asked the Minister of Transport the number of persons employed on road schemes assisted by the Minister of Transport for the relief of unemployment at the present time and a, year ago, respectively?

I have been asked to reply. At 27th March, 1926, there were 19,721 persons engaged on road schemes assisted by the Ministry of Transport, as compared with 18,197 at 28th March, 1925. The figures take no account of the employment provided indirectly in the preparation and transport of materials, etc.

asked the Secretary for Scotland how many new schemes for settling ex-service men on the land in Scotland are on hand in the Board of Agriculture, and how many men it is expected will be settled on the areas in such schemes?

The number of land settlement schemes, which the Board of Agriculture for Scotland are developing or to which they are committed, is 32. Under these schemes 133 new holdings and 85 enlargements of existing holdings will be formed. In addition, the Board have in contemplation 12 schemes, which, if put into operation, would provide about 113 new holdings and 167 enlargements. It is not possible at this stage to say how many of the applicants who may be settled will be ex-service men.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether a decision has yet been reached regarding the independent appeal tribunal for officers and men invalided from the Service?

Very careful consideration has been given to this matter. My hon. and gallant Friend is of course aware that the establishment of tribunals to deal with cases arising during the War was an innovation, but it was no doubt justified by the extraordinary conditions of the time, namely, the conscription of the majority of the adult male population, the arduous conditions of War service and the difficult and complex medical questions involved. Under post-War conditions the same necessity does not, however, exist.

Under existing conditions the service medical history of every man is well known from the date of entry onwards throughout his career. The duties expected of him and the conditions under which they are performed are well known to the medical officers of the Service, and I cannot admit that any outside tribunal or referee is more competent to determine whether a man is physically fit for retention in the Service or not, and whether a disease is attributable to the Service or not than they are. The decisions of local surveying officers are always subject to review by the medical authorities of the Admiralty, and any officer or man who is aggrieved by the decision in his case can appeal to the Board of Admiralty with the result that his case is thoroughly investigated again. I feel sure that on reflection my hon. and gallant Friend will agree that it would be quite impracticable to remit the question whether an officer or man is fit for retention in a fighting force to any authority outside the Department, and, as to the other issue, he cannot fail to recognise that the surveying medical officers are independent and unprejudiced judges who cannot have any personal interest whatever in the matter to prevent them from giving each case the most sympathetic consideration possible.

I am, therefore, convinced that there is no justification for establishing a general right of appeal beyond the Board of Admiralty in these cases, and though I undertook to consider the possibility of making exceptions to the general rule in special cases, I find it impossible after full consideration to support any such proposal. Satisfied as I am that a general right of appeal is unnecessary, I have come to the conclusion that to single out any one or more diseases as affording grounds for exceptional treatment could have no other result but to create a sense of grievance among those who were invalided for other diseases or injuries.

I have consulted my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for War and the Secretary of State for Air, and they fully endorse the conclusions I have reached and I regret, therefore, that I cannot recommend any departure from the present rule that the decisions of the Board of Admiralty must be final.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) if any troops were engaged in the operation of the trains in Great Britain between 1st and 14th May, 1926; and, if so, the numbers so employed and in what capacity they were so engaged;

(2) the number of armoured cars and tanks that were drafted into the Metropolitan area between 3rd and 13th May, 1926;

(3) the number of troops that were employed at the Port of London Authority between 2nd and 14th May for any purpose; the regiments from which they were drawn; and on what duties they were engaged?

I do not see that any public interest would be served by disclosing the details of troop movements during the emergency. I feel sure, however, that this House is grateful to the Army for the efficient and good-tempered manner in which they performed their duties.