asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food if Australian and New Zealand beef and mutton is landed at London Docks at 6d. and 9d. per 1b.; and, if so, will he say who gets the difference between the above price and current charges?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Poplar on 18th June by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade setting out the terms on which the meat in question is brought to this country and placed on the market.

The hon. Gentleman has not answered the latter part of my question. The answer given on the date he mentions gives no idea who gets the difference between price at which it is sold by the Department and the price at which it is sold to the public.

Will the hon. Gentleman give us that information?

It is obviously no use asking supplementary questions of the hon. and gallant Member, who is only replying on behalf of the office, pending the vacancy being filled.

asked if the present prices of meat are on account of the Government Departments lifting artificially prices in the interests of the home producers of meat?

I am not able to make any statement on this matter at the moment.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture what steps, if any, the Government propose to take to-prevent the spreading of the potato blight in Ireland; if facilities or a Government Grant for spraying will be placed at the disposal of plot holders in Ireland; and if the plots are all cultivated by working men with small wages?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. A full statement on this matter was made by the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture in answer to the hon. Member for East Mayo on the 21st June. I understand that loans for the purchase of sprayers are being granted by the Department to farmers, labourers, and others growing potatoes; but it is not proposed' to give any Grant for the purpose. No doubt a very large number of plots are being cultivated by shopkeepers, clerks, tradesmen, etc.

Is it intended to make spraying compulsory so as to prevent the disease spreading?

Yes, if there is any indication that it is necessary, but at present there is no indication that there is any necessity for compulsion.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether his attention has been called to the consequences of food shopping; whether he is aware that women have to wait outside shops for two, three, and four hours in the hope of being able to buy margarine and sugar, and after waiting often find the stock gone by the time their turn comes; that the long waiting in any kind of weather has imposed a strain upon the health of some of the women, and has caused some of the children to contract pneumonia and bronchitis; and whether it is the intention of his Department to organise a better system of distribution?

The question of the better distribution of foodstuffs is receiving the Food Controller's attention. I would refer to my answer given yesterday to the hon. Member for South West Ham, in which I asked that Members would, for the moment, refrain from raising questions as to control of prices and profits, which could only be answered when the general policy of the Food Controller is determined. I hope that Members will apply the same principle to questions as to the supply and distribution of foodstuffs and other points of general policy.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether on six separate occasions daring the past few weeks vans were sent by a wholesale provision merchant to the goods yard of the Great Eastern Railway Company in the City to obtain delivery of a large quantity of bacon; that on each occasion delivery was refused; that the said bacon subsequently became unfit for human food; and whether he will take steps to prevent similar delays and mismanagement in the future?

I am not aware of the cases to which the hon. and gallant Gentleman alludes. Perhaps, if he has reason to think that the railway arrangements were at fault, he will furnish me with further particulars in order that the matter may be investigated.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if his attention has been drawn to the treatment of sailors who have had the misfortune of losing their effects on ships which have been submarined; if he is aware that James Duggan, 46, Portland Row, Dublin, employed on the ss. "Amneree," lost his outfit, valued at £10, and was twenty-three hours hi an open boat after the "Amneree" was torpedoed; if he is aware that this claim was rejected by the Committee on cases of hardship; and if he will see that this case will be sympathetically reconsidered?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. The facts are substantially as stated in the question. I should explain that the Committee on cases of hardship is limited to the consideration of cases in which the seaman had insufficient means or opportunity for insuring against the risk of loss of his effects. I am informed that the reason why this particular claim could not be admitted was that the claimant had had every opportunity of insuring against this particular loss, having had his attention specially drawn to the matter by the Captain and Board of Trade Superintendent, but preferred not to insure.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has discovered the source of supply of petrol to a number of cars on pleasure excursions still to be seen upon the roads; and whether steps will be taken to stop this supply?

I am afraid that it is the case that a certain number of persons still use motor cars for purposes which are no: altogether essential, the petrol for the purpose often being obtained from savings on the restricted amounts which were authorised by the petrol licences.

May I ask whether any attempt is made to check the purposes for which cars are used by stopping cars on the road and ascertaining the purposes for which they are used?

The function of my Department lies in restricting the use of petrol by licences, and very severe restrictions have been imposed since 1st May. We believe that these cases arise out of savings effected in supplies received prior to that date.

Is it not necessary to ascertain how the cars are being used in order to see that the conditions are being fulfilled?

The most effective method is to restrict supplies.

Is it not a fact that the restrictions are making it less and less possible to have anything but business journeys, and that the question will cure itself?

That is what I tried to convey in reply to the supplementary questions. As far as our evidence goes, what pleasure riding goes on now is attributable to savings in petrol supplies received prior to 1st May. I think my hon. Friend is quite correct and that the matter will now solve itself.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of controlled establishments having foreign book-debts which they have been unable to collect owing to the War, a due reserve will be allowed before computing the profits of the company for the purpose either of the Excess Profits Tax or the munitions levy?

Where in these circumstances a reserve has been made, the payment of an appropriate amount of Excess Profits Duty is allowed to remain in abeyance, and a like course will be followed for munitions levy.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the case of controlled establishments holding moneys in the countries of neutrals or of our Allies, the valuation of such moneys for the purpose of determining the profits of the company, whether for Excess Profits Tax or Munitions Levy, shall be taken at the rate of exchange current on the date at which the account is made up?

Ordinarily the course suggested by the hon. Member would be adopted, but in any case in which an obviously inequitable result would be produced, suitable alternative methods would be considered.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, when application is made to the Inland Revenue Commissioners for allowances on account of depreciation or obsolescence of machinery or any other assets belonging to controlled firms, he can give an undertaking that such allowances shall not be at less favour able rates than the controlled firm has used in those years by which its standard profit is computed without prejudice to any exceptional consideration that may be due to circumstances caused by the War?

I can hardly conceive that there are circumstances—save in the most exceptional cases—in which at less favourable rate of allowance for wear and tear of machinery or plant would be appropriate during the war period as compared with the pre-war period. If the hon. Member has any specific case in mind, perhaps he will furnish me with particulars.

asked the President of the Board of Education whether his staff and offices have been or soon will be re moved to South Kensington; how many persons are affected by the removal and for what period the removal is contemplated; and whether, as a result, the Victoria and Albert Museum will be in whole or partially closed for the present?

The removal of the Board's offices to South Kensington will begin at the end of this week, and a circular on the subject has been issued, a copy of which I am sending to my hon. Friend, to which I may refer him for particulars. The number of members of the Board's staff who will be moved to South Kensington is about 600. I certainly do not contemplate remaining there a day longer than is absolutely necessary for the prosecution of the War. A large part of the Museum will remain open to the public.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if the Government have decided on the building in which the Convention will meet to consider the Irish question; whether the council chamber of the Dublin municipal buildings has been considered; and if he will state the date of the Convention?

As to the building, I have nothing to add to the answer I gave yesterday. The date of meeting will be announced as soon as the arrangements are complete.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he is aware that injury has been caused to the Irish tourist industry by the withdrawal of all excursion and tourist facilities, excepting those places where railway companies have hotels, and that this preferential treatment is tantamount to subsidising opposition to private enterprise out of public funds; and if the Government is prepared to appoint a committee of business men to inquire into the matter and the position arising therefrom throughout Ireland?

I have asked for information on this subject from the Irish Railway Executive Committee.

asked the Under secretary of State for War if any steps are being taken to have a census taken of soldiers who have not had leave from the front for eighteen months and more; if so, when it will be completed; and, if not, why it has not been taken?

I have no information whether the Commander-in-Chief has taken a census, as my hon. Friend suggests. Such a matter is within his discretion. I know that he gives the most sympathetic consideration to the question of leave, and I understand that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State is in communication with him on the subject at the present time.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will state in simple form under what conditions discharged soldiers are exempt from being called up under the Military Service (Review of Exceptions) Act and publish the same

Under the Military Service (Review of Exceptions) Act, 1917, a man is exempt from being called up under the Act

Does the hon. Gentleman by "special board" mean the verdict of the board resulting in an ordinary discharge

The point of the hon. Member is covered by my answer, which is very long. Perhaps my hon. Friend, when hi3 reads it, will see that his point is met.

As the discharge paper does not usually contain the specific reason for the man's discharge, and does not, for instance, mention that he has been wounded, is it sufficient for him to say on the back of the form that he has been wounded or must he prove that he has been wounded?

No; I think my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary has answered that question repeatedly. If the man has been wounded, he fills up the form on the back to that effect.

Will instructions to that effect be issued to all the recruiting officers?

I think the instructions which have been issued to the recruiting officers cover the point.

Is it not a fact that since the undertaking given by the Undersecretary recruiting officers have, nevertheless, called up men who have been discharged?

And have put them into the Army?

Will a man who has actually been put into the Army under such a misapprehension be entitled to his discharge?

asked the Undersecretary of State for War what "is the cause, and under what Regulation, Irishmen who were rejected in Dublin as medically unfit for service and given certificates that they were permanently medically unfit should be called to report themselves for further medical examination in Great Britain, having been induced to leave Ireland to take temporary employment; and if he will issue instructions to recruiting officers to cease such treatment of men who obtained employment on the strength of rejection certificates issued in Ireland by the military?

If the hon. Member will supply particulars of specific cases inquiry will be made into the facts of each case, but I must refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him on the 7th March, 1917, and remind him that Irishmen who come to Great Britain and enter into employment on munition work, other contracts with Government Departments, port transport work or agriculture, are considered to be resident in Great Britain for a special purpose within the meaning of the Military Service Acts, 1916, and may be provided by the Employment Exchange with a card as evidence that they are ordinarily resident in Ireland and only temporarily resident in Great Britain for a special purpose. If Irishmen come to Great Britain and enter into employment not included in the arrangement with the Board of Trade they come within the provisions of the Military Service Acts as and when they become ordinarily resident in Great Britain, unless they can show that they are resident in Great Britain for a special purpose; and an Irishman who has offered himself for enlistment since 15th August, 1915, and been rejected for service, is liable to be sent the statutory notice under the Military Service (Review of Exceptions) Act, 1917, as and when he becomes ordinarily resident in Great Britain. I must also remind the hon. Member that the mere fact that a man has been rejected for military service in Ireland does not necessarily mean that ho is an Irishman ordinarily resident in Ireland.

asked the Under secretary of State for War if a number of Irishmen who were transferred by Government Departments in Ireland to posts in Government Departments in Great Britain have received calling-up papers from military authorities and that the Government Departments have issued papers to the men releasing them for military service; whether this arrangement to conscript Irishmen has the approval of the War Office; and if he will see that justice will be done to these men who were induced to leave Ireland to take up employment in Great Britain?

If the hon. Member will supply particulars of specific cases in which Irishmen employed in Government Departments have been transferred from Ireland for the purpose of working in Great Britain and have now been sent notices calling them up for military service, inquiries will be made into the facts of each case. The hon. Member was informed on the 24th May, 1917, that Irishmen who were employed in Government offices in Ireland and who had been transferred to Government offices in Great Britain would, if ordinarily resident in Ireland, be excepted from the liability to military service under the Military Service Acts, 1916.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the methods of the Excise authorities to obtain recruits; if he is aware that since the outbreak of war they induced a number of Irishmen to come to England to do Government work and that they are now releasing them for military service although they are not ordinarily resident in Great Britain; and if he will see that this treatment will not be tolerated by the War Office?

I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given on 25th June to the hon. Member for Wicklow, W., by my hon. Friend the Joint Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and on 24th May by my hon. Friend the Undersecretary of State to the hon. Member for Dublin Harbour.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will cause inquiries to be made into the case of Private Thomas Tynam, C Company, 11th platoon, 2/8th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, Taverham Camp, Norfolk; if this man for the time he was in Great Britain engaged in work of national importance and that his ordinary residence was in Dublin; if he will order this man's discharge; if he will issue instructions that would prevent recruiting officers interfering with Irishmen who were induced to leave Ireland to perform work of national importance; and if this man was rejected medically unfit before leaving Dublin?

Inquiries have been made into the facts of this case, and it has been ascertained that Tynam, or Lynam, was living in Glasgow, and registered there under the National Registration Act on the 4th December, 1915. He was called up to report for service with the Colours on the 18th April, 1916, the calling up notice being returned marked, "Not found." The police were subsequently requested to make inquiries, and reported that they were unable to trace Lynam, and in August, 1916, Lynam's name and description were sent to the Editor of the "Police Gazette," as a result of which he was traced and advised by the police to report to the recruiting officer at Glasgow. Lynam reported to the recruiting officer on the 7th September, 1916, and was medically examined and classified as temporarily unfit for a period of three months. On reporting to the recruiting officer he made no claim to be an Irishman not ordinarily resident in Great Britain, or to have been previously rejected for military service. At the expiration of three months Lynam was again called up for medical examination and was re-examined and passed as fit for garrison duty abroad (B1), but he was not then posted to a unit. On the 14th May, 1917, Lynam was called up to report for service with the Colours, and reported in accordance with the notice and was posted to the 2/8th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, and is at present stationed at Taverham Camp, Norfolk. The recruiting officer at Glasgow reports that although Lynam reported at the recruiting office on no fewer than three occasions, on no occasion did he claim to be excepted from the liability to military service as an Irishman who was not ordinarily resident in Great Britain, nor did he state that he had been rejected for service or produce any evidence of such rejection, and in these circumstances the recruiting officer would appear to have been perfectly justified in posting Lynam to a unit. Inquiries are being made with respect to the statement that Lynam offered himsef for enlistment in Dublin and was rejected on medical grounds.