asked the Secretary for Mines whether he is aware that, owing to the improved methods of cleaning coal large quantities of unsaleable material are left in and about colliery premises; and what consideration his Department has given to this question?

I am aware that modern methods of handling coal are successful in giving the consumer a cleaner product, from which it follows that more unsaleable material is extracted at the colliery. The disposal of this material must be dealt with by each colliery in the light of its particular circumstances.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this material is put into heaps at the collieries and that there is danger of spontaneous combustion? Nothing has been done about this matter, and I am asking the right hon. Gentleman to deal with it for the protection of the people working at the collieries.

I quite understand the point put by the hon. Member, but we do not see any means of dealing with the subject by general regulations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is before the House a Bill which would deal effectively with the subject, but that the Government will not give facilities for it?

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he is now in a position to say what reply he has had from the colliery owners as to what they intend to do with burning pit heaps and what methods they will adopt to prevent such fires starting?

I understand that representatives of the Mining Association have asked for an opportunity to discuss this question with the Secretary for Mines, and that a meeting will be arranged as soon as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have been asking this question at intervals for four months, and that I get the same reply every time? I do hope that something will be done.

We are getting nearer the date now.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether it is his intention during the shot-firing investigation he is now making to take into consideration and examine other means of breaking down coal, such as compressed-air blasting, as this is believed to be much safer?

I assume that the hon. Member refers to the study of simultaneous shot-firing which is at present in progress by a Sub-Committee of the Safety in Mines Research Board. This investigation is confined to the safe use of explosives, and does not extend to other means of breaking down coal. The use of such other means, however, receives constant attention and encouragement from His Majesty's inspectors, and the Mines Department is always ready to consider the merits of any new methods which may be brought to its notice.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there appeared recently in one of the scientific papers a statement about the practice in America? If I send that cutting on to the right hon. Gentleman, will he read it?

I will see that it falls into the proper hands.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a great many eminent mining men are not satisfied that simultaneous shot-firing ought to be practised, and will he have further inquiries made?

Yes, I am aware that there are differing opinions with regard to simultaneous shot-firing, and the hon. Member can take it that the matter is being closely examined now.

May I ask whether there is a committee at the Mines Department considering alternative methods of breaking down coal, without the use of explosives?

I think I had better be given notice of that question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us, when we are likely to know the name of the new Secretary for Mines?

asked the Secretary for Mines whether he will state the number of boys under 16 years of age killed in the mines in Great Britain during 1934 and the number injured which resulted in disablement for three days or more?

In 1934, 15 boys under 16 years of age were killed and 4,148 were disabled for more than three days by accidents below ground at mines under the Coal Mines Act. The corresponding figures for surface accidents were four killed and 1,026 injured.

asked the Secretary for Mines whether there is any evidence to show whether any coalowners under the existing quota system are disposing of their quotas at a price which is more profitable than would be obtained from the selling of coal upon the reopening of their own collieries?

No, Sir.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) whether he is aware that the French Government have made a statement that the reduction of tonnage of newsprint into France has been based upon a percentage of the tonnage supplied by each country in previous years, and that a quota of 500 tons has been allowed to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics when there has been no previous import into that country from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; and whether he has made, or proposes to make, representations to France to secure a larger British quota;

(2) whether he is aware that under the French quota restrictions the quantity of newsprint of United Kingdom manufacture which will be allowed to enter France at the minimum rate of duty during the year 1936 has been reduced to 392 tons as compared with 1,200 tons for a period of 14 months from November, 1934, to December, 1935; whether any representations have been made by His Majesty's Government to the French Government with a view to securing a larger share of the French import quota of newsprint for United Kingdom mills; and, if no such representations have been made, whether such representations will be made by His Majesty's Government in the immediate future?

The reduction of the United Kingdom share of the French quota for newsprint is due partly to the reduction of the total quota from 75,000 tons for the period November, 1934, to December, 1935, to 47,000 tons for 1936, and partly to the operation of the system adopted for dividing the quota among supplying countries. I am informed that the quota is divided roughly on the basis of the average imports during a period of three previous years, advancing the period one year each time; the division of the quota for November, 1934, to December, 1935, is based on imports in 1931–33, when the United Kingdom supplied 1.38 per cent. of the total, while the division of the 1936 quota is based on imports in 1932–34, when the United Kingdom supplied only 0.77 per cent. of the total. I regret that I do not see any ground on which the French Government could be requested to modify the basis of distribution of the quota. Moreover, under the present system of division the United Kingdom share would rise again to 1.28 per cent. in 1937. The allotment granted to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has not operated to reduce the United Kingdom allocation.

Do I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's answer that the share of the United Kingdom is increasing compared with the share that is allotted to other countries?

It varies from time to time, but there is a rise for 1936. I do not know how that would compare with some of the others.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the volume of trade between the several British Dominions and Germany for the last available 12 months?

As the answer involves a number of figures, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many instalments have been paid under the recent Anglo-Rumanian debt agreement?

One monthly instalment only has been paid. The Rumanian Government are being pressed to pay the instalments due on 15th May and 15th June.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when it is expected that payments will commence under the recently concluded Anglo-Brazilian debt agreement; and whether the sum of £1,000,000 is yet available for that purpose?

The cash payments provided for in Article 4 of the Anglo-Brazilian payments agreement will begin as soon as the necessary particulars regarding the arrears, which are now being collected as rapidly as possible by the Board of Trade and the Bank of Brazil, have been checked and analysed, and when the basis of distribution has been agreed with the Brazilian Government, as provided for in the Article. This process must inevitably take some little time. I have no reason to suppose that the £1,000,000 will not be available as soon as required.

May I ask whether any part of this £1,000,000 under the agreement of 27th March this year will be taken from the exchange already allotted to earlier British creditors?

I am afraid I could not answer that question without notice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that in Japan the minimum rates of wages paid by the Teikoku Rayon Company are 1s. 5d. a day for men, 8½d. for women; by the Toyo Rayon Company 1s. 3½d. for men, 7½d. for women; by the Kurishiki Silk and Asahi-Bemberg Companies 11¼d. to men, 5d. to women; and what steps he proposes to take to protect the work and wages of the British silk and artificial silk industries against the effect of these low wage rates?

I have seen a Press report that these rates of wages are payable to rayon yarn operatives in Japan. I would remind my hon. and gallant Friend that the silk duties were revised, in accordance with the recommendations of the Import Duties Advisory Committee, in July last.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Japanese socks I hold in my hand can be purchased for 1s. 2d. for 10 pairs; and how does he expect our British industries to stand against competition like that?

May I ask what progress is being made with the Anglo-Japanese agreement? Are the negotiations likely to come to a conclusion at an early date?

That question does not arise out of the answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the average prices for flour imports from France, Germany, and Italy per sack of 280 lbs. weight for the four months ended 30th April, together with the average prices obtained during the same period on the markets of origin, and the prices of British flour over the same period?

As the answer includes a number of figures, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give any figures to show the effect on imports and exports in Italy and Germany of their system of insisting that exports and imports to each country should balance?

I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the value of the trade of Italy and Germany during the first four months of each of the last three years. I am not

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury why the British milling industry failed to obtain drawback of duty upon exports of flour made wholly or in part from wheat which had already borne duties; and whether the scheme, based upon the Finance Act, 1932, submitted to the Import Duties Advisory Committee in May, 1933, is still under active consideration?

This application was advertised by the committee in 1933, but there was, I understand, delay on the part of the applicants in furnishing the necessary detailed information, and the committee thought it desirable to advertise it again at the end of March this year. It is now under active consideration.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he will consider the appointment of a captain of Edinburgh Castle with duties corresponding to those of the Lieutenant of the Tower of London?

I think my hon. and gallant Friend is referring to the office of Governor, which, in the 17th century, was styled "Governor and Constable," or "Captain and Governor," and was at one time held by the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Scottish Command. The title corresponding to the Lieutenant of the Tower of London would be Deputy-Governor. At the moment I can only say that the suggestion to revive the title of Governor will be considered.

If any such changes are to be made, will the right hon. Gentleman consider promoting the Constable of Caernarvon Castle to superintendent?

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office the number of animals, and the kind of animals, used for poison-gas experiments at Porton, Cambridge, and other places in this country, in the years 1925 to 1935; how many perished immediately; and how many died within one month?

During the years in question, chemical defence experi

asked the Minister of Agriculture the average wholesale price of English, Channel Islands, and foreign tomatoes for the past three years?

asked the Minister of Agriculture the number of

With the hon. Member's permission a statement is being circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT giving the average monthly prices of English, Channel Islands and foreign tomatoes during the past three years. Owing to the seasonal nature of the trade, yearly average prices would be misleading.

I have been asked to reply. Particulars of the acreage under wheat, oats and barley during the present year will not be available until early in August. A statement is being circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT giving the figures for 1933 and 1934.

asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether any conclusions have been reached regarding the restrictions of overseas meat imports?

I am not able to add anything to the answer on this subject which I gave the hon. Member for Colchester (Mr. Oswald Lewis) yesterday.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give a date when it will be possible to make a statement?

I will endeavour to explain the situation up to date on Thursday.

asked the Minister of Transport the total amounts spent on road construction in England and Wales for each year since 1929 to 1934?

The amounts spent by highway authorities in England and Wales on new construction of roads and bridges during each of the three years ended on 31st March, 1931, 1932 and 1933, were approximately £4,406,000, £6,240,000 and £3,822,000 respectively. These amounts are exclusive of administration expenses. Comparable particulars are not available for the financial year 1929–30 and those for the financial year 1933–34 will be published in due course in the Road Fund Report.

asked the Minister of Transport the numbers of motor vehicles, commercial and non-commercial, which have made use of the improved Forth ferry service at Queensferry, in each month between September, 1934, and May, 1935?

As the answer involves a number of figures I will, with my hon. and learned Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Minister of Transport whether, under the proposed London Passenger Transport improvement schemes, regard will be had to the claims of the South-Eastern district of London for greater tube facilities?

The electrification of the Southern Railway has improved the travelling facilities in South and South-East London, and the London Passenger Transport Board have informed me that in these circumstances they consider that other areas not so well served are more in need of improvement schemes.

(by Private Notice) asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give the House fuller particulars of the arrangements for the London Passenger Transport improvement schemes?

I am glad to state that the detailed arrangements between the Treasury, the London Passenger Transport Board, the London and North Eastern Railway and the Great Western Railway have now been concluded and an agreement has been initialled for signature by the parties. A White Paper containing a memorandum on the proposed financial resolution to authorise the introduction of the necessary Guarantee Bill will be available in the Vote Office this evening. Annexed to this memorandum is a copy of the agreement between the parties. The Financial Resolution authorising the introduction of the Bill will appear on the Order Paper to-morrow.

Is there any truth in the statement that appeared in some of the papers that the Government are to pay the interest on that £35,000,000?

No, Sir.

Will it not be necessary for private Bills to be introduced, and at once, to enable the work to be carried out; and has my right hon. Friend any information yet in reference to such private Bills?

Yes, Sir, private Bills will be necessary. I cannot tell my hon. Friend when they will be ready, but no time will be lost in the matter.

I beg to move, in page 2, line 3, at the beginning, to insert:

"As respects entertainments to which the next succeeding sub-section applies the said duty shall cease to be charged on payments not exceeding one shilling and as respects other entertainments."

The purpose of this Amendment, as no doubt the Chancellor of the Exchequer realises, is to extend the remission of Entertainments Duty which he has granted on all seats at sports and entertainments where the charge does not exceed 6d. We take the view that, while that is a remission of taxation which is well warranted in a great many quarters, and will undoubtedly give satisfaction to a large number of people, there are certain entertainments which do not get that benefit and which we think ought to come within the scope of the remission. The Entertainments Duty is a war tax, and it has been juggled with by different Chancellors of the Exchequer, who at different periods have found it necessary to placate public sentiment by granting some remission of the tax, while on other occasions the duty has been re-imposed. I think the right hon. Gentleman, during his Budget speech, made a statement regarding some of the plays and entertainments affected, and suggested that, if it were possible for him to grant a remission of the duty in the case of some of the entertainments mentioned in Sub-section (3) of Clause 1, it would confer a considerable benefit and at the same time would not endanger the balancing of his Budget. He, of course, is in a better position than I am to state how much money this Amendment would involve, but I do not think the sum would be so large as to make it necessary to consider any question of risk in accepting it. The entertainments in the case of which we are asking for an extension of the remission include

"a stage play, a ballet (whether a stage play or not), a performance of music (whether vocal or instrumental), a lecture, a recitation, a music hall or other variety entertainment, a circus or a travelling show,"

and I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree that in several of these cases the remission would confer a great deal of benefit. I am certain that hon. Members present will be able to enlarge upon the different classes of entertainments mentioned in the Sub-section, and will be able to show the benefit that would accrue to each and every one of these classes of entertainment. Taking the case of the circus or travelling show, where a marquee is set up at one of the periodical fairs which are held in small towns and villages throughout the country, where the charge for admission does not exceed 1s., the benefit that would accrue to those who run these entertainments and shows would be very considerable, and would go a long way to meet the expenses entailed upon them in travelling from one part of the country to another. It is unnecessary for me to detain the Committee at any length on this matter. The tax on the dearer seats will still be continued; we are only asking that the remission which has already been granted on the 6d. seats should be extended to those at 1s., but not over 1s.; and, in view of the smallness of the sum involved, I feel sure that the right hon. Gentleman will be prepared to meet us and accept the Amendment.

I trust that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will accept this Amendment. I am more anxious than ever to see an opportunity given to the legitimate stage to reduce its prices and so to get a larger clientele. While I have no objection to the cinema, I am anxious that those engaged in orchestras, instead of being mendicants on our streets, should have a favourable opportunity of employment in theatres. In our large cities, especially in Liverpool, the question of "canned" music is becoming acute, and when I look round, as I have had to do for the past 40 years, and see the popularity of the plays produced in Liverpool, I am convinced of the elevating influence that the theatre has upon our people. Recognising, as I do, that other forms of entertainment are now competing against the theatre, and finding that "canned" music is taking the place of the orchestra, I am anxious if possible to see a recrudescence of better times for those theatres which are now being practically driven out of business. The production of these plays in our great cities, and particularly Shakespearian plays, has a great educational influence on boys and girls from school, and many classes of people are able to see such productions without in any way impinging upon family life or involving any question of morals. They have had a good tendency. For these reasons, I would like if possible to see it popularised, so that a now dwindling professional body may once again take their place in the practice of the histrionic art.

Anyone who knows anything at all about it must be fully aware that the theatre is not the vagabond life it used to be in the olden days, but is really beneficial. If only our people could be encouraged to go and see good plays, and the theatres to engage artists, I am convinced that it would be beneficial, and the Chancellor would be doing a great justice if he could see his way to make the concession for which we ask to-day. In other classes of industry professional men have been thrown out of employment, and many theatres, owing to people not being able to go to see the plays, have not been able to keep their orchestras in employment. We have seen theatres turned into cinemas, displacing the performance of the drama and other stage plays, and orchestras have disappeared. It has been very hard lines upon professional musicians in their efforts to obtain a living. I want to see art, drama and the stage play take their proper part in the work of the nation. I am convinced that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would provide an opportunity for a reduction to be made in the charges for admission our people would be encouraged to take full advantage of the concession, and it is because of that that I make a plea to him to accept the Amendment.

The purpose of the Amendment, I take it, is to make the employment of those engaged upon the stage more easy. There does not seem to be much hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer can accept the Amendment in its present form, but in the Bill that is before us to-day he has made an alteration which shows that he is not un-favourable to the principle embodied in the Amendment. He has made an alteration in the scale of Entertainments Duty which can have for its purpose but one thing, which is to make employment easier for all those engaged on the stage as opposed to the films. I have risen in order to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give a hopeful reply. I am sure that it would be a great encouragement to those engaged in this industry if he could give some indication that, if he had the funds available, he would be prepared to extend still further the principle which he has already embodied in the Finance Bill by exempting the particular form of entertainment mentioned in Sub-section (3) of the Clause from Entertainments Duty so far as prices not exceeding 6d. are concerned. If he could give such a hopeful reply he would encourage a greater number of people to carry on in times of great difficulty in the hope that the funds would become available, and that in due course they would be able to secure exemption from Entertainments Duty on seats for which a charge not exceeding 1s. is made in accordance with the terms of the Amendment. When one looks at the particular industry, it is difficult perhaps to believe that a concession even of this character would make the revival of the stage easily possible, because the advantage of the film is so enormous, but I am sure that the Chancellor of the Exchequer wishes to make it possible for employment on the stage to continue and indeed to develop. If he could give but a hopeful reply to the Amendment, I am sure that he would be giving encouragement to a great number of people and to an industry which, as the hon. Gentleman the Member for the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr. Logan) has said, is not without its value in the life of the country.

I want to pay tribute to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. [Laughter.] Right hon. Gentlemen and hon. Gentlemen seem surprised. I am an admirer of the very great abilities of the right hon. Gentleman, and I recognise that he has made a very real and constructive attempt to help the theatre. It looks a little ungrateful to ask for more, but the very fact that he is putting words into this Clause singling out the theatre for special consideration is a recognition of his interest in and sympathy for the drama. I agree that we have to consider the people employed in this important industry, the actors, the players, the musicians, the stage hands and all concerned, but, even more than that, the great public are concerned. They have to be weaned away from the mechanical theatre and encouraged to go back to the drama and the great British theatre which has been our pride and glory for centuries. It is well to pay tribute to the Chancellor of the Exchequer because he has recognised that principle. I have reason to believe that he is really interested in the theatre, and desires its progress and well-being. It is always easy to ask for more. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Mabane) that it would be a great thing if the Chancellor of the Exchequer could give a message of hope to the theatres, and say it is not going to end there, and that his aim is to give even further relief in the future.

One of the difficulties is the complexity and the elaborate differentiation between various seats. If the Committee will turn to the Schedule, it will be seen that on seats exceeding 6d. and not exceeding 8½d., a humble ½d. is to be charged as duty, from 8½d. to 11d., one penny is to be charged, and from 11d. to 1s. 1½d., 1½d. is to be charged, and so on. It seems to be a needless and complicated tax, and it would simplify matters very much if a clean sweep could be made of this tax upon what is, after all, a very low-priced seat. To people who can afford 1s., an extra ½d. or so is very irritating, it is difficult to collect, and is annoying to the box office and the owners of the theatre and cinema. It would be very satisfactory if the Amendment could be accepted, but I appreciate that the right hon. Gentleman has recognised the principle, and it is right that it should be so recognised.

I am sincerely grateful to the hon. Gentleman the Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Sir P. Harris), and also to the hon. Member for Huddersfield (Mr. Mabane), for their recognition of the advance in the direction which they desire which has been made in the Finance Bill, and I am the more grateful because I missed any recognition of that fact in the two opening speeches with which the Amendment was moved and seconded. The sentiments which were expressed by the hon. Member opposite are such as have my sympathy, and, indeed, although some of the greatest literature in the English language is to be found in dramatic writing and plays which are literary and are read for their own sake without necessarily having to be seen on the stage, we may perhaps recollect that they would never have been written if they had not been intended to be acted. But in these days when the theatre has fallen upon hard times in competition with a new form of entertainment, I certainly feel that one does not want to do anything to make the lot of the theatre proprietor, producer, playwright or play actors any harder than it is. I have for the first time in this Finance Bill drawn a distinction between what has been described as the living performance, by live performers, and the mechanical form of entertainment, and have made a concession to the former. I do not think it is fair either to one's self or to one's successor to express an opinion as to what may or what may not be done in the future when funds are available which are not available to-day, but I would point out that, once a distinction has been made, a most important advance, I should have thought if I were financially interested in theatres, has already been made, because it is always much simpler to increase a concession which has been given, when a definition has already appeared on the Statute Book, than it is to introduce a new definition and a new distinction between the different kinds of performance. Therefore, in taking this step and making this distinction between the living performance and the mechanical performance a most important advance has been made.

The hon. Member who moved and the hon. Member who seconded the Amendment were generous in the recognition of the value of this step. They thought it was so good that they would like to have more of it. But one has to consider not merely a particular item but the whole extent of the national expenditure, and I have, as best I can, to apportion whatever concessions can be made, with some attempt at fairness to all kinds of interests. In this particular case the Com- mittee may recollect the line which I took. I said that I would give back the whole value of the extra Entertainments Duty which had been imposed in 1931 but that I would make a somewhat different distribution of it. The bulk of the cost was involved in the abolition of the tax on seats up to 6d. There remained a sum of £400,000 distributed over the higher priced seats, which sum I said I would devote entirely to the relief of the living performances, concentrating the relief upon the cheaper seats. I thought that would be most helpful in the competition with the mechanical performances. It will be seen that in the result there is a uniform reduction of duty. Instead of a duty varying with the price of the seat there is a uniform reduction and the percentage reduction on the cheaper seats is much greater than the percentage on the dearer seats. In this way I have utilised the £400,000 which I had allotted myself for this purpose.

The hon. Member who moved the Amendment suggested that it would not cost very much to go a little bit further. I do not say that it would cost very much. It would cost perhaps about £150,000, but