asked the Secretary for Mines the number of coal seams or mines that have been abandoned during the year 1937 in the collieries situate in the township of Abram, near Wigan, and in the township of Ashton-in-Maker-field, stating the primary reason for their abandonment; and to what extent the unworked coal is likely to be worked from other directions?

During the year 1937 no coal mine or seam in the parish of Abram was abandoned. In the parish of Ashton-in-Makerfield no mine was abandoned in 1937, but in each of two collieries one seam was abandoned for economic reasons. In each case the colliery is still working, and the unworked coal could be got from these mines if it were found profitable to work it.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman consulted in any way before the closing down of seams or mines?

No, Sir.

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman give instructions that in future, before a seam or colliery is closed, his Department shall be consulted by the colliery company?

These were abandoned for economic reasons over which I have no control.

asked the Secretary for Mines the number of coal seams or mines that have been abandoned in Lancashire and Cheshire during the last 10 years owing to the lack of adequate pumping machinery; and what action was taken by the Mines Department to try to avoid abandoning these seams or mines?

During the last 10 years six mines in Lancashire and three in Cheshire have been abandoned through lack of adequate pumping machinery. Of these all but two were small mines employing only a few persons. Another mine was closed because the quantity of water to be dealt with made working unprofitable. With regard to the last part of the question, as the hon. Member is aware, in order to establish a joint pumping scheme it is in practice necessary to have in favour of such a scheme a majority of the colliery owners concerned, which so far it has not been possible to obtain. My Department is always ready to give any assistance in its power to this end, but cannot compel agreement.

Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman realise that the lack of pumping machinery is ruining big coal areas in Lancashire and other parts of the country, and will he take more action to get the colliery companies to consider this matter favourably?

What is the number of employés in the two mines to which my hon. and gallant Friend referred as being different from the others which employ only a few?

I am afraid I have not got that information at hand, and could not give it without notice. As regards the question of the hon. Member for Ince (Mr. Macdonald), I think the question he asked and my reply may serve a useful purpose.

asked the Secretary for Mines the number of mines closed down in Leigh during 1937; the names of the colliery companies which owned them; the cause of closing; and the number of persons put out of work?

During 1937 one mine in Leigh parish was abandoned. This was Heyfield and West Leigh Colliery, owned by the West Leigh Colliery Company, Limited, and on 31st December, 1936, it employed a total of 1,315 persons. The mine was closed for economic reasons.

When events such as this take place, does the hon. and gallant Gentleman warn the Prime Minister of the distress caused by unemployment, so that steps can be taken by the Cabinet to deal with the matter?

I think it would be unreasonable to say in public what communications pass between Ministers.

Is not the closing down of these pits due to over-capitalisation?

If I may say so with respect, that was hardly a fair reply of the Minister. Will not the hon. and gallant Gentleman treat the question more seriously than he has done?

Is it not advisable that the hon. and gallant Gentleman should communicate with the owners in districts where there are many mines and where the closing of one mine affects a large number of collieries, with a view to asking the owners to get together to consider whether they cannot take joint action to save the mines?

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary for Mines whether he can now make any statement with regard to pit-head baths?

Yes, Sir. This matter has been for some time under consideration in view of the urgent need for the more rapid provision of pit-head baths. The Government propose during the next session of Parliament to introduce a Measure to increase the output levy from ½d. to 1d. for a period of five years, commencing with the levy on the 1938 output, the extra amount to be earmarked for the provision of baths.

asked the Minister of Health the number of persons in receipt of public assistance in July, 1931, and at the latest date on which figures are available, giving separate figures for Lancashire?

On Saturday, 11th July, 1931, the number for England and Wales, excluding rate-aided patients in mental hospitals, persons in receipt of domiciliary medical relief only and casuals, was 968,107. The corresponding number on Saturday, 9th July, 1938, the latest date for which figures are available, was 1,028,926. The figures for the Administrative County of Lancaster, together with the 17 associated county boroughs, were 139,100 and 167,496 respectively.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of those people were in receipt of old age pensions?

Not without notice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the closing down of a mill at Leigh that employed 300 people, and that two other mills employing 1,400 people have received notice that on 27th August they will close down for three weeks; and will he have inquiries made to find out the cause and to see whether anything can be done to ease the position?

I am informed that the first mill referred to has been closed on a transfer of its work to another part of Lancashire. I am also informed that the other two mills have been running full time for a number of years and that production has latterly exceeded demand. It is hoped to resume full time working after the interval of three weeks.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether anything is done by his Department to prevent this kind of happening, or to make preparations to absorb the unemployed when it does take place? After all, it is a serious matter for the people of Lancashire?

Of course, there are two parts to this question. One is a mere temporary closing, and after the three weeks it is hoped that everybody will be absorbed again in the same undertaking. The other is part of a reorganisation scheme which will give a lot of work in another part of Lancashire, not very far away. Any question of transference, is a question for the Ministry of Labour.

Is there liaison between the right hon. Gentleman's Department and the Ministry of Labour in such a case?

indicated assent.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that a number of mills have closed down in Leigh and others are on notice; that similar circumstances are prevalent in Lancashire; and will he set up a department with a Minister whose work will be to examine and report to the Cabinet changes in industrial conditions so that plans can be prepared to be in readiness to meet slumps and thus prevent hardships that arise at present?

As regards the first and second parts of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to-day to his Question No. 12 addressed to my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade. In reply to the last part of the Question, I would refer him to the answer given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 4th July to the hon. and learned Member for Greenock (Mr. R. Gibson). I do not think that any additional machinery is necessary.

Has the attention of the Prime Minister been drawn to a speech of the right hon. Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Eden) in which he said that the Special Areas were on the increase and that, unless something were done, the whole country would become one special area and, in view of that statement by a prominent ex-Member of the Government, is not my Question worth consideration from the right hon. Gentleman and his Cabinet?

Reports continually come to us from the Departments concerned, and we get full information as to the conditions of employment throughout the country.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that unemployment, contrary to the usual trend, is now rising, and in view of the on-coming winter and the serious position of a large number of very poor people, will he not consider during the Recess what emergency steps and additional steps can be taken to deal with the position?

I should not like to reply to that in the affirmative, because it might rouse hopes which could not be fulfilled. The opinion of His Majesty's Government is that the emergency work which has been put in hand for the purpose of dealing with unemployment has not proved in the past effective. The number of people who can be dealt with in that way is exceedingly small in proportion to the cost. There are several other ways in which something may be done to mitigate the fluctuations in trade, and I can assure the hon. Member that the Government have them very closely in mind all the time.

Is not the Prime Minister conscious that the serious feature of the position to-day is that the depression is taking place in spite of a tremendous expansion of expenditure on armaments, and will he ask the Service Departments to see that that expenditure is directed to those areas that are feeling the full pressure of industrial depression?

The hon. Baronet knows that the Government have throughout done their very best to direct expenditure upon armaments to those areas where unemployment is most prevalent. We have, indeed, on numerous occasions taken action in cases where, if we had considered simply the desirability of getting the work out in the quickest time, we should have sent the work elsewhere, but it has been deliberately diverted to places where it was most required. There, again, I think the general question of trade is one to which we have to direct our attention. I deprecate any suggestion that we are on the edge of a slump or of a return to any such conditions as existed in 1931.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the most familiar sight in Lancashire is notices of sales of mills, that these are not temporary matters, and that it is not a question of the possibility of a coming slump? Will he consider, in view of what is taking place and the trade that is being destroyed—because the machinery is being broken up—having something done to take its place between now and the reassembly of Parliament? Lancashire is going down all the time.

The Government are very conscious of the difficulties of Lancashire, and are anxious to do anything they can. The hon. Member has given me credit for greater powers than any wizard has ever claimed if he thinks that I can devise during the Recess some new industries to take the place of the cotton industry.

Is not emergency work a very poor substitute for a revival of the export trade; and, as regards this matter of the export trade, will my right hon. Friend cause the Foreign Office and the Colonial Office to work in greater collaboration with the Board of Trade than has been the case so far?

Is it not a fact that increasing unemployment in the textile industry is largely attributable to the fact that the pound sterling is too highly valued in the foreign exchange market?

That is another question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the proportion of British seamen employed in British whaling ships during the last season in the Antarctic?

As only a few of the British whaling ships are registered in the United Kingdom, it is not possible to give, from official records, the figures for which my hon. Friend asks, but I understand from the British whaling companies in this country that about 22 per cent. of the total personnel of their factory ships and whale catchers during the 1937–38 season were British.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the very serious distress among British fishermen of this class; and will he consider recommending to these companies that they should do everything in their power to increase the number of British deep-sea fishermen employed?

Yes, in fact, they have done so. As far as I am aware, up to 1936, practically the whole of the whaling fleet was manned by Norwegians, and the 22 per cent. has been achieved entirely in the last two years.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what were the ports of registry of the 207 ships purchased from foreign countries during the six months ended 30th June last and in what British ports these ships were registered; what were the ports of registry of the 141 British ships sold to foreign countries during the same period and in what foreign ports they were registered after such sale; and what was the total tonnage of the ships so bought and sold, respectively?

As the reply contains tabular statements I will, with the hon. and learned Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the installation of heavy guns in the vicinity of Gibraltar, His Majesty's Government will make representations to the Spanish insurgent authorities on the matter?

As I informed the hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) on 13th April, the situation has been closely watched. As a result of a fresh examination of the question which has recently been expressly made, His Majesty's Government do not consider it necessary to make any representations at the present time.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the desirability of the war in Spain being brought to a speedy conclusion, he will endeavour to obtain from the leaders of the Spanish Government and of the nationalist forces an assurance that it is not their intention to allow any executions of their opponents or other reprisals in the event of a cessation of hostilities being agreed upon; and whether, upon a peace settlement being made, the British Government will consider help being granted to Spain, by means of credits and in other ways, to enable her to recover from the effects of the war?

As regards the first part of the Question, His Majesty's Government have frequently urged the contending Spanish parties to abstain from reprisals, and, as I explained in the House last Tuesday, they are ready to take advantage of any opportunity which may occur for mediation. I fear that the matter raised in the second part of the Question is at present too hypothetical for me to make a statement upon it.

May I ask whether the representations that have been made lead my hon. Friend to believe that the answer to the first part of my Question is likely to be favourable?

I sincerely hope so. I am afraid I cannot go further than that.

Is not the fear of definite reprisals on the cessation of hostilities on both sides one of the great reasons for the prolongation of the war; and would not the Government consider making joint representations to both sides, and, if possible, securing the good offices of the Vatican in this matter?

I am sure that His Majesty's Government would not put anything out of mind in regard to this very serious aspect of the case. As to the question of making representations, I have already dealt with that in my original reply.

Arising out of the last part of the Question, will the Minister give an assurance that the Government will in no circumstances, and at no time, make loans to those who have committed repeated acts of piracy against British ships?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can give the House any information regarding the bombing and sinking of the steamship "Dellwyn," in the harbour of Gandia, on 27th July; and whether he proposes to take any action?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can make a statement concerning the attack by aircraft on the British steamship "Dellwyn," in the Spanish port of Gandia, showing to what company this ship belonged; what cargo it carried; what was the nature of the attack; and what was the country of origin of the attacking aircraft?

asked the Prime Minister, with regard to the sinking of the British ship "Dellwyn" in the British-owned port of Gandia, whether the nationality of the aviator and of the aeroplane which destroyed the ship are known; and whether the renewal of attacks on British ships will affect the relations of His Majesty's Government with the Burgos authorities?

The British steamship "Dellwyn," belonging to the Dellwyn Steamship Company of Cardiff, and carrying a cargo of coal, was attacked at Gandia on 26th July by a single low-flying aircraft and sank as a result of the damage sustained. Reports hitherto received suggest that the attack on this vessel was deliberate. If, on further investigation, this view was confirmed, His Majesty's Government would at once request the Commission, which is being formed to investigate such cases, to examine without delay the circumstances of this attack.

Is it not a fact that this ship was attacked on four separate occasions before she was sunk; that the aircraft came very low over her and machine-gunned her repeatedly, and, in view of those facts, will the Government not immediately withdraw Sir Robert Hodgson definitely from Burgos?

No, Sir. I accept as substantially correct the statements which the hon. Gentleman has made, but I think it is better to follow the course which I have suggested in my original reply, that if, on further investigation, the view that these attacks are deliberate is confirmed, we should then request the Commission which has been formed for the purpose to examine without delay the circumstances of this particular case.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this Commission is to receive oral evidence or evidence in writing, and will evidence be received from members of the crews of any of the ships which have been attacked?

It is precisely that sort of problem which our agent at Burgos will work out with the Burgos authorities.

Has it not been proved that measures of this kind are not sufficient either to stop these attacks or even to secure compensation?

That is precisely why this new measure has been proposed, and I think we should give it every chance of operating.

Will witnesses from the area which is under Spanish Government control be allowed to give evidence?

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the Government know the type of the aeroplane and the country of origin?

That is one of the points upon which we are awaiting further information.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that substantial reinforcements in men and materials have been supplied to General Franco from Italy in recent weeks; and whether he will give the House the information he possesses on the subject?

While I cannot subscribe to the accuracy of the hon. Member's statement, I shall, of course, be prepared to cause enquiries to be made into any reliable reports on this subject which the hon. Member will send me.

Has not the hon. Gentleman any information at all as to the reinforcements which are being sent from Italy to General Franco in recent weeks?

I have always said that we have sources of information, but I could not go as far as the hon. Gentleman does in the Question which he has put on the Paper.

How far can the hon. Gentleman go?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can assure the House that His Majesty's Government's recent proposals to General Franco do not by implication recognise the legitimacy of indiscriminate air attacks on ports remote from the battle front or legitimacy of attempts to establish a blockade by means of aircraft?

The proposals in question do not imply any such recognition.

Are we to understand that the Government definitely repudiate the legitimacy of indiscriminate attacks on ports, and that they still adhere to their view that it is not legitimate in international law to attempt to establish a blockade by air?

Yes, Sir; the Government stand by the view expressed by the Prime Minister on 13th July, which was:

"His Majesty's Government have made it plain that they cannot accept as legitimate the bombing and sinking by aircraft of merchant ships."—[OFFIcrAr REPORT, 13th July, 1938. Col. 1334, Vol. 338.]

Has that been made plain again in the recent note to General Franco?

I think General Franco is personally well aware of our view on this matter.

Are we to regard the Prime Minister's statement of some weeks ago—that if these deliberate attacks continued they must affect friendly relations between this country and the Burgos authorities—as withdrawn, since it has never been in any way implemented, in spite of recent occurrences?

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now make a statement as to the replies received from the Spanish Government and the Burgos authorities as to the British plan for removal of foreign combatants from Spain?

The reply of the Spanish Government has now been published. It contains a number of observations on detail, but His Majesty's Government for their part regard this prompt reply as being an acceptance of the Non-Intervention Committee's plan as a whole. I understand that the Burgos authorities are studying the plan urgently with a view to an early reply.

Is it proposed to ask the Burgos authorities to expedite their reply so that it will be received shortly?

We hope to receive the reply and forward it to the Non-Intervention Commitee. I will certainly consider the hon. and gallant Gentleman's suggestion.

asked the Prime Minister how many attacks by the insurgents on the British-owned port of Gandia has taken place; and whether His Majesty's Government has considered taking any special steps for its protection?

There have been seven attacks on the port of Gandia by General Franco's forces. As regards the second part of the question, I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave to the hon. Lady on 27th June.

Seeing that this is a fresh attack and a peculiarly deliberate one, as shown by the hon. Gentleman's own statement, will it not have a serious effect on the prestige of the British Government if warnings repeatedly given by the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister are not in any way implemented?

The hon. Lady asked me what action we should take, and I said in my previous reply that although this port is leased by a British company, it remains part of the territory of Spain, and that if we were to go on to the territory of Spain and defend it, we should be taking part in the war, which we are not prepared to do.

Are there not many precedents in history, including precedents in the civil war in Spain, for action being taken within territorial waters to protect British shipping from attack, and will the hon. Gentleman look up the precedent of 1873 on this matter?

Are those precedents encouraging?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the sinking of the steamship "Dellwyn" at Gandia, on 27th July, was witnessed by His Majesty's ship "Hero"; and whether the latter vessel took any action against the hostile aeroplane?

The answer to the first part of the question is yes, Sir; and to the second part no, Sir.

Have the British naval authorities been given instructions to allow British ships to be hit and sunk under the very guns of the British Navy, and that on no occasion shall anybody fire upon the Italian friends of the Government?

The instructions given to the Royal Navy are in accordance with the policy of the Government, which is to give full protection to British ships outside territorial waters and not to give such protection inside territorial waters.

Has the hon. and gallant Gentleman any knowledge of any previous case in British history where a British ship has been sunk in any waters under the eyes of the British Fleet and the British Fleet have not taken action? Is there a precedent for it? I do not know of any?

I should certainly require notice of that question.

Was a British ship sunk under the eyes of the British Navy?

(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he has received any further information as to the circumstances in which the observing officer of the Non-Intervention Committee was killed during an attack on the British ship "Kellwyn"?

No, Sir. Urgent steps are being taken with a view to obtaining confirmation of reports which have appeared in the Press on the subject.

Is any action taken on the Non-Intervention Committee when their officers are killed in this way? Is the matter taken up by the Non-Intervention Committee at all? Is any notice taken of it?

I think that in similar cases the matter has been taken up by the Non-Intervention Committee, with a view to making the only amends that can be made in the matter, and that is compensation.

Is no protest made by the members of the Non-Intervention Committee against the killing of their officers, who are specially appointed to accompany these ships to the places to which they go, in conformity with the arrangements made and under the orders of this Committee? Do the Committee just sit down under this state of affairs—the whole lot of them?

It is not reasonable for the right hon. Gentleman to expect me to answer a question of that kind without notice. It is a question concerning the actions of the Non-Intervention Committee, and I cannot be expected to know everything they do. Of course, if I had notice I could find out.

Has this matter been brought to the attention of the Foreign Secretary and of the right hon. Gentleman, and may I ask whether any instructions have been given to our representatives on the Non-Intervention Committee to do anything in this matter?

I am not quite sure what the right hon. Gentleman means by "this matter." If he means the matter on which he is asking a question, of course that has been brought to the notice of the Foreign Secretary.

This is not the first occasion on which observation officers of the Non-Intervention Committee have been killed. I am asking whether they can kill observation officers just as they can kill anybody else without any protest being made?

I really do not know what the right hon. Gentleman means by "they can kill observation officers." I have already said that I do not know what the circumstances are in which this observation officer was killed, and until we get the information, for which we have urgently asked, I do not think we had better make any assumptions.

Is not this the third observation officer killed? Was not the first killed some months ago? If the Non-Intervention Committee are to continue to send officers, ought they not to take measures for their protection, or, if they cannot protect them, ought they not to cease to send them on these international duties?

It is difficult to answer that question offhand, but, of course, I quite agree that if non-intervention observers are liable to be killed in the performance of their duties it may be difficult to expect them to perform those duties, and it may give rise to complications which will have to be considered and dealt with.

Is it not the point that this is not a matter for this country alone but for all the countries which are represented on the Non-Intervention Committee? Ought they not to take co-operative action to protest, rather than that it should be left to ourselves? Ought not that to be impressed upon the Committee?

I agree with the hon. Baronet that it is a matter for all those concerned in their joint capacity.

Whatever the nationality of the observation officer, is it not the responsibility of all the 27 signatory States to protest or to give warning that they expect their representatives, of whatever nationality, to be respected on the high seas?

The hon. Member could not have understood me. That is precisely what I was saying. It is not the business merely of the country to which the observation officer who happens to be killed belongs, but the duty of all the countries which are concerned in this joint arrangement to take whatever steps may be necessary.

My question was whether any instructions had been given to our representatives to raise this matter on the Non-Intervention Committee, so that all the States could bring pressure to bear upon the perpetrator. I am asking whether any instructions have been given to our representatives on the Non-Intervention Committee?

The right hon. Gentleman must not talk as though this were a deliberate attempt to kill observation officers. The observation officer has been killed because his duties brought him in close proximity to the objective, whatever the objective was, which was being aimed at. I understand that the matter has been discussed on the Non-Intervention Committee, and that they have had under consideration suggestions for making it safer for these observation officers to perform their duties in the future, and I cannot go further than that.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department the total number of policewomen employed in the Metropolitan police area and the total annual cost, giving the figures separately for their pay, cost of rent allowance, uniform, and other incidental charges?

One woman police superintendent and 105 other ranks are employed in the Metropolitan Police District, to whom total annual payments are made of £21,441, consisting of £19,437 for pay, £953 for rent allowance, £860 for uniform, and £191 for other incidental payments.

Can the Noble Lord say whether there is any superannuation plan in connection with these policewomen?

Not without notice.

asked the Home Secretary what action is taken by the chief of the Metropolitan police to protect the people when property is being demolished in the various parts of the Metropolitan police area?

The Metropolitan Police have no special statutory duties in connection with demolitions, nor have they any instructions specifically relating to demolitions as such. They are, however, instructed wherever buildings or structures appear to be in a dangerous condition to warn any occupants, to prevent pedestrians from passing near, and where necessary to divert traffic.

Is the noble lord aware that a woman was killed in consequence of a hoarding not being properly protected; and surely somebody is responsible in such cases?

If the hon. Member has in mind the recent case in Newport, the circumstances there are quite different. There are no regulations, I understand, in that particular place such as exist in London in regard to the demolition of buildings.

asked the Home Secretary whether he can give any information in connection with the explosion at the Oldham Ice Company's works at Falcon Street on Saturday last; what was the cause of the explosion; and how many people were injured by the ammonia inhaled?

From a preliminary report which my right hon. Friend has received, it appears that the explosion originated in a brine cooler which was under repair. I have not full information as to how many persons were injured or affected, but I understand that two of the three employés on the premises were affected by the fumes, and are now in the infirmary. The matter is being fully investigated.

asked the Home Secretary whether it has been decided to prosecute the owner of the aeroplane which flew over the crowd assembled in the garden of Buckingham Palace on Monday, 18th July?

The inquiries which are being made in this matter have not yet been completed.

Would this not be a good subject for extra taxation, if we are to have this form of advertisement?

That is a question that should be addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Am I right in imagining that it is the ordinary constable in the street who is responsible for the detection of these aeroplanes and of what number is on them?

That would really depend on the circumstances. The difficulty in this particular case—I will be perfectly frank about it—is that there are conflicting reports as to where and how the aeroplane flew, and those conflicting reports are now being investigated.

Will the Noble Lord bear in mind that there is a very considerable nuisance from these low-flying aeroplanes?