asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the action taken by the military censors in France in regard to letters written in the Welsh language by Welsh soldiers serving at the front; whether his attention has been drawn to the particular case of a letter written by Private D. A. Jones, 35,250, in Welsh, to a relative in Wales, which was censored upon the ground that a letter written in Welsh is not allowable; and whether he will give an assurance that arrangements will be made which will prevent the censoring of such correspondence in future?

The Regulations with regard to censorship of letters written in the Welsh language are quite clear and satisfactory. They are as follows:

All ranks in France have been informed that letters are permitted to be written in the Welsh language and this privilege has been made known in Wales through the vernacular Press.

Letters written in Welsh do not differ from letters in any other language in regard to liability to censorship. They may be censored either regimentally or, if contained in the green envelope, at the Base. In case of difficulty they may be transferred to the London Censorship for examination.

The action of the military censors in France is governed by the censorship regulations for troops in the field. It is there laid down that letters in Welsh which cannot be censored regimentally should be sent under cover to the Chief Postal Censor, War Office. There are censors both at the Base in France and at the War Office, who are able to read letters written in Welsh.

I am obtaining a report upon the particular case to which my hon. Friend draws attention in the question. It will thus be seen that letters written in Welsh are not exempt from censorship, and it is certainly not the case that there is a prohibition against letters being written in Welsh.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he will grant a sworn inquiry into the circumstances of the death of Councillor Richard O'Carroll, secretary of the Dublin Bricklayers' Trade Union and chairman of the Dublin Labour Party, who it is alleged was unarmed and was shot without trial?

No, Sir, I do not think there is a case for inquiry. Richard O'Carroll took an active part in the rebellion and was wounded during the fighting on the 26th April. He was armed. He was taken on that day to the Military Hospital, Portobello Barracks, and died of his wounds there on the 5th May.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction that is being caused in all parts of Ireland owing to the whole-sale arrests of those of the labour and Gaelic movement; and what steps, if any, are being taken to limit the arrests of innocent persons?

Every care is being taken to limit the arrests of innocent persons. The idea that there is any discrimination against persons connected with the labour movement is without foundation.

What are the grounds for any movement whatever against men simply because they are connected with labour movements or the Gaelic League; what authority is there to hold such men suspect, and in times of excitement shoot them out of hand?

I think it is a mistake to suppose that there is any discrimination against persons connected either with the Gaelic movement or the labour movement. Persons under suspicion would be arrested, no matter what movement they happened to be connected with.

asked whether Miss Mulhall is still in prison for having waved her hand to the Countess Markiewics passing in custody; and, seeing that this lady had neither knowledge of nor connecton with the insurrection, when will she be released and what amends will be made to her for imprisonment?

The hon. Gentleman's information is very much out of date. Miss Mulhall was released on the 8th May.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that a large number of the members of the Dublin Trades Council have been arrested and are being detained for the past fifteen days; if there is any charge against them besides being advocates of the working classes; and if he will order their immediate release or trial so as to enable them to carry on their labour duties?

These cases are being investigated with the utmost rapidity.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that James Sugrue, Cornelius Jones, and Patrick Landers were arrested at Listowel on Tuesday night, the 16th instant; will he state on what grounds were they arrested, and what charge, if any, has been preferred against them?

These three men have been discharged.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Joseph O'Leary, of 11, Tremadoc Road, Clapham, London, who is spending his holidays in Ireland, was arrested on Tuesday, 16th May, in Dublin, and detained since in the Bridewell; whether he will say why Joseph O'Leary was arrested and detained; what charge, if any, has been made against him; and whether his release will be ordered immediately?

This case is receiving immediate attention.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this man attested under the Derby scheme and was rejected as being unfit for service?

asked on what grounds James M'Elligott, clerk in the Local Government Board, Dublin, has been arrested and deported to England; whether he is aware that this young man has an unimpeachable character; whether he is aware that James M'Elligott's mother's health is in a precarious condition as a result of her son's arrest and deportation, and that she cannot get any information about her son; and whether his release will be ordered at once?

I cannot at present add to what I said yesterday.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why this man was refused permission to see his brother on Friday last at Stafford Gaol?

If the hon. Member will give me the name and address I will see that he has access to his brother.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when I can get any information with reference to this man, who had no connection whatever with the Sinn Fein movement? He has now been under arrest for three weeks, and surely during that time the Government authorities ought to have got sufficient knowledge of his movements?

I am endeavouring to get information, and I cannot reply until I have got the actual answer.

The following question stood on the Notice Paper in the name of Mr. T. M. HEALY: 34. To ask the Under-Secretary of State for War if, out of thirty-five young men arrested in Mitchelstown by the military on 8th May, five are detained, namely, W. Casey, J. Hannigan, D. Roche, and the brothers O'Sullivan; have these men been removed to Cork and then to Dublin in custody, although all arms were surrendered and no incriminating documents or matter were found upon them; are their relatives left without any knowledge of their whereabouts and denied the opportunity of procuring their defence; have any of them been deported to England; if not, are they to be tried, on what charge, and where; and is any opportunity to be afforded them of consulting a solicitor or making a defence?

I have been asked to postpone this question again. It has been on the Paper for more than a week, and the right hon. Gentleman has not answered it. Why keep these men in prison? How would you like to be kept in prison yourself?

I have already made representations that I may be supplied with the earliest possible information, and I cannot do more.

asked the Prime Minister whether, having regard to the fact that the people of Mayo County took no part in the recent insurrection and have shown their strong disapproval of it, he will have the cases of young men arrested in Westport district, most of whom are now imprisoned in Wandsworth Military Detention Barracks, investigated forthwith. with a view to their immediate release when it is found that no criminal charge can be substantiated or even laid against them?

These cases are being investigated with the utmost rapidity.

asked the Prime Minister if the Lord Lieutenant will authorize the exhumation of the bodies of the citizens of Dublin shot without trial, so that an inquest may be held and indictments presented against the guilty parties; and will the military furnish the relatives with the place of burial in each case?

I am not aware upon what evidence my hon. Friend bases his question, or the charges which it suggests. If he will furnish me with such evidence I will see that it receives the most careful examination.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman upon what ground Mr. McIntyre was shot, upon what ground Mr. Dixon was shot, and upon what ground Mr. Sheehy Skeffington was shot? I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that a public investigation was to be held. Perhaps I may be allowed, as a matter of personal explanation, to say that a remark of mine yesterday would appear to throw a slur upon the practice generally of courts-martial, I desired to throw no such slur. I desired simply to make the objection I did make to investigatng these cases by the method of court-martial.

My hon. and learned Friend was, I thought, aware that the three cases to which he has referred are now the subject of public inquiry by court-martial.

Only last night I received from Mrs. Skeffington's solicitors a statement that they could get no information whatever from the military authorities on the subject of the alleged inquiry?

Will my hon. and learned Friend send me the letter?

I am not sure that I kept the letter.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War the name of the regiment and officers in charge in North King Street, Dublin, during the rising; whether he is aware that fourteen men, unarmed, and not connected in any way with the rising, were shot without trial and without any charge being made against them; and if, in the interests of justice and peace in Ireland, he will demand an explanation from those responsible for the incident?

What the hon. Member asks for in the last part of this question has already been arranged—that is to say, a Court of Inquiry is being held to investigate the occurrence and all circumstances of the case.

Is it a Military Court of Inquiry, and private?

It is a Court of Inquiry ordered by the military authorities, but not necessarily a military inquiry.

Will it be a public one?

That I cannot say.

Otherwise it will be a farce and disgust people.

I hope not, Sir.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if there be no military necessity for prolonging the anxiety of Irish people regarding their missing relatives, dead, imprisoned, or deported, in connection with the insurrection, whether the names of all who live, indicating where they are, will be communicated direct to their relatives or published in Dublin and provincial newspapers without further delay; whether the prisoners will be allowed to see their relatives in accordance with the Prime Minister's promise; whether elderly prisoners, having no connection with the rising, such as Mr. John Sweetman, a former Member of this House, will be released on giving security for appearance when required; if detained, whether they will be given, or allowed to procure from their homes, a bed and some clothing; and whether all women and boys under seventeen years of age now detained in connection with the same event will be released forthwith?

I can assure the hon. Member that every endeavour is being made to expedite these investigations. Prisoners are allowed to communicate with their relatives, and lists of prisoners under detention are being published daily in the Irish newspapers. As regards the last part of the question, as I stated yesterday, a general statement is to be made as to the disposal of the prisoners who have been arrested and deported.

When will that statement be made—we are anxiously awaiting it?

I understand in two days.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is now in a position to say what terms P. H. Pearce, commander of the Irish Volunteers, proposed or asked before he surrendered?

P. H. Pearce neither proposed nor asked for any terms before surrender.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Doctor Kathleen Lynn is still in prison in Dublin for having attended to wounded Irish Volunteers; of any other offence has been charged against her, will he say what it is; whether she attended the wounded on both sides indiscriminately; and whether he is aware that her sole connection with either side was as a doctor?

The hon. Gentleman's question contains a number of assumptions which I cannot either support or contradict until I have received the results of the investigation which is now being made. Doctor Kathleen Lynn is still detained in Dublin. I am obtaining further information in this case and also on the points raised in a question of which the hon. Member for the Harbour Division of Dublin gave my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister private notice this morning.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, before giving this information, ascertain from Dr. Kathleen Lynn her connection with the matter?

No doubt evidence on the matter will be taken in the course of the inquiry.

Will the right hon. Gentleman stop the deportation proceedings about to take place this week of Red Cross workers in connection with this movement? I understand that Lord Derby—

The hon. Member is now making a statement.

If I may answer the hon. Gentleman's question preceding his statement, I would say that certainly I shall report to the Government of Ireland that that is a desirable thing to undertake.

asked (1) what military or other advantage is expected to accrue from needlessly enforcing filthy and unsanitary conditions on Irish insurgent prisoners; what need there was for leaving them eighteen hours a day without a drop of cold water to drink; why no adequate provision was made for necessary evacuations; why access to a water closet was denied for twenty-five hours; why elderly men, required to sleep on flagstones, were not allowed to procure beds or rugs from their homes; why permission to see friends, though promised in this House, has not been accorded to them; whether independent doctors are allowed to examine the health conditions in which all the prisoners are kept, to question on that subject any they may desire to question, and to record their opinions; and (2) what advantage was or is expected to be derived from starving numbers of military prisoners, crowded together like cattle in transit, in cold, hunger, and filth; compelling them to sleep on cold flagstones, with neither bed nor covering; putting looters and thieves in amongst them for their humiliation, and taking their finger prints as if they were ordinary criminals; and whether this treatment has been carried out under the supervision of Max Green, chief gaoler of Ireland?

asked the conditions of the prisons in which Irish prisoners are detained; whether the sanitary arrangements, the food supply, and sleeping accommodation would pass the public health authorities; and if the prisons will be open to the inspection of public health authorities?

I understand the wording of my question (No. 13) has been somewhat improved, but the question is based on the experience of persons who underwent this treatment, and will the right hon. Gentleman please answer it on that basis?

The assumptions contained in Question No. 27 are not in accordance with facts.

Undoubtedly the conditions which arose at the time of the general arrest of the rebels were uncomfortable, but those conditions do not now exist. I would also refer the two hon. Members to the reply given yesterday to the hon. Member for Salford by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, which was based upon his personal experience. I can further assure the hon. Members that everything is under strict medical supervision; that a representative of the Public Health Societies has already inspected these detention barracks, and that all proposals put forward by him have been carried out.

Does the right hon. Gentleman deny that the finger prints of these rebels have been taken, and that ordinary criminals have been let in among them, as stated in Question 27?

Yes; that is denied.

Is there a single word you are getting from Dublin which is not false?

This is not the time for such statements.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I visited Wakefield Prison yesterday, and had an interview with almost all the people of my Constituency who are interned there, and that they requested me to make public the fact that they regard themselves as being well treated?

This does not arise out of the question. The hon. Member is making a series of statements.

The question I have to ask bears very strictly upon the answer that is given. People of my Constituency want to know if the right hon. Gentleman is aware that last week they made public the fact that they are well treated, with every consideration by the staff of the prison?

But Wakefield is not Dublin, though.

Will the right hon. Gentleman allow other Members of this House to visit any prison he pleases in the United Kingdom?

I will give that my consideration.

What is the reason for this discrimination between Members of this House?

Can the right hon. Gentleman relieve the punishment of solitary confinement? That is the only complaint I have made on my part, and I can verify the statement made by the hon. Member.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why no inquiry has yet been held into the shooting of Nurse Kehoe by soldiers while she was attending to the wounded in the South Dublin Union; on what grounds the military authorities intimated to Miss Kehoe's relatives that they would be well advised not to demand an inquiry; can he say what risk they would incur by demanding it; and whether, in the circumstances, a public inquiry into the death of Nurse Kehoe will be held while the facts are fresh in the minds of witnesses?

The hon. Member is mistaken. A careful inquiry into this case has been held and all the witnesses who could give information have been examined. The conclusion arrived at is that Nurse Kehoe was shot accidentally during the fighting. I would add that the military authorities never intimated to Miss Kehoe's relatives that they would be well advised not to demand an inquiry.

Has the right hon. Gentleman made any inquiry in this case but from the military?

I make my inquiries from the Irish Government.

There is no Irish Government.

asked if the Irish Members wishing to see prisoners alleged to be rebels will be granted facilities for visiting them with a view to obtaining the immediate release or trial of those who are innocent?

Yes, Sir, every facility is given and has always been given for such visits in accordance with the regulations for detention barracks. The steps to be taken to secure release of individuals have also been made public, and were stated by me in this House last week.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me why I have been refused permission to see one of these prisoners, although I have had a pass?

I will see my hon. Friend after questions.

Why was Mrs. McDonald not allowed to see her husband?

I am not aware of that.

It is only one of hundreds of cases.

asked the Prime Minister if he will give a day for the discussion of the Motion standing in the name of the Member for East Nottingham—

"That this House expresses its deep sympathy with the bereaved relations of brave officers and men of the 2/7th (Robin Hood) and the 2/8th Battalions Notts and Derby Regiment (Sherwood Foresters), who voluntarily enlisted in order to fight for their country against foreign enemies, and have been cruelly and treasonably slain during street fighting by Irish rebels in the United Kingdom." [ Sir J. D. Rees. ]

No, Sir; I doubt if this is necessary. I have already expressed the deep sympathy of the House with the bereaved relatives of these gallant men.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the hon. and learned Member for Cork (Mr. Healy) has said that these very heavy casualties were due in a great measure to a wrong route being selected by the troops, and will he answer if I raise the matter on the Vote of Credit?

I am afraid I have no information myself, but I can procure it.

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that bad housing conditions and the low rate of wages paid to the working classes are the principal causes of dissatisfaction in Ireland; and if he will state what steps, if any, the Government will take to remedy this evil?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to his similar question on the 17th instant

( by Private Notice ) asked the Prime Minister whether the report is correct that Professor Owen MacNeill is being tried by court-martial in camera ; if so, what is the statutory authority for this procedure; and whether he will immediately order the trial to be made public and Mr. MacNeill's evidence to be taken by civil commission of inquiry?

I only just now received notice of this question. I believe it is the case that Professor MacNeill is being tried by court-martial. The proceedings are not public. The statutory authority is the Defence of the Realm Act—

What Section?

The Section of the Act under which many of these trials have already taken place. No trial has taken place in Ireland except under the authority of the Defence of the Realm Act.

Then you must be in a very bad way!

In view of the fact that nobody else apparently but himself can find this power in the Act to which he refers will the right hon. Gentleman give me the Section under which it is conferred?

No, Sir, but if the hon. Gentleman will put down a question to the Attorney-General, he will supply him with that information.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether a man who has not attained the age of forty-one, but who has received his discharge from the Army after completing his term of service, is entitled to appeal for exemption on the grounds set forth in the Military Service Act, 1916?

Yes, Sir. A man who has been discharged from the Army on the termination of his period of service, and who, under the terms of the Bill at present before Parliament, is required to rejoin, is entitled to apply for exemption under the provisions of the Military Service Act, 1916.

asked whether the rules for field punishment which provide that an offender may be kept in irons— i.e., in fetters or handcuffs or both fetters and handcuffs and may be attached for a period or periods not exceeding two hours in any one day to a fixed object and that straps or ropes may be used in lieu of irons, but not during more than three out of four consecutive days nor during more than twenty-one days in all—are intended to authorise the punishment known as crucifixion, in which the arms of the offender are fastened outstretched while the feet of the offender are sometimes raised above the ground; and whether they also authorise an offender being fastened to a cart-wheel with feet and arms extended?

The rules for field punishment do not contemplate such procedure.

Does such form of punishment never occur, then?

I cannot answer that definitely; I only say they do not contemplate it.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ascertain whether these punishments are ever being imposed on men who are resisting orders on conscientious grounds?

I should think it is highly improbable, but I cannot answer for it definitely without putting a question.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries?

I am very much disinclined to do that.

asked whether boys who attain the age of eighteen next August will be precluded from entering for the Sandhurst or Woolwich examinations which are held in November, and from studying for these examinations in the intervening months?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on the 17th May to the hon. Member for Devonport.

asked what is the position in respect of liability to military service of a widower with children dependent on him, having regard to Clause 1, Sub-section (2), of the Military Service Bill and its bearing upon the principal Act?

A widower with children dependent on him was treated by the principal Act as a married man. The Bill now before Parliament applies to married men and by consequence also to widowers with children dependent on them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman sure that the wording is as clear as the intention?

I think so.

asked where the seventeen men who were taken last week from the military prison at Harwich to Havre are now placed; whether these men, or any of them, are still refusing military service; and whether one of them, H. F. Brewster, has recently been sentenced to twenty-eight days' field punishment, and for what offence?

I regret that I am unable, as I have already stated, to give information as to the situation from day to day of individual soldiers, and I am consequently unable to answer the inquiries contained in the question.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any other men who are resisting orders have been just sent to France since these seventeen?

I gave the House and my hon. Friend in an answer about three or four days ago the latest information I had from France to the effect that the Non-Combatant Force which had arrived there was doing very well, and there was no trouble with them at all.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman's answer refer to the Non-Combatant Corps who accepted non-combatant service? My question refers to those men who are still resisting orders on conscientious grounds.

It was alleged that among them was a body of men who had resisted non-combatant service, that they had been sent to France for that reason, and that that was one of their grievances. I was informed by the Adjutant-General in France that there was no trouble at all.

The trouble alleged is not in regard to the main body of those who had accepted non-combatant service, but a certain number, seventeen, who have refused any form of military service, and who were taken, some of them without uniform, to France?

The hon. Member is now making a speech.

asked the Under-secretary for War whether men who have been deemed to be enlisted under the Military Service Act, but have consistently protested that they cannot conscientiously undertake military service and have been taken against their will to France, will be subjected to field punishment for continuing their refusal?

This depends on the nature of the offences they may commit.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he will inquire into the case of Daniel Collins, a native of Meelon, Bandon, county Cork, who, on the occasion of one of his periodical visits to Manchester during Easter week, was drafted into the Army; whether he is aware that this man has but lately been discharged from the hospital where he was under treatment for appendicitis but could not be operated on owing to the serious condition of his heart and lungs and general low condition of health; whether he has been drafted to Naas depot, county Kildare, No. 26,818; and, being of Irish domicile, whether he will have the man immediately sent back to his home?

I have some information on this case, but I have had to refer it back for further inquiry as to the man's proper domicile. When the man was before the medical board he was found to be of exceptionally good physique and was passed for general service. He was posted to the regiment in which he expressed the desire to serve, namely, the Dublin Fusiliers.

asked what is the standard of chest measurement, and what is the weight for height for men now being passed for general service?

I understand the hon. Member is referring to those enlisted for the duration of the War only. The details are too numerous for me to give him the information he seeks in an answer, but I am sending to him a printed paper, and I would also refer him to Appendix 2 of the Recruiting Regulations, 1912.

asked what is the estimated total cost for the present year of the special allowances proposed to be made to soldiers under the new scheme of the Local Government Board?

I fear that it will be impossible to frame an estimate until some experience of the working of the scheme has been gained.

Can we have any estimate of the cost before we discuss the Budget?

I am afraid it is quite impossible to give any reliable estimate as to the cost to the State.

Can the Government spend this money which they have not estimated for, which must amount to something between £30,000,000 and £50,000,000, before they have the permission of the House?

I hope my hon. Friend has exaggerated the amount, but it is quite impossible to give a reliable estimate.

asked the Prime Minister if the conclusion to which the Government came on the review of the situation by the Cabinet Committee, that 200,000 unattested married men could be spared to the Army from industry, was arrived at by settling the minimum numbers of men necessary to be retained in each of the separate trades; and if he will inform the House whether it is proposed to issue any instructions to the tribunals setting out the number of men that should be enlisted, having regard to the number already obtained in the district under their supervision, so as to avoid the depletion of labour in industries which are discharging responsibilities essential to the prosecution of the War?

With regard to the first part of the question, I must refer my hon. Friend to the answer given him by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade on the 16th May. With regard to the last part of the question, the Government are of the opinion that their present arrangements provide against the danger to which my hon. Friend refers.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether at a recent meeting of the West Suffolk Appeal Tribunal, held in the Shirehall, Bury St. Edmunds, the chairman, Lord Bristol, in dismissing a case in which an employer applied for the exemption of a blacksmith in his employment, said that the time was approaching when the Government would take steps to organise industrial conscription; on what authority such a statement was made; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made?

My right hon. Friend is not aware of the statement to which reference is made. The Government have no intention of introducing industrial conscription.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether Councillor James Price, a miner and Labour representative on the Aberavon Town Council, has been a member of the Aberavon Tribunal and has performed his work with fairness and impartiality; whether he is aware that because Councillor Price presided over a meeting against Conscription the recruiting officer for the area, backed up by the military representative to the Aberavon Tribunal, has demanded that Councillor Price should resign his seat on that tribunal, and that the recruiting officer insisted that Councillor Price had broken the law by presiding at a meeting against Conscription; whether there is anything in the rules and regulations to justify this action; and, if not, what action he proposes to take?

My right hon. Friend has not received any information respecting this matter, and he does not think it necessary, on the evidence before him, to take any action. He has not received information that Councillor Price has ceased to be a member of the tribunal. It is, of course, desirable that members of tribunals, whatever their personal opinions, should refrain from any action which might possibly appear to throw doubt on their impartiality.

Does that apply to both sides or only to one side?

That certainly applies to both sides.

asked the President of the Local Government Board if he will define the position, under the new Military Service Bill, of Colonials who have been resident for some time in the United Kingdom; what term of residence for business or other purposes in this country on the part of Canadians, Australians, or South Africans would make them eligible for service under the Bill; and whether, in the case of Colonials temporarily resident in the United Kingdom, and who may be exempt from the provisions of the Bill, he will extend to them the same consideration as to Americans and Danes, leaving the question of their domicile and citizenship to be decided, hot by public tribunals, but by the Colonial High Commissioners resident here, whose certificates would guarantee exemption?

The position of persons from the Dominions residing here, apart from age and other questions, depends on whether they are or are not ordinarily resident in this country. No definition of ordinary residence in terms of time can be given. The question is one of fact, which, if in dispute, can only be decided by a Court of Law. My right hon. Friend the Secretary for the Colonies has been in communication with the Army Council with a view to the military authorities accepting certificates from the Colonial High Commissioners with respect to persons from the Dominions whom the High Commissioners consider to be exempted from the Military Service Act.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether his attention has been called to the representations made by the Swansea Corporation, the chairman of the Glamorgan County Council, and of the West Glamorgan Appeal Tribunal in favour of the appointment of a medical board at Swansea; whether he is aware that real hardship is being caused to men desiring to be properly classified who have to travel forty-five miles to Cardiff for medical examination; and whether, in view of the large population in and around Swansea, he will immediately set up a competent military medical board in that town whose decision shall be final?

The matter to which my right hon. Friend calls attention has been referred to the Western Command for consideration, and it is hoped that a reply may be received in the course of a day or two.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has had any offers of the services of any Volunteer regiments; and, if so, whether the services of any such regiments have been accepted, and will he state the names of any such regiments?

Yes, Sir, certain offers of service have been made to, and have been accepted by, the King. It is not considered desirable to make public notification of the regiments accepted until the form of enrolment for Volunteers has been decided. It is hoped that this may be settled in the course of the next few days.

Why have the services of the Cheshire Volunteer Regiment, comprising 9,000 men, which were offered two months ago, not yet been accepted?

It is not considered desirable to make public notification of a particular unit; therefore I am unable to give the hon. Member an answer.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman inform the authorities of that particular regiment privately through the ordinary channels?

Oh, yes, they will undoubtedly be informed.

They have not been.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has assigned to any special department of the War Office the administration of the Volunteer Force; and, if so, to which department?

The administration of the Volunteer Force has been assigned as a temporary measure to the department of the Director-General of the Territorial Force, which will in this matter work under the Adjutant-General.

asked whether, when the services of the county Volunteer regiments have been accepted, such regiments will communicate direct with the War Office on all matters of administration and discipline, or will they communicate through the Central Association of Volunteer Training Corps?

An announcement on this matter will be made in due course. The exact procedure to be followed is still under the consideration of the Army Council.

asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that the military authorities are entrusting the Volunteer Force of the United Kingdom with various important duties, the Government will make an appeal to all men over military age, or disqualified from joining the Regular Army, to enrol in this force, so as to increase their num- bers and relieve more Regular troops for service abroad; and whether, in order to encourage the movement, he will make it clear that the Government attaches importance to the force and desires the men to volunteer for the duties entrusted to them?

The Volunteer Force has in several cases given valuable assistance to the Army in many ways, and the Government hope that men disqualified for Regular or Territorial Forces, if not employed on duties of national importance, will join the Volunteer force and in it be available for necessary services.

asked whether recommendations for the award of the Territorial decoration for officers and the Territorial Force efficiency medal for noncommissioned officers and men of the Territorial Force when serving with an Expeditionary Force, are to be held in abeyance during the period of the War; whether these decorations and medals are given for stated periods of service with good conduct, and are in no way given for war service; and, if so, what is the reason for suspending the giving of them to those men who are serving with an Expeditionary Force while they are still being given to those men who are serving at Home?

The comparison in this matter is rather between the position of Territorial officers and men serving with the Expeditionary Forces and Regular troops serving in these Forces, than between Territorial troops serving at Home and those serving with the Expeditionary Forces. The Grant of the Territorial decoration and Territorial Force efficiency medal is being held in abeyance in the case of those serving with the Expeditionary Forces, because it has been thought desirable to put all members of the Expeditionary Forces on one footing.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is hardly understood by those Territorials serving abroad? Some of them feel that they ought to be getting these medals.

The hon. Member is making a statement—he is not asking a question.

Perhaps I may be allowed to say that I hope the hon. and gallant Gentleman will make it clear to those he spoke for what I have just said.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the case of soldiers home from active service, especially in Egypt and the East, who, owing to some misunderstanding or mistake, have received railway passes only as far as London, though their homes are in Scotland; whether in every case leave carries with it the right to a free railway pass to the soldier's home; and whether he can take any further steps to make clear to soldiers what their rights in this respect are?

When this special leave from the front is given it carries a free travelling warrant to the man's home. I think this is so generally understood that no further steps to make it known are called for. The railway transport officers at the London termini have power to alter the destination on the railway warrant in cases where they are satisfied that this is necessary.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, since the year 1914, the allowance paid in lieu of rations to soldiers on the lodging list has been reduced from 2s. to 1s. 9d. and since last month to 1s. 7d. per diem; whether, when billeted, the householder is now paid 17s. 6d. per man per week, composed as follows: 1s. 9d. for rations and 9d. for lodging, fuel, and light per diem; whether, when drawing consolidated family allowance, the rate allowed to the soldier himself in lieu of rations is still 1s. 9d. per diem; and, if so, whether, in view of the increased cost of food, he will consider the desirability of continuing the allowance of 1s. 9d. per diem to soldiers on the lodging list in the Woolwich district and elsewhere?

The facts are as stated, but the general allowance in lieu of rations is now 1s. 7d., and I am afraid it is impossible to make any special arrangements for soldiers on the lodging list.

What justification is there for reducing the rations allowance when food prices are increasing?

The justification is that the ration itself has been reduced. The meat rations have been reduced a quarter of a pound and the rations allowance by 2½d.

asked if the ration allowance to commissioned officers was reduced from 1s. 9d. per diem to 1s. 5½d. per diem in 1915; and whether it has since been increased to 1s. 9d. per diem?

In those cases where officers, to suit their own convenience, elect to take a money allowance instead of the ration in kind, the cash allowance was reduced in 1915 from 1s. 9d. a day to 1s. 5d. Following on a reduction in the ration is has been further reduced to 1s. 3d.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any estimate has been formed of the effect upon the public revenue of improving the graduation of Death Duties upon the capital of estates in accordance with the principle underlying the provisions of Section 22 of the Finance Bill affecting income?

My hon. Friend is no doubt aware of the provision in Section 13 of the Finance Act, 1914, the cost of which was estimated at the time of its introduction to be about £40,000 in a full year. The preparation of the statistical details from which the actual result might have been calculated is part of the work with which it has been necessary to dispense with a view to economising statt.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware of the feeling of injustice among persons owning low-paced cars used for the purposes of their business that they should be charged the same rate for their cars as persons using high-priced cars purchased for pleasure; and if he will consider if it is possible to make some differentiation?

As I have already explained, I am considering all questions relevant to the Motor Car Duty, and I hope to make a statement on the Committee stage of the Finance Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these cars have gone up very largely in price?

When the right hon. Gentleman is considering this question, may I ask him not to assume that all low-priced cars are being used for business and the high-priced cars all for pleasure, which is certainly not in accordance with the facts?

That is an assumption which I should never make.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider this tax upon cars from 16 to 26 horse-power, which are very largely used in Ireland for business purposes?

That is one of the points I have in mind.

Will he consider the cases where the tax has been raised from £6 to £18?

That is the same question as that raised by my hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether his attention has been called to a case in which a workman employed by Messrs. Hewitt and Kellett, of Bradford, applied to the Court for a leaving certificate on the ground that a member of the firm had employed towards him constant bullying and bad language; whether he is aware that this workman drew attention to a notice posted in the works that any employé using bad language to a superior is liable to a fine of £3 at the Munitions Court; whether this regulation has been officially sanctioned by the Ministry of Munitions and, if so, whether he will take steps to render an employer or foreman liable to monetary penalties who uses improper language toward an employed person?

My attention has been drawn to reports on this case, in which, I understand, the workman was refused a certifi- cate. The model rules sanctioned by the Minister, which can alone be the ground of prosecution before a Munitions Tribunal, provide that no person employed shall "use abusive language in or otherwise interfere with or annoy any other person employed in the establishment." This would apply to all persons employed in the establishment, including foremen. I will make inquiry to see if, as appears to be suggested in the question, the rule posted by the firm differed from the model rule. It is open, of course, to the man, if he so desires, to see whether there are grounds for appeal.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether an employé of Messrs. Hewitt and Kellett, of Bradford, applied en 4th May for a leaving certificate before the Bradford Munitions Tribunal on the ground that he had become skilled as a steel-cutter and could do work more to the national advantage than his employment as a labourer, and that the application was refused, and that the chairman informed the applicant that if he left his employment he would be unemployed for six weeks, and might in the meantime be forced into the Army; whether it is with his sanction that the Munitions of War Act should be reinforced in this way by the Military Service Act; and whether he will cause inquiry to be made?

My attention has been called to this case, and I am making further inquiries.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he has requested certain firms to send in lists of their employés, indicating those who are essential and those who may be sent into military service; whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that in some of these lists men who are quite close to the limit of military age have been indicated as available for service whilst much younger men have been indicated as being essential to the business; whether, in some instances, the men indicated as available for military service seem to have been selected on account of their political opinions and trade union activities; and whether anything can be done to see that military and industrial considerations alone are to determine the making up of these lists?

Inpectors of the Ministry are now visiting works to which war service badges have been issued with a view to ascertaining whether badges are being held by men who appear to be more urgently needed in the Army than for munitions work. With a view to facilitating their inquiries these inspectors have in some cases asked firms to supply them in advance of their visit with a list of badged employés. My attention has not been called to any cases in which a firm has attempted to secure the release of men on account of their political opinions or trade union activities, but special instructions on this point have been issued to inspectors with a view to preventing any such attempt from being successful if it were made.

asked the Minister of Munitions the amount of the allowance paid weekly to the families of the workmen deported from Glasgow by order of the Ministry of Munitions and the military authorities; the nature of the undertaking into which the workmen must enter before they can obtain employment; and whether the alternative to their entering into such an undertaking is that the workmen shall remain away from Glasgow under circumstances which deprive them of work and wages?

The allowances paid to the families of the men in question vary from 10s. to 15s. a week. The men are not required to sign any undertaking before obtaining employment in the towns where they now are.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether the Clyde Dilution of Labour Commissioners have completed their inquiry into the circumstances leading up to certain disputes on the Clyde and to the deportation, without trial, from Glasgow of certain workmen; whether the Report of the Commissioners has been forwarded to the Ministry of Munitions and whether it will be made public; and whether any opportunity will be afforded to the deported men to disprove, if possible, the charges made against them?

As I stated on 12th April, an inquiry was undertaken by the Clyde Dilution Commissioners into the causes and circumstances leading up to the strike at Beardmore's, Parkhead. The completion of the inquiry was delayed by the illness of a material witness, but I understand that the Commissioners are now considering their Report. When the Report has been received, my right hon. Friend will consider what action he should take thereon.

Will the evidence in this Report be published when it is completed?

I will be able to say what will be done when I see the Report.

Will the precedent set in the case of Lord Balfour of Burleigh's Report on Discontent on the Clyde be followed with reference to this Report?

made a reply which was inaudible.

asked the Prime Minister whether Portugal is receiving financial support from this country in her participation in the War; if so, to what extent; and whether he can indicate the directions in which the Portuguese Army and Navy are co-operating with the Allies?

It would not be in the public interest to specify the precise part to be played by Portugal in defeating the common enemy, but the hon. Member may rest assured that the Portuguese Government are acting in the closest co-operation with His Majesty's Government.

May I have a reply to the first part of my question?