asked the Postmaster-General when the telephone service which was interrupted by the mid-winter storms will be re-established in rural areas as in Wiltshire; and whether rebate of rental will be made to subscribers whose telephones have been out of use?

:The damage caused by the storm at the end of February has been generally repaired, although there is a small number of lines still out of order in the West and South West (including cases in Wiltshire), where the damage was exceptionally heavy. It is hoped that service will be completely restored very shortly. As regards rebates of rental, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given by my predecessor on 21st February to my hon. Friend the Member for Swindon (Mr. Wakefield).

Is my right hon. Friend using his influence to get these repairs finished as quickly as possible?

Yes, Sir. I should like to use this opportunity of paying a tribute to the men engaged in this work. There were 60,000 lines put out of order, and yesterday the number still out of order was only 448.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the telephone service between the Isles of Scilly and the mainland has ceased to operate since the war; that the Scillonians have been informed by the postal authorities that they are legally bound to pay for this service notwithstanding the fact that it does not exist; and whether he will either restore this much-needed service or remit the charges in respect thereof?

The public telephone service between the Scilly Isles and the mainland was suspended on the outbreak of war for reasons of security. I am glad to say that communication was restored on 8th April.

asked the Attorney-General whether he will take steps to amend the law so as to prevent fraud before it is committed rather than to inflict punishment after a client's possessions have been stolen by a solicitor?

As I have already indicated in answers to previous Questions, the Law Society are hoping to introduce a Bill part of which is directed to preventing frauds of the kind referred to.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that a considerable number of conscientious objectors are being granted exemption on condition that they remain in the teaching profession; and whether, in view of the danger to the country of the spread of the views held by these people, he will take steps to ensure that they are not employed in any schools which receive State grants?

I have no information on the matter, but I would remind my hon. and gallant Friend that the appointment of teachers and the termination of their appointment are the responsibility of the local education authorities or governing bodies of schools, as the case may be. As regards the last part of the Question, I have no reason to suppose that the teachers concerned would fail to observe the principle, to which the teaching profession itself attaches great importance, that political propaganda should in no circumstances be introduced into the schools.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for his reply, might I ask whether he does not think it undesirable that patriotic citizens should be forced to send their children to be taught by these people, and will he use his influence with local authorities to prevent their being employed?

If there is any evidence of political propaganda by such persons, steps can, and will, be taken.

asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that 11house physicians and house surgeons of the Royal Hospital, Wolver Hampton, were recruited on 1st September last into the Emergency Medical Service, and were informed that they would be retained in their then posts in the hospital for a period of three months from that date, and that one month later their appointments were cancelled without payment of salary; and is it intended that the same three months' salary shall be paid to these 11 doctors as that which has been paid to all house officers recruited under the same class and whose appointments have been cancelled under like circumstances?

The practitioners referred to were enrolled in the Emergency Medical Service last September, on a three months' contract, involving liability to be called up for service, in the first instance, at the Royal Hospital, Wolver Hampton. No occasion arose for calling them up, and their contracts accordingly lapsed, without any question of remuneration. I am unable to agree that these officers have received different treatment from others in comparable circumstances.

While thanking the hon. Lady for that reply, might I ask whether it is not a fact that others who were enrolled in like circumstances have received compensation in respect of the cancellation of their enrolment?

These particular officers at Wolver Hampton enrolled, and were not called up. In other districts, officers enrolled, and were called up; and, because they were called up, they have received remuneration. There was no need to call up these officers; and, therefore, they did not receive remuneration.

Is not that point purely a technicality? Is it proposed to deprive these doctors, because they failed to fill in a certain form, of pay which is going to all their colleagues?

No, I do not think it is only a case of failing to fill in a form, nor is it a technicality. Certain officers in Was all, who were called up, had particular work to do; and those who were called up were then liable to be sent to any part of the country where their services were required. Those who were not called up, but were merely enrolled, remain in their hospitals, doing exactly the same work as they were doing before.

If my hon. Friend and I bring to the attention of the hon. Lady cases which are comparable, where payment has been made, will the hon. Lady be good enough to look into them?

Officers have been called up only when it was thought necessary to utilise their services.

Has the Prime Minister any further statement to make about naval operations in the North Sea?

I do not propose to-day to make any general statement on the naval aspects of the war, as I hope it will be possible for one to be made by my right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty to-morrow, when perhaps more information than we now possess will have come to hand. The House, however, will probably wish to hear the account which I have just received of the fierce action fought by the British destroyers against the German force in Narvik this morning. Five British destroyers steamed up the fiord, and engaged six German destroyers, of the latest and largest type, which were also supported by the shore batteries and guns newly mounted ashore. His Majesty's ship Hunter was sunk, and the Hardy was so severely injured that she had to run ashore and become a wreck. The Hotspur also received serious damage, and the destroyer Hostile slight damage. The remaining vessel, the Havoc, was untouched.

After a most determined action against a superior force, with larger and more modern ships, and in the face of gun-fire from the shore, the damaged Hotspur withdrew, covered by the other two destroyers. The enemy appeared in no condition to attempt pursuit. One 1,600-ton German destroyer was torpedoed, and believed sunk, and three were left heavily hit and burning. It is perhaps not less important that six merchant ships, suspected of containing the unloaded stores of the German expedition, were sunk in the action by the British destroyers. On the way out, they met the German ship Ravensfeld, which was found to be carrying the reserve ammunition of the landed German forces. This vessel was blown up. The House will naturally not expect me to deal in any way with further operations.

Was not a heavy gale blowing at the same time, giving added glory to the episode?