4. Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSONasked the President of the Board of Trade on what basis was the supplemental grant for reparation claims calculated; whether 205 the amount of the grant bore any relation to the amount claimed; and, if so, what?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERI would refer to the statement made by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury in the last Government during the Debate on the Motion for Adjournment on 21st March last (col. 894 of the OFFICIAL REPORT). As to the second and third parts of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to my answers of 24th ultimo to the hon. Member for Southampton, copies of which I am sending him.
Mr. THOMSONIn so far as the amount granted bore no relation to the justice of the claim, will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether it is not possible to supplement the amount now that the amount of the claims are known
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERAs the hon. Member knows, that is a matter for the consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In this matter I am only the paymaster of such sums as are provided by this House. Perhaps the hon. Member will address a question on this point to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. THOMSONWill the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the lines suggested?
§ Mr. A. V. ALEXANDERIs the right hon. Gentleman's view still the same as it was on the Supplementary Estimates?
§ Captain WEDGWOOD BENNAs the right hon. Gentleman is the only Minister acquainted with the facts, is it not his duty, if he think well, to make representations to the Treasury?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERNo, Sir. Several lien. Members rose
§ Mr. SPEAKEROrder, order. This is becoming a Debate.
§ 7. Mr. BASIL PETOasked the President of the Board of Trade how many claims for compensation have been lodged against Germany in the case of the masters, officers and crews of British ships which were seized in German ports before the official declaration of war; how 206 many of these claims have been settled; and what has been the nature of the settlements arrived at?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERThe answer is a long one, and I propose, if my hon. Friend will permit me, to have it circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. PETOWhy should not the answer be a very short one, namely, that only one such seaman has received any compensation at all?
§ Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTERNo, Sir; that would be quite an untrue answer.
Following is the answer:
Nine hundred and forty-seven of the masters, officers and crews of British vessels detained in Germany at the outbreak of war lodged claims with the Reparation Claims Department, practically all of which have been admitted against the £5,000,000. These claims were assessed at a total of £297,230, and payments have been made after scaling down in accordance with the First Report of the Royal Commission.
In addition, 128 of such persons lodged belated claims practically all of which have been admitted against the £300,000. Those claims have been assessed at a total of £31,988 and, after scaling down in accordance with the First Report of the Royal Commission, the proper grants out of the £300,000 have been or will be paid to such claimants.
Eight hundred and sixty-seven claims have also been lodged with the Clearing Office under Clause 4 of the Annex to Section IV of Part X of the Treaty of Versailles, by officers and men of 81 separate ships which were detained in German ports before the outbreak of the War. Two eases have been finally decided in favour of the claimants and two rejected. The basis of the favourable decisions was that the claimants were entitled to compensation for damage arising directly out of acts committed by the German authorities before the declaration of war, and, in the arbitrator's view, the measure of such damage was the loss of special wages and extra grants which the claimants would have received if they had been able to return to England and had remained in the employ of the respective steamship companies during the War. In four 207 other cases the question of principle has been decided in favour of the claimants, but the assessment of the compensation has been reserved for future decision. It has been arranged that in the particular case of loss of personal effects, any damage which would give rise to a claim under Article 297 shall in future be assessed by the arbitrator and not the Mixed Arbitral Tribunal.