asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the contemplated flotation of Treasury notes to the value of £7,500,000 by the Nanking Government, on the security of the salt revenue of the provinces of Kiangsu and Chekiang; and whether he can make a statement on the matter?

On the 9th of July His Majesty's Minister reported that the Nanking Administration were proposing to raise a loan of $60,000,000 (£6,000,000) in Shanghai on the security of the salt surplus and that Mr. Hussey-Freke, the Associate Chief Inspector of the Salt Administration, was publishing in the Chinese Press a statement to the effect that such a loan would be a contravention of the Reorganisation Loan Agreement of 1913 and warning the public to have nothing to do with it.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Ministers of France and Japan met to discuss this matter, and whether they made any protest about this proposed loan?

I have once again to plead that my memory does not allow me to retain the immediate possession of all the fats which at one time or another come to my notice. I do not think they have, but I would not like to answer definitely without notice.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any action has been taken or whether any information has been received from the Southern Finance Minister at Nanking?

I must ask for notice as to communications which passed. I cannot remember exactly.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any information from the British representatives at Shanghai to the effect that the Customs at Shanghai, under the instructions from the Nanking Government, have refused permission to ship consignments of specie to other ports; and can he give full particulars?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for West Willesden (Mr. Viant) on the 21st of July.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether his information shows that it is intended to place a virtual embargo on silver there?

The facts were stated by the Under-Secretary in a reply to which I ask the hon. Member to be good enough to refer.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any claims have been lodged by consular and British officials whose property was lost or damaged in the Nanking outrage; if so, what is the amount of such claims; and in what manner is it proposed to deal with them?

The details of the claims have not yet been filed by the British officials whose property was destroyed or damaged in Nanking.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is now in a position to make a statement regarding the Government's attitude towards the proposed increases of the Chinese Customs duties?

In addition to the consultations referred to in the reply given to my hon. Friend on the 13th instant, His Majesty's Minister has been in consultation with the British Chamber of Commerce at Shanghai. No decision can be arrived at until I have received the Chamber's views, which, His Majesty's Minister reports, have now been formulated.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what information he has as to the present military and political situation in China?

In the present chaotic state of affairs in China and the complicated intrigues that are apparently taking place between the leaders of the various factions, it is impossible to give a clear summary of the situation. I therefore confine my reply as far as possible to matters of fact. There has been no fighting of any importance since 6th July, when the last summary of the situation was given. On the northern front, it is reported that an armistice has been arranged between Chang Tsung-chang and Chiang Kai-shek: the latter's troops have entirely retired from Shantung and have in large numbers withdrawn to Chinkiang, whence they have proceeded up river.

On the western sector of the front the Fengtien troops have withdrawn to Paotingfu, and the Shansi troops of Yen Hsi-shan have entered Chihli, and are occupying the railway in the south of the province, thus inserting themselves between the Fengtien forces and those of Feng Yu-hsiang, who has advanced his troops across the Yellow River and appears to have occupied the whole of the north of Honan up to the Chihli border. On 18th June martial law was declared in Hankow; various strategical points were occupied by the 35th Army under General Ho Chien; Communists and labour agitators were arrested; the extremist members of the Wuhan administration resigned; and the various Russian "advisers" left for Kiu-kiang. The Government was completely reorganised on non-Communist lines. Borodin and other Russians have since returned to Hankow. Strong forces under Chang Fa-Kwei have proceeded down river to Kiukiang, and have thence gone southward to Nanchang. There are rumours of rapprochements between Nanking and the Wuhan administration, between the latter and Feng Yu-hsing, between Chang Tso-lin and Chiang Kai-shek, and various other combinations.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his Department is in touch with any foreign Government at the moment with regard to the elimination of the visa; and, if so, with which Government or Governments?

The only Government with which His Majesty's Government are at present in negotiation is the German Government.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether in the next few months he expects finality to that discussion?

I do not expect finality to any question.

Is it too much to ask for finality in this matter, seeing that the other people concerned have agreed to carry out this arrangement?

Is it not a fact that the German Government and the American Government have come to terms over this visa question?

I have asked for notice as to what exact information is in my possession as to the doings of our own Government. I am even more entitled to ask for notice of questions as to what has passed between other Governments.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the action of the Finnish Government in still refusing to hand over the title deeds of certain forest property in which British capital is invested; and what action he proposes to take in this matter?

My attention has been drawn to a statement to this effect, and I have requested His Majesty's Minister at Helsingfors to ascertain the position and, if necessary, to make suitable representations to the Finnish Government.

Is it not a fact that this delay is most detrimental to the British interests concerned, and have not the Finnish Government gone back on the decision of their own Supreme Court?

I have told my hon. Friend that a statement to that effect has been made to me, and I have told him also the instructions that have been issued to His Majesty's Minister.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that one of the welfare committee's requests approved by the Admiralty allowed leave from a ship's home port, but that notwithstanding ships of the home service belonging to the Portsmouth division and with 65 per cent. of the ratings with homes in that district, grant leave from Portland; and if he will inquire into the matter so that this Admiralty privilege, which is greatly valued, may be carried out wherever possible?

Leave to men serving in ships in home wavers is given whenever possible at the home ports to which the men belong. There are at Portland certain vessels which are permanently based on that port. As far as possible leave is given while these vessels are being refitted at their own home ports, but my hon. and gallant Friend will realise that it is not possible for all the leave to be given on these occasions and the balance has necessarily to be given from Portland.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the many instances of low wages which are now prevalent in the catering trade; and if he is prepared to conduct an inquiry into this trade with a view to inclusion under the Trade Boards Act?

Since the publication last year of the Report upon conditions in the Light Refreshment and Dining Room (non-licensed) branch of the Catering Trade, no fresh facts have been brought to notice which would justify the institution of a new inquiry.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it was stated recently by the Chairman of the Licensed Victuallers' Defence Association, that 65 hours a week, exclusive of meal times, was considered quite proper in that trade? That has been stated in the last few months.

Would not the points referred to by the right hon. Gentleman be sufficient to justify him in proceeding forthwith to establish a trade board for this body of workpeople?

Is it not the case that unless the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to carry out an inquiry of this kind, there is no possible chance of these people getting any advance in pay or reduction of hours; that the only alternative is to go out on strike, and that they can then be "pinched" under the Government's Bill, next week?

In view of the unduly low wages paid to these workers, will the right hon. Gentleman not reconsider the whole position in regard to the catering trade?

Is it not a fact that the people in this trade make their money out of the public and not out of their wages?

In view of the changed circumstances will the right hon. Gentleman not reconsider his decision of twelve months ago?

This matter can be raised in the Debate to-day.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of industries for which Trade Boards have been set up; and the number of men and women employés, respectively, in those industries?

Trade Boards have been set up in Great Britain and are in operation in 39 trades. No exact information is available as to the number of workpeople employed in these trades, but it is estimated that some 350,000 males and 922,600 females are so employed.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many Trade Boards have been set up since the present Government came into office?

Not without notice.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of prosecutions in Glasgow and Scotland, respectively, which have taken place of employers who have failed to observe the Regulations with regard to Trade Boards?

Since 1920, six prosecutions under the Trade Boards Acts have been taken in Glasgow, and nine in other parts of Scotland.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that G. J. Lippitt, checkweigher, Oak Leigh, Aberbeeg, Mon., William John Waters, check-weigher, Commercial Road, Llanhilleth, Mon., and James Thomas, checkweigher, Havodrymis, Mon., were dismissed on the 30th April, 1926; that these men have never been re-employed since that date; that they have been refused unemployment insurance benefit from May to December, 1926; that these men were not in any way affected by the industrial dispute last year; and will he see that these cases are investigated and benefit paid to these insured persons?

I am having inquiries made and will let the hon. Member know the result as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Labour if he can state when it is proposed to proceed with the building of the new Employment Exchange for Central Glasgow?

No, Sir. It has not yet been possible to find a suitable site for this building, but every effort is being made to find one.

Why did the Department dispose of the old site which was suitable for this purpose and why should they now be in the position of having to look for a site for a new Exchange?

If the hon. Member puts clown other questions on the subject, I will communicate with him in regard to the old site. As regards the new site, we have one in mind and are having inquiries made about it.

asked the Minister of Labour what progress is being made in the erection of the new Employment Exchange at Rochdale; and if any date has been given for the completion of the new buildings?

Building operations have started and are expected to be completed in about 12 months.

Why has it taken such a long time to complete this exchange?

I could not say without inquiry.

asked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons registered as unemployed throughout the country who are normally engaged as shipbuilding workers and the total number for the same period last year?

At 20th June, 1927, the number of persons in Great Britain classified as belonging to the shipbuilding and ship-repairing industry and recorded as unemployed was 47,499, or 22.7 per cent. of the estimated number of insured persons in that industry, as compared with 88,152, of 39.5 per cent. at 21st June, 1926.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the workers engaged in two jute mills in Dundee ceased work on 22nd July, to resume on 2nd August; that these workers having drawn insurance benefit within the previous six weeks the Continuity Rule, U.I.L. 10, applied; and why these workers were asked to attend at the local Employment Exchange on Tuesday, 26th July, to sign the register, seeing that they were not entitled to any benefit during the period 23rd July to 30th July, these being the recognised customary holidays?

I will make inquiry and let the hon. Member know the result.

What conceivable reason can there be far a wanton and unnecessary instruction such as this?

I can only tell the hon. Member that, judging from the circumstances which he gives me, and which I must verify before giving a definite reply, it looks as if an instruction of this kind had been given in order to safeguard possible applicants themselves. By the continuity rule it is quite possible that they might be entitled to benefit for a single day after the holidays were over, or for two days after the holidays were over, If you have a period of less than three days unemployment after holidays, proof of being out of work during those holidays would have to be given; consequently, an instruction of that kind might be in the interests of the applicants themselves.

What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by "proof of being out of work" during a period of recognised and customary holidays?

Answer!

In view of the urgency and public importance of this matter, I must press the right hon. Gentleman for an answer to my supplementary question.

The answer is quite plain. Under the Act, proof has to be given of part-time employment, and the fact that in certain trades holidays may or may not be customary, does not provide positive proof. I have said to the hon. Member that with regard to the particular case raised by him, it is clear I must inquire into the circumstances and verify the accuracy of the statements made before giving a definite answer. He asked me for a provisional answer, and I have given him what, on the face of it, seems to be the possible reason for such an instruction, if it was given.

May I ask the Leader of the House if it is the intention of the Government that the Unemployment Insurance Bill, which is now going to be introduced, will be printed at an early date?

Is this the Bill that has reference to the conclusions of the Blanesburgh Report?

I am informed that it will be printed and circulated in ample time to enable Members to take part in a Debate on the subject as soon as possible after we resume in November.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that large numbers of workmen are involved in this and that their conferences are held, at which decisions must be made, between now and the time we are meeting, and is it not possible that we may have it even earlier than the time promised by the right hon. Gentleman?

It must be left to the Government's judgment when it is possible for them to mature their proposals and to lay them before Parliament, but ample time will be given before the meeting of Parliament in the Autumn Session for Members to study and familiarise themselves with the details.

May we take it from that reply that the Bill is not yet drafted and that important decisions have yet to be taken by the Cabinet?

It is very unusual to ask questions or give information about the exact state of legislation which has not yet been presented. Every Government is entitled to prepare its legislation and to present it at the proper moment to the House, and that is exactly what we are going to do.

Since the Measure is actually being presented to-day, within two or three days of the conclusion of the Session, is it not usual for the text of a Bill to be in the hands of Members of the House?

We are presenting the Bill to-day for the express purpose of enabling it to be printed and circulated in the Recess, so that Members can have reasonable time to study it and its discussion can be begun as soon as we meet in the Autumn. We really cannot adopt a more correct procedure than that.

Are we to understand that this is only a dummy Bill?

The question of my hon. Friend the Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) was whether the Bill will be published before the great meetings of the trade unions. This thing affects them very nearly. After all, the Government hope, I suppose, to get the Measure well received by the trade unions, and it would be advisable to present it in time for proper discussion to take place.

I think the House of Commons claims priority even over these important meetings.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he has satisfied himself, on investigation, as to whether the law on the basis of which other Governments have ratified the Hours Convention is or is not adequate; and, if the law is considered inadequate, whether he has made any representation to such Governments to the effect that, on the strength of such a law, His Majesty's Government would not feel entitled to ratify the Hours Convention?

As I have from time to time explained to the House, one of the most serious obstacles in the way of ratification of the Washington Convention lies in the different interpretations which are placed upon a number of its provisions. The London Conference last year cleared up some of these differences, but in ray view further examination of the situation is necessary before a position satisfactory to this country can be reached. I would remind the hon. Member that the responsibility for seeing that the law in any given country is in accordance with a Convention that has been ratified rests with the Government of that country.

Can the right hon. Gentleman name the countries where he considers the Convention is not being carried out?

No, I certainly could not, in answer to a question.

Is it not the case that legislation passed by the Government has made it more difficult to adopt this Convention?

Has the right hon. Gentleman any complaint to make, particularly with regard to Belgium?

If there were any complaint, from whatever quarter, raised in regard to Belgium, it would have to be raised under Part XIII of the Peace Treaty and laid in accordance with the provisions of that Part of the Treaty. It is precisely that kind of difficulty which makes me anxious that we should know our own position quite clearly and get other nations to come to agreement, before any Convention is entered into by us.

Is it a fact, that in case a nation ratifies a Convention and has reason to believe that another nation which has also ratified that Convention is not carrying it out, the nation which has the allegation to make can lay it directly before the League of Nations and have it investigated?

The procedure, with which doubtless the right hon. Gentleman is familiar, is in accordance with Part XIII of the Peace Treaty. I am speaking off-hand, but, if I remember aright, while it provides in the first instance for a Commission of Inquiry appointed by the League of Nations, in the end the matter would have to be settled by the Permanent Court. I speak subject to correction.

Is it a fact that, during a meeting between the Labour Ministers of several countries, the French Minister expressly stated that, in case a complaint were made against the administration in France of a Convention ratified by France, they understood that a case would he taken to the League of Nations for investigation?

I should certainly wish, before giving an answer to a point of that kind, to verify my references.

Is not the real reason why the Government are prevented from putting this Convention into operation, the opposition of the "bosses" in this country?

asked the Secretary of State for Air how many high-speed machines of the Supermarine-Napier and Gloster-Napier types are being built; how many, including reserves, are to be sent to Venice for the Schneider Cup race; and whether a warship or aircraft carrier is to accompany the British Schneider Cup team?

The answer to the first part of the question is that three of each of the types of aircraft mentioned are built or are being built for experimental work; to the second part, that three Supermarine and two Gloster machines together with a Short seaplane fitted with a Bristol engine will be sent to Venice to be tested out in the Schneider Cup race. As regards the last part, an aircraft carrier and four destroyers will visit Venice at the time of the race, and it has been arranged with the Admiralty that they shall give such assistance as may be possible to the British team.

Can the hon. Baronet say how long before the race the team will be allowed to go to Venice, so that they can practise over the course?

I think about a week.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware that an ex-service man employed as a technical officer in the Works and Buildings Department, and selected for establishment by the selection board, has been refused a certificate on the ground that his disability contracted during war service prevents him from serving over seas; and whether, as this is an officer admittedly competent to carry out his duties satisfactorily at home, he will grant the certificate?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave him on the 18th May, and would add that since that date I have decided that, where the disability can be regarded as attributable to war service, fitness for service in Iraq will not be insisted upon as a condition of establishment. It is under consideration whether the case which I imagine the hon. Member has in mind comes within this concession.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India how often the Governor-General and the lieutenant-governors of provinces have had recourse to the power of certification daring the last three years?

If by the "power of certification" the hon. Member intends to refer to the exercise of the special power to enact legislation, the answer is that in the last 36 months the Governor-General has had recourse to this power once, and the Governor of Bengal once. (There are no lieutenant-governors in India.) If he intends to include rejected or reduced Budget votes which the Governor-General and Governors have "restored" then I must obtain a detailed statement from India.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India what offices and establishments of the Government of India will be removed from Simla and permanently located in Delhi; and when?

If the hon. Member will repeat his question after the Recess, I hope to be able to give him, a reply.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India how many persons sentenced to imprisonment in the Punjab during the past 12 years charged with offences connected with the. Conspiracy Acts or for offences dealt with under martial law, are still in prison, and for what further terms such persons will be detained; how many of these prisoners, if any, died while in prison; the ages of the prisoners at present serving terms of imprisonment; and is it the intention of the Government to review the cases of these prisoners for the purpose of granting an amnesty?

My right hon. Friend has not available the information asked for, but is taking steps to obtain it, and will communicate with the hon. Member in due course.

asked the Minister of Health whether, in view of the recent collapse of a house in Beak Street, Regent Street, his attention has been drawn to the state of the law in regard to dangerous structures, inasmuch as a district surveyor, who has notified a house to be dangerous, is not empowered to take steps to ensure the safety of the occupants; and whether he will adopt measures to amend the law?

I have no general jurisdiction as regards the law of building in London, which for the most part is contained in private Acts promoted by the London County Council. I will send the council a copy of the hon. Member's question, but I may mention that Section 114 of the London Building Act, 1894, already empowers a Petty Sessional Court upon the application of the council to direct that the inmates of a dangerous structure shall be removed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that 5,091 defective structures were notified by the London County Council during 1926, and that in only 11 cases were the tenants removed, and will the right hon. Gentleman also thaw the attention of the London County Council to that very serious fact?

I will include that observation.

Is not one of the difficulties that the London County Council have to face the shortage of housing accommodation in London, and that there is nowhere to transfer people?

Are there not large numbers of empty houses in Kensington, Chelsea and such places?

Is it not better——

This is becoming a debate.

asked the Minister of Health what is the latest available figure for houses built in the county of Berkshire, excluding the borough of Reading, for the last 12 months, indicating the number built with Government aid and the number without any public assistance; what were the respective figures for a

asked the Minister of Health whether he has received any reply from the London County Council and the Tottenham Urban District Council as to their willingness to submit to the arbitration of his Department the question of the terms upon which tenants of the post-War houses on the White Hart Lane estate could have their rates and rents collected weekly; and, as this question has been under negotiation for seven years, will he, in the interests of a large number of tenants who are being continually summoned for non-payment of rates, press these authorities to accept arbitration without further delay?

I have received a reply from the London County Council, and will send the hon. Member a copy of the letter. No reply other than of an interim character has yet been received from the Tottenham Urban District Council, When I hear from them, I will consider what further steps, if any, can be taken in the matter.

As the answer involves a tabular statement, I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permision, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will empower local authorities to expend money raised for the maintenance or the improvement of roads within their areas for the purpose of making sidewalks, thus enabling the existing width of road to be used for vehicular traffic only?

I have been asked to reply. The powers already at the disposal of highway authorities enable them to effect improvements of this character. Many authorities are availing themselves of these powers to carry out such works, which in suitable cases are eligible for grants from the Road Fund.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is a suitable case, because there are several cases where it has been refused?

Where there is urgent public need.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on many roads there is no footpath at all, and people have to take to the main roads, to their own danger?

I am fully aware of that, but the hon. Member will appreciate that the first move in this matter must come from the local authorities, and also that there are many calls on the Road Fund, so that it is a matter of balancing advantages as between this improvement and that improvement.

Who is the best judge of urgent public need, Whitehall or the local authorities?

The local authorities certainly, and it is for them to make the move.

If a request comes from a local authority, will the Minister always agree?

I must exercise discretion and see how much money I have got.

Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman transferred money to the Treasury that ought to have gone to the improving of these roads?

asked the Minister of Transport whether he has now received the Report from the London Traffic Advisory Committee for dealing with the problem of travelling facilities in North and East London; and what action he proposes to take?

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Hornsey (Captain Wallace) in answer to a similar question on Thursday, 21st instant, a copy of which I am sending my hon. Friend.

Will the Report be available for Members of Parliament?

I have not, yet received the Report, but I hope that I shall very shortly. As to its publication, that will have to be considered when I have received it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise the enormous number of people who are interested in this Report, after the three important inquiries that have been made in regard to this situation?

Yes, I am aware of that.

In view of the fact that this Report represents two years' work on the part of this Committee, does the right hon. Gentleman not think it is of sufficient importance to have it published, irrespective of his own opinions as to the value of the Report?

I shall have to consider that.

asked the Minister of Transport whether he will take steps to empower local authorities to prohibit motor vehicles from using tracks and bridle paths across down country, seeing that if motor vehicles continue to use such tracks without restriction it may devolve upon the local authorities to maintain such tracks as roads?

I am advised that any person who, without the consent of the owner of the soil, drives a vehicle on a foot or bridle path or on any land which is not, a public carriage-way, commits an act of trespass. It would be a matter of considerable legal difficulty to give local authorities any control over such use of private land.

In the case of a right-of-way which has been established by long custom on land which is not claimed by private owners, what is the position?

If land is not claimed by private owners, then surely it must be under the jurisdiction of a public authority, and, if so, it will probably be a charge on the public.

Under those circumstances, if motor vehicles use them, have the public authority power to close such roads if they are not metalled roads?

I should require notice of that question.

Are not recognised bridle tracks which have been open for horses for centuries open for motor vehicles?

If they are only open to horses, they will not be open to motor vehicles.

Is it not a fact that the owners of these lands are good enough to allow the public to use them, and why should anybody else interfere? Should we not rather encourage owners to do this?

Is it not within the power of a local authority to prohibit the use of these tracks by motor vehicles without any fresh legislation?

That is a question of law.

asked the Minister of Transport if his attention has been drawn to a resolution passed by the London County Council, on 29th March, 1927, to the effect that His Majesty's Government be informed that the council is prepared to enter forthwith into negotiations with the Minister of Transport in regard to the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Cross-River Traffic in London concerning the proposed Victoria Dock Road, and to a letter written by the clerk of the council to the Prime Minister of the same date with respect, inter alia, to this matter; will he state what steps have been taken to commence such negotiations; and, if no steps have been taken, what are the obstacles in the way of action being taken?

I am aware of the terms of the resolution and of the letter to which my hon. Friend refers, and it caused me considerable satisfaction to receive the assurance that the London County Council were prepared to negotiate with me upon the subject of the proposed Victoria Dock Road. Having received this assurance, I have now been able for some time past to discuss procedure and ways and means with some of the other authorities who are interested, and affected by, the scheme. As my hon. Friend knows, the proposals involve the re-housing of a considerable number of people, and it is essential that the terms and conditions of re-housing should first be settled with the statutory authority in whose area the people live who are to be dispossessed of their homes. Negotiations upon this subject are now taking place, and I hope very soon to be in a position to open formal negotiations with the London County Council.

Do I understand that the right hon. Gentleman is now in communication with the Borough Council of West Ham in regard to the housing accommodation?

We are having conversations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman yet in a position to say whether legislation that will be necessary will be Government legislation or whether it will be private legislation; and, if private, by what body it will be promoted?

I think that must largely depend upon what bodies come into the scheme.

asked the hon. Member for Monmouth-shire, as representing the Forestry Commissioners, the policy of the Commissioners with regard to the management of the New Forest?

The policy of the Forestry Commissioners is governed by the New Forest Act, 1877, and in particular by Section 6 of that Act, which provides that in cutting timber care shall be taken to maintain the picturesque character of the ground, and to keep the woods replenished by protecting self-sown plants or by planting, having regard to the ornamental as well as the profitable use of the ground. The working plan of the forest prepared by the Commissioners of Woods and Forests and followed by the Forestry Commissioners provides for:

(1) the growing of good oak timber wherever soil and silvicultural conditions are adapted to the purpose, and the production of coniferous timber over the remainder of the area;

(2) the preservation of the amenities of the forest; and

(3) subject to the above, the attainment of the best sustained financial results from the forest.

The Forestry Commissioners have appointed a Committee representative of local and public interests to advise them as to the selection and special treatment of areas within the inclosures of the New Forest which are of outstanding picturesque interest.

May I ask my hon. Friend what are the objects of these enclosures, and what proportion they bear to the whole forest?

The earlier enclosures of the 17th century were set apart for the growing of oak for the Royal Navy and other national purposes. The later enclosures, those under the Deer Removal Act of 1851, were granted to the Crown in exchange for the rights of keeping deer in the forest. The area enclosable amounts to 17,600 acres, of which no more than 16,000 acres may be enclosed at any one time (present enclosures about 15,000 acres). The remainder of the forest, amounting to about 46,000 acres, of which 5,000 acres are older timber comprising the ancient and ornamental trees for which the forest is famous, is open and unenclosed and subject to rights of common; no felling or forestry operations can be carried on within the area except supply of dead or dying timber for firewood.

asked the Postmaster-General how many meetings of the advisory committee of the Post Office have been held during his tenure of office; upon what date the last meeting took place; and whether the opinion of this advisory committee has been sought on the question of advertising the telephone service?

The answer to the first part of the question is six; to the second, 25th May, 1927. The development of the telephone service has constantly engaged the attention of the Advisory Council; while the relative merits of different means of advertisement have not been specifically referred to the Council I have no reason to suppose that they would dissent from the policy at present pursued.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in the case of a business committee like this, many of whom are experts, it would be possible for them to meet more than six times and, further, does he think that the miserable sum of £86 per annum, as announced yesterday, is enough for the advertising of the Government's greatest business?

That question must be discussed another time.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that mails are sent to Stornoway from the mainland every week night, he will take steps during the recess to see that such mails are delivered to the addresses on the island not later than the following day, Sundays excepted?

I am afraid there is very little to add to the reply I gave to the hon. Member's question of the 24th of May. The postal services in the Island of Lewis are now on the same footing as in pre-War days, i.e., there is a daily delivery on all main routes. I really could not justify further expenditure.

asked the Postmaster-General, in view of the large number of appointments allotted to ex-service men employed in a temporary capacity, if he is prepared to offer appointments in the clerical class to all established ex-service men who have secured the Civil Service Commissioners' educational qualifications at the December, 1926, examination?

The Southborough Committee which reported upon the appointment of ex-service men to posts in the Civil Service considered the bearing which their recommendations in favour of ex-service temporary clerks might have upon the claims of the manipulative grades employed in the Post Office, and recommended that the claims of the latter should be sympathetically considered by a Committee of the Post Office Whitley Council which was then sitting

"in order that there might be no suggestion that they have been unfairly treated in the light of the special arrangements made for"

the temporary clerks. The resulting recommendations of this Committee of the Whitley Council are being carried out, and I am not prepared to reopen the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give up to the latest available date the number of applications for safeguarding, the number granted, the number rejected, and the number pending, respectively?

Up to the present, 44 applications under the Safeguarding of Industries procedure have been received by the Board of Trade. Fifteen of these have been referred to Committees for enquiry, and seven duties have been imposed. Of the remaining 29 applications, three have been withdrawn or are in abeyance, 22 have been rejected without reference to a Committee, and four are pending.

May I ask whether the hon. Member thinks that result satisfactory?

Most unsatisfactory.

Yes, I think on the whole it is satisfactory.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many foreign firms have started, or have made arrangements to start, new factories in this country for the manufacture of motor tyres since the imposition of a duty on foreign motor tyres?

References have recently appeared in the Press to proposals by two foreign companies, or branches of foreign companies, to start new factories in this country for the manufacture of motor tyres. Another foreign company made similar arrangements last year.

Can the hon. Member say what are the names of those three companies?

No, I could not.

Did I understand the hon. Gentleman to state that one company has decided since the imposition of the duty on the opening of a factory here?

I do not say that the company which has opened a factory here made a decision to open here since the imposition of the duty.

May I ask whether this was not a case of intelligent anticipation?

Is it not the case that Messrs. Goodyear said they were astonished that we had not done it long ago and that they would have opened long ago?

Is it not a fact that Messrs. Goodyear have got a factory here?

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether the oil purchased by the Shell Transport and Trading Company, Limited, from, the Soviet Government at the request of His Majesty's Government was sold by the company to His Majesty's Government; and, if so, what amount was paid for this oil by His Majesty's Government to the Shell Transport and Trading Company, or, alternatively, whether His Majesty's Government paid the company a buying commission?

I understand that at the time of the Trade Agreement with the Soviet Government in 1921 a verbal request to the effect mentioned in the question was made to the Shell Company. Any purchases made in pursuance of this request were not made on behalf of the Government, and none of the oil was sold by the company to His Majesty's Government. The remaining parts of the question, therefore, do not arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether an amending Bill for Health Insurance is in preparation; if so, whether fishermen are to be included in it; and if it will apply to Scotland?

I have been asked to reply. As soon as the consideration of the recommendations of the recent Royal Commission on National Health Insurance has been completed, it is hoped to introduce the necessary legislation, and the question of the compulsory insurance of share fishermen both in England and Scotland, in so far as they are not already included in the scheme, would be dealt with in such legislation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Parliamentary Secretary made a definite statement at a meeting in Norfolk on Saturday that shore fishermen—I do not know what he meant by that—would be included in such a scheme? Can he say why that statement was made in such definite terms?

I think what my hon. Friend said was "share fishermen" and not "shore fishermen." The statement that he made was corroborated by myself.

In the "Times" newspaper the word was "shore."

Will it be the case that if share fishermen are included, they will have to pay both the employers' and employés' contributions, and will he make sure that these fishermen want the insurance before he introduces it?

That will be considered when the legislation is introduced.

Will this scheme include crofter fishermen in the Highlands?

I do not know what a crofter fisherman is.

May I ask for a definite answer to my question? Has there been a decision taken? If not, why was such a decision announced in terms at a public meeting in the constituencies on Saturday?

The hon. Member seems very hard to satisfy. I have already told him that if and when legislation is introduced these share fishermen will be included.

I may be hard to satisfy, but so are the fishermen, who do not know where they are.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that dissatisfaction is felt amongst Irish loyalists at the inadequateness of the awards made by the Irish Grants Committee in the few cases in which the amounts of such awards have been disclosed; and whether, in view of the anxiety which exists amongst the large body of claimants to whom the amounts recommended have not been disclosed, he will state the reason for refusing to disclose the recommendations of the Irish Grants Committee to the persons interested?

I have been asked to reply. I would invite reference to the reply given by the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs to the hon. Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto) on 17th May.

Can me right hon. Friend say what are the objections, when a case has been heard, to telling the claimants what amount has been awarded?

I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the answer which was given by the Prime Minister on 17th May, and I believe he will find that it deals as fully as it is possible for us to deal with the subject of his question. If, however, there should be any point with which that answer does not deal, and he will communicate with me, I will see what can be done to meet his wishes.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that on 8th July 14 horses were booked to be shipped from the island of Tiree to Oban per steamship "Cygnet" on 12th instant, which ship has often taken a larger number of horses; that the proprietors of the steamship "Cygnet" then wired that by Board of Trade Regulation they were only allowed to take four horses; and that only four horses were shipped; and if he will consider whether this Regulation, which results in loss to the islanders, can be rescinded?

I have no knowledge of the incident referred to, but I am making inquiries and will let my hon. and learned Friend know the result.

Will the hon. Member take care that no regulation of the Board of Trade is broken by this company or any other company being allowed to carry more than the prescribed number of horses?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is ample accommodation on this boat for horses, but very little for passengers?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will bear in mind, in his negotiations for the new fast Stornoway mail steamer, the need for proper accommodation for the large numbers of fisher girls who travel to and from the mainland, and the pressing need for the early morning train connection to the south that existed before the War?

As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the question of accommodation for large numbers of fishing girls is one which only arises four times in the year, and special arrangements have to be made on those occasions to facilitate the transport of this abnormally heavy traffic. The desirability of expediting the passage of these girls has, however, been kept in view in considering future requirements. As to the early morning train connection I would refer the hon. Member to my answers to his questions of 7th and 12th April and 10th May last.

But since I received that answer, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it has been agreed to put a faster and more commodious steamer on the Stornoway service, and is he unable or unwilling to insist that the mail contractors shall expedite the sailing of that steamer in order to catch the early morning connection to the South, the loss of which means the loss of a whole day to the business people of Stornoway?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the recent prosecution under the Shops Act, 1912, of Robert Lindsay and five other jewellers in Oban; is he aware that these jewellers constitute a clear majority of that particular class, and that they have thrice petitioned the local authority, in 1924, 1925, and 1926, craving exemption from closing their place of business on any weekly half-holiday in terms of Subsection (4) of Section 4 of the Shops Act, 1912, but the local authority have declined to give effect to their petitions; and will he inquire into this case?

I have communicated with the local authority in regard to the matter referred to in the question which had not previously been brought to my notice. I understand that petitions were presented in 1924 and 1925 and that a third petition was presented on the 8th instant and is presently under consideration. My information does not show whether the petitioners are a majority of the jewellers in Oban. The action to be taken on the petition falls to be decided by the local authority on whom is laid the duty of administering the Shops Act.

What steps does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take supposing a local authority fails in its duty?

That is a hypothetical question.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the infantile mortality rate for the Mile End,. Whitevale, and Dennistoun wards in the Camlachie Parliamentary Division for the quarters ended in March and June for the years 1926 and 1927?

As the statement desired includes a number of detailed figures I propose, with the hon. Member's