asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any reason to suppose either that the German Government adheres to or that it repudiates the pledge given on 4th August, 1914, that even in the case of armed conflict with Belgium Germany will under no pretence whatever annex Belgian territory?

So far as I am aware the German Government have been careful not to remind the world that they explicitly promised to Great Britain in 1914 not, under any pretence whatever, to annex Belgian territory. But, from the tenor of communications emanating from sources apparently inspired, this is a promise which, if they can, they propose to repudiate.

Would it not be worth while to discover whether or not the new Government adheres to this pledge?

:. The British Government have no means of communicating with Germany.

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?

The report has been considered, and the officer having expressed his regret for the incident, it is not proposed to take any further action.

Does my hon. Friend seriously inform this House that an officer who, while on duty, pours over the head of a private soldier a cup of hot coffee, is to be let off with an expression of regret?

:I can add nothing to the answer I have given.

Are we really to take it that an officer who publicly, in a railway station, pours hot coffee over a private soldier is not to be dealt with in any way by the War Office?

I will send my hon. Friend a copy of the full report, and he will see that there are extenuating circumstances.

I will raise this question on the Adjournment to-night.

As there was a lady handing out the coffee, who was reduced to tears, will the officer apologise to the lady?

I have no doubt the gallant officer has apologised to her

He did apologise.

Is not this the antidote to pouring cold water over one?

Is not the real explanation that the War Office is afraid of its own officers?

I do not think that my hon. Friend can make that statement with any justification, seeing that at his own request, and the instigation of some of his friends, two officers were suspended only last week.

Arising out of that latter answer, will the War Office reconsider the case of these two officers?

That does not arise on this question.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether promotion to the rank of major has now been given to Cavalry captains of fifteen years' service, as has been done in other arms of the Service; and, if not, what are the reasons for differentiating between the different branches of the Service in this matter?

The answer is in the negative. My predecessor, the then Under-Secretary of State, went into this matter fully with my hon. and gallant Friend both in an answer on 18th April of last year and in correspondence. The Army Council do not see any reason to consider that the position has undergone any substantial change.

Does not the hon. Gentleman consider it very unfair that these officers should not only suffer in promotion, but that if they are killed their widows should lose the pension they would otherwise get. Is not that an injustice?

I will put those considerations before the Army Council.

Thank you!

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to a speech recently delivered in St. John's Primitive Church, Bridlington, by Mr. J. D. Fenby, a member of the Bridlington Local Tribunal, in which he said that the establishment of compulsory military service in England was the greatest crime, and that it was high time that the War stopped, as it was having a damaging influence on Christian character; and whether, in view of the character of this language by a member of a local tribunal in the district in which he acts, he will say what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

My right hon. Friend is communicating with Mr. Fenby to ascertain whether he had in fact made the statements attributed to him.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the Scottish Command Headquarters, when asked by a soldier who managed a watchmaker's and jeweller's business in Invergordon to grant a permit to his sister, Miss Dora Merrens, nineteen years of age, to enter that area and manage that business for him while he was serving his country with the Colours, advised him to sell the business, which was the sole means of support of the soldier's mother, father, and younger brothers and sisters; that such businesses are practically unsaleable except at great sacrifice, bringing financial ruin to this soldier while he is at the front; and whether his Department will permit the soldier's sister to manage the shop until his return?

I am afraid that I can add nothing to the reply which I gave my hon. Friend on the 30th July. As I stated then, the business in question is not, I understand, the sole support of the family.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War, with reference to the desirability of safeguarding the Irish students of the Irish College, Rome, and of other Roman Catholic colleges in Italy, from being obliged to return to this country for Conscription or join the Italian Army, if he will say what is the exact meaning, under the international compact law, of the word "domiciled"; whether those who go to Italy merely for a course of study, with the intention of returning to Ireland when that course is completed, can be held to be domiciled in Italy; and can they be regarded as domiciled in Italy if they stay there for five, six, or seven years in pursuance of that purpose?

The construction of Acts of Parliament, including the Military Service (Conventions with Allied States) Act, 1917, is a matter for the Courts and not for the War Office. It is not, however, considered that an Irish student who is resident at the Irish College, Rome, for the purpose of his education and who does not intend to remain permanently in Italy would be held by the Courts to be domiciled in Italy.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether excessive sickness prevails among the troops at Aden; and whether any recognition has been made of the gallantry of the men there in fighting against largely predominant Turkish forces?

This is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India, and perhaps my right hon. Friend will address his question to him.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office (1) whether under Army Regulation No. 393 soldiers receive 2s. 6d. per night of an allowance which does not admit of ration allowance being drawn at the same time; has therefore a soldier in Class 19 or 20 to provide hotel or other lodging accommodation and food from this 2s. 6d. per night; (2) asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether a soldier of Classes 19 and 20, under Regulation 393, is allowed 2s. 9d. per day allowance while he is provided with quarters; and, if so, can he explain why 3d. per day more is given to this man than to him getting night allowance although his outlays are less?

The maximum nightly allowance under paragraph 395 of the Allowance Regulations for Classes 19 and 20 was raised to 3s. 6d. on the 13th July last.

asked the Pensions Minister whether anything can. be done to expedite the consideration of the case of Mrs. Florence Ridgwell, whose husband died after long and meritorious Army service from disease accelerated by service in the present War; and whether he is aware that the Statutory Pensions Committee could not deal with the case because repeated applications to the local pensions committee at Divas Institute, Battersea, failed to produce any reply or any recommendation on the case from that committee?

The case to which the hon. Member refers was only very recently brought to the notice of the Ministry, and will be settled as soon as it has been ascertained whether Sergeant Ridgwell's illness which led to his death was aggravated by his service subsequent to his re-enlistment in October, 1915. There appears to have been some delay on the part of the local committee in dealing with the case.

Would it not be possible in such cases to expedite the action of the local committees, as letter after letter has been sent to the Statutory Committee?

Yes; we will certainly do that. This case, however, will now be dealt with by the Ministry of Pensions.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say, in connection with this question, whether applications are to be made to the Ministry of Pensions, whether the Statutory Committee has now ceased to exist, and whether the Ministry are ready to entertain applications?

I think applications are now made to the Ministry of Pensions, although, strictly speaking, the Statutory Committee is still in existence.

asked the Pensions Minister whether an officer of the rank of lieutenant-colonel of the Regular Army, holding a permanent commission, who loses by wounds two limbs or one limb and an eye would under the old Warrant receive as retired pay and wound pension £800 a year, and under the new Warrant £300 a year; and a subaltern suffering in like manner £273 a year under the old Warrant, and £175 a year under the new Warranty and, if so, will he explain the reason for the change, seeing that the new Warrant was described as a generous improvement upon the old?

No change is made by the new Warrant in the cases to which the hon. and gallant Member refers, and the figures quoted by him are incorrect. The exact figures necessarily depend on the length of the officer's service and the period of his command, but, taking minimum rates, the correct figures are: Lieutenant-colonel, £800; second-lieutenant or lieutenant, £254 15s.

Are we to understand that wounds pensions are payable in addition to the pensions given under the new Warrant; if so, who pays them, and who decides what shall be paid?

Wounds pensions are paid by the War Office, and there has been no change made in the new Warrant where the additional pension does not affect the total.

Is that in addition to the disability pension given in the hew Warrant?

It depends upon the total amount. If it comes to a certain amount then there will be an addition; if not there will not be.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say explicitly whether an officer in these circumstances gets first his Service pension plus his disability pension, or whether he gets a combination?

It depends upon the circumstances—in most cases it is a combination.

Yes, I think that is so.

If an officer gets more under the old than under the new Warrant, I presume he will be allowed to continue under the old Warrant?

Yes, certainly; all existing rights are preserved.

asked the Pensions Minister whether officers now joining the Regular Army as holders of permanent commissions will have any option, in the event of their becoming entitled to a disablement pension at any subsequent date, as to whether they will be assessed under the old Royal Warrant of 1914 or will they be forced to accept the assessment of the new Warrant, if the new Warrant is approved in its present form?

An officer joining the Regular Army after the 1st August, 1917, can only be dealt with for retired pay under the Warrant of that date in respect of disability arising out of the War. The hon. and gallant Member, however, appears to be under some considerable misunderstanding. In no circumstances whatever, so far as I can discover, would an officer now joining the Regular Army with a permanent commission benefit if his disablement pension were assessed under the old Royal Warrant of 1914, instead of under the new Warrant which has just been approved. The new Warrant is more beneficial in all respects.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether he is aware that a Spanish steamer was on or about 31st July chartered for a cargo of coal from this country to Barcelona at 215s. per ton; and whether other vessels under the control and direction of the Inter-Allied Chartering Executive are only permitted to receive a freight to Algiers or Oran, approximately the same distance, of 48s. 6d. per ton?

The fixture referred to was effected, and my hon. Friend will no doubt appreciate the fact that the Inter-Allied Chartering Executive cannot effectively control the rates which are paid for cargoes to Spain carried in Spanish steamers, even if they had any interest in making the attempt. So far as neutral tonnage is concerned, the Executive do not restrict the rates to Algiers and Oran to 48s. 6d. per ton.

Will the hon. Gentleman see that our Government informs the Allies of the sacrifices we are making in this matter?

The sacrifices which are being made by this country in respect of its shipping are very well known indeed to the Allies.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether British liner steamers loading on the berth at Buenos Ayres for Liverpool are directed by the Government to charge 50s. to 52s. 6d. per ton on Government cargo; whether on cargo for civil and commercial purposes rates of freight are as high as 250s. per ton; and whether these steamers are under requisition and receive payment from the Government at Blue Book rates, all excess freights over Blue Book rates being taken by the Government?

The figures mentioned by my hon. Friend are substantially correct. The steamers in question are running under the special conditions of the Liner Requisition Scheme, which secure any profits which may accrue to the Government, the owners being paid on a Blue Book basis.

Does the consumer get any benefit from this or is the Government profiteering?

So far as the great bulk of our imports are concerned, they are made on account of the Government; therefore in respect of them the consumer directly benefits. So far as the balance—a comparatively small balance—is concerned, the Treasury benefits. This simply means that the Government takes any profit which may arise —it does not necessarily arise.

Arising out of that question and answer, how is it that the Treasury receives the benefit and not those of us who support this Government?

I am not sure that I apprehend the purport of the question of my hon. Friend. But I should like to explain that in every case where the commodities concerned are controlled by the Government so that the consumer may obtain the advantage of the Blue Book rates he gets that advantage; in cases where we cannot ensure that the consumer gets the advantage and where there is a danger of the middleman getting it, then the Treasury gets it.

Is not this profit made by the Treasury a new form of taxation, and should it not appear in the Finance Act of the year?

It will simply pass into the accounts in the ordinary way.

Is not the Treasury's profit the taxpayer's profit?

I think my hon. Friend's suggestion is perfectly sound.

Does not this arrangement mean that certain trades or certain importers are having an enormous profit made out of them, while other trades and other importers are practically allowed to go free?

No; certainly not

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether all British trades have been taken control of by the Shipping Controller and all ships allowed to carry out their operations in these trades are requisitioned at Blue Book rates, the Government taking the whole of the difference between Blue Book rates and the actual freights earned by these steamers, amounting in many instances to large sums of money; whether it is admitted that Blue Book rates in various cases inflict a loss upon the owners while the Government are making large profits out of the freights earned by these steamers; whether the owners have to give their services in managing and loading these steamers without remuneration; and whether he can state what the Government do with the money that they are extracting from the shipowners by means of this system of commandeering?

All the trades embraced in the liner requisitioning scheme have now been placed under requisition. In so far as my hon. Friend's question implies that the difference between Blue Book rates and the freights earned is net profit taken by the Government, the implication is inaccurate; it is true that the Government receives the freight, but it has also to meet all charges other than those imposed by the Blue Book on the owner, and the question whether the Government makes large or, indeed, any profits will depend entirely upon the rate of loss from war casualty in the future, for the Government bears the full cost of insurance against war risks. As the hon. Member knows, the precise terms of the arrangement for the working of requisitioned liners are in process of being finally agreed; under this arrangement the intention is to reimburse the lines the actual cost of maintaining their organisations. If any profit eventually accrue to the Government as a result of the working of the liner requisitioning scheme, it will, of course, be treated as ordinary Exchequer receipts, and thus benefit the British consumer indirectly. I may add that by far the greater part of our imports are now carried for Government account, and that therefore it is not the case that the Treasury is likely to receive large sums of money in this connection.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that he is quite mistaken in what he states about Blue Book rates; and, furthermore, would it not be better, instead of taxing the shipowner in this surreptitious manner, to let the public know it is not the shipowners but the Government who are charging these high rates?

As I endeavoured to explain in my previous answer, the consumer gets the advantage of low freights on the greater part of our imports—on practically the whole of the bread and meat, and practically the whole of the commodities carried.

Will the hon. Gentleman see that the public are informed of it, and this spirit of resentment against the shipowner, which has been brought about directly by the Government methods, will be removed?

I think the public are now well aware that the profit which hitherto went to the shipowner now goes in the great majority of cases direct to the consumers, and in a smaller number of cases to the Treasury, and I think they are well content.

Has the hon. Gentleman consulted the Law Officers of the Crown as to whether it is legal to make this profit?

No, because I am given to understand it is quite unnecessary to do so.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware how very ignorant he is of what is going on, and that, as a matter of fact, an action has been started against the Shipping Controller on this very ground?

I would venture to recommend my hon. Friend to await the result of that action before proceeding any further.

asked whether the British Government, through the Ministry of Shipping, have been chartering neutral steamers at as high as 50s. to 55s. per ton per month on their total deadweight carrying capacity, and paying all excess premiums for war risk insurance over 1 per cent. per month; whether they are are now endeavouring unsuccessfully to charter neutral steamers at 47s. 6d. per ton or upwards on their total deadweight carrying capacity, our Government paying all excess premiums for war risk insurance over 1 per cent. per month; and whether British steamers of similar type and class under Government requisition are only receiving about 6s. 6d. per ton per month on their deadweight.

All time chartering of neutral steamers is effected by the Inter-Allied Chartering Executive, on which the French and Italian Governments are represented, as well as His Majesty's Government. Neutral steamers have been and are being chartered with the 1 per cent. Clause at rates which vary from 47s. 6d. to 55s., according to size, and since their appointment the executive have been successful, not only in obtaining steamers at the rate of 47s. 6d. per ton, but in maintaining the market rates for neutral chartering at approximately the same level, in spite of the increasing shortage of tonnage. The rate paid for British steamers of similar type and class under Government requisition is equivalent to about 6s. 9d. on the deadweight, but in that case the whole of the war risk is borne by the Government.

Does the hon. Gentleman see how the British shipowner is being handicapped, whilst the neutral shipowner is being helped by the Government?

So far as the Ministry of Shipping is concerned, we cannot possibly have that degree of control over foreign shipping that we have over our own shipping. Our constant effort is to remedy the grievance.

But does the hon. Gentleman not see that this inequality of handicap remains, notwithstanding the efforts of the Government?

I am sure the hon. Gentleman would not be content that, because a foreign shipowner may make an undue profit out of the exigencies of this War, we should allow others to do it.

Is that a justification for extra taxation of shipowners?

We cannot really have a Debate on this.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether he is aware that the Shipping Controller has consistently declined to grant interviews or give information to representatives of British news papers on matters in connection with his Department and that he recently granted an interview to representatives of the French Press, taking them into his confidence; and whether, in view of his statement that ships crossing danger zones should have a speed of fifteen knots, this is the speed which the standard vessels being built by the Government will possess?

I can assure my hon. Friend that he is quite mistaken in regard to the attitude taken by the Shipping Controller towards representatives of the British Press. The published account of the interview recently granted by him to a representative of a French newspaper was in some respects inaccurate. The last part of the question, therefore, does not arise.

But why should the French newspaper representative be told, or led to believe, that the speed of the standard ships is to be fifteen knots per hour, whilst this House and the British public are not informed on the point?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Shipping Controller cannot be responsible for the spreading of inaccurate information, but, as I explained in my answer, the interview which actually took place was somewhat inaccurately reported by the French newspaper representative.

Would it not be in the interests of the country that the Shipping Controller should inform the British Press of the true facts of the case?

As I have already explained to my hon. Friend, we have no intention to divulge the speed of the ships.

We know it.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether the first standard vessel built on Government account has yet been completed and entered on service; whether he can state the total deadweight carrying capacity of this steamer and her average speed per hour at sea; and whether he can state the number of standard steamers and their deadweight tonnage and speed which is expected to be completed and ready for service during the months of August, September, October, November, and December respectively?

The first standard ship will be completed and put into service during the present month. Her total deadweight carrying capacity will be about 8,000 tons. It does not seem desirable that particulars of her speed should be given in public, but I shall be happy to inform my hon. Friend privately. The information asked for in the latter part of the question cannot be furnished.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that he has already in this House indicated what would be the speed of the standard ship?

I hope I was not guilty of that inadvertence.

You were.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller why a certain steamship was allowed to leave an American port with 3,500 tons of spare space which might have been occupied with corn or other food stuffs if a few days longer time had been permitted for filling the steamer?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for communicating to me privately the name of the vessel to which he refers. I have made inquiry, and find that she is a foreign vessel, over which we have no control, and for which we have no responsibility.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether any arrangement has yet been completed by the Scottish Board of Agriculture to acquire land under the Small Holdings Colonies Act for the purpose of providing experimental small holding colonies?

The answer is in the negative. Repeated attempts have been made to secure land which is at once suitable and available, but so far without success. The difficulty lies in the fact that in the case of every estate which has been under consideration much of the land required is under leases which have a number of years to run. Accordingly, I am considering whether it may not be necessary to extend the powers contained in the Act, which are purely permissive, so as to enable the Government to make land immediately available notwithstanding that it is subject to current leases.

asked whether arrangements have now been completed for the afforestation of the Borgie estate, and when it is proposed to commence a scheme of small holdings and afforestation on this estate?

The arrangements, though in progress, are not yet completed. Plans have been laid for a scheme of small holdings and afforestation, and preliminary steps have already been taken with a view to commencing the necessary works of adaptation and equipment. Fencing, road-making, and reclamation will be proceeded with during the present year, and the expenditure of a sum of £3,500 for these and cognate purposes has been authorised. Difficulties of labour and transport have been acute; but there will be no avoidable delay in proceeding with the scheme.

Have arrangements been made for a forest nursery?

I must have notice of that.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any discharged soldier has yet been put upon this estate?

Certainly not up to now.

asked the number of small holdings in Scotland at the date when the Small Landholders (Scotland) Act, 1911, came into operation, and the number of small holdings in Scotland as at 31st December, 1916?

The number of holdings in Scotland above one acre and not exceeding fifty acres as ascertained at 4th June, 1912, was 51,866. The number of such holdings on 5th June, 1916, was 50,969. These figures do not include holdings under one acre nor holdings over fifty acres, the rent of which is under £50. In these respects they do not cover the whole definition of a small holding as denned in the Small Landholders Acts, 1886–1911. The number of new holdings constituted by the Board of Agriculture for Scotland and occupied by landholders up to 31st December, 1916, was 556, and in addition the Board were instrumental in enlarging 377 existing holdings.

Is it not the case that since the Act of 1911 was passed there has been a continuous decrease in the number of small holdings in Scotland?

There has been a decrease, but it is less than the decrease before the Act was passed.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture whether, in the ease of Sergeant-major F. W. Hymers, who has served in the Army since 1914 and is about to be discharged on account of wounds, and who thoroughly understands intensive cultivation, he has any power under any Act to provide him with a small holding; and, if so, whether any loan will be made to him to enable him to cultivate it?

If Sergeant-Major Hymers will make application to the Department it may be possible to provide him on or after 11th October next with land for the purpose of intensive cultivation at the Holbeach Colony, a new colony under the Small Holdings Colonies Act, 1916. He can at any time apply to a county council for land under the Small Holdings and Allotments Act, 1908. There is no power to make him any loan to enable him to cultivate land.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this man has already been refused a holding by the Board of Trade, and if the Government cannot provide one single wounded man with a small holding now, how are they going to provide thousands of soldiers with small holdings when they come back from the War? Are the Government going to do nothing?

I do not know anything about the Board of Trade, but I am certain if this man will apply for a small holding either in Yorkshire or Lincolnshire his application would be carefully considered.

asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that trades advisory committees (disabled sailors and soldiers), consisting of an equal number of representatives or associates of employers and workpeople, have been set up in practically all large industries to deal with the training and employment of disabled sailors and soldiers by the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Pensions, any steps have been taken in this direction by the Post Office; and, if so, whether he is in a position to announce the names of those on the committees?

I am considering the appointment of an Advisory Committee to discuss certain questions in connection with the employment of disabled soldiers and sailors, but I am not yet in a position to make any definite announcement.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether it is proposed to take control of the baking trade of this country; and is he aware that this is the expressed desire of that trade?

I have no knowledge of any such intention, nor am I aware that the trade have expressed any such desire.

asked why the maximum rate of commission to Mr. T. H. Hodge, of Blairgowrie, as agent for the Scottish raspberry crop, has been placed as high as £1 per ton when, in the opinion of the Food Controller, the reasonable commission on such consignments would be 5s. a ton; what has been the usual commission paid by private firms on such consignments in recent years; what is expected to be. the average price of the crop per ton; and what is expected to be the actual aggregate amount of the commission payable to Mr. Hodge on the basis of a crop of 3,000 tons.

The Raspberries (Jam Manufacturers' Prices) Order provides that the amount of an agent's commission shall not exceed 20s. per ton. I hoped that I had made it clear in my previous answer on this subject that while Mr. Hodge's remuneration would be generally subject to this limit the Food Controller had intimated that in his opinion 5s. per ton would be a reasonable commission on raspberries when they were delivered through associations, as those associations will themselves incur the expense and do much of the work which will be required from Mr. Hodge in the case of other transactions. The price of raspberries throughout the United Kingdom, when bought by jam manufacturers, has been fixed by the same Order at £35 a ton, and this is the price which will be paid to Scottish growers. The aggregate amount of commission payble to Mr. Hodge will not be known until the transactions are completed.

Is the hon. Member aware that Mr. Hodge is himself a large grower of raspberries, and can he say whether Mr. Hodge will get this commission on the raspberries of his own growth in addition?

That is not the point covered in the question. With regard to the first part of the supplementary question, I should say it is because he is a grower, and therefore a practical man, that his services have been requisitioned.

asked by what amount and what cattle feeding foods have been reduced in price by his action?

The Food Controller on Thursday last expressed his belief that subject to his obtaining tonnage for the importation of raw materials he would be able to reduce the price of feeding-stuffs to farmers; but the measures he is proposing to adopt have not yet been brought into operation.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary whether he is aware that there were condemned at Grimsby this year, and sold as manure as unfit for human food, in January 45 tons of Norwegian herrings in barrels, in February 1,083 stone of fish and 34 tons of salt herrings, in March 1,248 stone of fish and 3 tons of herrings, in April 466 tons of herrings and other fish, and in May 115 tons of fish; if he can say who is responsible for the making of these contracts and if there is any financial loss incurred; if so, on whom does it fall and what is the amount of such loss incurred during the present year; is the traffic in fish from Norway and Holland in the hands of highly-qualified experts in the preservation of fish; is it possible to preserve much of this fish food by slightly salting or otherwise treating it before being dispatched on its journey here; and will he make a full investigation into this matter at once?

The circumstances attending the loss of fish at Grimsby have already been fully investigated. As has been stated in reply to previous questions on the subject the losses are due to delays in transit. The purchases abroad are controlled by the Restriction of Enemy Supplies Department and the loss incurred, the amount of which I am unable to state, will be borne by the Exchequer. Every precaution is taken for the preservation of the fish, including the supply of salt. The agents in Norway and Holland are highly qualified experts, and of the total quantity of fish brought from Norway and Holland to the country during the first six months of 1917 the quantity condemned was less than 4 per cent.

Will he say whether any commission is paid to private firms or individuals in connection with the fish traffic, and, if so, to whom?

That is a point on which I should require notice.

Is the difficulty caused by transit at sea or by the railway company?

Principally at sea.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if, at the present time, when Orders about the sale and purchase of farm produce and livestock are being constantly made and altered by the Food Controller, he will consider the desirability of notices as to the Orders made being inserted in the local weekly papers in all Irish counties remote from the chief towns, as the small farmers in those counties do not read the daily papers and at present are quite in a fog as to what they can or cannot do?

I am in communication with the Ministry of Food on this subject with a view to securing more general publicity for the Orders of the Food Controller.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether his attention has been called to the case of Messrs. Timmis and Company, Mytton Flour Mills, Montford Bridge, Salop, whose mill was burnt down last year; whether he is aware that all the materials for rebuilding are now at the mill except a small quantity, twenty-two standards of timber which is ready for use but cannot be moved without a Class A priority certificate; whether this mill is situated in the middle of one of the best corn producing districts in the country, that there is no other flour mill working for nearly twenty miles, and that a large quantity of grain is now moved by rail long distances and returned to the towns in the neighbourhood in the shape of flour; whether, in the national interest, he will consider the desirability of this mill being rebuilt at the earliest possible moment and resuming its work; and whether, under these circumstances, he will allow the certificate asked for to be issued?

This case has been fully considered, and on the facts at present before the Department I see no ground for varying the decision already reached not to recommend priority certificates. Further inquiries will be made, however, with a view to seeing if the grant of certificates would be justified.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the editor of the "New Republic" has expressed in writing his anxiety to conform in letter and spirit to the Defence of the Realm Regulations; whether, with this object in view, he has asked to be furnished with particulars of the matter which it is considered would amount to a breach of the Regulations so that it can be expunged from the issue in question; and, if so, what answer has been made to this offer?

The answer made to the editor's request was that the Secretary of State cannot undertake to discuss in detail articles which have not been passed by the Press Bureau, and that it is for the editor to see that any articles which he may propose to publish conform both in letter and spirit to the requirements of the Defence of the Realm Regulations, Nos. 27 and 42.

Is not the editor of the paper entitled to some protection? If out of one article there was only one passage which is doubtful, surely it is only a matter of common-sense to point that out to him?

I have nothing to add to my answer.

asked whether, in view of the importance of the powers of the Censor and considering the difficulty of ascertaining whether these powers are exercised with judgment and impartiality, he will set up a small Committee, either of Members of this House or of eminent journalists outside, and submit to this Committee the question whether the paper the "New Republic," for the publication of which he refused sanction, contains anything which could be rightly described as security or advances any argument against recruiting except such as derive from general philosophic expressions as to the wickedness or uselessness of war?

The answer is in the negative.

I wish to raise a point of Order on this question. I ask, Has a Member of this House any protection against a Minister who deliberately deceives the House, as I say that the Home Secretary certainly deceived the House in his remarks on this subject when he spoke about the scurrilous passages in this paper. I ask whether there is any protection of hon. Members of this House from a Minister standing at that box?

It is rather a vague and general question, and I am afraid I am not particularly acquainted with this matter. If the Home Secretary has not exercised proper judgment in this matter, it would be for the House to decide, and the matter could be raised on a formal and separate Motion.

In this particular case the House has no means of judging upon the face of it. The Home Secretary in this case gave a statement which was certainly not in any degree in accordance with the facts, but at the same time he refused to divulge the grounds on which he made that statement to the House. Therefore I say he has deceived the House and prevented the House from forming any judgment on that point. I ask, Is there no course?

I am not aware of any course. It is a very serious charge to make against a Minister.

asked whether the proposals of the Ministry of Reconstruction will be embodied in Bills to be presented to the House and passed as other Bills before they are acted upon, or whether, and, if so, under what conditions or in what cases the Ministry will exercise executive functions?

I would refer my hon. Friend to Clause 2 of the Bill, and to the statements which my right hon. Friend made on behalf of the Government on the Second Reading.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state a little more explicitly whether the proposals of the Ministry of Reconstruction will be embodied in Bills to be discussed in Parliament or will they be laid upon the Table of the House as Regulations and Rules, on which no discussion can possibly take place?

Would my hon. Friend put that question down?

That is the question on the Paper to which I have not had an answer.

I would rather the hon. Member put down a further question.

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that Mr. Quelch, of the so-called Workers' and Soldiers' Council, has threatened that unless their conferences are protected by the Government the pacifists will consider a drastic reprisal; whether he has any official information showing that the South Wales miners are now considering strike action and that their lead will be taken up in other quarters; and, if so, whether the Government will take steps to prevent persons from fomenting industrial troubles among the workers in industries necessary for the prosecution of the War?

These questions require and receive constant attention from His Majesty's Government, but the action to be taken depends on the circumstances, and I cannot make a general statement.

Is the present strike one of the things which Mr. Quelch stated that he would bring about unless he could get what he wanted?

I have no knowledge of the strike to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty (1) the amount of public money which has been spent on the Royal Naval College buildings and accessories at Osborne since it was started; (2) if the opinion of those parents who are satisfied with the present system has ever been considered as regards the utility and position of the Royal Naval College, Osborne, or only the censure of the minority; (3) if there is any intention of doing away with, or transferring, the Royal Naval College, Osborne; if the proposed changes are due to the recent epidemic which was equally severe in many other schools; if the proposed change is due to a wish for the revision of educational schemes; if so, whether he will consider the desirability of consulting educational experts; (4) if the Government are still building or have arranged to build additions to the Royal Naval College, Osborne, in respect of the sick bay and other buildings; (5) if any Commission has ever recently visted Osborne when the life of the Royal Naval College could be studied or only when the cadets were on leave; (6) if the late Second Sea Lord is responsible for the whole proposed changes at the Royal Naval College, Osborne; (7) if the Admiralty will give an undertaking not to make any drastic changes as regards the Royal Naval College, Osborne, without first giving Parliament the opportunity of discussing and expressing an opinion on the matter?

The question of the Royal Naval College at Osborne is under the consideration of the Board, and no final conclusions have yet been reached.

( rising at the end of Questions ): Am I now in order in stating that, owing to the unsatisfactory reply of the right hon. Gentleman, I shall raise the whole question on the Adjournment?

asked the Prime Minister whether he intends to take any steps to give effect to the proposals with regard to the administration of the Military Service (Review of Exceptions) Act, 1917, which the Secretary of State for War has announced his readiness to accept?

If the hon. Member refers to certain promises made by the Secretary of State for War to the Select Committee, I am informed that Orders to give effect to them have already been issued, the Army Council Instruction in which they are embodied having previously been shown to the Chairman of the Committee and by him to the Committee, to whom the proposals commended themselves as carrying out the pledges. If, on the other hand, he refers to the larger question of the transfer of the responsibility for recruiting, this matter has been before the War Cabinet, who have Accepted the change in principle. The details have still to be determined.

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to accept the three recommendations proposed by the Select Committee in reference to the men who have joined since 5th April?

I really must ask for notice of that question. I do not know what the Resolution is.

Has not the Leader of the House yet read the three recommendations made by the Select Committee?

The hon. Member need not proceed further. I have to confess that I have not read them.

Oh, shocking!

asked the Prime Minister what Department or what per- son is responsible for the delay in loading and discharging ships at Basra, which has involved the holding up at that place of tens of thousands of tons of shipping; whether the quarantine, the intense heat, causing labour inefficiency, could have been foreseen; and why ships with heavy stores beyond the capacity of the ship's derricks to unload have been sent to Basra, when no other power of unloading was available?

The necessity for quarantine is not one that could be foreseen. Heat is to be expected any summer at Basra, but I understand that this season it has been abnormal. The progress of discharge was also handicapped by the arrival of ships in a convoy. In spite of these disadvantages the rate of discharge compares most favourably with that of a year ago. The construction of railways in Mesopotamia has necessitated the shipment of heavy rollingstock, most of which had to be discharged by a floating crane. Additional crane power is being provided.

Who is responsible for sending ships to Basra where there is not the capacity to unload them?

:I think it is a joint responsibility of the Admiralty and the War Office.

Is my hon. Friend aware that a number of masters and members of crews of these ships are being struck down with sickness and left in hospital, and that the ships have to proceed in some cases minus masters, and in other cases minus important members of the crew, with the result that it interferes with the safe navigation of the ship?

I would ask for notice of that question.

asked the Secretary of State for India what is the present position of Lieutenant-Colonel Carter, Indian Medical Service; is he still on service in India or is he still detained in this country; if the latter, whether it makes any difference in his pay and allowances and, if so, to what extent; and whether, in view of the praise of this officer's action by the Mesopotamia Report, he proposes that he shall be promoted or given any special recognition in view of his services to the British and Indian troops?

Lieutenant-Colonel Carter is at present employed under the Admiralty on the equipment of hospital ships. Under Indian Regulations an officer placed on special duty in this country draws somewhat less than the full pay of his substantive appointment in India. Lieutenant-Colonel Carter's deputation pay— £1,057 10s. a year—is accordingly less than that attached to the last appointment which he held in India, namely, £1,360 a year. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative, and I am in communication with the Government of India on the subject.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not feel that this one man, who was responsible for exposing the scandal of Mesopotamia, ought not to suffer either financially or in any other way as a result of his action?

Do not officers in the Indian Service regard serving at home for a time at slightly lower pay as a privilege and an advantage?

It is because I recognise that the gallant officer's services deserve some recognition that I am in communication with the Government of India with regard to his promotion or other special recognition. The difference between service in England and service in India must, according to the Regulations, obviously—and I think rightly—be represented by some difference in emolument.

Is it not a fact that Surgeon-General Sir William Babtie is serving at home on Indian pay?

That does not arise out of the question.

Why has this officer been transferred to the Admiralty and not been kept in the Indian Medical Service?

The gallant officer has shown himself peculiarly well equipped for the service he is rendering to the Admiralty. He has been loaned to the Admiralty for the purpose of assisting in the equipment of hospital ships.

Is it not rather hard on this officer that he is receiving less pay at the Admiralty than he did in the Indian Service?

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether in making this recom- mendation for the promotion of Colonel Carter he will bear in mind the fact that Colonel Carter was in independent charge of a hospital ship running between Bombay and Basra, and that consequently he had to bear none of the heat and burden of the day of going down the River Tigris in charge of wounded, which was. borne by the other officers of the Indian Medical Service, and will he recommend officers of like rank in the Indian Medical Service for promotion as well as Colonel Carter?

They did not render the same service.

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the fact that there is no Department responsible for the provisions of doctors to meet the medical requirements of the civilian population; whether the War Office has called up civilian doctors irrespective of civilian needs; that, owing to the defective organisation of the Royal Army Medical Corps, the services of doctors who have joined the Army are not utilised to the fullest extent; and whether he will appoint a competent authority to adjudicate, between the competing claims of the Royal Army Medical Corps and the civilian population, as has already been done in the case of agriculture?

There is a Committee appointed for this purpose under the Military Service Act, which is the competent authority under that Act. I think my hon. and gallant Friend is under a misapprehension in supposing that the War Office calls up doctors irrespective of civil needs or that the fullest and best use is not made of the doctors serving on the various fronts.

By what Department was this Committee appointed?

By the War Office.

Has any estimate been formed of the number of qualified medical men who are serving as privates in the ranks?

No; I do not think that any estimate has been formed, but every inducement is being given to qualified men in the ranks to take commissions in the Royal Army Medical Corps.

asked the Prime Minister whether, as a result of the recent Allied conferences on questions relating to the Balkans and our war policy in the Near East, he will make a statement in Secret Session before the Adjournment of the House?

I am not prepared to adopt my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that Captain William Stanley Shaw, 10th Middlesex Regiment, served over two years in the Territorials during the present War besides previous years of service and was retired on account of ill-health at the age of forty-seven, and has applied for employment to the Food Controller, National Service Department, Ministry of Munitions, Board of Trade, War Office, and Home Office, he can say why no employment can be found for this officer, in view of the fact that he has served his country and has had over twenty years' business training and has a knowledge of foodstuffs; and can he see his way to utilising the services of this officer?

I understand that Captain Shaw has applied to the Departments named in the question, but he has not been considered suitable.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether he knows anything about this case?

As the result of the question I have made inquiries, and I have seen some letters from the gentleman named which suggest to me that he would not be a suitable employé.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the increased cost of living, he will, by legislation or otherwise, take steps to increase the disablement benefit of 5s. per week, as paid under the provisions of the National Insurance Act, by at least 50 per cent?

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the question of increasing the scale of benefits under the Insurance Act, pari passu with the scale of pensions, to meet the increased cost of living?

I have been asked to answer these questions. To increase the rates of benefit under the National Insurance Acts, as suggested, would involve a large increase in the contribution both of employers and employed, and any such change is not in contemplation.

asked the Prime Minister whether Lord Haldane is now employed in any kind of work by the Government or in any kind of employment with which the Government is connected?

Lord Haldane has for some time been serving on a Subcommittee of the Reconstruction Committee, but, as I have already stated, these Sub-committees have been appointed to give confidential information and advice to the Government, and it is not thought desirable that the constitution, terms of reference or reports of these Committees should be made public.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Lord Haldane is thoroughly distrusted by the people?

That is a debatable point.