asked the Secretary of State for the Homo Department whether he will state the names of the seven registration authorities under the Theatrical Employers' Registration Act, 1925, who have written to the Home Office in support of the resolutions passed by the London County Council in February, 1927?

The seven registration authorities are the County Councils of Middlesex, Surrey and the West Riding of Yorkshire, and the City Councils of Glasgow, Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle-on-Tyne.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether anything is being done to carry out the recommendations or resolutions passed by those councils?

I have given a full answer to the question of the hon. Member, and I am not prepared to answer further questions without notice.

asked the Home Secretary the number of charges for indecency brought by the police under the Hyde Park Regulations for the month of May, 1928; and how many of these charges were supported by other than police evidence?

The answer to the first part of the question is none. The second part, therefore, does not arise.

With reference to the very large number in the previous month, I would like to ask if special instructions were given to the police to try to obtain corroborative evidence?

The question put to me relates to the number of charges for indecency, and the answer is that there were none in the month of May of this year.

The point I want to make is that in the previous month there were 64 cases, of which only one was supported by corroborative evidence. May I ask whether the reason for this great reduction is that special instructions have been given to the police to try to obtain corroborative evidence?

No, Sir; the hon. Member must form his own conclusion as to the reasons for the falling off.

Does that mean, as I hope was the case, that there has been an improvement in public manners in Hyde Park, or that the police have been hampered by recent events in carrying out their duties?

I think the hon. and gallant Member will see that these questions are putting me in a very difficult position. The fact is clear that there was an average number of from 30 to 40 cases per month in the previous months, and since certain events there have been none, and that is what always follows in regard to similar events. I hope that before very long the police will resume their normal activities. I must confess that I cannot say that there is any change in the position of affairs.

Is, the Home Secretary aware that a great majority of the Members of this House and the public outside are ready to support him in properly administering the law?

As the hon. and gallant Member knows, the position is an exceedingly difficult one. I am exceedingly anxious not to take any false step in the matter, and I would ask him to leave it to me.

asked the Home Secretary the number of monthly arrests for misconduct in Hyde Park during the first five months of 1927 and 1928, respectively; and the number of similar arrests for the first three weeks of June in both years?

As the details are rather long, I will circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Home Secretary whether the passport of Mr. Harry Thaw, an American citizen, was endorsed by the British authorities in America before he sailed?

The papers produced by Mr. Thaw on his arrival in the United Kingdom carried, I believe, a British visa granted in America before he sailed. But every alien seeking to land in the United Kingdom must obtain leave to land, and this was refused to Mr. Thaw.

Is there any liaison between the authorities in the United States and the authorities here?

I have caused an inquiry to be made into the circumstances under which the visa was granted.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why Mr. Thaw was prevented from entering this country, while at the same time Mr. "A" was allowed to enter?

I have no jurisdiction in regard to anyone who is not an alien. Mr. Thaw was an alien, and I thought it was undesirable that he should have permission to come into this country.

asked the Home Secretary whether, especially in view of recent cases, he proposes to introduce legislation to deal with bogus night clubs in the Metropolitan area?

The answer is in the negative.

Is the Home Secretary satisfied with his present powers?

The hon. and gallant Member has referred to recent cases. My present powers have nothing to do with them.

Was it not General Sir Nevil Macready, the Chief Commissioner of Police, who said that women police trained and qualified under proper superintendence would be a great help in dealing with night clubs, and will the Home Secretary hear that in mind when he is considering the question of increasing the Metropolitan Police Force?

Certainly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a strong feeling against women police, and will be remember that fact?

All relevant considerations will be taken into account.

asked the Home Secretary what, if any, accommodation is provided for women prisoners appearing before the Gloucester assizes; whether it is customary to bring prisoners each day from Birmingham Prison to Gloucester, entailing thereby journeys of more than 200 miles each day; and whether he will arrange for the provision of more satisfactory accommodation?

There is no women's wing at Gloucester Prison and the usual practice is to bring women prisoners from Birmingham. In a case now pending where it is anticipated that the trial may last more than one day, special arrangements have been made to lodge the woman in a detached part of Gloucester Prison, under the care of female officers.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Mrs. Phyllis Grace Canals, a British-born woman, deported in 1926; whether he is aware that this woman had married an undesirable alien; that she is now left stranded in the British hospital in Paris after being stabbed by her husband; that her father and sister in this country have offered themselves as guarantors on her behalf if she is permitted to return to this country; and whether he will have the circumstances of this case re-examined with a view to cancellation of the deportation order?

This case is well known to me. She has twice married an alien and both husbands were undesirable. The second husband was deported by me in 1926, and I made a similar Order in regard to the wife. She had been convicted many times for solicitation and similar offences. On representations made to me, I gave her another chance, but warned her of the consequences if she were again convicted. She was again convicted three times within four months; accordingly she was deported. The father had offered to look after her before her deportation, but she did not live respectably. She has lived as a prostitute in Paris for some months. The case appears to be hopeless, but, if the hon. Member can help me in any way to get her into better surroundings, he will not find me hard in the matter.

Is it the case that both the British and the Spanish consuls in Paris have recommended that this woman should be given another chance, in the circumstances in which she finds herself?

They rather want to get her away from Paris, but, until I can be satisfied that she is not coming back on to the streets of London as a prostitute, and that she will be well cared for, I do not propose to let her come back into this country.

asked the President of the Board of Education in how many parishes in England the only school is a church school?

The available information relates to rural areas only, and indicates that there are about 5,000 civil parishes in such areas in England where the only public elementary school is a denominational school.

Does the same thing apply to Wales?

I am not sure whether this covers Wales or not.

asked the Minister of Health by what means he intends to carry out the undertaking of the Government to confer with all the local authorities concerned in the proposed changes in local government areas and services, including roads; and when it is proposed by the Government that any changes resulting from these conferences shall come into operation?

I have laid before the House a memorandum, dealing fully wish the proposals of the Government in regard to local government and finance. The memorandum will be circulated to the associations of local authorities, and it is my intention to discuss these proposals with representatives of the associations. As regards the second part of the question, I would ask my hon. Friend to await the publication of the memorandum.

I suppose we may take it that these changes cannot possibly come into effect until this House has considered and passed a Bill?

That is true.

As I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that he will be issuing a memorandum to the local authorities, will be also place copies of it in the Vote Office, so that Members of the House may have an opportunity of reading it?

Copies will be in the Vote Office to-morrow.

Does this memorandum contain the famous formula to which the Chancellor of the Exchequer referred?

Yes, Sir.

Do the words "including roads" mean all roads?

I do not think that the word "roads" is mentioned in my answer. The hon. Member must ask my hon. Friend who put down the question.

We are not to suppose that roads are excluded from the memorandum?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister of Health whether he will state the reason for the request made by his Department that unclaimed bodies of deceased patients in the Park Prewet and Brook-wood Asylums, and other mental institutions under the Farnham Union, should be handed over to the University of Oxford for anatomical examination?

The request to which the hon. Member refers has been made to these and other similar institutions, in order to assist in the provision, under proper safeguards, of unclaimed bodies for anatomical examination, which is indispensable to medical education.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that in certain districts boards of guardians compel casuals to apply to the police for tickets of admission to the local casual ward; and whether, seeing that the majority of casuals are genuine unemployed genuinely seeking employment, he will take the necessary steps to bring this practice to an end?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, but it is a common practice that police officers should be appointed as assistant relieving officers and empowered to issue orders for admission to a casual ward. The practice seems to me to be in the interests of the casuals themselves, and I see no reason for suggesting its modification.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the men resent this very much indeed, seeing that it associates unemployment with crime?

Perhaps the hon. Member will give me some particulars of what it is he has in mind, because I do not personally know of any such cases.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that men whose only fault is that the country will not employ them find themselves in casual wards which they resent very much indeed?

Perhaps the hon. Member will send me particulars of cases.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the revenue authorities in the Manchester district are now seeking to impose Income Tax on what they describe as the value of the right to receive annual chief rents on conveyances of land subject to perpetual chief rents, notwithstanding such annual rents are already being taxed; and will he inquire into the matter?

I think that my hon. Friend may be under some misapprehension as to the real question at issue in the matter to which he refers. The Inland Revenue authorities are contending that when property is sold by a taxpayer carrying on the business of dealing in property, the value received for the property, whether it takes the form of cash or of the right to receive an annual chief rent, should be brought into account in computing the profits of the business for the purposes of assessment to Income Tax under Schedule D.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to the uncertainty that exists among visitors from other parts of the British Empire coming to this country with regard to their liability to British Income Tax if they stay here for more than a certain time; whether he is aware that this uncertainty prevents many from coming; whether, in fact, any such time limit is applied in the case of visitors; and whether he will publish in a short and easily intelligible form a memorandum explaining exactly in what circumstances such visitors become liable to British Income Tax?

Broadly speaking, British Income Tax is chargeable in the case of a person resident in Great Britain or Northern Ireland on all his income wherever arising, and in the case of a person not so resident, on his income derived from sources in Great Britain or Northern Ireland. The difficulties in the case my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind centre round the question whether a person is or is not resident here for Income Tax purposes. This question, as was indicated in recent judgments of the House of Lords, is one of fact and degree to be determined according to the circumstances of each case, and does not lend itself to summary exposition in general terms. The matter is, however, engaging my attention, and certainly I do not wish to discourage the temporary residence in this country of foreign visitors.

Do I understand there is not really any truth in the widely-held belief that, because you stay in England one day over six months, you are ipso facto brought within the net of British Income tax?

I do not think that is the case, but I do not like to lay down the law on Income Tax in reply to a supplementary question.

Is it not a fact that, under agreement between the Dominions and this country, if a man becomes liable for Income Tax in this country, he is exempted in his own Dominion, and vice versa?

There are agreements of some such kind, but I was addressing myself more to foreign countries.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the criticisms of Mr. Justice Bowlatt, in the King's Bench Division, on 26th June, on the subject of the interpretation of Section 21 of the Finance Act, 1922; whether, in particular, the statements of the learned Judge to the effect that the people of this country are taxed by laws which they cannot understand, and this is the worst example of such legislation that has been put upon the Statute Book, have been brought to his notice; and whether he is prepared to set up an independent Committee to inquire and make recommendations for the clearer drafting of this rule, particularly in relation to the Amendments contained in Sub-section 24 of Section 31 of the Finance Act of 1927, or whether he is himself prepared to take independent action that will relieve the taxpayer of the cost of litigation in the prosecution of his legitimate claims for relief?

My attention has been called to the remarks to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers. I would remind him that the legislation in question owed its origin to the ingenuity of taxpayers in avoiding liability to the Super-tax, and that its length and complexity are mainly due to the multifarious qualifications made at the instance of hon. Members of this House with a view-to confining its application to the proper cases. I would also remind my hon. and gallant Friend that last year I appointed a Committee to review the whole law relating to Income Tax and Super-tax, and to see in what respects it can be simplified and rendered more intelligible to taxpayers. As my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary has already informed the Houe in another connection, I do not think it is desirable, pending the completion of the Committee's task, to try to deal with the matter piecemeal.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why it is that Judges can criticise legislation and legislators are not permitted to criticise Judges?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is in a position to make any further statement with regard to the French debt agreement?

I have no further information on the subject. But I may say that, at the time when we signed the Debt Agreement and accepted the large abatements of our admitted claims, it was a definite understanding that the French Government would make itself responsible for securing the ratification of the Agreement as soon as possible. When M. Poincaré formed his Government, I was assured that he accepted this understanding, and nothing that has since passed justifies the suggestion that the intentions of the French Government are in any way altered. In the meantime, the payments due under the agreement for the financial years 1926–27 have been duly made, and the French Government have undertaken to pay the £8 millions due in the current financial year, half on 15th September next—half on 15th March next.

In view of the length of time which has elapsed since the agreement was made, has the right hon. Gentleman made any recent representations to M. Poincaré urging him to rectify the agreement and thus give us the advantage of certainty, for which alone we sacrificed so large a part of the debt?

No, I have made no such representations.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider doing so at the earliest possible date?

I shall not be guided in that matter by any suggestion which may reach me from the hon. and gallant Gentleman. The question of our relations with the French in connection with the repayment of this debt is one which has to be handled with proper regard to its gravity.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think he secured the consent of this House to the release of these large sums in consideration of this assurance that the agreement would be ratified by the French Government, and, as that has not been forthcomings he secured the acquiescence of the House under false pretences?

No, I do not think that is true at all, and I am quite sure the House will not wish the Government to be pressed into taking precipitate or unsuitable action.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has yet made arrangements for writing off as a contra account the sum of £135,700,000 given on page 5 of the Financial Statement as the amount of loans from certain Allied Governments.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to a similar question put by him on 21st March last. There has been no change in the position since that date.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the duties of the Government directors on the board of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company; and, seeing that the participation of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company in a price-fixing ring is a matter of policy affecting the interests of the taxpayer and is distinct from the ordinary questions of management, what instructions have been given to the Government directors.

The duties of the Government Directors do not differ from those of the other Directors on the Board of the Company, save that, in any matter of a financial or general character on which, in their opinion, the directions of the Government should be sought, or on which their advice is desired by the Government, it is their duty to consult, or to report to, the Government as the case may be, and generally to act in accordance with any instructions which may be given to them by the Government in such matters. As regards the latter part of the question, I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member on 26th June. In accordance with an undertaking given by the Treasury to the Company in 1914, referred to in Command Paper No. 7419 of 1914, the Government are under obligation not to interfere in the commercial management of the Company.

Do not the matters which the right hon. Gentleman describes as of a financial or general character include amalgamation, for price-fixing purposes, with the other two great foreign oil combines, and have the directors accordingly consulted his advisers, and what directions have they been given?

Of course, I have to answer with care in these matters, because they might become the subject of litigation, but, speaking under all reserve, I have very little doubt that the marketing of oil is not a matter within the scope of interference legitimate to the Government representatives.

Does not the marketing of oil mean an alliance for marketing purposes with these great foreign combines? Was not the original object of the Government holding to safeguard the Government's position with regard to the Navy's fuel supplies, and is not this much larger question quite outside management—surely the right hon. Gentleman has seen the categorical statement in the Press to-day—and what assurance can he give?

When did the Government last interview their directors on this Oil Company, and, further, have any instructions ever been given them with regard to joining forces with other companies for the purpose of price fixing?

The view of the Government—not only this, but preceding Governments—has been that the marketing of oil is not a matter in which we should interfere. Of course, if a situation arose where this country was being held to ransom in regard to its oil supplies, that would be a matter for Parliament, like every other situation, but it would be for Parliament to deal with it on general grounds and not, in my opinion, through its position as partner in the Anglo-Persian Oil Company. It is, as I say, safeguarded by the declarations which have been made in the past. But there is no such situation at present, and there is no such situation in view, according to any opinion that I can form.

Do not the Government deem it part of their duty to control this matter of price fixing? Does it not mean that the British public fails to get the advantage it might get from reduced prices, and is not therefore the whole purpose of our having directors on the Board vitiated?

No, the entry of the Government into the matter was dictated by the importance of securing a naval supply of oil, and that has been the governing principle throughout. A definite undertaking was given by the Government in 1914, that they would not interfere with the commercial management of the Company. That undertaking could not be departed from without infringing the rights of the non-official shareholders in the Company, and would have other reactions.

In view of the public uneasiness—

Where?

Among all the motorists.

In view of the public uneasiness at the situation that the Government is a majority shareholder in a company which is a price-fixing combine, will the right hon. Gentleman have the matter debated by Parliament with a view to having it settled?

I do not control the business of the House. There is opportunity of raising any matter that comes before Parliament, especially during the course of the Finance Bill. But I do not think there is the slightest ground for public uneasiness in anything that has occurred up to the present. The broad feature in recent years has been the marked fall in oil prices and the abundance of supplies. Whether that will be altered in the future I make no prediction at all. We must deal with new situations as they arise. Up to the present there is not the slightest ground for the suggestion that there is any reason for Government intervention.

We cannot spend all the afternoon on one question.

I give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment on Monday.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how the stock of gold bullion and specie in this country compares with the stock at the time of the restoration of the gold standard?

No data are available except of the gold in the Issue Department of the Bank of England, which has risen from £153,906,000 on the 29th April, 1925, to £169,146,000 on the 80th June, 1928.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury the price paid to the Royal Mint for the medals which were struck at the Royal Mint to the order of the British Empire Union to commemorate Empire Day, 1928; what was the cost of making them; and what was the profit derived on this transaction?

As I informed the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) on the 13th June, the prices quoted by the Royal Mint for these medals were fixed on the basis of a fair profit. For reasons which should be obvious to the hon. Member it is not customary to publish the details of individual transactions.

Can anybody or any organisation have medals struck?

I think so, if they pay a proper price for them.

asked the Prime Minister, approximately, when the Report stage of the Companies Bill is likely to be taken?

I regret that I cannot anticipate the course of business beyond next week.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether it is proposed to take the main stages of this Bill during this Session?

I shall be making a statement about business in the course of the remarks I have to make on the Motion standing in my name.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say definitely whether he intends to take the Report stage of the Bill before the Recess.

I will make a statement about this in the course of my speech.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what allowance, if any, was made to Mr. Martin Hale on the legal expenses incurred by him in the prosecution of his claim for an award before the Royal Commission; whether Mr. Hale has made any declaration to the Treasury as to the amount of legal expenses thus incurred by him, and if the figure may be given to the House; and whether he will state the sum awarded to Mr. Hale by the Commission and the figures deducted or claimed on account of Income Tax and Super-tax, respectively?

No allowance of Income Tax has been, or could be, made in respect of the legal expenses to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers. The awards made to Mr. Hale by the Royal Commission amount to £22,000, and a sum of £4,400 has been deducted therefrom on account of Income Tax. Super-tax is charged, not on specific items of income, but by reference to the total income of the individual. Information on this point cannot, of course, be disclosed by the taxing authority. As regards the second part of the question, Mr. Hale has stated in a letter to the Press that he incurred costs on litigation, etc., amounting to £10,413 in establishing the validity of his patents in the Law Courts.

Is my hon. Friend aware that Income Tax is taken off all the awards made by the Royal Commission automatically, and will he favourably consider a new Clause in the Finance Bill in order to get over that difficulty?

The law is as I have stated, and we have to obey it. We are advised that the law does not allow expenses of this nature to be deducted for Income Tax purposes at all.

Will my hon. Friend say on what grounds that advice is given?

On the grounds of the law of the land.

Can my hon. Friend say whether the Department or this House interprets the law?

We have to turn for advice to our legal advisers, and they have advised us that the law is as I have stated.

Is it not a fact that this gentleman, who has rendered great services to the country, is losing rather than getting any reward for all these services?

That may be so; I cannot say. But we have to obey the law.

Can my hon. Friend say what is the cost under this head?

I cannot give that information without notice.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he will consider shortening the present qualifying period of residence under the Old Age Pensions Act, 1924, of aged people of 70 who have returned to this country after living for a number of years in any Colony?

I have noted my hon. Friend's suggestion, which would, however, involve legislation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture when the Report of the Committee dealing with egg-marking is to be expected?