asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will consider the desirability of declaring herrings as contraband in order to prevent the passage of quantities of such fish through Holland to our enemies, especially such as are not caught in Dutch waters, or if he will consider if this would be more easily accomplished by extending the application of the Iceland split-cod arrangement with Denmark to include herrings and thus place Holland in the same position as the above-named?

Herrings are contraband; I am unaware of the Iceland split-cod arrangement to which the hon. Member refers, but the importance of depriving the enemy of fish supplies is thoroughly recognised and is receiving careful attention.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland (1) whether on the 25th ultimo a resolution was passed by the Queenstown (County Cork) Council that they strongly protested against the acceptance of the proposals of the Minister of Munitions as constituting a betrayal of the cause of their country, for which the Irish race and its leaders had laboured and made sacrifices since the union; whether their protest has been conveyed to those at present negotiating a settlement of the Home Rule question on the basis of a partition of Ireland; (2) whether at a specially convened meeting of the Cork County Council, held on the 23rd ultimo, a resolution was passed protesting against the exclusion of part of Ulster from the Government of Ireland Act as unjustifiable, and only to be accepted provided the exclusion was of a temporary nature, with satisfactory fiscal provisions, and accompanied by a complete amnesty for all republican prisoners, immediate suspension of martial law, and a promise that the excluded counties be allowed no executive of their own; whether he will bring to the notice of the Cabinet this considered resolution of an official Nationalist body; (3) whether, in addition to those who had previously registered their protest, the following local authorities have expressed their disapproval of the proposed settlement of the Home Rule question: Fermanagh County Council; Castlebar, Cootehill, Bandon, Claremorris, Newry, Pembroke, Wexford, Monaghan, Milford, Listowel, Kinsale, Mullingar, Ida, Queens-town, Belmullet, and Rathkeale urban and district councils; Kenmare, Bantry, Kin-sale, Athy, Dungarvan, Cavan, Killarney, Portumna, Clonmel, Listowel, Baillie-borough, Borrisokane, and Westport boards of guardians; and the Limerick and Sligo trade and labour councils; if so, whether he will bring this fact to the knowledge of the Government; and (4) whether between 5th and 29th June more than thirty branches of the United Irish League from all parts of the country passed resolutions hostile to the proposals for a settlement of the Irish question on the lines recently formulated by the Minister of Munitions; and whether any of these resolutions have reached him and been conveyed by him to the Government?

The resolutions referred to have not yet been received.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will be able to make a statement to-day, or, if not, will he say how soon, on the progress of the negotiations for a new Irish Government?

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether the Ulster Unionist Council, before coming to its decision thereon, were assured that the proposals of the Minister of Munitions had the unanimous approval of the Government; and (2) whether his attention has been called to the meeting of the Irish Nationalist Directory and to the resolution passed that the proposals of the Minister of Munitions should be accepted as the best means of carrying on the fight for a united self-governing Ireland; and, in view of this, does he still intend to go on with the proposals?

asked what proposals have been made on behalf of His Majesty's Government to the Irish leaders with a view to a settlement of the Irish; question in the interest of all concerned; and what progress has been made in connection therewith?

I hope to make a statement with regard to these matters on Monday next.

Before my right hon. Friend makes his statement, will he consult the Liberal party with regard to the settlement?

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House that the Cabinet were unanimous about these proposals? Has he really forgotten that, too, already?

I never made any statement of the kind.

As Question No. 56 affects me personally, may I say that no such statement was made to the Ulster Council?

Altogether apart from the proposals that were made to the Irish leaders, and the prospective statement which we are to hear, are there not other people in the United Kingdom apart from the two Irish leaders who are interested in knowing what proposals were submitted to the leaders?

I shall make the statement on Monday.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland the number of suspects arrested in 1867 and in 1881–2, under the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act; and the number of Irishmen now in gaol without trial under the Defence of the Realm Act?

From such inquiries as it has been possible to make in the short interval since the hon. and learned Member gave notice of this question, it appears that 955 persons were arrested and detained without trial under the Protection of Person and Property Act, 1881, during the years 1881 and 1882. Under the Habeas Corpus Suspension Acts, 17th February and 10th August, 1866, and 26th February, 1867, and subsequent dates in the years 1867 and 1868, numerous arrests were made throughout Ireland in connection with the Fenian movement and rebellion, and according to returns presented to Parliament on the 7th May, 1867, 961 persons were arrested under these Acts from 1st February, 1866, to 1st March, 1867. I presume the last part of the question relates to the persons interned under the Defence of the Realm Regulation. The number of these is about 1,800, but very few of them are now in prison, nearly all having been moved to the internment camp at Frongoch.

How many were arrested altogether; was it not 3,000?

Rather over 3,000 were arrested at the time of the rebellion, but about 1,200 were released by the military authorities.

After the most cruel treatment.

asked the Home Secretary if Irish untried prisoners in England are debarred from getting from gaolers, under the Habeas Corpus Act, copies of the warrants under which they are held?

These prisoners are interned in pursuance of Orders made under Defence of the Realm Regulation 14B, The authority for the Order and the grounds of internment are stated both in the Order, and in the notice of it which is served upon each man.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my question, which is whether the prisoners arrested under the Defence of the Realm Act are entitled under the Habeas Corpus Act to a copy of the warrant in accordance with the Statute?

I have said that they all received one.

I beg the right hon. Gentleman's pardon. I want to know are they entitled to the protection of the Habeas Corpus Act?

If it is not a matter of fact upon which the hon. and learned Member is inquiring but a matter of law, of course the Home Secretary is not in a position to answer.

I beg to ask him whether, if a prisoner applies under the Habeas Corpus Act for a copy of the warrant under which he is interned, the gaoler will give him one?

If he can show there is reason to believe that he has lost the copy which has already been furnished to him. I have repeatedly told the hon. and learned Member that each man, when interned, receives a copy of the Home Secretary's order for his internment.

Are not these prisoners arrested under the Defence of the Realm Act?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Home Secretary whether the food supplied to the Irish prisoners at Frongoch is wholly insufficient for the healthy young countrymen; that in the south camp sleep is rendered impossible by defective ventilation, the heat of a boiler, and the constant noise of a dynamo, and that some of the prisoners could remedy these defects if permitted; that the sanitary arrangements are dangerous; that the visits allowed are too few and of too short duration, and impose needless expense on relatives coming from Ireland; that, without interfering with visits of relatives, persons appointed by committees formed for supplying comforts should be allowed to enter all the camps once a week and to ascertain the needs of all the prisoners; that the promise to admit all Irish newspapers is not yet redeemed; and, now that these prisoners are relieving the Government of much expense, whether these grievances will be redressed?

I have taken steps to keep myself informed as to the conditions at Frongoch. The hon. Member's allegation with regard to the supply of food is quite unfounded. The diet is identical with that supplied to military and naval prisoners of war and is amply sufficient to keep the prisoners in good health. The dormitory in the South Camp to which reference is made was formerly occupied by German prisoners, when it accommodated about double the present number of men. I have had this dormitory specially examined, and am informed that it is quite suitable for sleeping accommodation. The sanitary arrangements are reported to me to be excellent. With the existing staff it is impossible to increase the number of visitors or extend the time for their visits. I regret that I cannot alter the present arrangements in this respect, nor can I give authority for the visits of representatives of committees. Irish news papers are allowed in the camp. Careful consideration is given to all reasonable requests which may be made to the commandant by the representatives selected by the prisoners.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is the daily ration for these prisoners?

I will send it to the hon. Member.

Is it a fact that the American Ambassador in London entered into communication with the Government, stating that that particular prison was not fit for German prisoners, and that Irish prisoners were sent there afterwards?

I am not aware of that.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries?

Yes, with pleasure.

asked the Home Secretary if Mr. Ernest Blyth, who was deported to Abingdon and was living there quietly during the rebellion, has been interned in Brixton Prison by his order, and has been kept in solitary confinement since 10th May; why, if Frongoch Camp has been found suitable for untried Irishmen, has Mr. Blyth been isolated in Brixton Gaol; and what offence is he accused of and the date thereof?

I would refer the hon. and learned Member to the reply I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for North Westmeath.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that the conditions of internment of Irish Sinn Fein prisoners in this country, many of them known to be innocent, are unneces- sarily harsh; whether their friends, after travelling from Ireland to some remote and inaccessible camp in this country, are only allowed fifteen minutes' interview at long intervals and in the presence of warders; and, if so, whether these military restrictions can now be relaxed?

The conditions in which these persons are interned have been carefully devised so as to avoid all unnecessary harshness. I regret that I cannot, owing to the exigencies of staff, increase the facilities for visits from friends.

asked the Home Secretary whether he was aware, when he stated that no untried Irish prisoners were kept in solitary confinement, of the case of Conor Deere, of Goolds Cross, kept isolated in Wakefield Prison by War Office Order of 29th May, although this man had no connection with the rebellion; and will he investigate the treatment meted out to other innocent men in Knutsford Prison, such as Dr. Dundon and Frank Healy, barrister-at-law?

I am informed by the military authorities that these persons were not kept in solitary confinement. They were allowed to exercise out of doors from the first; and, after a few days, as soon as the necessary arrangements could be made, they were placed in association with other prisoners of the same class and allowed to receive visitors.

asked the Home Secretary if interned alien enemies' visits are limited to a quarter of an hour, as in the case of the Irish subjects of His Majesty unaccused of crime; is any internment camp for Germans so inconveniently situated for visitors as Frongoch; and why was it not selected for alien enemies instead of for Irishmen?

Yes, Sir. Visits to interned alien enemies are limited to a quarter of an hour. Several internment camps for Germans are, I should say, at least as inconveniently situated for visitors as Frongoch, while those in the Isle of Man, which contain over two-thirds of the whole number of interned enemy subjects, are certainly much more so. Frongoch was used for a long time for German prisoners.

Why was not Frongoch good enough for Germans?

It is not a question of its not being good enough. The War Office made arrangements which enabled that camp to be allocated for the internment of Irish prisoners.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the ventilation of that particular place where the Irish prisoners are kept is most unhealthy and unsatisfactory?

That is not my information.

Had the United States officer who visited Frongoch Prison anything to say to the fact that this prison was no longer considered suitable to Germans?

Not that I am aware of, but I will make inquiry. I did not know there was any report.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are no sidelights in the place where they are kept?

That does not arise out of this question. It is a question of site.

asked the Prime Minister if he will grant power to the Advisory Committee dealing with Irish prisoners to reopen and examine the evidence and adjudicate on the cases of all the Irish prisoners who were tried by court-martial and sentenced to terms of imprisonment from six months to life sentences?

No, Sir, I am afraid that I cannot adopt this suggestion.

Have the Government anything to fear from holding an impartial inquiry?

asked the Prime Minister if he will give a day to discuss the arrest and the detention without trial of the Irish prisoners; and if he can say when they are likely to be released?

With regard to the first part of the question, I am not aware of any general desire for such a discussion. With regard to the last part of the question, the decisions of the Advisory Committee will be forwarded to the Home Secretary as soon as possible.

Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that three months is sufficient time for considering the case of these five ladies?

I believe that they have already been very carefully considered.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the victims of pneumonia among the Irish prisoners of war at Wakefield belonged to the party imprisoned at Kilmainham, three in each cell, with no bed or bedding, not even a plank, nothing to lie or sit upon except one blanket on the flagged floor, from Thursday, 27th April till Friday, 5th May; whether they were brought on 5th May to Richmond Barracks, and a party of about 360 prisoners lined up in the barrack square and kept standing there in heavy rain without overcoats, many without any coats or boots, as they had been dragged from their homes at dead of night, and were wet through before the guard was ready to start; whether they were then marched to North Wall and put on board an un-cleaned cattle boat for Holyhead, and crammed into an inadequate train for Wakefield; whether in consequence of this treatment in wet clothes many were ill, but received no medical attention; on what dates the sickness of those who have died was first admitted; on what dates they died; whether a priest was allowed to attend them; and whether inquests were held?

Only one case of pneumonia occurred amongst the Irish prisoners at Wakefield. A priest was present with the man during his illness and an inquest was held. Arrangements were made for the presence of his mother and sister at the funeral. As regards the rest of the question, I can only repeat what I have previously stated, that the prisoners whilst in Dublin were treated with every consideration consistent with the conditions existing at the time, but it is not possible entirely to eliminate hardship when a considerable number of prisoners have to be provided for hurriedly.

Are those who fought for the Irish Republic now recognised as prisoners of war?

That question does not arise. It is only put to irritate.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has inquired into the state of health of Alexander Skedd, at present in Barlinnie prison; and whether he is being fed on bread and water?

As I have previously stated on more than one occasion, I cannot undertake to make inquiries into the particulars as to whereabouts, conduct or treatment of individual soldiers, unless there be valid cause to fear that there has been any irregularity in the action of the military authorities. As no cause to fear anything of the kind is disclosed in this question I see no reason to call for a report.

As the name of the soldier is given in the question, and the reason of my asking is given in the question, and as the right hon. Gentleman sees no reason to make any inquiry, as suggested in the question, I will raise the subject on the Adjournment.

asked the Home Secretary when the Irish lady prisoners are likely to be released?

The cases of these ladies are now under the consideration of the Advisory Committee. I have not yet received any recommendation, but I have no doubt they will deal with these cases as speedily as they can.

When does the right hon. Gentleman expect the recommendations?

I cannot say definitely. The Committee is responsible for its own procedure. I hope I shall receive recommendations in this case very soon.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these ladies are already three months in confinement?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Prime Minister, seeing that the objects of the Gaelic League have always been such non-political objects as the revival of the Irish language, literature, music, and industries, and that it has done excellent work in all these departments and has never been accused of illegality, whether he concurs in the use now being made of political disturbance to destroy this league and defeat those objects by arresting and keeping in internment its principal officers, Messrs. Sean T. O'Kelly, Padraig O'Maile, and Peadar O'Hourihane; whether the evidence on which the latter was about to be tried comprised that of Head-constable Hennessy, representing Mr. O'Hourihane as at a certain place at a specified time, and that of Constable Lyons, representing Mr. O'Hourihane as at a different and distant place at the same time; whether, in consequence of inability to sustain any charge, the court-martial to which Mr. O'Hourihane has been summoned had to be abandoned; and, there being now no charge against any of these gentlemen, whether he will by releasing them avoid the odium of destroying the Gaelic League and its work?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. The cases of the prisoners referred to are under the consideration of the Advisory Committee.

asked the Prime Minister under what provision of martial law did the Cork county inspector, Royal Irish Constabulary, prohibit at the annual Mallow show, held last week on the festival of St. Peter and St. Paul, the competition amongst children in the local schools in Gaelic speaking, singing, and dancing; is he aware that the suppression of this attraction caused much financial loss to the managers of the show by robbing it of a most popular feature; had the suppression any connection with the attendance of a military band at the show; was the county inspector authorised by Sir John Maxwell to take this action; and, if not, as this is the same official who forbade the Gaelic dances at the Coach-ford show, will he be rebuked and ordered to pay compensation for the less he has caused?

I am informed that a Gaelic feis, advertised to be held in conjunction with Mallow Agricultural Show, was withdrawn from the programme by the committee on receipt of an intimation from the county inspector that he would not allow it to be held. The authority for this action was a proclamation of General Sir John Maxwell, of the 11th May. The feis was not confined to children, and the step was taken with a view to preventing demonstrations which the county inspector had reason to think might take place. I have no information to the effect that the action of the county inspector caused any financial loss to the show. The reply to the last part of the question is in the negative.

So the Government approve of the action of the police in putting a stop to these innocent amusements?

I have no reason to think that the action taken was unnecessary.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is still unwilling to make amends to Mr. Harrel for his dismissal from the post of Assistant Commissioner of Police in Dublin by the late Chief Secretary, in view of the Report of the Royal Commission on the rebellion in Ireland, from which it appears that the dismissal of Mr. Harrel was one of the events which led to the rebellion, the chief responsibility for which is attributed to the late Chief Secretary, who dismissed him?

I am afraid I can add nothing to the answers I gave my hon. Friend on the 27th June on this matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make the decision known to the House as soon as possible?

Was not Mr. Harrel given as compensation a very important and lucrative post in the Admiralty?

That is only a temporary post.

Was this gentleman dismissed owing to the finding of the Royal Commission?

His conduct was censored.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in the interests of good feeling between the two countries, he will consider the advisability of putting an end to martial law in Ireland?

I can add nothing to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend on the 26th June.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War the result of his inquiry with reference to Messrs. Lemass and Manning, left lying wounded in a courtyard in the Custom House, Dublin, for three days of the insurrection, thereby complicating their neglected wounds with other sickness; whether they have died or are recovering; and what the intention of the Government is with regard to them?

I do not know whether the facts are as stated. Inquiries are being made, and in the meantime I must regard the hon. Gentleman's suggestions as merely allegations.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War the number of funerals from Dublin to Glasnevin, after the suppression of the insurrection, which even the nearest relatives were not allowed to accompany, with the official reason for this prevention; the number of coffins burst open on the way by the military and police, with the official reason for this desecration; whether anything was found in any of the coffins to justify this interference; and, in view of the Irish feeling that the dead should be inviolable, will he say who was responsible for what was regarded as a violation of the dead and an outrage on the living?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given him on the 16th May. I cannot state the number of such funerals. As I have said, the purpose of opening coffins was identification.

When will the right hon. Gentleman be able to give the particulars asked for in the question, so that I may not repeat the question?

I have given the hon. Gentleman all the information in my possession.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not propose to inquire? I will repeat this question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the military authorities administering martial law in Ireland have yet allowed any civil investigation of the picking of pockets of prisoners and of the persons shot and buried surreptitiously, and of the looting done in houses under pretext of searching them; whether property so acquired, including table linen and ladies' dresses used to carry smaller articles, is deemed to belong to the individual soldier taking it; whether the property so taken from the houses of Madame O'Rahilly and Countess Plunkett has yet been restored; and whether the soldiers who took the property are being detained in Dublin for a public civil inquiry into such matters?

Inquiry will be made, but in the meantime I must not be taken as accepting as correct the allegations contained in the question.

Will it be an inquiry by a civil authority as distinguished from a military authority?

No, Sir. All our investigations are made by the military authorities.

The accused persons!

asked the Home Secretary whether, pending the production of evidence on the part of the friends of Ernest Cavanagh, he will have inquiries instituted in Dublin so that the circumstances in which this young man met his death while unarmed and peaceful on 25th April may be ascertained as completely as possible?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. I will have inquiries made.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ascertain two or three points, one being that this young man was unarmed.

The hon. Member should give notice of those points on the Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to a printed document sent by post from the Maclean Publishing Company to every Peer and Member of the House of Commons; whether this document by its accusations against members of the Cabinet is calculated to create disaffection and prejudice recruiting among disloyal subjects of His Majesty; whether this document was passed by the Censor; and what action he proposes to take?

I have seen the printed slip referred to, but I do not think it necessary to take any action.

asked the Home Secretary whether he has yet considered the question of discriminating in the matter of identity books issued to registered aliens between neutral aliens and allied aliens; and if he will now provide a special form of identity book for issue to aliens of allied nationality who may be personally known to the authorities as completely trustworthy?

The hon. Member is, I think, under a misapprehension as to the nature of an identity book. The very object of the book is to discriminate by the description it contains between one person and another. The alien of allied nationality is shown by the contents of his book to be of that nationality, and provision is made in the book for the insertion of all useful particulars.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that under the system prevailing at present distinguished gentlemen who are perfectly trustworthy have received very undesirable treatment; and has his attention been called to the treatment of M. Alexandre Livenntaal, who was arrested at Brighton and taken to Lewes?

I think that gentleman was a British subject.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that a number of women hands employed at a certain Government-controlled factory in the Woolwich area recently left this factory and, without disclosing their previous service, were enrolled at Woolwich Arsenal in various capacities; and that, a complaint having been received by the Ministry of Munitions, these hands were traced and discharged from the Arsenal; whether he is aware that a number of these hands were subsequently enrolled under assumed names; whether he is aware that such desertion and subsequent re-entry was due to the rate of pay at the one place being much smaller than at the other for exactly similar work; and whether, in view of the hardship suffered by some of these dismissed hands and in view of many other similar instances, steps can be taken to standardise the rates of pay on both piece and day work as between the Arsenal and controlled firms in the Woolwich area?

The answer to the first and second parts of this question is in the affirmative. I have no information as to the third and fourth parts. I do not think the suggestion made in the last part of the question would be practicable, or, if practicable, would achieve the object which the hon. Member has in view, since differences of earnings in this case are due not so much to differences in rates of pay as to differences in the hours worked. There are also other differences of conditions.

asked the Minister of Munitions what is the basis for fixing the day-work rating of women hands at Wool-wich Arsenal on entry for those whose ages range from sixteen years to twenty-one years, respectively, at date of entry?

The day-work ratings of women and girls at entry are as follows:—

• Over eighteen years of age, £l a week;
• From seventeen to eighteen years of age, 15s. to 17s. 6d. a week;
• From fifteen to seventeen years of age,10s. to 15s. a week.

Are those payments adhered to irrespective of ability?

Persons who are there being employed received the rate. If they are not worth being employed they are dismissed.

If they have conspicuous ability?

There is nothing to prevent a person getting more.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether his attention has been called to the fact that the day-work rating of a woman of twenty-five on entry is 20s. per forty-eight hours, and for a man of the same age 31s. or more; whether he is aware that, notwithstanding that both may be working on the same class of piece work at the same rate of remuneration and doing the same amount of work, the actual wage earned by the woman is substantially less than that of the man, owing to the overtime bonus in each case being calculated on the day-work rating; and whether he will cause an equitable adjustment to be made, so that the rates of pay for overtime on piece-work may be the same in both cases?

The basing of overtime allowances upon the day-work rates is in accordance with the Order made by the Minister of Munitions under Section 6 of the Munitions of War (Amendment) Act, 1916, relative to the employment and remuneration of women on work which, before the War was not recognised as women's work. I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of this Order, which embodies the recommendations of the Munitions Labour Supply Committee generally known as Circular L 2.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that the rate of pay at Woolwich Arsenal is based largely, especially in day-work and occupation ratings, on the age of the worker, irrespective of his ability, so that two-men, one just under and one just over twenty-one years, doing similar work in the same factory and in all respects equal in resulting values, receive substantially different rates and amounts of pay; and whether this was the ground in the C.F. 5 factory for shop No. 16,421 receiving an increase and subsequent reduction in his rating, and for the recovery, by reduction of part of his subsequent weekly earnings, of the sum of £12 17s. 6d.?

In the case of male employés full adult rate of day-work pay is not usually given until the employé has reached the age of twenty-one, and, in the case of tradesmen, has also attained full proficiency in his trade. "Occupation rate," being in lieu of piece-work, does not depend upon age, but upon the class of work. In the case in C.F. 5 referred to, the facts are as stated in the question, the man having misrepresented his age for the purpose of obtaining an increased rating.

asked whether a large percentage of staff clerks, shop managers, assistant managers, and principal and assistant foremen now employed at Woolwich Arsenal are of military age; if so, whether there would be any difficulty in replacing them by men of non-military age; and how many of these men of military age have been engaged between 4th August and 31st December, 1915, and from 1st January, 1916, to the present time?

Two hundred and twenty members of the managing staff, as defined in the question, being 34 per cent, of the total members, are men of military age. Of these fifty-nine were engaged between 4th August and 31st December, 1915, and nine since 1st January, 1916. The question of replacing men of military age by women or men unfit for military service at Woolwich has been and is being fully considered. There would, however, be very considerable difficulty in doing so in the case of the officers in question.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that the rates of pay to writers on entry in the wages and other departments of the Arsenal were until recently below that of ordinary labourers in the Arsenal; whether, under existing rates of remuneration, such writers, before receiving pay for normal overtime, must work six hours per week without any remuneration; if so, what justification there is for this arrangement; whether the war bonus granted to the labourers and other grades of workmen in the Arsenal has been refused to these writers; whether he is aware that six months ago or thereabouts the secretary of the National Union of Clerks requested that this matter might be referred to arbitration, and that although repeated efforts have been made to obtain a hearing in this matter they have so far met with no success; and whether he will arrange for the reference to take place without further delay?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second and third parts, the rates of pay of the male writers in the Royal Ordnance factories are fixed to cover a weekly attendance up to forty-eight hours if required, after which overtime pay at the rate of time and a half is allowed. The lowest weekly rate at present paid to these writers is 31s. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness on 29th June by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that the varying rates of pay in the different Departments of Woolwich Arsenal have, for a long time past, caused and are still causing a condition of unrest among the hands; and whether, with a view to a substantial increase in the output, he will take steps to remove the cause of the unrest?

I have no information to suggest that there are unreasonable variations in the rates of pay or unrest arising therefrom in Woolwich, and will be glad to consider any information on the subject which the hon. Member can supply.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question: whether there has been a substantial increase in the output?

The hon. Member will know that that involves a careful analysis. There has been a very large increase of output, but I do not think I can give an absolute answer.

asked whether, in view of the drop in the output of munitions owing to the Easter holidays, an explanation can be furnished for the temporary suspension from Tuesday, 9th May, to Friday, 12th May, of some hundreds of women hands in the new Q.F.C.F. 4 factory at Woolwich Arsenal, notwithstanding that the factory was actually completed and ready for work prior to the Tuesday; and whether the said hands were paid for their attendance on Monday, 8th May, although no work was actually done?

About 250 workpeople were brought in on Monday, 8th May, for preparatory work, with a view to starting output as soon as possible in this new factory. It was found, however, that the presence of contractor's workmen interfered with the carrying out of the danger building precautions, and the workpeople were therefore suspended from midday Tuesday, the 9th, until the following Friday morning. They were, of course, paid for the time of their attendance.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Munitions whether the proposals of the Central Control Board to purchase licensed houses, breweries, etc., can be postponed until such a time that the electors of the United Kingdom are allowed to vote and express their opinions as to whether they consent that public moneys shall be utilised for such undertakings?

A postponement of these proposals for the period suggested by the hon. Member would be totally inconsistent with the purpose for which the Control Board was established under the I authority of the Act of Parliament.

Before the State becomes brewer and publican, will the opinion of Parliament be taken?

All I can say is that the Board is empowered to do these things by Act of Parliament.

When this Board was first appointed was it intended that they should purchase public - houses and breweries?

I do not know what was intended, but I know that powers were conferred on the Board by Act of Parliament.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consult the OFFICIAL REPORT of the Debate and see what was said as to the intention?

I do not think I need do that. What we are acting under is what is contained in the Act of Parliament.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that better beer is supplied in these public-houses?

Are we to understand that we are not to attach any importance to statements made by Cabinet Ministers when Bills are proceeding through this House?

No doubt we attach great importance to them. This Board is operating under an Act of Parliament, and their operations are governed by Act of Parliament and not by what is said in the House.

asked the Home Secretary whether the sub-manager of the Russian Bank for Foreign Trade in London is Mr. Alexander Szilagyi, who is an unnaturalised Hungarian and has been six years in London; whether Mr. Szilagyi holds the procuration of the bank; whether another employé is a man named G. Schneider, who is an unnaturalised German, and whether the documents relating to shipments of munitions of war to Russia passed through his hands; whether, subsequent to the loss of His Majesty's ship "Hampshire" and the death of Lord Kitchener, this man was removed to another department of the bank; whether a third employé of the bank is a brother of Mr. Szilagyi; and whether he proposes to take any steps in this matter?

The facts with regard to the employment of the three persons referred to are as stated. The two Hungarians have been exempted from internment, and Schneider from repatriation, on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee. In the case of the former strong representations were made by the Russian Embassy as to their being indispensable to the bank, while Schneider was exempted in consideration of a bond given by the bank, and in view of the facts that he has resided here for over twenty-five years, has an English wife, and was favourably reported on. I am informed by the bank that in the course of his work Schneider may have handled documents relating to certain shipments to Russia of articles required for the production of munitions, but that there is no connection between this circumstance and the recent change in his work, and there is no foundation whatever for the suggestion that the handling of these documents by Schneider had or could have had any connection with the loss of His Majesty's Ship "Hampshire."

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to resolutions passed unanimously by various public bodies in county Clare, including the county council, expressing the hope that the salaries of national teachers would be paid monthly and that a war bonus should be granted to the teachers; and whether, in view of the fact that while prices have gone up in regard to all requirements of life the salaries have remained at their former low level, he will take steps to have effect given to the resolutions of these public bodies acquainted with local conditions?

I am aware that resolutions have been passed in the sense referred to, but regret that I am not able to add anything to the replies given on the 1st March last by the late Chief Secretary to questions on this subject by the hon. Baronet the Member for North Wexford.

Has the right hon. Gentleman ever looked into the question of paying these national teachers monthly?

Yes, I have inquired into the question, but there are great financial difficulties in making a change which would involve making twelve monthly payments in one year. At present the Treasury cannot see their way.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to entertain a very reasonable proposition on the part of the teachers, namely, to grant the concession simply for the current three months?

I do not think that would satisfy the teachers.

If it would satisfy them, would he consider that very reasonable proposition?

I understand various attempts have been made to come to an agreement with the representatives of the teachers, but not, so far, successfully. If the hon. Member will send me any communication he is in a position to make on behalf of the teachers, I assure him it will be considered.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is now prepared to finance the replanting of trees in Scotland where the woods have been purchased by the Government?

The question of the steps to be taken to preserve and increase the timber supply of this country is under the consideration of the Reconstruction Committee of the Cabinet.

Have not the Treasury already given their sanction for replanting in Ireland?

Is the Reconstruction Committee of the Cabinet dealing with this matter itself or through another body?

It is not dealing with the matter itself, but is conducting inquiries through another organisation.

asked the Postmaster-General (1) if, in considering a revision of the mail contract between Caithness and Orkney, he will take into consideration the fact that soldiers and sailors on leave for a few days will be practically debarred from visiting their homes; and (2) if he is aware that the services of the ferry boat between Caithness and Orkney have been shortened approximately by one-half, that prior to the War the service occupied between forty and fifty hours weekly, and that the present curtailed service will only occupy about eighteen hours weekly; and will he say whether the North of Scotland Company are demanding in respect of the eighteen hours' service the same subsidy received for the service occupying between forty and fifty?

The question of the remuneration to be paid to the shipping company for the reduced mail service between the mainland and Orkney and the various suggestions of the hon. Member are under my careful consideration, and I shall be glad to communicate with the hon. Member in regard to the matter before any final decision is taken.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the very sympathetic attitude of the Admiralty towards this question, and will he take them into his counsel?

Yes. I shall be very glad to do so.

asked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that in many post offices, particularly in London, delay and inconvenience are caused by the present method of conducting war certificate business; and if he will consider whether any special arrangements can be made whereby the sale of such certificates can be carried on with due regard to the convenience of the purchasers and the officials and without interference with the ordinary work of such offices?

As I explained in my speech on the Post Office Estimates last Monday, the arrangements for the sale of War Savings Certificates at present in operation are, generally speaking, the best possible having regard to the depleted condition of the staff and the very varied nature of the business transacted at post-office counters. It is not practicable, owing to considerations of space and staff, to assign the War Savings Certificate business to particular officers as their sole duty.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if it will be possible to reduce the premiums of air-raid reinsurance?

As stated, in answer to a question by the hon. Member for Blackburn on 24th May, the aircraft insurance scheme, which came into operation in July last, has at present money in hand, but that position may change at any moment. It is not proposed to increase the rates, but it would not be wise to reduce them.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why the War Risks Insurance Committee do not allow those who are insured the usual month, which is allowed by other insurance companies, to renew their premiums?

The hon. Member had better give notice of the question; it does not arise out of this.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that a quantity of quarters of beef was marketed this week by the American beef companies; if he will say whether this was imported from our colonies in Canada; whether he is aware that this beef was slaughtered at St. Johns on the 6th February last, slaughtering certificate taken from quarter of beef pur1 chased in Smithfield on Tuesday this week attached, and was therefore lying held up in a cold store seven or eight days' voyage from Liverpool during the whole period which prices were being screwed up in this country; and whether he will explain who was to blame for a state of affairs like this?

Small quantities of frozen and chilled meat are from time to time brought from Canada and the United States to the United Kingdom. They are imported and sold on private account, and I am not acquainted with the circumstances in which they are bought. I am unable to say whether the retention of the meat to which my hon. Friend refers in cold store in Canada was due to a shortage of insulated tonnage or to the motive which he suggests. The Board of Trade have for some time been anxious to resume their purchases of full cargoes of Canadian beef, but the prices at which tenders have been made have not been satisfactory.

If I hand the right hon. Gentleman this slaughter ticket, will he consider the matter?

Yes.

asked whether the plant of the British manufacturers of dyes is now being so used as to secure the maximum output of dyes or whether any part of it is being diverted to the production of other articles, such as munitions of war; and, if so, to what extent the output of dyes is less than the maximum of which the plant is capable?

It has been found necessary to utilise part of the plant of some of the makers of dye-stuffs for the manufacture of explosives, and the output of the remaining dye-making plant in existence has been adversely affected by the shortage of materials. It is not possible for me to give the exact data asked for by my hon. Friend, but he will be glad to learn that the production of dye-stuffs in this country has made very substantial progress since the commencement of the War.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will explain why a firm named Grime Nattalis, of 38, Deans-gate, Manchester, is still being allowed to do business and compete with British firms, in view of the fact that it is entirely German, that the manager is a German, by name Muller, and that the firm is still making money and having their name and business kept before the public till the War is over?

I am asking the Advisory Committee to consider the case referred to and advise the Board of Trade whether an order should be made requiring the business to be wound up.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the registration of a new company known as the Excess Values (Liverpool and London) War Risks Insurance Association, Limited; whether this company is to be regarded as part and parcel of the Government scheme of insurance of merchant vessels against war risks, or whether, seeing that it proposes to cover every description of marine loss or risk, it is a form of private enterprise of leading shipowners in connection with the Government scheme; and, if otherwise, will he state the exact reasons for the formation of this new company?

The association referred to was formed with the full knowledge and consent of the Board of Trade for the purpose of insuring against war risks values in excess of those covered by the Government insurance scheme. It is not part of the Government scheme, but is worked in connection with it. The other War Risks Clubs have for a long time had arrangements for insuring these excess values on a mutual basis.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will say how many Canadian timber fellers are working in this country; whether they are employed by the Government or are their services available to private owners of timber; whether the Government is prepared to buy timber from private owners; and, if so, what class of timber?

The Canadian timbermen constitute a military unit—the 224th Canadian (Forestry) Battalion. There are 1,600 officers and men in this country. They are employed solely upon Government work, and their services cannot be made available for private persons. Offers of timber by private owners should be made to the Home-grown Timber Committee, 4, The Sanctuary, Westminster, who are prepared to consider the purchase of large lots of 40,000 or 50,000 cubic feet and upwards of either softwoods or hardwoods. The Committee are also prepared to purchase converted timber from private owners in smaller lots.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that considerable dissatisfaction prevails among the Canadian, timber fellers at Virginia Water owing to-the terms they have received?

I have not heard of that. It rather surprises me. I will look into it at once.

asked the President of the Local Government Boards whether, seeing no relief from rates is granted to business men who have been, called to the Army in respect to their business premises where they have been, unable to close their premises and remove their stock prior to their joining the Colours, he will take steps to see that relief from rates is granted in such cases where these men have been unable to remove their stock; or will he communicate with the local authorities giving them a discretionary pow7er in these cases to forego the rates on such premises if they think fit to do so?

Rates form one of the obligations in respect of which relief may be claimed from the Military Service (Civil Liabilities) Committee, and I think this is the proper way of dealing with cases such as those to which the hon. Baronet refers. My right hon. Friend has no power to direct or authorise local authorities to forego the demand for rates.

asked the Prime Minister whether, considering that the Military Service Act is now in force, His Majesty's Government will reconsider the decision come to at the commencement of the War under which all Civil servants who joined the Army were to lose nothing by doing so, so that men of military age in Government Departments may now be enabled to join the Army on the same terms as other men and at less expense to the State?

I do not think it would be equitable to reconsider the decision at the present time.

Will nothing be done to facilitate the Civil servants of the State being permitted to join the Colours? Does not the right hon. Gentleman know that nothing will do the permanent Civil servants more good than a time in the trenches?

I have not yet met any Civil servants who are reluctant to go. On the contrary, most Civil servants are clamouring to be allowed to go, and all Civil servants are allowed to go who can be spared from their work. The system to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers was inaugurated at the beginning of the War, and was followed by a large number of private employers. It would be most unjust to abolish it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole system has been altered?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman must remember that there are others besides himself who want to ask questions.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War the nature of the orders that have been given to the effect that in future no attempt is to be made to enforce obedience by means of physical violence; whether any Regulation has been issued on the subject; and whether commanding officers have been warned that when a man represents that his disobedience to orders is due to a conscientious objection to military service he must forthwith be brought before a district court-martial for trial?

The hon. Member does not possibly realise, although I stated it, that in reply to his question of the 4th July I read the report of the General Officer Commanding in Chief, Western Command, and that the last paragraph of the report contained a statement as to the orders which had been issued by him. The nature of the orders seems to me perfectly clear. The Regulations in regard to the powers of a Commanding Officer in disposing summarily of offences under the Army Act will be found in paragraph 487 of the King's Regulations, and the hon. Member will see that an offence which, falls within Section 9 (1) of the Army Act cannot be summarily disposed of by a Commanding Officer. As regards the last part of the hon. Member's question, Commanding Officers have not been so warned, as the suggestion introduced by the hon. Member is not contemplated by Section 46 (8) of the Army Act, and it is therefore not possible to give effect thereto. But the effect desired can be produced by the soldier himself exercising his statutory right of demanding a court-martial under-Section 46 (8) of the Army Act.

Do I understand that the reply given the other day applies only to the particular case, and that it is still open to officers of other regiments to-enforce obedience by physical violence?

Oh, no!

Will arrangements be made for similar instructions to be issued—

There are many questions still to be got through.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can state the result of his inquiries into the-treatment of Frank Ward, a conscientious objector to military service, at Chelmsford Barracks; and whether any steps have been taken to deal with his case under the-Army Order X., of 25th May, 1916?

Yes, Sir. I have now received a report. The allegation that he has been subjected to ill-treatment at the Chelmsford Detention Barrack is unfounded. Neither he nor any man has-been bound with ropes and dragged along the ground. On one occasion Ward refused to drill and, flinging himself upon the parade ground, declined to stand up or move. He was consequently removed, but no violence was used As regards the allegation that he had to be moved to hospital in consequence of his ill-treatment, I am informed that the only hospital treatment that Ward has received was for a blistered heel caused by an ill-fitting boot. Ward has made no complaint either to the Commandant on his daily inspection or to the detention barrack weekly visitor. Conscientious objectors are not treated at this detention barrack differently from any other soldiers. If they break the rules or disobey orders they are necessarily admonished or punished, but the punishments inflicted are in strict accordance with the King's Regulations. I think this is another case where my hon. Friend's warm heart has triumphed over his cool head, or he would not have been led into describing as persecution action which was perfectly proper.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his Department has made any arrangement whereby time-expired soldiers, who under the last Military Service Act, will be required to re-enlist, will be given posts as drill instructors or in the Army Pay Corps where they have the necessary training; and, if so, will he say how these men are expected to set about applying for such posts?

I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the Instructions on this point, which are too voluminous to be read out in this House and possibly not of sufficient general interest.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if on re-enlistment time-expired men are entitled to a bounty; and, if so, what; and whether they are also entitled to a month's furlough in addition to the same rank as on retirement?

I would refe6r my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for Brentford on the 27th June as regards bounty and furlough. As regards rank these men will be given the substantive rank which they held on discharge.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the men of the National Reserve who joined up at the outbreak of war for one year, or for a second year if the War still continued, will, on the termination of their two years' service, if not yet forty-one years of age, be kept on and come under the same conditions as the regular soldier, and be entitled to a bounty and furlough on completing their two years' service at the Front?

I much regret that I am not yet in a position to answer my hon. Friend's question. I will write to him shortly.

asked the Secretary to the Local Government Board ' what is the amount of money now in the hands of the Road Board, other than the sum advanced on loan to road authorities; and will he cause money from the fund to be handed over to road authorities for the repair of damage caused by military traffic consequent on the War?

The amount in the Board's hands is a6bout £3,800,000, but this sum does not represent the free balance now available for new schemes, as substantial Grants out of it have already been promised to local authorities. In so far as payments are due from public funds in respect of military damage to roads, they will be made from Army funds, and not from the Road Improvement Fund, and such payments have already been sanctioned to the extent of £770,000.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the sanction of Parliament is required for any alterations contemplated in the system of distributing prize money and that the Bill will have to be of a restrospective character covering the past twenty-two months of the War, he can now state when the Bill will be introduced?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. It is impossible to name a date. The preparation of the Bill is being pressed forward with all dispatch, but the points involved are numerous and intricate and require very careful consideration. Of course, all necessary steps will be taken to ensure that legislative authority is secured in good time for executive action without delay when the proper time arrives.

Has the right hon. Gentleman realised that great injustice is being inflicted on the Royal Navy by delay with this matter?

I cannot admit that. If the House wished to revert to the old system of paying the prize money to the actual captor there would be no prejudice as regards private bounty. I have already informed my hon. and gallant Friend that one payment has been made and that others are in progress.

Will care be taken that this Prize Money Bill is introduced at a period of the Session which will enable us adequately to discuss it?

Were we not promised this Bill more than a year ago?

I should think that that is very likely. The promise, I believe, was that it would be done as soon as possible, but no one knows better than the right hon. and learned Gentleman that with the new proposal and the conditions of modern warfare the matter is very involved.

Has the right hon. Gentleman yet even appointed a Committee to inquire into this complicated question, and, if not, will he do so at once?

The question just asked is to some extent an answer to the points that have been raised. We have all been at work discussing these various points that have arisen.