asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether men serving in the Anti-Aircraft Corps of the Royal Naval Air Service are actually enlisted in a branch or section of the Royal Navy; and whether they are subject to the provisions of the Naval Discipline Act?

The men in question are enrolled in the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve, and are subject to the provisions of the Naval Discipline Act.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, according to the custom of the Navy throughout its history, as set forth in the Naval Discipline Act and all Statutes and Regulations up to 1907, courts-martial for the loss of all warships will be held on the survivors as soon as the public interest will allow of public courts-martial being-held?

The tradition of the Navy is, as my hon. and gallant Friend suggests, that whenever a ship is lost a court-martial should be held on the survivors. We desire to adhere to the spirit of that tradition as far as the public interests and the conditions of modern naval warfare will allow.

Does that mean that the rule will be followed? As there is no precedent, will the rule be followed and a court-martial be held some time—even a year or two years hence?

I can only speak with regard to the present. As regards the future, that must depend on circumstances, I think the general tenour of my answer is unmistakable and should satisfy the hon. and gallant Member. He wants me to give a pledge that on every ship lost, no matter what the circumstances may be, a court-martial will be held, probably after I have ceased to be First Lord of the Admiralty. It is an unnecessary pledge. So far as I am concerned I shall always direct that a court-martial be held wherever the public interest seems to need it.

Does that answer apply to all losses of vessels during the War previous of the time when the present First Lord of the Admiralty came into office?

What may happen at the end of the War with regard to vessels lost before the time of the present Board of Admiralty must be a matter for future consideration. Naturally I have not reconsidered the decisions of my predecessors with regard to this matter.

Does not the law under the Naval Discipline Act override the decision of the previous Board of Admiralty?

No, I do not think so. The decision of the Board of Admiralty was made and is made in view of the general public interest, and I do not think the law the hon. and gallant Member has in mind will override that, nor do I think he would wish it to be overridden.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on what date he became aware of the existence of an agreement between Bulgaria and the Central Powers; whether he knows the approximate date of that agreement; and, if so, what was the date of it?

I am afraid that I have no information on this subject which I can give to the House.

asked the Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether as soon as Bulgarian mobilisation was announced the Serbian Government asked permission of its Allies to attack Bulgaria, in anticipation of what it believed to be an inevitable attack by Bulgaria upon Serbia; whether such permission was refused; and, if so, on what ground?

The Serbian Government expressed the opinion that the right military policy was to attack Bulgaria before her mobilisation was completed. In the view of my right hon. Friend, that was a question which it was for the Serbian Government to decide in the light of the various political and military reasons for and against such a course. My right hon. Friend, therefore, sent no instructions to the British Minister at Nish, and the only record he has of his intervention on the subject is that when his opinion was pressed for, on 27th September, he said that all the political and diplomatic arguments were against such action, and that he was no judge of strategical considerations and could deal only with the others. There was no question, as far as he was concerned, of refusing permission; what he felt unable to do was to say whether the strategic considerations for taking the step should override the others against it.

Was there actually no refusal in this case?

I think the answer I have given is quite clear. My right hon. Friend says, "all political and diplomatic arguments were against such action, and he was no judge of strategical considerations."

The Serbian Government thought it was refused.

asked the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether the despatches from Dr. E. J. Dillon to the Press in this country dealing with foreign affairs have been submitted to the Foreign Office by the Censor before being mutilated, and the passages deleted have been so treated on the advice of the Foreign Office; and whether, in view of the fact that Dr. Dillon writes with authority and knowledge on Balkan conditions and politics, he will instruct the Censor to submit Dr. Dillon's dispatches to the Foreign Office for examination?

Yes, Sir. The Foreign Office takes full responsibility for all censorship of Dr. Dillon's published dispatches dealing with foreign affairs. I should like to take this opportunity of expressing the great obligations of His Majesty's Government to the directors of the newspaper to which Dr. Dillon most frequently contributes for their loyal acquiescence in all the suggestions made to them in the public interest and the discretion they themselves exercise.

Will the Noble Lord say whether the Foreign Office will avail themselves of the advantage of perusing these dispatches from Dr. Dillon and getting a wrinkle from them?

I do not know about a "wrinkle." But I can assure my hon. Friend I have had the pleasure of reading every one of Mr. Dillon's dispatches since I have had the honour of holding my present office.

asked whether the force of British bluejackets now with the Serbian main army is under the command of the Serbian Commander-in-Chief?

A British Naval Mission was detailed for special service with the Serbian Forces, and its head, of course, conforms to the wishes of the Commander-in-Chief of those Forces in all matters connected with military operations.

asked on what date the order was issued for British troops to proceed from Salonika to Serbia, and on what date the troops crossed the frontier?

Permission was given to the general in command to cross the frontier into Serbia on the evening of the 26th October, his permission was acted upon without any delay.

asked the Prime Minister whether the decision was arrived at by the Cabinet to send a large British Force to Serbia before General Joffre visited this country; and whether this decision was arrived at after the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dublin University had resigned from the Cabinet?

I can add nothing to what has been said on this matter by myself last week and by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs yesterday.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he can make any statement upon the progress of the operations in West Africa?

My right hon. Friend does not think it desirable to make any general statement, but he is satisfied with the progress of the operations.

asked the Secretary for the Colonies whether the Imperial Government has invited the Union Government of South Africa to send an official contingeant to Europe?

Before the conclusion of the South-West African Campaign the Union Government expressed their readiness to render to His Majesty's Government all the assistance in their power in prosecuting the War in Europe and elsewhere to a successful conclusion. In pursuance of this policy they agreed to send a contingent to Europe, which I am glad to say is now training in England.

asked the Secretary for the Colonies why military operations in East Africa are only reported at the time by the authorities in East Africa for local information; and whether he will take steps to ensure that at least these official communiqués should be issued here also, so as to ensure that people with friends in the Colony should be kept in touch with what is happening?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. Reports of military operations of sufficient importance are communicated to the Press by the War Office in due course as received from East Africa. Matters of mere local interest would not be reported by telegram by the General Officer Commanding.

Are these operations under the War Office or the India Office?

The War Office.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether the contributions of Eye-Witness to the public Press have been discontinued; and, if so, why this has been done?

Yes, Sir, these contributions have been discontinued, as it was considered that the special purpose which they were originally designed to serve was being adequately met in other ways.

asked the Under Secretary for War whether his Department will take into consideration the question of free travelling to those of His Majesty's Forces who are allowed to visit their homes during the Christmas and New Year holidays, especially those troops who are in training in this country; and will he consider the advisability of allowing as many of the troops as possible who are on active service to visit their homes during the season's holiday; if so, will early arrangements be given to this effect?

I recognise the natural interest taken in this matter by the public generally. It is under careful consideration, but my hon. Friend will recognise that it is quite impossible to make a detailed public announcement on a matter of this kind, and I must ask him to leave it to the Department to reconcile all the considerations involved.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether, now the winter in Flanders has begun, he will reconsider the question of giving those of our troops who have been out more than a twelvemonth a complete rest, which would be of more value than the four days' leave now given, and would enable such troops to go back thoroughly refreshed for the next campaign?

It does not follow because winter may have begun in Flanders that the military situation is rendered so much easier that leave can be granted on a more extended scale. Subject to this reservation, I think I may say that the Commander-in-Chief will give all the leave that is possible, but I must again emphasise the fact that the decision on this matter rests with the Commander-in-Chief, and only with him.

asked the Under-Secretary for War how many men and women of nationality other than British are employed in the Censor's Department of the War Office, stating also to what nations they belong?

In the postal censorship there are 140 examiners who are subjects of one or other of the Allied States, and there are fifty-nine who are subjects of neutral States. It would take too long to state in detail the various nationalities represented, but I can forward the information to the hon. Gentleman if he so desires.

Has the right hon. Gentleman inquired into a case I sent him? Is that person who has German relations fighting at the front still in the Department?

I cannot charge my memory with every case, but if my hon. Friend will see me privately I will go into the matter.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has considered the criticisims passed recently upon the Press Censorship; whether he is aware that the German Press Censorship allows excisions by the Censor to be indicated by asterisks, whereas the British Censor expressly forbids this, and that, partly as a consequence of this, neutral countries have come to regard news from German quarters as more honest and trustworthy than news from British newspapers; and whether he can announce any modification in the policy of the official Press Bureau?

I am doubtful whether the comparative study of censorship methods can be advantageously pursued by way of question and answer, though I have no doubt that the Home Secretary will consider any suggestions which my hon. Friend may submit to him.

Has the Prime Minister considered the speech recently delivered by the most eminent journalist living, Lord Morley?

Yes. I have read it with the greatest interest and respect.

May I inquire whether it has had any influence in suggesting a change of policy of the method in the censorship?

It has given much occasion for thought.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government, as suggested by the Lord Chancellor, to further curtail the liberty of the Press in criticising Ministers?

There has never been any intention on the part of the Government to curtail the liberty of the Press.

asked the Under-Secretary for War what separation allowance is paid to a wife and five children of a second-lieutenant serving abroad who are entirely dependent on the same owing to the husband having given up his civil employment and not receiving any allowance from his employers?

Separation allowance is not paid to the wives of commissioned officers

Then what allowance is paid to the wife and five children of a second-lieutenant?

An HON. MEMBER: He said "Nothing at all."

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if the limit of one month is still relaxed in the case of applying for separation allowances; and whether he can make any statement as to the present position?

A public announcement on this point is about to appear. I will send the hon. Member a copy.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will consider the advisability of issuing to Members a brief statement showing how the various persons entitled to naval and military war pensions can apply, to whom they can apply, and within what limits of time?

I hope shortly to circulate a statement on this subject, after I have conferred with my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Admiralty.

asked the Undersecretary for War whether he will give instructions to regimental officers that all boys below the age of seventeen years serving at home or abroad can be discharged on application made by the parents or guardians of such boys for such discharge?

So far as concerns lads serving at home, necessary instructions in the sense desired have already been issued. As I have already stated, if a lad below the age of seventeen years is serving abroad, the matter falls to be decided by the Commander-in-Chief concerned.

Will lads of thirteen or fourteen who are serving abroad be discharged?

If they are abroad it will rest with the Commander-in-Chief.

asked the Undersecretary for War whether two boys, aged respectively seventeen and eighteen, recently ran away from a public school and enlisted; whether the Secretary of State himself gave instructions that these boys were to be discharged from the Army and sent back to school; and, if so, will he say why the Secretary of State refuses to allow boys of the working classes to be treated in a similar manner?

I understand that two boys at a public school did act in the manner mentioned in the first part of the question. As soon as they had run away the request was made that if possible their enlistment should be stopped, and an undertaking in that sense was given Departmentally. The matter did not come before my Noble Friend the Secretary of State. The boys had, however, already enlisted before they could be stopped, and, in view of the pledge given that these boys should be stopped, an order for their discharge was given. No case precisely similar has arisen, but everything possible to stop such enlistments, whoever was concerned, would be done if immediate information was given.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the case of two boys belonging to the same town where the school is situated, being fifteen years of age, the War Office have refused to discharge them?

I can only say, in answer to that, that if the information had been conveyed to us in the, same manner as the information was conveyed in the other case, we should have taken precisely the same steps.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether, seeing that all persons who desire to join the Army have now in their possession a registration card, he will, to prevent boys being enlisted, give instructions to the recruiting officers that no recruits are to be enlisted who do not produce their registration cards?

Recruiting officers have already been instructed to examine the registration cards of recruits presenting themselves, and their attention is being directed specifically to the question of age.

asked whether the War Office have any information as to the number of boys of fourteen and fifteen years of age serving in the Army who have been enlisted as being nineteen years of age or over?

No, Sir; I have no official information, though my hon. Friend has sent me a list of such cases which reached me this morning.

Did I not send the right hon. Gentleman seventy-nine cases of boys between thirteen and sixteen years of age who enlisted as being over nineteen years of age?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for having made the compilation.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) whether recruiting officers are still in possession of orders directing them not to enlist skilled employés of electric power corporations, tramways, etc., without the written consent of the company, or have those orders been modified or withdrawn since the 12th of July; and (2) whether he is aware that to ensure the carriage, to and from their homes, of workmen engaged in the manufacture of munitions of war at Bradford there must be retained in the tramway department of the corporation an irreducible minimum of skilled artisans of military age after every possible substitution of older and less skilled men for those younger and more efficient has been made, and after reductions have been carried out to the limits even of wartime possibility; and can he now state whether these remaining necessary men will be granted an official badge to show they have been refused enlistment in the Army of the King by the recruiting authorities on the ground of public expediency?

The attestation of all such men as those mentioned has been authorised by the War Office. When attested, they will be placed in their proper group and will not be called up unless and until when their time comes, they are found to be no longer indispensable to their employers; but, in the meantime, the employers are required to take every step as far as is possible, to provide temporary substitutes for these men either from men medically unfit, men too old for enlistment, or women. This arrangement has been agreed to by the various Departments concerned.

Is a special badge to be given to those men who have been recruited but who, for the reasons stated, have not been enlisted?

Yes, Sir. My Noble Friend Lord Derby has in contemplation the giving of an armlet.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether appeal tribunals in connection with the present recruiting campaign will be set up in each Parliamentary area or in each recruiting area; whether, in the case of large Parliamentary areas or large recruiting areas there will be more than one appeal tribunal; whether they are to be constituted according to instructions of the Director-General of Recruiting; if not, under whose authority are they to be constituted; and whether copies of the regulations constituting such appeal tribunals and of the rules issued for their guidance in determining appeals will be laid before this House?

Every rural district council and urban district council and borough council has been asked to suggest the constitution of a tribunal for its area. These tribunals are appointed under the Local Government Board, with the concurrence of the War Office. The point raised in the last part of the question is being considered.

When will the issue of rules for guidance, which are constantly in request, be made?

Very shortly, I think. Perhaps my hon. Friend will give me notice of that question?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the non-issue of these rules is seriously affecting recruiting?

I will make that representation to my Noble Friend and see if it is possible to issue these rules without any delay.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War if firemen in the Metropolitan Fire Brigade and in brigades in the neighbourhood of London, whose services, in view of the danger from hostile aircraft, are of exceptional importance during the war, are unstarred and have received Lord Derby's recruiting appeal, notwithstanding that they have hitherto been on the exemption lists of the Admiralty and War Office; whether the fire brigades referred to are working in co-operation with a view to air raids according to a scheme devised by the Commissioner of Police at the Home Office on the 25th May; and whether it is desirable that these firemen shall enlist, in order to settle their doubts as to their duty in the matter created by their receipt of Lord Derby's appeal?

I am informed by Lord Derby that this question has been satisfactorily settled between himself and the London County Council on the lines that the men will be allowed to enlist, that they would be placed in their proper group and not called unless and until the London County Council have notified the recruiting officer that they have ceased to be firemen.

Does that apply equally to members of brigades who are not under the London County Council, but who are in the home counties, for instance?

I should like to have time to consider that.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if any Members of this House have received payment for expenses or for their services for addressing recruiting and munitions meetings during the War; and, if so, what is the total amount?

I understand that no Member of this House has received any payment for his services in the connections mentioned, but that claims for expenses have been made and paid. I cannot state what is the total amount involved.

asked the Undersecretary for War whether he has now ascer- tained the percentage of head wounds in British and French hospitals, respectievly; whether there is any communication between the British and French military authorities with regard to the adoption of appliances which may be useful in war; and on what date the first order for steel helmets was placed by the British Government?

I have no information regarding the percentage of head wounds in the French Army. In the British Army in France the percentage of such wounds during the last three months has been 15 per cent. As regards the second part of the question, the military attaches of the two Powers are in a position to get information on the points mentioned, and this they communicate to those concerned. I have already stated that I am not prepared to answer questions as to the date when orders for articles of equipment have been placed.

asked whether the Duke of Marlborough, the Duke of Westminster, and the hon. Member for Hythe hold positions on the Staff of Sir John French; if so what those positions are; and what are the qualifications of the holders of them, what rank do they hold in the Army, and to what regimental units, if any, are they attached?

My hon. Friend has been entirely misinformed. The three officers he mentions do not hold positions on the staff of Sir John French. But the last-named gentleman is on the staff of Lieutenant-General Sir H. Rawlinson, where I know he has performed most valuable work.

asked whether the War Office has yet adopted any principle applicable to men discharged from the Army with disease which the War Office claim was contracted before enlistment, although passed as medically fit by medical men, whereby they will receive any consideration; and, if so, what do they propose?

These cases will continue to receive, as in the past, the fullest consideration of the Commissioners of Chelsea Hospital and the Army medical authorities; but the suggestion that all disease subsequently manifesting itself in a man who has passed the doctor as a recruit should be regarded as due to military-service cannot be accepted.

Do the War Office intend to lay down any principle, or do they mean simply to consider these cases on their merits?

The principle upon which we have always acted is that where it is proved that the illness or disease is the result of military service a pensioner whatever is the consideration, is given—it may not be a pension, but a lump sum. If it is not proved that it is due to military service, there is no charge on Army funds.

Is it necessary for the discharged soldier to prove that the disease is due to military service or does the onus rest upon the War Office to prove the opposite?

In cases of this kind there is not much onus. What is done is that the Chelsea Commissioners examine the case. It is then subject to revision by the Director-General of the Army Medical Service, and when we come to a decision that the case is due to military service then a grant is given.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether he proposes to recover from doctors the fees paid to them for passing men into the Army as medically fit who have subsequently been discharged as medically unfit?

Under instructions given in December last fees are recovered in the case of recruits discharged as medically unfit on first joining.

asked how many generals since the War began have been allowed to resign or have been recalled or retired while on active service; and what is the average age of the generals thus allowed to resign or who have been recalled or retired?

Several general officers have been recalled for various reasons, but none have been allowed to resign nor have any been retired. The calculation of the average age of generals suggested in the last part of the question would be extremely misleading, as age had nothing to do with recall in a great many cases.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a general impression that inefficiency is generally the result of the age of these generals?

I would not like to say that in no case could it be conceivable, but, on the other hand, I do not think it is at all a necessary disqualification.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether there has been any instance in the present War of a lieutenant-colonel promoted to the rank of a general because of distinguished service on the field; and, if not, is it that there has been no lieutenant-colonel worthy of such promotion, or has regulation or custom or the vested interests of older and untested officers intervened to prevent it?

I assume that when my hon. Friend speaks of the rank of a general he includes the rank of brigadier-general, and I may inform him that there have been many cases of promotion of lieutenant-colonels and even of majors to the rank of brigadier-general. That being so, I am not called upon to answer the last part of the question, which contains an imputation quite undeserved by the Army, and, if I may say so, unworthy of my hon. Friend.

May I ask my right hon. Friend if he is speaking in that way for the Government or if it is his own personal opinion?

I am speaking for His Majesty's Government.

( later ): May I ask your ruling, Sir, on a point of Order which has arisen concerning a question which I put to-day in courteous and polite terms, and to which I received an answer which was personal and offensive, and I think, in a Parliamentary sense, impertinent. I want to know if I have any redress, and can I give notice now to call attention to this subject this evening, or is there any other method which I can adopt, or can I refer to the matter on the Adjournment of the House?

I have no particular remedy which I can offer the hon. Member. He must take advantage of those opportunities which the House affords, if he thinks he has been in any way injured.

I will repeat the question which my hon. Friend asked me:—

"Whether there has been any instance in the present War of a lieutenant-colonel promoted to the rank of a general because of distinguished service on the field; and, if not, is it that there has been no lieutenant-colonel worthy of such promotion, or has regulation or custom or the vested interests of older and untested officers intervened to prevent it?"

My answer was:—

"I assume that when my hon. Friend spoke of the rank of a general he includes the rank of brigadier-general, and I may inform him that there have been many cases of promotion of lieutenant-colonels and even of majors to the rank of brigadier-general."

I went on to add:—

"That being so, I am not called upon to answer the last part of the question, which contains an imputation quite undeserved by the Army—"

It is not the Army; it is the War Office.

"And, if I may say so, it is unworthy of my hon. Friend."

I only want to say that I think the House will recognise that it is out of delicacy of feeling to my hon. Friend that I ventured to say what I did say, that it was unworthy of him. I think he would be the last man -to make an imputation which was really undeserved, and, that being so, I put in those words. I can assure my hon. Friend 'they were not intended to be disrespectful to him or to be impertinent in any sense of the word. If I have injured his feelings, I am perfectly willing to apologise.

I desire to ask you, Sir, whether a Minister, in answering a question at the Table, is entitled to express his personal opinion on the merits of any question, seeing that Members are not allowed in the questions they put to express their opinions; and are not Ministers bound merely to give an answer to the question, without expressing any personal opinion?

It is not a personal opinion at all; it is the opinion of the War Office.

May I thank my right hon. Friend for the explanation, which I entirely accept.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Indian Government civil officials who join the Indian Army Reserve of Officers are informed that military service out of India does not count for leave; that this rule presses with peculiar severity on such officers now on active service in Mesopotamia who, however long the War may last, will still require to return to India from Mesopotamia to serve out the balance of the months or years during which it is necessary in peace time for civil officials to reside in India in order to qualify themselves, according to regulations, to receive a specified grant of leave; and whether he will cause a remedy to be found for this hardship?

I will consult the Government of India on the subject.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware of a grievance felt by certain former lieutenants of the Indian Volunteers who, after five months' active service, saw their regiments demobilised in consequence of the sinking of the "Emden," and themselves reduced to the rank of second lieutenant in the Indian Army Reserve of Officers, while Territorial officers attached to British units suffered no such degradation of rank, and how this sense of grievance was increased when these lieutenants discovered that while they were on active service other gentlemen, never Volunteers at all, had been appointed to the Indian Army Reserve of Officers, and thus became their military seniors; and whether he will remove this grievance by arranging that all Volunteer officers who have been actually on active service shall, on appointment to the Indian Army Reserve of Officers, be given the same rank which they held while on active service?

I have no information regarding the circumstances referred to in the question, but if the hon. Member will furnish me with particulars of any specific cases which have come to his notice, I will make inquiry of the Government of India.

asked the Secretary of State for India if he will, for the period of the War, recommend that in the case of officers of the Indian Army the eighteen years' service necessary for promotion to major shall be reduced?

I do not consider that circumstances would justify a general measure of the kind suggested, as it would run counter to the principles of the Indian Army system which I have explained in the House on more than one occasion. The grant of temporary rank to meet the needs of certain classes of cases is now under consideration, and has to some extent already been given effect to.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that some temporary rank will be given to officers of the Indian Army during the course of the War so that they may not be superseded while on active service by officers much junior to them?

I cannot at present go further than I have done in the answer.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether, in view of the number of men suitable for commissions who joined the Army as privates in the early stages of the War, he will arrange that if recommended as suitable by their commanding officer they will be given preference over men without military experience who are now applying for commissions?

It is the practice to give preference to suitable condidates who have had recent military experience.

Will my right hon. Friend notify commanding officers at the front that men who have been out there some time may have a preference?

It is the practice, and I do not think it really requires to be notified to the General Officers Commanding. If my hon. Friend has any particular case in mind I will certainly look into it.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the decision to promote to the rank of captain all lieutenants of the Territorial Force, Royal Army Medical Corps, who have given six months' mobilised service, with effect from 1st April last, is being carried out; and when the promotions will be gazetted?

Yes, Sir, the decision: was promulgated by special Army Order of the 5th August and has been acted upon. Promotions are carried out immediately on receipt of individual recommendations. The majority of these have already been put forward and have been duly gazetted.

asked the Prime Minister what are the views of the Central Control Board (Liquor Traffic) on the subject of extending the provisions of the No treating Order to all parts of the United Kingdom; and whether he intends to introduce legislation to effect this?

I have consulted the Central Control Board, who inform me that, in view of the results attained under the Board's orders, they think it expedient that progress should continue for the present on existing lines. The Board are extending their action to further large and important areas after local inquiry in each case.

Has the Minister of Munitions any official information as to the effect of the No-treating Order in the Metropolitan district?

The convictions for drunkenness in the Metropolitan Police district for the three weeks subsequent to the No-treating Order show a marked diminution compared with the convictions for the four weeks prior to the Order, the weekly averages being 695 and 993 respectively. In addition, the police have reported as follows:—

"There is a Consensus of opinion among the superintendents of all divisions that drunkenness generally, and among women in particular, has decreased.

A marked diminution in the number of women and children standing outside public-houses drinking has been noticed, and in many districts the practice has ceased altogether.

Police have invariably found fewer people on licensed premises, and a tendency to make shorter stays has been observed.

Practically no breaches of the Order have occurred, and licensees and their servants have shown at all times their willingness to assist police."

Has the right hon. Gentleman the separate convictions of men and women, showing the ratio of diminution?

Perhaps my hon. Friend will put down a question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there is diminished consumption?

I think it is a very good test of diminished consumption.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it has been ruled by the Treasury that employés of Government Departments who have enlisted in the Royal Naval Air Service, and are at present engaged in home defence, are to be regarded as having placed their whole time at the disposal of the Admiralty; whether they are only in receipt of the balance of Civil pay, i.e., Civil pay less naval pay, from their Department; and whether it is the intention of the Treasury that such men shall be treated in all respects similar to all Government servants who have joined His Majesty's Forces?

Employés of Government Departments enlisting in the Royal Naval Air Service continue to receive their Civil pay less a deduction in respect of their naval pay under conditions similar to those applicable generally to Government servants who enlist in His Majesty's Forces. No ruling has been given by the Treasury on the point raised in the first part of the question, but I understand that a number of Government servants are in fact serving in a section of the Anti-Aircraft Corps which is recruited on a part-time basis.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he has received resolutions and memorials from associations of traders advocating the assessment to Income Tax of the profits of co-operative societies; if he is aware that co-operative wholesale societies, which own a fleet of steamers, have secured Government war contracts in competition with private traders and limited companies, and their immunity from Income Tax gives them an unfair advantage over their trade competitors; if, having regard to these facts, he will take steps to make the profits of these societies liable to Income Tax in the same way as other industrial concerns and especially allocations of profits to reserve and capital purposes; and (2) if he is aware that, having regard to the present rate of Income Tax, private traders throughout the country strongly resent as an injustice to them the immunity from taxation enjoyed by trading concerns known as retail, wholesale, and productive co-operative societies; and if he will appoint a special committee to inquire into the working of the Industrial and Provident Societies Act, 1903, with special reference to the desirability of repealing Section 24 of that Act?

In so far as co-operative societies make a profit through their trading operations with non-members, such profit is already assessable to Income Tax in the hands of the recipient. The ordinary transactions of these societies resulting in a return to members of any excess purchase price that may have proved to have been paid by the members is, in fact, a mere discount on purchases and not a profit. In these circumstances I am unable to adopt the hon. Baronet's suggestion.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the profits of these societies during the past year have amounted to no less than £14,000,000 whilst only £1,750,000 has been distributed to the shareholders?

Assuming for the moment that the figures stated by the hon. Baronet are accurate I should have called them not profits but discounts.

Does the right hon. Gentleman think anyone who is a member of a co-operative society escapes payment of the tax?

No, I believe every member of a co-operative society who is above the limit and is assessable is bound to pay.

Does not a company which distributes dividends pay Income Tax, and does that excuse the company from paying?

No; in the case of a company the profits earned are regarded as profits, and Income Tax on them is collected at the source. The only issue between the hon. Baronet and myself is whether the tax should be collected at the source or later.

Will the right hon. Gentleman explain how he derives Income Tax for the £10,500,000 of undistributed profits which are placed to the Reserve Fund?

No; I cannot accept the hon. Baronet's figures.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Treasury Committee on new issues lately sanctioned the placing of £500,000 Bonds of the Pullman Car Company purchased by Messrs. Higginson and Company, both being American concerns; and whether, as the result of the transaction, if successful, would be the transfer of British money to America, he will explain why sanction was given, in view of the principle of the Committee's action, namely, that sanction is refused except in cases where the issue is definitely desirable for the successful prosecution of the War?

The Committee have not sanctioned the placing of the above bonds, nor has any application to place such bonds been received by them.

Was this issue advertised in the papers with the statement that it had been passed or had the sanction of the Treasury Committee?

I am not a member of the Committee myself, and I can only give my hon. Friend the information that is communicated to me. I understand that no application of the kind referred to was made.

Perhaps my right hon. Friend will inquire.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in Section 21 of the Finance (No. 3) Bill, the word husbandry includes forestry; and whether owners of woodlands would have the option of having their Income Tax assessment as occupiers levied on their actual profits under Schedule D?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. In accordance with the promise made by my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary on the 26th October, the question of a satisfactory basis on which the option to be assessed under Schedule D may be extended, so as to include the case of woodlands occupied for commercial purposes, is now under consideration.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the case of a limited liability company which has been liquidated and whose assets have been distributed, it is intended, under Section 40, Sub-section (2), of the Finance (No. 3) Bill, to make the directors personally liable for the Excess Profits Duty on last year's trading; and whether he is advised that the words of the Section would have this effect?

Where a company has bonâ fide been liquidated and its assets have been distributed prior to the introduction of the present Budget, it is not proposed to hold the directors personally liable for any Excess Profits Duty.

Has my right hon. Friend considered whether the words of the Clause as they stand could be interpreted as holding the directors liable?

I will look into the point.

asked the Prime Minister whether there is any age limit applicable to general officers occupying the highest positions on active service abroad, and, if so, "what is that limit; and whether, in the selection of officers to command divisions in the field, he will consider the desirability, as a definite Government policy, of restricting, as far as possible, all such appointments in the future to officers whose age does not exceed forty years?

There is no hard and fast rule as to the age limit for officers commanding the different formations. It is found in practice that officers differ considerably in their characteristics: some men age much sooner than others. It is therefore not proposed to introduce any hard and fast rule, but to appoint to and retain in command of divisions those officers who, from both physical and mental qualifications, are most suitable for such appointments.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Sir John French and Sir Ian Hamilton, not to speak of many others, are all senior to himself in years, and does he think that officers of that age have sufficient combined mental and physical energy—

The hon. Gentleman has already put that question.

asked the Prime Minister whether he was in a position to state that he will shortly introduce a Bill to amend the Parliament Act and provide that the period of the War shall not be calculated as time in the five years' life of the present Parliament?

The Government will shortly introduce a Bill to amend the Parliament Act, so far as the present Parliament is concerned. As to the method by which it is proposed to be done, I must ask my hon. Friend to wait until he sees the Bill.

asked the Prime Minister if he will take the opportunity to be afforded by the expected presence in this country of the leaders of several of the Dominions to hold a conference with them to consider the steps to be taken throughout the Empire to meet the flooding of the whole Empire with cheap goods from enemy countries which is expected at the conclusion of the War?

This, and any other question of interest to the Empire, will be discussed when the opportunity is given by the presence in this country of the representatives of the Dominion Governments.

asked the Prime Minister if ho has considered the repeated suggestions that the Government should show its personal interest in making efforts to promote economy by reducing the salaries paid to Ministers and to Members of the House of Commons by 50 or 35 per cent., so as to make it easier for Members to advocate economy by others after they have put it in practice themselves?

I have no doubt that those referred to in the hon. Member's question are doing what in them lies to promote and practice economy in their personal expenditure. Whether the abolition of their sources of income, or a considerable portion of them, would make this task easier I cannot say.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an opportunity to the House to discuss this question on the Resolution standing in the name of the hon. and learned Member for Cambridge, which has been for a long time on the Paper?

I think it may be discussed possibly on the Vote of Credit; certainly on the Consolidated Fund Bill next week.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of reducing the salaries of Ministers and set an example to the country on the lines of economy he has preached from that bench?

Everybody has got to consider what he conceives to be his duty in this matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of pinching the profits of coal owners?

asked the Prime Minister if he is in a position to announce to the House the names of the Committee of the Cabinet to which it is intended to refer the strategic conduct of the War?

I will make a statement to-morrow.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the appointment of a War Council of the Cabinet, consisting of Ministers without portfolios, in order to relieve such Ministers of Departmental work and allow them to concentrate on the prosecution of the War; and whether he will add to that Council any naval and military adviser also untrammelled by Departmental duties?

I do not think that this suggestion would prove otherwise than disadvantageous. It is essential to maintain the closest touch between the War Committee and the Departments which have to carry out their decisions.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a memorial in favour of the passing of a Midwives Bill for Scotland as an emergency measure arising out of war conditions; and whether he can see his way to fulfil the wish of the memorialists and the urgent need of Scotland?

I can only refer my hon. Friend to the answer given on 26th October on my behalf by the Minister of Munitions, in which the hope was expressed that this Bill might be proceeded with.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture what quantity of nitrate of soda the Government have bought for shipment between 1st September last and 31st March next for use as a fertiliser; have they specially chartered vessels in the open market to carry it or any part of it from Chile, or do they intend to use steamers chartered or requisitioned by the Admiralty at rates with which merchants cannot compete; and whether the Board of Agriculture contemplates any further trading operations with public funds?

In order to maintain the production of food at home the Government have purchased a certain quantity of nitrate of soda, and they are hoping to make an arrangement with importers which will be announced when it is concluded. Any statement as to the future involves prophecy as to national necessities which I am unwilling to make.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer that part of the question as to ships being requisitioned? If ships are requisitioned it will make a great difference as to current rates.

I am not willing to make a great difference. The holders of stocks will vary their policy according to their knowledge as to what we are going to do.

asked the First Commissioner of Works what is the estimated cost of constructing a new temporary Army post office in Regent's Park; and why the more economical course of renting an existing building for this temporary purpose was not adopted?

The estimated cost of the temporary building, including fittings, is £50,000. There was no satisfactory alternative. No existing building in a position at all suitable would have afforded the accommodation that was urgently required.

Did you consider the position of the Agricultural Hall, Islington?

The question of the Agricultural Hall was considered, and I may add that we considered many other places, including the White City, the Botanic Gardens, even part of the docks; and we were driven to the erection of a temporary building as a last resort. The idea of this structure was fought in the Post Office itself till it became inevitable. The Post Office work in connection with the Army grows continuously with the growth of the Army itself. We must have at least one bag for every unit of the Forces, and that alone represents a large total.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many acres of Regent's Park the public are to be deprived of?

155,000 square feet.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the Civil Service Commissioners, in dealing with appointments of clerks for temporary service in Government Departments owing to the War, have laid it down that their employment is strictly temporary, does not entitle them to a gratuity, and cannot lead to a permanent situation in the Civil service; and whether, in view of the employment of clerks in certain Departments who have not been appointed through the Civil Service Commission, he will state that the terms as mentioned above apply to all clerical appointments made as a result of conditions arising out of the War in other ways than those provided for the regular appointment of permanent officials in ordinary times?

The answer to both parts of the question is in the affirmative.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state under what authority he issued a circular to the Metropolitan Police magistrates pointing out that the prevailing condition of darkness ought to affect the mode of dealing with charges under Section 1 of the Motor Car Act, 1903, which may be brought before them by the police?

The circular was issued on my authority. It is one of the ordinary functions of the Home Secretary to assist magistrates with information and advice in matters of this sort.

Is not this question one for the judiciary rather than for the executive?

The judiciary, subject to direction by the Higher Courts, of course lay down what the law is. If my hon. Friend will read the circular he will see that it is not laying down what the law is, but that it is asking to have attention paid to particular parts of the law.

If my right hon. Friend will let me have the circular I will deal with the matter.

Were not the right hon. Gentleman's directions to the magistrates made necessary by the increasing number of fatal accidents?

I rather demur to the hon. Member describing the circular as directions. It is the duty of the Home Secretary, on proper occasions, to call the attention of magistrates to certain provisions of the law. That is all that I have done.