asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether all naval and marine officers, and naval and marine ratings, including Royal Naval Reserve and Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve, serving afloat or at the Admiralty, or holding other appointments ashore, at home, or abroad will be equally eligible, according to rank, to receive prize money; and how do the Government propose to calculate what a man is entitled to receive if, for instance, he has been serving since the opening of the War or has joined at a subsequent period, it may be only a few days before the cessation of hostilities?

The points raised by my hon. and gallant Friend are at present under consideration, and it would be premature to make any statement until the details are settled.

Will the the right hon. hon. Gentleman ask the Government to give a day for the discussion of this question? Or will he appoint a Committee to collect information with regard to this very complicated question?

Of course, we will collect all the information and make our plans.

May we take it that the Bill will provide that the Lords of the Admiralty will have a share of this prize money?

I do not think that arises.

But will the right hon. Gentleman appoint a Committee to draw up a scheme?

I should like notice of that question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if ho has received Sir John Jellicoe's dispatch on the Horn Reef battle; and, if so, will he say when it will be published?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. It is hoped that the dispatch will be published next Friday.

With reference to the question on the Paper the right hon. Gentleman will observe that people are giving different designations to this battle. Will the Admiralty consider the question of giving it an official designation?

We will consider that.

Will the Papers be finished on Thursday night in time for publication on Friday?

Yes.

Then are the newspapers to have it before the House of Commons?

I naturally desire to respect the rights of the House, but I imagine this dispatch would not first be submitted to the House. Previous dispatches, both Navy and Army, have not been so submitted; they have been published in the "Gazette."

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the policy of tightening the blockade which has now been put into force means that all ships arrested by the Navy on suspicion of carrying goads with enemy destination are now to be adjudicated upon by our Prize Court without interference by the Foreign Office or by any other authority, or whether such interference is in some or many cases still practised?

Under modern conditions of warfare it is impossible to exorcise the belligerent right of search satisfactorily on the high seas. Hence it has become necessary to send into a British port for search all or almost all ships proceeding to ports in neutral countries adjacent to Germany which do not voluntarily call at such ports. There the search takes place, and it is only after such search that any judgment can be formed as to the probable ultimate destination of the cargo carried by the vessel. The data for such a judgment include the nature of the cargo, the character of the consignors and consignees, the amount of similar articles recently imported into the neutral country for which the ship is bound and, it may be, other information of a secret character which has come into the hands of His Majesty's Government. All information bearing on these and other relevant points is collected in London, and it is therefore in London that the question is necessarily determined whether there are any grounds for putting into the Prize Court the ship, the cargo, or any part of it. To put into the Prize Court all vessels and their cargoes which are sent into port as explained above, as apparently my hon. Friend suggests, would be neither just nor wise.

asked the Secretary for Foreign Affairs if he has any further Report from the American Embassy respecting the treatment of British prisoners in Germany; and if the representations conveyed to the German Government through the American Embassy have produced the desired effect?

It is assumed that the hon. Member's question refers to civilian prisoners of war. I regret to say that no reply has yet been received from the German Government to our proposal for the exchange of all the British civilians interned at Ruhleben.

What is proposed to be done?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put his question down for tomorrow.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is with the knowledge or co-operation of the Colonial Office that Mr. Fuller, a member of the South African Senate, has come to England to arrange for bringing over to England a certain amount of native labour; and whether, before official countenance is given to any such project, the dangers, economical, physiological, and moral, which it involves will be fully considered and an opportunity of discussing it given to the House?

No such proposal is under consideration by His Majesty's Government. I have no information on the subject beyond what has appeared in the Press.

If any such proposal is started by any agent from South Africa, will the Colonial Office take steps to stop it?

It certainly could not be done without the consent of the Government, and it will be time enough for me to express an opinion when that consent is asked for.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War how many Non-Combatant companies have been sent to Egypt, Salonika, East Africa, and Mesopotamia, respectively; how many Eastern Companies, Non-Combatant Companies, have been formed; whether men sent abroad in these companies have received the ordinary leave granted to men proceeding abroad; whether any men in these companies persist in disregarding military orders; whether any have been court-martialled; and whether he receives regular reports as to their conduct and treatment?

This question of my hon. Friend and others seems to be based on the assumption stated in the last part, i.e.,that regular reports as to the doings of each individual of the Non-Combatant companies are received at the War Office. This, however, is not the case, and I am unable to regard these men as deserving any special treatment in this regard different from that given to other soldiers. The answer to the first part of the question is none, and to the second five. The rest of the question I am unable to answer.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether a man who is unfit and does not go up for re-examination until he is called up after 1st September has the right of appeal in the event of his being accepted, or must he appeal before 30th September?

A man who has offered himself for enlistment and been rejected since the 14th August, 1915, and to whom written notice to present himself again for medical examination is sent by the Army Council before the 1st September, 1916, must deliver to the appropriate tribunal before the 30th September any application which he proposes to make for a certificate of exemption.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) whether the only men who will not be reexamined are those who are blind, without limb, lame, paralysed, and those whose names are recorded in the military register as having been rejected by a medical board; whether those who have been rejected at the primary military examination, but whose names were not recorded owing to the fault of the recruiting officer, will be re-examined or the mistake simply rectified; (2) whether, as promised by the President of the Local Government Board, recruiting officers have been instructed to give medically rejected men an opportunity to present their cases before being summoned for medical re-examination; if not, whether he will issue such instructions so that the recruiting officers may have all necessary information before deciding what men are to be summoned for medical re-examination; and (3) whether the recruiting officers throughout the country have been notified that the aim of the Army Council in summoning men for medical re-examination is to eliminate only the improperly rejected—that is, men holding certificates which have been granted to others than themselves and transferred to them, and men holding certificates saying they were unfit because of some transient and now long-past disability; and whether recruiting officers have been instructed to proceed on those lines in deciding what men are to be summoned for medical re-examination?

I have already sent to my hon. Friend a copy of the Instructions issued by the Army Council with reference to the re-examination of men previously rejected, and I will send him a copy of the Army Form which is to be sent to men who offered themselves for enlistment and were rejected since the 14th August, 1915. I do not think there is anything that I can usefully add to the full information contained in these papers, except possibly a reminder to him that as this country is engaged in a serious struggle it needs all the man power at its disposal.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have seen these papers and because I have seen them I have put these questions down? Because of his unsatisfactory reply, I will raise the matter on the Adjournment to-night.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why men who have already been medically rejected are invited to attest up to 31st August under the Derby scheme; why it is stated that if they do not do so they will be called up-under the Military Service Act; and whether this applies to men who hold certificates of rejection in any of the categories mentioned by him?

This invitation was extended to these men because many of them expressed, either directly or through intermediaries, their wish to have an opportunity of coming forward again voluntarily as they had done in the past. My hon. Friend will agree with me that these men's patriotism is most praiseworthy, and that the Army Council would have been much to blame and would have created a grievance if they had withheld the opportunity desired. The statements which have already been made in regard to calling up men for re-examination holds good.

Do I understand that none of the four categories mentioned by the right hon. Gentleman as coming under the proposal are to be called up under the Derby scheme?

So far as I realise the situation, the men who have offered themselves voluntarily and have been rejected will have exactly the rights stated in the forms I have sent to my hon. Friend. What that has to do with the Derby scheme I am really unable to say.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether B. Owen, No. 412221, 17th Cheshires, was passed by the Carnarvonshire county tribunal for service in the Navy, he being a fisherman; that Owen was refused on medical grounds, but that he was placed in a labour battalion; and whether, in view of the scarcity of food and in the national interests, he will take steps to have Owen released, even temporarily, so as to follow his occupation as a fisherman?

The War Office does not, of course, possess information of all the circumstances affecting individual soldiers. On the information given in my hon. Friend's question it appears that a mistake has been made, and inquiries will be made in the circumstances.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his Department has made an arrangement with tribunals throughout the country that working plumbers of over twenty-five years of age are not to be called up until, at the earliest, 10th October, in view of the fact that very few of these men now remain to perform the work necessary for the community?

No such arrangement has been made. On 1st March the Reserved Occupations Committee heard evidence from a full deputation of the Institute of Plumbers and the United Operative Plumbers' Association and decided that there would be no necessity to give any special protection to plumbers by way of reservation beyond that which plumbers engaged on munitions work or in public utility services obtain. The Committee since that date has not found any reason to lead them to consider that there is any necessity for further action.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case of Mr. Sidney J. C. Warr, of Southend, who made his claim for exemption before the Appeal Tribunal on Saturday, 17th June, and on the 24th received a telegram from the tribunal granting him leave to appeal to the Central Tribunal, but not withstanding that he had returned his calling up paper to the recruiting officer with the information that he was appealing to the Central Tribunal, was arrested on 27th June as an absentee; and what steps he is taking to remedy the injustice that has been done?

I am unable to answer this question to-day. Perhaps my hon. Friend would repeat it next week?

asked the Prime Minister whether, considering that conscientious objectors who put forward objections as a pretext and cloak to cover their indifference in responding to the national call should be treated, as they ought to be treated, with the utmost rigour, His Majesty's Government will now take steps to mark the difference between those who have responded to the national call and those who have not, by depriving these so-called conscientious-objectors of the rights of the franchise and the other rights and privileges enjoyed by those who do their duty by the State?

As I have informed the House, steps will be taken to compel such men to do their duty, and I think nothing would be gained by adopting my hon. Friend's suggestion.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it right that these men should be treated differently from those-who do their duty?

Yes, I do.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take some steps to mark that?

We are doing.

asked whether a conscientious objector in the Army against his will can apply to have his certificate varied before the tribunal?

The issue of Regulations dealing with this matter is under consideration.

asked the Home Secretary whether he has already set up the special tribunal to examine aliens who are or may be made liable to military service; if so, who are the members of this tribunal; where and when will the tribunal sit; will its proceedings be public; whether legislation will be necessary to give effect to its decisions; and whether he will state what persons will come under the denomination of political refugees whose case is to be sympathetically considered?

The details of this proposal are under consideration. A statement will be made in due course.

In view of the larger number of these aliens in Glasgow, and also in Manchester, will my right hon. Friend consider either setting up special tribunals for these places or visits to these localities?

Yes, the question of setting up tribunals in towns outside London is under consideration.

Will my right hon. Friend give some assurance that in setting up these tribunals due regard will be had to the position of men who have sought refuge in this country on account of their political or religious views?

I have already made a statement about that to the effect that those who are political refugees will have their cases considered

asked the Prime Minister whether, considering the impossibility of distinguishing between a German naturalised in this country who is legally absolved from his German nationality and one who is not so absolved, His Majesty's Government will now take steps to cancel all naturalisation certificates and to re-issue such certificates only to those persons who have finally been certified as legally absolved from their German or other nationality, so as to prevent the possibility of any naturalised subject owing allegiance to two sovereigns at the same time, and to prohibit all changes of name on the part of naturalised aliens?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. I have nothing to add at present to my answer to the hon. and gallant Member on the 26th June, and to my speech on the Home Office Vote on 29th June.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that, in the case of Post Office telegraphists, all unattested men, regardless of age or seniority, are being released for military service, whilst attested mien are being indiscriminately retained; and, having regard to the desirability of the Government setting an example of fair treatment in the release of men for the Army, whether he will see that no difference is made as regards recruiting between attested and unattested men and, in order to avoid any danger of victimisation or injustice, that junior men be released first, seniority to be the important factor when deciding what men shall be retained in the service of the Post Office?

The answer to this question was given in the course of the Debate on the Post Office Estimates, last Monday, and in accordance with the pledge then given, my right hon. Friend is communicating with the War Office.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that certain railway companies refuse to grant facilities to employés who have been appointed members of Military Service Tribunals to enable them to attend the meetings of these bodies, and that such action has the effect of defeating the legal right of labour to representation; and whether, therefore, he will communicate with the railway companies and urge that in this matter every facility possible should be given to the few employés concerned to enable them to perform their duties on the Military Service Tribunals?

My right hon. Friend has only heard of two complaints of this kind, and he is in communication with the railway company concerning them. I have ground for saying that the companies do not wish to stand in the way of their men acting as members of Military Service Tribunals where the attendance at the tribunals will not seriously interfere with their railway work.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the decisions of many Appeal Tribunals which sit in public do not announce their decisions publicly; and whether he can see his way to give instructions that they should do so?

It is not obligatory on tribunals to announce their decisions in public; my right hon. Friend does not think it necessary to issue any directions on the matter.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether the War Office receives information regarding the part taken by individual regiments in action; and, if it does, whether any objection exists to publishing such information which is recorded in the Press but lacks official confirmation?

The names of regiments which have distinguished themselves in operations are mentioned in the official communiqués from General Headquarters when such information can be given to the public without assisting the enemy. The War Office do not withhold mention of regiments when it has been sanctioned by General Headquarters. It obviously rests with the military authorities responsible for the operations to decide which regiments are deserving of mention, and they form, their opinion without reference to the impressions which may or may not have been formed by Press correspondents. The hon. Gentleman must not suppose that the War Office receives a daily or weekly report on the performances of each unit similar to that furnished by schoolmasters with reference to their scholars at the end of each term.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman spread himself out in this way? Is it with a view to a flight? Why does he resent questions regarding regiments which are put at the instance of relatives of the men in the regiment, when he answers so patiently innumerable questions with respect to shirkers, shammers, slackers and conscientious objectors?

The hon. Gentleman is raising controversial topics irrelevant to the question, and I will beg him not to repeat the performance.

May I inquire—

We had better pass on.

asked the Under-Secretary for War (1) whether Major-General Peyton's Gallipoli dispatches will be published; if so, within what period of time; and (2) whether any dispatches will be published regarding the part taken by the 2nd Mounted Brigade in operations at and in the evacuation of Gallipoli, and by the mounted troops who replaced that brigade after its dispatch to Egypt?

I will answer these two questions by repeating what I have often stated previously. The operations of subordinate commanders are covered by the dispatches of the Commander-in-Chief and are not published. This rule applies to the case mentioned in these two questions.

asked the Under-Secretary for War whether it was with the concurrence of the Government that a Member of this House, at a time when he had a question on the Order Paper calling attention to the unsanitary condition of Wakefield Prison, after many untried Irish prisoners had been sick and two are believed to have died there, was prevented from entering and verifying the complaints made to him regarding that prison; whether the sanitation is so bad that a Member of Parliament interested in that subject cannot be allowed to examine it; whether this Member is excluded from other prisons for the same reason; whether there are any untried Irish prisoners now in those unsanitary prisons; whether those in them are sick; and whether they will be transferred to healthy quarters as soon as able?

Yes, Sir; the action taken in refusing to an hon. Member admittance to the Detention Barracks under military control has the full approval of the Government. The hon. Member refused admittance was the hon. Member who puts this question. It has been found necessary to do this owing to the highly improper utterances of the hon. Member when he was allowed the usual privileges granted to Members of this House. The allegations contained in the last six lines of the question are not founded on fact, as has been found to be the case in so many of the hon. Member's previous allegations.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the question put on the Paper with reference to Wakefield Prison was based on a letter received from a prisoner there and bearing the mark of the Prison Censor? Is it the fact that no prohibition regarding myself was sent to Wakefield Prison until that question had appeared on the Paper?

I am aware that no prohibition was made as to the hon. Gentleman's visits to prisons until he had used the opportunities afforded him in a most improper manner.

asked the Home Secretary if Ernest Blythe is still untried like the Irish prisoners; why he is being treated more severely than they; when he is to be tried, and where; and whether he will be sent to the camp at Frongoch pending trial?

As I have already explained twice to the hon. Member, Blythe has been interned under Regulation 14B of the Defence of the Realm Regulations. He was entitled to make representations against the order for his internment to the Advisory Committee, and did so in writing, but refused to avail himself of the opportunity of appearing before them in person. It is considered inadvisable that some of the chief leaders of the movement should be interned with the remainder at Frongoch, and arrangements are being made for their internment elsewhere.

Why is this man described as a chief leader of the movement, as he was in Abingdon by order of the Government, and remained quietly there during the rebellion?

Nevertheless, he was one of the leaders in the movement which ultimately resulted in the rebellion.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge that this is more severe treatment than that given to the men at Frongoch for the same offence?

There is no question of their being put in solitary confinement.

He is secluded by himself. Is not that solitary confinement?

I do not think he is secluded by himself. When arrangements are finally made for these men to be interned and they are brought together in one place they will all be in association.

This man has been in Brixton since 8th May without seeing a soul.

I think the hon. and learned Gentleman is misinformed.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of treating them as political prisoners?

They are not treated as prisoners at all. They are not kept in similar confinement.

I refer to the man named in this question and the other Irish prisoners sentenced to terms of penal servitude. Could not the right hon. Gentleman consider treating them as political prisoners?

This man has not been sentenced to penal servitude at all, but is interned.

rose—

The hon. Member had better put any further questions on the Paper. I cannot possibly hear him.

asked the Home Secretary on what charge Mr. John O'Hanrihan, into whose case a special inquiry was promised, is still interned, notwithstanding his twenty-one years' service in the Army with the best record obtainable by his rank; whether he is aware of the purpose of a local policeman to injure him in his business; and, if the Government do not concur in that purpose, whether an immediate civil trial will be allowed, or Mr. O'Hanrihan's release?

I have no information concerning Mr. John O'Hanrihan, but I presume the question relates to an Irish prisoner called John Hourihane, of Lick, Skibbereen. The grounds for his internment appear in the notice of the order which has been served upon him. His case is under consideration by the Advisory Committee, who will be able to judge of the accuracy of the allegation made in the question.

asked the Prime Minister whether before any arrangements are concluded for the future government of Ireland, he will give a day for the discussion of the Report of the Royal Commission on the rebellion in Ireland?

I am not prepared to give any pledge at present on this subject.

If the right hon. Gentleman will not give a pledge will he give a day for the discussion of this Report, which contains a distinct and complete condemnation of his own Government?

I cannot give any pledge at the present time.

Docs the right hon. Gentleman really—

The hon. Member had better put down any further questions.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that clerks in Government employment who were made prisoners when fighting British troops in the Dublin rebellion have since their release been reinstated; and whether he has sanctioned the giving of Government pay to those who took part in the rising?

The reply to both parts of the question is in the negative.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire as to Patrick Kelly, who was taken prisoner defending Jacobs' factory, and as to Patrick Sheehan, who fought in the rebellion—

The hon. Member must give notice of those questions.

asked the Home Secretary if Mr. Gerard Crofts, of Dublin, has been convicted of anything but the singing of patriotic songs, will he say what it is, on what evidence, and whether in an open Court whether he is the only prisoner undergoing penal servitude for the singing of patriotic songs; and, having regard to his delicate health and the character of the offence, if he is to be kept in custody whether it will be as a political prisoner?

I cannot answer this question without examining the proceedings and the evidence. This I have not yet been able to do.

When does the right hon. Gentleman expect to be able to do so?

I am afraid I cannot state the time.

asked the Home Secretary what is the procedure in respect to the hearing of appeals to the Advisory Committee when the same have been heard; is the decision of the Committee final, or do they merely recommend release or detention; if the latter, to whom is the recommendation made and what follows upon such; are the military and police of Ireland consulted or referred to before the release if the same be recommended; and will he state the real value and advantage of an appeal under 14 B of the Regulations under the Defence of the Realm Act?

With respect to the first part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for East Mayo. The Committee make their recommendations to me, and the responsibility for the action taken rests with me. With regard to the last two points, the Advisory Committee take police and military evidence in cases where they consider it necessary; the advantage of the appeal to the prisoner is that it secures him a full hearing of all he has to say in favour of his release, and that release will normally follow if the Committee so recommend.

What time elapses between the recommendation of the Committee and the release, if release be recommended? I desire to know also, whether a police constable in Ireland has a veto upon the decision of the Committee?

The answer to the first part of the supplementary question is that the release would follow at once; and the answer to the second part is in the negative.

Have any recommendations been made to the right hon. Gentleman, and is it essential that these recommendations of the Committee should be unanimous?

No, Sir; it is not essential that they should be unanimous. A small number of recommendations for release have been made, and the men have been released.

Has the right hon. Gentleman yet received any recommendations regarding the Irish lady prisoners who were tried by the Advisory Committee in Westminster Hall last Friday morning, and can he say when they will be released?

No, Sir.

asked the Home Secretary, having regard to the number of entirely innocent persons who, without charge or trial, are now interned in this country as the result of the recent Irish rising, if he will endeavour to accelerate the decisions of the Advisory Committee?

The Committee sit daily, for very long hours, and are dealing with the cases as quickly as possible.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will state what the arrangement is, if any, between this Government and that of the United States with reference to interference with innocuous correspondence to and from America, respectively; whether it is known to the American Government that letters of poor people in Ireland to friends in America, seeking financial help in consequence of the death of their relatives in Dublin in the recent rising, and letters from such friends in America conveying help, are alike stopped and confiscated in this country; and whether, instead of stopping the outward letters and leaving their senders in ignorance, the postage having been paid, the senders will be given an option of sighing an official form of expression conveying the substance of the request, which will then be duly forwarded?

When once it has been established that correspondence between this country and America is innocuous, it is subjected to no interference whatever by the censorship authorities in this country. This rule is of general and universal application. No exception is, of course, made in the case of the letters of poor people in Ireland who require or receive financial assistance. No arrangement has been made with the Government of the United States in regard to the censorship of this correspondence, the exercise of which is one of the universally recognised rights of sovereignty.

In view of the necessity of preserving not only the good will, but the confidence of the United States, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the effect of the numerous misunderstandings indicated in the question?

I quite realise that it is desirable to use precaution and tact in the matter. These most necessary obligations are not being lost sight of.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is yet in a position to supply a complete list of the seventy-one civilian prisoners, including women, shot without trial at Richmond Barracks, Dublin, after the suppression of the insurrection, and hastily buried without identification; the number shot and hastily buried at Portobello Barracks; the number shot and buried in cellars in the North King Street area; the number shot in Eden Quay and district; and, if the names of all are not yet available, whether he will supply those so far ascertained?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer he received from my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on the 3rd July. I have nothing to add to the answer already given.

Will not inquiry be made into any of these cases except through the military authorities who are accused?

No, Sir; all inquiries are made through the military authorities.

asked whether, owing to the attitude of the republican party in Cork City, the police on night duty are obliged to carry loaded rifles; and what steps are being taken to reassure the law-abiding inhabitants of the city and district?

Since the recent outbreak in Dublin the constabulary on day or night duty in Cork City have been armed with revolvers, but not with rifles, except when employed in guarding special points. All necessary precautions are being taken.

asked whether on the 26th ultimo a body of military officers were hissed and insulted by a crowd of Irish republicans on emerging from the Theatre Royal, Dublin; whether he is further aware that non-commissioned officers and private soldiers have complained in writing of having recently been hooted, jeered at, and spat upon while walking in the streets; and will he say what action he proposes to take?

The police have no knowledge of the alleged occurrence at the Theatre Royal, nor was it reported to the Provost-Marshal. Soldiers have been hooted in the streets of Dublin upon a few occasions. The police have orders to arrest offenders.

If I send the right hon. Gentleman a sworn affidavit by those who have seen these occurrences will he have the matter inquired into?

I shall be very glad to consider any information the hon. Member gives me.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the new duties on petrol apply to petrol for stationary engines used for such purposes as lighting?

No, Sir; though, of course, a licence for the supply will be necessary.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether petrol used by motor and aircraft manufacturers for the purpose of testing machines on the bench, on the road, or in the air, is free from the new duty levied on permits for the issue of petrol; and, if not, whether he will insert words in the Finance Bill to give effect to this?

The answer to the first part is in the affirmative, and the second part does not arise.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether telegraphists employed solely on military and naval work at the War Office and Admiralty will be entitled to reduced rates of Income Tax under Clause 20 of the Finance Bill?

I gather that the hon. Member is referring to civilian employés of the State paid out of the Vote for the Post Office. If so, no question of relief under Clause 20 arises.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his concurrence has been obtained with that part of the negotiations for the partition of Ireland which involves the expendture of £80,000 of public money to found and run an evening "Freeman's Journal" in Dublin, to advocate partition and support those in favour of it; whether the scheme provides for the investment of public money in any other journalistic enterprise in Ireland; and whether, in the accounts of the fiancial relations between the two countries, all such investments of public money will be treated as expenditure for the benefit of Ireland?

I am not aware of any such arrangement.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire and not allow this payment to escape audit like that of £5,000 paid to Mrs. Pankhurst for a bogus procession?

I have no need to inquire, because I am quite sure no such arrangement has been made.

As the Prime Minister does not appear to know what the proposals were which the Cabinet unanimously agreed to, I ask leave to put this question off for the third time.

I desire to ask the Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury whether there is any prospect of a statement to the country on the Irish situation?

I cannot answer that question.

May I ask the Home Secretary or some other Minister when the House of Commons is going to have some information on a matter which is of such urgent importance, and which is given to every outside tribunal apart from the House of Commons?

No, Sir; I am not in a position to say when a statement will be made.

Will there ever be one?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the Committee appointed to inquire into the working of the Royal Aircraft Factory at Farnborough has concluded its investigation; and, if so, when will the Report be published?

(representing the Air Board): My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. The Committee has concluded its investigation, and its Report will be laid before the House at an early date.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the War Office in reconsidering Army Order No. 1219, of 18th June, 1916, regarding the discontinuance of bands of third-line units of the Territorial Force, will take into consideration the fact that, in the case of the third-line unit of the 4th Leicester Territorial Battalion, the town of Leicester presented the battalion with a fine set of band instruments, that there is no cost to the public for upkeep, that a large proportion of the bandsmen are unfit for active service, and that the band itself is an asset of great military value in the camp in which the battalion is training, and will therefore sanction the continuance of the band?

The question of bands is, as I have stated, being reconsidered, but I cannot yet announce any decision. My hon. and gallant Friend may be assured that this decision will not turn upon the question of the cost of provision and upkeep of instruments. He will realise that the question of personnel is the main element.

Will the right hon. Gentleman keep in mind the suggestion that he should allow bands to continue, provided that all the men fit for general service are discharged from the bands?

Yes, Sir, due weight will be given to that.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has consulted with the Minister of Munitions with a view of coming to an arrangement by which munition workers who enrol in the Volunteers will not be called away from their munition work in case of the mobilisation of the Volunteer Force, unless the emergency is such as to make it necessary to mobilise every available man in the country, including munition workers?

The object which the hon. and gallant Member has in view is, of course, constantly present to the minds of the Army Council, who are consulting all those, whether public Departments or otherwise, who are concerned, but I cannot announce any decision to-day.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether a charge made for Army Form W 3105, to soldiers serving in the Army Service Corps in France is authorised; and, if not, whether he will at once take steps to see that the practice is discontinued?

No, Sir; a charge for this Army Form is not authorised, and I have no information that a charge is being made. Perhaps my hon. Friend will be good enough to give me any information which may be in his possession?

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if the civilian clerks of works and foremen of works employed in the department of the Royal Engineers were eighteen months ago granted overtime pay for any overtime they worked; that this was considered by them as a grant to help them to meet the increased cost of living; if the commanding officer of the Royal Engineers at Aldershot in March last stopped the payment for overtime; and whether, in view of the increased cost of the necessaries of life, he can see his way to increase the pay of these men?

Overtime pay in these cases was authorised by the War Office in December, 1914, but it was in payment for extra time worked, and not as a grant towards increased cost of living. I have no information as to what took place at Aldershot in March last, but presumably it ceased to be necessary to work extra time.

Is it not the fact that overtime iias been worked while overtime rates have not been paid? Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries?

. Certainly.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether return railway tickets at a cost of single fare and a quarter were issued to visitors to the Royal Agricultural Show at Manchester; and whether he can see his way clear to have the same facilities extended to the working classes of the country during the August Bank Holiday?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. The issue of cheap railway tickets to visitors to the Royal Agricultural Show was an arrangement made exceptionally in view of the importance of the Show to the agricultural interests of the country. As regards the latter part of the question, I am afraid I can only refer my hon. Friend to the reply given on the 27th June to the hon. Member for West Wolverhampton, of which I am sending him a copy.

asked the Secretary of State for India if the Report of Sir W. Vincent and General Bingley upon the medical arrangements in connection with the Mesopotamia Expedition has yet been received; and, if so, when it will be published?

The Report has not yet been received.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether the sum of at least sixteen lakhs of rupees was put by princes and other wealthy persons in India at the disposal of the Government of India for the purpose of a proper medical equipment of the expedition to Mesopotamia; if so, what portion of that sum was applied to such equipment; and what Department or officer of the Indian Government was responsible for the expenditure or non-expenditure of the money?

No such gift has been reported to me by the Government of India. Several Indian chiefs combined to present a hospital ship for the general purposes of the War, and some motor ambulances, motor cars and the like have been presented by individual donors or by communities for the troops in Mesopotamia.

asked the Postmaster-General whether the postal rates of letters and parcels for the forces in Mesopotamia have been increased?

The postage rates for parcels sent from the United Kingdom to the Indian troops forming part of the Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force have been recently assimilated to those which have always been in force for the rest of the Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force, namely, 1s., 2s., and 3s. for parcels weighing 3 lb., 7 lb., and 11 lb. respectively. There have been no other changes in rates of postage.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he has had under his consideration the question of revising the Rules for Promotion in the Indian Army Reserve of Officers?

The subject of promotion in the Indian Army Reserve, of Officers has recently engaged the attention of the Government of India, and they have submitted certain proposals to me, which I have approved. The principal change is that while the Indian Army time-scale of promotion is to be retained as the general rule, Indian Army Reserve officers who are reported fit for accelerated promotion may, on the recommendation of the Commander-in-Chief in India, be promoted at any time to higher rank. Officers joining the Indian Army Reserve who had previously served in the Army as commissioned officers, will, on joining the Indian Army Reserve, be given the rank in which they left the Army, and will be allowed to count their previous service towards promotion. Second-lieutenants who belonged to the Cavalry branch of the Indian Army Reserve at the outbreak of war, or who joined it before 7th June, 1915, will be promoted to lieutenant on being detailed to serve with a 'Cavalry unit in the field, arrangements being made whereby such officers shall not supersede Regular officers of the Indian Army with longer service. The Government of India have been requested to send home copies of the revised rules, and the hon. and gallant Member shall be informed as soon as they are received.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, having regard to the withdrawal of the prohibition under martial law of football and hurling matches in Ireland, the Commissioners of Inland Revenue have arrived at a decision as to whether, under the Finance (New Duties) Act, the entertainments of the Gaelic Athletic Association will be exempt from Entertainments Duty?

I am informed by the Board of Customs and Excise that an application from a branch of the Gaelic League for exemption of their entertainments has been received, and that the Board have decided that on the evidence before them there is no title to exemption.

asked the First Commissioner of Works if, in view of the high and increasing cost of meat, he will consider the desirability, while abandoning flower beds in the Royal parks, of raising therein for the instruction of and an example to those who have garden plots adjoining their houses, whether in London or elsewhere, such vegetables as are deemed by experts to be an effective substitute for meat?

This question has been fully considered, but I regret to say that the objections to the proposal are so serious that I have not felt it advisable to give effect to it.

Will my right hon. Friend take into consideration the fact that the flowers in the Royal parks are a great joy and comfort to thousands of our wounded soldiers?

I am not prepared to accede to the request.

asked the Prime Minister if, in view of the public anxiety over the circumstances surrounding the loss of His Majesty's ship "Hampshire," he will fix an early day for discussion of the Motion standing in the name of the hon. Member for Maidstone or that of the hon. Member for Walsall?

As the hon. Baronet is aware, a formal Court of Inquiry has already been held by the naval authorities into all the circumstances attending the loss of His Majesty's ship "Hampshire," and the conclusion has been repeatedly stated to the House. It is not proposed to hold any further inquiry.

I beg to give notice-that I will raise this matter on the Adjournment of the House to-morrow evening.

Did all the witnesses who were examined at the inquiry take the same view of the cause of the disaster?

I cannot say.

How many more names does the right hon. Gentleman want to the Motion on the Order Paper before he will give a day?

I have given my answer.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the question and keep an open mind until after the discussion has taken place in the other place to-morrow?

I did not know there was such a discussion.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Rev. Dr. John Clifford, of Westbourne Park Baptist Chapel, is in receipt of a pension of £200 a year from the Civil List; if so, for what services to the State was this pension granted; whether he is aware that Dr. John Clifford has recently been taking an active part in anti-recruiting and Stop-the-War propaganda, having been present and addressed a Stop-the-War conference at Devonshire House from which the Press representatives were excluded, and that his speech was afterwards reported in the "Labour Leader"; and, under these circumstances, will he consider the advisability of stopping any further expenditure of public money in the support of Dr. Clifford?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister if, having regard to the condition of old age pensioners owing to increased prices and also to the fact that local burdens have been lessened by the State payment of pensions, he can see his way to an increase of pension during the period of high prices and to making the cost of such increase a charge on local rates?

Legislation would be required to give effect to this suggestion, and for the reasons stated by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the Motion for the Adjournment on the 26th ultimo His Majesty's Government are not satisfied that a case has been made out for such legislation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the tremendous agitation that is going on in different parts of the country in consequence of the old age pension not being increased? I am quite sure if the Government were to make some proposal they would get universal support.

That may be, but we have to consider where the money is to come from.

Half-a crown a week will only amount to £7,000,000. Surely we can find that very small sum, anyhow?

One hundred and sixteen resolutions have reached my right hon. Friend on this subject, but there are important differences in the recommendations made.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether, until the Treasury authorities are prepared to provide an extra grant to old age pensioners, he can see his way to issue a circular instructing boards of guardians throughout the country to allow old age pensioners the value of 2s. 6d. in kind, such allowance to be made on a doctor's order in each case in order that the pension is not forfeited; and if he is aware that the purchasing power of 5s. in the case of food-stuffs has been reduced by 52 per cent.?

My right hon. Friend has no power to give such instructions as are suggested. In regard to the general position of old age pensioners at the present time, I may refer to the reply which I gave on the 28th June to the hon. Member for Bury.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these old people are crying out like cripples at the Cross in all parts of the country for something to be done for them? It is certainly high time that something should be done about the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will indicate the extent to which the Sunday employment of women and young persons is at present authorised in munition factories; and what steps are being taken to restrict it within the narrowest-possible limits?

The Sunday employment of women and young persons is allowed only under Special Exemption Orders, and these Orders are granted by the Home Office only for two purposes, namely, to expedite work of an exceptionally urgent character, or to enable continuous processes to be carried on. Apart from a few cases where authority has been given to work on a Sunday in the event of a breakdown of machinery or similar emergency the total number of Exemption Orders in force on the 1st of this month was forty-six. In nineteen of these the permission given is subject to a condition that each worker employed on Sunday shall be given a holiday on another day in the same week. In fifteen cases the Sunday employment is part of a system of eight-hour shifts, in which provision is made for weekly or fortnightly periods of rest. In the remaining cases, with one exception, employment is not permitted on every Sunday. Every effort is made to restrict these Exemptions as narrowly as possible. Each application is carefully inquired into by the Factory Inspectors, and, wherever necessary, it is referred for consideration to the Hours of Labour Committee appointed for the special purpose of advising the Ministry of Munitions and the Home Office on this and similar questions.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Government factory inspectors have great difficulty in persuading private firms to abandon Sunday labour inasmuch as Government factories themselves are working on Sundays?

I am not aware of that.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether, in view of the special conditions of the Annan district And the necessity for the utmost output to meet the Government's demands, he will consider the desirability of curtailing and diminishing, if not prohibiting, the sale of spirits and strong drink rather than increasing the number, attractiveness, and importance of the places where these drinks are sold?

The hon. Member may rest assured that this matter is receiving careful consideration from the point of view emphasised in the question.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether his attention has been drawn to the petition protesting against the erection by the Liquor Control Board of Annan of a place for the public sale of intoxicants with various attractions, such as a cinema theatre, etc., signed by every magistrate in Annan, every doctor, minister of religion, solicitor, bank agent, all the accessible justices of the peace, every member of the school board except one, and members of the town council, and leading employers of labour, addressed to the Central Liquor Control Board; whether he has evidence that they do not represent the strong feeling of the community, and what the evidence is; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

I am informed that arrangements have been made to enable the petitioners to discuss these matters with the local committee.

Is this Control Board a nominated Board, and, if so, who nominated it?

It is appointed under an Act of Parliament, and for the purposes of that Act.

asked the Minister of Munitions if he will state how the managers of the public-houses, under the Liquor Control Board in Annan, are brought under the Licensing (Scotland) Act, so as to be punishable for offences under that Act, in view of the fact that they have not been granted any certificate by the magistrates; and, in order to clear up the uncertainties of the authorities, and public, if he will state definitely by what authority or under what Act or Regulations the managers can be prosecuted for any offences which would be punishable under the Licensing Act?

I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the relevant provisions of the Defence of the Realm (Liquor Control) Regulations, 1915.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that the sale of spirits has ceased in the Gretna area where the men are under the control of the construction managers; and whether he will consider the possibility of extending the same restriction to the neighbouring district of Annan, where a number of the temporary construction workers are housed, instead of extending the facilities for drinking?

The sale of spirits has ceased in the factory owing to the action of the management, but not in the rest of the Gretna area. The question whether further restrictions should be imposed upon that portion of the district in which large numbers of the temporary construction workers are housed (which includes Carlisle and Longtown as well as Annan) is being carefully considered, but the hon. Member is under a misconception if he thinks that the action of the Control Board at Annan either has increased, or is intended to increase, or will increase, the facilities for drinking at that place.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the very strong opinion of the people on the spot?