sanitary Inspectors' Association to receive a deputation to discuss the point?

The provisions of the draft Regulations specify the medical officer of health as the officer to whom notices of slaughtering are to be sent, but the local authority is empowered to direct that such notices are to be sent to the sanitary inspector or any other specified officer in lieu of the medical officer of health. I have already written to the Sanitary Inspectors' Association acceding to their request for the reception of a deputation to discuss this and other points arising on the draft Regulations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question and similar ones frequently come before the Local Legislation Committee in this House in connection with the Bills of local authorities, and will he take steps to incorporate this in a public Act so as to avoid the necessity of local authorities having to make special provision in local Bills?

asked the Minister of Health whether it is the intention of the Government to amend the Bill which has been introduced to deal with the question of the prices of building materials so as to enable the Government to take over building works without compensation in cases in which terms cannot be agreed; and, if so, will he state when an official announcement of the Government's policy on this matter will be made to the House?

The answer to the first part of the question is "No." As regards the last part I hope that it will be possible to take the Second Reading of the Building Materials (Charges and Supply) Bill early in the Autumn Session.

Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been drawn to the speech made by the learned Attorney-General recently, and was the Attorney-General speaking on behalf of the Government or not, or does the right hon. Gentleman dissociate himself from the Attorney-General?

I have not had the pleasure of reading the speech referred to. I have no doubt that it would be most interesting, and if the hon. Member will send me a copy I will take care to read it during the holidays.

As so much publicity has been given to the speech of the Attorney-General, will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Attorney-General to send him a copy of the speech?

asked the Minister of Health if new legislation is necessary before local authorities could be authorised to give information concerning birth control at maternity centres?

The question whether further legislation would be required is not free from doubt, but in any case, as I have already informed the hon. Member, I am not prepared to sanction the use of maternity centres for so controversial a purpose without the express directions by Parliament.

Is it the view of the right hon. Gentleman that he now has executive power to grant this permission if he so wishes?

I am not quite sure whether I have, but even if I had I would not introduce such a revolutionary change.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any reason to explain why the families of the poor working-classes are larger than those of the wealthy classes?

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether all the privileges and facilities which existed prior to the War for children desiring to bathe in the Serpentine have now been restored to them?

No changes have been made and the arrangements are the same now as before the War.

Will any steps be taken to bring that fact to the notice of the children of London?

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he will exercise his powers under the Ancient Monuments Act of 1882, 1900 and 1910, as well as under the Consolidation and Amendment Act of 1913, so as to schedule Hadrian's Wall in order to ensure its preservation?

Unless in cases of immediate urgency, my Department awaits recommendations from the Ancient Monuments Boards before scheduling monuments. I am not aware that there is any need to depart from this practice in the case of any portions of the Roman Wall. I may say, however, that the Ancient Monuments Board for England recently recommended for scheduling a few of the sections of the wall which are still preserved, and they will no doubt deal with other sections in due course. I should, perhaps, add that the power of scheduling is confined to that given by the Act of 1913. The Act of 1913 repeals the earlier Acts. Scheduling only imposes on the owner an obligation to give this Department notice before altering, adding to, or removing the scheduled monument. It gives no power to require the owner to keep it in repair.

Is the House of Lords going to be referred to this committee on ancient monuments?

Where is the money to come from if these powers are to be extended?

There is no authority to purchase.

For the excavations.

Parliament will supply it.

asked the First Commissioner of Works whether he is aware that there are in England, Scotland and Wales a number of ancient monuments and historic buildings of large size and major importance which are falling rapidly into decay through neglect on the part of the owners; can he state whether the dangerous and decayed condition of such buildings is reported by officers of his Department; and are representations made to the owners that repairs should be carried out?

My Department, through its inspectors and their local correspondents, does what it can to keep a watch upon the condition of ancient monuments and historic buildings scheduled under the Act of 1913, and when cases of neglect are reported representations are made to owners as to the need for carrying out repairs.

Is any portion of the large sums which are sometimes received by the owners of ancient monuments ever allocated for the repairs of those buildings or their preservation?

Not by us. It is in the owner's own discretion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take a look at Holyrood and see what he can do to preserve it?

Is it not a fact that in any number of cases the owners spend far more than they receive on the maintenance of those ancient buildings?

I am quite sure that it is.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that an application for a pension on behalf of A. Maskell, father of Private George Maskell, No. 17,462, late Royal Berks Regiment (regimental number 11/p.p./56,406), who was killed in the War, was refused, the reason given in the letter to the father being that, in view of his circumstances, he could not be in pecuniary need; and whether, having regard to the fact that A. Maskell is a man over 60 years of age, is totally without money, and by reason of physical disability only able to work occasionally in fine weather at his occupation of an agricultural labourer, the matter can be reconsidered by the Ministry?

My right hon. Friend is having inquiries made regarding this case. A communication will be addressed to the hon. Member at an early date.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is satisfied that, in selecting medical officers for discharge from his Department, those who have not served overseas are discharged before those who, if equally efficient, have served overseas; and whether he is satisfied that no medical officer without overseas service is retained in a position for which an officer with overseas service is eligible and equally suitable?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the affirmative, subject always to the paramount consideration of efficiency of the public service.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been called to the frequent overcrowding of the trains between Hull and King's Cross and between King's Cross and Hull, especially in regard to the third-class compartments; if he is aware that passengers have recently had to travel the whole journey standing in the corridors or sitting on their luggage in the corridors: and whether he will bring this matter to the notice of the railway company concerned?

My attention has not previously been directly to overcrowding on the particular service referred to, but I will call the attention of the railway company to the hon. Member's complaint.

Has the hon. Gentleman any powers if the railway companies pay no attention to him?

Is it not a fact that the attention of the Minister of Transport has been called to complaints of overcrowding on the North-Eastern, the Midland and the Scottish routes, and that the overcrowding at present is worse than it was when his attention was called to it originally, and what steps, if any, does he intend to take to secure the safety of the travelling public?

Can the hon. Gentleman institute a special inquiry, covering all the railways of the country, into this question of overcrowding?

I think that a great deal of the trouble at the moment is owing to the abnormal traffic—[HON. MEMBERS: "No!"]—owing to the Exhibition. I think that that is beyond dispute. Wherever there are cases demanding attention, I do look into them, and I do the best I can.

Has the right hon. Gentleman yet circularised the local authorities with regard to their powers in this matter, as he stated in reply to a question put by me a little while ago?

Is it not a fact that ever since the amalgamation, two years ago, the service to Hull has been much worse than it was ever before? Will he bear that fact in mind if he or his Government consider still further amalgamations?

Will the hon. Gentleman consult those Members who went to the Holland by-election, and get their opinion as to the monstrous overcrowding on this line?

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the further increase in the number of fatal and other traffic accidents in London during the three months ended 30th June, he proposes to take any steps to bring about a reduction in the number of such accidents and to secure the greater safety of foot passengers?

I need hardly say that every effort is made by the authorities concerned to ensure the safety of foot passengers in London, and I hope that the setting up in the near future of the Advisory Committee, under the London Traffic Bill, will lead to a closer co-ordination of these efforts.

asked the Minister of Transport whether his attention has been called to the very serious motor-coach accident at Blockley, whereby seven women and children have been killed, and nine so seriously injured that comparatively little hope is entertained for their recovery; whether his attention has also been called to another motor-coach accident on Abbotsbury Hill, near Weymouth, whereby 15 casualties have been caused, two of a very serious character, out of the 24 occupants of the vehicle; whether he is aware that both these cases were apparently due to failure of the brakes; whether the Ministry of Transport will hold an inquiry into both these cases with special reference to the adequacy and efficiency of the braking systems and the competency of the drivers and state of the road surface in each case, and whether steps will be taken to publish the result of such inquiry?

Before the hon. Gentleman answers, may I ask whether he has seen a report in the papers to the effect that, so far as one of the accidents was concerned, the driver said he could not throttle his engine?

All reports that reach me of serious accidents on highways are referred to the Divisional Road Engineers of my Department for informal investigation, but I am not yet in a position to state the causes of the particular accidents to which the Noble Lord refers. I am unfortunately not at present empowered to hold inquiries into accidents, and, as the Noble Lord is aware, I have promoted a Bill to secure the requisite power. I very much regret that it has not been possible to pass the Bill before the Adjournment, but I hope to press forward with it in the Autumn.

Has it not been the practice of the hon. Gentleman's Department to be represented at any inquiry into serious accidents which may take place, and will he see to it that a representative of his Department is present at any inquiry which takes place as the result of these accidents?

So far as the inquiry is concerned, I will give all the information that I have. I do regard the matter as serious and requiring attention.

Will the hon. Gentleman take steps in the autumn to ensure that authority is given to licensing authorities properly to inspect as to the fitness of vehicles for letting out on hire?

Notice must be given of that question.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government will recommend to Parliament a grant of public money to assist the 100,000 Christian refugees from Asia Minor who are now in Greek territory; and whether the Italian and Belgian Governments have made similar grants?

His Majesty's Government, together with the Italian Government, among others, have already contributed considerably to the alleviation of the lot of these refugees, and continue in their endeavours to enlist public sympathy in this country for them, but in view of the many calls upon them the Government do not feel justified in recommending any further grant of public money under this head.

When the Prime Minister says that the Government has contributed, does that include any response to the recent appeal from the League of Nations?

Will the right hon. Gentleman direct a question to the Northern Government of Ireland as to whether they will give compensation to refugees from Northern Ireland?

With reference to the League of Nations, we have not been satisfied that the conditions under which it was dispensed deserved the grant asked for. We are always anxious to do what we can for refugees, but we must do it carefully and under conditions which will ensure that for 20s. given the refugee gets 20s. worth of benefit.

Will the right hon. Gentleman keep an open mind until he gets to Geneva?

My mind is always open.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he can state the number of acres under wheat in 1924 and 1923, respectively; and the number of acres under grain for the same period?

The total area returned as under wheat in England and Wales in 1923 was 1,740,000 acres, and under all kinds of corn 5,611,000 acres. The tabulation of the Returns for 1924 is not yet completed, but it is hoped to publish the figures in the course of the next few days.

asked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that on August Bank Holiday it was impossible to get post offices to accept telegrams for towns in England; that, through the dislocation of the railway traffic and the consequent missing of trains, much inconvenience and anxiety was caused through telegraphic communication not being available; and whether in future he will take steps to ensure that the Post Office telegraph system is made available to the public on public holidays?

Telegraphic facilities provided on Bank Holidays are normally adequate for public requirements. Any general extension of the hours of attendance would involve expense out of all proportion to the use likely to be made of the additional facilities, and I regret that I should not be justified in authorising such an extension.

This is a public service and the public requires special facilities. Cannot the right hon. Gentleman arrange that we have full public facilities at this time?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that sometimes it takes as long as 11 minutes to get a reply from the toll exchange downstairs in this House, and that the telephone service is very much worse since the present Government came into office?

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that Mr. R. R. Montague is an applicant for employment as a skilled telegraphist in the Bristol Post Office; that Mr. Montague joined the service of the Marconi Company at the age of 17 years on 29th October, 1917, and was appointed to the sea-going staff on 13th September, 1918; that he was attested at Whitehall on 13th June, 1918; that owing to the important nature of his service as a wireless operator on the Steamship "Clan Maclaren" he was not called up for service with the Forces; and that Mr. Montague is held to be ineligible for an appointment to the established staff of the Post Office on the ground that he was not called to the colours; and whether, in view of the shortage of skilled telegraphists and having regard to the nature elf the service rendered by Mr. Montague, he will reconsider the decision?

I am aware of the case to which the hon. Member refers. There is no shortage of skilled telegraphists, and there is a long waiting list of qualified ex-service men seeking permanent employment in the Post Office in that capacity. Mr. Montague is not an ex-service man, and, in the circumstances described, I can find no grounds for treating him exceptionally. It may be possible, however, to give him temporary employment at Bristol for a short time.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not admit that a man who served in the mercantile marine during the War is equally as eligible as a man who served in the Navy?

asked the Secretary of State for War what steps are being taken to withdraw Circular Gen. No. 6/6,618 (F6), which calls upon clerks and writers to sever all connection with trade unions?

The hon. Member does not quite correctly state the purport of the Circular. It is only that portion of the clerical staff which is being brought on to the permanent pensionable establishment that is affected. The Circular was issued with the full concurrence of the staff side of the appropriate Whitley Council.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (1) what undertakings, given as a result of the recommendations of the Lytton Committee, prevent a resumption of appointments to the administrative class from the 1921 list, in view of paragraph 31 of the Final Report of the Southborough Committee, in which it is stated that effect has already been given to the recommendations of the Lytton Committee in regard to the administrative class;

(2) whether, when normal recruitment of the administrative grade by open competition is resumed, under paragraph 31 of the Final Report of the Southborough Committee, the claims of the candidates who took the open competition of 1921 will be reconsidered before arrangements are made to hold further open competitions for that class?

The statement in the Final Report of the Southborough Committee to which the hon. Member refers is coupled with the statement that it is proposed to extend somewhat the period during which appointments may be made from ex-service candidates at the examination held in accordance with the recommendation in the Third Interim Report of the Lytton Committee and with the further suggestion that the normal method of recruitment should be resumed as and when sufficient vacancies exist. The list of candidates from the 1921 open competition has already been kept open for two years beyond the normal period, and I regret that I am unable to reconsider the decision to close the list as from 31st March last.

Is the hon. Member aware that several of those who passed the 1921 examination, and are now waiting for appointments, were men who served in the War, and, after serving in the War, returned to their studies, prepared for and passed the open examination, and obtained high places in the list, and are they not still being kept out from any employment because preference has been given to those who have been temporarily employed, without passing any examination?

I have very great sympathy with my right hon. Friend's points. There is undoubtedly difficulty, but the list was kept over for more than two years, and the real problem is the competition of these ex-service men with other ex-service men who have also claims to be appointed.

But is the ex-service man who, after serving in the War, goes back, resumes his studies, and then passes the open examination, not a very much superior one to the ex-service man who, with small qualifications, accepts a temporary post and then keeps out this better qualified man? Is not the hon. Member aware that this is detrimental, and is proving itself detrimental to the service generally? I ask for the consideration of the Prime Minister.

I have already told my right hon. Friend, and he knows, that I sympathise very largely with his point of view, but I am afraid we are bound by the decisions of the House in these matters. It is a very difficult thing to reconcile these claims, but I am satisfied that we should not keep this list open longer. It has already been kept open for two years beyond the time.

Is not the first thing to look upon the efficiency of the service, and is not that efficiency being injured by the present procedure?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will set up a committee to discuss the question of equal pay for equal work for men and women in the Civil Service?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer gave on this subject on the 3rd July to the Noble Lady the Member for the Sutton Division of Plymouth, of which I am sending her a copy.

A most unsatisfactory reply!

Does not the hon. Member think that that reply was contrary to the spirit, if not the letter, of the Sex Disqualification Removal Act?

Does not the hon. Gentleman think it was contrary to the election promises of the Labour party?

The Government had to consider whether under the existing conditions this very large expenditure could be faced, and the decision was that at the moment it could not be faced.

The Government should have considered that point when they were making the promise.

Are we, as a nation, not committed to support this principle in the Treaty of Versailles, and if we are committed to support this principle, should not the Government Departments set an example?

The position, I think, is that we are quite committed to the principle of equality of opportunity, and generally, also, on the question of equality of pay, but, as I view it, this is very largely a practical matter of how soon that can be attained, and the decision is that at the moment the funds cannot be found for this very large expenditure.

Have not the Government already recognised this principle, because the lady Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour receives the same salary as other Parliamentary Secretaries??

That is a different matter.

asked the Secretary of State for War what was the regimental pay of the private soldier in August, 1914, and in November, 1918; if he still concurs in the statement contained in the Report of the Ex-Ranker Officers' Committee that men who served in the trenches for 1s. a day in 1914 were followed later by others who were paid half-a-dozen times as much; if so, will he give the title and date of the Order which authorised the payment of 6s. a day to private soldiers who served in the trenches during the War; the approximate number of men who served in the trenches at the higher rate, and if they continued to draw such rates as private soldiers until the end of hostilities; and will he indicate under what circumstances these favoured soldiers served in comparative comfort with their less-favoured comrades in the trenches?

The answer to the first part of the question is that the regimental pay of an infantry private in 1914 was 1s. a day, in 1918 1s 6d. a day. The remainder of the question is based on a misreading of paragraph 17 of the Report. This contains no suggestion that the higher paid personnel referred to were soldiers serving in the trenches, but, on the contrary, espressly contrasts the nature of the service as well as the amount of the pay. In these circumstances the specific questions asked do not arise, but I may say that the men who appear to be alluded to by the committee are the motor drivers, fitters and tradesmen of various kinds who up to a certain stage of the War were enlisted at 6s. a day and other rates largely in excess of the normal infantry rate. Men enlisted with those rates retained them as long as they served.