asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the expenditure incurred and paid from public funds in respect of the transport of the emigrants to New Zealand by the Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company's steamer "Tainui," which sailed from Southampton on the 8th January, 1926?

The total expenditure incurred under the Empire Settlement Act in respect of the passages of assisted migrants who proceeded by this vessel was £2,687 5s. The number of assisted migrants was 86 men, 89 women, 74 children.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider an investigation into the conditions under which it is alleged that these people were compelled to travel?

Was not that question very effectively answered yesterday?

asked the President of the Board of Trade, approximately, what quantity of British coal would have been required if the iron and steel manufacturers thereof imported in 1925 had been made in this country?

The net imports into this country of iron and steel and manufactures thereof in 1925 amounted to 2,712,271 tons. Owing to the variety of these imports it is not possible to make a close estimate of the amount of coal which would have been required if they had been produced in this country; but, as has already been stated on behalf of the Board of Trade in this House, the quantity of coal in question would probably be between 7,000,000 and 10,000,000 tons.

In view of the fact that the Report of the Royal Commission on Coal stated that the only hope of greatly-increased consumption of coal at home was in the improvement of the steel trade, will my right hon. Friend now, in connection with the coal crisis, reconsider the whole question of steel?

I was asked a specific question to which I gave a specific answer. I cannot add to it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state how much our coal output could be reduced in case we did not export our steel or anything else?

I should certainly require notice of that question, and I rather doubt whether, if I had notice, I could give the information.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to the large increases in the monthly returns of imports of iron and steel; if he is aware that in the month of April the figure reached the record of 261,787 tons as compared with the average monthly figure in 1913 of 185,000 tons; that each fall in the French franc increases the volume of these imports; and if, in view of the recent serious disclosures in the balance sheets of important iron and steel manufacturers showing the loss of many thousands of pounds, he will state what action the Government intends to take or is taking, to deal with the situation?

I am aware of the import figures mentioned by my hon. Friend in the second part of the question. With regard to the remainder of the question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given by the Prime Minister on the 21st December.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, seeing that under the powers conferred by Congress the American Treasury have already taken steps to offset the action of the German steel interests in granting a bounty to German iron and steel manufacturers on exports, he proposes to take any countervailing steps to prevent unfair competition in this country?

I have been asked to reply. If the effect of the German arrangements to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers is that German iron and steel products are sold or offered for sale in this country at prices below the cost of production as defined in the Safeguarding of Industries Act, 1921, a complaint to that effect can be made to the Board of Trade under Section 2 (1) ( a ) of that Act.

Have not the Government already refused to permit the steel industry to have an inquiry under that Act?

No. I thought the hon. and gallant Gentleman's knowledge of the Act was so meticulous that he would realise that this was a dumping question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of the exports of British manufactures to the remainder of the British Empire and to foreign countries, respectively, during the first quarter of 1926 and, for comparison, the corresponding average quarterly figures for 1913?

As I explained to my hon. and gallant Friend in an answer on 20th April, particulars of our exports of manufactures (as apart from those of food and raw materials) to individual countries are only compiled in respect of calendar years. But taking the figures of British produce and manufacture, the declared values of our exports were as follow: First quarter, 1926, to the British Empire, £86,851,000 (of which £8,903,000 represented exports to the Irish Free State); to foreign countries £102,744,000. The corresponding average quarterly figures for 1913 were £48,828,000 and £82,486,000, respectively. In the 1913 figures the Irish Free State is, of course, included in the United Kingdom.

Will my right hon. Friend consider whether it is not possible —unless it involves considerable cost— to get out the figures with regard to manufactured quantities?

No, that would really be a very costly thing to do. My hon. and gallant Friend knows that I do get out at regular intervals a statement of the general distribution of our markets.

Is it not a fact that the Tariff Reform League publishes comparatively accurate figures of these trades, and are not these figures published in great detail?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is perhaps more acquainted with that than I am.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state the number and value of commercial motor vehicles manufactured in this country in 1925; and the number and value of such vehicles imported from abroad during the same period?

I regret that I am unable to state the number or value of commercial motor vehicles manufactured in the United Kingdom in 1925. Six hundred and fifty-five complete commercial vehicles, valued at £113,339, were imported into the United Kingdom in that year, and 212, valued at £32,097, re-exported. In addition, 3,740 chassis for commercial vehicles, valued at £537,616, were imported in the second half of 1925, and 52, valued at £11,588, were re-exported. Particulars of the imports of commercial chassis in the first half of 1925 are not available.

Will my right hon. Friend give an idea of the proportion of British manufactured vehicles and imports?

I am afraid I could not do that. It is that kind of question, the answer to which is important, for which I so much want a census of production.

Did the figures of imported commercial vehicles include those imported in parts and assembled in this country?

I have given the figures for complete vehicles and for chassis.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any recent efforts have been made to secure the showing of a percentage of British films on the screens of this country and throughout the Empire, and with what results; and whether this question is definitely to be placed on the agenda to be considered at the forthcoming Imperial Conference?

As regards the first of the question, I am awaiting a report from the cinema industry on certain proposals which' I have placed before it. As I stated on the 27th April, His Majesty's Government are proposing that this question should be placed on the agenda of the Imperial Conference.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that sugar refiners in Czechoslovakia, Poland, Germany and other Continental countries are dumping sugar in this country; whether the British refiners who handle Empire cane sugar products have any protection against this policy; and, seeing that these sugar refiners have, in addition, to face competition by State assistance, to which they are bound to contribute, whether he will investigate the whole matter to see if fairer treatment can be secured for the British refiners?

I have no evidence of the prevalence of any such practice. The imports of refined sugar from Europe have been less in quantity in the first four months of this year than in the corresponding period of 1925, whilst the imports of unrefined sugar from all countries into the United Kingdom have increased.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, as a result of the tax on wrapping paper, the prices of British made wrapping paper have already advanced to those charged by the foreign manufacturer, and that approximately 70 per cent. of the total export of Swiss chocolates is imported into this country and escapes the taxation imposed on British firms by keeping the wrapping paper below the 15 per cent. limit; and what action he proposes to take to remove this anomaly which gives a direct bounty to the foreign manufacturer and penalises British firms?

As regards the first part of the question, I have made careful inquiries, and am satisfied that the prices of British wrapping papers have not been advanced as a result of the duty. With regard to the remainder of the question, the Government's proposals in respect of the Wrapping Paper Duty are before the House.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when it is likely that the Report of the Royal Commission appointed to consider the question of subsidence in mining areas will be presented?

I am informed that the preparation of this Report has unavoidably been delayed, and that it is impossible to say with confidence when it is likely to be ready.

Is it not a matter of considerable importance to urge on the publication of the Report, in view of some of the recommendations of the Royal Commission?

It is very important, and I hope that the Report will soon be ready, but of course I cannot say when.

Has the Commission had any sittings lately?

I believe it has been sitting regularly, but I cannot answer definitely offhand.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the practice of certain shipping companies in paying off coloured and other foreign seamen in British ports without making arrangements to repatriate them to their own countries, and whether he is prepared to take any steps to prevent this practice?

I have been asked to reply. Every seaman, unless in possession of satisfactory evidence to show that he is a British subject, must obtain leave from the immigration officer before he can land in the United Kingdom. Except in the case of those alien seamen who have been signed on in the United Kingdom for the round voyage or are domiciled in this country, leave to land for discharge is granted very sparingly, and when granted is frequently subject to the condition of repatriation or removal from the United Kingdom under a responsible guarantee.

Does not my hon. and gallant Friend see that in the case of shipping being paid off, all these men have willy nilly to come ashore, that his officials have to allow them to come ashore, and in the seamen's homes they become chargeable?

Obligation is frequently placed on shipowners to see that they are taken to some other country. They are not necessarily allowed to live in this country.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that certain British subjects born abroad, coloured men, are not allowed to land in England unless they have signed alien forms?

That has nothing to do with the Home Office. Any question with regard to British seamen, of whatever colour, is a question for the Board of Trade, and not for the Home Office.

Did not the Home Secretary give me an undertaking that the alien certificate would be cancelled, and it has not been cancelled?

That is another matter.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Mr. F. J. Houghton, late Lieutenant, 7th battalion Leicestershire Regiment, has applied for his War gratuity; that, owing to ill-health caused by wounds received in action, he was unaware that he was entitled to it, and has been informed by the War Office that the gratuity cannot be allowed him although it is acknowledged that he is entitled to it; and whether he will state the reason why this gratuity has not been paid to Mr. Houghton?

The circumstances of this case have been reviewed, and I am glad to say that, after consultation with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War, it has been found possible to reconsider the decision previously given, and to authorise the issue of the gratuity in question to Mr. Houghton.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he is now in a position to state at what investigation held to inquire into the truth of his allegations against the Indian military authorities Lieutenant Glendinning was afforded the opportunity of being present; if the evidence of the witnesses wishing to give evidence on behalf of this officer was taken at the investigation; and if the evidence given against him was subject to cross-examination by a legal representative of Lieutenant Glendinning?

Statements in writing from Mr. Glendinning and from those who gave evidence on his behalf were considered by the Army Council in connection with this officer's appeal under Section 42 of the Army Act, on which the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War in the Socialist Government found himself unable to advise His Majesty to issue any special instructions. As I stated on 27th April last, there is nothing to warrant the case being reopened.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman give me a reply to the last part of the question?

I think that follows from the first part of my reply. I stated that written evidence was given, and, of course, it is impossible to cross-examine on written evidence.

I wish to know whether Lieutenant Glendinning was allowed to be legally represented at this inquiry, and whether that legal representative was not entitled to cross-examine the witnesses who were oral?

That is covered by the first part of my answer. The case was considered by the Army Council on the written appeal of this officer, and he was not represented by counsel, nor were his witnesses actually heard. Witnesses' written statements were considered by the proper appeal, to the Army Council.

Is it not a fact that some of the witnesses heard against this man were persons who had recently been convicted under the criminal law; and does the hon. and gallant Gentleman think it fair to the man that he should not have ben allowed a legal representative who could cross-examine such witnesses?

I consider no man could have a fairer hearing or judgment than he receives at the hands of the Army Council.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether any rule book is issued to civilian employés in the Army Ordnance Services indicating the conditions on which they are employed; when the last rule book was revised and issued; whether the self-discharge by two consecutive days' absence without leave has been superseded by Rule 65; and, if so, when and by what means was Rule 65 made known to the workmen?

As regards the first and second parts of the question, the regulations applicable to employés of the Army Ordnance Services are the standing orders and regulations of the Royal Arsenal and Royal Dockyard, Woolwich. Storeholders and the principal foremen have copies and any employé can see them. The present edition was published in 1904 and amendments and notices referring to the Regulations are published in departmental orders which are exhibited on the notice board. As regards the third and fourth parts of the question, the regulation as to self-discharge by two consecutive days' absence is not superseded by Rule 65; the former relates to absence without leave, the latter to notice required before leaving. Both rules are of long standing, well-known to the employés concerned, and are normally observed by them.

asked the Secretary of State for War when it is expected that the Report of the Committee which was appointed to consider the promotion of Royal Artillery artificers will be published?

The Committee in question was a Departmental Committee whose Report will not be published.

asked the Secretary of State for War if inquiries were made of the officer responsible for the safe keeping of the official confidential documents, referred to in the book entitled "As Others See Us," now withdrawn from publication, one of which, relating to the late Commandant, Auxiliary Division, Royal Irish Constabulary, the Army Council offered to recall; if so, when the document came into existence and when it passed into unauthorised hands; and whether he is aware that the resignation of the Commandant referred to took place on 19th February, 1921, and that the said document was not in existence before that date?

I do not know to which officer the hon. Member refers. The answer to the remaining questions is in the negative.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that questions on this subject have already been put to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, who has said that he does not know how the document passed to other hands?

The hon. Gentleman mentions several documents, and I do not know to which officer he refers.

asked the Secretary for Scotland when the Report of the Land Court for 1925 will be available?

It is anticipated that the Report will be issued shortly.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he is aware that recently Mr. G. Sowerby, normally employed as a clerk, while acting as a safety man at Messrs. Pease Partners' (Limited) colliery at Eldon, county Durham, was seriously injured; and whether he will take steps to ensure that experienced men only will, in future, be permitted to undertake the duties of safety men at collieries?

I am informed that Mr. Sowerby was not acting as a safety man at the colliery when he was injured on 2nd May, but was engaged in working a hand winch at the coke ovens adjoining the colliery. The second part of the question does not, therefore, arise.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether, in view of the fact that the information is not given in the Report of the Royal Commission on Coal, as in the case of other European countries, he can state what number of men are engaged in the coal mines of Russia, what are the hours worked, and what are the rates of pay?

In the first quarter of 1925 there were 185,300 persons employed in the production of coal in the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. The Soviet Labour Code lays down a six-hour working day underground—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"]—hon. Members had better wait, and hear the rest of the answer—and a weekly period of rest of 42 continuous hours for all workers. But it is understood that neither of these provisions is generally observed, and that eight or even 10 hours a day are commonly worked. The average weekly earnings of coal miners in the Donetz coalfield were about 25s. in February and 27s. 6d. in March of this year. Wages and conditions of service in Russia are determined by the State.

Do these figures not disclose the fact that, both as to wages earned and hours worked, the Russian miner is in a desperate condition compared with the workers in this country?

Has the right hon. and gallant Gentleman any reliable information that the legal hours are not being observed in Russia? I was in Russia, and I know.

My information comes from the Central Administration of Statistics of the U.S.S.R., the British Trade Commissioner in Moscow, and the International Labour Office.

By what right does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman make this statement? By my own evidence, the legal hours are being carried out in the mines each day.

I do not see how the hon. Gentleman can possibly know that unless he has been working in the coalfield.

I was underground in the mines.

Can the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say how it is that these very underpaid workmen managed in two days to subscribe a month's wages to the strike fund of the British miners?

asked the Secretary for Mines if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT the names of the mineral royalty owners in West Yorkshire?

I am afraid that this information is not in my possession.

As this information is so easily obtainable, is not the real reason for that answer because the right hon. and gallant Gentleman himself, and many of his hon. and right hon. Friends opposite, are mineral royalty owners in that area?

No, the real reason is that my Department has no official connection with royalties. The only contact which the Government have with them, is in regard to taxing power, and if the hon. Member puts down a question to the Treasury he may get this information. I have not got it.

asked the Secretary for Mines the number of ships which have brought coal to British ports for discharge since the 1st May, 1926; the amount of tons so discharged; the value of such quantities; and the countries of origin?

The approximate quantity of foreign coal discharged in British ports since the 1st May is 87,000 tons from 110 ships. The coal was all from the Continent (France, Belgium, Holland, Germany, and Poland). I have not yet information as to its value.

Is there any truth in the report that Soviet Russia is now exporting coal due to the fact that Russia has secured markets during the dispute?

The question which I was asked was as to coal coming into British ports and up to now I have heard of no Russian coal.

Why is it that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman has information on this particular question, which relates to the Board of Trade, but he could not give us any information in reply to the previous question on royalties?

For the simple reason that this is information which I have got and the other is information which I have not got.

Then, may I ask, can the right hon. Gentleman not get knowledge on the matter dealt with in the previous question, as he has on this particular matter, and thereby escape the charge of ignorance?

( by Private Notice ) asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that certain British steamers are being detained by the competent port authorities and being used as warehouses for comparatively small quantities of coal; whether the Government intend to compensate the owners of steamers so detained; and whether it would not be more economical for such action to be taken as would immediately free such vessels as have only small quantities of coal on board so that they may as far as possible be free to resume their normal employments?

I do not know whether you are aware, Mr. Speaker, that this subject was raised by a private notice question last week, and was debated in the House?

I recollect the Debate, but I thought the hon. and gallant Member had some special point in this question as regards vessels with only small quantities of coal on board.

Certain vessels, owned in the port of Hull, are being detained and they are the cases about which I am asking the right hon. Gentleman. They are quite fresh cases, and that is the reason I have raised this matter.

The question, which is quite general in its terms, is directed to the general practice. It is the same question as was raised in Debate last week. Vessels with full cargoes and a few with part cargoes are being held up at various ports as a mobile reserve for use in the event of a continuance of the dispute in the coal industry, and the possible necessity for the movement of coal to districts where needs become urgent. Under the Emergency Regulations, and following the precedent of other emergencies, His Majesty's Government do not admit any liability in respect of demurrage on such steamers. But I have consulted the Chamber of Shipping in this matter, and it is anticipated that arrangements which have been made will distribute the burden as equitably as possible. No vessel is detained unless, in the opinion of the responsible authorities, the coal is likely to be required for urgent national needs.

What is the object of detaining a vessel —I have given the right hon. Gentleman details—of nearly 4,000 tons, but has only V00 tons of coal on board.

The necessity for detaining all vessels which are detained is in order that mobile resources, of coal may be available. In every case vessels are dealt with on their merits, and as fairly as possible to all concerned. I cannot possibly give a decision in one case which might grant a special privilege to a particular ship and would be relatively disadvantageous to others.

Are we to understand that the answer of the right hon. Gentleman means that the Government are going to admit claims in certain circumstances from shipowners, but will refuse to admit claims from the owners of cargoes?

If the hon. Gentleman reads the answer, he will see that it states exactly what is the practice, and it is the same procedure which has been adopted in every other emergency.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has received any complaints from county authorities where beet-sugar factories have been established that the condition of the roads has been considerably aggravated by the extensive carting of beet sugar; and, if so, whether he will give the counties from which these complaints have emanated?

Representations of this nature have reached me from Norfolk and Suffolk.

asked the Minister of Transport the total number of omnibuses licensed in the Metropolitan Police area at the present time; how many of these are owned by proprietors of a single omnibus; how many are owned by proprietors independent of the London General Omnibus Company, and what is the total number of such proprietors?

I have been asked to answer this question. The number of motor omnibuses licensed in the Metropolitan Police district on 31st May last was 4,910. 109 omnibuses were licensed to proprietors of one motor omnibus only. The total number licensed to proprietors independent of the London General Omnibus Company was 478. There are 184 such proprietors.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the delay in the introduction of the Road Vehicles Bill and the difficulties that are being encountered by manufacturers of motor omnibuses, chars-à-banc, and goods vehicles, he has now considered the desirability of making and issuing orders giving effect, so far as his existing statutory powers allow, to the recommendations made in the year 1922 by the Departmental Committee on the Taxation and Regulation of Road Vehicles in regard to revised weights and speeds of heavy motor cars, and to the recommendations made in May, 1925, by the Departmental Committee on the Licensing and Regulation of Public Service Vehicles in regard to the specification of such vehicles?

I have had in mind the possiblity of giving effect to the suggestion contained in my hon. Friend's question should an opportunity for introducing the proposed legislation be delayed much longer. It would in my opinion be far preferable, however, to deal with the whole question in one amending and codifying Bill, and in any case I am afraid that my powers under the existing law, particularly in respect of public service vehicles, are very restricted, but I will further consider the matter.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman consider the possibility of introducing this Bill so that the House and the country may see his intentions in the matter?

I think I would rather see the Electricity Bill passed into law first.

Is there any possible relationship between the two; and is it not desirable that the Government's intentions in relation to weights and speeds of heavy traffic should be known?

Is not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that there is a growing feeling throughout the country that the Ministry of Transport is about the slowest thing as regards transport in this country?

My hon. Friend is entirely misinformed.

When does the right hon. and gallant Gentleman expect the Electricity Bill to be passed?

asked the Minister of Transport whether any reply has been received to the representations made by the London Traffic Advisory Committee to the English Football League, asking for the reconsideration of the decision that the Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur football teams should play all home matches during the 1926–27 season on the same dates, thereby causing serious transport difficulties in North London, and particularly at Finsbury Park?

As the hon. Member is aware, representations have been made to the Football League upon this subject by the London Traffic Advisory Committee, with his assistance, and I am happy to say that I have to-day heard from the Football League that they have been good enough to rearrange the fixtures so that the Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur teams will only play at home together on three Saturdays during the season instead of 17 as originally proposed. I am much indebted to the League for the ready and important assistance they have given.

asked the Minister of Transport if he can give the House the mileage of new roads which have been constructed in London and the home counties during the past 12 months?

I assume that my hon. Friend's question relates to the new roads constructed by local authorities with assistance from the Road Fund, and opened to traffic within the past 12 months. The length of such roads in London and the home counties is approximately 21 miles.

Is there any up-to-date map available to show where these new roads are?

No, but if my hon. Friend wants one, I will supply him with it.

asked the Minister of Transport if he is able to give the number of licensed chars-a-banc in the United Kingdom, together with their carrying capacity?

I regret that it is not possible from the returns available to extract the information sought by my hon. Friend, and I doubt whether it would be possible to obtain reliable figures from any source, as no separate return of chars-a-banc, as distinct from omnibuses, is made.

asked the Minister of Health whether the Urban District Council of Cowes, Isle of Wight, have yet taken adequate steps to remedy the state of the housing in parts of their area of which formal complaint was made by two justices about 12 months ago, and which has been known to the Government inspector for a still longer period; and, If not, what steps he proposes to take?

This matter has been the subject of correspondence with the District Council, following on the visit made by one of the Ministry's Inspectors to Cowes in February last. My right hon. Friend understands that a committee of the district council have under consideration the making of an improvement scheme with respect to a part of the area of which complaint has been made.

While appreciating the answer as to the activities of the Ministry of Health in regard to this matter, may I ask the hon. Gentleman to see that these rules are carried out as soon as possible, as when there is heavy rain the houses in which these people are living are flooded, so that the people cannot live on the ground floor?

I think I had better wait till the scheme has been sent by the council.

asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the large number of cottages in certain rural areas intended for workers in those areas and now occupied as weekend residences by the inhabitants of neighbouring cities; and whether he proposes to take any steps to remedy this?

My right hon. Friend is aware that in some rural districts a certain amount of conversion of cottages has been reported. He has no power enabling him to intervene in such cases, but where local authorities are building cottages themselves or giving subsidies to contractors, it is open to them to impose conditions limiting the occupation of the houses to agricultural or other workers.

Will the hon. Gentleman draw the attention of the Minister of Health to the fact that this problem is especially serious where the cottages are attractive and picturesque, as in Warwickshire and in the neighbourhood of great cities such as Birmingham?

Does not the hon. Gentleman's answer indicate that it is very much better for cottages to belong to an adjacent landed estate?

asked the Minister of Health the total amount of debt now owing to the Ministry of Health by the West Ham Guardians; and if he proposes to make further advances if approched by the guardians?

The present debt of the guardians is £1,975,000. My right hon. Friend has received an application for a further loan and is in communication with the guardians in regard to it.

Is there to be any limit to the debt that may be incurred by these local bodies?

My hon. Friend must understand that definite conditions are now laid down, which will have to be carefully adhered to before any further money is advanced.

How much per head of the population does this £1,900,000 represent?

I think my hon. and gallant Friend had better give notice of that question.

Will the hon. Gentleman state how far this £1,900,000 went to relieve destitution in West Ham?

I think to a very considerable extent.

asked the Minister of Health if he proposes to introduce a Bill giving necessary powers to the Minister of Health to supersede boards of guardians in certain circumstances such as in the position which the West Ham Guardians have now reached?

While in certain contingencies my right hon. Friend might have to ask Parliament for further powers in this matter, he hopes that those contingencies will not arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether Lord Southborough's Committee has yet reported regarding disinterested management; and whether any action is to be taken this Session in regard to the sale of intoxicating liquor in clubs?

I have been asked to reply. The answers to both parts of the question are in the negative. I may add that the Home Secretary has not, as some hon. Members have been mistakenly informed, referred any general question relating to clubs to the Committee referred to in the question, but has postponed all questions relating to licensing legislation till that Committee has reported.

As this is rather a special Committee, collected in order to deal specially with intoxicating liquors, does the Home Secretary mean to refer the question of drink in clubs to them, or does he mean to appoint another Committee?

The Home Secretary is not coming to any decision in regard to clubs until this Report has been received.

Scared!

Is it not an insult to the clubs of British working men to describe them as "drinking clubs"?

Are not drinking clubs known to the United States?

Would the hon. and gallant Gentleman give me any idea as to when he expects that Report?

Of course, there is a great deal to discuss in regard to this Committee, but it is hoped that the Report will be issued during the autumn.

asked the Postmaster-General if he is in a position to make any statement on the matter of the editorial reviews now being broadcast by the British Broadcasting Company?

I have been in communication with the British Broadcasting Company on this subject, and I understand that care is now being taken to avoid the broadcasting of statements which might be regarded as being of a controversial character.

asked the Postmaster-General if, taking the different counties of England, Wales, and Scotland, he will state the respective numbers of broadcasting installations of any sort, basing his figures upon the licences taken out?

Information is not available as to the number of licensed wireless installations in each county and the cost of compiling such a return would be considerable and would hardly be justified. The total number of wireless licences at present in force in Great Britain and Northern Ireland is about 2,050,000.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he has authorised a display of advertisements of alcoholic beverages in post office and telephonic cabinets; and what is the annual revenue it is anticipated will be raised by means of these advertisements?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; to the second, that no data are available; but the orders obtained in the few working days since the removal of the embargo give ground for expecting the annual revenue to be substantial.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think that it is a good policy for the Government to have these enticing advertisements of alcoholic drinks put up in Post Offices?

May I ask if the Liberal party are opposed to the taxation of alcohol?

There cannot be a debate on this question now.

asked the Postmaster-General whether any, and, if so, how many, postal officials are enrolled in a union which claims the right to direct them to withdraw their service from the State at any time when the officials of the union consider it desirable to issue a mandate to this effect, whether the matter at issue be the direct concern of such postal officials or not, irrespective of their duty to the State?

I am not aware that the constitution of any union of Post Office servants invests its officials with such powers as those referred to in my hon. Friend's question.

Is it not a fact that in the recent general strike intimation was given to the Union of Postal Servants that they must stand by, pending orders from the Trade Union Congress; and are they not under the authority of the Trade Union Congress, and is that compatible with their duty as State servants?

As I have said to my hon. Friend in my reply, I do not find anything in the constitution of any union of Post Office servants which invests its officials with such powers.

asked the Minister of Agriculture the scales of expenses which are allowed to agricultural labourers and other persons who are invited to attend and give evidence in London before Departmental Committees or conferences convened by the Ministry?

As the reply is rather long, and contains a number of figures, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say if there are cases where an agricultural labourer has been called to London as early as nine in the morning, has been retained all day, and has only received his travelling expenses?

I should like notice of that question.

Following is the reply :

The following allowances for expenses are in force for witnesses summoned to attend before Departmental Committees or conferences convened by the Ministry. The scale is similar to that in operation in other Departments.

N.B.—The extra allowances above the 25s. rate in the first two cases are intended only for witnesses in actual private practice in these professions; they do not apply to whole-time salaried officials or to those who have retired from the active practice of their profession.

Day Allowance.

When a witness to a committee is obliged to be absent from home for not less than eight consecutive hours, but does not sleep away from home, a day allowance may be paid to him to cover personal expenses equal to one-third of the appropriate night allowance given above.

Travelling Expenses.

Witnesses will be repaid their actual and necessary expenses of locomotion by public conveyance, or where no public conveyance is available, such sum as may seem reasonable to the Ministry.

Compensation for Loss of Time.

Workmen following their trades who suffer actual loss of wages through attendance as witnesses may, in certain circumstances, receive compensation for loss of time in addition to subsistence allowance.

asked the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household, as representing the Lord President of the Council, whether the Lord President's nominations to the General Medical Council are made for life, or on what basis?

The nominations of His Majesty, on the advice of His Privy Council, to the General Medical Council are made for five years under the Medical Acts.

asked the Vice-Chamberlain of the Household, as representing the Lord President of the Council, whether, seeing that the Lord President controls a large number of nominations to the General Medical Council, he will nominate at once, or at the earliest possible moment, a number of non-professional persons, in view of the fact that the one just appointed can not possibly fill his role adequately if alone amongst 37 other medical members?

The Crown nominees to the General Medical Council are five in number, and nominations can only be made under the Statute when vacancies occur.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Booth v. Amalgamated Marine Workers' Union; and whether, in view of the remarks of the learned Judge, he will give instructions that the papers therein be referred for the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown?

I have been asked to reply. My attention has been called to the judgment in this case, and it is receiving consideration.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman take into consideration that the sum of £38,000 is said to have been expended as administration expenses by this union, and only £3,000 distributed, and that a large number of ballot papers were forged, and is it not time that the working classes should be protected?

The hon. Member seems to be contributing information.

Is not this a case to which the attention of the Public Prosecutor should be called?

As I have already said, the matter is receiving consideration, and until I have duly considered it, I am not in a position to say what action will be taken.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say whether he will make inquiries of the Registrar-General of Friendly Societies as to why he is taking no action?

At the moment I prefer to consider the judgment, before I decide what action, if any, should be taken.

While consideration is going on, is there to be no protection at all for trade unionists in this country against this kind of thing?

May we take it that this is a decision that has been given in favour of the workers, hence the whole Tory party are up in arms against it?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider the advisability of taxing the profits of co-operative societies at the source to place them on a more equitable footing in regard to taxation with other sections of the trading community?

I have received representations on this subject from many quarters, but if my hon. Friend will refer to the Report of the Royal Commission on the Income Tax (Command Paper 615 of 1920), which went very fully into the subject of the Income Tax assessment of co-operative societies, he will see that the conclusion was reached that the tax paid by these societies and their members under the legal provisions which govern their case does not greatly differ from that which would be payable under general Income Tax law. This being so, I came to the conclusion, after considering the whole subject, that the revenue at stake did not justify the expenditure of Parliamentary time, and I may say the amount of political controversy which would inevitably have been involved.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider that the trading organisations in the country feel they are put upon an unfair basis, and that they look to this Government to put fair play above every other consideration?

It is not the time for speeches on the question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why Super-tax payers were not notified of the Treasury's grant of discount on prepaid Super-tax; and whether he will now do so and with draw his decision to rescind this arrangement, which only failed to function owing to ignorance as to its existence?

The practice which had grown up of granting a small discount if applied for was without legal sanction; the arrangement could not, therefore, be generally notified, and on the question being raised in Parliament, I decided that the concession should be withdrawn. Inquiry which I have made indicates that it would not be worth while to introduce legislation sanctioning a general grant of discount on prepayment of Super-tax; the discount in the vast majority of cases would amount only to a very trifling sum.

Would it not be of advantage to the State to have this money in advance?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, where an addition is made to wages either by way of bonus or by way of a fixed share in the profits or otherwise in a profit-sharing or co-partnership scheme, the employer is nevertheless charged with Income Tax on the whole of the profits in the business, irrespective of the payment so made?

No, Sir. Where the employés receive wages and a bonus varying with the profits of the employer, the whole of the payments made to the employés—wages and bonus—is allowable as a deduction in the computation of the employer's profits for Income Tax purposes. Where the employés are shareholders, although the dividends payable to them as shareholders are, like other dividends, not allowable as a deduction from the profits of the business, the appropriate tax may be deducted from the dividends in the ordinary course so that no burden falls upon the employer, while the employé will subsequently receive by repayment or otherwise every relief to which he is entitled by reference to his circumstances and to the total amount of his income. In appropriate cases the authorities are ready to make arrangements for simplifying the collection of tax on co-partnership dividends where deduction involves undue inconvenience to shareholders.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that a large number of persons who would be willing to have Income Tax on their War Loan dividends deducted at the source are prevented from doing so by reason of the fact that, in the year of transfer from one system to the other, the taxpayer is involved in the payment of double Income Tax, owing to the rule that, for Income Tax purposes, Income Tax on interest un-taxed at the source is based on the preceding year, while Income Tax on interest taxed at the source is payable on the actual year of assessment; and whether he will insert a Clause in the Finance Bill to remedy this anomaly?

If a person holding War Loan on which he has been accustomed to receive interest without deduction of Income Tax arranges that the whole of the interest is to be paid under deduction of Income Tax, then for the year of assessment daring which he receives the interest less tax deducted at the source he is not charged with tax in respect of the interest which he received in full during the preceding year. In these circumstances, the difficulty to which my hon. Friend refers would not appear to arise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, owing to the hostility of the banks to collecting interest at the source, the Treasury is losing a considerable sum every year?

No, Sir; I am not aware of that.

Has the right hon. Gentleman not read the Report of the findings of his own Royal Commission?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to the appearance of cinema shows to which admission is free on the understanding that each visitor so admitted pays for liquid refreshment consumed in accordance with a specified value; whether such shows are liable to Entertainments Duty; and what instructions on the subject have been given to the excise officers?

My attention has been drawn to Press reports of the existence of a cinema show of the kind mentioned, and the matter is at present being investigated.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the Inland Revenue authorities have again considered the desirability of applying the Entertainments Duty to cabaret shows on the same lines as to other places of amusement so long as this duty is in existence; and what decision has in this case been reached?

I can only refer my hon. Friend to the answer given him on the 31st March, which represents the present position.

Are not these cabaret shows a serious competition to the music halls, which do-pay the Entertainments Duty, and will he give the matter his urgent consideration?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the entertainment given at the cabaret shows is, in some respects, the same as in the music halls?

I believe that is so.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the worn condition of many Treasury notes now in circulation; and whether renewals are being carried out as in normal times?

The hon. and gallant Member is probably right, though I have seen no other complaints on the subject. During the period of the general strike the practice of the banks was to reissue notes so far as possible instead of sending old notes to London. This would naturally result in rather more worn notes being in circulation than is usual. The effect is, of course, transient, though it may take some little time to wear off.