(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Scotland his reasons for refusing to meet a deputation of unemployed men who had marched from Glasgow to Edinburgh to voice the claims of the unemployed, whether these men are now in Edinburgh without shelter and whether he proposes to take any action?

As regards the first part of the question, it did not appear to me that any useful purpose would be served by my receiving this deputation. As regards the second part, I am informed that these men are no longer in Edinburgh, and the last part of the question does not therefore arise.

Does that mean that the right hon. Gentleman thinks that because the men have left Edinburgh the grievances of the Glasgow unemployed have been removed?

No, Sir, by no means.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why, as he has received almost all sort of deputations during his term of office, he refuses to meet a perfectly legitimate deputation of the unemployed in Edinburgh?

I thought in this particular case that no good purpose would be secured by my receiving the deputation, and I am fortified in that view by the policy of the late Labour Government.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman's Department must have some cognisance of the grievances of this large body of men, and why is it that when they come to him constitutionally to state their grievances he does not extend to them the usual courtesy of hearing them, as he does to richer deputations?

I have received deputations from rich and from poor during my term of office. It is not because they were poor that I refused to receive them in this case. I might mention to the hon. Gentleman that on 3rd May last I wrote to this deputation saying that I thought no useful purpose would be served by my receiving them.

May I ask whether this is not the first deputation of the unemployed who have asked to see the right hon. Gentleman since he took office, and consequently he has not been asked to receive poor people? Why is it that in this case, when a number of people wish to put before him their grievances in a perfectly constitutional and legitimate way, he does not meet them with that ordinary courtesy which they have extended to him? Why is it that he cannot at least give the courteous treatment to these people which they have evidently given to him?

I gave this matter very serious consideration before I came to the decision which I announced to them on the 3rd May.

Was the right hon. Gentleman influenced in any respect, by the fact that the request to receive this deputation was made to him by myself as a Member of this House; and is he aware that the reply to my request was the curtest letter which I have ever received from any Minister of the Crown at any time?