asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether women who are engaged in work in France connected with the Army are subject to military law; whether, when charges are made by the military authorities against a woman that woman has any right to demand an investigation corresponding to the right and duty imposed upon officers under paragraph 446 of the King's Regulations; and whether he will consider the desirability of according this privilege to women working for the Army in France?

The conditions under which camp followers may be dealt with under military law will be found by reference to Sections 176 (10) and 184 (1) of the Army Act. No such right exists as is mentioned by my hon. Friend, and there is no intention of granting any such privilege to camp followers, who are merely permitted to accompany an army in the field at the will of the Commander-in-Chief.

I do not, of course, refer to enrolled members of the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps serving in the field, whose conditions are totally different, and to whom are accorded privileges and advantages which officers and men of the British Army now possess.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he observed a decision given by the Lambeth Tribunal on 28th December, in which it was agreed that a discharged man who had served overseas could not be compulsorily posted under the Military Service (Review of Exceptions) Act; and whether he now proposes to discharge all time-expired men recalled on the basis of service irrespective of wounds?

:I am not aware of the decision referred to. Perhaps my hon. Friend would consult the Minister of National Service, but I know of no recent alteration in the conditions of discharge.

asked whether it is proposed to give all fighting units who went through the 1914–15 winter at the front the opportunity of spending the present winter at home?

I am afraid that this is not possible, in view of the present state of the man-power question.

Is the hon. Gentleman prepared to give no consideration whatsoever to the men who have been serving?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) for what reason Mr. P. M'Dougall was exempted from military service; whether the reason was that his services were urgently required on his farm; if so, since he has subsequently been given a Government appointment as commissioner for live-stock in Scotland at £1,000 a year, and is therefore not required for his farm, his exemption will be cancelled; whether the War Office was a party at any stage to the grant of such exemption; (2) if he is aware that five out of the six sub-commissioners for live-stock in Scotland, who are paid £500 a year, are of military age; will he say why such as are of that age have been exempted; whether other persons not of military age and capable of performing their duties cannot be found in Scotland; whether such live-stock sub-commissioners as are of military Age will be forthwith drafted into the Army; and whether the War Office was A party at any stage to the exemptions granted?

The appointments apparently referred to by the hon. Member are proposed by the Ministry of Food in connection with the Live-stock Scheme, and, as they affect men of military age, they have been referred for the concurrence of the Ministry of National Service, which has not yet been given. I understand that the men selected already hold tribunal exemptions as farmers, and that these are still current. I have suggested to the Ministry of Food that, before the appointments are confirmed, further inquiries should be made and, in particular, that the local agricultural committees should be consulted, if this has not already been done, in order to ascertain whether suitable men over military age cannot be found to fill these appointments.

Am I to understand that the exemptions of these gentlemen are at present under suspense, and that the Ministry of Food, so far as it is concerned, will not ask that they shall be confirmed?

I do not think the hon. Member quite understands the position. These men have been exempted as individuals by the tribunals, and those exemptions are still current. It is now proposed to employ them by the Ministry of Food in an official capacity, and such applications must come to the Ministry of National Service, and they are being considered.

Were these men not exempted because they had some agricultural value, and as soon as that value ceases should not these exemptions be cancelled?

Does the hon. Member not see that a man who cannot leave his farm to go and fight, but can leave it to draw £1,000 a year is a man whose exemption should be at once cancelled?

If my hon. Friend will read my answer he will see that those facts are being fully borne in mind, and at the present moment the Minister of National Service has not given the necessary authority to employ these men as Government officials.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a farmer with £15,000 capital has had all his labourers taken away, the sole man left having got up to colour-sergeant after serving seven years, while other men have been refused exemption after years of service?

Has not the gentleman mentioned in the question already been employed for very many months?

He is certainly not employed by the Ministry of National Service, and we have written asking if he cannot be replaced by a man who is not of military age.

Does the Ministry of Food not advise in these matters?

Has the Minister of National Service to ask for permission or does he order a man from another Department?

The hon. Member cannot really have been listening to what I have said. I said that no man could be employed in the Government service of military age without the consent of the Ministry of National Service.

asked the Secretary for Scotland Whether he was consulted at any stage regarding the exemptions granted to Mr. P. M'Dougall, Commissioner of Live-stock for Scotland, and to his six sub-commissioners, of whom five are believed to be, like himself, of military age; and whether he was a party in any way to the appointment of these gentlemen of military age to the offices they now hold it salaries of £1,000 and £500 a year respectively?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative. For the facts as to Mr. M'Dougall's exemption I beg to refer my hon. Friend to the answers given him by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food on the 16th instant, and also. by the Minister of National Service of to-day.

Does it not fall within the right hon. Gentleman's duties as Secretary for Scotland to terminate what is practically a scandal and a rock of offence in and out of Scotland?

I have informed my hon. Friend that my Department has no responsibility in this matter.

Was it not stated in a previous answer given by the Ministry of Food that the Board of Agriculture in Scotland was consulted about these appointments before they were made; and, if so, is the right hon. Gentleman's answer to-day consistent with that fact?

I think my hon. and learned Friend is mistaken. I made special inquiry, and the Board of Agriculture, according to my information, were not consulted.

Is it correct, then, to say that they were not consulted in any way before the appointments were made?

The question put to me was whether I was consulted regarding -the exemptions, and the answer to that question is in the negative. The answer with regard to the Board of Agriculture on that point is also in the negative.

Would the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of the -question relating to the appointments and not to the exemptions—that is the part to which I am referring?

According to my information, the Board of Agriculture was not consulted, and certainly I was not consulted.

asked the Home Secretary what information he has of the state of health of a conscientious objector named Eagle, now detained in Maidstone Prison; whether this man has been on work strike for a considerable period; whether he is in a dying condition owing to disciplinary and dietetic punishments; and whether he will be released before fatal consequences ensue?

This man is in good health, and there appears to be no ground whatever for the suggestion that his health has been injured by disciplinary and dietetic punishments. He has been punished on four occasions during the last two months for refusing to work, but the punishments awarded were of a very moderate kind.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that we often get the statement that men are in good health and subsequently we find that they have collapsed and even died?

asked the Home Secretary on whose authority the conscientious objectors at Princetown have been allowed to hire a cottage for use as a kind of club; whether this hostel, as the conscientious objectors call it, is a hotbed of revolutionary propaganda; and will he cause inquiries to be made with a view to the closing down of this establishment?

I understand that a building in Princetown called "The Friends? Hostel" is rented by a committee of the Society of Friends, and is open to conscientious objectors while out on leave. No meetings of any political organisation have been held on the premises, and no literature other than books or magazines of general interest is sold or distributed. A meeting for worship is held every Sunday evening. As at present advised, I see no ground for interference.

Is it not a rule of the Home Office that no propaganda whatever shall take place in Princetown, and that no rooms shall be used for the purpose; and, if so, why is this room used?

I have explained to the hon. Member in my answer that this room is not being used for propaganda purposes.

asked the Home Secretary why the programme used by the conscientious objectors at Prince town at the concert they gave on the Thursday after Christmas Day in the Wesleyan church bore no printer's name; and, having regard to the statutory provisions in such matter, what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

I am advised that the statutory provisions do not apply to a document of this kind.

Is it not a fact that there were several pamphlets printed and that they had no printer's name upon them; is it to be supposed that these things are printed in the prison; and will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the conscientious objectors have free access to the prison press?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will give notice of some of those questions.

I will.

asked the Home Secretary whether several hundred- weights of dried fruit were supplied to the conscientious objectors at Princetown for Christmas, while other people in the vicinity and elsewhere had to go short; that 150 tons of coal a month are provided for consumption in the private gas plant in the prison, and this when ordinary citizens have to ration themselves to meet the calls of patriotism; why these men who have refused to defend their country against the enemy, and have left that task to their neighbours, are allowed to receive this preferential treatment; and why numbers of turkeys and geese were permitted to be consumed by these men at Christmas, seeing that food was and is so scarce a commodity that many people had and still have to go without?

Dried fruit is part of the regular dietary at Princetown, but the amount consumed in the last three months of 1917 was less than 1 lb. per head. The consumption of coal for gas is 105 tons a month, which furnishes the supply not only of the prison building, with 1,200 inmates, but also of other Government buildings in Princetown. No turkeys or geese were supplied to or eaten by the men in the work centre, but possibly some of them dined at Christmas with their friends outside. The Committee is consulting the Ministry of Food on the question of the purchase of food by these men outside their rations.

Does the right hon. Gentleman deny that several hundredweight of dried fruit were taken into the prison during Christmas week?

The facts are as I have stated them in the answer.

asked the Minister of National Service whether he is aware that a married man with five children, J. Dloogatz, R.D.R., Maidstone, who has for years suffered from tuberculosis, been in two sanatoria, and was recently a patient at Victoria Park Chest Hospital, where he was warned against sleeping in the same room as other persons, has been taken into the Army, and has for two weeks been sleeping on a cement floor with a crowd of men at Maidstone; and whether, to prevent the spread of tuberculosis, this man will be immediately discharged?

I am having inquiries made into the matters referred to in the first part of the hon. Member's question. I think that the points raised in the remainder of the question should be addressed by my hon. Friend to the Under-Secretary of State for War.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that there are a great number of scandals and that there has been a great deal of newspaper comment on the conditions at that place?

I have no knowledge of the hon. Member's scandals.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why members of the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps serving abroad are suspended from insurance and have to make good their arrears on resuming work in the United Kingdom?

It has been decided to make good these arrears in future.