asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that all British judges who served in the native courts of Egypt since the British occupation always heard pleadings and delivered judgments in Arabic, thereby respecting the native language and customs; and whether His Majesty's Government will set an example to the other Powers by making a working knowledge of Arabic a condition in the future appointment of British judges in the mixed courts?

I am aware that the charter of the Egyptian native courts lays down that Arabic is the judicial language. It was therefore natural that during the period when British judges sat in those courts they should have been acquainted with Arabic. The charter of the mixed courts, on the other hand, provides that Arabic, English, French and Italian are the judicial languages to be used; there is therefore no valid reason for the adoption of the hon. Member's suggestion, which would considerably restrict the choice of candidates. But a knowledge of Arabic is naturally and properly a high qualification for service in any capacity under the Egyptian Government.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it would tend to create a better feeling in Egypt, if these judges were conversant with the language of the country in which they are engaged?

The charter names four languages and the ideal would be that every judge should be perfectly familiar with all four. That is setting a rather high standard. We do our best to be fair.

Would it not be better, in the interests of peace and concord in Egypt, if questions of this nature were not put on the Order Paper at all?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any communications regarding the desire of the Turkish Government for a modification of the Straits Convention of 1923; and what is the attitude of His Majesty's Government on this matter?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what representations have been received from the Turkish Government regarding the demilitarised zone adjoining the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus; and what attitude he has adopted in this matter?

The question of the possible modification of certain provisions of the Lausanne peace settlement, dealing with the demilitarised zones in the Straits, was tentatively raised over a year ago by the Turkish delegate before the General Commission of the Disarmament Conference at Geneva. It has not formed the subject of specific representations to His Majesty's Government. The question having, however, more than once been alluded to by Turkish Ministers in conversation, I took a recent opportunity of mentioning it to the Turkish Sinister for Foreign Affairs at Geneva. His Excellency then assured me that in present circumstances the Turkish Government did not propose to pursue the matter. In these circumstances the question of the attitude of His Majesty's Government no longer arises.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any progress has been made in pressing the claims of British subjects against the Spanish Government for damages and loss sustained during the riots at Malaga and elsewhere; and whether he will urge upon the Spanish authorities the need for settlement of these claims which have been outstanding for so long?

Further representations have been made since the date of the reply returned on this subject on 9th November last. While it has not been possible to induce the Spanish Government to accept liability, my hon. and gallant Friend may rest assured that no opportunity to bring about a settlement of these claims will be overlooked. I may mention that claims by other Governments on behalf of their nationals in respect of losses incurred during the riots in question are also outstanding.

In view of the fact that much the same answer has been given to this question for the last two years, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the matter can be brought to a definite issue within a reasonable space of time?

We are, naturally, anxious not only to bring it to a definite conclusion, but to bring it to a favourable conclusion. It is in the effort to get a favourable conclusion that some delay is involved.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the Third International of Moscow is at present carrying on seditious propaganda among the armed forces of the Crown; what information is in the possession of his Department on this matter; and what action is it proposed to take?

I have been asked to reply. The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second part, it would not be in the public interest to publish such information as is available. With regard to the third part action can only be taken when there is sufficient evidence to show that a breach of the law has taken place.

Is it not the case that the learned Attorney-General said the other day that these documents are in daily circulation among the troops in this country; and surely the Foreign Office at any rate ought to take action towards the Government of Russia without whose connivance the Comintern could not exist for a day?

As the Attorney-General explained at the time, it is hoped that the Bill which he is at present piloting through Committee will enable the authorities to deal more effectively with people who are guilty of this offence.

Would it not be more to the point to attack this ulcer at its source and to attack the Comintern which is spreading this propaganda?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the claim of Japan to control the policy of China in respect of all political questions is admitted by His Majesty's Government?

I am not aware that the Japanese Government make any such claim as is suggested in the question. The hon. Member presumably has in mind the declaration made by a spokesman of the Japanese Ministry for Foreign Affairs on the 17th April last. I would draw his attention to the statement on the subject which I made in the House on 30th April in answer to questions put by my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Sir H. Cayzer) and the Member for South Shields (Mr. H. Johnstone).

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the official declaration by Marshal Pétain to the effect that Germany is now rearmed to the level of 1914; and whether His Majesty's Government have any information on this subject?

I understand from the Press that on the 6th June Marshal Pétain made a statement to the Army Commission of the Chamber of Deputies on the subject of German armaments. The proceedings of the Commission are secret and I have no official information as regards the details of the Marshal's statement. According to the official communiqué, as reproduced in the British Press, the Marshal drew attention to the strength of the para-military organisations, to the existence of a German military air force, and to the intensive manufacture of arms.

In view of the anxiety in this country, would it be possible for the Government to issue a statement showing the extent to which, in their opinion, Germany has observed the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles or, on the other hand, the extent to which those provisions are not being observed in this connection?

That is a matter which would need consideration. I could not deal with it in answer to a supplementary question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has now any information to give the House with regard to the economic arrangements made between Italy, Austria and Hungary consequent upon the signature of the Rome Protocol; and what effect these arrangements have upon our economic position in Central Europe?

I understand that agreements between Italy and Austria and Italy and Hungary respectively were signed at Rome on the 14th May. Pending the ratification and publication of these agreements, I am unable to reply to the last part of my hon. Friend's question, but the effect of these agreements on the trade of this country will naturally be watched with close attention by His Majesty's Government.

asked the Minister of Agriculture if he will inform the House as to the dates of the building agreements relating to the recently rebuilt properties in Regent

As the answer involves a long tabular statement, I propose, with my hon. Friend's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can my right hon. Friend give Regent Street as an exhibition of the beneficial results of the nationalisation of land, in view of the enormous rents exacted from these people?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he can make any statement with regard to the proposals recently submitted by the herring-fishing industry for the grant of temporary assistance by the Government?

Yes, Sir. I met representatives of the herring producers' associations on Friday, when agreement was reached on schemes by which, subject to the approval of Parliament, funds will be provided up to a limit of £50,000 for the purpose of loans at 3 per cent. repayable in three years for the purchase of nets, and in addition the Government will undertake to meet any amount by which the boat's share of the net earnings at the end of the season falls short of £50 or the actual expenditure on fitting out, whichever is less. The undertaking will apply to Scottish or English drifters of over 65 feet in length which engage in the summer herring fishing from ports in Scotland and on the North East Coast of England and are included in a list containing not more than 1,000 vessels submitted by the producers' associations to the Fishery Departments not later than 14th July. The Government undertaking will only operate if the number of drifters of the type specified which have commenced fishing on or before 7th July is under 1,000. I desire to emphasise this condition. Supplementary Estimates for the provision of the necessary funds will be submitted to the House and full particulars of the schemes will be published immediately.

Are we to understand that if the number of boats slightly exceeds 1,000, the whole liability of the Government under the second heading falls to the ground?

That is a hypothetical question. I made it very clear to the members of the herring producers' associations that the Government undertaking was only given on the understanding that the number would not exceed 1,000.

Does that mean that a boat that proceeds to sea now does not know whether in fact eventually there will be any undertaking by the Government at all?

No. All the boats that have gone to sea under this agreement will be put on this list.

Is the second part of the right hon. Gentleman's proposal expected to be defrayed by the £50,000, or is it in addition?

I purposely used the words "in addition."

When is this matter likely to be submitted to the House?

Until I receive particulars of the money required, it would not be in keeping with the practice of Parliament to submit Estimates. Full particulars in detail will be published at the very earliest moment.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he has received a report from his inspector in connection with the explosion that occurred at the Cumberland County Council's stone quarry at Baron Cross, Stainton, near Penrith, at which five men were injured; if he can state the cause of the explosion; and whether the men are seriously injured?

My hon. Friend has received a report on this acci- dent, from which it appears that on 1st June five shot holes were fired in the quarry face to blast down the stone. Three days later, while the shot firer and another workman were removing the loose stones with crow bars, an explosion occurred at one of the holes. The shot firer was severely injured and, unfortunately, has since died in hospital; out of a number of men working on the quarry floor two were severely injured, and two others were slightly injured. It is evident that the explosion was caused by some explosive remaining in one of the shot holes, and it is probable that the shot firer accidentally struck or disturbed it with his crow bar and caused it to explode.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the barn owls of Great Britain, which are of great service to farmers in destroying vermin, are gradually becoming extinct; and whether he will take steps to protect these birds from destruction?

No representations on the subject have been made to me, and I have no power to make Orders under the Wild Birds Protection Acts except on the application of the councils of counties and county boroughs. Under the Wild Birds Protection Act, 1880, the owl is protected during the period 1st March–1st August, and Orders extending this protection to the whole of the year and protecting the eggs of the bird are in force in the majority of counties and county boroughs in England and Wales. The prohibition imposed by the Act and by the Orders applies to owners and occupiers of land as well as to the general public.

Can my right hon. Friend say what steps will have to be taken to place these beautiful birds in the same category as green plovers, which are now generally protected throughout the country?

I cannot say. I think the great majority of counties and county boroughs have already protected them for the full year. I do not know whether anything further can be done.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is satisfied from reports received of the initial performances of the rodeo at the White City that no action is called for on the part of his Department?

I understand that a report of the opening performance has been submitted to the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and is now under consideration.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that an otherwise thoroughly sporting performance was slightly impaired by two steers galloping into a gate and hurting themselves, and, in view of the fact that the performances would not be materially affected by having this gate open instead of shut, will my right hon. Friend draw the attention of the management to this point?

I have not yet had the opportunity of reading the report of the Commissioner; when I have I will consider that point.

asked the Home Secretary if he is aware that the British Union of Fascists have organised an air defence force and an armoured-car section; and if he intends taking action in the matter?

No, Sir, I am not aware that the British Union of Fascists have organised an Air defence force, though I am aware that in May last a flying meeting was held in Gloucestershire at which a number of Fascists attended. I should be glad to consider any information in the possession of the hon. Member. As regards the use of armoured cars, I am informed that the four vehicles in question are in no way armoured but are ordinary commercial vehicles with wire protection at the windows which are used to convey members of the organisation to and from meetings.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he has read the supplementary question which I put to him the other day? If not, I will read some of it——

I cannot allow the hon. Member to do that now.

Well, then, may I ask the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to a statement made last year by the uncrowned king of the Fascist movement, that he is prepared to meet the situation with machine guns and that his party is organised for a struggle with violence? I want to ask the Home Secretary why, if that statement is in the hands of the chief of police, action was not taken against him then? Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that when the hon. Member who is now talking made a less violent speech in Trafalgar Square, he was pinched?

We have all the information available, but I invite the hon. Gentleman to give me any further information.

Is it not a fact that the air defence force referred to is a flying club on all fours with other flying clubs in this country?

asked the Home Secretary the number of persons injured at the Fascist meeting at Olympia on the 7th June?

asked the Home Secretary whether he has received a report from the Commissioner of Police in connection with the serious disturbances at the Fascist meeting at Olympia no Thursday night, 7th June; the number of persons injured and the number taken to hospital for treatment; whether he has been able to find out the fundamental aims and objects of this organisation; and whether he intends taking any action in the matter?

asked the Home Secretary how many baton charges were made by the police outside Olympia on Thursday night the 7th instant; how many police were injured in the disturbances; and why it was considered necessary to employ 1,000 police in this neighbourhood?

asked the Home Secretary what steps are now proposed to prevent any further outbreak of Blackshirt brutality?

I think that it will be for the convenience of the House if I make a general statement at the end of Questions in reply to these questions.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that unnecessary violence such as that shown by persons wearing political uniforms at Olympia on 7th June will inevitably provoke retaliation, the Government will give an early date for the discussion of measures to avert this menace to public order and political good will?

Perhaps my hon. Friend would await the statement to be made after Questions by the Home Secretary, but, as regards time, I would point out that the matter could be raised on the appropriate Vote on an allotted Supply Day.

Early in May it was announced that a meeting organised by the British Union of Fascists would be held at Olympia on the 7th instant and would be addressed by Sir Oswald Mosley. The Commissioner of Police subsequently received information that the Communist party of Great Britain proposed to make a counter demonstration against this meeting, the counter demonstration to take the form of an organised opposition inside Olympia, and a monster mass demonstration outside Olympia. In the light of this information it became the duty of the Commissioner to make adequate arrangements for carrying out the responsibilities that fall on the police on occasions of this character.

The question of the extent of the responsibility of the police for preserving order at public meetings was fully considered by a Departmental Committee appointed by one of my predecessors, the right hon. Herbert Gladstone, in 1909, and the present policy is based on the recommendations of that Committee. In accordance with that policy, it is no part of the ordinary duty of the police to deal with interrupters at public meetings held on private premises, and they have no legal authority to enter the premises except by leave of the occupier or the promoters of the meeting or when they have good reason to believe that a breach of the peace is being committed. Nor again is it any part of the duty of the police to act as stewards at a meeting, but the police have been advised by the Home Office that, on extraordinary occasions when there is a definite reason to apprehend disturbance of a serious character, they should make arrangements for policing the meeting inside as well as outside if they are asked to do so by the persons responsible for convening the meeting.

On the present occasion, the British Union of Fascists informed the Commissioner that the Fascists did not require the assistance of the police inside the building and at no stage was any request made for police to enter the meeting. On one occasion, however, a small party of uniformed police entered the precincts of Olympia, but not the meeting itself, on being informed that there was a man who required attention.

The Commissioner took the necessary steps for controlling traffic and the crowd in the vicinity of Olympia before and during the meeting, and he arranged for a number of both foot and mounted police to be kept ready in reserve. In all, about 760 police were detailed for these purposes, and in view of what took place at Olympia, I think that the House will agree that the precautions which the Commissioner deemed it necessary to take were in no sense excessive.

As regards the disturbance inside Olympia, I have already explained that the police were not called into the meeting, and I have nothing to add to the very full accounts which have already appeared in the Press. Allegations have been made by responsible eye-witnesses that assaults were committed by the Fascist stewards in ejecting interrupters, but, as the law does not allow undue violence to be used and as the question whether unnecessary force was used may come before the courts, it would not be proper for me to make any comment on these allegations. I think, however, I ought to point out that, hitherto, the advice as regards police action has been based on the assumption that the stewards of a meeting in dealing with interrupters will act without undue violence and will themselves avoid illegal acts. If this assumption should be found to be unwarranted as regards meetings promoted by any particular organisation, the whole policy of police action inside such public meetings will have to be reviewed.

As regards what took place outside Olympia, the Commissioner informs me that, while the meeting was assembling, considerable numbers of persons collected outside the building and that it was necessary to clear the approaches to the hall. Throughout the duration of the meeting, crowds remained in the roads adjacent to Olympia, and at times became disorderly. During the course of the evening 23 persons were arrested by the police on charges of assault, obstructing the police, and using insulting words and behaviour, but I am informed that there were no baton charges by the foot police, though on one occasion a party of four mounted police drew their truncheons but did not use them. During the disturbances outside Olympia two constables and one woman were assaulted in the street and received slight injuries. It is know that a number of persons were injured inside the meeting, but the police are not aware of the number of persons so injured, though 10 persons are known to have received treatment at neighbouring hospitals for injuries believed to have been sustained during the disturbances inside Olympia. Order was finally restored soon after midnight.

I am sure that I am voicing the feeling of this House and of the country as a whole when I say that scenes of disorder on the scale which we have recently witnessed cannot be tolerated and that if they continue it may be necessary to arm the executive authorities with further powers for the purpose of preserving public order. I am not concerned to-day to apportion blame between the Fascists and the Communists. It is the function of the Government to preserve law and order. They would be failing in their duty if they allowed any faction, either of the Eight or of the Left, to disturb the public peace, and they are certainly not prepared to allow their responsibilities for the maintenance of order and the preservation of our free institutions to be usurped by any private and irresponsible body, no matter what may be their avowed aims or objects.

Is it not quite evident to the Home Secretary that the reason why Sir Oswald Mosley did not require the police inside was that he had hundreds of men there, brought from all parts of the country by train, and that the majority of them were armed with some very dangerous implements. [HON. MEMBERS: Oh! What about the Com- munists?"] Those implements were used inside the hall, as hon. Members of this House and others who were at the meeting can bear witness. Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that in consequence of the avowed declaration of the ultimate aim and object of this organisation it should be declared an illegal organisation—[HON. MEMBERS: "No"]—in exactly the same way as the Land League was declared illegal in Ireland?

Is the Home Secretary aware that the Fascists propose to hold a meeting at the White City on the Sunday before August Bank Holiday, and, in view of the fact that the White City holds ten times as many people as the Olympia, what steps is he going to take to prevent disturbances and casualties there?

In considering any future arrangements will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to ensure that any party in this country, however distasteful its views may be, has a chance of presenting its case to the public, and that the public are enabled to attend meetings without organised opposition and molestation?

Is my right hon. Friend aware that leaflets were issued in East London on the morning of Thursday urging East London workers to assemble at Stepney Green and march to Olympia in order to fight Fascism, warmongers and capitalists, and that a great demonstration did meet at Stepney Green and was escorted by the police to Olympia, with the object of fighting Fascism; and does the right hon. Gentleman not think that that ought to have been prevented, and that people who engage a hall, for whatever purpose, ought to be protected?

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when Sir Oswald Mosley stood for Smethwick in 1926 practically every Conservative meeting was broken up by his Socialist supporters; and, although a leopard may change his shirt frequently, is it not obvious that he cannot change his spots?

I think I have made it sufficiently clear that the view of His Majesty's Government is that a repetition of the kind of behaviour which has recently taken place cannot be tolerated. I am sure it is in the interests of every party in this country that our meetings should be orderly; and, as one who has been long accustomed to political meetings, and in fairly rough quarters sometimes, I have always found that if you make a reasonable appeal to the common sense of the audience you will succeed. There may be organised demonstrations but there are powers to deal with those, whoever may be running the meeting. All I want to say from the police point of view is that we try to take no part with either side, because the duty of the police is to keep order. I have no reason to think that they did not do so on this occasion.

Having regard to the information which they received, did the police take any steps to have a police observer within the meeting?

There is a distinct difference between uniformed police going to a meeting, which is not proper unless they are asked to go, and the police taking such steps as they think are desirable to have the fullest information of these meetings.

Were there not private detectives inside this meeting in the same way as there are at our meetings, and does it not seem strange that not one of the people who attended this meeting and were locked up belonged to the Fascists? Did the Fascists not use violence on several occasions?

I am not aware as to whether those who have been taken by the police were either Fascists or non-Fascists.

Is it not probable that they were the organised interrupters?

Without wishing to imply any criticism of the right hon. Gentleman's answers at this stage—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh!"]—I mean this entirely respectfully—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:

"To call attention to the violence accompanying the Blackshirt meeting at Olympia on Thursday, 7th June."

I am afraid that the Motion hardly complies with the Standing Order, if for no other reason than that it is not definite, and that I could not allow it.

May I make a submission on that. As to its definiteness I should have thought, with great respect, that what occurred last Thursday was all too definite. As to it being an urgent matter of public importance, surely the public are exposed to this danger of extraordinary and unprecedented disorder unless peculiar steps are taken?

I do not propose to make any remarks about what took place at Olympia. All I say is that the terms of the Motion do not comply with the Standing Order relating to the Adjournment.

In view of the importance of the matter, I beg to give notice that I shall raise it on the Adjournment at an early date.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the accident at the Whipsnade Zoo on 7th June, when a man was killed by lions, he will take steps to require keepers at this and other zoos to be armed with lethal or other weapons to enable them to deal with any such emergency effectively and also to ensure adequate precautions being taken?

I have no power to require keepers at zoos to be armed and I am not prepared to propose legislation on the subject.