asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the British representative at Athens ever informed the Foreign Office of the installation of wireless telegraphy by which ex-King Constantine was kept in continual communication with the German court and the military commanders; whether any of the messages interchanged were ever read and reported to the Foreign Office; and what action, if any, the Allied representatives took in consequence?

His Majesty's Government were aware that King Constantine was in direct communication with Berlin, and certain messages had, in fact, been intercepted. These and other unconstitutional actions of King Constantine led to the blockade of Greece, the enforced transfer of his armed forces to the Morea, and ultimately to his removal from Greece.

Will the Noble Lord explain why they did not bring about his removal in time to be effective?

I think it was in time to, be .effective.

Is it not the fact that the Allied Forces in Macedonia were held up for a month?

No, Sir; I do not think that is so.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact of the disclosures recently made in Greece that the object of the visit of Prince Nicholas to this country was to defeat the war aims of the Alliance by representing to the British Court that the efficient carrying out of the military plans would place the dynasty in danger; whether the mission of Prince Nicholas received encouragement in this country; and, if so, whether the military plans were altered in consequence?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative; that to the second and third parts in the negative.

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

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the advisability of stimulating the democratic spirit throughout all the troops fighting against the Central Empires, he will form into a pamphlet for general distribution in the Army and elsewhere the dispatches, recently published in Greece, of ex-Queen Sophia to her brother, the Kaiser?

I am afraid that owing to the large number of troops engaged, and the general shortage of paper, the hon. Gentleman's proposal is hardly practicable.

Would it not encourage the troops, in view of the fact that this august lady described them as "infamous wine"?

Could not some of the paper be used that is wasted on biographies of the Prime Minister in this country?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, on the occasion of the Prime Minister seeking to convey to the Labour party congress that M. Kerensky was opposed to the sending of delegates to Stockholm, he conveyed these alleged views of the Russian Premier to the Prime Minister?

I have nothing to add to the full statement which the Prime Minister made on the Motion for Adjournment of the 13th of August last.

As the statement of the Prime Minister is not exactly the same thing, may I ask if the information came from the Foreign Secretary, or through the ordinary diplomatic channels, or is he working behind their back?

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

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the fact that the statement of the Prime Minister at the time of the Labour Party Congress that M. Kerensky was opposed to the sending of delegates to Stockholm alienated the supporters of the Russian premier and caused him to issue a denial of the statement, whether he took any steps to make amends to M. Kerensky for the injury that had been done him?

The Prime Minister never stated that the Russian Government were opposed to the Conference, and this was explained to the Russian Government at the time.

Did not the Prime Minister state that M. Kerensky was not in favour of holding a Conference, and did not that statement give Lenin his chance?

No, Sir; that is a ridiculous suggestion.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the fact that the overthrow of the Kerensky Government is attributable to the Allies having refused to discuss war aims at the Paris Conference, steps will be taken to remove the impression that the British Government has no regard for the views of the Russian people and seeks to impose upon them a war policy which they cannot fulfil owing to internal conditions of famine, bankruptcy, and disorganisation?

There is no foundation for any of the suggestions made in the hon. Member's question, a fact with which I should have supposed him to be well acquainted.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the urgency of cutting off the sources of supply of the Central Powers, he has yet taken any steps to obtain information as to the quantity of supplies of food, cotton, metals, and other essential products for the manufacture of munitions of war sent during the twelve months ending 30th June, 1917, from the Turkish Empire and Bulgaria to the Central Powers; and whether, if such information has not been obtained, he will communicate the desirability of obtaining it to the heads of the Intelligence Department?

It is obviously not in the public interest to discuss in the form of question and answer in this House the possibility and means of obtaining intelligence from enemy countries. I can only assure the hon. and gallant Member that His Majesty's Government are fully alive to the importance of obtaining information as to the supplies available to and received by the enemy from all sources.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the general appointed as chairman of the inquiry now being held into the distribution of medical officers with the British Armies in France had retired upon half-pay in 1898; whether he afterwards returned to the Service and again retired in 1909; whether he returned again and was appointed Inspector-General of Infantry in 1914; whether he has any special knowledge of the medical branch of the Service; and, if not, what are the reasons for his selection?

The circumstances to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers were known when the officer in question was selected. His intimate knowledge of the Army in peace and war, and his tact in dealing -with situations that might arise, marked him out as the best chairman for a Committee partly composed of civilians who had no knowledge of Army organisation and methods.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the General Officer in Command of the British Mission attached to the Serbian Army reports direct to the War Office in London or whether he acts merely as liaison officer between General Sarrail and the British Commander-in-Chief at Salonika?

The head of the British Mission attached to the Serbian Army reports direct to the War Office in London.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, since no proper provision of officers with legal training or knowledge exists for the defence of officers or men charged with offences before courts-martial, he will consider the advisability of securing such provision; and whether he will also take into consideration the advisability of officers or men being given a right of representation by a qualified officer at field general courts-martial?

I can add nothing to the answer which I gave my hon. and gallant Friend on 31st October.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War how the deaths of soldiers executed by sentence of courts-martial are treated; whether the names are inserted in the lists of missing or in any casualty list; and whether in all cases the next-of-kin are informed of the death and its actual cause?

The names of soldiers executed by sentence of court-martial are not published in casualty lists. The next-of-kin are informed of the facts.

Are they informed immediately or only after one or two months?

I cannot say, but they are informed.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the next-of-kin are informed by a very brutal letter, and will my hon. Friend consider whether these cases could not be put in the casualty lists, so as to avoid, this kind of communication to the parents? In many of these cases the boy is suffering from shell shock.

My hon. Friend most be aware of the facts. As I think I have stated, to put these cases in the casualty lists would not be stating the true facts. It is a polite letter which is sent, stating what is necessarily a, brutal fact.

Is not this a printed form, and could not an autograph letter, at any rate, be sent, with one or two words of sympathy added?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the insanitary and verminous condition of the camp at Seizwell, near Leiston, and generally to the unsatisfactory arrangements of the camp, including the victualling; and whether he will make an inquiry into the matter, in view of the fact that both officers and men have complained for months?

There are no troops now in camp at Seizwell, near Leiston, but three platoons of a battalion of the South Wales Borderers are accommodated in hired buildings and huts there, under good sanitary conditions. No vermin have been detected since the arrival of these men on 23rd September last, but a few cases of scabies have been medically dealt with. No complaints have been made by officers or men, as my hon. Friend suggests At a recent inspection some minor matters connected with catering were brought to notice and have been remedied.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that, contrary to the promise given in the House, Welsh boys with slight knowledge of English are being sent for training to various camps in England where they are unable to benefit fully by the instruction; and whether he will arrange for them to be sent, as promised, to Kinmil or some other camp in Wales?

No cases have been brought to the notice of the War Office where Welsh boys have been unable to derive benefit from instruction owing to their imperfect acquaintance with English. Every consideration is given to national sentiment, and, where practicable, recruits are posted to Infantry battalions for which they express preference. Young soldier battalions are affiliated to the South Wales Borderers and to the Welsh Regiment, to which Welsh boys of eighteen years and one month are posted. The locality of these battalions is not material.

Could not the boys be sent to camps in Wales to receive instruction?

I do not know whether they can be sent to camps in Wales; they are sent to the Welsh regiments to which they are attached.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that those boys who are unable to understand English are sent to a camp where they may receive instruction from Welsh instructors?

I think that is a very reasonable request, and I think my hon. Friend will gather from my answer that every attention is being paid to the subject.

asked whether John Taylor, a conscientious objector at the Wakefield work centre, recently attempted suicide by cutting his throat; whether this man is the John Taylor, No. 23,162, D Company, 3rd Battalion, Essex Regiment, who was granted a non-combatant certificate by his tribunal, was forced into a combatant regiment, ordered to do rifle drill, and afterwards subjected to field punishment No. 1; whether it is owing to this and subsequent treatment that the man was driven to attempt suicide; whether he has now been certified insane; and whether inquiries will be made into this case with the view to fix responsibility?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I have no information as to the allegations contained in tithe second part, which should be addressed to the War Office. As regards the third part of the question, six of Taylor's friends among the men employed at Wakefield have voluntarily supplied a report on the facts of the case and on Taylor's mental condition. It is not suggested in this report that his condition was in any way due to his treatment while in the Army or in prison: on the contrary it is mainly attributed to anxiety caused by an explosion near his home and by subsequent air-raids in London. Taylor has now been certified insane. I see no ground for further inquiry into the matter.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this man is now in a dangerous condition and that his friends have been sent to see the last of him?

I have not heard that, but I am sorry if it is so.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the feeling which exists in the country owing to the fact that men who claimed exemption as conscientious objectors, but failed to satisfy the various standards of the tribunals in different parts of the country and who, for refusing to obey military orders, have suffered punishment on more than one occasion for what is, in effect, the same offence, he is in a position to say that the question of the method of dealing with these men is being reconsidered by the Government?

If the hon. Member means by his question to suggest that the general feeling of the country is adverse to the continued enforcement of the law in the case of persons claiming to be conscientious objectors I do not agree with him. It must be remembered that all conscientious objectors now in prison have been offered their release on condition of their undertaking non-military work under the Home Office scheme, and have either refused the offer or failed to carry out the conditions on which they were released. The question how these men should be dealt with has been recently considered by the Government, who have determined that the law must be enforced, and that they must serve their sentences in prison. But in the case of men of this class who have been sentenced to a long term of imprisonment the Government have decided that some relaxation of the prison rules should be allowed to prisoners who have earned the marks representing a twelve months sentence (whether such marks have been earned in one or more sentences), and I propose shortly to give directions to this effect under No. 243A of the Prison Rules.

May I ask, in view of the varying standard of tribunals in various parts of the country, whether a body could not be set up to which appeal could be made by these men?

No; we must accept the decision of the tribunals. The men have no right of appeal.

Does the right hon. Gentleman see his way, in view of the feeling of those not generally in sympathy with conscientious objectors, against these men being imprisoned time after time for practically, the same offence, and in view of the great demand for man-power in this country at the present time, to allow these men to be employed, in the interests of the State, on work they are willing to do, rather than to be kept on unnecessary work?

The men are not now doing unnecessary work.

They are.

May I ask whether men are not being re-court-martialed on release and re-sentenced to six months' or a year's imprisonment?

At the beginning of the War the practice was to reduce the sentences in all these cases to 112 days, or about three months. When a man was released he was again apprehended and again brought up for punishment. More recently—I think about a year ago—the practice was changed. The court-martial now imposes a full sentence of two years' hard labour.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make an inquiry, as. I can produce an instance where a man has been imprisoned on two separate occasions in the last six months?

If so, it would not make the least difference to the answer I have given.

Would it not be as well for the Home Office to cease this prosecution and the manufacture of anarchists?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether General Sarrail still is in command of the Salonika expedition; what nations now contribute men to the Allied Forces on this Front; and whether the officer there commanding is assisted by an Allied headquarters staff, on which are officers of each national army engaged?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As to the second part, it is not within the competence of the War Office to publish information as to the strength and distribution of Allied troops. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative, but Commanders of Allied contingents have permanent liaison officers attached to General Sarrail.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that on the 2nd instant a soldier at Belton Park Camp was found to have a fever; that forty-one other men in the same hut were then sent to an isolation camp and ordered not to leave it; that in spite of this they were marched to the parade ground and allowed to mix with the other men on parade; and whether, with the object of preventing the spread of fever in the camp, he will communicate with the responsible officer on the matter?

A report has been called for, and I will communicate the result to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War how many of the Presidents of Republics, Allies in war of this country, hold honorary rank in the British Army; and whether he will give the complete list of the monarchs, ex-monarchs, or royal princes who hold honorary rank in the British Army?

No Presidents of Republics hold honorary rank in the British Army. The list requested in the last part of the question is as follows: The King of the Belgians, the late Emperor of Russia, the King of Spain, the King of Norway, the King of Denmark, and the King of Siam.

Has the War Office considered that, at a time when the word "democracy" is held to be of use, it has placed the King of Siam and the dethroned Czar of Russia in higher precedence than the President of the United States or the President of France?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware of the circumstances of Private W. W. Hill, No. 28807, 7th Duke of Cornwall's Light Infantry, who joined the forces in October, 1915, has served with good record in France till sent to hospital suffering from shell-shock in May, 1917, was then returned without leave to the front, and though he reported sick on 29th July, 1917, was sent into action where he was guilty of an act of desertion, and that it has been conveyed unofficially to his parents that Private Hill was court-martialled and sentenced to a term of penal servitude; why no early and official notice of this was sent to his parents; why was correspondence from his parents from August to October returned to them marked, "In hospital, locality not known"; will he say where Private Hill is at the present time; whether his parents will be allowed to write to or visit him; and, if Private Hill has been court-martialled, whether the usual procedure has been observed in his case?

I am making inquiries into this case, and will let my hon. Friend know the result as soon as I am in a position to do so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether it was for services at either the first or second battle of Gaza that General Sir A. Murray was mentioned in dispatches; where General Murray's head quarters were during those battles; and when the publication of the dispatches relating to them may be expected?

General Sir A. Murray was mentioned in dispatches dated 3rd November, 1917, for good work in connection with the organisation of certain minor expeditions and of the lines of communications in Palestine, which have maintained a large force in the desert, and thereby prepared the way for the successful operations, resulting in the defeat of the Turks at Gaza and Beersheba. As regards the latter part of the question, details will be found in the dispatch to be published shortly.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that he was not mentioned in the dispatches relating to the two battles?

My hon. Friend must give me notice. I have answered the question on the Paper.

Is it the fact that he was never out of Cairo?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any course of technical training in their special duties is given to recruits of the Royal Army Medical Corps at the present time?

All recruits of the Royal Army Medical Corps receive technical training in their special duties both at the R.A.M.C. training centres and in hospitals in England.

Will the hon. Gentleman make inquiries as to the training at Blackpool of the R.A.M.C., as I am credibly informed that the training there on technical duties is not satisfactory?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the Army Council proposes to make use of the Defence of the Realm Act for the purpose of reintroducing any provision which will have the same effect as the Contagious Diseases Acts?

No, Sir; I am not aware of any such intention.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has now made further inquiries into the cases of flogging of Irish soldiers, by order of Lieutenant Gilliland, in the prisoners of war camp in Philippopolis; whether any cases of flogging by German officers of German soldiers has been reported to him from any prisoners of war camps in this country, or of flogging by Turkish officers of Turkish soldiers in prisoners' camps; and what further action he has taken in the matter?

I have carefully perused all the information available, and I have come to the conclusion that the charge made against Lieutenant Gilliland in this question has been recklessly and unjustly made. He was not the commandant of the camp, and the orders for flogging for admitted offences were given by the commandant. I received yesterday from our Foreign Office a copy of a letter which the Foreign Office received from the American Embassy here. It is dated October 11th, 1917, and is from Mr. Murphy, of the Legation of the United States of America in Sofia, and is addressed to Lieutenant Gilliland's sister. As it states the other side to a cruel charge against an officer—a charge which will make pleasant reading for our enemies and is abhorrent to us—I think that I ought to read it, and at the same time remind the House that Mr. Murphy's statements are corroborated by Mr. War-field and Mr. Einstein, who preceded Mr. Murphy at the Legation at Sofia:

"Legation of the United States of America,

Sofia, 11th October, 1917.

Dear—I am in receipt of your favour of the 14th September and am deeply grieved that any of the returned British prisoners of war should have accused your brother unjustly. To say that he ordered British prisoners to be flogged is absolutely untrue.

The fact is that flogging is in vogue in the Bulgarian Army as punishment for a certain class of offences. Flogging was the rule at the camp, and your brother was powerless to prevent it. When men not only sold their own clothes and parcels, but stole those of others to get drink, your brother would have failed in his duty had he not reported the matter to the Commandant. The latter told me on several occasions that he never could have conceived that men could so brutalise themselves until he had seen them brought to the camp completely stupefied by drink. It was by his order the flogging was done, and in so doing he was carrying out the regulations prescribed for him.

Your brother spoke to me of the horror he had of flogging, and asked if. I could not have a stop put to it. As such form of punishment is utterly abhorrent to me, I appealed to the Commandant and to the Colonel Commanding so strongly that flogging was thereupon abolished so far as British prisoners were concerned. It was your brother who first called my attention to the thing, and I well remember his expressions of gratification that it had been abolished. The very large majority of the British prisoners of war at the Philippopolis camp are very decent and well-behaved. It is the few who seem to have so lost all sense of decency that ordinary confinement in gaol or guard-house has no effect. Your brother is innocent—so please make your mind easy. You may use this letter in any way you may deem proper, and I shall be glad, if called upon officially, to put your brother, for whom I have high admiration and warm regard, in the right light.

I beg to remain, dear—

Sincerely yours,

(Signed) D. J. MURPHY."

Are we to understand, then, that the statements voluntarily given in one case by four repatriated Irish prisoners, who were not themselves flogged, but who spoke from their own knowledge of flogging having taken place, and a voluntary statement by Sergeant Edgerton, of the Hampshire Regiment, taken at a time quite different from the time of the statements of the Irish prisoners, are absolutely unreliable?

I can tell the House that I spent two hours this morning reading over the documents. I saw the statements of the four repatriated Irish prisoners, of the Connaught Rangers, to the president of the Irish Prisoners of War Association, and I also saw the statement made to the Government Committee of the Foreign Office. Those two statements are entirely contradictory. In one statement they made it perfectly plain that Lieutenant Gilliland showed no unfairness in the distribution of food or clothing, and only one of the prisoners mentions flogging at all, and he says that Lieutenant Gilliland might well have stopped it if he lifted his finger.

The hon. Gentleman has not answered my question about Sergeant Edgerton's statement to the Government Committee of the Foreign Office?

I read Sergeant Edgerton's report to the Government Committee of the Foreign Office, and he never mentions the word "flogging."

Is it not the fact that in the original statement made by these men these charges were most specifically made?

I do not know. I have no doubt the same men gave two different accounts. They gave one account to the Irish Prisoners of War Association and another to the Government Committee. I am content to abide by the one they gave to the Government Committee, and possibly my hon. Friend is content to abide by the other.

Were the persons who conducted this investigation independent investigators, and did they warn the repatriated prisoners that their statements would be taken down and might be used in evidence against them?

I do not suppose they did. Everybody knows the composition of the Government Committee. The President is a judge of the High Court, and the other members are well-known patriotic citizens. They have no wish to endanger the life or liberty of a private soldier any more than of an officer. They accept the statements given to them in good faith.

Can the hon. Gentleman say of his own knowledge whether those men were assured if they made frank statements they would not be used against them as soldiers in the Army?

I should see to it that no statement made by any soldier will ever be used against him. This Committee is not a military Committee. There is no officer serving upon the Committee so far as I know.

That does not answer my question. What I want to know is did the gentlemen conducting this investigation assure the witnesses that no punishment would follow from their evidence?

I cannot say that offhand. I cannot imagine any soldier being terrified. I am quite convinced in my own mind that Lieutenant Gilliland gave no such orders for flogging.

asked the hon. Member for Sheffield (Central Division) whether the British prisoners in the Courland camps have been removed; if so, can he state where they are at present situated; and if he can say whether the supplies of warm clothing which have been promised them for the winter have yet been despatched?

I am informed by the War Office that information has been received from the Netherland Legation in Berlin that orders were issued some weeks ago for the withdrawal of prisoners from these camps. We have recently inquired by telegram whether the withdrawal has been completed, but have not yet received a reply. Under these circumstances the specially warm clothing which was intended to be sent to these prisoners has not so far been despatched.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that dissatisfaction was recently shown by a unit in the Irish Command; and has he any statement to make?

I am afraid my hon. and gallant Friend hardly gives me sufficient information to enable me to identify the matter which he has in mind.

Would the hon. Member impress on the Irish Department the need for telling officers and men to be careful what they write home?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that Sapper Stephen Kelly, an Australian soldier, was mentioned in dispatches for finding water in Gallipoli without which thousands of men must have died or left their positions, he can say why this man cannot get employment in the Army?

I have ascertained from the headquarters of the Australian Imperial Force that Sapper Kelly was found to be permanently unfit for any Army service by a board of consultants on 24th May owing to a disability which is not due to service, and that he was discharged accordingly. I understand that there is no record of any application for re-enlistment.

As this man was the only man who could find water in Gallipoli, could lie not be employed by the Government in Palestine, where they are badly off for water, as he is known to be the best water-finder in Australia?

The information in the answer to this question does not come from the War Office. I had to apply to the Australian Imperial Forces for it. I will convey there my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Pensions Minister if he will say whether, in the assessment of an award to a dependant, Class A, dependency is determined by the amount of the Government allowance upon the required allotment?

asked whether, in the assessment of an award to a dependant, Class A, dependency is determined by the amount of the Government allowance upon the required allotment?

Dependence for the purposes of pension is determined by the support given by the soldier prior to the outbreak of war, or enlistment if later, as laid down in Article 24 (7) of the Royal Warrant of the 29th March last. In the absence of any reason for questioning the finding, the assessment made for separation allowance is accepted.

Yes, but that does not answer my question whether in the assessment dependency is determined by the amount of the Government allowance upon the required allotment; that is to say, does the assessment depend on that part of the allowance which comes from the Government, or does it take into consideration also that part of the allotment which is compulsory to get an allowance?

Yes, those two parts, the voluntary allowance and the Government allowance, depend upon the dependence before the War, and we accept that unless some question is raised.

asked the Pensions Minister why, if the amount of the required allotment in the case of a dependant class A is not included in the amount of the assessed dependency, such allotment should be compulsory?

asked why, if the amount of the required allotment in the case of a dependant, Class A, is not included in the amount of the assessed dependency, such allotment should be compulsory?

I have been asked to reply to this question and No. 33 and I will answer them together. The required allotment is included in the amount of the assessed dependency.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture if he is aware that owners of horses and cows in the London area are finding difficulty in securing hay; and will he take steps to facilitate the cutting and conveyance of this food to the Metropolitan area?

The shortage of hay in London has been brought to notice, and endeavours are being made to find some means of assisting in obtaining sufficient supplies.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in the light of the disclosures in the recent Report of Sir John Anderson, he will now grant a political amnesty to all persons suffering imprisonment in Ceylon as a result of the riots in 1915?

I presume that the hon. Gentleman intends to refer to the recently published Report of a Commission of Inquiry appointed by the Governor; but that Report contains nothing relevant to the cases of men imprisoned under sentences of properly constituted tribunals. Sir John Anderson has investigated all the sentences of imprisonment imposed in connection with the riots. On various grounds he has released a number of prisoners and reduced the sentences of many others. Those remaining in prison were properly convicted, in his opinion, of serious crimes; and I see no reason for suggesting that they should be released.

Did he not say before that they were properly convicted who are now proved to have been quite innocent: did not Sir John Anderson also say that these men were properly shot whom he is now sent home to tell you were quite improperly shot?

I believe I have covered all the circumstances in my answer.

Has the Government decided they will do nothing to alleviate the feeling of injustice of the Cingalese people?

My answer covers that question.

Is the matter under further consideration?

It is under constant consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can give an assurance that until the advice of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the Rhodesian land case has been tendered to His Majesty's Government, no natives will be evicted from lands lately included in the reserves without the definite sanction of the Secretary of State?

I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to Part II. of the Report of the Commission (see p. 22 of Cd. 8674), from which he will see that he need not fear evictions. The Report has been approved by the Secretary of State.

asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that the High Commissioner in South Africa and the Secretary of State suggested to the British South Africa Company the desirability of nominating upon the Native Reserves Committee a senior officer of the Native Affairs Department; and if he can state what reason, if any, the chartered company gave for ignoring the suggestion of Lords Harcourt and Gladstone, and nominated instead first the company's treasurer and then, as their alternate representative, the company's principal land official, whose position obviously is, and whose public attitude is known to be, in conflict with the Native Affairs Department upon the adequacy of the native reserves?

The High Commissioner and Secretary of State suggested a senior officer of the Native Department, but the company proposed Mr. Newton, considering that his ability and experience rendered him eminently qualified to be a Commissioner, while the senior officer of the Native Department remained free to give evidence before the Commission, and my predecessor approved the appointment. Mr. Atherstone was recommended by the company's administrator in South Africa as having a valuable knowledge of the land question. Lord Gladstone proposed to approve, and Lord Harcourt agreed. I should like to add that there is no reason to attribute to the company any intention of preventing full consideration of the native point of view.

Is it not the interest of the company to get land from the natives; is it not, therefore, undesirable that they should break their word and put in a man who has no special sympathy with the natives?

I do not think that question arises.

Absolutely!

asked whether large numbers of British ex-Service men can be absorbed on the land in Australia without financial assistance from the Home Government?

I must refer the hon. and gallant Member to pages 7 to 10, 22 and 23 of the Empire Settlement Committee's Report, and more particularly to paragraph 134.

Why does not the hon. Gentleman answer the plain question on the Paper?

I think the plain question is answered.

No!

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the apprehension felt and expressed by people in this country, and especially amongst the soldiers, as to the correspondence with this country of Prince Albert of Schleswig-Holstein, who is employed on the Intelligence Department of the German Army in Berlin, he can give this House and the country the assurance that all letters to and from this prince are examined by the Censor?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which was given yesterday on this subject to the hon. Member for West Clare by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

Did the right hon. Gentleman make it quite clear that all letters to and from this prince were examined by the Censor—it is not clear to me?

My recollection is that he did make it quite clear that all the letters of Prince Albert of Schleswig-Holstein were treated in the same way as the letters of everyone else, and were controlled by the Censor

Can we be certain that all letters are censored, because all letters are not carefully read?

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 had 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?

I have made careful inquiry into the case to which my hon. Friend refers. The vessel in question had proceeded to a port on the North-East coast in accordance with Admiralty orders designed for security, which had also made it necessary for her to call at another British port. She was ordered to sea next morning to await escort to her port of discharge, and, owing to unfavourable weather conditions, her escort was a little late in arrival. The Admiralty Report shows, however, that she was adequately guarded while awaiting escort. It is difficult for me to give a fuller answer here, but I shall be pleased to show the detailed reports to my hon. Friend, and I thank him for calling my attention to the case.

May I ask whether, when similar circumstances arise, and a convoy is necessarily late, it would not be possible for the commander of the convoy to communicate by wireless with the nearest shore station, so as to prevent the vessel being exposed in the danger zone, where several valuable ships have already been put down for a period of 6½ hours?

I agree with my hon. Friend that it would have been better if the ship had remained in port instead of coming out and waiting unnecessarily outside. Note has been taken of the error in that particular matter; that is why I have thanked my hon. Friend for having called my attention to the fact.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food the estimated amount which it will cost the nation to give effect to the Food Controller's proposals regarding the sale of potatoes below the figures fixed in the Potato Order?

The charge upon the Exchequer involved by the War Cabinet's decision to compensate growers who sell potatoes of the 1917 crop below the guaranteed price of £6 per ton is estimated not to exceed £5,000,000, and there is reason to believe that the reduced price will bring about not only an increased consumption of potatoes but a decreased consumption of cereals, in which event there will be a reduction of the bread subsidy as a set-off against the potato subsidy. Perhaps I may be allowed to take this opportunity of saying, in continuation of the statement that I made on Friday last, that the Food Controller has decided to fix the base prices under the new potato scheme as follows for the period ending 31st December, 1917:

For England and Wales, £5 per ton f.o.r. grower's station.

For Scotland, £4 10s. per ton.

For Ireland, £4 per ton.

Will the hon. Gentleman say if it will make much difference to the ratepayers whether he pays the subsidies for flour or potatoes?

That is rather a matter for argument than for question and answer.

asked if there are in Falmouth Docks 6,000 tons of wheat, a great part of which has been allowed to go bad; whether he can state how long this wheat has been in stock, and why it has not been used for food; whether there is a stock of coffee in the same docks which is mostly unfit for use; and, if so, can he explain who is to blame for this result?

It is undesirable to publish information as to stocks of foodstuffs in a particular port at any given time, but as the question suggests loss from negligence, I may say that there are not 6,000 tons of wheat in Falmouth Docks. The only wheat recently discharged at this port consisted of 3,500 tons from a sailing vessel; the whole of the cargo was sold to millers, and delivery has been completed except as regards a few hundred tons which have been held up through lack of transport facilities. None of the wheat has been allowed to deteriorate through want of care. I am informed that there is no coffee lying in Falmouth Docks.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how long that 3,300 tons of wheat has been lying at Falmouth Docks?

As the answer indicates, it was loaded to the millers as soon as possible after arrival.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller whether the control of the ore shipments is entrusted to Mr. G. C. Welborn, who, at the commencement of the War, was a partner or in the employ of a well-known firm engaged in the mineral ore trade; and whether he will consider the possibility-of finding some qualified man not connected with any firm in the ore trade to supervise ore shipments in order to avoid friction in this trade?

Mr. Welborn was employed by a firm of the kind described until the spring of 1916, when he severed his connection with it in order to serve in the Iron Ore Chartering Office then being organised. He has been in charge of that office since April last. I am aware of no such friction as that to which the hon. Member alludes. The Shipping Controller is satisfied that Mr. Welborn is personally well qualified by training and ability to fill a post in which practical experience is essential.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that as Okehampton, Devon, is a non-competitive station on the South-Western Railway, the cost of carriage for coal is from ls. to 2s. 6d. a ton more than to Plymouth, thirty-three miles further on the same railway; and whether, in these circumstances, he will at least equalise the railway rate as between Okehampton and Plymouth from the coal districts, which at the present moment is greater-for carrying coal a lesser distance?

Representations have been made to the effect that the Okehampton coal rates are unduly high, and these representations are being investigated.

When may these people expect a reply?

Within the next few days.

asked the Prime, Minister if winter horse racing can be-allowed provided that no train facilities are asked for?

The Prime Minister has asked me to answer this question. The point raised is at present under consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will communicate to the House the reasons in consequence of which the late Director-General of the Mechanical Warfare Supply Department has been relieved of his duties; whether he is aware of the circumstances under which this officer was originally appointed to this office; whether this appointment was first considered at a meeting of the Committee of Imperial Defence at which this officer attended in his capacity as secretary to the Tank Experimental Committee; whether three of the four members of the Tank Experimental Committee were unaware of the presence of this officer at the meeting of the Committee of Imperial Defence referred to; whether this officer at this meeting stated that he was an automobile engineer; and what engineering qualifications has this officer to his credit?

I have been asked to answer this question. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Munitions desires me to say that it is not usual to state the reasons which lead to change being made from time to time in important administrative posts, and he is confident that my hon. Friend will not press for an exception in this case. He desires me, however, to draw my hon. Friend's attention to the fact that the late Director-General of the Mechanical Warfare Supply Department is still employed in an active and important capacity, where his special knowledge and exceptional experience in regard to tanks will receive full scope. The latter portions of the question refer to matters which lie wholly in the past, and no records exist to which reference could be made.

If this gentleman has no engineering experience, he would not, of course, be employed as an engineer?

I am afraid I cannot add anything to the Minister's answer.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Bill to be introduced for the State purchase of the liquor traffic will include any provision for local option?

As I explained yesterday, the Report of the English Commission on this subject has only just been received, and the Scottish Commission has not yet reported. In these circumstances it would be premature to make any statement on the matter.

asked the Prime Minister whether the small co-ordinating Committee just appointed by the Government to regulate the holding of public meetings on behaf of various war aims also co-ordinates all forms of publicity, including the dissemination of news and literature; and, if not, whether he will arrange for such a body to be called into existence?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The hon. Member's suggestion is being considered.

asked the Prime Minister how many different Departments or Establishments are responsible for official publishing; and whether, over all, there is any one supreme authority?

If the question refers to the publication of news by Departments, the various Departments of the Government are responsible for communicating to the Press such matters as come within their respective spheres of activity.

asked the Prime Minister what immediate action the Government intends to take on the recommendations of the Empire Land Settlement Committee's (the Tennyson) Report, particularly with regard to Clause 10 on page 3 of the Report?

I can add nothing to the previous answers on this question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can state on what basis the owners of woodlands who are getting enhanced prices for timber are assessed for Income Tax; and if he will say whether Excess Profits Tax is paid by them?

Occupiers of woodlands are normally assessable to Income Tax under the rules of Schedule B of the Income Tax Acts, to which I would refer the hon. Member. Woodlands cannot come within the scope of the Excess Profits Duty unless they are managed on a commercial basis and are assessed under Schedule D.

Seeing that enormously increased prices are being received from the colliery companies by the owners of woodlands, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether any steps will be taken to get a greater share of excess profits from the landowners?

I can say nothing except this: When the next Budget is introduced, whoever is in my place will do his best to get money wherever he can get it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the Government of the Commonwealth of Australia has secured as a war measure a valuation by owners of the freehold land of Australia, which has been disclosed at approximately £500,000,000; and if he will take steps to secure such a valuation of the land of the United Kingdom under the powers of the Defence of the Realm Act, so as to make provision for the growing financial needs, and to give further assurance that there is no danger that of necessity the National Debt will be repudiated in whole or in part?

I am aware of the fact to which reference is made, but I am not prepared to adopt the hon. Member's suggestion.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's statement that he will get money in the next Budget wherever he can best get it, would it not be well to have this valuation in readiness for then?

I do not think so. I have no hope of getting money by means of a land valuation.

May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman's lack of hope is simply due to the opposition of landowners, who see that everybody else is taxed except themselves?

Not at all. It is due to the lack of belief that money can be got from that source.

Is not that belief strengthened by the Budget of 1909?

Does my right hon. Friend mean that there is no money in land values in this country?

I think I have made myself quite clear.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the case where a collier employed at the Llay Hall branch colliery was denied the minimum wage under the Minimum Wage Act on the ground that he had not worked 80 per cent, of the possible number of shifts; whether he is aware that the reason for non-compliance with this condition was that the collier in question is chairman of the Miners' Association and representative of the workmen at his colliery, is a member of the advisory committee under the Military Service Act, the Naval and Military Pensions Committee, the Food Committee, the Harwarden Rural District Council, and Justice of the Peace for the county of Flint; whether he is aware that the independent chairman of the Joint District Board ruled that the collier's absence from work to attend to these other duties was not something over which he had no control, and, therefore, he was not entitled to the minimum wage; and whether he will consult with the Coal Controller as to the advisability of issuing an instruction that where workmen are absent from work in consequence of attending to public duties they shall not be penalised under the Minimum Wage Act?

The case referred to has not previously been brought to my notice, but I will cause inquiries to be made into it. I would, however, remind the hon. Member that the Board of Trade have no power under the Minimum Wage Act to vary the Rules under the Act. Such alteration can only be made by the Joint District Board itself or its neutral Chairman under Section 3 of the Act. I have, therefore, no power to cause to be issued any such instruction as is contemplated in the question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that on the 8th of February last the War Office issued an Order to all importers of timber stating that they had assumed control of all stocks of soft woods, planed and unplaned, in the United Kingdom, and that such goods could not be sold from that date, unless for urgent needs for which a permit had to be obtained, and that the price charged should not exceed that current for similar goods on 31st January; is he also aware that in May, acting on the instructions of the Director of Timber Supplies, the timber buyer requisitioned about three-fourths of the whole of the stocks then in the country for the Army Council at 31st January prices, and has been selling them over at a profit of from 25 to 40 per cent., in many cases to the customers of those who held the stock, as for instance, at Wisbech, where goods were bought at £34 to £36 10s. per standard and offered out at £44 10s. to £49 10s., at Hull, where goods were taken over at £38 10s. and offered out at £52, and at West Hartlepool, where goods were taken out at from £33 to £36 and offered out at £41 to £45; and will he explain why the Government buyer should be permitted to take such large profits, whilst at the same time prices are limited for the small portion of the stocks left in importers' hands to those prevailing on 31st January last?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. With regard to the second part, only about one-fourth of the timber was requisitioned, this having been done to constitute a Government reserve which has been added to by purchases made at current prices; deliveries from Government stock are always made at prices sufficient to cover cost of replacement, but as a fact only trifling amounts of timber requisitioned at January prices have been so released where it has been specially convenient. With regard to the last part of the question, the Controller has been advised by his Trade Advisory Committee to take no action in the direction of levelling up the rates for the stocks left in importers hands to which the 31st January prices apply.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a great feeling of resentment in the timber trade at this unfair treatment, and does he consider 25 per cent. to 40 per cent. profit by the Government is not profiteering?

Has the attention of the Department of the hon. Gentleman been called to the fact that marked favouritism exists in the conduct of this Timber Controller in admitting imports from one importer and refusing them from another?

If the hon. Gentleman will give me any case of that kind I will have inquiry made into it at once.

Will the reporter of this case not be threatened under the Defence of the Realm Act?

No.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the use of a. motor-car for station or business purposes will make the owner liable to prosecution where a taxi-cab or a horse carriage can be hired for the journey?

Under the provisions of Motor Spirit Restriction Order No. 2, 1917, the owner of a motor-ear who uses, it for station or business purposes might be liable to prosecution if a taxi-cab or other vehicle licensed to ply for hire were reasonably available for the journey.

May I ask whether the Order makes it quite clear that he will be liable, unless he can show he was, bound to use his own car if he could not get another conveyance?

That is a matter of interpretation, and those who use motorcars must take the risks.

Except Ministers.