asked the Under-Secretary of State for India the amount of iron or steel imported into India during the financial year 1934–35 and used in connection with Government contracts; and what portion of the same was supplied by the United Kingdom or other countries?

The information is not available in this country but I will ask the Government of India whether they can supply it.

Will the Minister suggest to the Government of India that they should, all things being equal, give a preference to United Kingdom manufacturers?

I think the Government of India have that consideration always in mind.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the decision of the Indian Legislative Assembly to give notice to terminate the agreement signed at Ottawa in 1932 between the British Government and the Government of India; whether the Government of India intend to take action in accordance with this decision; and whether any action is contemplated by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Government of India have yet given notice to terminate the agreement signed at Ottawa between the British Government and the Government of India, in accordance with the recent decision of the Indian Legislative Assembly?

I am aware of the recent vote of the Legislative Assembly. In view of the undertakings given by the Government of India to the Legislative Assembly, it is presumed that the Government of India will in due course give formal notice of termination of the agreement. The next step lies with the Government of India.

Will His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom make representations to the Government of India?

I think that consideration will be borne in mind.

How soon will the hon. Gentleman be able to tell us when the Government of India have decided to give notice; and how much notice will have to be given?

The Government of India will have to give notice in the terms of their commitment to the Assembly after the result of the Assembly debate. I shall certainly try to keep the House informed when the Government of India take the decision.

Can the hon. Gentleman answer the second part of my question as to the length of the notice which will have to be given?

I understand that it is six months.

In view of the great importance of this decision in the Assembly, will His Majesty's Government make representations to the Government of India as to the undesirability of taking this course?

The Government of India are already committed to the Assembly to give notice in view of the decision which the Assembly took.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India what is the estimated cost of rebuilding Quetta; and whether, in view of the fact that Russia, Afghanistan and Persia are members of the League of Nations and adherents with India and Great Britain to the principle of collective security, it is proposed to give further consideration to the strategic needs of this part of the frontier of India?

The civil and military reconstruction of Quetta is at present expected to cost on provisional estimates something over seven crores of rupees. The strategic needs of the frontier of India are under constant consideration, and all relevant factors were taken into account when the decision was taken to rebuild Quetta.

In view of the fact that the menace can only come from Russia, will not my hon. Friend consult the Foreign Secretary with a view to the conclusion of a non-aggression pact with Russia?

As Great Britain appears to be committed to bearing the cost of everybody else's defence, would it not be fair to ask Russia and Afghanistan to contribute towards the rebuilding?

Has the hon. Gentleman any reason to suppose that any menace is coming from Russia?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the Government's declared intention to deprive Mr. Subhas C. Bose of his liberty in the event of his return to India, it is the intention of the Government to formulate a definite charge against Mr. Bose and bring him to trial on this charge?

As regards the action to be taken against Mr. Subhas Bose, my Noble Friend must be guided by the views of the authorities in India. Mr. Bose was previously detailed under Regulation III of 1818, a procedure which does not involve trial upon definite charges.

Will the hon. Gentleman ascertain the views of the Government of India as to any future course of action against Mr. Bose?

Certainly.

Will the hon. Gentleman not use his influence to stop the persecution of this gentleman who has a distinguished record of public work in India?

The same reasons which led to Mr. Bose's detention in 1932 still hold good, but he his been allowed to visit Europe for medical reasons.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Mr. J. Adhikari, of Bombay, who has been interned at Bijapur without trial since August, 1934, is suffering seriously from haemophilia, for the treatment of which no adequate facilities are available in India; that a restricted passport was granted to Mr. Adhikari for a single journey to England for the purpose of undergoing special treatment, and that this passport was suddenly cancelled for reasons stated to be political; and whether he will state the nature of these reasons and permit Mr. Adhikari to visit this country in order to receive the necessary medical treatment?

I am awaiting a report from the Government of India regarding the health of Mr. J. M. Adhikari, and will communicate with the hon. Member when it is received.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will ascertain how many lawyers are attached to, or are members of, the Egyptian Delegation at present taking part in the preliminary Anglo-Egyptian conversations, and their names?

My information is that there are no legal experts attached to the Egyptian Delegation, though some of the members of the Delegation are lawyers or have had legal training.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the declared attitude of His Majesty's Government towards Ahmed Bey Maher and Nekrashi Bey, he will draw the attention of the Egyptian Government to the undesirability of these persons taking part in the Anglo-Egyptian conversations?

Nekrashi Bey was a member of the Egyptian Delegation that negotiated with His Majesty's Government in 1930, while Dr. Ahmed Maher accompanied the Delegation as a technical expert. In view of these facts the action proposed by my hon. Friend is inappropriate.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the presiding Judge, the late Judge Kershaw, resigned after the verdict, stating that a gross miscarriage of justice had taken place; and that he was endorsed in this attitude by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give an assurance that when the Anglo-Egyptian preliminary conversations are completed, before formal treaty negotiations are opened a full statement will be made to the House and an opportunity afforded for debate?

I will certainly bear in mind my hon. Friend's request for a statement when a suitable occasion presents itself.

May we take it then that the House will not be committed by these preliminary conversations, but will have an opportunity to express their feelings and opinions on the matter before the negotiations begin?

I think my answer is quite clear.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state, approximately, at what date the formal Anglo-Egyptian Treaty negotiations are likely to be opened; and whether he can give an assurance that the legal expert to advise the British delegation will arrive in Cairo before that time?

The answer to the first part of the question is, No, Sir. As regards the second part, I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend on Wednesday last.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the statement made to the Prime Minister of Egypt, on 2nd June, 1926, that the acquittal of four persons, including Ahmed Bey Maher, tried for complicity in the murder of Sir Lee Stack, could not be accepted by His Majesty's Government as proof that the persons were innocent of the charges made against them, is still the view of His Majesty's Government?

My hon. Friend is under a misapprehension. No such statement was made on behalf of His Majesty's Government with regard to the trial of persons accused of complicity in the murder of Sir Lee Stack.

Is it not a fact that His Majesty's High Commissioner, purporting to act on behalf of His Majesty's Government, used precisely the words that appear at the conclusion of my question?

No, Sir. My hon. Friend is misinformed.

If I put a question on the Paper drawing my right hon. Friend's attention to the actual words, will he be kind enough to give me an answer then?

If my hon. Friend will await the answer to another question on the Paper, he may see where his error arises.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Ahmed Bey Maher and Nekrashi Bey were tried in Cairo in March, 1926, for complicity in the murder of Sir Lee Stack?

No, Sir.

I desire, Mr. Speaker, to raise a point of Order with regard to Question No. 26, which appears on the Order, Paper to-day in the name of the hon. Member for King's Norton (Mr. Cartland). You will observe that that question contains a grave implication in regard to two very distinguished Egyptian citizens; and you may remember, Sir, that the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs said that that statement had no basis in fact. I understand it is a Rule of the House that Members have to accept responsibility for statements made in their questions. I submit to you that, when such a grave statement as this is put down in a question, the Member himself ought to make sure that. it is in accordance with facts; and that to put a statement of this kind in a question without making certain that it is true is a grave breach of the Orders of the House.

On that point of Order. May I say that, as far as I knew when I put the question on the Paper, the facts were correct in every respect? I have not had time, since the hon. Member told me he was going to raise this point of Order, to produce a more authoritative statement than the book written by the ex-High Commissioner of Egypt dealing with these facts, in which it is stated that these two men were tried by a Court of Assize in Cairo consisting of Judge Kershaw as President and two Egyptian judges; the verdict of the Court was delivered on 25th May, 1926, the trial having begun in March, 1926. On these facts I submit that the question as put down on the Paper is correct.

It is a very well known Rule of the House that, as the hon. Member for Shoreditch (Mr. Thurtle) has stated, a Member who puts down statements in a question makes himself responsible for the truth of those statements. He cannot do more than that.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is aware of the great increase in the importation of eggs from Poland and Rumania in February of this year compared with the same month in 1935; and whether he has any statement to make on the subject?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, I would refer to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Moseley (Sir P. Hannon) on 23rd March, a copy of which I am sending to my hon. Friend.

When will my right hon. Friend be in a position to give us some definite statement as to the policy of the Government in relation to these enormous imports of eggs into this country in competition with our own?

This case is governed, as my hon. Friend knows, by trade agreements.

asked the Minister of Agriculture the number of successful prosecutions that have been taken by the Wheat Commission against farmers and millers who have made false applications for deficiency payments; the total amount paid under false pretences; and the total amount of fines to the nearest available date?

Applications for deficiency payments can only be made by persons who are registered growers, and up to the 3rd April, 1936, there have been three cases where convictions have been secured against growers of wheat for obtaining, or attempting to obtain, deficiency payments to which they were not entitled. Twenty-four registered growers were concerned in these cases. The amount of the deficiency payments in question was approximately £3,500. The total amount of the fines imposed was £615, and, in addition, the growers were required to pay a total sum of £327 towards the costs of the prosecution.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think it would be wise, seeing that there arc so many farmers breaking the law, to put them under the means test?

Do not the figures given by my right hon. Friend show the overwhelming good faith of the huge majority of the farmers growing wheat in this country?

Yes. It is a very small number of the registered growers.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is now in a position to state what percentage of British bacon is tank cured?

The Bacon Marketing Board have no information as to the proportion of tank-cured bacon to total output. Replies to a questionnaire issued by the board last year to registered curers indicate, however, that the tank curing capacity of the bacon factories in Great Britain has more than doubled since 1931.

Will my right hon. Friend consider the necessity of getting the information?

Yes, I will consider that.

asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he is now in the position to state the Government's long-term livestock policy?

I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of a full statement of the position which I made in reply to questions by the hon. Member for South Croydon (Mr. H. G. Williams) and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Molton (Mr. Lambert) on 4th February. There is nothing at present to add to that statement, except to say that the discussions with the Argentine Government on the propose is put forward by His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom are now being resumed.

Can my right hon. Friend give the House an assurance that neither the Ottawa Agreements nor the Argentine Agreement will be renewed except upon terms more satisfactory to the home producer?

Has a decision been made as to the conclusion on 7th May of the Agreement with the Argentine?

That question should be addressed to the President of the Board of Trade.

May I have an answer to my question?

I am afraid that it is not a question to which any answer can be given by a Departmental Minister.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the Post. Office declines to pay any compensation for letter-packets lost in the post, even when the addressee has received communications from the Customs authorities stating that the packet has been received and inviting the addressee to witness the opening thereof, and that an example of such a case is a letter-packet addressed to Mr. A. C. Brown, 145, Pittodrie Place, Aberdeen, who can ill-afford to bear the loss caused by an accident or negligence in the Post Office; and whether he will take steps to bring fairer regulations into force?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. So far as the second part is concerned, the sender of a letter can, by paying a small registration fee, provide for the payment of compensation in the event of the loss of that letter in the post.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this parcel came from abroad where we cannot expect a knowledge of the English Post Office regulations to exist; and will he ask his right hon. Friend whether, in view of the vast profits made by the Post Office, he is content to allow a situation to remain under which the Post Office is in a privileged position as compared with a private business?

I am aware that this parcel came from abroad. My right hon. Friend has given great consideration to this question of compensation, and he is of the definite opinion that to pay compensation for an unregistered packet would defeat the whole object of having the registration system.

Is the Post master-General relying on the existing regulations which prohibit him, or does he say he has no power?

My right hon. Friend is certainly relying on the existing regulations.

Does the Postmaster-General rely on the fact that he has no power, or is he refusing to grant compensation, although he has the power?

He is relying on the regulations, under which he has no power to make any payment.

On a point of Order. May I ask whether a question of this kind' affecting an individual could not have been dealt with by correspondence with the Post Office instead of wasting the time of the House?

That is for the hon. Member and not for me to say.

asked the Postmaster-General whether there is any fixed rate of wage arranged by the Post Office for assistants who perform counter duties at sub-post offices; will he state their remuneration; and give particulars of the nature of their duties?

The terms of a sub-postmaster's appointment prescribe that the remuneration and conditions of service generally of his assistants should be not less favourable than those of shop assistants of about the same standing in the service of good employers in the same district. The duties consist in the main of the sale of stamps and postal orders, the acceptance of parcels and telegrams, Savings Bank transactions, the payment of old age pensions, the despatch and receipt of mails, and in certain cases telephone work.

Is it a fact that they have to handle substantial sums of money?

We hope so, otherwise these offices would not be transacting much business.

Is the Minister aware that one sub-post office in South London is advertising for assistants not under 16 years of age at the miserable wage of 10s. a week? How can he expect them to be honest?

If the hon. Member will send me a copy of that advertisement we will inquire into it. We lay down definitely that the fair wages clause should apply to the people employed by contractors to the Post Office.

I have the advertisement here and I will hand it to the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the increasing interest taken by citizens generally in public questions resulting in considerably augmented correspondence with this House, he will consider the desirability of franking those letters of Members devoted to public business?

The hon. Member's proposal would revive in a modified form the system of franking which was abolished by the Act of 1840, and I see serious objections to its adoption.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider the matter after the introduction of the Budget?

No, Sir.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will investigate the present inadequate postal service to the Outer Hebrides and take steps to have it improved at the earliest opportunity?

All available services to the Outer Hebrides are at present used for the conveyance of mails, and in the circumstances I see no possibility of improving the postal services at present.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware of the inadequate post office facilities at North Harrow and that the existing sub-post office closes on Wednesday afternoons; and whether, having regard to the increasing population and needs, he will consider making an improvement?

I am aware that there is a demand for extended counter facilities at North Harrow and that the sub-office closes on Wednesday afternoons. I am considering whether better facilities can be provided.

asked the Prime Minister whether any sub-committee of the Cabinet has been appointed to co-ordinate policy in regard to the forthcoming revision of the trade agreements with foreign countries, and also the Ottawa Agreements, with a. view to safeguarding adequately the position of the home agricultural industry?

There is the closest possible collaboration between the Ministers directly concerned with these questions. The ultimate responsibility for co-ordination of policy must of course rest with the Cabinet as a whole.

In view of the great importance of this matter will the right hon. Gentleman consider the necessity of setting up a sub-committee or some other committee?

I think we have all the co-ordination necessary for the purpose.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will furnish particulars of the conditions laid down for the granting of permits to allow of the importation of plumage normally prohibited from entering this country under the Importation of Plumage (Prohibition) Act, 1921; and for what period such permits are made available?

Licences to import plumage for the restricted purposes stated in Section 2 (4) of the Act are granted subject to the conditions that they are not transferable and may be revoked at any time by the Board of Trade without reason given. The period of validity is usually limited to three months, but certain permits, for instance, to museums, may be granted for longer periods.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the application made by the Palestine Foundries and Metal Works, Limited, to the high commission in Palestine for an increase of duties from 7s. per bath to 30s. per bath, for an increase of duties on cast-iron soil pipes and connections from £1 per ton to £3 per ton, and for the withdrawal of the overriding ordinance which suspended the duties on pipes and fittings to be used in connection with water and drainage installations; that the withdrawal of this ordinance will make it impossible for British makers to do an export trade in these baths, pipes and connections with Palestine; and what action has been, or is likely to be, taken to safeguard British manufacturing interests?

I have been asked to reply. I am aware of the proposals in question, which are designed to protect a local industry in Palestine. The hon. Member will appreciate that it would not be proper for His Majesty's Government to interfere in this matter owing to this being a mandated territory.

Is it not possible for His Majesty's Ministers at least to open up negotiations, even with a mandated territory, in the interests of British trade?

It is possible to do it, but under the mandate we have to give impartial consideration to all countries, and I am sure that if I announced in this House that His Majesty's Government were going to interfere in the manner suggested I should at once be asked, "What about the mandate?"

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that large cargoes of slates are being imported from Norway into England and Scotland without any indication that they are foreign; that these slates are admitted by the Board of Trade officials on the ground that, having been purchased by sample, they are not required to be marked unless the bulk are offered for sale in this country; and whether it is the practice of the board to accept, in the case of goods imported by sample, a presumption that they will not be offered for sale?

There is no requirement at law that all imported goods must bear an indication of origin. By Orders in Council made under the Merchandise Marks Act, 1926, certain classes and descriptions of goods (including certain building materials) are required to bear such an indication on sale or exposure for sale in the United Kingdom, and in some cases at the time of importation also. The latter requirement does not apply to roofing slates, although under the Merchandise Marks (Imported Goods) No. 1 Order of 1930 they must be marked on sale or exposure for sale in the United Kingdom. The interpretation of the Act is, of course, a matter for the courts, but I am advised that a sale in the United Kingdom of slates which are abroad at the time of sale would probably not be held to be a sale within the United Kingdom of imported goods, and would be outside the scope of the Order, though if the slates were subsequently resold after importation, it would be necessary for the prescribed indication of origin to be applied. If the hon. Member is aware of any case in which this provision is not being complied with, I should be glad to arrange for the matter to be investigated.

asked the Minister of Labour how many married women were employed in insurable employment in the country on 1st March, 1936; how many married women were in receipt of unemployment insurance benefit on 1st March, 1936; and how many claims for unemployment benefit by married women have been refused in the past 12 months on the ground that these women were unable to prove the conditions required by paragraph 4 of the Statutory Rules and Orders, 1931, No. 818, Unemployment Insurance Anomalies Regulation s, 1931?

At July, 1932, the latest date for which figures have been obtained, it was estimated, on the basis of a sample enquiry, that there were approximately 655,000 married women and widows in Great Britain insured against unemployment. A special inquiry relating to 4th November, 1935, showed that at that date, 87,886 married women were applicants for unemployment benefit or unemployment allowances. The number of claims for unemployment benefit or unemployment allowances disallowed by Courts of Referees in Great Britain during the 12 months ended 29th February, 1936, under paragraph 4 of the Anomalies Regulations was 41,361. This figure relates to claims and the number of separate individuals concerned is not available.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the widespread practice of advertising vacancies for hotel and catering trade employés and giving a box number to which applications are to be sent; that applicants then, in many cases, receive from alleged employment agencies communications requesting booking fees of from is. 6d. to 10s.; and will he set up a committee to inquire into the genuineness of these so-called employment agencies with a view to stopping this exploitation of the unemployed?

I have been asked to reply to this question. Powers of control over employment agencies are given by local Act where need for such powers is shown to exist. My right hon. Friend sees no reason why any abuses arising in the manner described should not be dealt with under those powers. If the hon. Member will give my right hon. Friend particulars of any cases which have been brought to his notice, he will be glad to investigate them.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air whether he is aware that the Surrey Flying Services, previous to the crash on Thursday, 26th March, had stated that weather conditions would prevent night work being done and that the pilot of another aeroplane which had been struck in the same cloud had turned back, receiving a severe reprimand; and whether he will make a statement on the matter?

The hon. Member is misinformed. I have made inquiries of Surrey Flying Services, who state that weather conditions were favourable for flying when the two pilots set out on 26th March; otherwise they would not have started. Subsequently one of the pilots encountered a severe static storm and after warning the other pilot by wireless turned back to Croydon. So far from being reprimanded, he was commended for exercising his judgment in returning.

Is it a fact that one of the pilots said ice formations were encountered at 4,000 feet?

No, Sir, I did not see that, and the weather conditions were quite favourable for flying before they started.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Air (1) whether Army co-operation work may take the form of private passenger flights with the consent of the military authorities;

(2) whether aeroplanes used for Army co-operation work are in any cases supplied by private firms letting out machines; and, if so, what terms and form of contract are agreed upon?

Civil aircraft have, in the interests of economy, been hired for anti-aircraft co-operation practice on many occasions during the last three years. The main terms of the contract provide that the air transport company concerned will provide an aeroplane to fly over named areas for so many hours between such and such dates, but all risks to pilots, passengers (except Army personnel carried with due authority), aeroplane and third parties will rest with the contractor, and that hours of actual cooperation will be paid for at specified rates. Otherwise there is no reference to the carriage of passengers, which is thus at the company's discretion, provided they perform the specific service required of them in the contract.