asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether they have lately released cargoes of fertilisers for Holland; and, if so, whether, in view of the fact that our farmers are much in want of fertilisers and do not send their potato flour to Germany, as is the case with Holland, he could see his way to stopping the supply of fertilisers to Holland?

Instructions have been given to allow certain cargoes of fertilisers which are consigned to the Netherlands Government from abroad, to proceed to their destination conditional upon guarantees being given regarding their distribution. Holland has imported fertilisers in quantities far below the normal figures of pre-war years. Thus 157,000 tons were imported in 1916, as against an average of 1,301,000 tons a year in the three years 1911-13, or 556,000 tons a year after allowing for all exports to other countries.

May I inquire whether the time has not arrived when we cannot afford to export fertilisers to Holland or anyone else?

The fertilisers referred to are fertilisers from abroad.

They have been imported into this country on the hypothesis that we need them: is not that so?

They are fertilisers from neutral countries for Holland.

Is it not the case that there is an exceptional shortness of fertilisers in this country at present?

Of course there is.

Then why do you export them?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether Denmark has supplied this country with the quantities of goods stipulated under the agreement; and, if not, what steps does he propose to take to keep Denmark to her agreement in the future and recover the goods not supplied in the past?

There is no agreement such as the hon. Member assumes to regulate Danish imports into the United Kingdom.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Danish slaughter companies have been sending to Germany about 39 per cent, of the production instead of 14 per cent. As agreed upon; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer I have just given to his previous question.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the London Chamber of Commerce instructed its members not to send goods to neutrals without obtaining adequate guarantees that the goods were for home consumption only, and when, on a protest being made by the commercial community of Denmark, the Foreign Office instructed the London Chamber of Commerce that they must not interfere, why the Foreign Office interfered, in view of the fact that the Danes have not kept their agreement and have failed to supply us with the produce stipulated; can he say why the Foreign Office protects the Danes against our own people; and will he have this policy reversed at once?

I understand that the London Chamber of Commerce have advised their members who may be exporting goods to Denmark that, in order to comply with the Customs (War Powers) Act, 1915, Section 1, they should obtain personal guarantees from their Danish consignees, in addition to those given to His Majesty's Government by the Danish Chamber of Manufacturers' and Merchants' Guild. The Foreign Office have not, as suggested by the hon. Member, "instructed the London Chamber of Commerce that they must not interfere," but have simply asked to see the circular in which the above recommendation was made, and the Chamber's reasons for issuing it.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether there are now a number of cargo steamers loaded up with feeding stuffs for Denmark in British ports; and, if so, will they be allowed to go to Denmark to supply food for animals destined for German consumption when our farmers are so badly off for feeding stuffs for our own animals?

Yes, Sir. The grant of clearance to these vessels is being made dependent on the supply to this country of satisfactory quantities of Danish agricultural produce. I would add that the cargoes of these vessels have not been loaded in the United Kingdom, but have come from overseas.

Seeing that Denmark has failed to forward the supplies she promised, why does the Foreign Office continue to allow these goods to go into Denmark?

No, Sir; Denmark has not failed to do what she promised.

How does the hon. Gentleman reconcile his answer to Question 25 with that he has just given to No. 20, namely, that there is no arrangement whatever in regard to the export of Danish produce to this country?

There is no arrangement with regard to the export here of Danish produce.

Does the Foreign Office hope to make one?

Is it not the fact that the exports of linseed cake to Denmark is the cause of the enormous rise in the price of these articles in this country?

No, Sir; the feeding stuffs referred to are not from this country to Denmark, but from foreign countries

Could you not, when they come here, keep them here for the benefit of our own country?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the Dutch official statistical bureau in January last issued a statement showing that licences had been granted during the space of thirty-three days for the export of 3,274,000 kilos of potato flour to Germany and only of 40,000 kilos of potato flour to this country, he can say why the Foreign Office allow Holland to supply so much to Germany whilst sending so little to this country?

The export in question was of potato flour made of the Dutch potato crop of 1915. It had not been imported into Holland, and being Dutch home produce did not in any way come under the control of His Majesty's Government.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether there is any system in the Navy to ensure that no food refuse or swill is thrown overboard from ships in harbour and that where possible it is brought into port from ships at sea and sold for pig-feeding; and whether, in view of the difficulty the large pig-feeding industry in the vicinity of Edinburgh finds in feeding its stock under present conditions, he can arrange that facilities should be given for pig-feeders to purchase all the refuse which can by care be saved from the Fleet in the Forth?

The disposal of food refuse for feeding pigs has been in operation at certain naval establishments for some time, and the question of extending the system generally to the Fleet and naval bases, wherever practicable, has recently been under the consideration of the Admiralty. The detailed orders which are about to be issued on the subject will provide facilities for the sale locally of the refuse.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether in some agricultural districts ploughmen are still being taken for military service; and whether, if in such districts the supply of ploughmen is regarded as being more than equal to local needs, the military authorities will take immediate steps to release them for work in other districts where they are urgently required?

There are undoubted excesses in certain parts of the country from which agricultural labourers recruited badly in the voluntary days and in which they have been over-protected by tribunals. As demands for ploughmen come in from the war agricultural committees and also on the initiative of local military authorities ploughmen serving as soldiers are sent to meet acute needs.

asked whether the Report of the Agricultural Sub-Committee of the Reconstruction Committee can be laid upon the Table?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will give instructions for the already completed Part I. of the Report of the Agricultural Committee, presided over by Lord Selborne and appointed in August, 1916, to consider and report upon the methods of effecting an increase in the homegrown food supplies, having regard to the need for such an increase in the interest of national security, to be circulated to the Members of the House of Commons before the Government introduce any Bill or Resolutions to carry their agricultural proposals into effect?

The Report will be circulated before the introduction of the Bill which is necessary to carry into effect the agricultural proposals announced by the Prime Minister.

asked what amount of British and Irish public money was paid last year for corn in Roumania; whether any corn was obtained for it; what is the prospect of recovering the money for which no value has been received; and where an audited account of the transaction can be seen?

I have nothing to add to the reply returned to the hon. Member on the 21st February last.

The right hon. Gentleman has omitted to answer the last clause of this question, as to where an audited account of the transaction can be seen.

The transaction, as the House will understand, ought not to be made public.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can give figures showing the ultimate feeding value of the materials used in brewing if consumed as beer and, its by-products being converted by feeding cows, milk, if consumed directly by human beings, and if converted into meat by feeding to cattle, respectively?

A reply to this question is contained in a paragraph, which is too long to read in answer to a Parliamentary question, on page 33 of the Report drawn up by a Committee of the Royal Society, and published this year as Command Paper 8421, a copy of which I am sending the hon. Member.

Would my hon. Friend consider the desirability of restricting the feeding of barley to animals with a view to increasing the proportion used in the making of bread?

The matter has already engaged the attention of the President of the Board.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received petitions from the Aberdeen Chamber of Commerce, the Aberdeen Fish Trade Association, and the Alloa fishermen, pointing out the injurious effects that the prepayment of the railway carriage on fish would have on the fishing industry throughout the country; whether a largely attended deputation of representatives of the fishing industry attended last Wednesday, the 14th, a meeting of the Railway Executive Committee; whether he has received any reply from that body as to the course of action they intend to pursue: and what steps he proposes to take?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the railway companies have given notice to the public that on and after 2nd April next all fish consigned by passenger trains must be carriage-paid in advance; that this regulation will be a hardship to the consignors, many of whom, owing to the high price of fish, have their capital fully employed; and will he recommend to the Railway Executive Committee that the present conditions be allowed to stand?

I have received several representations of an important character with regard to the effect on the fishing industry of the proposed prepayment of passenger train traffic, but I am not at the moment in a position to say more than that I am in communication with the Railway Executive Committee as to the possibility of making some concession in this matter.

Will the hon. Gentleman be able to make a statement at an early date, because the Order comes into force on the 2nd April? Will he be able to make it next week?

I am aware of the urgency, and will facilitate the matter as far as practicable.

Would it not be easier to arrange that the consignee should be liable if the consignor is not able to prepay owing to weather and other reasons at the moment of dispatch?

I will take note of that suggestion.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that the minimum wage in the Gibraltar Dockyard is 13s. 6d. a week, plus 15 per cent, temporary increase for the duration of the War, making 15s. 6d. per week; that the same class of work in the Royal Dockyards in this country is paid at the rate of 25s. per week, plus war bonus 7s., or 32s. per week; seeing that the cost of living at Gibraltar is equally as expensive as here, can he see his way to equalise the payments as to the minimum rates paid to dockyard labourers at Gibraltar and in the home yards; and will he say when the artisans and labourers employed in His Majesty's Dockyard. Gibraltar, may expect a reply to the petition sent in in 1914?

The existing minimum wage for adult male labour is, at Gibraltar, 13s. 6d. a week, plus a war bonus of 15 per cent; and at the home dockyards, 24s. a week, plus a war bonus of 7s. I cannot agree that the cost of living for local entrants at Gibraltar is as high as for workmen of similar grades in this country. As regards the last part of the question, the petition referred to was fully considered, and it was decided that the requirements of the case would more suitably be met by the award of a war bonus than by the grant of permanent increases in the present rates of pay.

Why was not that answer given to the men at Gibraltar instead of being given to the House of Commons two years later?

I imagined it was known; at any rate, the bonus has been given.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these men have not been informed?

The best reply to that is that they have received the bonus of 15 per cent.

After two years?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the in quest held at New Hospital, Stafford, on the body of Private George Arthur Will-day, who died at Brocton Camp; whether he is aware that the Royal Army Medical Corps surgeon declared the man had mitral disease of the heart and enlarged liver and ought to have been rejected, or at best classed in C3; whether he has noted the coroner's reprobation of the doctor who carelessly passed this man into the Army; and what action does he propose to take upon the case?

I have called for a Report, and I will communicate with my hon. Friend.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the privilege of one month's furlough to time-expired soldiers is still in existence if they elect to continue to serve for the duration of the War; and if a man who, having completed thirteen years in the Army, elects to continue to serve either for the duration of the War or to complete twenty-one years' service will be on the footing of a conscript although he has never left the Army at all?

Yes, Sir; the privilege is still in existence, provided that the exigencies of the service permit, and that accommodation in leave boats or transports is available in the case of men overseas. If my hon. Friend will let me have particulars of the case which he has in mind in the last part of the question, I will let him know how the matter stands.

Would the hon. Gentleman state if it is customary to give equality in each case, and not give leave once, twice, or three times to one man, when other men have had no leave at all?

We cannot give leave two or three times to the same man because he is time-expired.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether a circular has been issued directing the military authorities to bring under the review of the tribunals all exempted men under the age of thirty-one, including those engaged in agriculture?

Instructions have been issued under the directions of the War Cabinet that all certificates of exemption granted to men under thirty-one years of age are to be reviewed with certain exceptions. Men engaged in agriculture are among the exceptions.

Are the recruiting authorities paying any attention to it? Are they not reviewing the cases of men in agriculture under the age of thirty-one?

All that I know is that we have issued these instructions. If my right hon. Friend will give me some cases where they have not paid any attention to the instructions, I will look into them.

When the exemptions have been for a short time, such as two months, is it not possible for the War Office to arrange that such cases shall not be reviewed until the time has expired?

asked whether the military authorities maintain that a notice has been sent before 1st September, 1916, to a man who has already been rejected for military service within the meaning of Section 3 (2) of the Military Service Act (Session 2), although the man never received such notice in consequence of its being sent either to an address which he never occupied or to an address which he had left, he having properly registered his change of address; and whether any such cases have been tested in the Law Courts, and with what result?

In all cases which have been referred to the War Office in which the notice has been misdirected or sent to an address at which the man never resided, instructions have been issued that the man is not liable for service. In cases in which the man has changed his address and the military authorities have not been notified of the change of address and the notice has been sent to the man's last registered place of abode of which the recruiting officer had notice, it is considered that the military authorities have complied with the terms of Section 3 (2) of the Military Service Act, 1916 (Secsion 2). A case in which the point is raised is being taken to the High Court.

Am I to understand from that, that if a man has changed his address, and has properly notified the military authorities, and they have sent a summons to the wrong address, and the summons has not been received, then the man is exempted?

I do not think the hon. Member can understand that.

Then what does the answer mean? That is the question I have put on the Paper.

asked whether an-officer who is dismissed the Service for giving information which, though in the interests of the country, is not in the interests of his superior officers is, if he be of military age, immediately afterwards conscripted as a private soldier?

Any officer of military age, provided he is ordinarily resident in Great Britain, and has been dismissed the Service on grounds other than that of ill-health, is liable to be called up for service under the Military-Service Acts, 1916.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that men who are classified in category C1 for Home service are being drafted into labour battalions for service abroad; whether this procedure is in accordance with Army Council instructions; and, if not, whether he will take steps to secure-the observance of the said instructions?

asked by what authority men who are in C category are being sent abroad attached to labour battalions, seeing that these men have been passed for Home service only?

The authority is-that of the Army Council. I would remind my hon. Friends that these classifications are not statutory, but are a convenient method of expressing certain general standards of medical fitness.

Will my hon. Friend say whether these Army Council instructions-are available to Members of this House, or whether there are any in existence dealing with matters of this kind of which we do not know?

I will send my hon. Friend a copy of this particular Army Council instruction, No. 204.

What I asked was whether there are others in existence which are not published?

Yes, though not referring to this. But every Army Council instruction is not of public utility.

No, but it affects the public.

Are these men medically re-examined?

I understand they are medically re-examined. Whether they are re-classified I do not know; but I may tell my hon. Friend that we are reviewing all the classifications.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the Regulations governing the work and pay of conscientious objectors at Princetown; will he give the rate of pay and allowances, and say how many days per week these men are required to work and how many hours a day; and whether they are free to roam without supervision after their work is finished until 9.30 p.m.?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. The rate of pay of all conscientious objectors employed under the Committee on the Employment of Conscientious Objectors is 8d. a day, from which a deduction, up to a maximum of 6d. a day, is made in cases where a separation allowance is being paid to the man's dependants. No allowances are paid to the men, except that a ration allowance of 1s. 7d. a day is paid to any man who is absent, with the Committee's approval, for a complete day from his quarters. The men at Princetown are required to work ten hours per day for five days in the week, and six and a half hours on Saturdays. The men are not prisoners and are at liberty between the hour of ceasing work and 9.30 p.m., when they have to be in their quarters.

asked whether the conscientious objectors now boarded at Princetown are still in receipt of rations on the following scale: Bread, 1½ lbs. per day or. 10½ lbs. per week, meat ¾lb. per day or 5½lbs. per week, potatoes ¼lb. per day or 1¾lbs. per week, ¼lb. per day or 1¾lbs. per week, margarine 2 ozs. per day or 14 ozs. per week, together with two pints of tea per day; and, if so, seeing that these rations exceed the allowances under the Food Controller's scale for persons in ordinary civil life, will he consider the advisability of placing these men on a less generous diet?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. The hon. Member has been misinformed as to the dietary, which has been framed so as to comply with the Food Controller's scale. The amount allowed of the articles which he mentions is as follows: Bread 9 ozs. a day, meat 6 ozs. a day, potatoes 8 ozs. a week, jam 2 ozs. a day, margarine ¾ ozs. a day, tea one pint a day.

Is it not a fact that the rations stated in my question were posted at Princetown before the conscientious objectors arrived?

I have given my hon. Friend the facts as they are now.

Will the hon. Member answer my question?

If the hon. Member will put down a question I shall be glad to answer it.

I have put it down.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that, although education authorities are in want of teachers, there are qualified teachers in the Army of C3 qualification who are waiting to be used as substitutes without any immediate prospect of being so used; and whether, in the circum stances mentioned, he will arrange for qualified teachers to be put on Reserve and sent back to their work?

Steps have already been taken to order the transfer to the Reserve of teachers in medical categories below B I who are serving in this country, and who before enlistment were employed as teachers under local education authorities.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will have further inquiry made into the case of Gordon Barnes, Tallentire, Cockermouth, who, while suffering from an injured foot and unable to wear a boot, was taken by the military authorities and placed in the hospital at Carlisle; and if he can secure this man's release, at least temporarily, so that he can supervise the work on his farm which, though unfit for military service, he is able to do?

I have already been in communication with my hon. Friend about this case. In accordance with his wish, I am having further inquiries made. When I receive a reply I will communicate with my hon. Friend.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if the military representative on the Bridlington (Yorkshire) military service tribunal is a Councillor Harker, whose wife is a member of the tribunal; and, seeing that it is the common practice of the military representative to threaten the tribunal before a decision is given that, unless the decision is in accord with his demand, he will take the case to the Appeal Tribunal, and in view of the resentment of many members of the tribunal with the conduct of the military representative, will he take steps to have some other person appointed in his place?

No complaints have been received about the way that Mr. Harker performs his duties, which are voluntary, and it is not proposed to take any action in regard to him.

Does the hon. Gentleman think it a desirable thing that a military representative on a tribunal should, before the tribunal decides a case, say that he will appeal unless he gets his own way?

I must have further particulars about that allegation. I cannot accept my hon. Friend's statement.

It is a fact.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War what instructions have been given to the military representatives on the military service tribunals to carry out the undertaking given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the Cabinet regard the production of food as even more important than the sending of additional men into the Army?

Instructions have been given to the recruiting officers in England and Wales that in withdrawing men from agriculture for service in the Army the necessity for maintaining food production must not be lost sight of, and that for this purpose opportunity should be given to the local agricultural representatives to confer with recruiting officers as to the availability for service of individual men. Similar instructions have been issued in Scotland through the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Scottish Command.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office why Private T. Casey, of the Seaforth Highlanders and formerly in an Irish regiment, has been refused a transfer to an Irish unit; and whether he will inquire into the case and arrange the transfer?

Casey was serving in the A.S.C., and was transferred to a Scottish regiment. On his applying for transfer to an Irish regiment inquiries were instituted, and it was discovered that Casey was fifty years of age and therefore too old for the Infantry. Instructions have been given for his retransfer to the Army Service Corps, in which he enlisted voluntarily.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that cases are constantly arising of disobedience to the instructions of the War Office by refusal to Irish recruits of the right to go into Irish regiments? May I add that a couple of days ago I heard of an Irishman who wanted to be put into an Irish regiment being compelled to go into a Scottish regiment and wear kilts for the first time?

My hon. Friend and his colleagues know that in each case brought to the notice of the War Office where that has been clone it has been rectified.

May I hope, if I bring this case before my hon. Friend, that it will be rectified?

I can assure my hon. Friend that it will be investigated.