asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the dates on which the German and Italian Governments, respectively, agreed to impose a ban, respectively, on the export of arms and on the departure of volunteers to Spain; whether these pledges were given without qualification; and whether they included a ban on the despatch of aeroplanes and regular troops?

The German and Italian Governments notified the French Government of their adherence to the agreement regarding the prohibition of the export of arms and war material to Spain on 24th August and 21st August last, respectively. Both Governments took measures to prohibit the departure of combatants from their countries to Spain as from midnight, 20th–21st February last. So far as I know, no qualifications were attached to these undertakings, which covered the despatch of aircraft and regular troops.

Does not the despatch of aeroplanes since that date mean that the Governments concerned have broken their pledges?

Certainly; any despatch of aircraft since that date would be a breach of the agreement.

Is there any evidence to show that these pledges have been kept on one side more than on the other?

It is not for us to assess other Governments' responsibilities; we can only answer for our own and our hands are clean.

Is it not the case that the Italian representative on the Non-Intervention Committee stated two months ago that Italy would not withdraw a single man from Spain until General Franco had been victorious?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will bring to the attention of the Non-Intervention Committee the cases of the German air-pilots, Hans Sobotka and Joachim Hans Wandel, brought down on the Basque front, whose papers showed that they had left Berlin on 6th April and 22nd April, respectively?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to him on 21st June, to which I have nothing to add.

Should not this information be given to the Non-Intervention Committee, so that they may have the opportunity of asking the German Government for an explanation of the apparent breach?

Some information about this matter was sent to us by the Spanish Government. But there was no request to communicate it to the Committee

Is it not the purpose of the Non-Intervention Committee to secure that breaches of the agreement shall not occur?

Yes, Sir.

Is it the case that His Majesty's Government would look very seriously on a breach of the agreement?

Yes, Sir.

Why is it called the Non-Intervention Committee when it seems to do nothing else but interfere?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that Captain Cardozo and Lieut. Pembroke Stephens, representing respectively the "Daily Mail" and the "Daily Telegraph" in Spain, hold commissions in General Franco's army; whether passports have been issued to, or will continue to be issued to, these journalists; and whether equal treatment is being meted out to all in this matter?

From such inquiries as I have been able to make, I have received no confirmation of the allegation made in the first part of the hon. Member's question. The answer to the second and third parts is Yes, Sir.

Is it the practice of the Foreign Office to refuse visas to journalists or others fighting on either side?

Yes, Sir.

If I bring certain facts to the right hon. Gentleman's attention in connection with this matter, will he be good enough to look into them?

I did make inquiries when I saw this question on the Paper, and I have given the information that I have.

Is it not a fact that Mr. Cockburn, of the "Daily Worker," served for a long time with the Madrid Government, while under the protection of the British Embassy?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will give an assurance that the British Government will oppose at meetings of the Non-Intervention Committee any scheme for the withdrawal of foreigners fighting in Spain unless it is based upon the withdrawal of numbers from each side proportionate to the numbers there existing, and that any consideration of the question of granting belligerent rights will only be taken up by the British Government as a sequel to such general withdrawal of foreigners?

I would ask the hon. Member to await the publication of the proposals which, as I stated on Monday, His Majesty's Government intend shortly to place before the Non-Intervention Committee.

Do I understand that after that date the Foreign Secretary will be willing to give an answer to this question?

I think the hon. Gentleman will find that all relevant considerations have been borne in mind.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication as to how soon these proposals are likely to be available?

I understand that the Leader of the Opposition is to ask a Private Notice Question to-day.

Is it not a fact that those who have gone into Spain and have taken out naturalisation papers would be included in those figures?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign. Affairs for what reasons a passport has been refused to, among others, Lascelles Abercrombie and Sylvia Townsend Warner, who desired to attend an international conference of writers at Valencia, in of the fact that many British nationals live in safety in Madrid without the protection of any British officials; and can he give an assurance that it is not intended to sever cultural relations between this country and the Spanish Republic?

As regards the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave last. Wednesday to the hon. Member for North Lambeth (Mr. G. Strauss), to which I have nothing to add. The answer to the second part is Yes, Sir.

In view of the fact that the Belgian and Dutch delegates attended, and that the place of this function was fixed for Spain as early as May, 1936, does it not create a very bad impression that these distinguished people should be refused permission?

I hope not. We have to draw up some rules, and, if once we make exceptions, I do not know where the exceptions will stop.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the recent declaration by the French Government relative to suspension of control on the Franco-Spanish frontier was taken before consulting or obtaining the agreement of this country?

His Majesty's Government were kept fully informed beforehand of the step which the French Government proposed to take, but their agreement thereto was not sought. As I have previously stated, His Majesty's Government consider that the French Government's attitude is reasonable in view of what has happened on the Portuguese frontier.

In view of the propaganda in the German and Italian Press with a view to driving a wedge between this country and France, will the right hon. Gentleman impress upon the French Government the great importance of every step in this matter being taken in full accord with His Majesty's Government?

This step was taken in full accord with His Majesty's Government.

Is there any foundation for the statement that the Portuguese Government are now ready to resume supervision of the frontier?

I would rather not comment on that at the moment.

Croft asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether his attention has been called to the large number of tanks which have been used by the Government of Valencia on the Madrid front during the present offensive; whether he can state the country of origin; and whether the number has increased during the last four months;

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply which I gave on 16th June to a question put by the hon. Member for Dewsbury (Mr. Riley) on the subject of the entry into Spain of foreign munitions and combatants, to which I have nothing to add.

Is it not a fact that in the Siguenza counter attack, according to the "Isvestia," it was announced that there were 100 Russian tanks taking part, and is it not also a fact that the vast majority of the aircraft taking part on the side of the Valencia Government are in fact aircraft produced by Russia and France?

I have not seen the report in the "Isvestia" which I am afraid I do not read.

Is it not a fact that there were no Russian tanks and aeroplanes until some months later?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is prepared to publish consular reports from all big cities in Spain, giving such information as may have been received with regard to the massacre of civilians, destruction of churches, anti-God activities, and the state of law and order in those cities?

The value of reports of this nature must necessarily depend largely on the confidential nature of much of their contents being respected. It has not been the normal practice to publish such reports and my hon. Friend will appreciate the undesirability of departing from this practice.

In view of the great part which this country is taking in Spanish affairs, to preserve the peace of the world, is not Parliament justified in having reports not of a confidential nature which the right hon. Gentleman can obtain from his representatives in Spain?

I will bear in mind what the hon. and gallant Gentleman says, but this is really a difficult matter. For one thing, methods of communication are difficult in circumstances like these, and I do not like to pledge myself.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with this indirect attack on General Franco and his forces?

If the right hon. Gentleman is going to collect information from consular officers, will he consult, perhaps through the usual channels, with Members of the House as to the field over which these inquiries should range?

Will it be on both sides, in any event?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what expenditure was incurred in evacuating refugees from Spanish ports in British warships during the earlier stages of the Spanish war; whether the refugees so evacuated were restricted to women, children, and old men; and whether, as most of them may be assumed to have been members of families in sympathy with the insurgents, he will consider taking equally effective action to assist the evacuation of refugees from Santander where evacuation has been brought almost to a standstill by the warnings given by British warships to British merchantmen chartered by the Basque Government for evacuation purposes?

The chief expenditure incurred by His Majesty's ships in taking off refugees from Spain is in respect of fuel which up to the beginning of November last year was estimated to amount to £40,000. The answer to the second part of the question is No, Sir. As regards the last part of the question, it has repeatedly been made clear that, throughout the conflict, the humanitarian activities of His Majesty's Government including the evacuation of refugees on His Majesty's ships and the granting of protection by His Majesty's Navy, have been exercised with complete impartiality as between both parties in Spain. I cannot accept the implication that any discrimination has been or is being made in this matter. The position as regards the evacuation of refugees from Santander has been repeatedly explained, and I have nothing to add to those statements.

Is not the fact stated by the right hon. Gentleman that £40,000 was spent in evacuating refugees likely to lead to the supposition that not equally active steps are being taken unless the Government can take some really effective action to make the evacuation of Santander more effective than it is at present?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information with reference to the visit of British financiers to, General Franco's headquarters at Burgos for the purpose of negotiating a loan to General Franco; and will he give an assurance that fie Government will refuse to permit such a British loan as being contrary to their policy of non-intervention?

So far as I am aware, no British financiers have visited General Franco's headquarters at Burgos for the purpose in question.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the report in the Press that such a visit has taken place, and has he no information whether this report has any foundation at all?

I have given the information I have, which is that I know of no foundation for it.

Would it not be possible for British financiers to consider doing something for long-term credits for agriculture instead of worrying about foreign countries?

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of the question?

So far as I understand it, in present conditions such a loan would not be possible.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he has now taken advice concerning the legal position and rights of British shipping inside Spanish territorial waters vis-à-vis Spanish insurgent naval forces; and is he able to say if such shipping when upon lawful occasions will be afforded the protection of the British Navy against attack, interference, stoppage, or capture by insurgent naval forces both inside and outside Spanish territorial waters?

His Majesty's Government have consistently adhered to the policy of not intervening in Spanish territorial waters as part of their policy of non-intervention in the Spanish civil war, and so far as the legal position is concerned I have nothing to add to the answer given to the hon. and gallant Member on 12th July.

In view of the fact that General Franco does not enjoy belligerent rights, how can it be held that he has any right to attempt to control British shipping either inside or outside Spanish territorial waters?

Before the right hon. Gentleman answers that question—

Answer!

Is the right hon. Member prepared to answer?

On a point of Order. I understood that the First Lord was willing to answer the question.

I understand that the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to do so.

The question that really arises is not what are the rights of the rebel ships or the insurgent ships concerned, but what rights His Majesty's Government have to take any action inside territorial waters. I am not prepared to give a legal ruling on this question, but, broadly speaking, and from the point of view of a man of common sense, it seems to me that inside the territorial waters our position is the same as on the mainland in Spain. We cannot send into Spain to protect British subjects who are in trouble in Spain, but we reserve to ourselves the right to demand reparation if any wrong is done to them inside Spain, or outside.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in the circumstances, it is perfectly safe for any British ship to go in or out of Santander? [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Yes. General Franco's vessels cannot get within 10 miles of the territorial limits, and, in these circumstances, is it not clear that, if His Majesty's Navy does give protection up to territorial limits, it is perfectly safe for ships to go in and out?

Is it not the fact that General Franco and the Spanish Government have equal rights inside territorial waters?

Mr. Speaker, may I—

There are 96 questions on the Paper, and I have to protect the rights of other hon. Members who have questions on the Paper.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been drawn to the provisions of the Convention on the Right of Capture at Sea adopted by the Hague Conference in 1907; whether he is aware that Article 4 of that Convention provides that ships engaged on humanitarian missions shall be immune from capture; and whether the Government will now ensure the application of this rule to vessels engaged in evacuating starving women and children from Santander?

I have been asked to reply. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court of Hong Kong in the prize case of the "Paklat," with which the hon. Member is doubtless familiar, it would not be possible for His Majesty's Government to contend that Article 4 of the Hague Convention No. 11 is applicable to vessels engaged in evacuating women and children from Santander.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the harbour and territorial waters of Santander are protected by coastal batteries which include guns with a range of 10 miles, and by two destroyers, three submarines, and 12 minesweepers; that ships of other countries have entered and left the harbour since 8th July; and will he give instructions that ships of the necessary class will be near enough to the limit of the territorial waters to be able to give effective protection to British vessels carrying refugees to France?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he accepts the statement of the Basque Government that the approaches to Santander are adequately protected by coastal batteries, destroyers, submarines, minesweepers and pilotage arrangements, and that the harbour was safely entered on 7th and 8th July by two ships and left by eight, the only ships encountering difficulties being those which did not approach the harbour directly or were fired upon from outside territorial waters; and whether he will now request British warships to relax their warnings to British merchantmen not to enter and to give them more adequate protection from outside territorial waters?

Whatever may be the present state of the defences of Santander, in view of the fact that two French and two British ships have recently been captured inside territorial waters in attempting to enter that port I do not consider it desirable to relax the warnings that have been issued to British merchantmen.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not the case that the captures to which he refers took place before the date mentioned in the question, and that, therefore, the defences may have been more complete since that date? I would further ask him whether he is confident that British warships outside the territorial limit are always of the calibre necessary to deal with the insurgent warships present, and whether at the same time our ships are not too far away?

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that numerous ships have come in and out from Santander since the date which he mentioned; and is not this exactly a repetition of what we have had in the case of Bilbao, where the Government took all their information from General Franco?

With regard to the first part of the question of the Noble Lady and the question put by the right hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition, it may interest the House to know that a British ship was captured attempting to enter Santander this morning. [Interruption.]

In that case, having regard to the fact that General Franco is not recognised as having belligerent rights, will the First Lord of the Admiralty tell the House what the British Navy did to protect British shipping?

Is it not rather remarkable that the news of the capture of a British ship by the rebel forces should be greeted with hilarity by hon. Members opposite?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, and at what stage, protection is afforded by His Majesty's Navy to British shipping suffering interference enforced by threat of gunfire from rebel Spanish naval forces?

As has repeatedly been made clear, His Majesty's ships will afford protection to any British ship which is interfered with by a Spanish warship on the high seas. If, however, a British ship enters Spanish territorial waters, she does so at her own risk.

Suppose the Spanish insurgent ship is outside territorial waters and fires a shot at a British ship, what do our ships do then?

What I said remains the case, that the ship enters territorial waters at her own risk.

So that our ships would not interfere with an insurgent ship which has attacked a British ship from outside territorial waters?

That is a hypothetical question.

"No."

I made it perfectly plain that the protection of British ships does not, and never has extended to territorial waters. The question of whether an attack comes from inside or outside territorial waters is another point.

I must press the right hon. Gentleman. It is not a hypothetical case. A case has occurred during the last few days. What does the British Navy do when a rebel ship fires outside territorial waters at a British ship inside territorial waters?

If the enemy or the other side is in a position to capture a British ship inside territorial waters, and no other kind of attempt has been made, His Majesty's Navy does not interfere?

Would the right hon. Gentleman kindly direct his attention to the question that I asked. If, as recently happened, a rebel ship outside territorial waters fires at a British ship, what does the Navy do?

I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that that case has not arisen. A foreign ship has not fired at a British ship.

Then the right hon. Gentleman means—

That does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the action of the insurgent cruiser "Almirante Cervera" in firing while outside the three-mile limit upon or across the bows of the British Steamship "Gordonia" after is had passed that limit on its way to Santander to evacuate refugees, he will renew the warning given last April by his predecessor in office to General Franco that if his ships sink or damage a British ship even within territorial waters he will be held responsible for any claim resulting from such action?

I have been asked to reply. The warning to which the hon. Lady refers stated that His Majesty's Government could not tolerate any interference with British shipping at sea, and pointed out that it must further be understood that any advice given to British ships at sea does not of course affect the ultimate responsibility for any damage which may be done to any British vessel even if it has disregarded such advice. The Salamanca authorities are, therefore, presumably aware of the position.

Does it not involve that a British ship at the worst runs no further risk than the risk of being held up, and, in view of the fact that the result of the naval warning is to enable General Franco to secure the advantage of a blockade which he has shown no proof of being able to maintain with his own forces, will not the Government consider the relaxation of these warnings?

I am not sure that I can answer all that supplementary, but if tie hon. Lady will study my answer she will see that there is no great divergence in what I have said from what she has said in the last part of her question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any precedent where His Majesty's Government have previously granted the right to exercise the rights of blockade even in territorial waters to an insurgent who has not been recognised as a belligerent?

I could not accept the hon. Member's definition.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what advice or instruc- tions have been given to British ships as to obeying orders received from Spanish rebel naval forces and enforced under threat of gunfire?

No instructions as to obeying orders received from Spanish warships have been given to British merchant ships. They have, however, been given advice to the effect that if they decide to submit to a summons to stop by a Spanish warship belonging to either party, made when they are inside Spanish territorial waters, they should indicate their intention by making an alteration of course of at least 90° in addition to reversing engines.

Am I to understand that the Admiralty has issued advice, which is tantamount to instructions, to merchant ships to obey the orders of the insurgents, and may I ask also whether the Admiralty have issued orders to our warships not to fire if our merchant ships are attacked within territorial waters?

The Admiralty have issued no orders or instructions whatever. They have merely given advice to merchantmen how they should behave inside Spanish territorial waters, just in the same way that we might give advice to British subjects how they should behave inside Spain.

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any statement to make with regard to the proposals for ending the deadlock of non-intervention?

The proposals which His Majesty's Government have drawn up at the request of the Committee have been circulated to all members of the Committee this morning, and will be in the hands of the Governments during the course of the day. They will be published to-morrow morning. Meanwhile the House will appreciate that it would not be proper for me to make any statement about their contents until the Governments who entrusted His Majesty's Government with this task have had an opportunity of seeing them. I am, however, arranging for the convenience of hon. Members that the full text of the proposals shall be circulated as a White Paper with the Votes to-night.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when there will be another meeting of the Non-Intervention Committee to consider these proposals in view of the admitted urgency of the matter?

Yes, Sir. I understand on Friday.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information in connection with the Franco-Russian pact; whether it is an offensive alliance or a defensive alliance; whether, in the view of his advisers, Article 1 of the treaty is in conformity with Article 10 of the Covenant of the League of Nations; and whether he can give any other information about the matter?

The hon. Member will find the text of the Franco-Soviet Agreement, together with other relevant information, in Command Paper 5143 of 1936. As regards the second part of the question, this Agreement is described in the protocol of signature as a mutual assistance agreement, and the case against which it provides is an unprovoked attack upon either signatory by a European State. The answer to the third part is Yes, Sir.

Do I understand from that answer that, in the event of aggression either by France or Germany, no action could be taken between France and Russia until the matter had been referred to the League of Nations?

I should like to see that question on paper.

Is not this pact entirely in accordance with the Covenant of the League of Nations?

The hon. Gentleman will see from the first part of my reply that that is so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can make a statement concerning the treaties which were entered into between the German and Soviet Governments and remained in force until June, 1933, and were thereafter terminable at one year's notice?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply returned on gth December last to a question on this subject by the hon. Member for Plaistow (Mr. Thorne), of which I am sending the hon. Member a copy. The position, as far as I am aware, is still as described therein.

Does that refer to both the 1926 and the 1929 agreement?

I am not sure that those are the right dates, but the hon. Member will find it all set out in the answer.