asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the proposed sale of the Kellner-Partington Wood Pulp Company to an alleged Norwegian syndicate; whether the names of the actual purchasers are not disclosed and the conditions of sale are such as to raise suspicion that the real purchaser is the Imperial Foreign Trade Department of the German Government; and who are the persons negotiating this purchase on the Norwegian side and what are the financial relations of each of these persons, what directorship they hold, and what holdings they possess in Germany and Austria, before any such transfer is sanctioned?

I would refer the hon Member to the replies on this subject given yesterday to the hon. Member for South-West Ham.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether some years ago the Norwegian Government passed a law prohibiting the sale of freehold property, water-power, and mines to foreigners; that under this law the Kellner-Partington Wood Pulp Company were prevented from increasing their holding in Norway; whether it is now proposed to sell the British holdings in this company to a Norwegian syndicate, whose names are not disclosed; and whether, as this will imply the passage of over £200,000 worth of industrial property in this country to the control of foreigners, and possibly enemy foreigners, and the transfer of numbers of British workmen to foreign employment, he will oppose the completion of this transaction?

The answer to the first two parts of the question is in the affirmative. The third part has already been answered. As regards the last part, I understand that the original scheme of purchase included the resale to an English company of the industrial property in Great Britain, valued at about £200,000, and negotiations for this purpose are taking place.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the total amount of wood pulp imported into Great Britain in 1912, 1913, 1914, 1915, and 1916; what proportion of this came from Norway; and of the Norwegian consignment what proportion was imported by the Kellner-Partington Paper Pulp Company?

to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Wardle): I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I returned to a similar question which he put to me on the 13th November.

asked the Secretary to the Board of Trade whether his attention has been directed to the fact that a large transfer of works and forests situated in Norway, Sweden, and Austria is about to be made from the Kellner-Partington Paper Pulp Company to a Norwegian syndicate; whether, as no sale of these Austrian properties is possible without the consent of the Austrian Government and without direct business relations with the enemy, he will have the correspondence of the directors of this company examined and find out to what extent they have been negotiating with the enemy; and if he will commence proceedings against them under the Trading With the Enemy Act?

Negotiations for the sale of the Austrian property of this company were licensed by the Treasury under the Trading With the Enemy Acts. No licence was necessary for the sale to a neutral purchaser of the other interests referred to in the question.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, before sanctioning the transfer of the Kellner-Partington Pulp Company to a secret Norwegian syndicate, represented in this country by one Jans Frederiksen, he will have careful inquiries made in Copenhagen, Christiania, and Stockholm as to the actual relations between Frederiksen and the Actien Gesellschaft fur Maschinen PapierFabrik, of Germany, whose works at Aschaffenburg, Memel, and other places, are now employed in the conversion of wood pulp into munitions of war and celluloid for Zeppelin manufacture?

Mr. Frederiksen is a Norwegian barrister, who signed the contract of sale of the Kellner-Partington Company's properties on behalf of the Norwegian purchasers. As regards the general character of the latter, I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given yesterday.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs who are the directors of the Bank of Norway; and whether any inquiries have been made at any time by his Department in order to ascertain the extent to which this bank or the directors of it may be used by persons in this country as a means of evading the Trading with the Enemy Act?

The Bank of Norway has, on many occasions, given valuable assistance to His Majesty's Government. The directors are: Messrs. K. Bomhoff, W. Monsen, H. C. Klingenberg, K. K. Heie, W. Duborgh; and there is no reason to believe that it has been used by persons in this country for the purpose indicated in the question.

Has the right hon. Gentleman any knowledge of any Swedish, capital in the bank?

I am afraid I could not say without notice.

Will my right hon. Friend make inquiries?

Of course, I will.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the list of regimental care committees for prisoners of war is no longer available at the post offices, he will arrange that record offices shall send out with the notification that a man is missing which is now sent out to the next-of-kin the name and address of the regimental care committee, either on a slip attached to the notification or otherwise, asking for the next-of-kin to communicate with the regimental care committee as soon as he or she shall receive information that the man posted as missing is a prisoner of war?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for his suggestion. There are, however, arrangements already in operation which are working well and go far to meet his point, and there are also various considerations which render it inadvisable to adopt the further measure proposed. If my hon. Friend will allow me, I will write to him and explain the matter in greater detail than is possible in answer to a question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Army Council Instruction No. 1,564 is intended to prohibit soldiers from travelling even for short journeys on Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays, or whether it is only intended to prevent an undue amount of week-end leave being granted?

The arrangements to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers were made on the understanding that ordinary leave involving railway travel on Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays would not be granted. Provision is made for journeys on these days in special circumstances. The present Regulations as regards leave are far more favourable to the men than those previously in force, and in view of the heavy demands on the resources of the railways, it is considered necessary to maintain the existing restrictions.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to a statement from British soldiers at present in the East Leeds War Hospital protesting against the difference in treatment of themselves as against that of an Austrian interned prisoner of war who is also in the same hospital, the allegation being that the Austrian prisoner of war is fed with luxuries and treated with a consideration denied to wounded British occupants of the same ward; whether wounded British soldiers make no complaint about their own hospital treatment but declare that what is good enough for them should be good enough for this alien enemy; and whether, having regard to the fact that this differential treatment is causing criticism locally of the hospital authorities, inquiries will be made and steps taken to rectify the matter?

This man, who is an interned civilian, was on a fish diet, and the statements made respecting special treatment are incorrect, except that on one occasion a jelly was bought and given to the patient, who was very ill and unable to take his food or share the gifts of special food articles sent to the ward. He was at first separately accommodated with another interned civilian in a small ward of two beds, but it became necessary to use this ward for other dangerously ill cases, and he was then moved into a general ward.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he will state the rules which govern the promotion of officer prisoners of war in the case of second-lieutenants, lieutenants, captains, and officers of higher ranks; and whether there has been any modification in the Regulations on this subject laid down in Article 47 of the Royal Warrant for the pay, appointment, promotion, and non-effective pay of the Army since 1914?

I would refer my hon. and learned Friend to the answer I gave to the question he put to me on 13th March. Officers are eligible for promotion up to the rank of captain, but throughout the War it has been the practice that one step only is given during the period that an officer is a prisoner of war. Otherwise there has been no modification of Article 47 of the Pay Warrant in this respect.

In view of the ambiguous language of Article 47 of the Royal Warrant, will the hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of bringing out a new version or edition of it?

I will look into it.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why the County Territorial Associations were not consulted before the Central Volunteer Association was authorised to intervene in matters of Cadet organisation and training; and whether it is proposed to continue to allow the Central Volunteer Association to interfere with the Territorial Cadet movement?

The Central Association of Volunteer Regiments have not been authorised to, nor is it intended that they should, interfere with the responsibilities of Territorial Force Associations in regard to recognised Cadet corps. The Central Association offered very patriotically to place their services at the disposal of Territorial Force Associations and to help them in the matter of providing speakers and other propaganda work for the extension of the Cadet movement and the formation of new units; but the responsibility for recognising Cadet units, and of administering such units after recognition has been accorded, will rest, as heretofore, entirely with Territorial Force Associations, who may or may not, as they please, take advantage of the Central Association's offer of assistance.

Is it a fact that the County Territorial Associations have not availed themselves of this offer at all, and that they do not want it and have not asked for it?

I understand that a great many of the County Territorial Associations have gladly accepted the offer of the Central Volunteer Association.

Will the hon. Gentleman take into consideration the rules allowing boys of seventeen to enter Volunteer regiments Would it not be better to take them into Cadet corps up to the age of eighteen?

I understand that the rule as it at present exists is very satisfactory. Boys up to seventeen are entitled to enlist in the Volunteer Corps and are placed in Section C.

Will the hon. Gentleman take into consideration the desirability of placing them in Cadet Corps?

It is much more satisfactory, and in the best interests of the Army, that a boy of seventeen just about ready to enter the Army at eighteen should have some preliminary training in a Volunteer Regiment.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if certain men in the South Wales Borderers, stationed at Kinmel Park, who were inoculated on the 31st October, and who were excused duty by the medical officer for forty-eight hours, were ordered by the commanding officer within twenty hours of the inoculation, and while their arms were stiff and sore, to scrub out the huts, and then to stand by their kit on the wet floor, with the result that a number of them were faint and feverish; and whether he will inform this commanding officer that in future the order of the medical officer must be observed?

Inquiries are being made, and I will write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if, in view of Lieutenant-Colonel Monteagle Browne's good service during nearly the whole of the South African War and of his distinguished service during about 32 months at the front in France in this War, he can say why he was dismissed from His Majesty's service without being granted either an official inquiry or a court-martial, especially in view of the excellent reports on him by the generals under whom he served in France?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer given on July 31st to my hon. Friend the Member for Limerick East, to which I have nothing to add.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the reasons given to me at the War Office for turning this officer out of the Army were so hopelessly bad that I was compelled by the War Office to promise special secrecy for fear the public should find out the gross injustice that has been done to him?

Is there any Court of Appeal or of Inquiry to which officers such as the one referred to in the question, in the event of there being any question raised as to their efficiency, can submit their claim, or are there any means by which an officer, if found unsuitable for work in one direction, can be transferred to some other branch rather than that his services should be lost to the State at a time like the present?

I think my hon. Friend is under a misapprehension. The War Office does not dismiss men from the Service. That can only be done by court-martial. Colonel Monteagle Browne was removed from the Service because he refused to obey an order directing him to send in his resignation.

Will the hon. Gentleman order an inquiry into this case?

There are two ways of getting rid of the services of an officer. One is on account of misconduct, which is purely a question of fact; and the other is on account of inefficiency, which is a matter of opinion. Colonel Mont-eagle Browne was asked to send in his resignation on account of reported inefficiency. Inefficiency is a matter of opinion. He was reported by his brigadier-general, then by the divisional-general, and right up to the Field-Marshall Commanding-in-Chief, and, as always in the Army, the War Office was perfectly satisfied that he was justly asked to send in his resignation.

Is it not a fact that this man has commanded three different battalions in one year and that he has been found to be a most efficient officer during the whole time of his service, that he got the Distinguished Service Order, and that nothing whatever has ever been alleged against him; and is not the least that can be done to have an inquiry into his conduct and alleged inefficiency?

There has been no Court of Inquiry allowed in the case of any officer who has been serving at the front. If he has been asked to send in his resignation on account of inefficiency, it would be quite hopeless, as the House will readily realise, to have such a Court of Inquiry. All inefficiency questions are matters of opinion, and it is quite clear that the brigadier-general, the divisional general, and the Field-Marshal Commanding-in-Chief, who are in direct contact with him in varying degrees, are the best judges of a man's efficiency.

Does my hon. Friend seriously ask this House to believe that in the Army efficiency or inefficiency is a matter of opinion?

Certainly, and it has always been regarded so in the Army.

Is not Colonel Mont-eagle Browne's record, by the various officers in whose command he has served, one of the very best? In view of the very unsatisfactory answer of the hon. Gentleman, I beg to say that I shall raise this question on the Motion for the Adjournment to-night.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War what regiments have taken part in the advance in Palestine; and what London Territorial regiments were present at Beersheba and Gaza?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to a similar question on 7th November. All information which can be given without detriment to the public interest has been published in communiqués, and I would call my hon. Friend's attention to the review of his operations from 31st October to 8th November, which has been received from General Allenby, and was published on 14th November. This review contains the fullest particulars as to the regiments engaged which it is possible to publish.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the newspaper correspondents' accounts of this advance the London Territorial regiments were mentioned, and, in view of the anxiety of the relatives and friends of the men in these regiments, is it not possible to give the numbers of the Territorial regiments so engaged?

No. I think it would be extremely ill-advised to give the numbers of any regiments until the Commander-in-Chief in the theatre of war thinks fit to give them.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the increase of one penny per day for service applies to every unit of the Army; and, if not, what are the exceptions?

I think the hon. Member will agree with me that we had better await the issue of the final orders on this subject.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the fact that the Government promised this increase of pay to these men as from the 1st October of this year and that this is now the 20th November, but not a single man in the British Army or British Navy has received this increase? When do the War Office propose to give this increase to the men?

As I have already explained previously to the hon. Member, the matter is being reconsidered by the Cabinet, and until the Cabinet announce their final decision I do not think it is desirable to go into the details raised in this question. With regard to the question of the pay dating back to the 1st October, I have already assured the House that that will be the case.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chancellor of the Exchequer said, in reply to me only three or four days ago, that the amount payable as from the 1st October was being paid in addition to the fact that the Cabinet were considering a further increase, and why is it he does not know what the Leader of the House knows?

I think the Leader of the House gave that answer in reply to a supplementary question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that after the announcement of this promised increase to the man's wife and family, in many cases the families have spent their money on that promise but that neither the man nor the wife has received the money?

I am sorry for the delay, but either the man or the wife will receive the money as from the 1st October.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean to suggest that the Leader of the House did not know what he was talking about in his reply to me?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Shipping whether coal is being sent to Italy from Great Britain in requisitioned British liners at Blue Book rates; what the hire money and expenses for the voyage to Italy represent in freight per ton of coal carried; the cost of the coal f.o.b. at the loading port and the cost of the coal plus freight and charges delivered at the Italian port of discharge; whether this coal is sold to the Italian Government or to local authorities or private firms or individuals in Italy; and whether he can account for the price of coal in Italy, which costs the private consumer £24 per ton or thereabouts?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The hire and expenses represent a freight of about 17s. 6d. a ton, exclusive of war risk, which is borne by the Italian Government. The price of the coal f.o.b. at the loading port varies according to the nature of the coal, but 30s. may be regarded as an average price; the cost of the coal delivered at an Italian port may be taken as 50s. 6d., exclusive of war risk. The coal so delivered is sold to the Italian Government. The Ministry of Shipping have no means of accounting for the retail price of coal in Italy.

Will the hon. Gentleman take measures to represent to the Foreign Office or to the Consular Service the fact that the people of Italy ought to be informed that it is not the British Government, or the British shipowner, or the British coal-owner, who is responsible for the high price of coal in Italy?

I can only say, in answer to that question, that the facts are as I have stated.

Can the hon. Gentleman offer any explanation as to who is getting the difference between the 50s. and £24 a ton?

I can add nothing to my answer, which gives all the facts.

Will the hon. Gentleman reply to my request that he will make representations to the Foreign Office?

I think my hon. Friend's question has already achieved that purpose.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Shipping whether there have been instances where British vessels have been requisitioned at blue-book rates and carried coal from the United Kingdom to Italian ports and immediately after discharge of cargo, have been put off hire and owners compelled to purchase bunker coal for the return voyage at current Italian market rates, although this bunker coal has been carried in the ship; and whether the hire money paid to owners in such cases has been swallowed up or nearly so by the cost of the bunker coal which had to be paid for by the owners, reducing the freight on the cargo coal carried to nil or nearly so?

Where under a practice discontinued some time ago, an owner accepted in Italy release of his vessel from requisition, he paid the current market price for any Government bunker coal taken over, just as the Government does in taking over owners' coal at the commencement of requisition. No owner, however, was compelled to accept delivery in Italy on those terms. He always had the option of remaining under requisition and was therefore never put in the position of earning less than the normal profit obtainable under bluebook conditions on either the outward or homeward voyage.

In reference to the first portion of the hon. Gentleman's reply, which proves the statements made in this question, is not that a proof that the British shipowners and the British Government are not responsible for the price of coal in Italy?

It is clear from my former answer that they are certainly not responsible.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether, in order to check extravagance in public restaurants and hotels, to encourage economy in the use of foodstuffs, and to remove the distinction at present existing, he will issue orders that the price of meals in hotels and restaurants shall not exceed those at present in force for officers and men in uniform?

As I am informed, the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydvil last Wednesday, in the case of cheap restaurants there is a limit of price but not limit of quantity; in the case of more expensive restaurants there is a limit of quantity but not of price. It is not clear that the further restriction which the question suggests would limit the consumption of essential foodstuffs.

Are the Government prepared to encourage extravagance among civilians and rightly prohibit it to soldiers and sailors?

No such extravagance is encouraged. What we say is that in the case of the more costly restaurants the expenditure on costly foods, like oysters and peaches, assists in reducing the consumption of essential foodstuffs.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food if the Chorley Food Control Committee has only been allowing a Mr. Howarth, who owns a temperance bar in that town, and who manufactures the herbal drinks he sells, 1 ⅛ lbs. of sugar per week; that that amount is now stopped; and that Mr. Howarth has been informed by the firm who supplied him with sugar that they have been instructed not to supply him with any more sugar before February next; and whether, with the object of preventing this man being ruined, he will give instructions that sugar must be supplied to him?

I am causing inquiries to be made, and I will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

asked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) if he is aware of the shortage of milk in Ireland caused by the manufacture of cream; if he will state what quantity has been exported from Ireland within the past five months; if he will state how many gallons of milk it takes to manufacture 1 gallon of cream; and if he is aware that during the summer hundreds of gallons were exported, thus making it difficult for the poor of Ireland to obtain a supply of milk?

The Department of Agriculture are aware of the present shortage of milk in various parts of Ireland. The quantity of cream exported from Ireland in each of the five months, May to September, 1917, inclusive, was returned to the Department as follows:

The total for these five months in the year 1917 was, therefore, 8,908 cwts., as compared with 15,740 cwts., 9,578 cwts., and 12,977 cwts. in the corresponding periods of 1916, 1915, and 1914, respectively.

From 12 to 15 gallons of milk are required to produce 1 gallon of cream containing 50 per cent. butter fat.

Is it not time that the Government made up its mind to prevent the manufacture of 1 gallon of cream, which is undoubtedly a luxury, and deprives deserving poor of 12 gallons of milk?

The question is occupying the attention of the Government at the present moment.

I hope we shall get an answer very shortly, and before there is any more of this manufacture of cream.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty the area of the land acquired for the purpose of the new national shipyard at Chepstow, the number of slips which will be completed there for new construction, and whether it is intended to construct shops for the manufacture of the engines and equipment?

It has not been definitely settled what exact area will be acquired for the national shipyard at Chepstow, nor has the number of slips been definitely settled. It is not the intention to construct shops for the manufacture of the engines and equipment. I would remind my hon. Friend that, as I stated on Thursday last, it is intended that the number of slips of the new national shipyards will be from thirty to thirty-six. I have already stated also that an addition of from fifty to sixty slips will be made to existing private yards, and that thirty-three of these have already been sanctioned.

As it is definitely decided not to construct shops for the manufacture of engines, from what sources does the right hon. Gentleman intend to obtain the necessary engines and equipment for these vessels?

From the existing shops in this country; from the engineering shops as a whole.

Is it intended to obtain the land for building workmen's houses at the same time, or is that to be left to private enterprise?

I explained fully the other day the procedure in regard to that.

Have the Admiralty taken any steps to secure the refusal of such land as they require at a price, or is the uncertainty they have as to the amount of land required enabling the landowners to raise the price?

We shall proceed to occupy under the Defence of the Realm Act Regulations, and if we require to purchase land we shall proceed under the Acquisition of Land Act.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how the Government propose to run the ships constructed in the new national shipyards; is it proposed that they should be run after the War by the Government in competition with privately-owned ships or are they to be sold to outside owners?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. I am not aware of any reason for distinguishing between ships built in national shipyards and ships built for the Government in private shipyards, and it, is not proposed to make any such distinction.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the question how the Government propose to run these ships after the War? Are they to be run in competition with privately-owned ships?

Our present purpose is to run them for war purposes. As to post bellum that raises a very wide question, of which I must ask notice.

The notice is on the Paper.

The hon. Member will find that his question does not arise out of the question on the Paper.

The specific question is on the Paper.

Will my hon. Friend answer the part of the question which distinctly asks whether after the War they are to be run as privately-owned vessels or are to be sold?

My right hon. Friend will realise that that is a question which demands and is receiving the very serious attention of the Government. It is not possible for me to give it an answer at this moment.

Then the answer is that he is unable to answer.

No, my answer is that post bellum, questions relating to shipping are under consideration, as all other questions relating to reconstruction of industry are under consideration.

Then he is unable to give an answer.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty from what source he proposes to obtain the necessary skilled staffs of managers and draftsmen for the new national shipyards?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave last Wednesday to a question by my right hon. Friend the Member for the South Molton Division, wherein I stated that there is no intention of calling upon private yards to provide any labour for the new national shipyards, though we may, by agreement, secure the services of a limited number of foremen from the private yards, and, indeed, from our own Royal Dockyards. Labour for the national shipyards will have to be drawn from sources other than privately-owned yards. I may say that no skilled managers or draftsmen will be taken from existing shipyards without the consent of the shipbuilders with whom they may now be employed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman state how he proposes to obtain the necessary skilled managers and draughtsmen?

Our Shipyard Labour Department is in consultation with the National Service Department, and they are together working with our Deputy-Controller of Shipping.

Are they skilled managers of ship construction yards?

What is the reason why they have selected places for these national shipyards where there is no shipyard labour to be got?

There is plenty of shipyard labour.

Are these gentlemen the right hon. Gentleman has in view really skilled managers of ship construction yards or amateurs?

I can tell the hon. Member who they are. They are the heads of three Departments, the Minister of National Service, Sir Lynden Macassey, Director of Shipyard Labour, Admiralty, and Major-General Collard, Deputy-Controller for Auxiliary Shipping, and they have expert business people at work under them.

May we be told where there is plenty of shipyard labour to be got?

I certainly hope to get shipyard labour to the localities in question. If there is some there we will get on with the building of a few ships.

asked the Secretary to the Admiralty what is approximately the area of the land acquired for the purposes of a national shipyard at Beachley; whether it was acquired under the Defence of the Realm Act or under any other special provisions; when it was acquired; what was the purchase price of it; and what was being taken as its annual value for rating purposes at the time of its acquisition?

It has not been definitely settled what exact area will be acquired for the national shipyard. The land is at present being taken up under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, and that part of it which will be required permanently is being purchased under the Defence of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Act. As the purchase has not yet been completed, the answers to the other parts of the question cannot be given.

Can the right hon. Gentleman state approximately what land will be required?

No, I cannot. As I said before, if the hon. Member will put a question on the paper I will try to answer it.

In view of all this criticism of national shipbuilding, will the Tight hon. Gentleman not consider the idea of having one in Ireland where there will be no difficulty at all?

I am glad to hear there will be no difficulty at all. We do not propose to construct national shipbuilding yards in Ireland, but we are availing ourselves increasingly of the facilities which Ireland has for shipbuilding and repairs.

Does the right hon. Gentleman mean increasing shipbuilding in Ireland or taking advantage of the facilities which Ireland has offered to this country?

Shipbuilding in the North and repairing in the South. We are doing more than we have been to use facilities in Ireland.

asked the Civil Lord of the Admiralty whether the Government has yet begun to bore for petroleum in the United Kingdom?

No, Sir.

In view of the continued delay, will control of the matter be handed over to persons more concerned with the getting of oil than with political disputation?

I cannot tell what the hon. Member means to suggest by that. The matter is in the hands of the Government, which is not concerned with political disputation, but is glad to avoid it.

Is there any intention to proceed with the Bill?

asked the President of the Board of Trade who is responsible for the payment of accounts for coal supplied by direction of the Coal Controller to any customer?

Generally speaking, the customer to whom the coal is supplied is responsible for the payment of accounts. In cases where there is reason to doubt the financial position of a customer, or where a customer's position may be insufficiently well known, arrangements have been made for responsibility for payment of accounts to be undertaken by local committees, or payment may be secured before the coal is delivered.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now grant to holders of stocks of imported timber which have not been taken over by the timber buyer the liberty of disposing of the same at prices sufficient to cover the cost of replacement, and thus conform to the practice of the Government timber buyer?

The subject of this question has been discussed thoroughly by the Controller of Timber Supplies with his Advisory Committee of which my hon. Friend is a member and on the advice of that Committee it has been been decided that in present circumstances no change in the direction suggested can be made.

Am I to understand that this is an example of British fair play, that the Government should be allowed to charge 40 per cent. profit and that the previous holder of the goods left on his hands can charge none? That never was arranged at the Controllers' Committee.

I believe the hon. Member is aware that a conference on this subject will be held in the course of a day or two.

I hope something will come of it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he has taken as regards the increase by railway companies in London of season tickets; and if instructions have been issued to stop all further increases and to refund all recent increases made?

I am still in communication with the Railway Executive Committee, and I regret that I am not yet in a position to add to the reply given by my right hon. Friend to the question asked by the hon. Gentleman on this subject last Wednesday.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the posters which were issued last December increasing railway fares by 50 per cent. specially included increases to workmen's weekly and traders' and season tickets, and in view of the very great hardship to workers, many of them with small wages, by the increase of season tickets, can he give the House any definite date when he will be able to reply to the question?

With regard to the first part of the question, there is no increase of 50 per cent. on any season tickets.

I did not say that.

The hon. Member has asked a question. He should wait for a reply.

With regard to the second part of the question, I hope it will be possible within two or three days to give a definite answer.

Would it not be possible to make regulations so that third-class season tickets may in future be paid for by four equal quarterly instalments, instead of fining poor men, as is done in certain cases?

The hon. Member should give notice of that question.

Will the hon. Gentleman take into consideration the fact that in addition to the increased price that is now put on the season ticket a great number of stations have actually been closed, and people who travel by these trains are put to extra inconvenience and cost to reach the stations from which they now travel?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury how many speakers the War Aims Committee is employing at a weekly salary or upon an engagement for longer periods; and what salaries are being paid to them?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the statement made in the course of the Debate on Tuesday last to the effect that it is not considered advisable to give details either of expenditure or of personal employment in connection with this work. The opinion of the House was very definitely expressed in the Debate referred to.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many discharged soldiers have got work in speaking on war aims throughout the country?

I think my answer is quite complete.

the Chancellor of the Exchequer who will be in charge of the literary work of the National War Aims Committee; whether an editor has been appointed at a salary of £1,500 or less; and whether, in accordance with the new Regulation under the Defence of the Realm Act, his name will be appended to all the articles, pamphlets, leaflets, and other published matter from his pen?

In regard to the first two points raised in the question I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer given to the hon. Member for West Bradford. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative, though, of course, all publications will bear the imprint of the Committee.

If it is a matter of town talk that very large salaries are being given to certain necessitous persons under this scheme, will not some public reply be given for the purpose of denying or confirming it?

The opinion of the House was expressed on this matter very definitely in the Debate last Tuesday.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that this new Department is considered by many people as simply a subterfuge for giving subventions and help to necessitous persons?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the salaries paid by this Department will appear in due course on the Estimates so that the House can see how this public money has been expended?

They will come up on the Report.

On which Report?

On the Report stage of the Vote.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that the advertisement of National War Bonds, whilst being inserted in daily, local, religious, pictorial, fashion, comic, and miscellaneous publications, is being withheld from the trade papers and technical journals, which have done so much to develop national trade; and whether, in view of the circulation of these journals amongst the commercial classes, he will give directions that a fair share of the advertising is given to them?

I am informed that he question of advertising in the principal trade and technical journals is receiving favourable consideration.

Can the hon. Gentleman say who is responsible for the choice of the papers in which advertisements are put?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that a young Belgian, Raoul Van Parys, living at 5, Beckwith Road, Herne Hill, a conscientious objector to military service, is employed on work of national importance as a substitute for a British subject serving in the Army; why this young man has been subjected to domiciliary visits and constant police attentions; and whether he will in future be allowed to continue his present useful work?

I have no information that this man is employed on work of national importance as a substitute for a British subject serving in the Army. Inquiries have recently been made through the police as to why he refuses to discharge his military obligations under Belgian law; and steps are being taken, in pursuance of the arrangement between the British and Belgian Governments, to enforce those obligations by means of a Deportation Order.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the shooting affray at the Dartmoor settlement; whether he can say how it has been that a conscientious objector should be armed with a revolver; whether any search is made of a conscientious objector's belongings on admission to the settlement; if not, will he undertake that the precaution is taken in future; and whether a man who carries about him a weapon which may cause death can be correctly described as a conscientious objector within the meaning of the Military Service Act?

I have received a report on this shooting, which appears to have been accidental. The revolver was brought into Dartmoor without the knowledge of the authorities, and steps will be taken to prevent this from happening in the future.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question?

That is a matter of opinion. I suppose that a man may wish to defend himself and nevertheless claim to be a conscientious objector.

asked the Prime Minister whether Douglas Bishop, a member of the Society of Friends who has undergone repeated imprisonments after courts-martial in consequence of his conscientious objection to military service and to receiving merely conditional exemption therefrom, has been recently transferred to an asylum from Winchester prison; whether the Home Office were repeatedly informed both by his father and from other sources of the danger to his mind involved by his continued imprisonment; whether any action was taken in consequence of this information; whether previous to his last sentence the military doctor declared, after a medical examination, that he was not a to undergo hard labour, to which he was sentenced notwithstanding this; and whether the Government sanction this method of punishment, involving the loss of reason, of a man of high character whose action was the result of his religious convictions?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. I am in communication with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary with regard to the matter, but I regret I have not yet been able to complete the necessary inquiries. I will write to my hon. Friend as soon as the matter has been fully considered and I am in a position to let him know the result.

I will put it down again to-morrow.

asked the Minister of National Service if he is aware that the clerk to the Droylsden Local Tribunal is a single man of military age, and if he is further aware that, as an example of this tribunal's work, it has recently refused exemption to a man with eleven children; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

My right hon. Friend the President of the Local Government Board has made enquiry into the matters referred to. The clerk to the tribunal, who is also clerk to the urban district council, is of military age and holds a certificate of exemption granted on the ground that he is in a certified occupation. The military representative agreed to his exemption. The man referred to in the second part of the question was granted exemption in August, 1916, but the exemption was withdrawn six months ago because of his failure to comply with a reasonable condition attached to his exemption. He did not exercise his right of appeal against this decision of the local tribunal. I understand that some of the children are not dependant on him and that there is no question of financial hardship. My right hon. Friend does not see any ground for questioning the procedure of the local tribunal in either case.

What was the condition of exemption which is called a reasonable condition of exemption?

The condition was to join the local volunteers, which he refused to do.

asked the Minister of National Service whether his attention has been called to the fact that there are in Ireland at the present time a number of men who have left their homes in England and Scotland and gone to Ireland for the purpose of avoiding military service; and what steps have been or are being taken to get these men back to this country to fulfil their obligations under the Military Service Acts?

Full instructions were issued by the Army Council in May as to the procedure to be adopted for dealing with absentees under the Military Service Acts, 1916 and 1917, who had proceeded to Ireland for the purpose of evading their obligations under the Military Service Acts. A copy of the Instructions, Army Council Instruction No. 817, of the 19th May, 1917, may be seen in the Library. Action has been and is being taken under the Instruction, and in several cases men who had proceeded to Ireland have been brought to this country, and having been dealt with by a Court of summary jurisdiction, have been handed over to the military authorities.

asked the Home Secretary whether the offices of the Women's International League have been raided; what is the charge or suspicion against this organisation; and whether any Police Court proceedings will be taken?

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that on 14th November a police raid was effected on the suffrage shop in Duke Street, Adelphi; whether the advocacy of adult suffrage or other reasons placed this institution under suspicion; whether anything criminal was found on the premises; and whether legal proceedings will follow?

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that on 14th November a raid was carried out on 5, York Buildings, Adelphi, the office of the No-Conscription Fellowship; whether it is intended to make the objects for which this fellowship has existed, not hitherto illegal, into illegal objects; and, if not, why this raid was carried out against a body which has always been open and unwavering in its aims and methods?

These offices were searched by the police on the dates mentioned, on warrants issued by the competent military authority, under No. 51 of the Defence of the Realm Regulations. A quantity of literature was seized, and is now being examined. The question of prosecution will be for the Attorney-General.

How long does it take to examine this literature, seeing that the raid, was made over a week ago?

It takes some time.

Is it not a fact that there are only a few leaflets, but a large number of similar leaflets? Do they read every individual leaflet?

Does not the fact that the Home Secretary is making these raids, and seizing thousands of leaflets, and very seldom following up by prosecution, show that these leaflets are quite legal, and that the right hon. Gentleman is afraid of testing his action before a Court of law?

By no means. As a matter of fact, there are cases where seizure is more effective than prosecution by preventing circulation.

asked whether the office of the chairman of the Fawcett Association Trade Union was raided by the police in his absence last Wednesday evening, and Mr. Ammon's private cheque book, some loose postage stamps, and the minute book of the Bermondsey and Rotherhithe Trades Council, also a manuscript dealing with postal history, stolen; and if he will state what purpose it is thought will be served by acting towards trade union officials and trade unionists in such a manner?

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that the office of the chairman of the Fawcett Association Trade Union was in his absence raided by police officers last Wednesday, and that they removed his private cheque book, a number of postage stamps, the minute book of the Bermondsey and Rotherhithe Trades Council, also a manuscript dealing with postal history; if he can state for what reason these things were removed; and whether they have been returned?

Acting on a warrant issued by the Competent Military Authority, under Section 51 of the Defence of the Realm Regulations, the police visited No. 4, Duke Street, Adelphi, the offices of the No-Conscription Fellowship, on the 14th November. Certain documents were removed, among which were the minute-book and manuscript referred to, but no stamps. The minute-book and manuscript, which were removed in error among a mass of other documents, have been returned to the office. It is misleading to refer to this raid as having been made on a trade union official. The raid had nothing to do with the Fawcett Association (whose offices are at 55, Doughty Street), or with any other trade union, and was concerned with the No-Conscription Fellowship only.

Will the right hon. Gentleman see that the book with the list of the trade union delegates to Rotherhithe and Bermondsey Trades Council, the file of trade union correspondence, and the Income Tax assessment paper belonging to this official, are returned? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, despite all denials, the drawer was broken open and postage stamps were taken away, and have not been returned?

I will see that anything belonging to the trade union which has not been already returned shall be returned. In reply to the latter part of the question, I can only speak from my information which conflicts with that with which the hon. Gentleman has been supplied.

asked the Prime Minister if the Government by force of arms or peace negotiations will insist that Germany shall be compelled to yield to Belgium the rights which the British Government is prepared to concede voluntarily to Ireland, or whether the Government are in favour of giving both Belgium and Ireland the right of deciding for themselves without reference to foreign influences of any kind the form of government under which they prefer to live and the measure of freedom to which they are entitled; and whether the Government will not prevent such decision coming into operation immediately when the will of both nationalities, based so far as Ireland is concerned on the principles underlying the Representation of the People Bill now before the House, has been ascertained?

I can add nothing to the statements already made as to the intentions of the Government with regard to Ireland and to Belgium.

Have not Irishmen the same rights as Belgians?

I wish Belgians had the same rights as Irishmen.

I wish to ask a definite and precise question—would the right hon. Gentleman or the Government come to terms with Germany if Germany would agree now to constitute Belgium—

The hon. Member must give notice of that.

I will put it on the Paper.

asked the Prime Minister whether, with a view to rendering the Service universally attractive, he will Advise that the style and titles Royal Flying Corps and Royal Naval Air Service be changed by the substitution of the word National for Royal?

The answer is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the peril to which London is exposed on account of the development of aircraft offensive by the Germans, he can give the House the assurance that, within the control of the authorities concerned in the defence of London, there is constituted what might be called a thinking department whose duty it is intelligently to foresee the effects of German activities and to advise appropriate and adequate preparations to defeat them and to avoid the disadvantages of being taken by surprise and being compelled to substitute plausible explanations for vigorous and effective fighting action

The answer is in the affirmative.