asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the recent disclosures of Dr. Taylor as to the starvation of British prisoners and to the German reply thereto, he will endeavour to ascertain the average ration at present allowed to British prisoners and its quality, in order that a ration of equal quality and quantity can be served out to German prisoners here, plus any provisions that may be sent to them from Germany or given by German sympathisers in this country, and such ration varied for better or worse in accordance with any Reports he may from time to time receive as to the treatment of British prisoners?

We have received through the United States Ambassador Reports by Dr. Taylor, which show the amount of food issued to the British civilians at Ruhleben. Further correspondence on this subject will be in the hands of hon. Members to-morrow.

Can I have an answer to my suggestion?

As to that, the matter is still under consideration, and I would rather not make a definite statement on that point.

asked why 375 unfit German civilians were allowed to go back to Germany during the four months ending with May, when Germany only allowed twenty-two unfit British civilians I to come back to this country?

As the hon. Member is no doubt aware, the agreement for the repatriation of British and German civilians provides for the repatriation of a category of individuals, and is not an agreement for a man for man exchange of unfit civilians. The total number of unfit German civilians repatriated since the agreement came into force on 6th September last is 776, and the number of unfit British civilians repatriated in the same period is 394. There are, approximately, 26,000 German civilians interned in this country, as against 4,000 British civilians interned in Germany.

Are those German civilians unfit?

No, Sir. The meaning of the figures which I gave my hon. Friend is that since there is a very large excess amounting to six-and-a-half times the number of German civilians in this country to what there are British civilians in Germany it is not surprising that there are rather more German civilians who have gone back to Germany than British civilians who have come back here.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will furnish a complete list, up to date, of the enemy firms who have been ordered to be wound up under the provisions of the Defence of the Realm Act, 1916, with a statement against each name of the trade carried on and the approximate amount of the capital employed therein?

Lists of the businesses ordered to be wound up or discontinued with a statement of the nature of each business and other particulars have been presented to Parliament in accordance with Section 1 (S) of of the Trading with the Enemy Amendment Act, 1916. These lists bring the information down to the end of last May. The amount of capital employed in such businesses is, however, not shown, and, so far as persons or unregistered firms are concerned, there are many cases in which it could not be shown without further investigation, while in others, owing to the absence of complete accounts in this country, the information would be very imperfect. I do not think the expenditure of time necessary for the compilation of this information would be justified, but if the hon. Member desires such information in any particular case, I will endeavour to supply him with it.

asked for the number and value of the shares of enemy aliens in British companies which have now been sold under the powers conferred by the Trading with the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1916; and whether such shares have been sold by private treaty through the medium of the Stock Exchange or by public auction?

Shares and debentures held by enemies in British companies of the nominal value of £1,300,000 have at present been vested by the Board of Trade in the Public Trustee for the purpose of sale. He has completed the sale of shares of the nominal value of £102,000 and is negotiating for the sale of the remainder. These shares have been sold by private treaty and on the Stock Exchange in cases where there is a quotation. In several pending cases the shares are being put up for sale by public auction.

Is any care taken when the shares are not sold?

Yes.

asked why a German firm of which one of the partners is now living in Germany, after being ordered to wind up under the Hostile Foreigners Trading Order, has been allowed to be acquired by a firm of another name with an agency in London, and allowed to be under the same management as the former firm?

The transaction to which my hon. and gallant Friend presumably refers is at present under the consideration of the Government of India, and until a decision has been arrived at I am not in a position to make a statement.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether John McLean, now undergoing imprisonment for an offence under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, is the person who for several years previously conducted an educational movement among workers in the Glasgow district; if so, whether he will inquire into the work of education and organisation done by McLean before and during the War; and, if the result of such inquiry is to show that McLean exerted an ameliorating and enlightening influence, whether any mitigation of his sentence can be recommended?

I regret that the results of my inquiries do not justify my adopting the suggestion of my hon. Friend.

Has the right hon. Gentleman given his personal attention to this matter, and is he aware that this man has got a very high reputation and an estimable character?

I would remind my hon. Friend that at the trial Mr. McLean put that plea forward and brought evidence in support of it, but the verdict was given after it had been presented.

Was it by order or at the instigation of the right hon. Gentleman that the lady who has been interesting herself in this man's case with a view to mitigating the punishment has just had a domiciliary visit and all her papers taken away?

I have no knowledge either of the lady or of the domiciliary visit.

Will you make inquiries?

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to the sentence passed on Mr. Fenner Brockway by the City of London Quarter Sessions on 28th June of a fine of £100 and in default of payment of a distress levy, and in default of obtaining the sum of £100 by such levy imprisonment for sixty-one days; whether the punishment is prescribed by Regulation 58 under the Defence of the Realm Act; and whether, in view of the fact that such Regulation makes no mention of a distress levy, and that the Quarter Sessions, by inflicting such an alternative penalty, exceeds their powers, he proposes to take any action in the matter?

The offender in question was convicted at the Mansion House Police Court on 3rd April last and ordered to pay a fine of £100 and costs to the amount of £10. His appeal to Quarter Sessions was heard on the 28th June, and dismissed. The sentence passed at the Mansion House has now to be enforced in the usual way as provided by the Summary Jurisdiction Acts. If the fine is not paid, the proper course is to issue a warrant of distress to recover the amount duo unless there is special reason for not doing so. The term of sixty-one days' imprisonment imposed at the Mansion House in default of payment is not enforced unless the defendant (who has been allowed fourteen days for the purpose) fails to pay the amount due from him and it is not raised by distraint. This is the course laid down by the general law for recovering penalties imposed by Courts of Summary Jurisdiction, and is not affected by anything in the Defence of the Realm Regulations.

Was that course contemplated in the Regulations under the Defence of the Realm Act? Is it not specified?

Mo, Sir; this procedure is quite independent of the Defence of the Realm Regulation. It is the ordinary procedure under the normal provisions of the law.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Government proposes to appoint a member of the Grocers' Federation upon the committee on food prices?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the dissatisfaction amongst the grocers and provision merchants of the country that they are not represented on the Government Committee on Food Prices; and will he take steps to appoint a representative of this body on the Committee?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that, while two members of the Food Prices Committee are representative of the co-operative grocers' societies, there is no representative on the Committee of the private grocers; and whether, in the circumstances, he will see that some suitable representative of this class of the grocery trade is at once appointed to the Committee?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will take steps to see that the private distributive trades concerned are represented on the Government Committee on Food Prices as well as co-operative societies; whether two representatives of the co-operative societies have been appointed as members of the Government Committee; and whether he will see that private traders are proportionately represented on the Committee?

The inquiries of the Prices Committee will not be limited to food prices, and, even if they were so limited, it is not practicable to include on one Committee representatives of each important division of producers, wholesale merchants and retail dealers without unduly increasing the membership of the Committee. The Committee will, of course, call representative distributive traders as witnesses, and I will consider whether anything further can be done to meet the hon. Members' wishes, but I do not think I shall see my way to increase the members—already large—of the Committee.

Does the right hon Gentleman not think that the Grocers' Federation above all others has excellent claims to be represented?

If I said that then the Butchers' Federation would say the same thing, and they would also want to be represented.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that co-operative societies have two representatives on this Committee? Surely the grocers should be entitled to a representative.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reply to that part of my question about co-operative societies having two representatives on this Committee, and, if so, whether he does not think some representation should be given to the distributing trades generally?

There is only one member put on representing co-operative societies.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) whether he is aware that Captain Hall applied to the manager of the Isle of Man Labour Exchange for farmers' sons as seamen, and that the said manager wrote Captain Hall promising that he would do his best to procure the same; if so, if steps will be taken to prevent managers of Labour Exchanges using their influence to defeat the Military Service Act in future; (2) if he is aware that a man named Turton agreed to go to Fleetwood on 12th May, but on finding out that there was a dispute refused to proceed, on. which Mr. Gubbon, the manager of the Isle of Man Labour Exchange, Douglas branch, wrote to. Turton on 15th May threatening prosecution unless he went to Fleetwood at once to join the ship; if so, on whose instructions did Mr. Gubbon act in using a Government office for this purpose; and (3) if he is aware that the manager of the Labour Exchange at Douglas, Isle of Man, has been and is supplying men to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway and the London and North-Western Railway Companies' boats at Fleetwood, where there has been a dispute for the past four months owing to the railway companies having refused Government arbitration; and, if so, whether steps will be taken to prevent the Labour Exchange from supplying men in these circumstances?

The Douglas Labour Exchange is controlled by the Manx Government and not by the Board of Trade, and I am therefore unable to deal with the points raised by my hon. Friend as regards the action stated to have been taken by this Exchange. I should explain that a temporary Exchange was maintained for some time at Douglas by the Board of Trade at the request of the Manx Government; but this Exchange was closed on the 8th April last.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that a man named W. H. Lowey, a blacksmith, of Douglas, who had appealed to the tribunal for military exemption, was taken by Captain Hall, of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway, to Fleetwood on the promise of exemption from military service; will ho say by whose authority Captain Hall made these promises for the purpose of defeating the Military Service Bill; and if he intends to take action to prevent Captain Hall, or any other person, taking such a course in future?

I have no information in this matter, but I will make inquiries.

asked the Postmaster-General whether any discrimination is being made between postal telegraphists who have attested and those who are unattested; whether unattested men are being called to the Colours in preference to attested men; and whether he can give an assurance that the whole staff is being treated as one body, attested and unattested men alike receiving the same treatment?

I am sending the hon. Member the answer which I gave in the House, on the 29th June, to a similar question by the hon. Member for Leicester. The circumstances under which it has been decided to release unattested telegraphists for general military service are explained in that answer.

Is it the case that discrimination is being made between the attested and the unattested men, and that those who exercised their legal rights before are now being penalised?

I think I had better deal with that subject later on.

Meantime is it the case?

It is a matter which cannot be dealt with in answer to a question. It demands fuller explanation.

What later occasion will there be for dealing with it?

On the Post Office Vote this evening.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has considered the statement made on 28th June by General Child, Director of Personal Services at the War Office, that he would favour the elimination of all conscientious objectors by the powers given in Section 9 (1) of the Army Act; whether he is aware that that Section allows the death penalty for wilful defiance of authority; and whether General Child, as Director of Personal Services, will be the chief official at the War Office concerned with carrying out the policy announced in this House on 29th June?

As it was never the intention that any official in the War Office should be concerned with carrying out the policy announced in this House on the 29th June, but that the final decision as to the genuineness of a conscientious objector should rest solely and wholly with the Central Appeal Tribunal, the question does not arise.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman state last week that the preliminary sifting would be done by the military authorities, and, in that case, are they not responsible?

That is done in order to get rid of obvious cases.

Even then will not General Child have a very real power to prevent these cases coming before the Central Tribunal?

No, Sir, he will not.

May we take the Prime Minister's assurance of that, because there is a good deal of anxiety on that point?

asked the Prime Minister whether the proposals for the treatment of conscientious objectors to military service in the Army take account of the number of such men who have not been sentenced to imprisonment, but are under detention in military barracks and camps in consequence of declining to obey military orders; and what steps he proposes to take to deal with such cases?

Yes, Sir. Men who during or after their sentence of detention refuse to obey orders on grounds of conscientious objection will, I have no doubt, be tried by court-martial and thus come under the scheme which I outlined to the House on Thursday.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether there have been cases of conscientious objectors practising the hunger strike, either in Wandsworth Detention Barracks or elsewhere; if so, whether such men are forcibly fed; and how many men were so fed during the months of May and June?

I learn that soldiers who have practised hunger strike have been forcibly fed. I am not prepared to make the necessary inquiries with the view of ascertaining how many men have been so fed.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has inquired into the cases of J. Clinch and G. Glasscock who, on 29th May, were fetched by an escort from Croydon to Kingston-on-Thames, being conscientious objectors; whether they were handcuffed together on this occasion; if so, why, seeing that they offered no resistance; of how many men did the escort consist; why was that number considered necessary; whether J. Clinch is now in Maidstone Civil Prison; and what action is intended when his sentence is completed?

In view of the fact that no ill-treatment is alleged, no useful purpose would be served by making inquiry.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has inquired into the case of Philip H. Sleep, of the 10th Border Regiment, Non-Combatant Corps, who was granted absolute exemption from military service by the Croydon Local Tribunal on 25th March, 1916; whether his exemption was after wards reviewed by the Surrey Appeal Tribunal, who were misled by Sir Lewis Dibden's advice that a conscientious objector could not obtain absolute exemption; whether this man, who was originally granted absolute exemption, is now in Maidstone Civil Prison; and what is it intended to do in this case on Sleep finishing his imprisonment?

This case will be dealt with under the arrangements announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister last week.

Are not the facts correctly stated here?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War, having regard to the natural anxiety of his parents, will he say what is the sentence passed by court-martial on H. F. Brewster, a conscientious objector, sent from Lowestoft to Boulogne on 8th May, and where he is now?

As I have often stated, I cannot undertake to give information in this House about the situation from day to day of individual soldiers. Proper official machinery for making such inquiries is in existence, and I would recommend that my hon. Friend should address his inquiry to the Record Office of the soldier concerned. If, as my hon. Friend states, this man has been sent to France, it is not possible to disclose his whereabouts.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he can give information of Alfred Evans who, a conscientious objector of taking life, offered himself for the Royal Army Medical Corps, was recommended by his local tribunal for non-combatant service, but by the Ealing Tribunal was turned down, sent to Houns-low, then to Felixstowe, and placed in the Non-Combatant Corps, refusing to obey military orders, he was sentenced to twenty-eight days' imprisonment in the Harwich Circular Redoubt, and from thence was shipped to France; has he been sentenced to death; and why may he not be attached to the Royal Army Medical Corps, for which service he has offered himself?

On the information contained in this question I cannot find that the enlistment and posting of Evans to the Non-Combatant Corps was otherwise than in order. No report has been received that he was sentenced to death.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War approximately the number of unmarried men, registered on the National Register as of military age, who have not reported themselves and who have not been traced and accounted for or brought into the Army?

It is not considered desirable in the public interest to announce this figure nor would it be possible to say accurately how many men will finally be found to be absentees. Men are being traced every day.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman know that rumours are going about that this number is rather large, and we might be reassured if we got any approximate figure?

I should be very glad if I could give any approximate figure.

Is it right to assume that you will get them all in time?

I hope so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if, on account of several brothers being already in the Army, a youth just arriving at the age of eighteen wishes to remain at home for well-defined reasons the youth has any right of appeal for exemption; and, if so, what course should he take?

A youth just arriving at the age of eighteen becomes liable for military service on the thirtieth day following his birthday. At any time before that day an application may be made by him or on his behalf to a local tribunal for a certificate of exemption on any of the grounds provided in the Military Service Act. An application on business grounds should be made to the local tribunal for the district in which the youth's place of employment is situated. An application on personal grounds should be made to the local tribunal for the district in which he lives.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War what is the exact position of the men who enlisted under the Derby scheme and were rejected by the recruiting doctor, who wear the armlet, and have a card of rejection; does the Military Service Act, 1916, affect their position in any way; and are they subject to re-enlistment or will they be called up, or if called up will their previous rejection be a sufficient answer to such new call?

The Military Service Act does not affect the position of attested men in the groups in any way.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Section 2 of the Military Service Act, 1916, applies to men over forty-one years of age who have served in the old Volunteers, the Territorials, and the Army?

If my hon. Friend wants an authoritative legal interpretation of this Section I can only refer him to the Courts. The question of the interpretation of this Section of the Act for administrative purposes is still under the consideration of the military authorities.

Cannot my right hon. Friend give any clear decision as to what is meant by the Section? You cannot expect these men to go to Court and take their case to the House of Lords.

I quite understand that would not be a reasonable thing to expect, but the question of a decision for administrative purposes will be announced very shortly.

If some of them apply—

If they apply we will give them an answer as soon as we can.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will issue instructions taking away the right of the military representative on tribunals granting on his own personal responsibility exemptions, as such action on the part of military representatives is causing much dissatisfaction, thus guaranteeing all cases to be heard by the tribunals and the tribunals only being responsible for exemptions?

The only case in which a military representative can cause a certificate of exemption to be issued without the matter coming before the local tribunal is when a voluntarily attested man is shown to the satisfaction of the military representative to be actually employed in a certified occupation. If an application is made to the recruiting officer for exemption in such a case it is referred to the military representative for advice. If there is any doubt as to the man's usual and principal occupation or whether it is necessary in the national interests that he should continue in civil employment, the question is referred to the local tribunal for decision. I am not aware that this procedure (which was adopted to save not only tribunals but employers and voluntarily attested men, unnecessary trouble in clear cases) has caused any dissatisfaction, and, as at present advised, I do not see any reason for its alteration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether time-expired men are in all cases being granted the usual furlough before being required to continue their service with the Colours under the Military Service Act?

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on the 28th June to the hon. Member for East Manchester. The hon. Gentleman appears to expect that rules should have no exceptions, but that cannot, I fear, be arranged.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the inconvenience caused to medical men with a large rural practice by their chauffeurs being taken for military service; and will he consider the advisability of these men being enrolled in the Royal Army Medical Corps and left in their employment until absolutely required?

There is urgency in the demand by the Army for motor car drivers. Subject to this paramount consideration, arrangements have been made for the consideration of individual cases on their merits.

asked whether there is any fund for dealing with losses sustained by Australian merchants through enemy vessels at the outbreak of war going into neutral ports and remaining there; and, if not, whether he can see his way to extend the powers of the Prize Claims Committee, so as to enable them to consider claims of this character, which are at present outside their jurisdiction.?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. There is no fund in existence out of which losses of the character mentioned in the question can be dealt with. The Prize Claims Committee can only deal with claims against ships or cargoes which have either been condemned, or ordered to be detained by a Prize Court in the British Dominions. None of the losses referred to have been sustained in connection with such ships and cargoes, and it is not possible to extend the powers of the Committee so as to enable them to deal with such losses.

Is there no fund out of which compensation can be given for these very important losses which are equally as meritorious as other losses?

No such fund of any kind exists. These are losses involved by the War and, like any other losses of the same kind, they cannot be dealt with out of any existing funds.

Could not the merchants have avoided the losses by not shipping by German steamers?

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he can give any information as to the position and prospects of our troops in Mesopotamia?

I fear I cannot add anything to what I said last week about the position and prospects of the troops in Mesopotamia.

Can the right hon. Gentleman go so far as to say that he regards the position as satisfactory?

I think it is desirable that my right hon. Friend should postpone this question a little longer. I do not think it is desirable to make any statement now.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty whether any decision has yet been come to as to the increase of the number of lieutenants for commissioned warrant officers and warrant officers (gunners) of His Majesty's Navy?

The list of lieutenants promoted from commissioned warrant officers and warrant officers has been increased from 100 to 150, and twenty-five additional chief gunners were promoted to lieutenant on the 1st of May.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board what progress has been made in the administration of the Naval and Military Pensions Act, 1915; whether any and, if so, what part of the £1,000,000 promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer has yet been placed at the disposal of the Statutory Committee; whether any pensions have yet been granted by them; and will he state fully the present position?

The whole of the million promised by the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been placed at the disposal of the Statutory Committee. Regulations have been issued by the Committee with regard to recoverable advances, supplementary separation allowances and emergency grants, and upwards of £100,000 has been advanced by the Committee on requisitions from the local committees to enable supplementary separation allowances and emergency grants to be made, and also advances to disabled sailors and soldiers. The Regulations as to supplementary pensions have not been finally settled, but they are in an advanced state of preparation, and will, I hope, shortly be issued. Meanwhile the Pensions Sub-Committee of the Statutory Committee have been provided with funds, some emergency grants in pension cases have been awarded, and other like grants have been made through the voluntary societies. I hope to be in a position soon to make a more ample statement.

Can my right hon. Friend say how much of the £1,000,000 has been spent or ear-marked, and how soon he will require to come for a further sum?

At present we have advanced £100,000 on requisitions made by the local committees. How much these local committees have spent of that £100,000 up to the present moment I cannot say, but the total amount that they will require in the year, if their expenditure is at all on the lines of the expenditure for the last year of war, will be something between £1,000,000 and £1,200,000.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office to what person or persons separation allowances in respect of children of soldiers are payable when the mother is, by reason of her being in prison or other circumstances, unable to be entrusted with the care of these children?

When a soldier's wife is in prison, separation allowance in respect of the children is paid to the relative or other person nominated by the soldier as guardian. If the soldier is serving abroad or is otherwise unable to find a guardian the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children or the Soldiers' and Sailors' Families Association usually accept responsibility for the guardianship of the children and receive the separation allowance.

Do I understand that there is no delay in paying over the allowances, and that they are paid over at once directly the woman is unable to look after the child?

Directly the question of guardianship is settled payment is made at once.

Does that take long?

No.

asked the Attorney-General for Ireland whether any civil legal authority was consulted by the military authorities in Ireland before holding their recent courts-martial in camera on the legality of that procedure; and, if approval was given, will he say on what statutory provision it was based, seeing that none exists in either the Army Act or the Defence of the Realm Act for holding a field general court-martial in camera?

So far as my right hon. Friend is aware, no civil legal authority was consulted upon this question beforehand, but during the progress of these trials, and while disaffection was still seething, the Law Officers were informed by the military authority that in the interests of public safety and the defence of the Realm it had been considered essential that in certain cases the courts-martial should not be open to the general public. The Law Officers, in reply, informed the military authority that while the responsibility for their procedure must rest with the courts-martial, they entirely approved of the course adopted in such conditions, as the safety of the State was the supreme and overruling consideration.

May I ask if the Law Officers referred to any statute in support of their advice?

Perhaps the hon. Member will address that question to the Attorney-General.

Will there be any legislation undertaken to give indemnity to those officers who have obviously contravened the law and might be subject to grave penalties?

I do not think that arises out of this question.

With reference to the last answer the Clerk at the Table refused to take a question to the Attorney-General on the subject.

asked the Prime Minister, seeing that in connection with the recent insurrection in Ireland no opportunity was afforded for raising the question of the legality of holding field general courts-martial in camera, and that neither the Army Act nor the Defence of the Realm Act gives authority for holding field general courts-martial in camera, will he say whether the opinion of judges or of Law Officers on the question of the legality of that procedure was obtained before those courts were so held; and, if approved, on what statutory provision was that approval based?

The Law Officers advised that express power to exclude the public is conferred by the Defence of the Realm Act, 1915, in cases tried before a Court within Section 1 of that Act, and this Section seems to assume the existence of a similar power in courts-martial in the trial of similar offences. Apart from statutory provision, a Court has inherent power to exclude the public when the publication of the proceedings would be prejudicial to the national safety. The course taken was in accord with the procedure adopted in cases tried by court-martial in London in which for public reasons it has been considered advisable to exclude the public.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Law Officers of the Crown have not expressly approved courts-martial held in camera, but have left the responsibility to the military officers? Now that these men have been executed and there is no one to raise the point, which was not allowed to be raised at the trial, will the Prime Minister arrange to get a legal decision on this important point?

No, Sir.

No! Because it is Hunnish.

asked the Home Secretary the number and the names of prisoners from county Clare imprisoned in England on account of the recent rising; and whether, in consideration of the fact that there was no disturbance of the peace in county Clare, he will consider the advisability of the release of all these prisoners?

The cases are not classified by counties, but I understand that there are about ten cases from Clare. They are receiving the consideration of the Advisory Committee.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bring it home to the Government that it may be running counter to the public interest to pursue those petty cases?

I should say that will be given due consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether the promised public inquiry into the shooting of non-combatant civilians by the military in Dublin will cover all such cases; how many such men are known to have been killed at Porto-bello Barracks with Mr. Sheehy-Skeffing-ton; how many in the North King Street area; how many at Richmond Barracks at which an officer boasted that 71 rebels had been shot; by whom the question whether they were rebels was decided; where their bodies were buried; how many were so shot dead in the Eden Quay area besides Ernest Cavanagh, John Hewson, William Maguire, Harris, Casey, and Fowler, all non-combatants trying to continue their peaceful pursuits at the time; why no report or military inquiry has yet been made into any of the latter three groups; when the promised civil inquiry will be held; and whether it will deal with questions of compensation?

With regard to the first part of the question, I made no promise of a public inquiry except in the case of Mr. Sheehy-Skeffington. The answer to the second part of the question is two, namely, Messrs. Dickson and McIntyre. The answer to the third part of the question is that fifteen persons were reported killed, and Courts of Inquiry have been held on all. The district is a centre of Sinn Feinism and of heavy house-to-house fighting. No proof is forthcoming whether these were killed by military or rebels. The answer to the fourth and fifth parts of the question is that no such men were shot. The answer to the last part of the question is that no information of these or other casualties in Eden Quay has been received. The hon. Member is apparently referring to the bombardment of Liberty Hall, a rebel stronghold.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inform the House on what grounds he makes a distinction between the murder of Mr. Sheehy-Skeffington and the other men killed at the same time and place? In view of the indefinite answer he has been obliged to give, will he not agree to hold a public sworn inquiry?

We could not have a public sworn inquiry without an Act of Parliament.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is with the concurrence of the Government that the feis portions of local shows in Ireland consisting of children's competitions in Gaelic songs and dances, hitherto a source of amusement and revenue for the purposes of the shows, are now being prohibited; whether the prohibition will be removed from the projected show at Mallow; and whether he will specify any danger to the Realm apprehended from such entertainments?

In the disturbed state of the country it was desirable that large crowds should not assemble. All restrictions have now been removed, except upon parades, processions and political meetings. For the holding of these latter, permission must first be obtained from the Chief Commissioner of Police or from the County Inspector, Royal Irish Constabu- lary. Such permission is only withheld when it is believed there is likely to be some disturbance.

Has permission been given in the case of Mallow?

I cannot say.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Law Officers of the Crown were consulted as to the legality, without legislation, of the present policy of arresting persons on suspicion, imprisoning them indefinitely without charge or trial, and then permitting them to make an appeal in the nature of a defence without having been informed of the charge against them; whether the Law Officers have advised that this abrogation of the right of charge and trial and supersession of ordinary courts is legal; whether they have advised that the Advisory Committee set up to enforce this policy has been legally constituted for a legal purpose; whether they have advised that an Act of Indemnity will be necessary; and why a Bill for this purpose was not introduced before rather than after this procedure?

The procedure which is followed in these cases was adopted after consultation with the Law Officers. The internment of the prisoners is a necessary measure for the public safety, and is authorised by the Defence of the Realm Act. No Act of Indemnity is necessary. Every prisoner is furnished with a statement of the grounds for his internment.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what part of the Defence of the Realm Act justifies sending men from Ireland, where the offence is alleged to have been committed, to this country?

The general provisions of the Defence of the Realm Act enable regulations to be made, and Regulation 14B, which has been enacted, authorises the procedure referred to.

asked the Prime Minister when it is proposed to constitute the Advisory Committee under the Regulations of the Defence of the Realm Act to try the Irish political prisoners now interned for alleged participation in the recent rebellion; has the Irish section of the Committee been selected, and will the name or names be now disclosed; what the procedure will be; and what facilities will be given to the prisoners to state their case?

As I have already stated in the House, the Advisory Committee has been constituted and has held a number of sittings. The Committee, when considering the Irish cases, consists of Mr. Justice Sankey, Mr. Justice Pim, the right hon. Member for the Epping Division, the right hon. Member for Peebles, the hon. Member for Newry, and the hon. Member for the Bewdley Division. Mr. Justice Younger is also a member of the Committee, but is at present unable to sit. As regards procedure, counsel and solicitors are not heard as advocates, but each prisoner has every opportunity of stating his case before the Committee, and, if he so desires, is allowed to consult legal advisers beforehand.

I desire to know whether any reference has been given to the Committee in respect of these prisoners, and whether they have instructions to confine themselves to acts of rebellion and to ignore expressions of opinion and opposition to recruiting?

The reference to the Committee is really contained in the Regulation 14 B, under which they are appointed. No special reference has been issued to the Committee in respect of this group of cases.

Does the right hon. Gentleman and the Government hold that the law empowers them to call upon persons to make a statement in the nature of a defence before any charge has been made?

I have repeatedly told the hon. Member that at the same time the order of internment is served on the person interned the nature of the charge is stated in writing.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that these prisoners have not the advantage of legal advice, that they are far away from their legal advisers, that it is almost impossible for them to get legal advice, and that the defence is of no advantage to them whatever?

As no question of law arises in these cases, I think the Committee can be trusted to get at the facts of the case from the man's own statements.

The question is whether the law can be trusted. The law empowers them to cross-examine prisoners who have never been categorically charged.

asked the Prime Minister (1) on what charge Daniel and Denis Manning, of Kilbrittain, county Cork, were arrested; why they are still detained in Wakefield Prison; and, as their business has been practically ruined and their mother, who has been an invalid for some time, is entirely dependent on them, if he will have their cases inquired into immediately; (2) why Eugene Murphy, who was arrested at Barra Upton, county Cork, on the 8th of May, without any definite charge being made against him of taking any part in the late rebellion in Ireland, is still detained in Knutsord Prison; and whether he will have this case immediately inquired into, so that he may be permitted to return to his home, as he is the only support of his mother; and (3) whether any charge can be made against Mr Michael Griffin, Ballinadee, county Cork, to justify his arrest and imprisonment other than that of permitting the local volunteers to meet in a house, his property, in the village; whether this house has been freely used for many years by the people of the district; and whether, in view of the fact that this man's family are kept from starvation by the charity of their neighbours, who are making weekly contributions for their support, he will have the man released immediately?

The persons referred to are all at Frongoch. The grounds on which they are interned are stated in the orders for internment with which they have been served. Their cases are being considered by the Advisory Committee, to whom I will communicate the circumstances mentioned by the hon. Member.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether at least two newspapers openly advocating the Republican cause are now appearing in Dublin; and whether, in view of the punishments that have been inflicted by the Home Secretary on certain British newspapers held guilty of conduct tending to retard recruiting and prejudice the conduct of the War, he will advise the suspension of these newspapers?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The question whether there shall be a prosecution in the case of an alleged offence by a newspaper is one for the decision of the competent military authority under the provisions of the Defence of the Realm Regulations, unless the alleged offence is a "Press" offence, when such a decision lies with the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Do I understand that no Sinn Fein organ is being published in Dublin at present?

That is a question which requires notice. It does not appear to arise out of this question.

That was my question.

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister if he can give any information as to the extent of the increase in numbers of those who have joined the Sinn Fein movement in Ireland which has taken place since his recent visit to Ireland?

No, Sir.

asked the Prime Minister whether the plenary powers conferred upon General Maxwell in Ireland comprised power over the lives of persons not actually fighting; whether they comprised lining up the portion of the republican army from the Dublin Post Office after surrender against a wall with repeated threats of shooting; whether they comprised imprisoning a girl aged fifteen, putting her standing against a wall in front of a shooting party on three successive mornings, exhausted from hunger, bandaging her eyes to be shot, and giving all the orders for that purpose except the last, in order to make her divulge the contents of a dispatch which she had been carrying and had swallowed; whether they comprised telling the girl that her mother was dying and that she would be set free to see her mother if she divulged; whether they comprised finally insulting her because of her fidelity and bravery; and whether he proposes to take any action with reference to this use of the plenary powers conferred upon General Maxwell?

There is no foundation for any of the insinuations contained in this question?

There is every foundation. If the right hon. Gentleman believes there is no foundation, will he institute a public civil inquiry?

No, Sir, certainly not.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has received any information respecting the death of Ernest Cavanagh during the rising in Dublin; whether this young man, though he had taken no part whatever in the rising, was shot while alone, unarmed, and defenceless on the steps of Liberty Hall, under conditions which gave no ground for supposing that he was a combatant; whether he will advise an inquiry into the details of this matter; and whether such inquiry, if instituted, will be held in public?

No information regarding the death of Ernest Cavanagh has been received. Perhaps the hon. Member will forward me the evidence on which he bases his question.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government is being kept informed of the state of feeling in Ireland owing to the continuance of martial law; and whether, if it be made clear to him that martial law is producing effects quite contrary to the objects for which it was instituted and is causing the spread of disaffection, he will reconsider the whole policy and recall General Maxwell from Ireland?

Yes, Sir. The Government is kept fully informed of the situation in Ireland.

Has the Government been informed that the presence of General Maxwell and the continuance of martial law are having the effect of greatly increasing the state of unrest and agitation in Ireland?

I do not agree at all.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of appointing Lord Bryce to inquire into all these allegations of atrocities that constantly appear on the Paper, in view of their reproduction in America and their effect upon public opinion there?

The hon. Member should give notice of that question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War by what authority Major Price has told Mrs. Pearse that she will not be given the papers and poems written for her by her son, Patrick H. Pearse, before his execution; whether all those papers and poems will now be given to her; whether his sword, watch, and all the papers found on his person at the time of his surrender will be given to her; and whether all the property taken from St. Enda's school by the military when searching will be restored to Mrs. Pearse, including her own two rings, the lease of St. Enda's, account books, photographs of her sons, 10s. 6d. in silver, and a 10s. Treasury note?

Inquiry is being made, but I have not yet received the result.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Matthew Horan, of Blackrock, Dublin, who is at present interned in Frongoch, was home with his parents in Tullamore on leave from Easter Sunday last until 5th May, and could not possibly have taken any part in the revolt in Dublin; will he say whether the constabulary authorities in Tullamore gave him a pass to enable him to return to Dublin; on what charge is he detained; and whether he has already received full evidence showing conclusively that Mr. Horan did not nor could not have taken any part in the revolt referred to?

The prisoner will be able to lay all the facts of his case before the Advisory Committee.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will state what provision the Government is going to make for the dependants of the men of the Irish Volunteer Training Corps killed in action while helping the Regular troops to defend Beggar Bush Barracks, Dublin, while wearing the G.R. red armlet in the Irish rebellion; and whether, seeing that they had trained and equipped themselves at their own expense, the Government will see that they do not fare worse than the dependants of paid soldiers?

This question is at present under consideration by the Government. I regret that I am not yet in a position to make a definite announcement.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he has received a copy of resolutions passed at a meeting of 5,000 people held in Glasgow on 13th June, expressing dissatisfaction with the action or inaction of Lord Dewar's Committee who dealt with enemy aliens resident in Scotland, and calling upon him to adopt more drastic measures with these; and what action, if any, he proposes to take on account of these resolutions?

I have seen reports of the meeting. I am not aware that any facts were stated which reflect upon the careful work of Lord Dewar's Committee. I can assure my hon. Friend that there is no lack of vigilance on the part of the authorities concerned.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many days Lord Dewar's Committee sat dealing with cases in Scotland?

I could not say from memory, and I do not know that I was ever aware of the number of days they sat.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he proposes to deal with the wages of women employed on munitions work under the powers conferred upon him under Section 6 of the Munitions of War (Amendment) Act, 1916; and, if so, whether he will secure that an adequate minimum wage shall be paid to all women to whom the provisions of Section 7 of the Munitions Act have been applied by Order?

It is hoped to issue an Order dealing with this matter in the course of this week.

asked the Minister of Munitions if, on taking over the licensed premises of any given area, he will in preparing schemes for refreshment for the people give the inhabitants an opportunity of expressing themselves on the elimination of intoxicating liquors in such districts?

It is the practice of the Board to take special measures for keeping in touch with local opinion in districts in which they take over licensed premises, and for acting in conformity with it so far as is consistent with the primary object for which the premises are taken over.

asked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the fact that the Deutsche Bank in Berlin is preparing to finance a huge trade war upon us when peace comes, he can say why nine German clerks are still allowed to remain in the Deutsche Bank in London, where they will be able to help in the trade war, whilst British clerks in Germany are starving behind barbed wire?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my reply to the hon. Member for the Brentford Division on 28th June, and my remarks in the Debate on the Home Office Vote on the 29th.

Are not these clerks allowed to store up money for the use of Germans after the War?

The disposal of the money after the War is a matter that does not arise at present; and if it did arise it would be in the province of the Board of Trade and not of the Home Office.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps have been taken to maintain a sufficient staff of mine inspectors during the War, having regard to the number of members of the staff who have joined His Majesty's Forces?

In view of the importance of the services performed by the mines inspectors, the Home Office has been careful to see that the staff of the inspectorate should not be unduly depleted. Fifteen out of the 79 inspectors have joined the forces since the outbreak of war, one of whom has now returned to the depart- ment, but the work of the department has been zealously and effectively carried on by the rest of the staff.

Could the hon. Gentleman state the number of inspectors and sub-inspectors in Scotland at the present time?

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

asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department the number of mines rescue stations at present equipped and in working order in Scotland, giving the name of the district in each case?

There are now five central rescue stations equipped and in working order, namely, at Cowdenheath in Fife, at Edinburgh, at Coatbridge in Lanarkshire and at Auchinleck and Kilmarnock in Ayrshire. The three other stations which it was decided to erect, at Larbert in Stirlingshire, at Bathgate in Linlithgowshire, and at Lesmahagow in South Lanark, are also complete except as regards sets of breathing apparatus, and I understand that the makers have promised to deliver the whole of the sets required in the course of this month.

asked the Under-Secretary for the Home Department how far the recommendations made by the Home Office Committee on Coal Production during the war have been carried out; and what steps have been taken to obtain the maximum output of coal at the collieries?

It would not be possible within the limits of an answer to give all the information desired by my hon. Friend. He will find some information in the second report of the Coal Mining Organisation Committee, and additional information will be given in a further report which I understand will shortly be submitted. I may mention, however, that as a result of the steps taken, a marked reduction in absenteeism has already been effected, holidays have been curtailed, and the number of days worked increased by the abandonment of customary stop days. Further, at the present moment, after conference between the Mining Association and Miners' Federation, special measures are in course of being taken to bring about a still further reduction in absenteeism. It has also been decided that no more men are to be recruited for the Forces from among the miners. The Government are fully alive to the great importance of taking all possible steps to increase the available supplies of coal.

asked whether any inquiry has been instituted by the Home Office as to the causes of the short time being worked at some collieries; and what steps have been taken to secure the working of the pits as continuously as possible throughout the week?

The Coal Mining Organisation Committee has given close and constant attention to these questions, and I would refer my hon. Friend to the two reports which have already been issued by the Committee.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Excess Profits Tax, sought to be imposed upon controlled firms under the Finance (No. 2) Bill, is in addition to or in substitution for the levy imposed upon them under the Munitions Act?

I would refer the hon. Member to Clause 43 of the Finance Bill (as amended in Committee) from which he will see that the Commissioners of Inland Revenue may treat any sums actually paid in respect of munitions exchequer payments which appear to them to be attributable to the same period and subject matter as that for which Excess Profits Duty is to be paid, as a payment on account of Excess Profits Duty.

Does that answer of the right hon. Gentleman mean that the Government will take 60 per cent. of the 20 per cent. of the excess profits which under the Munitions Act the controlled firms are allowed to retain, as well as the whole surplus profits over and above the 20 per cent? Would it not be fairer to impose 60 per cent. on the whole?

That is a matter for argument in Committee.

asked whether the custody of the naval prize money has been left with the several Prize Courts; whether this was done under Order in Council, and, if so, when the Order in Council was published in the "London Gazette"; and, if not, why Section 29 of the Naval Prize Act, 1864, as to paying this money to His Majesty's Paymaster-General or an official accountant appointed by the Admiralty or Treasury, has not been carried out?

Moneys for which the Admiralty Division of the Supreme Court of Judicature in Prize is accountable are held by the Assistant Paymaster-General for Supreme Court Business "on behalf of the Admiralty Division in Prize." Moneys for which Oversea Prize Courts are accountable are, in certain cases, held by the Assistant Paymaster-General in the account of the Oversea Prize Disposal Committee, in other cases they remain in the custody of the Court concerned. The Order in Council of 5th August, 1914, brought into operation the Prize Court Rules, 1914, for regulating the procedure and practice of Prize Courts. Section 29 of the Naval Prize Act, 1864, was repealed by the Prize Courts Procedure Act, 1914, as from the date when the Prize Court Rules, 1914, came into operation; that is from 4th August, 1914.

Do I understand that the custody of the money is not in the hands of the Civil Prize Courts? Will the right hon. Gentleman draw the attention of the Admiralty to the fact, as it was stated in the House the other day the funds were in the custody of the Civil Prize Courts?

I should like to have further notice of that question. I rather think that some of the money is in the hands of the Civil Prize Courts.

asked the Home Secretary (1) whether, among others, the following boards of guardians have passed resolutions against the proposals for a settlement of the Home Rule question as outlined by the Minister of Munitions: Callan, Dungarvan, Baltin-glass, Mallow, Innishowen, Kilmallock, Castlebar, Granard, Ballinrobe, Sligo, Limerick, Tubbereurry, New Ross, Eden-derry, Skibbereen, Tralee, Manorhamilton, and Clonmel; and, if so, whether he will bring this fact to the knowledge of the Government; (2) whether he has official information showing that the Irish Trades Union Congress and Labour Party at a recent meeting held in Dublin condemned the proposals for a settlement of the Home Rule question as outlined by the Minister of Munitions; and (3) whether, among others, the following county, urban, and rural councils have passed resolutions to protest against the proposals for a settlement of the Home Rule question as outlined by the Minister of Munitions: Meath, Monaghan, Kerry, Dungarvan, Killala, Carriek-on-Suir, Sligo, Thomastown, Trim, Enniscorthy, Skibbereen, Delvin, Listowel, Castlecomer, Donegal, Manorhamilton, Mallow, Dundalk, Armagh, Tullamore, Carrack-on-Shannon, Boyle, Dunshaughlin, Tralee, and Millstreet; and, if so, whether he will bring this fact to the knowledge of the Government?

I have no information to the effect stated in these questions, but I will make inquiry.

Would the right hon. Gentleman care for me to send in a supplementary list of the same sort—would it help him?

I have asked the authorities in Ireland to report on the resolutions received. I understand they have not yet received them.

Has not the Cork Trades Council endorsed the resolution?

asked the Prime Minister whether it was with his concurrence that martial law and the Defence of the Realm Act were used in Belfast last week for the political purpose of facilitating a meeting in St. Mary's Hall to promote the partition of Ireland and preventing a meeting in the Ulster Hall in opposition to that project; and, seeing that the period for which the present Parliament was elected expired last January, whether he will delay the introduction of any Bill embodying that project pending the election of a constitutional Parliament by the electorate, and in the meantime withdraw the restraints on free expression of opinion on that subject?

I must refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Cork City on the 26th June, to which I have nothing to add.