asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can now publish the representations made by the British residents of the British concession at Canton, in China, regarding the removal of Germans from that concession?

I much regret that His Majesty's Government do not see any ground for varying their decision not to publish this document.

asked whether it is intended to publish an official English translation of the Allies' reply to President Wilson's Note?

The Allied Reply with a translation is being printed for presentation to Parliament and will shortly be laid, on the Table.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Russian Government's reply on inquiries made by the British Government concerning Russian subjects of military age in this country has now been received?

Yes, Sir. The Russian Government have expressed their readiness to conclude an agreement with His Majesty's Government on the subject, which is at present being considered by the competent Departments.

Will reports from any Member of this House on the subject be considered before the matter is finally settled?

Before the Noble Lord replies, may I inquire whether anything is likely to be more unpleasant to the Russian Government than a discussion of this matter in the House of Commons. Do they ever discuss similar matters in which we are concerned?

They do!

Before a reply is given, may I ask whether private communications, not a public discussion here, from persons well acquainted with this matter, will receive due consideration?

Certainly; I hope any communication from any Member of this House to any Minister of the Crown will always receive consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the appeal by the Food Controller to the civilian population to limit the weekly consumption per head to two and a half pounds of meat and four pounds of bread, he will consider the desirability of reducing the daily meat ration of prisoners of war from eight ounces to six ounces and the daily bread ration from one and a half pounds to one pound?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer given to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Ealing yesterday.

Has nothing been done yet to stop this anomaly?

Yes, Sir. As was stated yesterday, a Committee representing all the Departments concerned is dealing with the matter.

Has anything been done yet?

I think not.

asked whether arrangements have been made for alien enemies interned at the Alexandra Palace and elsewhere to undertake the cultivation of land either in or adjacent to their internment camps?

It is hoped that the services of all interned alien enemies who are able-bodied will be made use of during the coming season on the land, or for other purposes of prime national importance; but my hon. and gallant Friend will understand that the principle of compulsion is not applied to interned civilians as it is to combatant prisoners.

asked (1) whether any steps are being taken to give effect to the recommendation of the Food Prices Committee that the slaughter of all cows, sheep, and pigs with young should be prohibited; and (2) whether, with a view to increasing the supply of milk, he has considered the advisability of strengthening the Order for the maintenance of live stock by prohibiting the slaughter of cows under seven or eight years of age; and whether he proposes to take any action?

The recommendation of the Food Prices Committee and other suggestions for diminishing the slaughter of cows have been the subject of much conference and consideration between the Agricultural Departments and the Food Controller, but so far the objections to any specific step in the direction proposed have been regarded as outweighing the arguments in its support.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that local authorities in urban districts have arranged to supply manures, seeds, and seed potatoes to allotment holders in their districts; is he aware that in many cases these authorities are being pressed as to when these requisites, and especially the seed potatoes, will be available, and what their quality will be; and where inquiries on the subject have been addressed to his Board will he cause a definite reply to be given at the earliest possible moment?

Full instructions were issued to war agricultural committees on the 27th of last month as to the arrangements made by the Board for the supply of seed potatoes for small growers. These arrangements should ensure the delivery of good sound seed to any local authorities who have sent in particulars of their requirements, but owing to the short supply it will not be possible to guarantee the supply of any special variety. The Board have not undertaken to supply seeds of other kinds or manures to local authorities, but the Food Controller and the Board are taking all possible steps to secure that sufficient supplies are available.

I beg to postpone this question. The Attorney-General is consulting the Home Secretary on the matter.

asked the hon. Member for Wilton, as representing the Food Controller, whether the Wheat Commission purchased wheat in India at 2s. per quarter in excess of the market price in that country, with the result of upsetting the whole of the Indian wheat market?

I am informed by the Royal Commission on Wheat Supplies that in this, as in other cases, they purchased wheat at the market price.

asked the hon. Member for Walton, as representing the Food Controller, whether his attention has been called to the fact that quantities of fish are destroyed in dust destructors and also used as manure; and if he will consider the issue of an Order to prevent a repetition of these practices and ensure that all good fish shall be offered for sale as food and not destroyed?

Fish that becomes unfit for human consumption is no doubt destroyed in the manner indicated in this question. The Food Controller has no reason to believe that any fish in good condition is so destroyed, and having regard to the prevailing demand and the high price of fish, it would appear to be improbable, but if the hon. Member will give me particulars of any cases, within his knowledge, I will have inquiries made.

Is it not the case that in order to keep up the price of fish a great quantity is destroyed constantly?

As I have already said, there is no evidence whatever before the Department that any fish that is fit for human consumption is now being destroyed in the manner indicated.

Is it not a fact that the fishing trade resent these charges, seeing that such practices do not exist? The price is sufficient to guarantee that the fish is sold, and not wasted.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in the interests of a larger cultivation of potatoes this year, he will reduce the present railway charges on seed potatoes by 50 per cent, for the months of February, March, and April.

As at present advised, I hardly think that the suggestion of the hon. and gallant Gentleman is one that can be adopted.

May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food Control whether any decision has been arrived at with regard to the killing of game by tenant farmers when they are destroying human food?

I have had no private notice of this question, but the matter has been considered this morning after consultation with the President of the Board of Agriculture, and it has been decided to issue an Order authorising occupiers of agricultural land to have the concurrent right of killing the pheasants on the same lines that they have in respect of ground game.

At what date may the tenants kill pheasants; because now, of course, it is close time, and now is the time they are doing damage?

We propose to give the tenant farmers this right at once.

Until how long?

Without, at present, any limitation of time.

Are pheasants to be killed during the breeding season?

Most certainly, if they are eating food which is fit for human or animal consumption.

Will this new Order apply to the United Kingdom or only to Great Britain?

As far as I am aware, it is not proposed to make any exception in the case of Ireland.

After 1st February the killing of game is illegal. How can an Order of the Board of Agriculture or the Food Controller make legal that which is illegal by Statute?

The Food Controller has been advised that he has power to override existing legislation in this respect under the Defence of the Realm Act.

(by Private Notice) asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food Control whether he is aware that within the past three weeks the short price of tea in bond, as sold on the London market, has gone up by over 20 per cent.; whether he is aware that there is no shortage of tea for immediate or near future consumption; and whether he is also aware that several large tea companies and profiteers have taken this unpatriotic action of artificially raising the price of tea, and also of forestalling the Budget, as was done last year, with the result that the masses of the people, especially the poor, who are already heavily burdened in the cost of food, are now further penalised by the increased cost of their tea by over 3d. in the pound weight; and whether he can state what action, if any, has been taken, or will be taken in the matter?

I understand, on inquiry, that an increase of the nature mentioned in the question has taken place recently. On the information at present before the Food Controller, he knows of no sufficient justification for such an in- crease, and he proposes to take immediate steps to investigate the causes of this sudden advance in price.

Will the hon. Gentleman take such action as will make public these large companies who unpatriotically have bought large quantities of tea on the market and have stored it in their huge warehouses in order to increase the price to the poor people?

I will certainly take note of the hon. Member's suggestion and convey it to the Food Controller.

Does the hon. Gentleman remember that similar allegations on previous occasions on inquiry turned out to be founded on a total misunderstanding?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether an attested man who has been rejected since August, 1915, and to whom notice has not been sent before 1st September, 1916, calling him up for re-examination, is excepted from the operation of the Military Service Acts?

I must remind my hon. Friend that the provisions of the Military Service Acts, 1916, do not apply to attested men whose liability for Military Service accrues from their attestation, and not from the provisions of the Military Service Acts, 1916. On attestation an attested man passed into the Army, and the fact that he was not accepted for service on medical examination subsequent to attestation, did not discharge him from the Army. The written, notice required to be be sent by Section 3 (2) of the Military Service Act, 1916 (Session 2) only applied to men who had offered themselves for enlistment and been rejected since the 14th August, 1915, and did not apply to attested men.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the Gager case the Law Courts held that a man who had attested was not liable under the Military Service Acts?

I am quite aware of the case; but that, of course, is not binding on any other Court. That case was decided upon its own merits.

Does the War Office refuse to recognise the validity of the decision of the Law Courts in that case?

Yes, we do, because it was an exceptional case.

Why has the War Office not appealed? Will the War Office appeal?

Will my hon. Friend say whether the undertaking given by Lord Derby that an attested man would be in no worse position than a man to whom the Military Service Acts apply still continues to affect the administration of recruiting?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether an attested man who has been rejected as medically unfit on examination is given a discharge; since when has the practice of giving a discharge been discontinued; and what is the reason for its discontinuance?

The matter raised in this question is at present under consideration. As was stated on the 19th December, it is not intended to call up again for military service or for medical re-examination attested men who have, on re-examination under the instructions issued on the 30th October, 1916, been again found unfit for any form of military service.

Did not the hon. Gentleman in the reply to which he has referred tell me that these men who are rejected are given a certificate of discharge?

I am not quite sure about that. I do not remember.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware of the manner in which recruiting officers are dealing with exempted men at Seaham Harbour affecting Easington Colliery, New Seaham, and surrounding districts; is he aware that men exempted by the tribunals for agriculture are consequently called up and sent to barracks, as in the case of J. Norman, farmer, of Dalton-le-Dale, who was the only man on a farm of 60 acres; is he aware that this man was exempted by the Easington Colliery Tribunal on the 16th October, 1916, and was called up to appear before the Seaham Harbour recruiting officer on the 18th January, 1917, and sent straight away, without any reason being given for his exemption ceasing; and, seeing that the members of the Easington Colliery Tribunal are asking for the return of this man to civil life, will he say what action he proposes to take to prevent further decisions of this kind by this officer?

There is no information in the War Office as to the matters which my hon. Friend brings to my notice, but inquiries are being made, and the result will be communicated to him.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman if really the tribunals are allowed to give judgments, and when they have done so whether they are respected or not?

Yes, they are.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has now had time to consider the representations made to the authorities by the provost and town clerk of Musselburgh, the chairman and the general manager of the North British Railway Company, and the inquiries addressed to the Army Council by the hon. Member for Leith Burghs regarding the enlistment of a certain railway servant?

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is now in a position to give the result of the inquiries which in a letter to the hon. Member for Leith, dated 22nd December last, the War Office stated would be made into the circumstances under which John W. Pratt, a clerk from the North British Railway, was described and treated by the military authorities at Glencorse Barracks as a conscript, denied any choice of regiment, and compelled to enter the 77th Training Reserve Battalion of the Royal Scots at Dundee; and whether arrangements have been made, or will be made, to transfer this man into the Royal Garrison Artillery, the Royal Field Artillery, or the Railway Operating Division?

My inquiries into this case are not yet completed, but I will inform my hon. Friends who have put down these questions as soon as possible as to the result.

asked under what circumstances the leave which is usually granted to men in the Army who are on draft for overseas has been refused to men in the railway divisions at Bordon and Longmoor camps, many of whom have had no opportunity to arrange their private affairs, and all of whom are naturally anxious to visit their relatives and friends before proceeding overseas; and whether an assurance will now be given that all these men will be allowed some part of, if not all, the leave usually granted?

Leave is always given, whenever it is possible to do so. In exceptional cases, however, it is necessary to withhold it, when drafts or units are very urgently required to embark at short notice.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that men discharged from the Army and transferred to Army Reserve (W) are sent home without any financial support; and, seeing that many of these men are physically unfit to do any work, will he undertake to see that these men are maintained until they are fit and work found for them?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave yesterday on this subject to the hon. Member for Houghton-le-Spring.

Is the hon. Member aware that the treatment of these men is causing grave dissatisfaction in the North of England, and will he undertake to see that these men are not cast upon charity?

I cannot help thinking that some of these men may have been passed into the W Reserve improperly. It is not intended for unfit men, but for men fit to go to the work for which they have been passed into the Reserve. I have asked the hon. Member for Hough-ion-le-Spring (Mr. Wing) to give me instances to inquire into, and if I find this class is being improperly used I will put an end to it.

Can the hon. Member say whether any men admittedly entitled to a pension if discharged are sent to Army munitions work without any Army pay or pension?

No, I do not think so; but there have been cases where men have been passed into the W Reserve who have had a relapse through sickness or something of the kind. In these cases we restore their military status, and take them into military hospitals, and the families draw separation allowances.

Is the hon. Member aware that these men do not receive separation allowances, and employers will not take them into their service on account of the risk they run. The men cannot get their discharge except from the medical boards, many of whom are not competent?

Men are taken into the W Reserve in order to go to employment which is waiting for them.

Are any steps taken to see that employment is available for these men when they are passed into the Reserve?

That is what the Reserve was created for.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if ho is aware that bricklayers, carpenters, painters, and plumbers who joined the Royal Engineers and passed the trade test have been, owing to physical unfitness, transferred to the Infantry Works Company of the 13th Devons; that these men are working at their respective trades, as they would be if they had remained in the Engineers, but are not receiving the Engineers' rate of pay; that up to 31st December last they received 2d. per hour working pay plus 1s. per day Army pay, but that since the above date they have only received the 1s. per day; and whether he will inquire into this matter with the object of restoring at least the 2d. per hour working pay?

When men are physically unfit to carry out the duties for which they were enlisted, and their physical unfitness is not due to military service, they may be transferred to other units where their services can be utilised, receiving the recognised rates of pay in the new unit. Working pay has ceased universally in Infantry Works Companies from 1st January.

Is the hon. Member aware that many of these men are employed finishing work that contractors have not been able to do on account of not being able to get the men?

I am not aware of it.

asked the Secretary to the Local Government Board if he will say why the office staffs of all shipowners and shipbrokers carrying on business in the port of London are, under certain conditions, able to obtain certificates of exemption from military service from the Board of Trade, and for what reason this privilege is limited to the port of London; and whether he will take steps to put all persons doing similar work in other ports in the same position as those in London?

My right hon. Friend has asked mc to reply to this question. Port Labour Committees were established to deal with the granting of exemption certificates mainly to manual workers, and the Board of Trade think that the office staffs of shipowners and shipbrokers, like all other clerks, should be dealt with by the local tribunals, to whom representations can be made by their employers. The anomalous position of London is due to the fact that there the Board took over an existing scheme which included the clerical staffs and they felt bound to continue on the lines on which the London committee was already working.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider whether the time has not now come in which people carrying on the same business in all the great towns should be put on exactly the same footing?

I will certainly consider that.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether an inquiry has been made into the circumstances at tending the raid on the office of Sir Theodore Cooke; and whether the in ventor of the explosive, in developing which Sir Theodore Cooke has been active, has been detained in this country against his will and with no charge being made against him?

I answered that question yesterday.

Has the War Office come to any decision regarding the nature of the inquiry?

No. I hope we shall come to a decision this afternoon.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Colonel Allett, who was mentioned in dispatches for his work in the Dublin rising is the same officer who was present at the raid on Mr. Sheehy-Skeffington's house on the 28th April and who, being apparently senior officer to both Major Roxborough and Sir Francis Vane, took a party of soldiers with Captain Colthurst to effect this raid, which has been publicly declared by the Royal Commission to be disgraceful; whether the Secretary of State for War is aware that the raid was without the knowledge of the officer commanding the troops in Portobello and directly in contravention of an agreement made between Sir Francis Vane and Major Roxborough, which was, in effect, that Captain Colthurst should not be allowed outside barracks in command of troops; why has Colonel Allett, the leader, in company with Captain Colthurst of the raiding party on the house of Mr. Sheehy-Skeffing-ton, who had been murdered on the previous day, been mentioned in dispatches, whereas Major Sir Francis Vane, who was recommended in dispatches by Colonel Maconachie, C.B., brigadier-general of the 178th brigade, and who was acknowledged by the Royal Commission to be the officer who reported the murders in London, has been left without any mention of his services and without any command; and whether any steps will be taken to remove the impression calculated to be produced under such circumstances that Colonel Allett was the recipient of an honour for his participation in an outrage, and Sir Francis Vane was passed over for bringing to the knowledge of Lord Kitchener the perpetration of murders of which he had been kept in ignorance?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Being a retired officer, reemployed as draft-conducting officer only, Colonel Allett exercised no command, and Accompanied the party on his own initiative. The answer to the second part is in the affirmative. Nothing is known of the agreement referred to in the third part. Such an agreement would, I understand, be irregular. Recommendations for mentions in dispatches are dealt with by General Officers Commanding in Chief, And the Army Council are not concerned with recommendations made to these officers by subordinate commanders, nor is it their practice to interfere with the discretion of the General Officer Commanding in Chief in these matters. I cannot accept my hon. and learned Friend's suggestion in the last part of the question, and see no ground for supposing that such an impression will be created.

Do I understand then that the reason why Colonel Allett was mentioned in dispatches was that he was present, an aider and abettor in this raiding party conducted by Colthurst on the house of the man Colthurst murdered?

Certainly not.

Will the hon. Gentleman be able to reconcile how it is that Colonel Allett, whose only military service was this, was mentioned in dispatches for distinguished conduct in the field, whereas Sir Francis Vane, who communicated for the first time to Lord Kitchener the fact of this murder, and in whose presence the late Prime Minister's private secretary wrote a telegram at his in stance——

Speech.

May I conclude my question. How is it that he has not been mentioned having regard to that service which brought to Lord Kitchener's notice the murder and originated Lord Kitchener's telegram?

The supplementary question is almost as long as the question on the Paper.

asked the Minister of Munitions, with regard to the recent explosion in East London, if he will say who was the man responsible for the accumulation of dangerous explosives in the centre of such a thickly populated neighbourhood; and whether it was absoltely necessary that so great an accumulation should be permitted at any one time even if the exigencies of the War required manufacture in that particular place?

The matter is under the investigation of an expert Committee, whose Report is expected shortly, and, meanwhile, it would not be right of me to deal with the matter. I must not be taken to concur in my hon. and gallant Friend's suggestion that there was any undue accumulation of explosive material at the factory.

Has the Department not had warnings as to the danger of such accumulations by similar explosions which have occurred in Ayrshire?

I think the hon. Member ought to be content that the matter is being investigated.

How does the hon. Gentleman account for the greatness of the explosion in East London if there was no undue accumulation?

That is one of the matters which is the subject of investiga- tion, and my hon. and gallant Friend must be content to await the Report.

Will the Report be presented?

That I cannot say until I have seen the Report.

Then what is the good of my waiting for the Report?

asked the Minister of Munitions if he is aware that the 50 per cent, increase in the railway fares inflicts hardship on munition workers who are employed at a considerable distance from their homes; and whether he will make arrangements that will enable these work people to return home at week-ends at single fare and a third as they could prior to the increase in the fares?

This matter is under the consideration of the Board of Trade, to whom I have made representations on the subject.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that in consequence of the restrictions imposed on the commercial use of copper the price has been enhanced; whether he is aware that simultaneously with the increase in price certain merchants are holding up large stocks with a view to a further rise; whether manufacturers are thereby being driven out of their foreign trade; and whether the Department of Munitions and the Board of Trade will take steps to fix maximum prices or to commandeer stocks?

My information does not bear out the suggestions made in the first two parts of the question. Such copper as can be spared is being, and will continue to be, released so as to maintain the export trade of British manufacturers. By Order, dated 1st January, the Minister of Muntions requisitioned all copper not already allocated to manufacturers for munitions or essential trade purposes. The control over the disposal of stocks of copper is therefore complete.