asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the terms of the Franco-Russian Alliance and the present commitments of Great Britain to the Republic of France?

The policy and liabilities to which His Majesty's Government are committed are those of the Alliance made with France on 5th September, 1914, which has been published. As regards the rest of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given to him on 4th and 10th March and 28th April, 1915.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if time expired soldiers do not receive their month's leave on re-enlistment; and if they can be assured that it will eventually be granted them independent of the usual ten days' leave?

All men who, on becoming time expired, are retained in the Service under the Military Service Act, 1916 (Session 2), are granted a month's leave if recommended by their commanding officers. Such leave is granted at the discretion of General Officers Commanding, provided these men can be spared. It should, however, be understood that all leave in the case of men serving overseas is necessarily dependent on the amount of transport accommodation available. The month's leave referred to is quite independent of any other leave granted in the ordinary course.

Is not the month's leave really a right, which does not depend upon the kind offices of the Commanding Officer except as to time?

Any man who is time-expired and continues his service is still a soldier of the Crown, and it all depends on military exigencies whether at that particular time he gets the month's leave.

Is it considered a right, and is it understood that it will be granted by and by, if not at the time?

I think it is a right, but it cannot be granted in each case at the time.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether it is proposed to retain the Regulations which forbid soldiers to make criticisms, suggestions, or complaints to Members of Parliament?

asked whether any soldiers have been punished, and, if so, how many, for communicating to their representatives in Parliament complaints, suggestions, or criticisms?

asked what punishment, if any, falls upon soldiers and officers who are found to have made communications to their representatives in Parliament containing suggestions, criticisms, or complaints?

asked how the Regulation which forbids officers and soldiers to communicate to their representatives in Parliament criticisms, suggestions, or complaints is applied in the cases of soldiers who are also Members of Parliament?

asked how long the Regulations have been in force which prevent soldiers communicating to their representatives in Parliament criticisms, complaints, or suggestions?

asked whether the Regulations which forbid soldiers to communicate complaints to Members of Parliament apply in cases where soldiers desire to submit to their representatives statements as to their health or as to the position of their dependants?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can give an assurance to the House that no soldier whose letter of complaint or suggestion is sent to the War Office by a Member of Parliament will be subjected to any punishment?

asked whether, in view of the fact that the Army is now composed of the great majority of the young manhood of the nation, steps will be taken to cancel the Regulation framed in the interests of discipline in the old Army forbidding soldiers to write letters to Members of Parliament containing criticism and suggestions?

asked if the help of their representatives in Parliament is often sought by members of the Army in cases of hardship, illness, care of dependants, and other matters, with beneficial results; and whether such communications are forbidden?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the concern felt in many quarters at the existence of Regulations which forbid officers and soldiers to communicate complaints, suggestions, or criticisms to their representatives in Parliament; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

Before the hon. Gentleman answers these questions, may I ask him whether it is not a fact that these Regulations have, most unfortunately, become necessary by the action of certain hon. Members in magnifying trivialities and seeking to make mischief in the Army?

Probably the suggestion of my hon. Friend is in the minds of a good many hon. Members. I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave to my hon. Friend's question on this sub- ject on the 30th October, and to the supplementary question of my hon. Friend the Member for the Elland Division.

Does the hon. Gentleman propose to reply to the new points mentioned in these questions, which were not replied to before?

I have looked carefully at the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark (Mr. Whitehouse), and to the supplementary question by the hon. Member for the Elland Division (Mr. Trevelyan), and the answers to the main question and the supplementary question completely cover the points.

Do not these soldiers retain their character as constituents?

Certainly. They can vote.

Will the hon. Gentleman reply to the question whether soldiers have in fact been punished for communicating with their Members of Parliament?

I covered that in the answer to the supplementary question which I gave. I said that, so far as I knew, and I have verified my facts, no soldier has been in any way punished for communicating with his Member of Parliament.

Will the hon. Member reply to the question asking how the Regulation is enforced in the case of officers and soldiers who are members of this House?

I have answered that already.

Is it not a fact that a soldier who communicated with a Committee set up by this House to inquire into the Military Service Act was sentenced to three days' "C. B."?

That point was put to me the other day and at the time I could not reply. I referred to communications made to me personally by Members of this House. What happened in that particular case I do not know.

Is it not a fact that be was actually punished and appeared under arrest before a Committee of this House?

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he will undertake that letters addressed by soldiers to Members of Parliament at the House of Commons shall not be subjected to military censorship?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether letters written to Members of Parliament by soldiers in the field are stopped by the Censor; and whether there is any case of a soldier having been punished for writing such letters?

Letters written by soldiers in the field which contain matter contravening the Censorship Orders for Troops in the Field are liable to be detained by the Censor. Letters to Members of this House are not excepted from this rule. As regards the concluding part of my hon. Friend's question, I have nothing to add to the reply I have just given to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Lanark.

Does the Government propose to take any steps to punish Members of this House who say in the House these things which the men write to them?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War under what Regulation or Order are soldiers, at home and abroad, respectively, restricted in their rights to write to Members of Parliament; and whether any replies sent to soldiers abroad by Members of Parliament are subject to any special censorship or liability to be stopped?

I have already replied to the first part of my hon. Friend's question in the answer which I have just given to my hon. Friend the Member for Haggerston. With regard to the second part, the answer is in the negative. Letters from Members of Parliament are no more liable to be stopped than letters from other persons.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the responsible duties which have been discharged since the commencement of the War by officers commanding special reserve battalions in this country; whether those duties include the command of battalions of exceptionally large numbers, the training of great numbers of officers and men for active service, and the preparation and organisation for local defence; whether promotion has been given to any of these special reserve commanding officers in this country; and whether he will consider the desirability in proper cases of giving these commanding officers the command of a brigade?

Seventeen promotions have been given this year to special reserve commanding officers in this country, and two of them are in command of brigades.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War what arrangements have been made to inquire into the condition of the Indian troops serving in East Africa, with special reference to their medical equipment, convalescent treatment, and rationing?

Yes, Sir; a special inquiry is being made by officers who have been deputed for this purpose.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is in a position to make a statement as to recent military events and the present position in Mesopotamia, the kingdom of the Hedjaz, and the neighbouring sultanates?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the frequent and full communiqués which have been issued to the Press in regard to recent military events in the theatres under reference. I am afraid that the publication of a detailed statement as to the present position in these theatres while operations are in progress would not be compatible with the public interest.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War what is the estimate of Russian and Polish subjects of military age in the United Kingdom, and of these how many have actually been dispatched to their native country; how many have appealed against military service, and how many have claimed and obtained exemption owing to the good offices of Russian officials in this country; and if special tribunals to consider appeals have been set up in Brighton and Dublin?

As I informed my hon. and gallant Friend on 30th October, about four-sevenths of the Russian subjects who applied in the prescribed manner to return have availed themselves of the opportunity. In regard to the second part of the question, I would refer him to the answer given on the 30th. I have no information as to the number of exemptions granted by the Russian Ambassador, to whom the power is reserved. I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to my right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board in regard to the last part of the question. I understand it is not proposed to establish a tribunal in Brighton, and he will doubtless bear in mind that there is no object in establishing a tribunal in Dublin, as the Military Service Acts do not apply to Ireland.

What happens supposing one of these Russians goes to Ireland; is he exempt then?

No; he is not exempt at all. We have means under the Military Service Acts of getting him back.

I shall raise this question this afternoon, if I can.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether C 3 men of forty-one years of age are being sent out to France for clerical work immediately after they have joined the Army; and whether these men in France may have their categories raised and be placed in combatant corps without any opportunity of a proper appeal to a medical board?

The men to whom my hon. Friend refers would not be sent to France unless they have been passed fit for, and have received sufficient training in, the duties required. With regard to the last part of the question, I think my hon. Friend is under some misapprehension, as such reclassification would not be carried out without the men being brought before a special medical board at the base.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War if he will have immediate inquiry made into the case of Private No. 241252, 1/5th Lincolnshire Regiment, who is only nineteen years of age and who deserted his regiment in France about six weeks ago, having been over the top twice just previous to deserting and at the time of his desertion was undergoing field punishment No. 1 for two hours daily in a place exposed to shell fire and because of this exposure he ran away; will he ascertain if this boy was sent to France last week for court-martial; and, in the event of sentence of death being passed upon him, will he see, in view of his youth and past fighting record, that the death penalty is not carried out?

If the facts are as stated and the soldier has been guilty of desertion, my hon. Friend will realise that it is impossible for me to attempt to influence the Court which will try him in their finding or their sentence. The extenuating circumstances suggested would probably form the subject of a plea in mitigation of sentence which would receive the due consideration of the Court and of the Field-Marshal Commanding-in-Chief, by whom the proceedings eventually would be confirmed or mitigated.

Will the hon. Gentleman inquire whether it is a fact, as stated in the question, that soldiers may be subjected to field punishment under shell fire?

I will certainly inquire, but I am extremely doubtful if any such practice exists.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that men who have only one eye have been recently passed for active service in his Department who were, on account of their deficiency, the last of families of sons of widowed mothers to be taken; that in some instances the brothers have been killed fighting the enemy; and, having regard to the promise given in this House that the last son of a widowed mother would not be taken, will his Department release men so situated?

Men who have lost their right eye, if otherwise fit, are classified in a category lower than general service. Men who have lost their left eye, if otherwise fit, are passed to Class W of the Reserve in order that they may be called up later for general service, if necessary. In regard to my hon. Friend's suggestion that the last support of a widowed mother has been taken, if he will give me particulars I will make inquiries, provided that the man is in the Army. The question of taking him for the Army is a matter for a tribunal.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government have had under consideration the many cases of hardship that the calling up of men engaged in what are called one-man businesses entails; whether he is aware that such hardship is aggravated by the knowledge that Irishmen and aliens of Allied or neutral birth are exempted from a liability which falls on those of British birth alone; and whether he will make an early pronouncemeut of some scheme to preserve the interests and business of men who are called up for service?

The Prime Minister has asked me to inform the hon. and gallant Member that the Government is giving the fullest consideration to the cases of hardship arising out of the calling up of proprietors of one-man businesses. As a result of conference which I have had with various one-man business organisations, a federation has been formed of associations representing such proprietors, and a Joint Committee, under the chairmanship of one of my officials, has been set up to consider what steps it is possible to take with a view to minimising undue hardship. It is not likely that any scheme laid down on hard and fast lines will be applicable, as these cases vary so much in their detail. It is, however, hoped that certain broad principles may be approved at an early date, and that thereafter cases will be dealt with individually in accordance with those principles.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Local Government Board have a scheme on foot? Is that scheme to be transferred to the National Service Department?

We are working in the closest possible touch at the present time.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in addition to the Local Government Board there is also a scheme being devised by the Civil Liabilities Committee? Are we to understand that these schemes have been taken over by the National Service Ministry and that they are going to come to a decision?

The scheme will be a Government scheme, and the Departments concerned are in the closest consultation.

Which Department will come to a final decision, and which Department will work the scheme?

Will the discretion given to the tribunals by Statute be in any way interfered with?

There is no proposal at the present time to interfere with the discretion given to the tribunals by Statute. With respect to the other question, the result of the deliberations which are at present proceeding will, I have no doubt, be announced by the Department for which I am responsible.

In any cases where the tribunal has come to a decision already, will that decision be likely to be reviewed afterwards?

I should require notice of that question.

Is there any foundation for the statement in the question that Irishmen in this country are treated differently from those of British birth or allied and neutral birth?

There are certain privileges attaching to people whose place of ordinary residence was Ireland, and who cannot be interfered with by any administrative action.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that a conscientious objector now in Wormwood Scrubs is under observation in regard to his mental condition; that his mind has become affected as the result of his present treatment, and that while serving a previous sentence in Exeter he twice attempted to take his own life; and whether, in the circumstances, this man will be released and handed over to his friends?

My right hon. Friend stated the facts of this case fully on the 23rd October, in reply to a question by the hon. Member for North Somerset. The man referred to has now been certified insane, and instructions have been issued for his removal to Long Grove Asylum. There is no reason whatever to suppose that his mental state was due to prison treatment. The medical officer reports that there is conclusive evidence that the condition arose antecedently to imprisonment. Nothing is known of any attempt at suicide while in a civil prison.

Has any inquiry been made of his previous medical attendant before he was summoned to the Army?

I am afraid I am not in a position to say from whom the inquiry was made, but I am informed by my advisers that an exhaustive inquiry was made.

asked the Home Secretary whether the annual estimates for Dartmoor settlement are based upon the assumption that the loss per annum will be £40,000; and, if so, whether some more economical method will be devised for dealing with conscientious objectors than the Home Office scheme, which has proved to be a complete failure as a means of providing useful work for conscientious objectors as an alternative to keeping them in prison?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The total gross expenditure at Prince-town Work Centre for the six months from 1st April to 30th September was £19,346; but against this must be put the value of the work done by the men, at present nearly 1,200 in number, most of whom are employed on farm work, land reclamation, quarrying, and building. The value is not less than £10,600. It is not the case that the Committee's scheme is a complete failure. The returns from the labour of conscientious objectors at the various camps and centres is better than it was, though there is room for further improvement.

asked the Home Secretary if he can state the circumstances under which Mr. Vendelmann, a gentleman of Belgian nationality, who was connected with the Leopold regime in the Congo Free State, has been placed in direct charge of some of the conscientious objectors employed at Dartmoor; what re- muneration this gentleman receives for his work; whether his antecedents are known; and whether English surveyors are not available for the supervision of the digging up of the moorland on Dartmoor?

I understand that Mr. Vendelmann, a Belgian, is employed by the Duchy of Cornwall, who are carrying on a scheme of reclamation on Dartmoor. I have no information as to his remuneration or his antecedents. He is not in charge of the conscientious objectors employed in carrying out the reclamation scheme of the Duchy, who are under the direct charge and control of an officer of the work centre.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War to what extent the present Army Regulations forbid soldiers attending political meetings or joining political associations; and whether there is any prohibition upon a member of His Majesty's forces attending meetings during an election in the constituency in which he is a voter, in order that he may learn the views of the respective candidates and thus be able properly to exercise the right of voting proposed to be conferred upon him by the Representation of the People Bill?

The present Regulations dealing with the subject will be found in paragraph 451 of the King's Regulations. The provisions as to the exercise of the right of voting by a soldier will be found by reference to the second section of the Act, 1847, to regulate the stations of soldiers during Parliamentary elections, but for my hon. Friend's convenience I will forward him a copy of the Orders which are issued when a writ for the election of a Member to serve in the House is issued from the Crown Office.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any steps can be taken to increase the recruiting of officers for the Royal Flying Corps from public school boys reaching military age, as, for example, by arranging for successful squadron commanders to lecture at the schools and by increasing the rewards for individual courage in the air?

I understand that there is no shortage of candidates as pilots. The requirements of the Army have to be considered as a whole, and in this particular sphere of recruiting, which provides highly desirable recruits for all branches of the Army, I do not think any particular arm of the Service should have preference.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether the decoration which is to be given to the members of the original Expeditionary Force will be given to the next-of-kin of those officers and men who have since fallen in the War?

In the case of deceased officers and men who, if they had survived, would have received this decoration, issue will be made to the persons legally entitled to receive it.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he is aware that the Royal Army Medical Corps is now represented by a layman on the Army Council; and whether, in view of the condition of the Medical Services in various campaigns during the present War, and of the status given in the Armies of our Allies to the medical officers who have charge of their medical services, he will take any steps to secure that the Royal Army Medical Corps shall be represented on the Army Council by a qualified medical officer?

I must refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answers I gave to his two questions on this subject on 6th and 8th August. I have nothing to add.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the fact that when hospital physicians and surgeons were asked to join the Royal Army Medical Corps, Territorial Force, in 1908 they were given a definite official assurance by the then Director-General, Army Medical Service, that, if they did so, their appointment would entail no duties in time of peace, but a liability in time of invasion or national emergency to perform only clinical duties identical with those they perform in civil life in the general hospitals; and whether he will explain why a number of hospital physicians and surgeons who are over military age and who joined the Royal Army Medical Corps, Territorial Force, on this understanding in 1908 have been compelled to perform duties other than clinical which are wholly foreign to their previous experience?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, with this qualification, that no promise was made that the clinical duties should be identical with those performed in civil life. I am not aware of any case in which these officers are compelled to do duties other than clinical

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether Surgeon-General Sir William Babtie was appointed to his present position as Director of Medical Services at the War Office in recognition of the services he rendered in Mesopotamia; whether the causes of the breakdown of the medical services in Mesopotamia have been examined by any court-martial or court of inquiry; and whether the Army Council is satisfied as to what officer or officers must be held responsible for the breakdown of the medical services in Mesopotamia?

Surgeon-General Sir William Babtie was Director of Medical Services at the War Office before the Report of the Mesopotamian Commission was issued. After the appearance of the Report he was given leave, pending its consideration. As I stated in my answer to my hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset, on 18th October, Sir William Babtie submitted his explanation to the Army Council, who found it satisfactory, and he was recalled from leave to resume his official duties. I added that the Council still awaited the explanation of the other officers. From this it might be inferred, indeed it has been inferred, that these officers were called upon for their explanation at the same time as Sir William Babtie, and that they failed to submit them within a reasonable time. Such is not the case, and I regret very much that my reply should have given any ground for an inference both unwarrantable and unjust and prejudicial towards the distinguished officers concerned, who are, and have been, anxious to offer their explanations. Until all the explanations have been received I cannot answer the last part of my hon. and gallant Friend's question.

Will my hon. Friend give publicity to the explanation offered by Surgeon-General Babtie to the Army Council and accepted by them, in view of the public charges contained in the Report?

I do not think so.

Is not the reappointment of this officer a direct slur upon the Report of the Committee appointed by this House?

My hon. Friend will remember that in the case of Sir William Babtie the Commission practically recommended that he should be reappointed.

Why cannot the House of Commons get the explanation which was offered by Surgeon-General Babtie in order that we may know whether the explanation warrants this new appointment?

I think Sir William Babtie is content to let the matter remain where it is.

Is Sir William Babtie's explanation being sent to the Chairman of the Mesopotamia Commission?

I do not think that it is necessary.

asked the Undersecretary of State for War how many, and, if so, what appointments General Sir Archibald Murray has held since the beginning of the War; and whether any special reasons exist for the continued employment of this officer?

Sir Archibald Murray has been Chief of the General Staff in France, Chief of the Imperial General Staff at the War Office, General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Egypt. In regard to the last part of the question his most distinguished military record and his undoubted abilities amply justify his present appointment.

Is the disaster at Gaza one of his brilliant military exploits?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the shortage of doctors in this country, it is necessary that a man discharged from the Army owing to the loss of a limb, consumption, shell-shock, or other obvious disability, should be examined by six or more medical officers in the process of his discharge?

Only one medical board is necessary to determine the fitness or unfitness of a man for further service. But in the case of men suffering from nervous disorders a special board considers the case anew.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if, in view of the shortage of doctors in this country, it is necessary that three medical officers should sit on medical boards for privates and non-commissioned officers; and whether, if this arrangement is necessary, he can explain why two medical officers are sufficient to constitute a medical board for officers?

Two medical officers are sufficient to form a board, but in view of the grave issues which have to be determined three is a better number whenever the local establishments admit of this.

Is it, therefore, to be understood that six doctors are not required?

It depends on the case. Very strong animadversions were made in this House on the fact that the War Office did not give sufficient medical examination. Now that we are accused of giving too many doctors for medical examinations the case seems just as bad.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that these doctors are very much needed in civilian practice?

All that has been kept in mind. I stated in my answer that the civil establishments employ as many doctors as possible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War when it is hoped that the reports from the accredited correspondent accompanying the forces operating in East Africa will appear in the British and Indian newspapers?

I am afraid that the War Office can do no more than give every facility to the accredited correspondent to enable him to write his reports. When any report is received, it will no doubt be published. I understand that at present the correspondent is on the sick list.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether communications have been received at the War Office from representative persons, including the headmaster of the Manchester Grammar School, calling attention to the dangers resulting from the existence of wet canteens in battalions composed of youths eighteen years old, some of them fresh from school, and in officer cadet battalions in which a large number of boys are under eighteen; and what action the Army Council propose to take in the matter?

I have not seen the communications to which my hon. Friend refers, but I would remind him that in officer cadet battalions a very large proportion of the cadets are twenty-two years old and upwards. It is not proposed to take any action in the sense indicated.

Will my hon. Friend personally look at the communication from the headmaster of the Manchester Grammar School?

I will certainly look at any communication.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office (1) whether, as regards British officer pri- soners of war in Germany the 60 marks per month paid by the German Government to lieutenants and second lieutenants and the 100 marks per month paid by them to captains and officers of higher rank for their maintenance are to be treated as advances made by the German Government and to be ultimately repaid to them at the end of the War; whether there is any reason why such advances of 60 and 100 marks per month respectively, should not be taken as being of their actual exchange value, which in August last were £1 14s. 3d. and £2 19s., respectively; whether he will explain why the War Office authorities deduct from the pay of such officer prisoners of war £3 per month instead of £1 14s. 3d. in the case of lieutenants and second lieutenants, and £5 a month instead of £2 19s. in the case of captains and officers of higher rank; (2) whether the advances made by the British Government to German prisoners of war in this country of £6 per month in the case of officers of rank equivalent to lieutenant and second lieutenant and of £7 10s. per month in the case of officers of rank equivalent to captain and above ought to be and will be ultimately repaid by the German Government and at what rate of exchange?

As I explained in my reply to my hon. and learned Friend on the 25th ultimo, the purchasing power of the mark spent in Germany is not affected by the foreign rate of exchange. It was, therefore, decided that the proper deduction from pay in this country was the amount calculated on the standard value of the payment in Germany. Under The Hague Convention the amounts advanced by the British and German Governments, respectively, fall due for repayment to them at the end of the War; but there is no present agreement as to the rate of exchange.

In view of the fact that in this matter, as in others, the Germans have thrown The Hague Convention into the waste-paper basket, can my right hon. Friend give any reason why these British officers should be charged very nearly double in this country the value of what they receive in Germany?

I think that is not the case. The British officer has received the full purchasing value of the mark in Germany.

Surely if the £3 which is deducted in this country from the officers' pay were sent over to Germany, instead of getting 60 marks he would get something much nearer 100. Why is it fair, when he only gets 60 marks in this country, to deduct £3 in this way?

I am the last man in the world to want to deprive the British officer of any advantage we can give him. I will certainly look into the matter again.

Why in the case of an officer of higher rank does the German get an advantage of over half as much again, apart from exchange altogether?

I have explained that several times. Under The Hague Convention prisoners of war are paid by the captor Government the rate of pay appropriate to the captor Government's own officers. Our rates of pay are higher than the German rates. When we found that the German Government was issuing a rate of pay lower than that which they issue to their officers we made a corresponding reduction in the amount that we issued to the German prisoners.

Is not our rate still very much higher, and when are we going to have an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth?

In view of the fact that the German Government has not abided by the conditions of The Hague Convention is there any reason why we should pay these German officer prisoners of war more than the Germans pay our prisoners of war?

I should be very slow to run any risk of diminishing the attenuated payment which is at present made to our officers.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that widows, mothers, and other dependants have often difficulty in understanding the statement of accounts and credits in respect of deceased soldiers as presented by the regimental paymasters, and are often in doubt as to whether a complete and accurate statement has been made of moneys or other personal property in the possession of or due to these deceased soldiers, and payable to those to whom they left their property; and whether a simpler, clearer system can be devised which would at the same time convey full and satisfactory information?

A simple standard form of account is in use, and clear instructions have been issued for its preparation. I will consider whether any further simplification can be effected, but, as I am sure the hon. Member will realise, it is not possible to devise any form of account in these cases which will not present difficulties to certain applicants. I understand that complaints have been comparatively few, but if the hon. Member will bring any specific cases to my notice, I shall be glad to have them investigated.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it is a fact that statements of amount are not supplied to the relatives unless they are specially asked for, and the relatives are not aware in many cases that they are entitled to a statement?

I am not quite sure about that, but I will look into it.

In view of the great number of complaints against regimental paymasters, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether there is any system of auditing the accounts of these paymasters?

I think all the accounts are audited.

asked whether any wives are deprived of their separation allowances on the strength of secret police reports without their husbands being consulted?

A wife's separation allowance is never forfeited on the police report without corroboration, which is obtained in all cases from the local committee, except in cases of admitted immorality or of conviction for neglect of children. The husband is informed when it is decided that forfeiture of separation allowance must be made. The hon. Member will appreciate that it would be impossible to wait for consultation with the husband without a delay which would certainly be long and might be indefinite.

May we take it that the husband is always informed before the separation allowance is actually stopped?

The husband is informed, but we cannot wait until we get a reply in many cases.

asked the Pensions Minister whether he is aware that certain medical doctors when re-examining discharged men with a view to a possible revision of pension have a habit of asking them what wages they are earning; whether he can state for what reason this inquiry is made; and whether assessment for pension is based upon injuries received or whether it bears some relationship to economic circumstances?

As regards the first part of the question inquiries as to earnings should not take place, but as it has been represented that the practice has not entirely ceased, the Army Council have at my request recently issued an Instruction in the matter. As regards the second part, the assessment for minimum pension is based purely on the extent of a man's disability without regard to what he may be able to earn. If, however, a man is unable to follow a remunerative pre-war occupation by reason of his disablement and has to undertake a less remunerative one, he can apply for an alternative pension based on his pre-war earnings.

Is it not a fact that it is the practice of the Department not only to inquire what the man himself is earning but what the members of his family are earning?

No; In assessing the maximum pension we do not inquire into the earnings at all. As regards the alternative pension we only inquire what the man himself earned before the War.

asked the Pensions Minister what is being done, in regard to the industrial training of the children of private soldiers and noncommissioned officers who died during service or after discharge; whether any extra allowance is made in cases in which such children are to serve an apprenticeship at a trade and to receive special training; and whether he will indicate the future plans of his Department on this matter?

The Special Grants Committee are empowered to make Grants for the purpose of technical training or apprenticeship up to £25 a year, with £10 for travelling and other expenses for children, between the ages of thirteen and twenty-one, of noncommissioned officers and men. In the case of a child having to reside away from home, the amount can be increased to £50. The attention of local committees has also been drawn to the fact that the Special Grants Committee have a special fund from which the children of deceased sailors and soldiers can be assisted to start of life.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether his attention has been called to the case of a large steamer laden with sugar which arrived at a port on the North-East Coast on the 15th October about 9 p.m. and was ordered out to sea again next morning, where she remained for six hours in a danger zone before receiving orders to proceed to another port; whether this vessel has been in other ports since arrival in home waters; and, if the facts are as stated, what action he proposes to take to avoid the repetition of a similar occurrence?

The reports I have received are not quite complete, and I will therefore ask my hon. Friend either to put down his question again or to communicate with me privately.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that the War Trade Department have now authorised the import of China green tea destined for the use of the Moors provided it is shipped to this country in Japanese or neutral vessels and immediately transhipped; and whether, having regard to the loss and inconvenience which is now being caused owing to the tea prohibition, he can see his way to extend to the inhabitants of the United Kingdom the same rights to receive China black tea and Java tea imported in Japanese or neutral vessels as they have so wisely extended to the Moors?

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. As regards the import of China tea into the United Kingdom, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Members for the Tower Hamlets and the Wirral Division of Cheshire on the 22nd October, of which I am sending him a copy. The grant of transhipment facilities is based on a set of considerations wholly different from those governing the import of the same goods, and there is nothing inconsistent in granting the one and withholding the other.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether a census of tea of the different grades available, both in bond and in duty paid, was taken by his Department on the 3rd September, and various other returns furnished with regard to stocks within the United Kingdom during that month; whether he can now state what was the total quantity of duty-paid teas included in his census returns and the estimated quantity existing in the country which could not be included; and whether he will furnish the House with a table giving the effect of the various returns obtained by the Department as a result of these inquiries?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The total quantity of duty-paid tea included in the census returns amounted to 27,250,000 lbs. I am unable to form any estimate of the tea held in quantities of less than 500 lbs., and, therefore, not included in the census. The effect of the various returns obtained by the Department is not, I imagine, of general interest, but I shall be happy to furnish the right hon. Gentleman with a summary if he so desires.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food, with regard to the Order restricting the maximum price of tea to 4s. per lb., whether it was brought to his notice by a deputation that the Government had sold considerable quantities of tea a short time before the Order was issued at 4s. 9d. to 4s. 11d. per lb., including duty; that they had received the cash for these teas, but that, owing to various transit difficulties and other delays and the short notice which was given by the Food Controller as to the proposed new maximum price, in many cases these teas had not reached the hands of the buyers when the Government limitation of the retail price to 4s. per lb. was imposed; whether he declined to give even a short postponement of the Order so that these teas might be disposed of and other difficulties met; if he has now considered this matter m the light of the facts brought before him; and if he can announce any method of meeting the difficulty?

A deputation waited upon the Food Controller on 31st October, and called his attention to the fact that the Government, through the Admiralty, had sold at high prices a quantity of tea of which delivery had not then been obtained. In view of the extravagant prices which were being charged in many districts for quite common tea, Lord Rhondda could not consent to any postponement of the Order referred to in the question. He is, however, willing to consider the desirability of making special arrangements to meet ascertained cases of hardship in respect of tea sold by the Admiralty Marshal, where such tea was still in bond on 31st October.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food, with regard to his Order limiting the retail price of tea to 4s. per pound, whether he has considered that the duty, freight charges, and allowance for the cost of distribution in this country now amount to over 2s. per pound; and whether, having regard to the fact that small quantities of tea of fine quality have always been sold in this country at wholesale prices much over 2s., and seeing that the quantity which might be so dealt in had already been limited to 10 per cent., he can see his way to modify the Order so as to allow at least some small proportion of the finest qualities to be sold as free teas without limit of prices, so as not to prevent tea growers experimenting in producing tea of the finest qualities which are appreciated in this country by persons belonging to every class of society and which do so much to improve the general quality of the tea crop?

The Food Controller gave full consideration to the amount of duty, freight charges, and cost of distribution before the Tea (Provisional Prices) Order was issued. It should be borne in mind that there is still in the country a quantity of uncontrolled tea, brought either from China or Java before importation was restricted, or from India or Ceylon before the scheme of control came into operation, and that a considerable quantity of this tea is of inferior quality. A modification of the Order in the direction indicated by the right hon. Gentleman would make it extremely difficult to prevent the sale of this inferior tea at an extravagant price. The quantity of high-grade tea sold in this country at high prices is normally quite small, and I see no reason why a temporary restriction of price should discourage planters from continuing experiments which will prove of permanent value.

While thanking the hon. Gentleman for the partial concession, could it not be extended so as to cover teas on which the duty has been paid?

I have not had an opportunity of going into the question, but I will inquire into it.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he can now state the policy of the Government in regard to the release of further supplies of whisky from bond; and whether the Government propose to regulate retail prices?

I am unable to add anything to the answer given to this question on Thursday last.

May I ask my hon. Friend what is the real policy of the Government in connection with these restrictions? Is it due to fear on the part of the brewers that the customers will take to whisky instead of to beer, or is it part of the national temperance policy?

The hon. Member must hand in that question.

( by Private Notice ) asked the Secretary for Scotland if his attention has been called to the fact that the herring fishery off the coast of Norfolk is now in full swing, and that large catches of fish are being landed every day, but that the Scotch fleet of 160 boats is preparing to return home this week, leaving only 25 boats belonging to Yarmouth and Lowestoft; that this will practically end the fishing; if he can arrange for the Scottish boats to remain, and to continue fishing until the end of the month, and thus save a very large amount of valuable food which will otherwise be lost to the country?

I have to-day received representations to the same effect as those contained in my hon. Friend's question. I fully appreciate the importance of the matter. I am sending a representative to Yarmouth to inquire and report without delay.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of recent disclosures concerning the sale of honours in return for contributions to party funds, and that such sales were continued over a number of years through the offices of the Lords of the Treasury; and whether he will take some steps to render such transactions in future impossible?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, having regard to specific cases of selling or offering to sell honours and titles in return for party fund contributions, which cases have been recently made public, he can assure the House that no such transactions have occurred under the present Government?

I do not believe that any Government would be prepared to admit the principle that subscription to party funds should debar a subscriber who would be otherwise suitable from recognition at the hands of the Sovereign. The Prime Minister has made, and will make, no recommendation to His Majesty as a reward for contributions to party funds.

If a man gives a large sum to the party funds, is it not likely to bias the judgment of the Prime Minister?

I dare say it is likely, but perhaps my hon. Friend knows that the Government assented to the de- cision in another place, and that the Prime Minister distinctly said he was not influenced by these considerations?

Will he require a full statement in each case from the Patronage Secretary?

Otherwise he will not be in a position to say that he had not been influenced indirectly.

Do the Government as a whole accept the decision arrived at in the Resolution of the other House?

Of course the Government accept the decision, which was assented to by the Leader of the Government in the other House.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that now that no one has to pay for honours there will be a tremendous rush for them?

Will the Government abolish all party funds, and also all hereditary titles?

Does the right hon. Gentleman assert that no honours have been given as a result of contributions to party funds?

I said the Prime Minister has given no honours for that reason and does not intend to do so.

asked the Prime Minister whether he can now inform the House of the results of his promised inquiry as to the advisability of publishing a White Paper which would furnish the House and the country with the exact words of enemy statesmen on the subjects of the evacuation of Belgium, Alsace-Lorraine, and other matters to which he has recently replied?

I have considered the hon. Member's suggestion, and I regret that I do not think that such a collection could be published in a form which would be of any great value. The speeches of enemy statesmen on the subjects referred to are in most cases available only in the form of newspaper reports—often incomplete, and in varying versions. In these matters accuracy of text is of paramount importance, and, as I fear that this could not be reached in the suggested White Paper, I think it better not to proceed with its preparation.

Are the official reports of enemy Parliamentary assemblies not available?

asked the Prime Minister how many Inventions Boards and Departments are at present attached to the various Departments of State; whether he is aware that there has been overlapping and consequent waste in their activities; whether the promise that this matter should be considered has resulted in any changes in the direction of co-ordination; and whether any arrangements exist for co-operation with the Inventions Departments of all our Allies?

The question of the more effective co-ordination of the various Boards and bodies concerned with invention is now under examination by the War Cabinet Communication is maintained with the corresponding Departments of our Allies.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware of the shortage of spirits in the licensed trade; and if he will say when an increased amount will be allowed out from bond?

I have been asked to reply. The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The question of releasing further supplies of spirits from bond is still under consideration. An announcement will be made so soon as a decision has been reached.

asked the Prime Minister (1) which of the Secretaries of State, during the absence in India or on his way there and back of the Secretary of State for India, has and performs the powers and duties relating to the government or revenues of India contemplated by the Government of India Act, 1915, and in particular what Secretary of State during the absence of the Secretary of State for India from the realm does, as provided in Clause 2 thereof, superintend, direct, and control all acts, operations, and concerns which relate to the government or revenues of India and all grants of salaries, gratuities, and allowances, and all other payments and charges out of or on the revenues of India; (2) which of the Principal Secretaries of State is, during the absence from the United Kingdom of the present Secretary of State for India, responsible to the Crown and Parliament for the exercise of the Royal Prerogative in the government of India; (3) what officer of the Crown does, during the absence from the United Kingdom of the present Secretary of State for India on his expedition to India, exercise the duties of convening and deliberating with the Council of India and of voting at meetings of that Council, and in particular in regard to such matters as Section 28 of the Government of India Act, 1915, requires to be decided at a meeting of the Council of India with the concurrence of a majority of votes in respect of raising money, mortgaging estate, making contracts, and giving assurances?

Technically my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for India, during his absence from this country, retains responsibility for the due and proper exercise of the powers vested in him by the Government of India Act, 1915, and an Act of Parliament would be required to relieve him of these responsibilities. But the Cabinet were of opinion that, as a temporary expedient, the following arrangements would suffice:

Dispatches to India require the signature of the Secretary of State. Any Secretary of State may act for any other, and at present the dispatches are being signed by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies.

Most of the powers of the Secretary of State for India are exercised by the Secretary of State in Council, and the Act provides for meetings of the Council for the transaction of business in the absence of the Secretary of State. Council continues to meet weekly, the Vice-President presiding, as required by the Act.

Urgent questions of the first importance will be decided by the Cabinet. Questions of importance, but not of great urgency, will be decided after the Secretary of State for India's views have been obtained by telegraph. Questions of less importance will be decided in the Department in accordance with ordinary departmental procedure.

Lord Islington, Parliamentary Undersecretary of State, represents the Secretary of State in the Ministry and in Parliament.

Will Lord Islington, as Vice-President of the Council, preside at its meetings, and, if not, who will?

I must have notice of that question.

Are we to understand that Lord Islington is not acting actually in place of the Secretary of State at present?

Lord Islington is acting in place of the Secretary of State as far as he can.

And has the powers that the Secretary of Stats would have at the Council?

That is subject to what I have stated. As far as it is possible for him to act for the Secretary of State he is acting.

In the absence of the Secretary of State from the meetings of the Council, from any cause whatever, does not the Vice-chairman of the Council, who is elected from time to time by the Council, take the chair, and is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Parliamentary Secretary is not a member of the Council, and has no right to speak, though he habitually attends its proceedings?

No; I was not aware of that. My right hon. Friend has answered the supplementary question.

Is this arrangement intended to evade an Act of Parliament, and would it not be better to introduce a short Act?

My right hon. Friend has not listened to my answer. We could not have made any other arrangement except by Act of Parliament. I may add that the full question of the arrangements to be made in the absence of the Secretary of State for India was submitted by him to the Cabinet and approved of by him.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the acting Secretary of State at present, according to the description we have just had, has no vote on the Council, and does he think that this is consistent with the dignity of an acting Secretary of State?

Who is now responsible to the Crown and to Parliament?

If my hon. Friend will read the answer which I have just given he will see that that point has been dealt with.

asked the Prime Minister whether the list of the personnel of the Government published with the Parliamentary Debates of 16th October is official; if so, whether he can explain the omission of the name of General Smuts; whether the situation of General Smuts within the Government has ever been denned; and, if not, whether it will now be defined?

The list referred to is prepared by the Editor of the OFFICIAL REPORT, and inserted for the convenience of hon. Members. General Smuts' name will, I am informed, appear in the next list. As regards the last two parts of the question, I have nothing to add to the previous statements which have been made on this subject. [ See list at beginning of this Volume. ]

How will he be described in the next list?

He will be described, I presume, as a member of the Cabinet.

asked if the extra 2s. 6d. paid to old age pensioners applies to all new applicants as to pensions at the time such concession was made?

Any applicant for an old age pension who is awarded such pension will also receive the additional allowance of 2s. 6d.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether he is aware that loss and inconvenience are being caused by the diversion of ships carrying tea from the port of London to Liverpool and latterly to Manchester; and whether it is practicable for him, in co-operation with the Admiralty, to arrange that these vessels shall come into the port of London?

The paramount consideration in this connection is, and must continue to be, the safety of the ship and of her cargo. As far as it is compatible with safety the Ministry of Shipping endeavours in its arrangements to meet the convenience of merchants and shippers. Generally, it is not considered desirable that ships which are to load outwards from West Coast ports should make the additional sea passage and take the consequent additional risk which would be entailed if they were sent to London to discharge, and I am afraid that hi these cases, therefore, some inconvenience is unavoidable.

asked the Secretary for Scotland if, in order to secure full and early consideration by all concerned and in accordance with the general desire, he will endeavour to arrange that the Scottish Education Bill should be introduced this Session, without discussion, and printed?

I hope that it may be found possible to adopt the course suggested by my hon. Friend.