asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the results of the inquiries made by the Registrar of Friendly Societies into the conduct of the Hollins Permanent Building Society of Manchester.

Following his inquiries into the Hollins Permanent Building Society of Manchester, the Registrar of Friendly Societies has secured an undertaking from the society that it will not invite capital from the public. Accordingly, the Registrar does not propose to make an order under Section 11 of the Prevention of Fraud (Investments) Act, 1939. As a result of his inquiries the Registrar successfully took proceedings against the society and its then chairman for failing to comply with the provisions of the Building Societies Act, 1939, and he has drawn the attention of the society to other matters for criticism.

Is the Chancellor aware that since this matter was referred to the Registrar of Friendly Societies on the advice of the Government, the former chairman of the building society, Mr. Richard Hollins Murray, has been quoting to my constituents their letters to me and threatening proceedings for libel? Will the Chancellor make inquiries as to the circumstances in which my constituents' letters were disclosed to Mr. Murray. Further, will he particularly inquire whether any precautions were taken against their misuse by this man?

I will certainly make further inquiries at the request of the hon. Member, but I understand that the hon. Member's constituents' letters were made available, and that they were then passed on. I think it would have been better if the hon. Member's permission had been obtained before the opportunity was given to Mr. Murray to quote from them.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not a fact that all letters to Members of Parliament are matters of Privilege and cannot be used as a basis for any other action?

I do not think that follows.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I seek your guidance as to whether we are now to accept, by a simple answer from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that correspondence which is sent to us in confidence from our constituents may be given anywhere at any time, once it is in the possession of Ministers, without our knowing anything about it?

I do not think that follows at all. If an hon. Member encloses a letter to a Minister I think the usual course is to ask his permission before the letter is sent on, but I think it depends, as hon. Members will agree, on the style of case. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I do not think it is possible to lay down a general rule.

This is a most serious matter. Constituents write on the most delicate matters to Members of Parliament and feel that what they are doing is sacrosanct from any disclosure to an outside body. It is a great pity if that principle is departed from.

I think there is great substance in what is said. I was guarding myself against laying down a general and sweeping declaration because there are so many matters on which members of the public write to Members of Parliament. Some are by their nature confidential and are never to be disclosed, and others are quite different. As the matter has come up suddenly, the House had better let me consider it and if I can I shall try to tell the House what I find.

Is it not a fact that some letters sent to Members of Parliament are net confidential and that others may be, but surely every letter sent from a Member of Parliament to a Minister is confidential?

I will consider that point too.

Do I understand that you will consider this matter and advise us further, Mr. Speaker?

That is what I have asked the permission of the House to do. as the matter has arisen very suddenly.