asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of complaints he has received from various sources making allegations concerning the infringement of Part I of the Cinematograph Films Act; can he say whether these various complaints have been investigated; and what action his Department has taken?

The hon. Member may rest assured that I am watching the position carefully, and shall take such action as may be possible and useful.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether these complaints have been placed before the Advisory Committee?

The Advisory Committee consider the general position, but, when it comes to the question whether there is evidence for prosecution, obviously that must be considered by the Legal Department.

Have the Advisory Committee reported to the right hon. Gentleman on the complaints?

No, they have not. The Act lays down certain

asked the President of the Board of Trade what were the exports of American and Canadian apples, respectively, in 1926 to this country?

The exports of apples to the United Kingdom from Canada in 1926 were 1,111,000 barrels, and from the United States of America, 3,529,000 barrels, according to the official returns of those countries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state, for a surplus of 5 per cent. or other percentage in the production of apples in the United States, what is the equivalent surplus created for export, in view of the fact that the uncertainty thus created militates against the build ing up of the Empire fruit trade?

The answer includes a table of figures, and if my hon. and gallant Friend agrees, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the Report of the inspector appointed by his Department to investigate the affairs of the St. Mary Steamship Company; and whether it is his intention to take any action in the matter?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Copies of the Report have been communicated to the parties in accordance with the provisions of Subsection (6) of Section 109 of the Companies (Consolidation) Act, 1906. The Report has been submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is able to make any statement as to the Government's attitude to the proposal to change the form and terms of the helm orders on board ship by international agreement; and what steps have been taken, or will be taken, to ascertain the views of British mariners generally as to the desirability and form of the changes proposed?

Helm orders on British ships are governed by custom, not by law or regulation, and the Board of Trade would not intervene unless the custom were causing danger or unless there were a general desire to consider the advisability of a change and the Board were invited to assist in the process. In that event, the Board would give all the help in their power, but they would make three suggestions, first, that any proposed alteration should be fully considered by masters, navigating officers and pilots before a decision is reached; second, that if the British system is changed, it should be to some system which will be international; third, that special care be taken to prevent danger during the change over.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any evidence to show that either confusion or danger is caused by the present long-established and well-understood British helm orders?

No, Sir, absolutely none, and that is why I should hesitate so much to give any support to any change which might be suggested.

Will this House be consulted before any change is made and before we ratify any change?

I have no intention, as I said in the answer, of advising any change. I should not like to answer off-hand whether, if a convention should ultimately be negotiated, it would necessarily be subject to the prior aproval of Parliament or not. It seems to me quite academic.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake, before any steps are taken, and in the view of the possibility of any change, to get to know the opinion of King Neptune as to the desecration of the last remnants of the romance of the sea?

I hope that neither the questions nor the answers will suggest that any change is being contemplated, but, before I contemplate any change in any matter of that kind, I should take the very best expert advice that I possibly could.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the Board, in conjunction with the Board of Admiralty, have had any preliminary investigation, especially in regard to American experience in this matter?

Yes. I should not like without notice to say exactly what consideration has been given to it, but certainly we have no representation which leads us to suppose that any change is contemplated.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in America there are two systems now in vogue—the Admiralty have one system, and the Mercantile Marine have another—and can such a change possibly be made in the customs of this country without Parliamentary sanction.

I am not sure about that matter. I think that very likely Parliamentary sanction would be advisable, but I do want, again, to assert that the fact that these questions appear on the Order Paper should not be taken by anybody to suggest that a change is contemplated or is desirable.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether there is any reason why we should copy America in Naval matters?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his Department is negotiating with other Powers with a view to reaching an agreement that the plea of diplomatic immunity be no longer relied on in the case of defendant shipping companies subsidised by their Governments?

The negotiations which are at present proceeding on the question of the immunity of shipping from process of law are those connected with the draft International Convention of 1926 for the unification of certain rules relating to the immunity of State-owned vessels. This draft Convention applies to ships owned or operated by States and does not apply to ships which are merely subsidised.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether his attention has been called to the fact that the United States Shipping Line are taking this plea and will he say whether they have any contracts for carrying mails or any other arrangements with the Government?

As to what contracts there are for carrying mails, I should not like to answer that question without notice. I think it should be addressed to the Postmaster-General. Obviously, I cannot comment on a case that is sub judice, but I am not at all sure that the hon. Member is right in saying that the defence of immunity is in fact being taken in this case.

Is the right hon. Gentleman watching this matter closely from the point of view of British merchants and commercial houses?

Yes, certainly. That is why I was so anxious to get a convention which would abolish immunity of State shipping—a universal convention which would abolish that immunity in all cases where the State is the owner of ships. I think the Convention does not deal with mere questions of subsidy, but it is generally assumed by the International lawyers who are engaged upon it that they would not be covered.

Will the right hon. Gentleman call for papers in the case of Russell v. The United States Shipping Line and see what observations the Master made about the propriety?

The powers entrusted to me are fairly extensive, but I am not sure that they extend to the right to call for papers in such a case as this.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the attention of the American Government has been drawn to the position taken up by the United States Shipping Company, because, from what I know of America, it is perfectly certain that the common-sense there would prevent them from taking up so absurd a line as that taken up by the shipping line.

I think it would be well to await delivery of the pleadings in this case before we criticise the action of the company.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how long it is expected to have to continue the Enemy Debts Department; and what staff is at present employed therein?

The Enemy Debts Department, which includes also the Departments for the administration of German, Austrian, Hungarian and Bulgarian Property, is rapidly completing its work of dealing with claims and with ex-enemy property under the Economic Clauses of the Treaties of Peace, but it is not possible to indicate precisely the date when it will be closed down. The work of the office is kept under constant review, and the staff is being continually reduced. The number employed on 1st June last was 598, as compared with 914 two years ago.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that 10 years after the War a separate Department on this scale, with a staff of over five hundred people, wants considerable explanation?

Unfortunately, it does not rest with me, because the Treaty of Peace laid down a great many duties which I have to carry out, whether I like them or not. For instance, there are very detailed accounts which have to be rendered to Germany of all property sequestered. This is one of the most complicated matters. I should be ready to deal with it if I could and clear it out of the way.

Does that arise out of the policy of making the Germans pay?

In view of the work being completed, will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries why new people were introduced to the Department during this year.

Any detailed question with regard to particular members of the staff must obviously be put on the Order Paper.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether there are any cases in which the legal adviser to the Enemy Debts Department has advised that applicants for the release of sequestrated property are stateless, and therefore entitled to full release, in which the Enemy Debts Department has refused release or released only in part; and, if so, if particulars can be furnished?

The responsibility for the decision in these eases rests with the Administrator, who consults the Legal Adviser to the Department as necessary, and I am not prepared to divulge the advice rendered to the Administrator by the Legal Adviser. I would, however, explain that in all cases where the Administrator of the various ex-enemy properties is satisfied by the evidence of statelessness which has been furnished to him, the property concerned is released in full forthwith, provided that it has not already been accounted for to the German Government for the credit of the claimant. In cases where the evidence is not considered satisfactory, the claims are either rejected altogether, or, where the matter is doubtful, the claim is compromised, unless the claimant prefers to proceed in the Courts.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to furnish particulars to the House in regard to those cases where there has been compromise when statelessness has been proved?

The question is based on a misapprehension. It statelessness was proved the stateless person would be entitled to a release of his property. The only cases that are compromised are disputed cases which, like any other law action, in default of satisfactory settlement would go to the Court.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the rank of the officer of the enemy debts clearing office who submitted the memorandum making charges against the administration of the office; and whether facilities were afforded for him to be present at the inquiry stated to have been made and to substantiate his charges?

The officer was a temporary official holding the rank of Deputy Chief Clerk. His charges were detailed in writing in a very long memorandum, and no matters arose during the investigation on which further statements from him were found necessary to enable the charges to be dealt with.

In view of a memorandum being presented to the right hon. Gentleman, in which one member of the staff made charges against his chief, was there some reason why he was not called to give evidence, to substantiate or withdraw those charges?

I have already answered that question several times. There was no need to call upon this gentleman, because the whole of the charges could be dealt with on the statement made in his memorandum, and for the most part on contemporaneous records.

Why would it not have been better to call him in his own defence, without dismissing him?

The hon. and gallant Member is stating what is quite inaccurate.

It was stated by the Parliamentary Secretary yesterday.

It is not a case of appearing in his own defence; it is a case where a number of charges were made by him. As a matter of fact, he was not dismissed; he was given notice terminating the appointment. [Interruption.] There is every difference, as is well known, where an officer is temporarily employed. If I am challenged, I shall certainly justify the action which my Department has taken.

Was there any reason, other than the issue of the memorandum, to cause his dismissal?

The officer in question tendered his resignation. I would much rather not, unless I am pressed to do so, go into other matters relating to this officer, but, if I am pressed, I must do so.

rose——

We have had quite enough of this question.

When was his resignation tendered?

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether Regulations have been framed, in accordance with Section 5 of the Trade Disputes Act, 1927, to determine the position of civil servants who are members of the Law Society?

Regulations, dated 30th August, 1927, were made by the Treasury in pursuance of the requirements of Section 5 of the Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Act, 1927. I am advised that the Law Society is not an organisation of which the primary object is to influence or affect the remuneration and conditions of employment of its members within the meaning of Clause 5 of the Act referred to and of the Regulations made in pursuance thereof.

Is not the Law Society a society that maintains the professional interests of its members, although all members are not compelled to belong to it, and in what way does it differ from any other Civil Service institution?

I can only say that I am advised that the Law Society does not come within the meaning of Clause 5 of the Act referred to.

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will review it and see if there be any distinction between the Law Society and other unions.

If the hon. Gentleman will put down a definite question, I will certainly review it.

Has not the hon. Gentleman been advised by a gentleman who is a member of the Law Society?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the statement in the Report of the Scottish Board of Health that the gap is widening between the standard of medical services in the Highlands and that in the Lowlands; and what provision is being made for the maintenance and improvement of the Highlands and Islands medical service during the current year?

The statement referred to expresses the view of the Consultative Council on Highlands and Islands, whose Report I have seen and am now considering. As regards the second part of the question, the money available in the Highlands and Islands (Medical Service) Fund is sufficient to maintain the medical services on their present scale during the current year. It is anticipated, however, that the fund will be exhausted by the middle of next financial year, before which time the question of what further financial provision should be made will be fully considered in the light of the whole circumstances of the case.

Will provision be made, in the meantime, for catching up the leeway as well as merely maintaining these services at the lower level to which they have fallen?

The provision for this year has been made, and will be carried out to the full.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what progress has been made with the negotiations with foreign Powers for closing the Moray Firth to trawlers, and when this is likely to be effected?

As the hon. Baronet is aware, the question of the prohibition of trawling and other methods of fishing in the Moray Firth was remitted for consideration to a Committee of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. The Report of the Committee has been received and is under my consideration, but no decision has yet been come to with regard to the future regulation of trawling and seining in the Moray Firth outside territorial waters, nor as to the opening of negotiations with foreign Powers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that more foreign trawlers have been seen this year in the Moray Firth than at any other time, and that this fact is extremely annoying to the longshore fishermen who are accustomed to get their livelihood in that sea?

I am aware that there has been some slight increase, but that is being kept under review.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is now in a position to make a statement on the Report he has received on post-operation tetanus; and can he say what action he proposes to take?

Consideration of the matter is still proceeding, but I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he will make a statement on the Report which he has received?

I cannot say definitely, but I hope it will be very shortly.

If I put down a question for next week, will the right hon. Gentleman be able to answer?

I will see.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) the number of applications for small holdings in Harris which have been received since 1912; how many were granted; and the acreage involved;

(2) the number of applications for small holdings in Lewis which have been received since 1912; how many were granted; and the acreage involved?

The hon. Member will find the information asked for in these questions in Appendices Nos. 1 and 2 of the Report of the Board of Agriculture for Scotland for the year ended 31st December, 1927.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how it is that I can find this information in the Report issued by the Scottish Board of Agriculture, but I cannot get important statistics in regard to the Islands of Lewis and Harris?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he is aware that Neil Macdonald and Ewan Maclennan who were sentenced to four months' imprisonment at Lochmaddy Sheriff Court on 14th June, 1928, for occupying land, intimated an appeal against that sentence to the Second Division of the Court of Session; that they were arrested and placed in Inverness Prison in spite of the intimation of appeal; that a note for liberation pending the determination of the appeal was before the Second Division of the Court of Session on Wednesday, 27th June, who ordered the interim liberation of those two men; that the ruling of the Court was that the making of the appeal to the Court of Session suspended the warrant for imprisonment; upon whose instructions the warrant for imprisonment was acted upon in defiance of the appeal; and whether any compensation will be paid to the two men for their illegal confinement?

I am aware generally of the proceedings in this case and, in particular, that the Second Division of the Court of Session on 27th June ordered interim liberation of the appellants. Until the appeal is disposed of, the case is sub judice, and it would not be proper for me to make any statement regarding it.

Does the fact that the case is sub judice prevent the right hon. Gentleman from informing the House who authorised the warrant to be acted upon, and the men being put into prison when the Scottish law should be known to the Scottish Law Officers, that, pending an appeal, no man should be put into prison?

I think it is quite obvious that this matter is sub judice, and I cannot discuss it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how long these men were illegally imprisoned and what disciplinary action he proposes to take against the officials responsible for this outrage?

No, Sir. I have no information to show that they were illegally imprisoned, and, as the matter is sub judice, I cannot discuss it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Court of Session has decided that these men were illegally imprisoned, and ordered their release?

Surely the question is not sub judice, whether these men were put in prison at a time that they ought not to have been put into prison when their appeal was under consideration. Surely, the right hon. Gentleman can give us an answer on that point?

As I understand it, the whole question is before the Courts, and until it is decided it will be improper for me to discuss it.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman how that part of my question which asks who authorised the execution of the warrant and the imprisonment of these men, upon whose instructions it was executed, can come under the sub judice part of his reply? The imprisonment of these men has been declared illegal, and I am asking who authorised the illegal imprisonment of the men. That is not sub judice, and I am asking the right hon. Gentleman to reply to that point, with the assistance of the Lord Advocate, a Law Officer of the Crown.

As far as I know, this is a matter for the Court to decide.

The Court has decided.

No, the Court has not decided, and, until the Court decides, there should be no interference from the hon. Member or myself.

May I ask whether the Lord Advocate can tell us who really is to blame in this case? It is not a question of law, but a question of administration. As I understand it, these men have been released because they were wrongly imprisoned.

The interlocutor of the Court of Session, which I have seen, granted liberation ad interim. I have not all the papers in the case, but that, prima facie, is inconsistent with any suggestion that there was any illegal detention.

Can the Lord Advocate say whether in fact an appeal was intimated, and yet, in spite of that, the men were sent to prison?

It is difficult to discuss these questions by way of question and answer. With regard to the question of the hon. Member, the only report I have seen is a newspaper report of opinions expressed which is not part of the interlocutor of the Court. We are trying to get a full report. The actual judgment of the Court, however, prima facie, is inconsistent with any suggestion that the men were illegally detained. I can only speculate on what actually happened. On the point which the hon. Member has put, I know that, as far as the newspaper report went, one of the Judges seems to have indicated that the marking of the appeal was the time at which the interlocutor would be suspended, if it was held to be suspended. Even assuming that to be the decision of the whole Court, the marking of the appeal may not take place until some time after, and the men are automatically put in prison under a decision of the Sheriff; but it might have the effect of entitling them to get out of prison on the marking of the appeal. If you take it at its highest, it does not suggest that there is anything wrong in the men being put in prison as soon as the Sheriff has announced his intention.

rose——

The Lord Advocate has given all the information that he can.

I have a further question to put.

Order!

We cannot spend all the afternoon on this question. There are other questions on the Paper, and other hon. Members have an equal right to put them.

I beg to give notice that I shall move the Adjournment of the House at the end of Questions.

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely:

"The imprisonment of Neil Macdonald and Ewan Maclennan while an appeal against the decision of the Court has been lodged on their behalf."

This matter, obviously, does not come within the terms of Standing Order No. 10, which governs the conditions under which leave can be given to move the Adjournment of the House, and, therefore, I cannot allow the hon. Member to move.

Is it not a matter of urgent public importance that the law of this country should be administered properly and without any sign of partiality and, as the Lord Advocate himself stated, in supplementing the reply given by the Secretary of State, that these two men had practically been imprisoned while their appeal was pending, and that an application had to be made on their behalf to the Court of Session to have them released until the appeal was heard, does not that constitute a matter on which some inquiry ought to be made and some discussion take place in this House? I put it to you, Sir, with all due deference, that when these two men have, on the admission of the Secretary of State for Scotland, been waiting to receive land since May, 1912, it surely is incumbent on this House to discuss the question of their being imprisoned in spite of an appeal which they have lodged, and, consequently, their illegal detention.

I have listened to all that has been said on this case, and it is quite clear to me that it does not come within Standing Order No. 10.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that blind persons in Scotland suffer on receiving the 10s. weekly pension, in so far as it relieves the parish council of any duty towards them; that the total income remains the same after the pension is granted, but the parish council refuse to provide clothing, medical attendance, etc., which they have done formerly; and if he will issue a circular letter informing parish councils that the conditions of such persons should not be made worse because of the receipt of a pension?

I am not aware that persons in receipt of blind pensions, who are regarded for purposes of poor relief as being in the same position as old age pensioners, are penalised in the manner suggested. Parish councils must, on application, consider the circumstances of each case and where it is found that the pension, together with any other resources, is inadequate for the pensioner's requirements it is the duty of the parish council to render what assistance is considered necessary. As regards the last part of the question, I do not think that the issue of a general circular is necessary, but if the hon. Member brings any particular cases of hardship to my notice I shall have inquiries made.

Is the Secretary of State aware of what happens to blind persons, namely, that their income remains the same, but, because they are cut off from parish relief, they are refused medical and clothing benefits? Will the right hon. Gentleman see that no penalty is inflicted in these cases?

If the hon. Member will give me particulars of any cases, I will have them inquired into.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether it is intended that the Scottish crofter is to benefit to the same extent as other agricultural tenants under the new rating and valuation scheme?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether under the Government rating scheme for Scotland there will be any modification or alteration of the existing method of arriving at the assessable value of a crofter's holding?

Under the scheme, it is proposed that agricultural subjects in Scotland should be rated upon one-sixth of the gross annual value. It is not proposed to alter the law which governs the ascertainment of that value. The scheme applies to agricultural subjects generally whether held by crofters or others.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the Government estimate of the amount of relief from rating that will be given under the Government scheme to landowners, tenants of larger farms, and small landholders, respectively, in Scotland?

The relief in respect of owners' rates is estimated at £770,000 and the relief in respect of occupiers' rates at £110,000. During the currency of existing tenancies the occupier will receive from his landlord one-half of the relief given in respect of owners' rates. It is not possible to give separately the figures applicable to tenants of larger farms and small landholders.

Can the Secretary of State give us a rough estimate as to the percentages between large and small, say, about 25 per cent. or 30 per cent.?

I think it would be unwise to make a rough estimate; we had better wait and see.

asked the Lord Advocate whether when expensive plans are required by the Land Court for the consideration of applications for the apportionment of runrig lands, there is any provision by which the expense of providing such plans may not fall on the applicants?

I have been asked to reply. The answer is in the negative. In such cases the initial charge falls, in accordance with the ordinary procedure observed in Courts of Law, upon the applicants, and I do not think that any other rule would be workable.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that it is difficult for small crofters to find the necessary sum to prepare these expensive plans?

It is rather difficult to find any other way of dealing with a problem of this kind.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the frequent interruptions to which users of wireless receiving sets are subjected in Wick and other parts of Caithness and the north-east of Sutherland by the Wick wireless transmitting station, he is yet in a position to state when continuous wave equipment will be installed in Wick in place of the present spark apparatus?

Extensive building operations will be necessary before the new equipment can be installed at the Wick station, and as the work of reconstruction must be carried out without interfering with the normal working of the station it will, necessarily, occupy a considerable time. The preparation of plans and specifications is at present in hand, and it is hoped to complete the work during next year.

asked the Minister of Transport if he will now consider the construction of the Immingham-Grimsby direct road, having in view the unemployment in the area and the length of the only available existing road?

Although the construction of this road has been advocated on several occasions by the Grimsby Corporation, I am not aware that any definite scheme with estimates has ever been drawn up, and I have been no evidence that financial support would be forthcoming from the other local authorities affected. The initiation of such projects rests with the responsible highway authorities.

Sir Robert Thomas——

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the matter his favourable consideration?

I am prepared to consider the scheme, but favourable consideration will have to depend on the amount of money I have got.

On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. You called Question No. 26. Is the hon. and gallant Member in order in persisting in asking a supplementary question after an hon. Member has put his question?

No, strictly speaking, an hon. Member is not right in insisting upon asking a supplementary question after the next question has been called.

Will you then call the hon. and gallant Member to order?

The hon. Member must realise that it is impossible to give satisfaction to everybody.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, seeing that civil engineering difficulties at Liverpool Street Station are largely responsible for the delay in formulating an electrification scheme for the suburban lines of the London and North Eastern Railway Company, any plan for overcoming these difficulties is now under consideration?

I am informed by the railway company that their traffic and technical officers are at present engaged in considering the question of the electrification of the suburban lines leading into Liverpool Street Station.

Is the Minister aware that the London and North Eastern Railway Company have been considering this question for many years, but that nothing has been done, in spite of the appalling, and even dangerous, congestion at Liverpool Street?

Does the Minister propose to put into operation the recommendations of the committee which he himself set up, to inquire into travelling facilities in the East End of London?

My recollection is that the committee did not make any recommendations which I myself can carry out and that I can only carry them out with the co-operation of various bodies. As to the question put by the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Shinwell), I know that this matter has been a long time under consideration, but, after all, it is a matter for the railway company, and I have no power to compel them to act.

Will the right hon. and gallant Gentleman try to expedite the matter?

I have been trying to expedite it for three years.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, in view of the continued noisiness of motor cycles, particularly in regard to the silencing of the exhaust, he will institute an inquiry into the technical difficulties of the silencer question, inviting the co-operation of the Autocycle Union and the manufacturers' associations?

I do not think that all motor cycles can be said to be excessively noisy. The proceedings which the Police take for infraction of the regulations with regard to the fitting of efficient silencers will, I hope, result in the elimination of motor cycles which are unsatisfactory in this respect, and I do not think that it is for me to undertake a technical inquiry such as the hon Member suggests.

Is it not the case that there are no technical difficulties in the way of equipping these machines with efficient silencers?

My hon. Friend may be right, but I am not so advised by my technical advisers.

asked the Postmaster-General the number of motor cycles and sidecars employed in rural areas in England for the delivery of parcels; and if, in view of the difficulties experienced by rural postmen in coping with large numbers of parcels, he will consider increasing the deliveries by this means?

The number of motor cycles and motor cycle combinations at present in use by the Post Office for the conveyance of mails is about 380. These vehicles are mainly employed in rural districts on services which include parcel delivery. The Post Office is fully alive to the advantages of motor transport and its use is being continually extended.

Are these cycles fitted with efficient silencers?

Yes.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that in connection with an overpaid telegram on which there is a small refund the recipient of a postal draft from the Post Office is obliged to go to the place of transmission of the original telegram to cash it, he is aware that this procedure may entail the expenditure of from six to ten times the value of the refund; and whether, under these circumstances, he will consider some other way of avoiding this inconvenience to the public?

Yes, Sir. I will give instructions that any postal draft for a small amount issued in refundment of a telegraph charge shall in future be payable at any post office, unless there is some special reason for making it payable at a particular office only.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the Report of the Sub-Committee of the Post Office Advisory Council on the postal cheque system has yet been presented?

The Report in question has been received and the question of giving effect to its recommendations is under consideration.

Will the Report be made public?

I am always averse from going to the expense of printing a report unless I have reason to believe that there is any general desire for it. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will make representations through the usual channels if he really wishes that this Report should be laid, and I will see what can be done.

asked the Postmaster General the average number of telephone calls originating in Great Britain to the United States of America and Canada between the hours of 12.30 p.m. and 11 p.m., British time, on Sundays during the present year?

Approximately five, or including calls of Continental origin, 11.7.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that some reduction in the closing down of the service on Sunday would lead to its greater use?

At the moment I am not sorry to have a little spare time on Sunday, as Sunday is used for experimental work.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, with a view to popularising and increasing the output of telegrams, he will consider making no charge for address or signature?

The free transmission of the address in an inland telegram was abolished in 1885, and I do not favour the re-introduction of a system which was far from satisfactory.

Is it not a fact that the countries which go in for giving these facilities are those which make the most money out of telegrams?

I do not know if that is generally true. I can only say what has been the experience in this country. Our experience has been that with a system of no charge for addresses, the addresses tended to get longer and longer until in 1871 the average address was 12 words.

Is it not a fact that telegrams at the present rate show a loss?

That is well known.

Mr. Tinker—

May I ask the Postmaster-General in that case is there any use in—

On a point of Order. Is it in order for the hon. Member for Anglesea (Sir R. Thomas) to put a supplementary question after another hon. Member has been called?

I apologise. I did not hear the hon. Member being called.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury what is the average circulation of the Post Office Guide, the cost of production, the revenue derived from sales and advertisements, respectively, and the number of free copies issued?

As the reply contains a number of figures covering the Supplement to the Post Office Guide as well as the Guide itself, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Pensions (1) if he has received a resolution from the Bolton, Leigh and district war pensions committee, in which they urge him not to take into consideration the old age pension when assessing the need pension, and asking him to have a revision of such cases where the old age pension has been used to lower, or take away altogether, the need pension; and, if so, will he give favourable consideration to the appeal:

(2) if his attention has been called to a resolution passed by the Bolton, Leigh and district war pensions committee protesting against need pensions being taken away before they have been consulted, as they claim that if he got their views before the change was made some of the reductions would not take place; and will he state what he intends to do in the matter?

I have received the two resolutions referred to, which are, I fear, based on a misunderstanding of the nature of this class of pension. The amount of a pension based on need is determined by reference to the resources of the claimant, and as such it is necessarily subject to modification by way of increase as well as decrease, as the case may be, in the event of any permanent change in the circumstances of the pensioner. Account must, therefore, necessarily be taken of the grant of an old age pension, as was indeed expressly contemplated by the Widows and Orphans Pensions Act of 1925. I should have no authority to disregard one source of income in preference to another in determining the amount of a pension, nor to undertake to consult the war pensions committee on every occasion, as is suggested, before making an award. At the same time, I may point out that any pensioner is entitled, if dissatisfied with the decision of the Ministry, to make a complaint to the war pensions committee, whose reasons for supporting the complaint, if they did so, would always be very carefully considered.

asked the Minister of Pensions the number of cases in which treatment is being given although no pension is paid?

I regret that the records of the Ministry do not enable this information to be given.

asked the President of the Board of Education how many teachers employed under full-time agreements by local education authorities in grant-aided secondary schools and technical schools, respectively, have not been allowed to participate in the benefits under the Teachers' Superannuation Act on the ground that this service does not comply with the Board's Regulations; and in what respect in each case do the conditions fail to comply?

As indicated in Circular 1390 (a copy of which, together with the two previous Circulars, I am sending the hon. Member), the Board accept the annual returns, submitted by local authorities and governing bodies, of teachers employed by them in full-time contributory service under the Teachers' Superannuation Act, 1925, and I am accordingly unable to say how many teachers in the categories referred to by the hon. Member have not been included in those returns.

asked the President of the Board of Education what action he proposes to take in cases where the Board have suggested that the hot water supply in elementary schools should be extended to the medical inspection room and to certain other rooms, and the London County Council have refused to comply.

Each case must, I think, be considered on its merits in the light of the representations made by the authority. I am at present in communication with the Council in regard to a particular case.

Will the noble Lord press this matter on the London County Council and the education authorities as it is a very important matter?

As I have said, I must take each case on its merits, and I cannot give a general statement.

asked the President of the Board of Education what is the total number of supplementary teachers; how many apointments of supplementary teachers have been approved each year since 1919–20; how many authorities provide pensions for supplementary teachers; and to what age-groups do supplementary teachers belong, classified as follows: 20 to 30 years, 30 to 40 years, 40 to 50 years, 50 to 60 years, and 60 years and over.

The number of supplementary teachers on the 31st March, 1927, the latest date for which complete returns are available, was 8,734. I am unable to state the number of supplementary teachers appointed by local authorities during each of the years referred to by the hon. Member: but he will find a summary of total number of supplementary teachers employed in public elementary schools over a series of years, including the years in question, in Table 36 on page 31 of the Annual Statistics of Public Education for 1925–26. The particulars asked for in the remaining parts of the question are not available as the service of individual supplementary teachers is not recorded by the Board.