asked the Secretary of State for War if he will make inquiries into the case of P. B. Jordan, a conscientious objector, who is now undergoing a sentence of ten years' penal servitude as a result of his conscientious objection to military service; whether this man and the other men who are serving a similar sentence for the same cause are suffering physical ill-effects from their sentence; and whether, in view of the promise recently made by the Prime Minister, he will consider the advisability of releasing these men on furlough until their case can be reheard by the Central Appeal Tribunal?

In answer to the first portion of the hon. Member's question I would refer him to my reply to him of the 7th August. I cannot undertake to make any special inquiries as to the state of health of soldiers in prison in view of the fact that ample provision already exists for ensuring that the health of prisoners is observed whilst undergoing sentence. I am not aware to what the hon. Member alludes when he refers to a promise recently made by the Prime Minister, and I cannot consider the release of these men on furlough. I take this opportunity of stating that the only soldiers on furlough are those whose cases were not reached by the Central Tribunal during the currency of their sentence.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that one or two men sentenced only last week by court-martial are already placed on furlough, although their sentences are not completed?

No, Sir, I am not aware of that fact.

I will give the hon. Gentleman the names.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether, at a sitting of the Purley Local Tribunal on 31st July, four applicants named Sparks, Alexander, Armfield, and Narraway expressed willingness to undertake work of national importance; that in each case exemption was refused, and that before the same tribunal on the same day five men named Collier, Knight, Beasley, Mennell, and Peaice, stated that they were not able conscientiously to accept work of national importance as a condition of exemption, and were then exempted from combatant service and from non-combatant service if within twentyone days they found work of national importance; and whether the tribunal is carrying out the intentions of the Government, which were that an appellant was to be given that form of exemption fitted to his case?

My right hon. Friend has nothing to add to the reply which he gave on Thursday last to a question by the hon. Member for the Attercliffe Division beyond stating that the tribunal after hearing the cases came to different conclusions as to the genuineness of the objections of the two groups of claimants.

asked the President of the Local Government Board if he will have inquiries made into the cases of two conscientious objectors, Archie Victor Hobart and Cecil Arthur Hobart, of 1, Romany Road, Norwich; if he is aware that these two men, after appealing to the local and Appeal Tribunals, were exempted from combatant service but refused leave to appeal to the Central Tribunal; that on 19th and 20th May they sent in applications to the local tribunal for reviews of their certificates as they were willing to do work of national importance; that on 9th June both were arrested and handed over to the military authorities and subsequently sentenced to 112 days' hard labour on 21st June; that on 24th June the father of these men received notices for them to appear before the local tribunal on the. 28th June; and that in their absence, owing to detention in Maidstone Prison, the cases were adjourned; and whether they are still in prison and their cases not yet disposed of by the local tribunal?

The fact that a man holding a certificate of exemption from combatant service has applied for a review of his certificate does not preclude the military authorities from calling up the man for non-combatant service, nor are they bound to allow the man to appear at the hearing of his application for a review. I may inform the hon. Member that I understand that the cases of these two men have come before the Central Tribunal under the scheme outlined by the Prime Minister.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in the event of the proposals of the Home Office Committee for the employment of conscientious objectors embracing industries where the hours, conditions, and wages are governed by trade union regulations and agreements, the proposals will be submitted to the trade unions affected for their comment?

I understand that the Committee do not anticipate that any appreciable number of the men referred to them by the Central Tribunal will be employed in industries where trade union regulations and agreements are operative, but in any case the Committee do not intend that individual employers shall benefit at the expense of the community by obtaining the labour of these men at cheaper rates than they would otherwise have to pay. I cannot undertake on behalf of the Committee that they will submit any of their proposals to the trade unions (if any) who may be concerned; but I can undertake that any suggestions which any trade union concerned may make to the Committee with a view to the fulfilment of the principle stated above will be welcomed by them.

asked the Postmaster-General whether he has sanctioned conscientious objectors being retained in the Post Office; and, if not, now that such cases have been brought to notice, he will take steps to remove such men from Government employ?

The Postmaster-General has asked me to answer this question on his behalf. He has arranged with the Committee on Work of National Importance that Post Office servants who obtain exemption from military service on grounds of conscientious objection, conditionally on performing work of national importance, may, with the concurrence of the local tribunal, be allowed to remain on their Post Office duties. A Post Office servant who is a conscientious objector is required to appeal to the local tribunal; exemptions are not granted on grounds of conscience by the Post Office.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to an announcement that appeared on the 25th ultimo to the effect that recruiting officers will take steps after 1st August to call up all transport workers at the docks and public wharves who are not in possession of a Board of Trade certificate, a properly certificated badge, or an unexpired certificate of exemption granted by a tribunal on personal grounds, and that after 1st August it will no longer be safe to rely for exemption on certificates issued by local tribunals on the ground that a man is in. a reserved occupation; if he will say on what authority the recruiting officers propose to act, seeing that the result of their action will be to cancel certificates of exemption; and whether the right course is for the military representatives to apply to the tribunals for a revision of the certificates in these cases?

I have made inquiries into this matter and I understand that an announcement generally on the lines indicated by the hon. Member has appeared in the Port of London. Dock transport workers were certified by the Board of Trade as being engaged in work of national importance and any individual certificates of exemption issued on the ground that a man is engaged as a port transport worker would rest upon that general certificate of the Board of Trade. Applications for certificates of exemption from port transport workers would come before the Port Labour Committee. It is unnecessary for military representatives to apply to tribunals for revision of the certificates in these cases. I would refer the hon. Member to Part III. of the Regulations issued by Order in Council for tribunals under the Military Service Acts, 1916.

Do I understand that these men will have to get a certificate from the Board of Trade?

I think that they can go before the Labour Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for War on what grounds Hugh Gallagher, John Gallagher, and Anthony O'Donnell, migratory labourers, ordinarily resident in county Donegal, have been arrested in Mossend at the instance of the military authorities?

I have caused inquiries to be made about these men, and the results shall be communicated to my hon. Friend as soon as they are received.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether Mr. E. Halliwell, a married man, who broke his collar-bone two days before his case should have been heard by the Stoke Tribunal, sent his doctor's certificate with a letter asking for adjournment which was refused, the case being decided in his absence against him; that on inquiry of the clerk, Mr. Sharpley, he was informed that the letter and medical certificate were placed before 'he tribunal when his case was being considered, and that the chairman of the tribunal, Mr. T. Thornton, subsequently informed him that the letter and the certificate were not produced at the tribunal, which had no knowledge of the reason for his absence; and will he say whether, in view of the action of the clerk, the rehearing of the case will be ordered?

My right hon. Friend is informed that no statement such as is attributed to the chairman has been made, and that the chairman has not had any communication with Mr. Halliwell since the tribunal heard his case.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether Mr. G. W. Riley, of 95, Benwell Road, Holloway, an ex-Territorial, applied for exemption before the Islington Local Tribunal in ignorance of the fact that he was an exception under the provisions of the first Act; that he was refused exemption by that tribunal and did not appeal to the Appeal Tribunal owing to the fact that he had discovered that he was an exception; that he applied again to the local tribunal on the 23rd June, having come under the provisions of the second Military Service Act, and was refused a second hearing, with the result that he has lost his right of appeal to the Appeal Tribunal; and whether, seeing that Mr. Riley was handed over to the military authorities on the 23rd instant, he will instruct the Islington Local Tribunal to rehear the case as soon as Mr. Riley has obtained leave of the Army Council?

The facts do not appear to be as stated in the hon. Member's question. My right hon. Friend is informed that G. W. Riley applied for exemption on conscientious grounds on the 25th February; that he did not state that he was an ex-Territorial, that his application was refused, and that he then appealed to the Appeal Tribunal, who dismissed the appeal. Subsequently he made another application, again on conscientious grounds, and beyond merely stating on his application form that he was an ex-Territorial and did not come under the previous Act appears to have given no explanation for the second application. On the evidence before him my right hon. Friend is not prepared to intervene in the matter.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that the Stepney Local Tribunal consists of twenty-five members, of whom four are licensed victuallers; how many applications for exemption made before this tribunal by licensed victuallers have been granted, and for what periods; and how many have been rejected?

It appears that there are two tribunals for Stepney, one for cases under the Military Service Acts, the other for the case of voluntarily attested men. None of the members of the latter tribunal are licensed victuallers, but I am informed that four members out of a total of twenty-five on the former tribunal are licensed victuallers. Some exemption has, I understand, been given in thirty out of thirty-one cases of publicans and publicans' managers dealt with by this tribunal. I have no information as to whether the military representative has appealed in any of these cases. If he thinks the circumstances demand it he will no doubt do so.

In view of the rather remarkable figures, will inquiry be made and will the military representative himself be asked for a report upon the position?

I will consult my right hon. Friend on that point.

Might I say that I asked this question last Thursday, but the hon. Member was not ready. I then put it down again for to-day, but, in the meantime, I have received a reply from the hon. Gentleman. If he could give me the reply in this House, I might, perhaps, with your permission, put a supplementary question.

No, Sir; there is no insufficiency of sun helmets. A sufficient supply to cover issues to the whole force was sent from Egypt last month. No representations have been received as to insufficiency of punkahs for the sick and wounded.

I understand that quite recently there were a number of troops wearing sun hats. Could the hon. Gentleman say whether, according to his knowledge, that is so; and, further, whether, as a matter of course, punkahs will be required in hot climates?

I cannot say anything further with regard to the question of punkahs. I understand that no representations have been received as to any insufficiency. With regard to the question of sun helmets, I think it is a fact that until recently the troops were wearing sun hats and pugarees. It became evident that was insufficient. They have asked for sun helmets, and those are being sent.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether, considering the fact that there was no emergency which necessitated the sending out of drafts for regiments in India in the middle of the Indian hot weather and that the Commander-in-Chief in India asked in February that these drafts should be sent out as early as possible, he will state who were the officers in England responsible for the delay in the dispatch of these drafts from February till June, which delay was apparently the primary cause of the deaths from heatstroke on the Indian railway that subsequently occurred in the case of the drafts sent out in the transport "Ballarat"?

These drafts were asked for on 24th February, but previous demands not having been satisfied, owing to shipping and men not being available, they were not dispatched until 5th May, when shipping and men became available. The responsibility rests with those responsible for providing sufficient men to meet the needs of the Empire.

Might I ask, considering that drafts are never sent out to India in the hot weather, whether the authorities in England are not equally responsible with the authorities in India?

The men were urgently wanted, and I am afraid that we cannot observe the ordinary rules of peace time with regard to drafts. We had to send the drafts.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether the soldiers supplied to the private contractor engaged in laying about twenty-six miles of light railway in connection with No. 2 Filling Factory, Aintree, Liverpool, were, except for a bonus of 15s. for about three months' work, only paid Army rates, whilst the contractor's own men were paid the trade union rate obtaining in the district; and, having regard not only to the feeling on the matter among the soldiers concerned, but also the question involved of industrial conscription, whether he will see that soldiers are not used for industrial purposes?

asked the Secretary of, State for War whether seventy soldiers have been lent for the past two months to the firm of Messrs. Brunner, Mond, and Company, chemical works, at Lostock, Northwich; whether he can state the nature of their employment and whether they receive Army pay only; whether the Army pay is less than the customary wages they would receive as workmen; and, if so, whether the War Office benefits by such an arrangement at the expense of the soldier?

I dealt with the general question of the employment of soldiers for industrial work in answer to the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Stockport yesterday. I think that answer covers the particular instances referred to.

When soldiers are lent as workmen for a period of two months—I understand that period, with the consent of the War Office, can be still further extended—can they not be placed on the Reserve temporarily, so as to retain their civil rights whilst they are so employed, and so that they only come under military control when they rejoin the Army?

When the men are constantly passing into and out of military service in the manner suggested, there are real practical difficulties. As a rule, we limit these working parties as far as we can, but in cases where men are released for munition work and are passed into the Reserve the practice which my hon. Friend suggests is carried out.

Who takes the difference between the amount that Brunner, Mond, and Company pay in wages and the rate in the Army Reserve?

The arrangement which I announced yesterday only applies to eases of working parties where the men go as soldiers under their own officers. In future the men are going to get the appropriate rate of civilian wages less a proportionate deduction for food, lodging, clothing, etc.

In this case where Brunner, Mond, and Company have borrowed the men for two months?

That applies to the past practice, and the State gets it.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Private Arthur Flint, King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, belonging to Sheffield, who, after witnessing his friend's head blown off by a shell in the trenches, became mentally unbalanced and was sent back to England; whether he is aware that, after being put in various hospitals, he was placed in Wakefield Asylum and discharged from the Army on 9th January, 1916, as no longer fit for war service; that he has not received his arrears of pay; that nothing is being paid in respect of him at the present time; that his parents are contributing towards his maintenance in Wakefield Asylum; that repeated applications to the War Office have met with no response; and that the Chelsea Commissioners have intimated that the man is not entitled to a pension; and whether he will cause full and immediate investigation to be made?

Inquiries are being made into this matter. I will write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

What is the position of men who are mentally unbalanced by what they have gone through in the War when they are sent to the asylum—do they and their dependants continue to receive some measure of financial assistance from the War Office?

I have already explained that matter. Where the man has a pension the local authority, if he is sent to the county asylum, claims a certain proportion of the pension to cover the cost of maintenance, and any balance that remains goes to his dependants.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that it is rather hard that the wife and children of a man who loses his reason by being in the War should be penalised?

Yes, Sir; but the hon. Gentleman must remember that the pension is issued primarily to keep the man himself, and, that being so, if the asylum authorities insist upon a certain payment being made on account of the man's maintenance, then that naturally and necessarily becomes the first charge upon his pension, but the Government, acting for the State, recognises that there is a duty to provide for the wife and children, and that is done by means of the Statutory Committee, which gives a supplementary pension in each case.

In this case where a man is discharged from the Army and is in the county asylum, is there not a considerable charge on the rates for his maintenance?

Where the man is pensioned that is paid out of his pension.

Does the man always get a pension on being discharged from the Army? I had a case the other day of a man whose people were called upon to pay half-a-crown a week towards his maintenance in a lunatic asylum.

If I caught the hon. and gallant Gentleman correctly, that applies to another case altogether.

asked the Secretary for Scotland, anent the sentences of fine amounting to £55 passed upon five persons at Jedburgh by Sheriff-substitute Baillie, whether in the case of Mr. James Hunter, sentenced to pay a fine of £7 10s., the learned judge found as a fact that any atrocity or aggravating circumstances was alleged, admitted, or proved constituting a reason for inflicting a penalty of the above amount for breach of the Lighting Order regarding the obscuring of lights?

No finding in the terms suggested was issued, nor was any such finding required. I am informed that at least three warnings were given before the prosecution was instituted.

Can my right hon. Friend say on what ground in subsequent cases, particularly that of the procurator-fiscal, the fine was only £1?

I do not know whether it is to be put down to the clemency of the sheriff in that case or not. This was a case in which the man who had contravened this Order had been warned three times. Therefore presumably that operated in the mind of the sheriff, and made him think that exemplary punishment was required.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that that was one of the first prosecutions under the Order, and that in subsequent prosecutions the fine was smaller, although people had had notice that such fines were being imposed?

I can only assume in the cases where a smaller fine was imposed that the notices had not been so numerous.

Is the procurator-fiscal understood to be ignorant of the law, just as the Attorney-General here is ignorant of the law?

Well, Sir, we cannot all be as learned in the law as my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if he will state what is now being taken as the annual value for rating purposes of the estate of 12,000 acres offered by the Duke of Sutherland as a gift to the State, distinguishing be tween the annual value for rating purposes of the fishing rights, which are reserved by the Duke for himself and his successors, and the annual value for rating purposes of the property proposed to be gifted; whether there are any buildings or other improvements on that property; if so, whether they are included in the gift or on what terms they are to be taken over; and whether the State is undertaking any obligations as to the construction of the proposed light railway on another portion of the Duke's property?

According to the Valuation Roll for 1914–15, the annual value of the land and shootings is £475, and the annual value of the fishings reserved by the Duke is £180. The buildings on the property are included in the gift, and consist of the shooting-lodge and offices, a farm steading, and five dwelling-houses. There is no obligation to construct a light railway, but the Duke has granted a way- leave for such a railway over his adjoining property should it be required for the purposes of the land now gifted.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, if this assessment gives a correct estimate of the value of the land, is not the land on that basis worthless, or is it because it is under-assessed?

I really am at a loss to understand what operates in the mind of the hon. Member which makes him desire to detract from an honourable, a generous and a munificent gift, trying to make out that we, the recipients, are not the real persons who are advantaged by it.

In making that statement is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the assessment he has given shows the land is worth less than £1 an acre, and is it on land like that he proposes to put the Scottish soldiers?

If the Noble Duke happens to be the possessor of land which is not so valuable as other land yet chooses to give it to the State, surely we are not to look a gift-horse in the mouth.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he can remove the uncertainty that exists as to the terms on which farmers can obtain the temporary use of soldiers for harvesting or other urgent agricultural work; whether the soldiers thus released regain -for the time being their civil rights or remain subject to military law; whether they are paid the harvesting wages of agricultural labourers or continue to draw their ordinary rates of pay as soldiers; whether there is any difference in amount between the money paid by the farmer for the use of these soldiers and the money actually received by the soldiers; and, if so, what is the difference?

I do not think there should be any uncertainty. Full information has been issued by the Board of Agriculture and the War Office, and can be obtained at the local Labour Exchange. Soldiers allowed on furlough for agricultural work remain subject to military law. They are paid a special rate of harvesting wages. I think that I sent to my hon. Friend a copy of the relevant Army Council Instructions.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the speech by the European Member, the hon. Mr. Creasy, in June last in the Legislative Council of Ceylon, in which that gentleman expresses the conviction that a great many innocent persons were now dying in the gaols; and will he call for a Return showing how many persons are at present in gaol in Ceylon in connection with the riots?

I have seen a report of the speech in question. The number of persons convicted for offences connected with the riots is given in the correspondence presented to Parliament. Having regard to the undertaking given by the Governor, mentioned in my reply to the hon. Member for Salford North on the 1st August, I see no reason to call for any further Return at the present time.

Are we to understand that there will be no further inquiry with regard to these men who are now in gaol?

Not at all, Sir. If my hon. Friend will refer to the question and to the answer he will find that the Governor is making inquiry personally into these cases.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the penalties inflicted by the Seneschal of Sark upon two cab drivers in the island of Sark who infringed an ordinance relating to the restriction of vehicles being driven on Sundays by obeying an order to attend at the harbour on Sunday, 2nd July, to meet His Excellency the Lieutenant-Governor, who was visiting the island; and whether he can remit these sentences and procure the cancellation of this and other obsolete ordinances?

I am informed by the Governor that as a result of his inquiry into the circumstances of this case he is submitting a recommendation for the remission of the penalties imposed. The inquiry into the general question is not yet completed.

asked the Home Secretary (1) whether, in arrangements made for enlisting in the armies of the Allies those friendly aliens within the realm of Britain, he has considered the difference of status between those ordinarily resident in Great Britain and those who have come to reside here since the War began; whether a similar exception will be made in the case of the former to that exception granted by the Military Service Acts to those British subjects who are ordinarily resident outside Great Britain; and (2) whether a number of Russian Jews in this country are refugees from Belgium and France whom the invasion of those lands by Germany drove to these shores; that these persons have been waiting for nearly two years for the time when the deliverance of their homes from the German tyranny would allow their return to Belgium and France; and whether, in view of these persons being engaged here mostly in useful employment, he will exempt them from deportation to Russia, where they have no homes and where they fear that pogroms and penalties would await them?

The case of these men will receive the same consideration as that of other Russian subjects resident in the United Kingdom.

asked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the nuisance caused in the streets of London at night by persons whistling for taxi-cabs; and whether, in view of the large numbers of wounded soldiers now in London and of the loss of rest and the suffering caused to them by this nuisance, he will take steps to abolish these noises at any rate in the neighbourhood of hospitals, and, if necessary, introduce legislation for this purpose?

The comfort of the large numbers of wounded soldiers now in hospitals in London has the first claim to consideration; and I am disposed to think that members of the public would prefer to submit to the inconvenience of not being able to whistle for cabs when they need them themselves than continue to endure the nuisance of hearing the whistling when other people need them. The diminution of the number of cabs available has greatly increased this nuisance, while the development of the telephone has done much to provide a satisfactory alternative. I am informed by the Postmaster-General that telephones are now installed at forty-seven shelters in London, and a telephone device which I was able, when I held that office, to provide for cab ranks where there are no shelters, has now been extended to forty-five cab ranks. There are also 244 cab offices with telephones. I have consulted with the Commissioner of Police, and I am now proposing a Regulation which will enable me to prohibit the use of cab whistles during the hours of the night, probably from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., in a certain specified area or areas in the Metropolis. I hope it may be possible to bring the Regulation into effect on Monday next.

Can my right hon. Friend say why this proposal has been so long delayed. Why was it not taken a year ago?

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if care will be taken to see that the areas will be included in which wounded soldiers are likely to be living at night.

That is the first consideration.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me why last January his Department told me on the floor of this House that special legislation would be required in regard to cab whistles and now we are told that it can be done by a police regulation?

I should have to refer to the Question Paper and to the answers before I could have the privilege of replying.

asked the Home Secretary if he will explain why a German named Baeur is permitted to hold one-third of the capital of a firm supplying munitions; why this German is permitted to travel down to Wales when he likes and to live near a reservoir which sup plies the whole population with water; and if he will take steps to secure the internment of this alien?

Without further particulars I cannot identify the case to which the hon. Member refers. If he will give me the information on which his question is based I shall be glad to make inquiries.

May I say that I have already addressed two letters to the right hon. Gentleman giving him the proper name, yet the name is not right here?

I do not think they have been received. I will make inquiries with regard to the man named.

I wrote you two letters giving you the name.

ased the Minister of Munitions if he will make inquiries into the case of F. Greenwood, formerly of Burnley, and now working in the war department at Messrs. Waring and Gillows, and particularly if he will say whether this man was sent by the Burnley Labour Exchange, in November, 1915, to Vickers' Works, at Erith; whether as the result of his work there he lost his health so seriously that it was necessary for him either to leave this firm entirely or to be transferred to another job; that the firm refused to transfer him; that he then gave notice to Messrs. Vickers, dated 1st July, 1916, that he would leave their employment; that he has since been employed on war work by Messrs. Waring and Gillows, and that Messrs. Vickers have refused to give him his discharge, so as to force him back into their employment; and whether, in view of the fact that this man's health has been impaired, and that he is now engaged upon important war work, the Government will take steps to see that the Munitions Act is not used by Messrs. Vickers as an instrument of industrial compulsion?

The proper course for the workman in question, if he considers that a leaving certificate has been unreasonably refused, is to lodge a complaint with the Metropolitan Local Munitions Tribunal, who may, if they think fit, grant a leaving certificate. The case has previously been brought to my attention, and the workman has been advised to take the steps indicated above. I am not aware whether he has yet done so.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether certain contracts were entered into with many firms of London engineers after May, 1915, for the manufacture of shells and other munitions, and that on the strength of representations made to them they put aside ordinary work, laid down special or adapted plant, and entered into contracts, but that owing to the failure of the Government to supply raw material, drawings, specifications, gauges, etc., such contracts could not be completed by the specified time; whether under these circumstances he will permit the contractors to complete the original orders, provided he is satisfied that there has been no unreasonable delay on their part; and if repeat orders will be given?

Cases have occurred of the kind described in the first part of the question. Every such case has been carefully considered in conjunction with the contractor, and an agreed extension of time has been allowed. When the circumstances justified it, repeat orders have been offered or the contractors have been invited to tender for other articles.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake to make inquiries about similar cases that have occurred within the last twelve months of people being prevented from carrying out contracts and who were refused permission to complete the original orders?

I am afraid that will entail inquiries. Perhaps the hon. Member will give me details.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether his attention has been called to the statement by the then head of his Department in June, 1915, that the Government would see that there was no sweated labour among the women doing war work and that there should be a fixed minimum wage for the women workers; whether any minimum for these women has been fixed; and, if so, will he state what the minimum is?

In pursuance of the powers conferred on the Minister by Section 6 of the Munitions of War (Amendment) Act, 1916, the rates of wages covering nearly the whole field of female labour on munitions work have now been laid down in Circular L.2 and Statutory Rules and Orders Nos. 447 and 456, and are now-being applied. No payment at a lower rate than that specified in the Orders is permissible in any area or trade to which the Orders apply. If my attention is called to any case where sweating is alleged on munitions work, I will inquire into it at once and take any necessary action.

asked the Minister of Munitions what provision is made for medical attendance to the workers in munition factories and industrial establishments in connection therewith; and whether this service is prejudiced by the demands now made upon the Royal Army Medical Corps in connection with the recent heavy casualties on the Continent?

Every effort is made to provide suitable medical and nursing services in munition factories, so far as may be necessary. Special arrangements are made with regard to workers in explosive and filling factories and for those engaged in other dangerous occupations. In connection with these latter, further steps are at present under consideration. It is obvious that the means for obtaining these services are affected by the demands for medical services on the part of the military and naval authorities and of the civilian population.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether there is any enactment in the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1914, to prevent money received by-the Public Trustee as profits made by German or other alien enemy holders of investments in controlled or other firms being handed over to our enemies after the War; whether he can inform the House in how many controlled firms there are enemy alien shareholders; and whether it is the intention of the Government to modify the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1914, in such a way as to prevent these profits, when once lodged with the Public Trustee, being handed over to Germany or other alien enemy countries after the War?

Section 5 of the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1914, provides that after the termination of the War the Public Trustee shall deal with any money paid to him under the Trading With the Enemy Acts in such manner as may be directed by Order in Council. Full control is thus retained over all money paid to the Public Trustee, and no alteration of the provisions of the Act is necessary. I am unable to state in how many companies owning controlled establishments there may be some enemy shareholders.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly find out?

No, Sir. I do not think I can.

Is it not a fact that in the book which gives the names of people owning shares in companies the names of aliens are given as well as those of people in this country; and can the right hon. Gentleman not give a Return of those aliens who hold shares in companies which are now controlled companies and providing munitions for carrying on the War?

I do not think the names would give the fact that the individual was an alien. It would mean an enormous number of inquiries, which I am afraid the Board of Trade is not in a position to make.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the locomotive men employed by the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company at Goole are paid off one day or more a week, and consequently find it very difficult to maintain a reasonable standard of life on less than a week's wages, whilst at the same time labour is urgently required on Government work in the district, but these railwaymen are not allowed to work elsewhere; that Goole is said to be the only place in the country where railwaymen are not permitted to work a full week at the present time; and, having regard to the guarantee of divi- dends which has been given to the railway companies, and also the fact that it is not in the national interest during this crisis that men should be forcibly kept idle, whether he will at once inquire into the matter, and at least ensure that these men shall be guaranteed not less than a full week's work and a full week's pay?

Representations have already been made to the Board of Trade on this subject, and I am sending my hon. Friend a copy of a letter in which the Department, after making inquiry, have written in reply.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty if engineers signing under T 124 are not entitled to a share of prize money; and, if so, why this is the case?

The scope of the distribution of prize money has not yet been decided. It is therefore impossible to deal with the claims of any individual class. The claims of all classes who may have any reason for supposing that they are eligible to share in the distribution are now being considered. I ought again to add that inasmuch as the Board have decided upon a general distribution of prize money to the Fleet engaged in the War—as against the old system of the distribution of prize money amongst captors in each particular case—no distribution is possible, I am afraid, until the pool is complete at the close of hostilities.

When will the scheme of distribution of prize money be decided and published?

I do not know whether my hon. and gallant Friend refers to the scale. That will no doubt be published in due course in the "Gazette," but the whole matter will be presented to this House in a Bill which we hope will pass in time to enable us to proceed with the distribution when the pool is complete at the close of hostilities.

Cannot the right hon. Gentleman say when the Bill will be introduced?

In due time for the purpose it seeks to secure.

asked the President of the Local Government Board what schemes are already in hand for the training of partially disabled soldiers; how many soldiers are now undergoing a course of training; and whether the Government accepts responsibility for the industrial employment of these men when their course of training comes to an end?

I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the Circular recently issued by the Statutory Committee, which deals at some length with the training and employment of disabled sailors and soldiers after they have left the Service. Schemes of training are already in force at Roehampton, at Brighton, at St. Dunstan's, and in certain polytechnics and technical institutes, and, when the local committees are in working order, I hope that a complete scheme, such as is indicated in the Circular, will be in operation. Numbers could not at present be given. The Statutory Committee are entrusted with the function of making provision for the training and employment of disabled officers and men, and the hon. Member will find in the Circular information as to the methods which the Committee propose to adopt.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any of the schemes to which he has referred are financed by the Government in any degree whatever?

Yes, Sir; some of them are financed by funds which are more or less under the control of the Government.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board whether the Statutory Pensions Committee will consult with the Scottish Board of Agriculture as well as with the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries with regard to the provision of training for partially-disabled ex-service men in agricultural processes?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agricul- ture (Ireland) whether be has received representations showing that the funds of the conservators of fisheries for the Letter-kenny district have been seriously depleted in consequence of the restrictions placed by the Admiralty upon salmon drift-net fishing upon the North-west Coast of Ireland; and whether the Department is prepared to make a Grant, similar to that given in other districts, to enable the Board of Conservators to fulfil their obligations to their employés and to afford adequate protection to a national industry?

The Department have this application under consideration.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the Board of Customs and Excise has stopped the payment to preventive men employed in the Landing Department of the temporary allowance granted to preventive men; if he will state the reason for this action; and whether he will have the payment restored to these few men, who are feeling the financial loss in this period of high prices?

The men in question, being physically unfit for waterguard duty, have as a, special indulgence being retained in the Department on routine shore duties instead of being compulsorily retired, and they are not performing any of the special war duties in respect of which the allowance in question was granted to their colleagues on water-guard duty. They have, therefore, no claim to it.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the dissatisfaction in the Indian Army with the recent scheme for the temporary promotion of officers and the way in which the grievances of the Indian Army have been dealt with; and whether he can give any assurance that it is not the intention of the Government of India after the War to revert to the old scheme of promotion and that measures will be taken to prevent the present supersession of Indian Army officers being permanent?

I hope my hon. and gallant Friend will not think me unreasonable if I say he can scarcely expect me to deal with so large a matter of future organisation by way of question and answer in the House.

Can my right hon. Friend say that the matter will receive the consideration of the India Office later on?

Yes, this and many other questions arising out of the War will have to receive our consideration when we have the material for a judgment upon them. That is not to be taken as a pledge that I will produce a solution which will commend itself to my hon. and gallant Friend.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the danger to the State which is to be apprehended from the continued employment in Government Departments of persons of German nationality, whether naturalised or not, he will consider the desirability of making forthwith a general rule that all such persons shall be discharged immediately from the service of the Government?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. I have made inquiries and I am informed that no persons of German nationality or naturalised British subjects who were formerly of German nationality are employed at the War Office, the Admiralty, the Foreign Office, the Treasury, or the Ministry of Munitions, with the exception of one official as to whom I would refer to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War to my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford on the 13th December, 1915. If my hon. Friend has any particular case in mind in any other Department I shall be glad to make inquiries.

asked the Secretary of State for War if the War Office will allow the new Army Order of the wearing of gold braid to apply to all those soldiers who have been invalided from frost-bite, dysentery, and other causes whilst) on active service; and, if not, will he say why it is not to be so applied?

The question has been very carefully considered. The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, and to the second part that the distinction in dress in question is to be granted only to officers and soldiers suffering from injuries inflicted by the enemy.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Private T. C. Pomfret, No. 2,543, 1/7th Lancashire Fusiliers, born 10th February, 1899, enlisted on 10th September, 1914, when only 15½ years of age; that he was immediately sent to Egypt; and that a birth certificate showing his correct age was forwarded to his commanding officer, with a request that the boy should not be sent into the firing line; whether this request was quite in order; whether it was ignored, and the boy is now missing; and what explanation can be given to the parents?

An early report on this case has been asked for, and when it has been received no time will be lost in making my hon. Friend acquainted with the result.

asked the Postmaster-General whether letters and telegrams are now reaching the Mesopotamia Expeditionary Force; and whether information is sent to relatives at home if telegrams which they send are not delivered?

The Postmaster-General has asked me to answer this question on his behalf. Letters are dispatched each week to the Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force, and, so far as he is aware, the Indian postal authorities, to whom they are handed at Bombay, ensure delivery to the addressees wherever possible. Some delay appears to be inevitable. As regards telegrams, so far as he knows, there is no reason why telegrams addressed to members of the Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force should not be delivered; but he will be happy to make inquiry in any specific cases of the failure of telegrams to reach their destination, as he is doing in the case about which the hon. Member has written to him.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it sometimes takes four months for a letter from this country to reach the Expeditionary Force in Mesopotamia?

I was not aware it was as bad as that. There were delays. The Financial Secretary to the War Office gave an answer yesterday.

asked the Postmaster-General whether cablegrams, telegrams, and letters containing information as to commercial transactions are examined before delivery and information sent along to public Departments concerned in the commercial transactions to which the information so obtained refers?

The Postmaster-General has asked me to answer this question. I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave him yesterday. If the information contained in letters and telegrams falls within the formula I then used —i.e., is likely to conduce to the successful prosecution of the War—the answer is in the affirmative.

May we understand that commercial information which is contained in private letters is passed on to the Departments concerned in the transaction?

indicated assent.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the price of bread in London was to be raised on Monday, 14th August, to 9d. the 4-lb. loaf; and whether, having regard to the fact that the purchasing power of £1 is at present 12s. 9d., or thereabouts, he will say if there is any intention on the part of His Majesty's Government to take steps to prevent further increase in prices and to bring down the present price of bread to 8d. the 4-lb. loaf?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. I am aware of the fact that a general rise in the price of bread has just taken place in London. This appears to have been caused mainly by the rise in the price of wheat in New York, resulting from circumstances affecting the condition of the wheat and prospects of the harvest in North America. My hon. Friend will appreciate the fact that these circumstances are beyond the control of His Majesty's Government.

Is it a fact that speculators in this country have been holding up wheat and forcing up prices?

No, I do not think so. There has been a very remarkable rise in the price of Northern Manitoba wheat in the last four weeks in Mark Lane—from 57s. to 72s. 6d. per quarter on Friday last.

Does, not the right hon. Gentleman think that to prosecute some of these people would do a little good?

You cannot prosecute in America.

Is my right hon. Friend going to take any steps to commandeer the coming British harvests for the purpose of keeping down the price of bread?

No; I have no announcement to make on that subject to-day.

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that discontent exists among the Scottish workmen at Rosyth in respect to the lower wages paid them compared with the English workmen employed; can he explain why the war bonue given to Englishmen is 4s. a week while only 3s. is paid to Scotsmen; and why the English workers are allowed 6d. a day for travelling expenses whilst Scotsmen are allowed nothing?

I hope I may be allowed at once to dismiss any idea that we prefer Southerners to Scottish workmen at Rosyth. In our employment all the world over we have, I am glad to say, a very considerable number of Scotsmen, many of whom have made their way to high rank. We were, of course, bound in the earlier stages of the development of Rosyth Yard to ask for volunteers from our Southern yards, in order that the nucleus of the Rosyth staff should be officers and men well acquainted with dockyard practice and routine. In asking our Southern employés to sever all their Old associations and start anew in Scotland we were bound—and I am sure my right hon. Friend will concur—to offer special conditions as a set-off to inconvenience and interruption. The result is that, although we have secured to our employment a very considerable number of men locally entered, and although those men receive rates and conditions which compare favourably with the private employment of the locality, being only human, they probably look a little jealously at the special consideration which we have felt bound to offer to the transferees from the South. As regards the suggestion that we give a war bonus of 4s. to Englishmen, whereas only 3s. is paid to Scotsmen, the facts are wrongly stated. The 3s. is given to men, whether Englishmen or Scotsmen, who had already been locally entered at a time rate 1s. higher than those to whom the 4s. was given. As my right hon. Friend is fully aware, we are here, as elsewhere, anxious to deal fairly and equitably with men who are serving us loyally; but I cannot admit that the local entrants at Rosyth have a claim to the special concessions we have made to the transferees from the South, some of whom, I do not doubt, are themselves Scotsmen.

Does my right hon. Friend think it just and equitable that of hundreds of men who are living in the same town some distance from Rosyth, some of them are allowed travelling expenses and the others are not? Will he kindly give special consideration to that point?

The men who came from the South severed all their connections, and the Admiralty were bound to make allowances to them. Men living at a distance from Rosyth, whether local men or transferees, get free railway travelling, but the transferees get 6d. a day to com- pensate them for the time taken up in travelling, and if the right hon. Gentleman now asks whether that ought not to be given to local men too, I will go into that question again. There is another Department concerned in this besides the Admiralty.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that the Department have created a situation which will cause discontent at Rosyth, and that they have, in fact, created a discrimination which will not be assented to by the local men?

I beg to give notice that I will call attention to this matter on the first opportunity.

Is it not a fact that the men from the South get 23s. a week maintenance in addition to the 3s. paid for travelling expenses?

When we ask men to come from their homes in Devonport or Sheerness, and other places, for a period of three months, we give them up to 23s. 4d. a week to keep a second home. That is perfectly justifiable, and that enables him to look round and find a new home. When he has done that the 23s. 4d. stops.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that that distinction, to which I have no objection, is quite sufficient without imposing any other disabilities on the local workman?

I have said it is quite likely that, being only human, the Scotsmen will probably look with a little jealousy on these matters. I will look again into the point about the 6d. allowance for travelling.

Are the Scotsmen at Rosyth paid at the rates obtaining for men outside Admiralty employment?

Yes; I have said that the local Scotsmen are being paid at the rates of workmen outside our employment in that locality.

I desire to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he is in a position to give the names of the tribunal appointed under the recent Amendment of the Army Act?

The Court of Inquiry has been constituted as follows: Field-Marshal Lord Nicholson will be in the?chair, and the other members will be Major-Gleneral Lord Cheylesmore, Mr. Justice Atkin, and Mr. Donald Maclean, M.P.

Will Lord Nicholson do this as well as the Dardanelles?

I do not think this ought to take very long.