asked the Under- Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the report in the Indian Press regarding the meeting of bodies of men from time to time for the purpose of considering how and when the revolutionary doctrines which they hold shall be put into practice and the Government rendered incapable of performing its functions, and stating that it is almost incredible that the formulation of plans for destroying the existing régime should be permitted without let or hindrance; and whether he can state what steps are being taken in the matter?

I have seen reports of a character somewhat similar to those referred to in the question. I have every reason to believe that the Indian Government are doing and will do all that is necessary. It would ciearly not be in the public interest to give details of the action taken or contemplated by them.

Is it a fact that there is not a man in the Government of India who has sufficient backbone in him to take action?

The hon. and gallant Member is expressing his own opinion.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he can say how the Government of India define the political offenders of whom they tell the Press that they have only 5,000 odd in gaol: and does this figure include all those in gaol for breach of the Seditious Meetings Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act?

I am not aware that the Government of India have told the Press that they have only 5,000 odd political prisoners in gaot In fact, they have just reported that there are in all 3,836 persons confined in gaols in all provinces for offences in connection with political movements, excluding Moplah rebels. The offences include the two named in the question.

Are all the people in gaol under the Criminal Law Amendment Act or the Seditious Meetings Act included in this 3,400?

Yes.

Do the figures just given by the Noble Lord apply to the position before or after the gaol delivery reported in the Press to-day?

I do not know to what the Noble Lord refers. I have seen no reference to a gaol delivery in the Press to-day: perhaps the Noble Lord has been more fortunate.

Is the Noble Lord not aware of the report in the Press of a large gaol delivery which has just taken place, and were the figures he has just quoted obtained prior to or subsequent to that gaol delivery?

It has always been laid down that a Minister is not responsible for what appears in the Press. If the Noble Lord puts down a question based on that report I shall be prepared to answer it.

Will the Noble Lord state when the figures were obtained?

Yes, I shall have much pleasure in stating that. They were telegraphed for by instruction, in answer to a charge made by the hon. and gallant Member, that there were 20,000 persons in gaol for political offences, and they have just been received.

The Noble Lord must have made a mistake. I understand these figures were asked for, in response to questions put by me about two months ago, and prior to any suggestion being made that there were 20,000 in gaol.

Yes, but a telegram was sent, asking that the answer should be expedited after the speech of the hon. and gallant Member.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will give further consideration to the case of lieutenants who have served during the War, whose services have been satisfactory throughout, and who will be com-pulsorily retired owing to reduction of the strength of the Army; whether he is aware that these officers will receive no advantage as regards rank under the terms of Army Order 376 of 1918; and whether he will consider the advisability of recognising these officers' services by granting them a step in rank on retirement?

Officers who are compulsorily retired under Army Order 179 of 1922 are eligible for the rank authorised under the provision of Army Order 376 of 1918. It is not proposed to grant them higher rank than that to which they are entitled under this Army Order.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether a decision has been arrived at with regard to battle clasps for medals awarded for service in the late War; and has his attention been drawn to the fact that battle clasps are being worn by officers of His Majesty's Navy?

No, Sir. I regret that I cannot at present make any announcement on this subject. With regard to the last part of the question, I understand that no official issues of battle clasps have been made to the Navy.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many acres of land in the centre of Wimbledon Common are still in the occupation of the military authorities, and how many soldiers are now quartered there?

The answer to the first part of the question is 30 acres. There is at present one battalion of Foot Guards quartered at the camp, with a strength of 26 officers and 610 other ranks. I understand that the battalion is now undergoing its annual course of musketry training at Pirbright.

Is it suggested there are 600 men at present on Wimbledon Common?

If the hon. Member listened to the answer I stated they are quartered there, but at the present moment they are undergoing the annual course of musketry training.

In the circumstances—I believe there are only about 20 men on Wimbledon Common—will it shortly be restored to public use?

I cannot say with certainty.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) whether he is aware that some time after the commencement of the war it was decided that the conditions of employment of unestablished civilian employés who had been engaged at Army headquarters, and elsewhere, in this country, should follow the Regulations then in force for civilian subordinates, and that under those Regulations there was a provision enabling the Army Council to recommend the payment to employés not entitled to a pension of a compassionate gratuity, subject to their having served a period of seven years; that on the 16th December, 1921, the officer commanding-in-chief the Eastern Command communicated with the War Office strongly supporting the application of Mr. Frederick Buck, who had been employed in the office of the assistant director of supplies and transport, Eastern Command, for seven and a half years, for a retiring allowance, and that the application was refused; if he will state whether, at the time it was decided to apply to temporary clerks and other civilian employés the Regulations for civilian subordinates, they were notified that they would be excluded from the benefit of the Regulation authorising the grant of compassionate allowances;

(2) whether he is aware that the War Office, in a circular dated 1st June, 1922, laid down the course to be followed as regards the grant of compassionate gratuities to unestablished civilian employés on their discharge; that at an early period in the War such employés were made subject to the Regulations for civilian subordinates, numbers 160 and 162 of which deal with the question of gratuities on discharge; that in the circular referred to it is intimated that the cases of employés in supervisory technical, clerical, or analogous posts, who were engaged for the purposes of the late War, are not to be regarded as falling within the category of employment to which the two Regulations in question were intended to refer; that in the same circular it is laid down that employés engaged on manual labour are to be treated as being eligible for the grant of retiring allowances; if he will state what is the basis of this distinction to the detriment of clerical and technical employés, many of whom were in receipt of less remuneration than that of the manual employés, and who in a number of cases necessarily made greater sacrifices when giving up their former employment and placing their services at the disposal of the Government; whether, at the time it was decided to make unestablished civilian employés subject to the Regulations for civilian subordinates, it was laid down that clerical and manual employés would be treated on a different footing as regards eligibility for compassionate gratuities; and if he will take steps to have the matter reconsidered?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer on this subject given to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for East Woolwich on 4th May.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the replies to which he has referred me there are no replies to these questions at all, and may I ask for a specific reply to the last part of question No. 7, in which I ask whether at the time it was decided to make unestablished civilian employés subject to the regulations for civilian subordinates, it was laid down that clerical and manual employés would be treated on a different footing as regards eligibility for compassionate allowances?

I think if my hon. and gallant Friend looks it up, he will find that the reply of 4th May deals with that question.

I am sorry to press my hon. and gallant Friend, but may we know whether clerical employés have been treated in a disadvantageous manner as compared with those nominated as manual workers? Is there a difference between them?

No, Sir, I do not think there is.

Will my hon. and gallant Friend look into the matter and see whether there is a difference in this respect between the clerical staff and those termed manual workers?

I shall be glad to look into it.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the total number of refugees from Southern Ireland who have applied for assistance to the British Government; what is the nature of the assistance given and the total amount expended to date; what is the total number and amount of the claims which have been lodged in respect of damage to person and property in Southern Ireland; how many of such claims have so far been dealt with; and what is the total amount of compensation which has been paid?

The total number of refugees from Ireland who have applied for assistance to the Committee presided over by my hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea is 425, and assistance has been granted to 337 of these cases. In about 90 per cent. of the cases dealt with by the Committee the applicants came from Southern Ireland. The assistance given by the Committee consists of giants of money or loans on the security of malicious injury decrees. The amount expended in grants is £1,956 and in loans £1,365. I regret that I cannot give the figures asked for by the hon. Member in the latter part of his question, but it may assist him if I state that the number of decrees awarded to supporters of the Crown in respect of criminal injuries to the person prior to 11th July last, all of which will fall to be paid by the British Government, is approximately 1,750 since 1st April last. Final payments have been made in 261 of these cases and interim payments in 726 cases, the amount of money so expended being £390,000.

What is the position of the people referred to in the latter part of the question, who have obtained decrees, but are in urgent need of funds with which to carry on? Do I understand temporary assistance will be given to them, even though the whole payment may not immediately be available?

Yes, Sir.

Are we to understand from the answer that, at any rate, a certain number of people from Northern Ireland have applied for assistance to this Committee? The right hon. Gentleman states there are 90 per cent. from Southern Ireland; are we to understand 10 per cent. of these people come from Northern Ireland?

Yes, I think so.

What class of oppression do they complain of or on what ground do they apply for assistance from this fund?

I shall have to ask the Chairman of the Committee.

Has any further sum been allotted to the Committee over which the hon. and gallant Member for Chelsea (Sir S. Hoare) presides?

I do not think the need has yet arisen. Undoubtedly, if more money were needed, that would be a matter which the Treasury would have to take into consideration.

Is it not a fact that only £10,000 has been allocated so far?

It is also a fact that only £3,000 has been distributed so far.

Is not that owing to the policy of the Government?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that there are many Trish refugees congregated in the western ports of Ireland who are unable to obtain transport to Great Britain owing to lack of steamers and owing to the cargo steamers which call at those ports being prevented by Board of Trade Regulations from carrying more than a very limited number of passengers: and whether the Government will take steps to provide transportation for these unfortunate people?

His Majesty's Government is aware that a situation exists in certain of the western ports of Ireland comparable with that described by my hon. Friend. The shipping companies operating upon the western coast have, with the approval of the Board of Trade, instructed the captains of their vessels to accept passengers wishing to cross to this side in emergency without reference to the number allowed to be carried under the vessel's certificate, provided that the number of passengers so carried is not, in the captain's opinion, in excess of what it is safe for the vessel to carry.

Is the right hon. Gentleman taking steps to find out and get into touch with the situation in these western ports?

I have received from the Admiralty assistance in the shape of a good many of His Majesty's vessels which are cruising in the neighbourhood of Irish ports and putting in from time to time, but I have no means of acquainting myself with the situation which prevails inland at the present time in districts which are occupied by the Republican forces.

Is the Government taking any steps to bring away all these refugees? Supposing a similar case existed on the coast of France and there were civil war, would not the Government bring them away? In view of the unsatisfactory reply given, I beg to give notice, Mr. Speaker, that at the end of Questions I will ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House in order to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance.

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 failure of the Government to take adequate steps to provide for the transportation of Irish refugees from the western seaports of Ireland, and the insufficient means employed by the Government to deal with the relief of the Irish refugees."

Before that question be put, and leave asked, may I suggest that the word "western" would very much narrow the discussion which may take place? Would it not be better to strike out the word "western" and let it read simply the "coast of Ireland," so that the state of the refugees from Northern Ireland may also be argued?

I think that that would make the question more indefinite than it is, and it fails already on the ground of indefiniteness. The hon. Member for St. Rollox (Mr. G. Murray) introduces two quite different questions. With regard to the first, it is, except as far as the Board of Trade is concerned—and on that an answer was given in the House during Questions—outside the jurisdiction of this Government; and the latter part is entirely indefinite.

Supposing that there were British refugees assembled on the coast of France or any other country, it surely would be incumbent upon this Government to send vessels in order to bring them to this country? The same position exists in Ireland to-day, and the Government, although it is very largely due to their policy that these refugees are congregated where they are in these western ports—and I submit that that is not indefinite, because there are five well-known western ports on the coast of Ireland—the Government, notwithstanding that they know that those refugees are there, have told us at Question Time that they are unable to provide adequate transportation to bring them from those places.

That is quite inaccurate.

Certainly that was not my idea of the answer. The hon. Member in his question asked if the Board of Trade Regulations would be relaxed in the case of steamers calling at those ports, and the answer given, a I heard it, was that instructions had been given to that effect, subject only to the safety of the ships.

In the last part of the question I asked that adequate transportation should be given. The words exactly are, "and whether the Government will take steps to provide transportation for these unfortunate people."

On a point of Order. May I submit to you that no evidence has been brought before the House or the Government that the transportation which is available is not adequate to the comparatively small number of persons who wish to leave?

On that point, the right hon. Gentleman in his reply implied that there was insufficient accommodation. He said that he had given instructions, or instructions had been given, to men-of-war and steamers to be on the look-out.

Certainly. In order to meet any emergency which might arise at some particular point, the ships have been given this latitude, but that dealt only with a contingency which has hardly at all arisen so far, and does not at all represent the general state of affairs in Ireland.

May I ask the hon. Member for St. Rollox (Mr. G. Murray) if he will substitute, for the words "the western seaports of Ireland," the name of three ports? Would that make the question sufficiently definite to allow you, Mr. Speaker, to allow the hon. Member to ask leave to move the Adjournment?

I am afraid I must have some prima facie evidence of neglect on the part of the Government, and I have no such evidence.

May I put this point? The point at issue is whether the House is to understand that the removal of these refugees is a matter, as some suggest, of private enterprise, or whether it is one for the Government to undertake.

There, also I must have some prima facie evidence that there are persons with regard to whom the Government has an obligation, and that is a point on which I have no evidence at present.

May I ask whether it belongs to the functions of the Chair to determine what are really the merits of the question, and not strictly to confine itself to the question of order?

I think it is my duty to look for prima facie evidence of an allegation, in order to be sure that it is urgent, definite, and of public importance.

What difference does prima facie make?

Order, order!

Let us imagine the Noble Lord coming with any allegation he might make, and asking leave to move the Adjournment of the House. It would then be my duty to administer the Rule for the purpose for which it was intended.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the 11 Ulster Special Constabulary who were kidnapped at Belcoo have yet been released; whether it is known where these men are being detained; and what action the Provisional Government have taken to secure their release?

According to the latest information I have received, these 11 constables, who are believed to be confined at Athlone, have not yet been released. I am assured that steps are being taken by the Provisional Government in response to the continued representations I have made to them to secure the release of these and other inhabitants of Northern Ireland who are being detained in the South.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied as to the safety of these men meanwhile, and will he make representations that the Provisional Government will be held responsible for the safety of these citizens?

I have made every representation, and I hope they will have effect regarding this case, and also the case of the 15 men taken at Pettigo.

Is not Athlone in the hands of the Free State authorities, and what difficulty can Mr. Collins have in obtaining the release of these men?

I suppose the difficulty of the strain and stress under which that Government is labouring at the present time.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that a report has reached this country to the effect that during the last few days armed men forcibly removed from a British vessel, in Waterford Harbour, its wineless equipment, and shortly afterwards returned and kidnapped the wireless operator; whether he has any official information on this matter; and, if so, what action has been, or will be, taken?

A report of these incidents has been received from the shipping company which owns the vessel referred to, and I have received further particulars from other sources. The information has been passed on to the Provisional Government in Dublin, who will, I have no doubt, take all steps in their power to defeat the consequences and prevent the repetition of such lawless acts committed by those with whom they are engaged in open conflict.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied really that the Provisional Government will be able to stop a repetition of this sort of thing?

Fighting is going on on an increasing scale in many parts of the country, and the Provisional Government are doing their utmost to establish order. I shall certainly not attempt to forecast what the result of that fighting may be.

Have the Free State Government under their control any armed sea-going vessels?

They have, I think, one or two small steamers that were connected with fisheries protection, which they have used to transport troops, stores, armoured cars, etc., to different points on the coast where they are urgently needed for the prosecution of the operations.

Is it the case that the British Government cannot really take effective steps to protect British vessels going into ports like Waterford?

Of course, we can take steps by sending ships of war to these different places, but I am sure it would be very much better to give the responsible Irish Government full opportunities to make the will of the Irish people effective throughout the territory under their jurisdiction.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he received from the Moderator of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland an account of the massacre of Protestant families at Altnaveigh in June, and an appeal on behalf of Protestant residents in Donegal which called attention to the indignities inflicted upon them; what reply has been sent to the Moderator; and if any considerable delay took place in sending such reply?

I have received the two letters to which my hon. Friend refers. The former was acknowledged within a few day6 of its receipt. The reply to the Moderator's second letter was deferred until I should have received from the Provisional Government an answer to a letter which I was addressing to them on the general state of affairs in Donegal. In this letter I incorporated the substance of the Moderator's representations. The subsequent rapid developments in Ireland caused me to postpone addressing the Provisional Government in the sense intended, and I regret that any semblance of discourtesy should have been shown to the Moderator by the omission to inform him of the action which I contemplated.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know that the massacre referred to in the question meant the death of six people, and has he made representations to the Provisional Government in regard to that?

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the Government's present policy in the matter of the boundary between Northern and Southern Ireland?

I have nothing to add to the previous statements made on this subject.

May we take it that the Government adhere to the Clause in the Treaty respecting this Boundary Commission?

I should not have thought an answer was necessary to such a simple question.

If the question be so simple, why has not the right hon. Gentleman given a simple answer? May we take it that those provisions of the Treaty stand?

Of course, the provisions of the Treaty stand.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, having regard to the low bank rate and to the sums of money now seeking employment, he will consider the possibility of making an arrangement, in conjunction with the Government of this country and of the Provisional Government, with leading British and Irish banks whereby amounts up to one-half of the sums awarded as compensation in respect of malicious injury to property by the Irish County Courts could be advanced to those who hold the decrees, at a rate of interest not exceeding 2 per cent. above bank rate?

The answer is in the negative.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman say when the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be in his place, so that I can repeat the question?

I will communicate with my right hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether His Majesty's Government ceased to provide further subsidies towards cotton growing in Uganda and East Africa in 1914; at what date His Majesty's Government decided to impose an export duty on cotton produced; and whether the effect of this export duty has been to encourage production?

The grant of £10,000 a year to the British Cotton Growing Association from 1910–11 to 1915–16 did not concern Uganda or East Africa, and apart from the special grant of £1,000 to the association in 1916–17, partly in respect of its work in Uganda, no subsidy towards cotton growing in those countries has been given.

The Uganda tax on exported cotton was proposed by the Governor in 1918 and brought into force from the beginning of 1919. The exports of cotton in hundredweights were

in 1918	…	…	91,000
in 1919	…	…	128,000
in 1920	…	…	186,000
in 1921	…	…	290,000

But I cannot trace any connection between this increase and the imposition of the tax.

The tax has certainly not prevented this increase.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the duty on the export of hides from Northern Nigeria has rendered impossible the export of all but the finest skins, and that thousands of hides have had to be destroyed owing to the heavy cost of marketing; and will he consult the Governor of Nigeria as to the advisability of abolishing the export duty without delay?

It would, I think, be more accurate to say that the fact that recently it had not paid to export ordinary hides from Nigeria has been due to the great fall in the value here of such hides, rather than to the cost of marketing them. The price obtainable for them was, I understand, about 1s. 3d. a pound when the export duty of 2d. a pound was imposed, and the price has now fallen to 5d. or 6d. a pound. As the House was informed on 4th July, large reductions in the export duties on Nigerian hides and skins have been approved. The reduction in the case of raw hides will be from 2d. to ½d. a pound, and it is hoped that this will enable exporters to pay prices to the natives which will revive the trade. It is not proposed to remove the export duty altogether.

Why should not this duty be removed altogether if it is the wish of the people of Nigeria that it should be removed and if the money could be raised in other ways to which they are already accustomed in the Colony?

It is the wish of a great many people in a great many countries that a great many duties should be removed. Unhappily, it is not possible to balance the Budget under those conditions.

Why not leave the selection of the alternative tax to them, as was done in the case of settlers in Kenya and elsewhere, where the Colony itself is prepared to suggest an alternative tax?

I think that, while we have the responsibility for the administration, we must be the judges of the best method of balancing the Budget.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the French Administration of Dahomey imposes an export duty upon palm products, and how this compares with the export duties imposed by Great Britain upon the exports of the palm products of the native producers in the neighbouring territories of Sierra Leone and Nigeria?

I am not certain what the exact rates of the export duties in Dahomey on palm oil and palm kernels are at present. My latest information was that they were 49 francs 50 centimes and 24 francs 75 centimes per 1,000 kilos respectively. The Nigerian rates are £3 and £2 a ton respectively, and the Sierra Leone rates, £1 0s. 10d. and £1 a ton.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the policy of imposing heavy duties upon the export of raw material of the African Dependencies was adopted by the local Governors upon their own responsibility, or whether this departure in British Colonial policy was first considered and sanctioned by the Cabinet?

I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the reply which I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for the Western Isles (Dr. Murray). I am not aware that such revenue export duties in the Colonies have been submitted to the Cabinet of this country by past Secretaries of State. Export duties, of course, exist in a large number of Colonies.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think it would be a good thing to submit duties of this kind to the responsible authorities here?

I was under the impression that I was one of the responsible authorities here, and that this was a sphere particularly confided to me upon which to exercise my responsibility.

Would it not be advisable to have some sort of coordination of taxes? Why should there be export duties on the West Coast and import duties on the East Coast? Why this difference? Would it not be possible to have some sort of Committee appointed in order to co-ordinate these systems of indirect taxation?

What a pity my hon. and gallant Friend did not raise this question when the matter was before the House.

I did raise it.

In the case of Crown Colonies—

This is a matter that should be debated on the Estimates.

asked the Home Secretary if it is proposed to withdraw the police from His Majesty's dockyards and magazines and substitute inexperienced men; if so, what date has been fixed for this; and will compensation be given to the displaced men to meet the costs of removal of their homes and families to London and elsewhere?

I have been asked to reply. Solely in the interests of economy, and in compliance with the recommendation of the Geddes Committee, the Admiralty are arranging, as I explained in the Debate on Navy Estimates on the 16th March last, to substitute a special Marine Pensioner Police Force for Metropolitan Police for the work of protecting some of our establishments other than the Royal Dockyards. The introduction of this new Force is being pressed on as rapidly as possible, and I hope that the substitution will take place in the autumn. The Metropolitan Police thus relieved will be transferred by the Commissioner to other duties at no expense to the men themselves, in accordance with the usual procedure adopted in the case of transfers made in the "interest of the Service."

I could not hear half of what the right hon. Gentleman said, but will he answer this point? If these men have to return to London, will they have money found for them to pay the cost of their removal; and, secondly, are the men who are to take the place of the Metropolitan Police to get a less wage than that paid to the Metropolitan Police?

I did explain that the men will be brought back to whatever work they undertake at the cost of the Service. The new Marine Pensioner Force will be a cheaper force than the Metropolitan Police.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is now in a position to say whether legislation will be introduced at an early date to carry out the suggestions for immediate action contained in the Deer Forests Report, namely, the extension of deer forests to be forbidden by Statute, except with special sanction from the Secretary for Scotland, an annual return of the stock of sheep and cattle in each deer forest to be made to the Board of Agriculture, and local committees, with independent chairmen, to classify the deer forests and determine the stock that each should carry?

Clauses dealing with the points mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend are included in the Bill which has been drafted to give effect to recommendations of the Committees on Game and Heather Burning and Deer Forests. I hope that it may be possible, after the Recess, to proceed with the Bill as a whole, but, if not, I shall keep in view the question of proceeding separately with the Clauses in question.

Will it be possible to introduce the Bill before the House rises, so that we may have an opportunity of considering the Bill in the Recess?

I think not.

asked the Postmaster-General whether any decision has been reached as to the terms and conditions under which licences for wireless broadcasting are to be issued; and whether the licences are to contain a provision that only British instruments shall be used?

I have intimated to a committee, representing the manufacturers of wireless apparatus in this country, the conditions on which I propose to grant licences for broadcasting, and I understand these proposals will be submitted to the general body of manufacturers forthwith. I have informed the manufacturers that, in the event of their supplying the capital required and providing efficient broadcasting services, I will agree that the apparatus, which it will be permissible to use under the Post Office licence for the reception of those services, shall for two years be restricted to apparatus manufactured in Great Britain.

May I ask the Leader of the House whether, before any definite understanding is come to in that connection, the House will have an opportunity of discussing what is a novel form of procedure and of monopoly?

Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, may I ask whether he has power to do this?

Yes, Sir; power is given to me under the Act passed by this House.

What, to impose a protective system?

No, to issue licences, and it is inconceivable to me that we should allow a new form of communication in this country to be exploited by foreign manufacturers.

Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman is going to undertake advantage of his powers of license to impose in this hole-and-corner way a protective system in this country?

It is not a protective system, but merely a proper method of protecting a new means of communication in this country.

In view of the widespread unemployment in this country, is not the decision a perfectly proper one?

asked the Postmaster-General what progress has been made in respect to the installation of rural telephones since the Post Office Estimates were introduced; and whether he will state to what extent the party-line system has been adoped in such installations?

As a result of the more liberal terms for rural extensions of the telephone system announced in the Estimates Debate, support has already been obtained for 13 new exchanges. They will be installed as soon as possible. Canvasses are also in progress at a number of places where there is good prospect of securing adequate support. Since the 1st May, 662 additional rural party-line telephones have been installed and 151 call offices opened at provincial post offices, chiefly in rural districts. Statistics are not available as to the total number of exchange lines added to existing rural exchanges during the same period, but they are probably considerable. It has also been possible, in view of the recent concessions, to authorise the extension of the trunk system to the existing exchange at Fort William. The service will probably be available about the end of this month.

How many railway stations in rural areas now have telephones?

I cannot say without notice. I shall be glad to get the information.

asked the Post master-General whether he is aware that for such familiar communications as orders for goods, invoices and statements the advantage of the halfpenny postal rate is largely destroyed by the condition that unless posted before 3.30 p.m. in London and 3.45 p.m. in the country they will not be despatched on the day of posting; and if he will give instructions that some effective distinction be made between ordinary circulars and communications of a special and individual nature which, although coming within the halfpenny rate, possess a degree of importance both as regards their nature and time of posting and delivery?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. A. T. Davies) on the 6th July. I regret that I could not see my way to make a distinction between packets sent at the halfpenny rate, based on the nature of their contents. Such a course would defeat the object for which the new Regulation was framed.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, with reference to the representations he has received from the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme in favour of securing that Newcastle may be in future not a sub-office but a branch office of Stoke-on-Trent, he has given attention to the inferior service and facilities that a sub-office could supply; and whether, in view of all these facts, he has yet decided on the future status of the post office at Newcastle?

The whole matter is under inquiry. I may say, however, that the administrative status of an office does not as a rule affect the public facilities provided.

Can we take it that is this case, whatever happens, the public facilities will not suffer?

The whole matter is under inquiry, and I would wish to reserve any statement until I see the developments.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the site for the proposed high-power wireless station has been selected; and by what date it is hoped to have the installation completed?

A site for the proposed high power station has been selected provisionally, his final adoption depends on the result of certain inquiries which are now in progress. It is not possible at this stage to say by what date the installation is likely to be completed.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the Treasury sanction was given on the l5th September, 1921, for the revised rates of pay for salaried sub-postmasters; if so, in how many instances has this recommendation been carried out; and when it is proposed to apply the new scale to all officers concerned?

Treasury authority for a revision of the pay of salaried sub-postmasters was received in September, 1921; but the revision could not be carried out independently of the revision of the pay of head postmasters, which was closely associated with it. The revised basis of pay for these grades was promulgated at the end of January last. About half the offices have been dealt with, and the remaining revisions are being carried out as quickly as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that great dissatisfaction has been expressed by members of the public at the decision of the licensing justices in insisting on the evening hours at which licensed premises shall be open in London on Sundays being from 6 to 9 p.m.; and whether he will forthwith take steps to have the hours on Sunday filtered to 7 to 10 p.m.?

I am aware that the decisions of the justices in this matter have given dissatisfaction to some persons, but it is by no means the case that there is agreement on the question. I have no power to take any action such as is suggested in the latter part of the question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when the Bill passed through the House, the House compromised, and it was understood that reasonable latitude would be allowed with regard to these various hours; and is he aware also that the Bill would not have passed through the House if there had been any suggestion that on Sundays these houses would be closed at 9 o'clock?

Of course, I cannot tell what would have happened.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on one side of the road licensed premises are opened at 6 o'clock, and on the other side at 7 o'clock, and that on one side they close at 9 and on the other side 10 o'clock? Does he not understand these anomalies?

The hon. Member should confine himself to a question.

It was my first shot in.

The hon. Member has given information which, I think, we all have.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the great congestion of traffic at some hours of the day within the Metropolitan police district of London, and the consequent grave loss of time to the business community, he will consider the question of a revision of the traffic regulations, particularly with a view to securing some classification of traffic and some provision that certain classes of traffic should be restricted from passing along certain thoroughfares except during fixed hours?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport whether his attention has been drawn to the great increase in motor vehicles in the streets of London, and the corresponding decrease in horse-drawn vehicles; if he is aware that the whole traffic in certain streets is frequently held up by slow-moving horse-drawn vehicles, especially in the City and its environs; whether this matter is being dealt with in any way: and whether he will consider the desirability of reserving certain avenues of traffic for motor vehicles only?

As the hon. and gallant Members are aware, the whole question of London traffic was considered exhaustively by a Departmental Committee under the chairmanship of the late Member for the Hornsey Division (Mr. Kennedy Jones). Legislation would be required to give compulsory effect to the suggestions of the hon. Members, and, in view of the consideration of the whole question of London government which is now being given by a Royal Commission, I do not think it desirable to introduce legislation. A Committee, however, on which the police authorities and the principal traffic agencies are represented, meets regularly at the Ministry of Transport, and has, by agreement, secured many improvements.

Does the hon. Gentleman know that, notwithstanding all these Commissions and Select Committees that have been set up the Reports are put in the archives, and nothing is done?

Does the hon. Gentleman realise the great loss of time, and the great loss of money as represented by the waste of petrol and time?

Quite so, and for that reason many of the matters are being dealt with by the Committee I have mentioned.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the Ministry of Transport have, at the instance of the Treasury, refused to pay grants out of the Road Fund to highway authorities in respect of the repayment of principal and payment of interest on loans raised prior to the 15th August, 1919, for the reconstruction of main roads classified by the Ministry; and, seeing that this decision is inequitable in its operation, inasmuch as it penalises those authorities which have taken early steps to improve the condition of their roads in accordance with the requirements of modern traffic, and benefits those authorities which are only now undertaking similar work, in these circumstances, he is now prepared to reconsider the matter, and to give instructions that the repayment of principal and payment of interest on loans raised prior to 15th August, 1919, shall be regarded as charges for maintenance and repair, and admitted for grant accordingly?

I have been asked to reply, and, as I informed the hon. and gallant Member for Royton on the 11th instant, I am unable to hold out any hope of a reversal of the Government's decision.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that in the work of constructing the new arterial roads at Eastwood and Rayleigh, Essex, over 500 men resident in the London area are employed: that these workers, who are employed five days a week, have to travel long distances to their task, thereby involving them in additional travelling expenses and adding greatly to the length of their working day, making it necessary in some cases for workmen to be absent from their homes 14 hours of the day; that if the weather is unsuitable for work they still have to travel to the site of the work and then return home without doing work or receiving any pay; and will he consider the advisability of forming temporary camps under canvas on sites near their work, where the men could be accommodated from Monday to Friday, the working days of the week returning to their homes for the weekend?

I have been asked to reply. The men's travelling expenses are paid between the London terminus and the site of the work, and every endeavour has been made by means of arrangements with the railway companies and the contractors to reduce to a minimum the inconvenience of travel. The formation of temporary camps presents considerable difficulties, and although this expedient has not been lost sight of, it has not been found possible to adopt it.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that on some parts of these roads the men during certain parts of the day have to wait 2½ hours before they can get back to their homes.

I have made a personal inspection of these roads and shelter is being provided as far as possible.

asked the Home Secretary whether, as reported in the trial arising out of the Tipton explosion, the Disposal Board are under no obligation to inform purchasers of munitions for breaking-up purposes that a licence is required, and that the police also have no orders and no information on this matter; and whether, with a view to affording some protection to workers in this dangerous industry he will introduce legislation, either by way of an amendment of the Explosives Act or otherwise, requiring that the Disposal Board shall inform the purchaser of the necessity of obtaining such a licence, and shall inform the Home Office of the purchase made and of the place where it is proposed to deal with the explosives, and that before workers may be employed the Home Office shall inspect the premises, and also within a very short period after work is begun?

The Disposal Board have in every case informed purchasers of the necessity for complying with the requirements of the Explosives Act. The breach of the law at Tipton was due to the licensed firm sub-contracting with another firm, which was unlicensed, to do part of the breaking down. This was done without the knowledge of the Disposal Board. The Board now make it a condition of all such sales that no subcontract shall be entered into without their consent. They are also notifying all sales to the Home Office. As regards the last part of the question, the works are always inspected by the Explosives Department before a licence is issued, and the earliest opportunity is taken of inspecting them after they have started working. Fresh legislation does not appear to be necessary.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any sub-sales have taken place by the disposal of these articles to rebels in Ireland?

That question had better be put on the Paper.

asked the Home Secretary whether he has read the Report of the trial arising out of the Tipton explosion, and the comment of the judge that there was at the factory concerned a gross exploitation of the work of little boys and girls; and whether, in view of the fact that several children of 14 and 15 perished in the explosion, he will introduce an Amendment to the Explosives Act prohibiting the employment of these young persons in the highly dangerous occupation of handling and breaking up explosives?

The Explosives Act already prohibits the employment in a danger building of any person under 16 years of age, except in the presence and under the supervision of a grown-up person. I will consider whether the Act should not be amended so as to make the prohibition absolute.

Is it not a fact that the Government might have taken the wisest course by controlling these munitions, and then these children's lives would have been saved?

asked the Home Secretary if he has statistical or other informa- tion which enables him to say whether the substantial decrease in drunkenness, as evidenced by convictions in the year 1920 as compared with 1919, has since been maintained?

There was an increase, not a decrease, of convictions for drunkenness as between 1919 and 1920. In 1921 there was a decrease, as shown by the Volume of Licensing Statistics recently published. I have no figures yet for 1922.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly say whether the figures just published relate to 1920 or 1921?

They are published for both years, and those for 1920 show that there was an increase over 1919, and those for 1921 show a decrease compared with 1920.

asked the Home Secretary whether following upon the representations of the Somerset County Council and other bodies, he will invite their opinion as to the mental, moral, and physical harm done to children and young persons by certain classes of cinema exhibitions and the means of remedy most suited to their local conditions?

I shall be glad to consider any information which the Somerset County Council or any other local authority may think it useful to submit to me on this subject, but I do not propose to make any special inquiries.

asked the Home Secretary whether the statement of nspector Wyles contained in the Paper which he recently laid upon the Table of the House was made direct to the Commissioner of Police or through the inspector's immediate superior officer; and is it in accordance with police discipline for subordinate officers to communicate with headquarters except through their immediate superior officers?

Inspector Wyles' statement was made to the Assistant Commissioner charged with the immediate control of the branch which administers the women police. As I stated last Tuesday, the whole matter will form the subject of disciplinary inquiry; and it is not desirable that I should offer any comment at the present stage.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of the question, which raises the general practice, and not a particular case?

It is a pure matter of the circumstances of each case. In some cases it is right, and in some cases wrong.

When the inquiry is completed, will the House have an opportunity of reviewing its decision, which was so much influenced by the statements of the Home Secretary?

That question should not be addressed to me.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether his attention has been called to the case of Private A. G. D., Royal Marine Light Infantry, who was discharged from the Navy in November last suffering from spinal consumption, and was informed that his pension would be sent him in due course, but in spite of this promise later received a communication that he was not eligible, and on further inquiries being made it-was admitted after much delay that the mistake arose by a misreading of the doctor's report of "yes" for "no": and, in view of the great inconvenience suffered by this man, will he have special inquiries made and see that mistakes of this kind do not occur again?

The Ministry were not in a position to deal with this case until the end of May when the invaliding papers were received. I much regret that an erroneous notification of rejection was sent to the man; but I may say that the mistake was discovered within a week and corrected by an award of pension. Pension is now in payment and all arrears owing have been issued.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that at the end of last week this pensioner had not been paid?

I am giving my information up to date. I have already ordered an inquiry to see how this mistake came to be made, so as to avoid the like in future.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that I received a letter from this man on Saturday, saying he had not been paid, although he wrote earlier saying he had been?

asked the Minister of Pensions whether the officers' wound pensions and disability retired pay are likely to be reduced in 1923, or whether those at present in receipt of them canrely on no reduction being made on the 1914 warrant?

The present rates of disability retired pay generally were fixed in accordance with the recommendations of the Select Committee on Pensions and are, by the provisions of the Royal Warrant, subject to re-adjustment in 1923 in accordance with the rise or fall in the cost of living. Retired pay where drawn concurrently with a wound pension, at the rate and subject to the conditions authorised by the Pay and Pension Warrant, 1914, is preserved by the provisions of the Royal Warrant of the 2nd July, 1920, as an irreducible minimum. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of this warrant, and I would invite his attention to Article 30A and the Fourth Schedule.

Is my hon. and gallant Friend aware that the recommendations of this Select Committee in regard to the sliding scale ware not adopted by the Government, but were altered when the Bill was brought in?

I was asked for certain information, and I have answered the original question. The hon. and gallant Gentleman's question raises another point. Perhaps be will put down a question.

asked the Minister of Pensions what action has been taken to carry into effect the provisions of the War Pensions Act, 1921, for the making of final awards; and whether he has received any, and, if so, how many appeals in respect of final awards which have so far been made?

Regulations to give effect to the provisions of the War Pensions Act, 1921, for the making of final awards were issued in January last, and have since been in active operation. The latest figures available show that 8,500 appeals against final awards have been received, and these are being dealt with as rapidly as possible by the Ministry and by the independent Assessment Appeal Tribunals set up under the War Pensions Act of last year.

asked the Minister of Pensions what progress has been made in carrying out the reorganisation of war pension areas in conformity with the provisions of the War Pnsions Act, 1921: and what will be the paving in staff as a result of these changes?

Sixty-five War Pensions Committees have been established under the provisions of the War Pensions Act, 1921, and 63 other Committees are actually in course of formation. Very considerable reductions in staff have already been effected, and it is anticipated that the re-organisation of War Pensions Areas throughout the United Kingdom will bring about a reduction in the staff of local offices of more than 25 per cent. It is estimated that this reduction of staff, together with the more economical disposal of accommodation, will result in a saving of £300,000 in administrative expenses in the present year.

asked the Minister of Pensions whether the widow of the late Mr. F. Alsopp, No. 477120, sapper, Royal Engineers, has not yet received any pension or allowance as the result of the death of her husband from an illness alleged to be due to military service; and whether, having regard to the urgency of the case, he will expedite the necessary inquiries?

This case has been fully considered in the light of all the available evidence, but I regret that it has not been found possible to admit the widow's claim to pension. She has been informed of her right of appeal to the Pensions Appeal Tribunal against this decision.

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether it is proposed to move the directorate of research from London to Farnborough; what is the total number of personnel involved; whether the difficulties of housing the present royal aircraft establishment staff at Farnborough have already been made more acute by the transfer of the staff from Biggin Hill; whether suitable arrangements for providing adequate housing will be made before such transfer is effected: whether he will guarantee that reasonable notice is given to the staff concerned before such move is made: and that no member of the staff be requested to move without at least six months' notice, in order that the hardship and inconvenience inevitable to those having houses or flats in London may be reduced as far as possible?

The answer to the first and second questions is that it is proposed, for purposes of economy, subject to Treasury approval, to transfer some of the work of the Directorate of Research from London to Farnborough, but the extent of the transfer has not yet been settled, and consequently I cannot, at present, state the number of personnel concerned. To the third, that there is no difficulty in regard to unmarried staff, for whom quarters are provided, and there is still room in these quarters for an increase of scientific staff. On the other hand, no married quarters are provided, and the construction of married quarters for civilian staff is not considered practicable. To the fifth and sixth questions, that the staff generally have been aware of these proposals for some months, and when the proposals are approved those who are to be transferred will be given as much notice as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Air what is the total sum which has been authorised by the Ministry for expenditure on sites and buildings; and what is the total sum which has been authorised for expenditure in the building of aeroplanes and for the assistance of civil aviation?

I assume that my hon. Friend refers to the sums authorised in the current year's Estimates. On this assumption, the answer to the question is that £1,622,000 is taken in this year's Estimate for capital expenditure on buildings and purchase of lands; of this sum, half is for services overseas and half of the remainder is for purchase of land already in occupation and for improvements to existing accommodation at home. In this connection, I would remind my hon. Friend that, as the Air Force is almost entirely accommodated in temporary huts of War-time erection, these require a considerable amount of attention and repair to maintain them in a habitable condition. The remaining 25 per cent., i.e., about £400,000, is mainly devoted to meet the most urgent requirements for the replacement of accommodation which has become wholly inadequate.

The answer to the second part of the question is that £1,517,600 is taken for the purchase and reconditioning of aeroplanes, seaplanes, engines, and spares, including experimental work; and £335,000 is taken for civil aviation exclusive of meteorology, inspection and research services.

Is it proposed to make any part of this expenditure in Ireland, seeing that during the Bill she contributed so largely—

Would the hon. Member put that question down. It does not arise here.

On a point of Order. Does it not arise—

I must be the judge of that. It does not arise on this question.

asked the Secretary of State for Air if his attention has been drawn to the circumstances in which Observer-Officer Harold Smith has been retired from the Air Force; whether it is considered that the offence committed by this officer in August last on the night of the annual sports of his unit was of a nature serious enough to merit dismissal from the force; whether the incident in which Mr. Smith was involved during previous service in India was taken into account in the determining of his punishment for the later offence; why has he been given a character on retirement of such an unsatisfactory nature as to prevent him taking up other employment which was open to him; and if an inquiry will be held into the whole matter at an early date?

In answer to the first question, I personally investigated all the circumstances connected with the service of Observer-Officer Harold Smith in the Royal Air Force before he was called upon to resign his commission, and was satisfied that his retention as an officer was not desirable in view of the reports which had been received as to his conduct. In answer to the second and third questions, the incident referred to was the culminating offence which, taken by itself, might not have entailed upon the officer the call to resign his commission, but considered in conjunction with his previous record, which had necessitated his being placed under the strict supervision of his commanding officer on his return from India, indicated his unsuitability for retention as an office:. As regards the fourth question, the facts are that a fidelity guarantee company applied to the Air Ministry for confirmation of the statement that Mr. Smith had served in the Royal Air Force as an officer and inquired whether his service was entirely satisfactory. In accordance with their usual practice, the Ministry confined their reply to a confirmation of the fact that he had served as stated, and gave a reference to the "London Gazette." in which notice of his removal from the Air Force was published. No statement as to character was made. As regards the final question, I see no necessity for any further inquiry into the matter.

Is my right hon. and gallant Friend aware that this officer, who won the D.F. Cross, is unable to get any employment because the Ministry will give him no character of any sort, and is it not rather hard to continue the punishment of this officer after he has left the Force, and so practically to prevent him getting work?

My hon. and gallant Friend is an ex-service man, and he will clearly see that I have said as little as I possibly could.

Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that what he says in this House does not matter: it is the reports that are made to prospective employers of this officer that injure him. Will he look into that?