asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether British subjects resident in Russia who have been or are to be conscripted under the recent Act of Parliament and the convention with Russian following thereon, and who prefer to serve in the British Army, will have their passages and other travelling expenses paid for them; and whether similar terms will apply to Russian subjects conscripted in this country?

The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part of the question, arrangements will be made to secure that Russians who are unable to pay the expenses of their return to Russia are not thereby deprived of the opportunity of returning.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether on the occasion of his visit to Paris last week he was accompanied by Lord Hardinge?

No, Sir.

asked the Prime Minister whether he anticipates being in a position to make a statement to the House on the result of the deliberations of the Paris Conference?

I regret that it is not possible to make any statement on the subject.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Prime Minister whether he can give the House any further information with regard to the circumstances attending and the objects of the visit of the Labour Mission to Paris?

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to my Noble Friend yesterday.

Arising out of the answer of the Leader of the House to my Noble Friend, are we to understand that the Government have no knowledge at all of what is taking place in Paris at a conference at which one of the members of the War Cabinet is present? Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House no information about it at all? Are we to understand that a member of the War Cabinet is there en- tirely on his own responsibility and without consultation with his colleagues, and, for no mission on which the War Cabinet is concerned?

Yes; the hon. Gentleman has exactly described the situation. I have no information whatever as to what is taking place in Paris. My right hon. Friend is only doing what he has done before—that is, attending a meeting of the Labour party, of which he still continues to be secretary.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman see that the position of his right hon. colleague at an international conference is radically different from his position at domestic meetings in this House; and in these circumstances it is possible for the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Barnard Castle to dissociate himself from his character as a member of the War Cabinet? Consequently, can the mission to which he has gone be other than an official mission in the eyes of the world?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong in describing it as an "international conference." It is a meeting of Allies—members of the Labour party of the Allied countries—and the Government have no knowledge of what is taking place. I am quite sure, however, that my right hon. Friend will not do anything to commit the Government to any action.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information yet as to whether or not the hon. Member for Leicester was conveyed to France on one of His Majesty's ships?

I said yesterday that I had reason to believe that he had gone in the ordinary way. I got my information from the Admiralty, and I have no doubt it is accurate.

As a matter of public urgency, I would ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, in order that the House may be informed why the Labour Member of the War Cabinet is in Paris at a conference which may have an effect upon our international relations, and what instructions, if any, he has had for that conference?

The hon. Member has just heard that there have been no instructions given, and that the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Barnard Castle has gone to the conference as an independent member of the Labour party and not as a representative of the Government.

Well, then, Mr. Speaker, I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the question that a member of the War Cabinet is out of the country on a mission about which we know nothing, and in order that we may find out from the Government why they approve of such proceedings?

Will the hon. Member bring me the form?

having handed in his Motion—

The hon. Member for East Edinburgh proposes to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House in order to call attention to the action of a member of the War Cabinet on a mission of which the House has no information. I think I must really decline to accept the matter as one of urgency.

Hear, hear!

The right hon. Gentleman in question has gone, as I understand, entirely on his own responsibility and as a member of the Labour party. That is the information which has been publicly given.

Put it to the House, Sir!

On a point of Order. Is it not a matter of urgent importance to this House that a member of the War Cabinet should be out of the country on an international mission at a critical time in the War without the knowledge of his colleagues in the Cabinet?

I think the hon. Gentleman ought to wait until the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Barnard Castle returns.

No!

I believe he will be back to-morrow.

The mischief will have been done then.

I say what I do on the grounds of equity. The right hon. Gentleman has been attacked in his absence He will return to this country either to-morrow or the next day. It is only fair to the right hon. Gentleman that he should be here.

On a point of Order. May I point out that I am making no attack on the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Barnard Castle. My attack is on the War Cabinet who have permitted, without their approval, and without their knowledge— which they received afterwards—the absence of one of their members out of the country. It may be on a matter of international importance at a critical juncture in the War?

The hon. Member has put his Motion to the effect that he desires to call attention to the absence of a member of the War Cabinet about which the House has no information. I have explained the reason why the right hon. Gentleman is not here and why he ought to be here to defend himself.

May I ask the Leader of the House how it is that the Cabinet allow a fellow Member to be associated with the hon. Member for Leicester?

The name of the hon. Member for Leicester is not in the Motion.

On a point of Order. May I ask your ruling, Mr. Speaker, as to whether this will still be a matter of urgency when the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Barnard Castle returns? If a Motion similar to that which has been moved by the hon. Member is put forward will it still be urgent and in order?

I think so. I have refused the Motion entirely on the ground that the right hon. Gentleman who, as we have been informed, has undertaken this mission without previously consulting the War Cabinet, is absent to-day and, therefore, can give no explanation. I think it is fair that he should be here.

I shall move it to-morrow.

I beg to submit, Sir, that it is necessary after all that has transpired—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"]

I have given my ruling, and that concludes the matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has now inquired into the circumstances under which a memorandum entitled "Notes on Strategy" was sent out last week with the names of three members of the War Cabinet; and whether the views and policy of this memorandum are those of the Government?

The memorandum which is unsigned, was issued without the knowledge or the consent of the three members of the Government whose names figure on the council of the society. His Majesty's Government take no responsibility for the views expressed in the memorandum.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to an incident in York Station on the 16th instant, when about 11 p.m. an officer seized a mug of hot coffee from a soldier's hand and, without any warning or provocation, poured the contents over the man's bare head and down his neck; and what steps have been taken to deal with this officer?

An explanation has now been received of this incident from the officer concerned, and it is being considered by the military authorities.

When may I repeat the question, so as to have an answer?

On Tuesday of next week.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any of the officials of the Grove Park establishment for the training of officers have recently been prosecuted, and with what result; and what steps his Department has taken, or proposes to take, to deal with that place?

I presume that my hon. Friend is referring to the recent prosecution of an officer at the Central Criminal Court. This officer was not connected in any way with the establishment for training officers at Grove Park.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) if Lieutenant-Colonel Monteagle Brown, of the 2nd Ministers, has been deprived of the command of his battalion in France, and, if so, will he say why; whether he is now in England and how employed; whether officers and men from Reserve battalions of the Munsters in Ireland when under orders to proceed to France expressed a wish not to be sent to this officer's regiment; whether complaints have been made in France as to this officer's conduct as to the treatment of his men, and if officers of his regiment are continually applying for transfers; whether he has any official information showing that this officer in France in June, 1916, actually accused a senior officer of the Munsters of being a Sinn Feiner, or that at Loos in August, 1916, he refused the request of a company commander to bring the Roman Catholic chaplain to a sergeant of the Munsters who was mortally wounded in a raid, although the chaplain was only a quarter of a mile away at the time; whether the soldier died without receiving comfort from his priest; (2) whether he has any official information showing that Lieutenant-Colonel Monteagle Brown, at Guillemont, on 3rd September, 1916, threatened to place a senior officer of the Munsters under arrest for acting without his orders when at a critical period of the attack the officer in question went to the assistance of an Irish regiment, who were for the moment staggered through the loss of all their senior officers, and linking arms with their battalion piper, led them through a storm of shells and machine-gun bullets to the final objective, which they carried with great dash; whether he is aware that this officer went into the battle with both arms wounded and in bandages, against the orders of the medical officer, and after leading his men so bravely during the day was buried by a bursting shell that night and that no attempt was made by his commanding officer to find or rescue him though reported missing; whether he is aware that this officer was buried for eleven hours, and when rescued again rejoined his unit and refused to go to hospital; whether Colonel Monteagle Brown refused to recommend the officer in question for honours, though the bravery and heroic conduct of the officer was well known and much commented on throughout the 16th Division; and if the Army Council will cause an inquiry to be held into the conduct of this officer?

As this officer has already been called upon to resign his commission on account of adverse reports made by his superiors, I do not think that any useful purpose would now be served by making the inquiries suggested by the hon. Member.

Has he got a very good report from his senior officer?

I cannot answer that offhand.

Did this officer make a statement that he went over the top on the night that Major William Redmond was killed, when he was not within twenty miles of the firing line?

I cannot answer that offhand.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether the names mentioned in the dispatches submitted by Generals Aitken, Wapshawe, Tighe, and others in the early stages of the East African campaign will now be published?

As my hon. and gallant Friend was informed on 21st November last, General Smuts' dispatch of 8th May, 1916, included the names of officers and men mentioned for distinguished service in East Africa from the beginning of operations. It is not proposed to add any further names to the lists already published.

Why are these names mentioned by the Generals I refer to not published? There is a very great number of names which have not been published yet, though they have been mentioned.

I will look into it, but I am informed that General Smuts' dispatch includes the names of officers and men mentioned for distinguished service.

Not all the officers.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether the insults and attempts at injury to soldiers in uniform which have become frequent in Ireland have been under the attention of the Army Council; and will he say what steps have been taken and orders issued by the Irish command, in conjunction with the Irish Government, to defend isolated parties of unarmed soldiers from molestation?

I am informed by the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief in Ireland that, excluding the few days after the release of the prisoners, no cases of the kind referred to by my hon. and gallant Friend are reported. There are rumours from time to time, but inquiry has failed to substantiate cases other than those of interference with the military police when arresting soldiers. The military authorities in Ireland, in conjunction with the Irish Government, are fully competent to deal with the matter.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the 1/7th Highland Light Infantry, Bridgeton Battalion, has during the past two years had continuous foreign service; and whether an effort will be made to secure home leave for those privates who have had no home leave for over two years?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the statement which I made last night in Debate.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his Department can see their way to grant a meritorious service pension to Major Parr Campbell, late 2nd Seaforth Highlanders, in view of the fact that services rendered during the South African War should be allowed to reckon in his favour, he having retired voluntarily at 53½ years of age after thirty-five years' service in the Army with three campaigns to his credit and mentioned in dispatches, such South African service having made more than good the deficiency of age and service?

A retired combatant officer is not entitled to a reward for distinguished or meritorious service if his retirement was voluntary, as in this case.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether there is any legal objection to the employment of conscientious objectors in the various theatres of war in non-combatant service; and, if not, will he consider the advisability of removing the five sons of Mr. Dunn, the hatter, now enjoying themselves in country houses, with corresponding comforts, in the country, to some theatre where they may have the privilege of sharing war hardships with our brave soldiers even if they refuse to fight with them?

Four of these men hold certificates of exemption from military service. The position of the youngest is not known in the War Office. As I explained to my hon. Friend in answer to his questions on the 25th inst., I am not in a position to interfere or to adopt his suggestion.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the first part of the question about legal objection?

As I understand it these four men appealed from the local tribunal at St. Albans to the Appeal Tribunal.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the general question whether there is any legal objection to the employment of conscientious objectors in the various theatres of war in non-combatant service?

The hon. Gentleman may know that there are two types of conscientious objectors. One is the absolutist who refuses to accept any form of military service at all, and the other the alternativist, who is prepared to accept work of national importance. I assume these four men were alternativists and did accept work of national importance.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that great indignation is arising in the country at the action of this Committee in giving these cowards and shirkers soft jobs?

Are they making hats still?

I believe not. They are making hay.

asked the Undersecretary for War whether his attention has been called to the case of Private James C. Pedersen, No. 376550, 2/10th Battalion Royal Scots, a conscientious objector, who was court-martialled at Coldingham, near Berwick-on-Tweed, on 11th July, and sentenced to eighteen months' hard labour, with six months remitted; whether the prisoner was taken away from Coldingham on 17th July; whether he can give any reason for the refusal of the military authorities to inform Pedersen's wife where he was being taken to, except that he was being conveyed to a detention barracks; whether such procedure is contrary to Regulations, as to be in order Pedersen should have been sent direct to a civil prison; and can he see his way to allowing Pedersen's wife to be informed of his present whereabouts?

Inquiries are being made, and I will communicate with my right hon. Friend as soon as they are completed.

asked whether American subjects or their sons of military age are eligible for commissions in all or any regiments of the British Army, or, failing commissions, are they allowed to enlist in the ranks?

American subjects are not eligible for combatant commissions. If they are approved for enlistment in accordance with a recognised procedure, which includes the making of suitable inquiries, they are allowed to enlist up to the legally permitted percentage in any corps.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether this applies to all the Allies? Will a Russian gentleman of military experience be eligible for a commission?

I believe not, but they have opportunities open to them by joining the Russian Army.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has now got the promised report relative to the case of Private Thomas Cleary, No. 54/093,679, trade clerk, now transferred to the Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry, F company, Hut 49, Golden Hill, Freshwater, Isle of Wight; whether he is aware that Thomas Cleary joined the Army Service Corps as a clerk in April, 1915; if he will say why this man was transferred to an Infantry regiment against his will; whether Cleary protested; whether his protest was overruled although his transfer was illegal; and if he will now have this case considered with the view of returning this man to the corps he joined when he entered the Service and to the position he occupied in that corps?

Cleary enlisted for general service. His transfer to Infantry was made under the Army Transfers Act, and was not, therefore, illegal, as my hon. Friend states. He made no protest at the time of the transfer. All category A men who can be spared are being transferred to fighting from non-fighting corps, and there is no intention of retransferring them back.

Is the hon. Member aware of the fact from correspondence I submitted to him that he joined as a clerk?

That may be so. It all depends upon his attestation. I gather from the answer that he signed a general service form. As the hon. Member knows, in 1915 we passed the Military Transfer Act, which makes it possible for the War Office authorities to transfer men from one branch of the Service to another.

asked the Undersecretary for War whether his attention has been called to the numerous cases of men in the theatrical and music-hall profession who are said through undue influence either to have obtained exemption or jobs which keep them to London and allow them to pursue their ordinary avocations as usual; whether he is aware that men in the theatrical profession who have joined the Army are able to continue their ordinary theatrical and music-hall duties at night; and whether he will explain why this is permitted in view of the spirit and letter of the military regulations?

The questions of exemptions and low category classifications held by members of the theatrical and music-hall profession have been the subject of searching inquiry on the part of the recruiting authorities. The facilities afforded by the Review of Exceptions Act have been used to the utmost in all cases in which there was reason to suspect impropriety, and it is thought that the number of men holding improper classifications has been largely reduced. The question is one purely for tribunals, and applications for review have in all cases been made by the military representatives where there has been any prospect of success. As regards the question of serving soldiers taking part in theatrical performances at night, I would ask my hon. and gallant Friend for specific cases, and I will inquire into them. It seems quite possible, however, that soldiers stationed in London may have completed their military duties for the day and be in possession of passes, which would enable them to attend a theatre at night.

Has the hon. Gentleman not seen repeated letters and severe comments in the Press on this subject?

I have seen some letters. I think I have answered all the points put by my hon. Friend in the question.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that there are several soldiers in London who have permanent engagements at theatres and music-halls?

I am not aware of that, but if a man is performing his military duties during the day I do not see any reason why he should not be allowed to do this at night.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how it is that these gentlemen can get positions in the Army which enable them to carry on their ordinary work?

I cannot say offhand, but I assume that these men have by chance got occupations in London which enable them to put in full time at their military duties during the day and: attend the theatre at night.

Can the hon. Gentleman deal with the case of Mr. George Grossmith, inspector of tanks, who continues his theatrical occupation?

The hon. Member should give notice of that.

He asked for specific cases.

asked whether any mark of distinction is going to be awarded to the remnants of the first Expeditionary Force which saved the situation in the retreat from Mons and prevented the capture of Calais?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer given yesterday to my right hon. Friend the Member for Kirkcaldy Burghs.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he is aware that on the 6th July, 1917, the Special Medical Board classified Mr. F. M. Attwater in category C 1, notwithstanding that a London specialist had given evidence before the tribunal that he was suffering from Addison's disease, that such disease was incurable, and that any form of Army service would result in death in a very short time; whether the medical board had before them the certificate of Dr. Williams, and, if so, on what grounds did they disregard it; whether, in the event of the Appeal Tribunal not granting exemption, it is proposed, in view of the certificates, to call him up for service; and whether it will be contended before the tribunal that they are bound by the Special Medical Board classification?

From the documents referring to this man it appears that he was examined on the 21st June, 1916, by the Recruiting Medical Board at Battersea and was classified C 1, on which occasion he presented a certificate of neurasthenia. He was again examined on the 26th May, 1917, by No. 1 Recruiting Medical Board, Whitehall, when he was again classified C 1; on this occasion the man presented a certificate stating that he suffered from indigestion and a dilated stomach. He was again examined by the Special. Medical Board, Millbank, on the 6th July, 1917, and once more classified C 1. On this occasion his blood pressure was taken and found to be 150mm. mercury, which is the normal standard of the blood pressure. At the time of his examination by the Special Medical. Board he presented a certificate from Sir James Mackenzie, stating that he was easily exhausted on slight exertion, that he had an enormously dilated stomach, while his nutrition was very much impaired. The same physician had previously written to a gentleman interested in the case to the effect, "I don't think there is any cause to look forward to a fatal termination, because a large number of people suffer like this more or less all their life, and live to a good old age." A second certificate was presented stating that he suffered from cyclic albuminuria, a disorder often of little significance. A certificate from a third medical man was also presented stating that he suffered from Addison's disease and that "in unfavourable conditions he will die very quickly." It will be noted that considerable discrepancies exist in the statements made in the medical certificates, whereas the result of the examinations by the medical boards on three successive occasions was identical in every case. This man has now made an application to the Appeal Tribunal, and the recruiting authorities propose to fight the case.

Will the papers applicable to the first tribunal be available for the second tribunal, so that they can refer to them?

I assume so.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is Addison's disease?

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether, in cases where local tribunals grant exemption to one-man business appellants and the military representatives successfully appeal to the Appeal Tribunal against such decisions, he will issue Regulations providing that, in certain cases of age, medical categories, and magnitude of the businesses involved, the civilian appellant shall have the right to appeal to the Central Tribunal without the consent of the Appeal Tribunal?

Under the Military Service Acts it rests with the Appeal Tribunal to decide whether or not leave to appeal to the Central Tribunal shall be granted. It could not, therefore, be provided by Regulations that leave to appeal must always be granted in certain cases.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that dissatisfaction prevails throughout the country at the unequal decisions of tribunals as regards appeals on the ground of one-man-business hardship; and if he will refer the whole question to a Committee with a view to securing uniformity and fairness of administration in accord with the spirit of the Regulations governing appeals of this nature?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. I have had various cases of the owners of one-man businesses brought to my notice. Many of these are, I know, very hard, and I have much sympathy with the men. I have made some proposals, which are now under consideration, for giving further help in suitable cases. I do not think the matter is one calling for the appointment of a new Committee. The Central Tribunal have published decisions on the subject, and although there was at first some misconception about it, that has now, I hope, been removed. I would strongly press the importance of co-operation amongst retail traders. They can in many cases, and in some cases have done, much to reduce the hardship caused by the calling up of one of their number, and it is reasonable to expect that they will make all efforts in this direction.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the proposals to which he refers will be published?

I hope soon.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether Arthur J. W. Ball, No. 202,144, C Company, 2/4th Northampton Regiment, is at present in Ward 26, 3rd Northern General Hospital, Sheffield; whether as long ago as April it was decided to discharge this man; whether he has been medically examined since March last, and why; whether the doctor attending him has received no instruction to send him before a medical board; whether three medical boards have been held since Ball has been at his present hospital; why Ball has been told that he can be discharged immediately if he volunteers for service under the National Service scheme; and whether there is any good reason for this man's discharge being any longer delayed?

I am inquiring, and will inform my hon. Friend as soon as I am in a position to do so.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to offer any explanation of the circumstances surrounding the escape in civilian clothes of three interned German officers from Donington Hall?

I am informed by the military authorities that the evidence given at the Court of Inquiry showed that the three officer prisoners effected their escape from Donington Hall in uniform, and changed into civilian clothing after passing through a weak spot in the barbed wire surrounding the camp. The discarded uniforms of two of these officers were found in a hollow tree close by, and that of the third officer was in his possession when he was recaptured. The civilian clothing was such as is usually worn by British workmen, and, as the evidence pointed to connivance between the escaped prisoners and British workmen employed in the camp, inquiries have been instituted for the purpose of tracing the ownership.

Why was there a "weak spot" in the barbed wire, considering that all these officers had nothing else to do but to look after it?

I am afraid I cannot say.

Do I understand that no alarm was given?

No, apparently not.

Is any inquiry being made with regard to connivance outside the camp?

Yes, inquiries are being made. I know the authorities are not satisfied to let the matter remain where it is, but I cannot make any further statement to-day.

asked whether, having regard to recent occurrences at a certain aerodrome, all enemy aliens will be removed from the districts and all German prisoners from the aerodrome?

I am not aware to what occurrence reference is made, but if I may be given details I will have inquiries made and appropriate action taken as far as lies in my power.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that in the question I put down the specific aerodrome, which I was asked to omit? Surely that question would give the hon. Gentleman facilities for obtaining information.

I confess to having the question submitted to me, and I thought it was against the public interest that any specific aerodrome should be mentioned. I therefore took the responsibility of abstracting that myself. I made inquiries to-day, and the authorities at the War Office have no information at all about a recent occurrence such as the hon. Member suggests.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether an offer has been made by the Great Western Railway Company to manufacture aeroplanes in the carriage department at the Swindon Railway Works; wheher he is aware that facilities exist for the testing and finish of machines; and whether such offer has been refused?

Some time ago, before the taking over of the Aeronautical Supply Department by the Ministry of Munitions, the Great Western Railway, with other railway companies, were asked to what extent they could assist in the manufacture of aeroplanes and aeroplane parts. It appeared that the facilities they could then offer were comparatively small, and the matter was not proceeded with. Some aeroplane parts have, however, been constructed by the railway companies.

Might not a fresh communication be sent to the railway companies to see if they could now supply the goods that are required?

I understand that the facilities have not increased within the last few months; but if there is any individual railway company which can do anything substantial, I am sure that it will be done.

I understand that that is so.

asked the Undersecretary for War why, in view of the fact that the pensions and allowances for wounded non-commissioned officers and men have been considerably increased, he will explain why the pensions for wounded officers of the Regular Army have been been considerably reduced?

The hon. Member is under some misapprehension. The pensions to wounded officers of the Regular Army have not been reduced, nor is it proposed to reduce them.

Is it not a fact that if you take into consideration the service pension of the Regular officer, along with his disability pension, by the new Warrant he will suffer?

I do not think so, but I will consider any cases which the hon. Member may bring forward.

asked the Pensions Minister whether any fresh decision has been taken with regard to the basis of award of extra separation allowances to the dependants of apprentices by local War Pensions Committees?

This matter is still under consideration, and I will communicate with my hon. Friend when a decision is reached.

My right hon. Friend's communication told me the same thing about three weeks or a month ago.

I will do what I can.

asked the Pensions Minister whether he is aware of the hardship ensuing to dependant parents under Article 21 of the Warrant; and whether he is prepared to at least consider the award in all cases of a minimum payment?

The answer to the first part is in the affirmative. I am carefully watching the working of Article 21 of the Royal Warrant with a view to the consideration suggested by the hon. Member.

If the right hon. Gentleman knows, as he must know, that the average dependent parent is getting less than 5s. a week on the death of a son, is he making any attempt to approach the Treasury to establish a minimum payment to dependent parents whose sons have been killed in the War?

This matter has been put to the Treasury. It has been sympathetically met by the Chancellor, and it is under consideration.

Are we to get more than sympathy?

I hope so. The matter is now under consideration.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether on the morning of the raid last Sunday the Felixstowe air commander was at his post; if not, will he say why not; and whether it is in the best interests of the Flying Service that a commander should live nearly three miles from the air station?

It is presumed that my right hon. Friend is referring to the Royal Naval Air Station, and therefore I have been asked to answer this question. The reference is, of course, to the raid of last Sunday week. The commanding officer was not on the station at the time mentioned, but there was present, as there always is, an officer of sufficient experience and seniority to take charge. It has not been possible to provide accommodation for the commanding officer actually at the station itself.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether in these circumstances he will see that whoever is left in command of the station has authority to give an order for the squadron to engage the enemy, without having to wait to find the commanding officer or to get through to headquarters?

There is no need to say that. The second in command has full authority to engage the enemy at once, without waiting for anybody.

asked the Home Secretary whether a policeman who may suffer injury directly or indirectly attributable to the action of the enemy is entitled to wear the gold stripe on the left arm denoting injury received in the service of the country?

I understand that, under the Army Orders, the award of the gold braid distinction is confined to officers, soldiers, members of the Military Nursing Services, members of Voluntary Aid Detachments, and special probationers employed in military hospitals who are wounded by the enemy whilst serving in this country.

In view of the fact that you call on the police to act in a military capacity, will they be included in this distinction?

We do not ask the police to act in any military capacity.

Are not the police asked to expose themselves to danger which otherwise they would not have to do?

The police have always exposed themselves to danger.

asked the Home Secretary whether an aerial torpedo or bomb fell and failed to explode in the City in the course of a recent air raid; whether this live explosive has been removed; if not, whether this explosive has been left in a live state and concreted over; and whether it is the duty of the military or civil authorities to remove it?

No aerial torpedo was dropped in the recent air raid. Several bombs fell in the City and failed to explode, but in no case were such bombs left in a live state for a longer time than could be avoided. Since the bombs penetrate a considerable distance into the ground, often in most inaccessible places, their removal is sometimes a slow and laborious process. I understand that during the raid on 7th July an unexploded anti-aircraft shell, or a portion of one, made a hole in a cement pavement in the City and penetrated six feet below ground between a hydraulic main and a telephone cable. Its removal at the time presented difficulties, and in order to relieve the police of the necessity of guarding it, the place was cemented over, pending the matter being attended to.

In view of the fact that the hon. Gentleman states that no bomb is left in a live state, are we to understand that the bomb is accessible to remove the fuse and is inaccessible to be removed from the ground and to remove the charge from it?

The hon. Gentleman misrepresents what I did say. I said, "In no case were such bombs left in a live state for a longer time than could be avoided."

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the soldiers' ration money has now been reduced to 1s. 9d. a day; if so, why this allowance is less than the amount allowed for food to military nurses, namely, 15s. 6d. a week; whether any comparison has been made between this allowance and the amount now generally paid to domestic servants as board wages; and whether the War Office is satisfied that it is sufficient, having regard to the present high prices for food?

No, Sir; the ration allowance has not been reduced. On the contrary, it was raised from 1s. 7d. to 1s. 9d. from the 1st December last. Usually, rations are supplied to the soldier in kind. When this is not possible the equivalent value is issued in cash. The soldiers' rations are not suitable for nurses, and the same cash allowance is not applicable. The present allowance is 15s. a week, but it includes other items than that of food. Board wages paid to domestic servants vary, I understand, from 10s. to 15s. a week, but military nurses are classed for certain allowances with officers.

Is not the food allowance for soldiers deficient compared with the food allowance for nurses?

The cases are really not strictly comparable, because, as I have informed my hon. Friend, the nurses' allowance includes provision for items other than food.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether the sanction and approval of the Board of Agriculture for Scotland were obtained before the fixing of maximum prices of meat from September to January next?

The prices as finally fixed differ from those originally put forward on either side. They represent a compromise reached after prolonged discussion at a conference between representatives of all the Departments concerned.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether his sanction and approval were obtained for the fixing of the maximum prices for meat from September to January next?

I have nothing to add to the answer given by the Secretary for Scotland to the preceding question.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware that the reported restricted price of 60s. per cwt. for beef for the month of January is viewed with great concern by the National Farmers' Union, as, in their opinion, it is much below the cost of production, and unless the prices of feeding stuffs are restricted pro rata no farmer can produce beef during next winter at the price mentioned; and, seeing that the prices fixed for the last two months of 1917 are below what such cattle cost to produce, will he say what action he proposes to take?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food if he is aware that unless the price of feeding stuffs is very considerably reduced it will be impossible for farmers to produce beef except at a loss for January at 60s. a cwt., and that, therefore, less farmyard manure will be produced and there will be a shortage, if not almost total absence, of home-grown beef in the markets in January; and will he, therefore, confer with the Board of Agriculture or the farmers with a view to reconsidering the matter?

The attention of the Food Controller has been called to the views expressed by the National Farmers' Union, and he has also conferred with several deputations of agriculturists on this question. Lord Rhondda appreciates the fact that the high prices of feeding stuffs are causing difficulties to farmers, and he is giving the matter his most careful attention.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is impossible for farmers to produce beef at that price?

Has the price been approved by the Minister of Agriculture?

I am not able to say positively as to that, but it is indicated that the matter is still under consideration.

Has Lord Rhondda seen or consulted any deputation representative of the Irish trade in this matter? If not, is the Irish trade to be dealt with by Lord Rhondda or by a separate authority?

As to whether Lord Rhondda has met a deputation of the Irish trade at the moment I am unable to answer, but the heads of the Departments, together with myself, met representatives of Irish interests one day last week.

Is the Food Controller aware that numerous farmers complain that this will prevent them buying stock, because they think that they will be unable to make a profit at present prices?

I am not aware of that. I hope that it is not so.

It is so.

Can the Food Controller let the agriculturists of the country know whether any feeding stuffs will be available towards the end of the year for their purposes?

I should like notice of this.

Has the Order which has been passed for military meat been passed also for meat for civilians?

What applies to military meat applies also to meat for civilians.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the Canadian Government has fixed the price of wheat as from 1st August at 80s. per quarter, delivered at Fort William; and, if so, whether this applies to that portion of the crop which will be consumed in the United Kingdom?

I understand that the price mentioned is approximately the maximum fixed by the Canadian Board of Grain Supervisors for old-crop wheat.

Does that mean that the importer into this country has to pay that price, and that that is the price at which the wheat brought into this country has been bought?

It is subject to that maximum; but the hon. Member will realise that that is the maximum price, and therefore it by no means follows that every purchase in this country is at the maximum.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether last week there were several trucks, about eight, of old potatoes, to all appearances sound, at Cranbrook Station, which a farmer had bought to feed his pigs on; if so, will he ascertain to whom the potatoes belonged; and why these potatoes were not put on the market for human food during the recent shortage?

I was not aware of the facts stated by the hon. Member, but I am having inquiries made in the matter?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether his attention has been called to the waste of fish caused by difficulty of transportation; and whether he will take steps to prevent this loss of good food for the people?

Complaints have been received from time to time as to delay in delivery of fish, and action has been taken on each case according to the circumstances. If specific details of any particular case of undue delay are brought to the notice of the Food Controller, immediate inquiry will be made.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he is aware of the evasion and non-observance of food regulations that occurs among the non-British population of East London; and, seeing that the bakers, who are mostly non-British, sell sugar to their customers whereas it is difficult to obtain sugar in British-owned grocery shops, that bread is sold not twelve hours baked, composed of white flour and baked at night, will he consider the advisability of immediately entrusting the supply and regulation of food to a local food control committee composed of British-born citizens and armed with full powers to check the evasions practised by the alien population of East London?

I am informed that the police are sparing no effort to enforce in the East End of London the provisions of the Orders relating to food, and that a number of prosecutions have been undertaken, while others are pending. I may add that the devolution to local food committees of detailed regulation and control forms an important part of Lord Rhondda's policy.

Has the hon. Member seen the report issued by the medical officer of health of Stepney, which largely bears out my question?

The allegations in the question are not disputed. I have not seen the report in question.

May I send it to you?

Certainly.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in connection with the Government announcement that profiteering in food is to be punished by imprisonment, any Statutes or Regulations under the Defence of the Realm Act can be named as enabling such imprisonment to be inflicted by legal process; if so, what Statute or Regulation will be relied upon; if not, whether the general powers of the Government to intern dangerous persons without trial will be used; and whether the proposed methods against profiteering will be extended to cases where large profits have been, or may be, made out of Army contracts, etc.?

I have been asked to reply. The hon. Member presumably refers to Lord Rhondda's statement that where illegal profits had been made he would press for imprisonment in cases of sufficient gravity. That statement followed upon an announcement of his intention to fix prices for essential foodstuffs at every stage. This fixing of prices will be effected by an Order or Orders under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, and the charging of prices in excess of those fixed will render the offender liable to fine or imprisonment, or both.

Will the Government give an early day for discussing the question of profiteering?

The hon. Member must give notice of that question.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether there are any typists in his Department of from seventeen to nineteen years of age who are paid £3 a week on going into his Department direct from school; and, if so, will he say whether these obtained such appointments because they were relatives of Civil servants already in the service of his Department?

No, Sir.

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is in a position to make any statement as to the policy of the Government on the housing of the working classes after the War; and whether the Government are making adequate preparations to carry out such policy?

The Government have come to the conclusion that during a period after the War it will be necessary to afford financial assistance to local authorities from public funds for the purpose of securing the erection with as little delay as possible of a number of houses for the working classes. I have addressed a letter to local authorities in England and Wales communicating this decision and asking them for detailed information as to housing needs; the question of what can be done to revive private enterprise in housebuilding is receiving my earnest attention.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will endeavour to get the Taff Vale Railway Company to grant greater convenience to the workmen who travel between Abercynon and Aberdare by putting on special workmen's coaches on each of their trains; and whether he is aware that the colliers have to wait about for hours, often in wet clothes, and that such conditions are conducive to ill-health and loss of work?

I am in communication with the railway company on this matter, and I will write to the hon. Gentleman upon receipt of their reply.

asked the Prime Minister when it is expected to consider the inclusion of Ireland in the Representation of the People Bill; if he is aware that any attempt to deprive Ireland of the benefits of the Bill will be resented by all classes in Ireland; and can he now state Ireland's position in the Bill?

I can only refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave to him on Wednesday, the 18th of July.

asked the Home Secretary by what authority the Boundary Commissioners have proceeded on the assumption that the number of members to which a county is entitled under the Representation of the People Bill is determined by deducting the population of the boroughs in any county from the total population of the county and not by assigning to each county as a whole a member for each 70,000 of its inhabitants and a member for such fraction of 70,000 remaining over as is laid down in the Instructions issued to them?