asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether permits to visit Boulogne even on public business can only be obtained through the base commandant; whether permits to visit wounded relations in the military zone can only be obtained through the medical commandants of hospitals; and what means are available for ascertaining in what hospitals individual patients may be found, and how application to the medical commandants should be made?

Permits for British subjects to visit Boulogne or to visit wounded relations in the military zone can only be obtained through the permit officer, Downing Street. The notification of the hospital in which a wounded officer or soldier is lying is made from the War Office or from the Record Office. Under present regulations relatives must produce to the Permit Office the telegram from the War Office or Record Office saying that the officer or soldier is dangerously wounded.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that at the Permit Office the information given is that these permits must be obtained at Boulogne in the case of anyone wanting to go there?

I was not aware of that, and I think the proper procedure is the one I have just read out.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman will give careful consideration to this case, in view of the great anxiety of relatives, and the possibility, at any rate, that under the existing procedure they will not be able to get their permits until after their relatives are dead?

Of course, I thoroughly appreciate the anxiety of the relatives, and I am most anxious to do what is in my power. I will look into the question of the Noble Lord.

asked the hon. Member for the Saffron Walden Division, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, if Siegfried Hirschmann is still a director of the Union Cable Company and where he is residing; does he receive fees; and what steps the Office of Works has taken to secure that no part of the profit on the cable contract given to this German firm reaches Siegfried Hirschmann?

Mr. Hirschmann, so far as is known, is still a director. His place of residence is not known to the First Commissioner. He is receiving no fees. Before the contract was made the First Commissioner ascertained that the Board of Trade had appointed a supervisor under the Trading with the Enemy Amendment Act, 1914, which with other Acts and Proclamations precludes payment of money to or for the benefit of an enemy.

Will the Office of Works not try to find out where this man does live, in view of the importance of an enemy getting knowledge of our cable contracts?

I think my hon. Friend rather misunderstands the situation. The Office of Works has really no responsibility in this particular matter beyond giving the contract to the firm most suitable to carry it out. All Regulations regarding enemy aliens are done under the Trading with the Enemy Act and by a Board of Trade official.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the North-Eastern Railway Company has withdrawn the advantage of cheaper fares hitherto accorded to sick men taking up residence in convalescent homes; and whether this action has been taken by the company at the suggestion of the Board of Trade?

I am in correspondence with the railway company on this matter, and will inform my hon. Friend of the result. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this withdrawal is causing very great discontent?

asked the President of the Board of Trade, whether he will obtain from Lord Inchcape's Committee a formal Report on the congestion of various important ports in the United Kingdom; if the same will be issued to Members of this House or laid upon the Table; and if he can state at what date this Report will be issued?

Lord Inchcape's Committee was not constituted to inquire and make a formal Report on congestion in the various ports. It is a Joint Committee of members nominated by port and dock authorities for the purpose of an interchange of views as to the practical steps to be taken by those authorities either separately or in co-operation for dealing with the traffic of the ports in the most expeditious manner possible. The Committee has already accomplished valuable practical work on these lines. I doubt if any useful purpose would be served by calling on them for a formal Report on congestion, and I fear that such an alteration in the objects of the Committee would necessitate a modification of its composition and lead to delay.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that the congestion of the ports is a matter of vital importance, and is a direct factor in the increased cost of the food of the people?

Yes.

Is it not in the public interest that the Report should be issued, because others may be able to make suggestions as well? Can he explain why, on a recent occasion, when the Home Sec-rotary, answering a question addressed to the President to the Board of Trade, referred me to the Report. Was that merely diplomatic evasion?

I will make inquiries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that there is more congestion in the port of Liverpool than in any other port in the United Kingdom; that on or about 14th April some seventy vessels were waiting for discharging berths; that the average number of vessels waiting for berths daily since that date is about sixty, and that many of the berths allotted to steamers are full of cargoes discharged from previous vessels and technically known as foul berths, and, therefore, practically useless for the purposes of discharge; that the ss. "Lime Branch" arrived in the port of Liverpool on 1st March and at the present date, after being sixty-five days in port, has only succeeded in discharging about two-thirds of her cargo; that there is also a shortage of labour for discharging purposes in Liverpool; and that on the 3rd instant six steamship companies were short of about 1,000 men; whether he is aware that the delay in discharging steamers creates a scarcity of tonnage and an increase in freights without any corresponding advantage to the steamship lines; and whether, in view of the injury to the port and the steamship lines trading to and from Liverpool, he will make representations to the Admiralty and the War Office to make use of other ports where there is less or no congestion?

Without going into details the facts are, generally speaking, in accord with the hon. Member's question. The congestion of the port at Liverpool has caused me great concern, and I can assure the hon. Member that the Admiralty and War Office are fully alive to the difficulties at Liverpool, and are doing all they can to reduce them, both by the use of alternative ports and in other ways.

Will the hon. Gentleman make representations to the War Office and the Admiralty to divert some of the ships which are fitting out there and occupying berths to other ports, where they would not cause congestion in the same manner as they do at Liverpool?

I will consider that suggestion.

Does the hon. Member realise what the detention of a steamer like the one I have mentioned means for sixty days in port, and only discharging part of her cargo?

The hon. Member is now simply repeating his original question.

asked whether any steamers are trading between Great Britain and Holland, and, if so, which?

There are steamers trading between Great Britain and Holland, but it is not desirable to give publicity to their names.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the passenger traffic has been discontinued or suspended, and, if so, how long has it been suspended, and will he explain why that suspension synchronises with the holding of the Women's Peace Conference at The Hague?

May I ask my hon. Friend whether firms who are interested in sending and receiving goods have recently had notice of this suspension?

Perhaps the hon. Member will give me notice of that question.

asked whether the Swiss dye manufacturers attended at Whitehall recently and refused to be coerced into exclusive dealing with British Dyes, Limited; whether the chairman of the company has visited Basle by arrangement with the Board of Trade and what is the object of his visit; and what is the Government policy towards users in this country who object to this monopoly?

No suggestion as to exclusive dealing with British Dyes, Limited, has been made to the Swiss dye-making firms, and the answer to the second part of the question is also in the negative. I have no knowledge of any proposed monopoly such as is suggested in the last part of the question.

Will my hon. Friend say whether the Swiss dye manufacturers did attend at Whitehall recently?

That is so.

What was the object of the conference, and what was the pressure put upon them?

When the hon. Member makes suggestions as to pressure, perhaps he will give me notice?

Has any arrangement been made between the British Dyes, Limited, and the Society of Chemical Industries?

That does not arise.

asked whether Sir Mark Oldroyd has resigned the chairmanship of British Dyes, Limited; who is the new chairman; and whether he has been appointed with the approval of the Government?

I understand that owing to ill-health Sir Mark Oldroyd has found it necessary to resign the chairmanship of British Dyes, Limited, and that the hon. Member for Forfarshire (Mr. J. Falconer) has been appointed by the directors in his stead. The appointment is a matter solely for the directors of the company, and does not require Government approval.

May I ask if the hon. Member for Forfarshire was on the Advisory Committee or on the Committee which advised the Government?

I do not know to what Committee the hon. Baronet refers, and perhaps he will give me notice.

Is it not a fact that these directors are paid £10,000 a year for the management of British Dyes, Limited?

The figures were made public in the course of the Debate.

What salary is the new chairman paid?

That is really a question which the hon. Gentleman ought to give notice of, and it does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty what are the duties of the eminent doctors to whom he pays £5,000 a year; whether they demanded or were offered such fees; and how many other civilian doctors are employed at higher than the rate of pay for naval doctors?

The duties of five of the consultants, at a salary of £5,000, are to perform surgical, medical, or research work at the Naval Hospitals to which they are appointed and where they reside, and to visit for operative or consultative work any of the Naval Hospitals or civil hospitals taking naval patients, in any part of England. The sixth consultant performs similar duties for the whole of Scotland. They were offered the fees paid, and did not demand them. Other civilian doctors employed on special terms and not at naval rates are one junior consulting surgeon, at £1,500 per annum, who is acting as operating surgeon in the hospital ship at the Dardanelles and consulting surgeon for all ships and naval hospitals in the Mediterranean; and two anaesthetists, at £1,000 per annum, one doing daily duty at Haslar and one at Chatham hospitals. Both of these gentlemen are also sent anywhere in England or Scotland where their services may be required.

Is it not an entirely new departure for the Admiralty to employ medical consultants?

It was arranged generally in 1908, that in the event of this country being engaged in war, this scheme and the appointment of consultants on these lines, though not at these salaries—they were fixed afterwards—should be undertaken.

asked whether, in view of the engineering importance of the War, any of the British professional engineers appearing in the published lists of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the Institution of Electrical Engineers, and of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, to the number of 12,000, have been retained at upwards of £3,000 per annum; and whether he is aware that this is the only profession which has to qualify by actual labour experience before admission to the lists of the institutions, and therefore peculiarly numbers in its ranks the consultants whose services should be retained in labour matters?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part of the question, I am aware that a certain term of professional training is a condition precedent to membership of the institutions referred to, but I do not think that my hon. Friend's inference is necessarily a sound one.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the engineering importance of the War, any British professional engineers in the published lists of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the Institution of Electrical Engineers, and of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, to the number of 12,000, have been retained at upwards of £3,000 per annum; what number of these professional engineers are actually serving in the ranks, whereby their experience of labour and mastery of materials is lost to the nation and its workers who must have the advice and direction which constitute a great national asset; whether the Government will consider the advisability of retaining a number of these professional engineers at retainers essential to such an eminent and arduous profession and at least equal to those paid to medical and legal consultants; whether he has considered whether the public recognition and extensive retention of these trained engineers in authoritative positions would improve labour processes; whether these engineers could relieve a number of experimental military officers for service with the troops; how many of the listed professional engineers have offered their services for organising and other engineering work to the War Office and have not so far been retained; whether, in view of the preventative, constructive, and aggressive value of the work of this profession, the Government will take steps to place its members in prominent positions in the legislature and to extend its services beyond the Committee Rooms; and whether any chemists are retained by the Government at £5,000 per annum?

In reply to the first three parts of the question, I am not aware that any civilian engineers have been retained at a salary of £3,000 a year or upwards, nor can I state that number of the members of the institutions are serving with the ranks. The War Office is receiving much useful assistance from members of the civil engineering profession and no complaint has been made that workers on war materials are being hindered owing to want of professional advice. As regards the fourth part of the question, it is not considered that the labour processes would be improved by the extensive retention of trained engineers beyond those already in War Department service. As regards the fifth part of the question, a certain number of civil engineers have already relieved military engineers for service with the troops. As regards the sixth part of the question, the applications from civil engineers are to numerous to specify. I understand that sixty have been employed in various ways. I think that the point raised in the seventh part of the question would more properly be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. I am not aware that any chemists are retained by the Government at £5,000 per annum.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the evidence of the Director of Transports, he now proposes to put the crews of all vessels in Admiralty service under the Naval Discipline Act?

The question is under consideration.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether his attention has been called to the gallant conduct of 17153, Bugler S. C. Reed, Royal Marine Light Infantry, who lost his life on the sinking of H.M.S. "Formidable," of whom it is recorded that, when advised to use his drum to keep himself afloat, he replied that he had thought of it, but had given it to one of the bluejacket boys for that purpose as the lad had nothing to keep himself afloat in the heavy seas then prevailing, and that he did not feel very nervous; and will he consider whether a medal or some other enduring record of this boy's fine example might be given to his parents?

There is no medal which could be given for an act of this sort, but the relations will get the War medal. The Admiralty have already shown their appreciation of this boy's courage by sending to his father a special letter, which I will read:—

asked if, on the evening of 21st April, a party of ladies was taken over the torpedo-destroyer "Lawton" whilst lying in the Alexandra Dock, Newport (Mon.), and a torpedo was fired by one of the party across the dock, narrowly missing an Italian steamer and burying itself in the dock side; if so, what is the value of the damage done, including the value of the torpedo; and if it is within the regulations for parties of strangers to be shown over naval vessels during war time?

The facts are practically as stated, except that the accident was not caused by one of the party, but was due to gross carelessness on the part of one of the crew, disciplinary measures for which are now being considered. The party consisted of four friends of a chief petty officer, two of them, I understand, being employés in the docks. The estimated damage has not yet been ascertained, and I do not think it would be in the public interest to give the value of the torpedo. The regulations admit of friends of the crew being shown round ships, during war, at the discretion of the commanding officer.

asked if a large contract has been given to Glanfield and Sons for clothing; and whether, in view of that firm being busy with a £2,500,000 contract for the War Office, he will explain why the work was not placed direct with the makers?

Admiralty contracts recently placed with Messrs. Glanfield have not been very large, the most important being a contract for supply of kits for air mechanics, worth possibly some £500 a week. They are actual manufacturers of clothing, and are not allowed to sub-let this work, but they necessarily obtain some small articles of the kit from other sources, e.g., braces, ties, etc.

Is my right hon. Friend not aware that Messrs. Glanfield and Sons have sent letters to manufacturers in the West Riding saying that they are asked by the Admiralty to communicate with them and try and place orders with them?

I did not understand that in connection with the contract referred to in this question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether this figure of £2,500,000 is accurate and whether it is in addition to £3,000,000 worth of work which this same firm—

That has nothing to do with the Admiralty.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty have yet come to any decision in regard to the request made that those in their civil employ and not of military age may be allowed to join the Volunteer Training Corps; and will he accede to this request?

Yes, Sir. No Admiralty employé who is beyond the age for military service will be refused permission to join the Volunteer Training Corps.

asked the Attorney-General whether his attention has been called to Lord Lindley's and Lord Wrenbury's views that the Continental Tyre case, permitting alien enemies formed into an English company to carry on their trade, etc., here, should be carried to the highest tribunal; and, if so, whether he will consult the Board of Trade with a view to such appeal being carried out?

What is practically important in this matter is to secure that while British shareholders get their dividends as usual, enemy shareholders should not, and that no company registered in this country should be allowed to carry on its business in time of war save under British control and save in a way which is an advantage to this country. These practical objects are being secured under the emergency legislation which has already been passed, and I do not think an appeal in the Continental Tyre case would in any way improve the position.

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of legislation?

Yes, Sir. The desirability of legislation was considered by the whole. House last autumn, and the legislation to which I have referred was passed with the consent of the whole House with the object I have indicated.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the responsibility for the non-removal of alien enemies from the prohibited areas lies with the Secretary of State for the Home Department or with himself; and, if with himself, what is the reason for allowing so many to remain in such areas in spite of the raids, both naval and aerial, which the enemy has made?

The responsibility for the removal of enemy aliens rests with the Chief Constable, who is directed, in case of doubt, to consult the military authorities. The military authorities have also independent power, udder the Defence of the Realm Regulations, to remove suspected persons of whatever nationality, but I am advised that enemy nationality alone is not sufficient ground for removal.

Is it the War Office view that it is in the interests of the country to leave this largo number of enemy aliens in prohibited areas on our coasts?

All enemy aliens as to whom there is ground for suspicion are-removed. Those as to whom there is no suspicion are not.

Then unless there is actual suspicion in the mind of the War Office with regard to the individual enemy alien, there is no objection to their remaining in prohibited areas?

All enemy aliens who live in prohibited areas are the subject of constant watchfulness and care.

asked the Attorney-General whether the Prize Committee has been appointed under any Act of Parliament or with the authority of the House of Commons; what is the amount of claims made before such Committee up to the present date; what is the procedure of the Committee; and whether, before any money which would otherwise be payable as prize money to the Royal Navy or any public funds are allocated for payment of claims before the Prize Committee, this House will have an opportunity of discussing the question?

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, the Prize Court, when dealing with enemy property over which British or neutral bankers or merchants have a charge, lien, or mortgage for money advanced, disregards entirely all such claims, and leaves the banker or merchant without any security for the return of the money he has advanced. Consequently the Committee was appointed by the Prime Minister to receive and consider such claims and to make recommendations to the Treasury in regard to them. I have asked for details of the amount of claims, and will furnish them when they reach me. The Committee investigates such claims by examining the shipping and commercial documents or otherwise, according to circumstances. As I have already explained to the right hon. Gentleman, the Committee does not decide out of what funds the claims will be met. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will give notice of a question to the Prime Minister on the last point raised in his question.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, in view of his former statement that these claims may be paid out of the naval prize money, whether there is any representative of the Navy upon this Committee; and may I also ask him whether in other cases outside the question of capital, where contracts are interfered with and there are losses, the contracting parties will also get compensation, or why is there any special reason in this case?

As regards the first part of the question now put by the right hon. Gentleman, there is a representative of the Navy on the Committee; and, as regards the second part of the question, the House will judge whether it is not right that claims of British merchants and traders should at any rate be considered and investigated. I do not know of the other incidents to which the right hon. Gentleman refers.

Does the right hon. Gentleman know that every day there are questions where people have been almost ruined by the War in relation to their contracts?

I do not know what the question is unless it is that the right hon. Gentleman objects to the claims of British merchants and bankers being investigated.

No, the right hon. Gentleman must not say that. I have not said so at all. All I ask the right hon. Gentleman is that this matter should not be done behind the backs of the House, but that the House of Commons should have an opportunity of discussing these particular questions, especially having regard to the fact that the Prize Court is—

On a point of Order. Is this Question Time?

asked the Attorney-General whether, having regard to the provisions of the Defence of the Realm Act and the penalties at common law and by Statute for the dissemination of false news, he will consider the advisability of moving the Public Prosecutor with a view to the prevention of charges in the Press of corruption against Ministers and of such practices as tend to discourage the people of these countries in their efforts to bring the War to a successful issue and to give strength to the enemy?

The expediency of a prosecution has always to be judged in reference to the facts of a particular case, and I do not know to what case my hon. and learned Friend refers. I think public opinion will be far more effective than public prosecution in any such case as my hon. Friend supposes. Of course no objection is taken to public criticism, as long as such criticism is inspired by a single-minded desire to promote the public interest.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether it is proposed to grant a War bonus to meet the increasing cost of living to those assistant clerks who, for seven years and upwards, have been marking time on their maximum of £150 without any increase whatever in their pay?

I cannot differentiate between persons who have for some time been at the maximum salary of their class without receiving promotion and any other class of Civil servants receiving the same or a less salary. The question of the pay of Government employés at low salaries must necessarily be considered by the Government as soon as a decision is given in the case of the Post Office servants, but I cannot at present say more than that.

Is not this a case where differentiation ought to be made, seeing that the report of the Royal Commission on the Civil Service emphatically and very strongly reported that these clerks had a case for an immediate increase?

Quite; and they have all been given increments of salary.

Did not the Royal Commission also recommend that these men who had reached the maximum of £150 should be advanced to £200?

It was possible, as a very special case, to isolate the case of giving one increment to all assistant clerks from all the others, and it was done; but that is the only recommendation which can be isolated. The recommendation which the hon. Gentleman has just mentioned is intimately bound up with the whole reorganisation of very different classes besides this one.

Is it not a fact that in the same sentence they recommended that those who have reached the maximum should proceed by stages to £200?

The hon. Member will find that question is intimately connected with several other questions which must wait over until the authorities concerned have a little more time to deal with them.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that there are over 60,000 barrels of cured herrings still lying in Scotland; that whereas, before the War, the rate of freight to Petrograd was about 2s. 6d. per barrel payable by the consignee, freight and carriage expenses are now over 22s. per barrel payable in advance by the shipper; that if licences to export herrings to Russia had been promptly issued a large proportion of such herrings could have been sold, whereas owing to the delay in granting permits sales to any great extent on this side are now rendered almost impossible; and whether, in view of the hardship inflicted on holders, a large proportion of whom commenced business last year, he will appoint a Committee or take other steps to inquire into and report upon the situation?

According to my latest information, the stocks on hand on 30th April amounted to about 55,000 barrels, and a small export trade is still going on. From reports received, I understand that the former and present terms of export to Petrograd are substantially as stated by my hon. Friend. The issue of licences to export does not rest with my Department, and I am not in a position to enter into the considerations raised by his reference to that matter. I will consider the suggestion made by my hon. Friend as to the appointment of a Committee.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government contemplate making any payment whatever as compensation in respect of herrings rendered unsaleable by the War?

That is a very large question.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman shocked to realise that?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether Form Z 3 of the inquiry relating to the labour requirements of farmers has been sent to all farmers in Great Britain, or whether it relates to England only, or has only been sent to selected farmers; and whether he will make public the result of the inquiries made through this Form by his Department?

My hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. I assume that the hon. Member has in mind the Form Z 8. This is a Form of inquiry regarding the state of employment, and has been circulated to employers of labour in various industries by the Labour Exchanges Department of the Board of Trade periodically since the outbreak of War. With the object of ascertaining winter conditions of employment in agriculture, the Form was sent in January to a large number of representative farmers in England and Wales, the names being supplied through the Board of Agriculture. The results of this investigation were included in a Report presented to Parliament in March (Cd. 7850), a copy of which I am sending to the hon. Member. The form is at the present time being circulated again to a still larger number of farmers in England and Wales, and also to representative farmers in Scotland—the names being supplied, as before, through official channels.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make known to the House the result of these further inquiries?

I will endeavour to do so.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture what steps he has taken to encourage the employment of golf caddies in agriculture during the present shortage of labour?

The Board addressed a circular in March last to some 1,100 golf clubs in England and Wales suggesting that caddies over school age should be urged to register with the Labour Exchanges for agricultural employment. Replies have been received from ninety-two clubs, twenty-six of which promise to give effect to the suggestion, three promise consideration, and the remainder either do not employ caddies at all, or, if they do, the latter are already engaged on agricultural or other work in their spare time.

Will the hon. Gentleman extend his efforts to golf players?

I will consider that.

asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government will afford temporary assistance to hospitals and institutions which have at their disposal facilities for caring for foundling children so as to guard against the risk of hastily prepared measures in this direction in the absence of authoritative information?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this questoin. The information which has reachel me from a number of different sources leads me to believe that the problem will be found to be much smaller than has been suggested, and I doubt whether action on the lines proposed would be necessary or advisable. It is, of course, most important that infants should not be separated from their mothers, and I should hope that the number of foundling children would be very small indeed. I may add that the Local Government Board are prepared to receive applications for Grants in aid of maternity centres.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to bring in a Bill empowering and directing county councils and municipal corporations, acting through selected committees, forthwith to take a census and investigate all cases of unmarried men between the ages of eighteen and thirty-five within their respective areas, in order that they may furnish the War Office with the names of those men who, in their judgment, are deemed to be available for the service of their country, discriminating between those who can be called upon to serve in some military capacity or in industrial work?

I am not aware that a case has been made out for a compulsory return.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether a Treasury minute has been issued to the War Office intimating that no application for a commission is to be considered from anyone in the Government service until he has obtained permission from his Department or has discharged himself; whether the notification that a month's notice will not be required from members of the staff of the Valuation Department desiring to enlist applies to those applying for a commission; and, if so, whether a minute will be issued to the War Office stating that such applicants may be considered on the same footing as other applicants not affected by the Treasury Minute above referred to?

No minute of the nature referred to has been issued. The action of the War Office, though naturally related to the Treasury Regulations of last August, is within their own discretion. I understand that no difficulty such as my hon. Friend anticipates would arise in the case of a temporary valuation officer who, before terminating his engagement in order to join the Forces, applied to the War Office for a commission.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that inconvenience and delay in reaching their work has been caused to a number of workpeople employed at Woolwich Arsenal as a result of the closing of Deptford Station; and whether he will consider the desirability of making representations to the general manager of the South Eastern and Chatham Railway with a view to the restoration of travelling facilities for such workpeople when going to and returning from the Arsenal?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. I am afraid that I cannot add to the information contained in the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend's previous question on the 22nd April and the letter which I subsequently addressed to him.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether a notice has been sent to all farriers who have been engaged in making horse-shoes for the Army that no further hand-made horse-shoes will be required after 30th April; whether he can state where the future supply is being drawn from; and whether he is aware that the working farriers of the South of England were appealed to in November last to put forth their utmost exertions to supply the Army with horseshoes, and in response have not only produced a very large quantity but have stocked large quantities of iron which the decision of the War Office leaves on their hands?

A notice was sent to the farriers that no further handmade horse-shoes would be required after 30th April, and this date was subsequently extended to 31st July on receipt of information that some farriers had laid in stocks of iron which would otherwise be left on their hands. Orders have been placed in this country for all the machine-made shoes that can be obtained, and further orders have been placed in America. I regret the necessity, but the change is due to urgent representations by the military authorities that machine-made shoes are more satisfactory for shoeing in the field.

Is it not the fact that nearly all the defects in the hand-made shoe supplied are due to defects in the patent supplied, and not to the execution of the work?

I think those in the field are well able to judge as to that.

Does the hon. Gentleman make any inquiry as to the patents supplied to those engaged in the hand-made industry? Are those patents open to the criticism which has been passed upon them by officers in the field?

I know the matter has been fully investigated; but I shall be very glad to have the special point of the right hon. Gentleman examined.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if any civilian doctors are employed by the Army at salaries of upwards of £3,000 per annum; if so, who are they and what are they paid; and how many civilian doctors are receiving rates of pay higher than doctors of corresponding rank in the Royal Army Medical Corps?

There are no civilian doctors receiving higher rates of pay than officers of corresponding rank in the Royal Army Medical Corps and Army Medical Service.

Will not inconvenience arise from the fact that the Admiralty are paying four times as much as the Army?

I would remind the hon. Member that this is not the time for argument.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, seeing that over 11,000 out of 20,000 temporary men employed in the Post Office are between the ages of nineteen and thirty-eight years and over 6,000 are unmarried, he will endeavour to make some arrangement with the Postmaster-General to enable them to be enlisted and to employ more old men on this temporary work?

My right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General has already been communicated with in the sense mentioned. Perhaps the hon. Member will put a question to him.

I put one to-day.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether officers who, since the War began, have been promoted to higher ranks will henceforth receive the full pay and emoluments of their new rank; whether this will apply to all those recently appointed, including those in the substantive ranks of colonel, brigadier-general, and major-general; whether there are any exceptions to this rule; and, if so, what is the reason for these exceptions?

Yes, Sir. All regimental officers draw the pay of the higher rank from the date of their substantive promotion, and the same rule will now apply to temporary promotion also. Staff officers are generally paid according to the appointment which they hold.

In view of the hon. Gentleman's answer, is he prepared to give a return of the pay and emoluments of the directors of the different Departments of the War Office?

If the hon. Member will put that in a separate Question, I will certainly consider it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the fact that the literal application of the regulations under which a National Reservist was promised a gratuity of £10 if he joined the Regular Army on mobilisation, and £5 if he joined the Territorial Forces, has caused disappointment and a sense of injustice in the case of National Reservists who, having joined the Territorial Forces and received the £5, have gone to the front and are now fighting alongside of the Regular Army; and if he can see his way to increase the £5 gratuity to £10 in such cases and, if necessary, to amend or supplement the regulations for the purpose?

These gratuities have been paid in respect of a specific obligation, and I regret that the regulations cannot now be altered.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) why those men who resigned important and responsible positions in civil life and placed their whole time and services at the disposal of the Secretary of State for War to perform the duties of acting paymasters have not been given any rank or status, seeing that the duties of acting paymaster in peace times are performed only by commissioned officers; and (2) if those civilians serving on the strength as acting paymasters are the only body of civilians doing the duty of officers in any branch of the naval or military services who have not been given commissioned rank; and whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction that exists amongst them as regards their treatment, both by the military authorities at many of the places where they are serving and also by the Army Council, whom they have repeatedly memorialised in regard to their status, but who have ignored their representations?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answers which I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for the St. Augustine Division of Kent. I would add that a reply has been sent to all representations on this subject which have reached the War Office, and that, as I have previously stated, the Department is most anxious to place no obstacle in the way of those who might properly apply for combatant commissions.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if Colonel Carter, Inspector of Army Pay Offices, after a recent inspection, issued a report which has been forwarded by the Army Council to regimental paymasters at the various offices to the effect that acting paymasters are to be responsible for 10,000 accounts and their clerks for 1,000 accounts each, whereas in peace time a paymaster, with many years' experience, and skilled clerks of the Army Pay Corps have been expected to deal with a maximum of only 6,000 accounts; if Colonel Carter himself, when acting as regimental paymaster, ever dealt with more than 6,000 accounts, although he had the advantage of experienced clerks of the Army Pay Office; and if he is aware of the dissatisfaction that exists at all the pay offices in the United Kingdom, both with reference to Colonel Carter's inspection of the various pay offices and of his report thereon; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

I think that it would be most undesirable to discuss by way of question and answer in the House an unpublished report made by an inspector to the Army Council, but I would point out to the hon. Member that the system of pay accounts in war is much simpler than in peace.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War when the inquiry into the affairs of the Empire Battalion is to be held and where; what are the terms of reference; whether the inquiry will be public; and who are being asked to give evidence?

As already announced, the Court of Inquiry will hold its first public sitting in Westminster Hall on Monday, 10th May. I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the terms of reference if he so desires. The inquiry will be in public. The question as to who shall be called to give evidence is left to the discretion of the Court.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the only public charges were made by myself in this House, and that I have had no information at all about this inquiry, and that I am not asked to appear?

I think my hon. Friend is rather prematurely distressed.

In view of the very unsatisfactory reply, and of the fact that the Court meets on Monday, and that it is public matter of urgency, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment to-night.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Bangour Asylum is being converted into a military hospital; and, if so, what arrangements are being made so that the treatment of the present inmates is not interfered with?

Yes, Sir; Bangour Asylum is being converted into a military hospital. I should be glad if my hon. Friend would address the second part of the question to my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he will call for a list from the officers commanding units in Scotland of the number of applications by private soldiers and non-commissioned officers for commissions in other units which these commanding officers have refused to sanction, in view of the hindrance to the efficiency of the Army which such wholesale refusals entail?

I do not think it is desirable to call for such a list. To do so would not only throw great labour on the regimental authorities, but would also tend to encourage private soldiers and non-commissioned officers to go behind their commanding officers with a view to pressure being exercised in individual cases. It would not be proper for the War Office to take any step which could be construed as countenancing such undue pressure. The instructions which have been given ensure that each application for a commission receives careful consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the members of the St. John's Ambulance Brigade, coming from all parts of the country, who have volunteered for service and joined the Royal Army Medical Corps complain that the conditions on which they undertook to serve have been broken by the War Office; for instance, the St. John's Ambulance Brigade, Sheffield Corps, before volunteering were assured by their officers, Commissioner H. C. Chambers and Commandant O. F. Buxton, that their pay at home would be 1s. 10d. a day; that at Fort Pitt Hospital, Chatham, they received a like assurance from Paymaster-Lieutenant L. Else; that on the faith of these assurances they signed their engagements; that they received 1s. 10d. a day from the 23rd of September, 1914 to the 13th of November, 1914; and that after that date their pay was reduced to 1s. 6d. a day, from which the alleged over-payment of 4d. is deducted; and will he take steps to make good the promise made to these men who are highly trained and have made great sacrifices to serve their country?

I am inquiring into these cases.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, since the outbreak of War, the number of specially enlisted clerks in the Army Pay Corps, has been increased from about 800 to 6,000; that meanwhile there has been little or no promotion in the ranks of the warrant and non-commissioned officers of the corps; that the peace establishment of assistant paymasters, honorary lieutenants, in the Army Pay Corps is 58; that their present number is only 50, whilst the honorary commissions in the Army Service Corps have been increased by 128, in the Royal Army Medical Corps by 54, in the Army Ordnance Corps by 99 over their peace establishments; and will he take like steps to increase the number of assistant paymasters and thus enable promotion in the lower ranks and remove the feeling of dissatisfaction that now prevails?

The facts are not quite as stated. Since the outbreak of War, the number of promotions to commissioned rank has been more than 50 per cent. of the establishment of warrant officers; the promotions (including acting appointments) to warrant rank have been 15 per cent. of the establishment of staff sergeants, and those to staff sergeants have been 25 per cent. of the total establishment of lower ranks. The establishment of fifty-eight assistant paymasters is of recent creation, and was to be gradually filled as the senior officers retired, a process that would have occupied some years. Twenty-five assistant paymasters have been commissioned during the War, and only five promotions remain to be made.

Will the hon. Gentleman say whether or not there has been an increase in the number of assistant-paymasters? I could not hear his answer.

Perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman will put that question on the Paper.

It is there; but I could not hear the hon. Gentleman's answer. I asked him whether there is any increase in the number of assistant-paymasters?

I am afraid I do not follow to which part the hon. and learned Gentleman is referring.

May I read it?

There are so many questions still on the Paper that perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman will see his answer in print, and then, if any further inquiries are needed, he will make them.

On a point of Order. Am I not entitled to an answer to a question which is on the Paper?

The hon. and learned Member has had an answer, which he will see on the records if he did not catch its purport.

This part of the question was not answered, and I submit I am entitled to an answer. The question was not answered—it is on the Paper, and I propose to read it. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order, order."]

Is the House still under martial law?

Will the hon. Member specify to which part of the answer he refers?

It is the last part: "that the peace establishment of assistant paymasters, honorary lieutenants, in the Army Pay Corps is 58; that their present number is only 50, and will he take like steps to increase the number of assistant paymasters and thus enable promotion in the lower ranks and remove the feeling of dissatisfaction that now prevails?"

That will certainly be considered.

Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer ask these Under-Secretaries to speak up, because their voices are quite inaudible?

asked what is the number of British officers who have been reported missing on the Western front since the War began, and the number of such officers who, up to the present, have been afterwards accounted for, officially or unofficially, as dead, wounded, or prisoners of war?

The total number of British officers who have been reported missing in France and Belgium, and who still remain unaccounted for is 191. I am afraid I could not give the total number of officers who at any time have been reported missing. Many of the original reports that an officer is missing are erroneous and are corrected a few days later.

asked if arrangements have now been made whereby men, and more especially non-commissioned officers, who have been serving in the firing line for many months, and who are suffering from exhaustion and nerve shock, may be granted furloughs of six weeks to two months, in cases where the reserve units of their regiments can supply the vacancies so caused?

All non-commissioned officers and men who in the opinion of the medical authorities are suffering from exhaustion and nervous shock and require rest are sent home until they are recovered.