asked the Secretary of State for India whether he can give the House any information regarding the reported establishment in India of a trade bank; and will he say to what extent this bank, in the event of the report being founded upon fact, is to be a State or a State-aided institution?

The Secretary of State has seen statements in the Press, but has no further information. He has not sanctioned the establishment of a trade bank as a State or State-aided institution.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether the Secretary of State in India or the Viceroy has been communicated with respecting the raid on the Indian Home Rule League's premises?

Not before the event. The Secretary of State was on the high seas when the India Office notified to the Home Office the fact that the book, the importation of which into this country and India was prohibited, had been published in England.

He was not on the high seas, as I understand, when the raid was sanctioned.

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that "Young India," by Lajpat Rai, was published more than two months ago; and why the notification of the alleged dangerous character of this book to the Home Office was postponed till after the Secretary of State's departure for India?

The India Office was not aware of the publication of the book in this country until some days after the Secretary of State's departure for India.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the book was sent to Mr. Montagu personally, and to all Members of the House when it was first published, and can he explain how it was that the India Office was not acquainted with the fact?

I do not know whether Mr. Montagu reads every book he receives.

Will the Government now withdraw the ban upon this book, in view of the fact that the hon. and gallant Member who wrote the preface is now an official of the Government?

I will raise this question at eleven o'clock to-night.

asked the Secretary of State for India if he will state in what country Lajpat Rai is at present; and whether he is at large?

Lajpat Rai is in the United States of America. So far as is known he is at large.

Has the Government of the United States been communicated with with a view to the internment of this extremely dangerous person who, according to Sir Archibald Bodkin, advocates sedition and assassination?

Not so far as I am aware of.

asked the Home Secretary why in the recent raid made upon the premises of the No-Conscription Fellowship the police took a private cheque book, a file of trade union correspondence among which was at least one case relating to negotiations with the Ministry of Pensions about the settlement of a pension case for the widow of a member of a trade union, and among other papers taken was a list of the delegates and secretaries of trade unions, the taking of which has caused considerable obstruction of the trade union work; is he aware that the police broke open a private handbag and stole therefrom four boxes of matches; and will he see that all these articles are immediately returned?

All papers and other articles which have been seized by the police under Defence of the Realm Regulation 51, and are found on examination to be innocent, will be returned to the owners, but I must not be understood as admitting the statements of fact made by the hon. Member.

Does the right hon. Gentleman deny that a quantity of articles were stolen, including, among other things, four boxes of matches?

I have not thought it worth while to inquire about these details. The police had to deal with a mass of documents, and anything not falling within the Regulations will be returned.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the German Government, whilst extensively circulating amongst their troops and their people complacent official literature dealing with the War and war aims, suppress or subject to severe censorship all leaflets and pamphlets of an independent character bearing on the same question; and whether he can take steps, with the help of the War Aims Committee, to place before the British people this example of the effects upon liberty of opinion of Prussian militarism?

I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of the facts stated in the first part of the question. The second part is not a matter which concerns the Foreign Office.

Is the Noble Lord aware of the fact that pacifist utterances in this country are very freely circulated in Germany in order to encourage the troops?

Yes, Sir; that is so.

Is the Noble Lord aware that the speeches most widely circulated in Germany are those of the Prime Minister, and Mr. Hughes, of Australia?

Answer!

asked the Home Secretary whether the Regulation 27 c affects leaflets published on the food question, as by food committees, or on War Certificates, as by war savings committees; and whether, inasmuch as such leaflets relate to the War, he will make a new Regulation excepting such leaflets from imposing any penalties on their writers, printers, or distributors?

The answer to the first question is in the negative, and the second therefore does not arise.

Have the Government decided to withdraw the Regulation or to modify it?

No, Sir.

asked the Home, Secretary whether any other person has been authorised, apart from the directors of the official Press Bureau, to examine and pass leaflets under Regulation 27 c; if so, who is appointed; and at what address are applications under Regulation 27 c considered?

No, Sir. All applications should be addressed to the Press Bureau, United Service Institution, Whitehall.

asked the Home Secretary what provision in Regulation 27 c (Defence of the Realm Act) empowers him to allow the War Aims Committee to issue literature without the sanction of the directors of the Press Bureau?

Any leaflet issued by or under the authority of His Majesty's Government is expressly excluded from the Regulation.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Admiralty has yet made up its mind as to which of the routes proposed for the Forth and Clyde Ship Canal will best serve the purposes of the Admiralty; and, if not, when their decision in the matter will be announced?

The views of the Admiralty and the views of other interests concerned will be fully considered by His Majesty's Government. The decision, when taken, will be that of His. Majesty's Government, and I am not in a position to forecast its probable date.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the decision will be taken?

No, Sir.

How many years has Rosyth been under construction now, and how many years has the canal been under consideration?

With great respect, I do not think Rosyth arises out of this question.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he will state why, in the weekly returns of losses of British merchant ships due to submarines or mines,' no statistics are given of the numbers of ships hit by torpedoes and mines which are not sunk, in view of the fact that information is given as to the numbers unsuccessfully attacked; and whether he is aware that the Italian Government is giving this information?

The weekly return for the Press was framed so as to include only the number of British merchant and fishing vessels sunk, and the number of merchant vessels unsuccessfully attacked. The number of vessels damaged has never been included. Many of them come back to service after repair. It is true that in a recent return the Italian Government included one ship which was damaged by a torpedo and towed into port

The right hon. Gentleman has not told us the reason why it has not been done before—it is much more interesting information than the number unsuccessfully attacked.

One reason is that many of these ships go back to active service.

Is it not the fact that there are many steamers torpedoed or mined which reach the shore and become total wrecks, and those are not reported?

I should not say there are many.

Is any record kept of the ships which have been mined or torpedoed, and which reach the shore and become total wrecks?

I imagine that is the case.

Are they recorded in the returns any time?

No. I have already stated that.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that some thirty stokers of the Royal Fleet Reserve, immediate class, twelve stokers of the Royal Naval Reserve, and about twenty-one Marines, all belonging to the Chatham Division and drafted to one of His Majesty's ships, had received no leave since the commencement of the War till August last; will he say whether they have yet had leave; and, if not, will he take immediate steps to secure that leave be given to them?

My hon. and learned Friend is apparently under the impression that the particular ship to which he refers came home from foreign service in August last. She did not. Had she done so, leave would, of course, have been granted. The ship in question is still on foreign service, and arrangements are actually in progress to relieve those of the men referred to who have been three years abroad; the relief of all such men will be completed as soon as opportunities. permit.

I desire to repudiate any such impression. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that writing in July he stated that nine men had been sent to relieve these men, but that they were nine men of the Plymouth and not Chatham Division, and is he further aware these men applied in the ordinary service way in November, 1916, for leave, and will he say what steps he has taken since July to relieve these marines and stokers?

If my hon. Friend will give me those facts I will put them before the proper authorities at once If a ship is on foreign service it is very difficult to relieve the crew. My hon. Friend knows that. We do what we can.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have months since given him every detail, with even the name of each marine, in correspondence, and will he say what steps he has taken to get these men of the Chatham Division leave after service of three years?

I have placed the matter every time at once before the proper authorities, and, unless I am very much mistaken, I have every time written to my hon. and learned Friend or answered his questions in the House.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he can state how many German submarines were sunk on 16th and 17th November?

I can add nothing to the statement of the Prime Minister, which was based on information received by the War Cabinet from the Admiralty on the morning of the 19th.

Is there any reason why the right hon. Gentleman cannot give the figures for the 16th?

I simply stated that the statement made by the Prime Minister was based on information given him by the Admiralty on the 19th.

Was it in accordance with the information you gave?

Oh, yes, Sir.

Are we to understand that there were no ships sunk on the 16th and that five were sunk on the 17th?

In reply to a supplementary question, I said that the statement was made to the War Cabinet on the morning of the 19th, and fully justified the statement made by the Prime Minister.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say why he is trying to wriggle out of the two dates and why does he not come down and give us the frank figures and say whether or not there were submarines sunk on the 16th, and whether the five referred to by the Prime Minister were sunk on the 17th or on the 16th and 17th?

I have nothing to add to the information I have given. It would be wrong and dangerous to the public interest to suggest that anybody was desiring to wriggle. I feel bound to say this. I cannot imagine that my hon. Friends would consciously say or do anything to assist the enemy, but I happen to know, and can assure the House, that endeavours to cast doubt upon statements made in this matter are eagerly watched by the enemy, and, further, do give the greatest possible encouragement to him and to his civil population.

Do we understand that the only person in this House entitled to give information to the enemy is the Prime Minister?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he can state where it is proposed to establish the new national shipbuilding yards; what arrangements have been, or are proposed to be, made with the landlords for the lands proposed to be taken for the purposes of such yards; and who are the landlords?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the replies which I gave to the hon. Members for Chippenham and Newcastle-under-Lyme on the 15th November, in which I stated that the new national shipyards are being constructed at Chepstow, Beachley, and Portbury, and that the land required has at present been taken over under the Defence of the Realm Regulations. It is intended that such land as is permanently required shall be purchased under the Defence of the Realm (Acquisition of Land) Act. No arrangements have yet been made with the landlords. I am sending my hon. Friend a list of the landlords who are affected.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Committee that recommended these sites to the Admiralty consisted largely of Scottish shipbuilders?

Can the right hon. Gentleman see his way to place maps of these sites in the Tea Room for the convenience of Members?

I will consider that.

Will the names of all these landlords be published in the OFFICIAL REPORT?

I imagine there is no objection to that, subject to my hon. Friend's (Mr. Scanlan) agreement. I will alter my promise to send them to him to an undertaking to issue the list with the OFFICIAL REPORT.

[The following is a list of the Landlords referred to by Dr. Macnamara in the last paragraph of his reply.]

BEACHLEY.

A.N.S. Nos. 1 and 2.

Colonel Marling, V.C., C.B.

Mr. Curre.

Mrs. Saunders (who owns a cottage). The Standard Shipbuilding Company. The Chepstow Property Company. The Territorial Association.

Mrs. Anderson.

Mr. Hartland.

The Wye Fishery Association.

PORTBURY.

A.N.S. No. 3.

Mrs. Parnell.

Mrs. Mirehouse.

Miss Hall.

The De Winton Estate.

Miss Fry.

Mr. W. P. Bridgeman.

Lady Smyth.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a document known as the Declaration of Corfu, signed on 7th/20th July, 1917, by Dr. Trumbitch and Mr. Pachitch, the Serbian Prime Minister, has been formally communicated to him by the Serbian Government; and, if so, whether His Majesty's Government or the Allies have approved it and expressed their intention of enforcing their war aims accordingly?

This document was communicated by the Serbian Government to His Majesty's Minister at Corfu. As to the second part of the question, it is not desirable to say more than that His Majesty's Government received the communication with great interest and sympathy.

As this is important, and is practically decisive for the future state of Serbia, may we not know whether the Government supports or discountenances this declaration?

I have already said that the Government received the document with great sympathy.

This document abolishes the independence of Montenegro altogether: was that received with sympathy by the Noble Lord and the Government?

The general ideas prevailing is the document was received by the Government with sympathy.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in conjunction with our Allies and America, he will issue a reasoned statement for the guidance and warning of Russia regarding the serious results, both immediate and remote, that are likely to follow if the present chaos is allowed to continue or a separate peace concluded?

The question is under consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact that the secret treaties published by the present Russian Government reveal that the Allies were committed to aims of vast territorial aggrandisement; and can he state whether the existence of these commitments was the cause of the refusal of the request made by the Kerensky Government for a conference to reconsider war aims?

I cannot accept as accurate the suggestion in the first part of the question. Nor is it the fact that M. Kerensky's request was refused.

Did not the Chancellor of the Exchequer state that, at the coming Conference, war aims would not be discussed; and was not that the cause of the Lenin rising, and the failure of M. Kerensky to form a Government?

I believe my right hon. Friend did make that statement; but he did not refuse the request made for a conference to discuss war aims. Nor can I allow the suggestion made by the hon. Member to pass that anything of the kind had to do with M. Kerensky's position.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that a State document which has been published by the present Russian Government reveals that a director of a British bank was present at a conference of international financiers held at Berne in September last; can he give the name of the director referred to and the bank implicated; and can he state the circumstances under which a passport was granted?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the publication in Russian newspapers of an official statement that a meeting was held in Switzerland of international bankers and financiers on 7th September; whether passports were issued for this meeting; whether war aims were discussed at it; and whether it was the subject of any communications between the French and the British Foreign Offices?

I have been informed that a statement of the kind indicated has been issued in Petrograd. If any such meeting took place no British subject, so far as I know, took part in it. Certainly no passport was issued to enable him to do so, nor have any communications on the subject passed between the British and French Governments.

Is the hon. Lord going to make inquiries as to whether the matter is stated correctly, that a British banker did attend this Conference; and can he say whether the name of the banker was censored from the telegram and therefore did not appear?

No, Sir; I know nothing about the latter part of the question. We have made repeated inquiries about this matter in Switzerland and elsewhere, and the result of those inquiries is what I have already given to the House.

Can the Noble Lord say whether, in fact, a passport was issued to a director of a British bank about the time of the alleged meeting?

I should like notice of that question.

If the man is discovered will he be prosecuted?

That is a purely hypothetical question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether samples of concrete captured in the Ypres area have been analysed by experts; and, if so, whether such concrete is made from cement of a higher quality than that produced in Belgium; and (2) the President of the Board of Trade whether Belgian cement is of an inferior quality to British cement and is unsuitable for ferro-concrete work; whether for reinforced concrete work such as is used in pill-boxes and other fortifications only the higher grade of cement is of use against modern artillery; and whether he has information as to the extra high quality of the concrete work in German pill-boxes which have recently been captured in the Ypres area?

I have made inquiries, and am informed that, as the result of tests and analyses of numerous samples from different factories, the artificial Portland cement manufactured in Belgium is quite equal in quality to the average English product, and equally suitable for making concrete for fortification purposes. There seems no doubt that cement of German and Belgian manufacture is used for the construction of German pill-boxes and other fortifications. In the first place a paper cement sack has been picked up on the field of battle which from the lettering stamped on it clearly comes from Hanover, and in the second the metal label referred to in a letter by Captain Hewetson to the newspapers proves on examination to be from a Belgian factory. On one side it has the words " Cannon Brand Artificial Portland "; on the other, " Burcht, Antwerp." This indicates, I am told, that it comes from the Cannon Brand Artificial Portland Cement Works, of Burght les Anvers, a well-known Belgian cement factory, which was taken over by the German Government before March, 1916. On the other hand, no evidence has yet been discovered that British cement has been used in the German fortifications.

How can the difference between British and German cement be discovered when once they have been used?

I am not sufficient of an expert to answer that question without notice.

Is the Noble Lord aware that people are under the impression that some of this concrete is made in this country?

How can the Minister of Blockade say what is the impression of certain people?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that at a mass meeting of the munition workers at Messrs. Armstrong and Whitworth a strong resolution was passed demanding that the transfer of Kellner-Partington's Company to a foreign syndicate should be stopped, as the sale will have a morally prejudicial effect on munition workers who have made so many sacrifices for the War, and further that the transfer will result in supplying our enemies with munitions and other military necessities; and whether, under these circumstances, he will at once forbid this transfer to this foreign syndicate?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. To the second I have already explained, in answer to questions, all the circumstances of the case, and have nothing I can usefully add.

Is there not a perfectly new German invention by which chemical wood pulp can be made to produce high explosives of enormous value to our enemies?

Order, order. The Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs is not an expert on the manufacture of explosives.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he has had under consideration the question of including in the list of Civil servants honoured by His Majesty the King for war services the officers and men employed in His Majesty's dockyards; and if he can make any statement to the House on the subject?

Officers and men employed in His Majesty's dockyards are equally eligible with other servants of the State for appointment to the Order of the British Empire or award of the Medal of that Order, in recognition of their services in connection with the War. I can assure my hon. Friend that when the time comes for recognising the excellent work done by the civil staff serving under the Admiralty during the War, the exceedingly important services rendered by the staff of the dockyards will, of course, not be overlooked.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when that time will come?

I am afraid I cannot answer offhand, except to say that steps are being taken to see that due recognition is given to these men.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of their names appeared in the last list?

I do not think it included any of our employés, but it must not be concluded from that they will be overlooked.

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that a number of male civilian employés at the Royal naval hospitals are not receiving the last war bonus of 3s. a week granted as from the 2nd August, 1917and will he say why these civilian employés are treated in a different manner in this respect to the engineers' and electricians' staff?

It is the fact that the employés in question have not received this bonus except where they are engaged in connection with the maintenance and running of the hospital machinery and electrical plant. This is in accordance with Treasury decision.

asked (1) the date, time, and place of the court-martial to be held concerning the loss of the destroyers " Strongbow " and " Mary Rose" and the Norwegian convoy on 17th October; (2) the terms of reference of the courts-martial on the survivors of the destroyers " Strongbow " and " Mary Rose"?

The court-martial to inquire into the loss of the " Mary Rose " will probably be held at Chatham at 10 a.m. on the 3rd December. The court-martial to inquire into the loss of the " Strongbow " has had to be postponed owing to the condition of the commanding officer. The Naval Discipline Act does not admit of a court-martial being held to inquire into the loss of the convoy, but the matter will arise at the courts-martial on the two destroyers. The order to the Court will in each case be in the customary form " to inquire into the cause of the loss of the ship and to try the surviving officers and crew."

Will it be a public Court?

I cannot say. Power is taken, I think, under the Amended Navy Discipline Act to hear part or the whole of the case privately.

By what authority does the Admiralty act in not holding a public inquiry Is it by an Order in Council; if so, has it been laid upon the Table of the House, in accordance with the Naval Discipline Act?

If my memory does not fail me, one of the War Emergency Acts amended the Naval Discipline Act by including a Section giving the President of the Court and the Admiralty power to hear all or part of a case in private.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether representations have been made to him in reference to farriers, plumbers, and other skilled workmen urging that men belonging to these skilled trades now serving in the Army should, as far as possible, be employed in the work for which they are specially fitted; and whether he can give an assurance that steps are being taken by the military authorities to secure this result?

The answer to both parts of my hon. Friend's question is in the affirmative.

asked when it is proposed to place the employés of the Army Ordnance Department in Dublin on an equal footing with Army Ordnance workers in Woolwich?

It is not proposed to depart from the policy of paying workmen in accordance with the Fair Wages Resolution of the House of Commons.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War (1) whether he proposes to make inquiries from the General Officer Commanding the Forces in Ireland into the action of the president of a recent court-martial in Ireland in describing Irish as the language of the Hottentot; whether he proposes to distribute this description of their language amongst the Irish-speaking soldiers of the Connaught Rangers and the Munster Fusiliers and other Gaelic-speaking soldiers at the front; (2) whether it would promote the peace of Ireland to say "I don't care whether he is a Hottentot or a Sinn Feiner," and whether this was purposely meant to convey that the Irish were lower than the. Hottentots; whether tie will explain why the president of the court-martial at Cork on the 17th instant, when an accused person used an expression in Irish, instantly ordered the Court to be cleared; is he aware that, on an accused man answering in Irish when called on to plead, the president said he did not understand the Hottentot language, and will he state whether British officers in Quebec or South Africa are allowed to use offensive terms towards the French and Dutch languages respectively; and what action he proposes to take!

I have no information about the matters referred to in these questions.

Would the hon. Gentleman try to ascertain this information, on the ground that it tends to help Germany if Irish officials are allowed to call the Irish people Hottentots?

I really do not think it is necessary that I should ask any official to make inquiries. My hon. Friend need not be alarmed. The sanctity of the Irish language will not be affected by the obiter dictum of any man.

If information of this kind is supplied to the hon. Gentleman, will he make inquiries?

I do not think it is necessary.

As this statement has appeared in all the Irish papers, surely it must have passed the Censor, and is not the War Office prepared to take action?

I do not think so.

Is this officer to be allowed to insult the Irish people as he wishes?

As I say, I am as keen about Gaelic as anyone, but I really do not think it necessary to ask officials to make inquiries at the present time.

Why not give him a snub?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that cutting of timber trees is proceeding in the neighbourhood of Jedburgh and Kelso under the orders of Government, and that the useless branches are being burnt on the ground, whereas there are many women householders and others in and outwith those burghs who are prevented by the police from taking those branches home to use as firewood, and who would be glad if it could be arranged that they might take them away and so make a saving in coal and money; and whether steps will be taken to enable this saving to be made?

I have been asked to reply to this question. I am making inquiries, and will acquaint my hon. Friend with the result.

Does the hon. Gentleman know that on another Lord's estates, near Jedburgh, those of Lord Lothian, the women were invited very kindly to come and take away the useless branches?

I was not aware of that, but I thank it is very possible, and it shows much public spirit.

asked why all information concerning the events which took place in Turin and elsewhere in Italy on 21st August, 1917, and following days was suppressed by the Censor?

The Press Bureau have examined their records for the period from 23rd August to 17th September, and cannot find that any message on the subject was stopped by them.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the condition under, and hours, which some of the Voluntary Aid Detachments work in military hospitals; will he cause inquiries to be made; and if he finds that the conditions in some cases are such as to be detrimental to the health and well-being of these young women, will he have the matter remedied?

Nursing members of the Voluntary Aid Detachments in Military hospitals work according to the timetable for regular military nurses (Queen Alexandra's Imperial Military Nursing Service). I will circulate this time-table in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the time-table referred to:

Half a day every week from 2 to 10.

A whole day every month from 6 p.m. previous day to 10 p.m. following day.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will have a settlement made immediately of the case of Private H. Mond, No. 203,691, C Company, 4th East Lancashire Regiment, a time-expired man of over forty-two years of age, it having been stated that instructions had been given for the discharge of the soldier to be carried out forthwith; that representations were made by the hon. Member for Blackburn on the 27th October that the man had been sent home pending his discharge and had been offered employment which he could not take because his discharge certificate had not been sent, and this discharge certificate has not yet been sent and the man is still unemployed?

I am having inquiries made, and will let my hon. Friend know the result as soon as possible.

As this matter has been under consideration for a long time, will the hon. Gentleman accelerate it?

Certainly.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will have inquiry made into the complaints about the conduct of the second lieutenant E. L. Smith, commanding the 3rd Southern Non-Combatant Corps at Durrington Camp, Larkhill, who, since he took charge of this company, has persistently carried out a policy of irritation, his latest act being to order the searching of kit bags of the men and their personal belongings and their private correspondence; and among other orders he issues, which are not imposed in any other company, are the maintenance of the summer practice of washing and wet-scrubbing huts, the consequence of which is that their huts often remain in a damp state for two or three days; and also his practice of making all available men parade at 6.10 a.m. for route march on empty stomachs, this being the only company on Salisbury Plain where this practice is followed?

A full report has been called for, and on its receipt I will communicate with my hon. Friend.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Private Alan G. McDougall, No. 6,634, 3rd Reserve London Regiment, is now at Blackdown Camp awaiting court-martial; whether he is aware that Private McDougall has already been sentenced three times by courts-martial as a conscientious objector; whether, in view of the statement of the Secretary of State for War against successive punishments, the same treatment will be given to Private McDougall as to Private Scott Duckers; and whether he will be set at liberty?

Inquiries are being made in this case, and I will let my hon. Friend know the result.

asked whether it is proposed to give any recognition in the shape of a badge or a medal to those members of police forces who, being old non-commissioned officers, were lent to the Army in 1914-16 for the purpose of training recruits and who have now returned to police duty?

The suggestion made by my right hon. Friend will not be lost sight of when the general question of the recognition, if any, of such services is considered.

asked whether the only Germans interned in East Africa are the military men who have been captured, and that all other Germans, men, women, and children, are allowed to live in their own houses, to go on running their own shops, and to go about as they like, except that they have to be home by 6 p.m.; and, if so, whether steps will now be taken to clear Germans out of the country?

The whole question is under consideration. Negotiations are pending regarding the removal of all alien enemies from the region mentioned.

asked whether the Government has sanctioned the practice instituted at Donington Hall of allowing German prisoners of war periods of leave; whether parole is taken on these occasions; and, if not, whether they are accompanied by any guard?

Sanction has never been granted for periods of leave. The last two parts of my hon. Friend's question do not therefore arise.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that within the last few weeks forty-three new Army motor transports passed through Doncaster on their way to Edinburgh empty; that they were subsequently handed over to the Manchester Command and were again dispatched empty; whether he is aware that they were subsequently dispatched from Manchester to Aldershot, again empty, when it was discovered they were required in Edinburgh, and that they were then dispatched from Aldershot to Edinburgh again empty; and whether he will say who is responsible for this waste of some 2,500 gallons of petrol and the loss of labour and transport facilities thus occasioned?

This matter has already been brought to notice, and is being inquired into. I will let my hon. Friend know the result as soon as I am in a position to do so.

asked whether the rule that officers and men are not to be sent overseas until they reach the age of nineteen years applies to the Royal Flying Corps?

No, Sir; the Royal Flying Corps was particularly exempted by an Army Council Instruction of 8th December, 1916. It was found impracticable to apply the rule to this branch of the Service owing to the fact that a large number of the best pilots begin their training at the age of eighteen and become proficient and fully qualified long before they reach the age of nineteen.

asked how many men have been executed by orders of courts-martial who had previously been in hospital in consequence of shell-shock?

This information is not available.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that boards of guardians are refusing to provide relief to dependants of soldiers who have been executed by orders of courts. martial; and can he say how many dependants have been left by these men?

My hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. I am not aware that boards of guardians have refused to grant relief in the cases to which he refers. Some boards of guardians have, however, passed a resolution asking that pensions should be paid in these cases, thus removing the obligation of the guardians to give relief. I have no information as to the latter part of the question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that such cases have come up and been discussed by boards of guardians, and that at least in one case relief has been refused; and can he take steps to prevent such a discussion and such a decision?

A discussion has come up before some boards of guardians in some of these cases. but this is a question whether or not we should give pensions and other rights to widows and children of deserters, and whether, as a matter of policy, we should put them on exactly the same footing as the widows of those who have died honourably in the service of their country.

When the right hon. Gentleman is coming to a decision on this matter, will he bear in mind that some of these men have been executed shortly after having been in hospital for shell-shock?

I do not believe there is any ground whatever for that assertion.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether his attention has been called to the fact that many Territorial officers are being refused the wound gratuity on the ground that their wounds were not severe, although all the medical reports at the time of the casualty and the telegrams to the relatives described the wounds as severe; is he aware that there is a feeling that such treatment is meted out only to Territorial officers and not to officers in the Regular Army; and will he see that all officers of the forces are put on an equal footing in this respect?

I am not aware of any such feeling. All officers are on an equal footing in this respect.

The hon. Member has not answered the first part of the question, which is the main part.

The main part was whether or not any distinction or difference was made as between Territorial and Regular officers. With regard to the first part of the question, gratuities are not payable in respect of wounds which are certified as severe only. My hon. Friend will find in the pay warrant that the gratuities are only payable in respect of very severe wounds.

Who decided whether they are severe or very severe?

The medical authorities.

The medical authorities where the officer is stationed or the central authorities?

Various medical authorities. If there is any question it comes to the medical authorities at the War Office.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he is aware that soldiers in Mesopotamia have, in many instances, had to telegraph home for money in order to keep them going in the ordinary wants of a soldier; can he say whether this is due to his Department not paying the men regularly; and has he now seen this matter remedied?

No such complaints have reached me, but the payment of soldiers in Mesopotamia is a question for the India Office.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the desire to create a democratic sentiment in this House, some steps will be taken to honour the memory of the late Mr. Keir Hardie, and to call attention not only to his Parliamentary work but also to his devotion to democratic ideals throughout his Life , and whether, accordingly, some fitting memorial will be erected in this Douse to typify the phase of national endeavour which he represented?

Those who, like myself, were colleagues of the late Mr. Keir Hardie, entertained, I am sure, a great respect for his sincerity and honesty, but I see no reason for adopting the suggestion of the hon. Member.

asked the Prime Minister whether steps have yet been taken for the more effective co-ordination of the various boards and bodies concerned with invention; and whether the promise that this matter should be considered has as yet resulted in diminution of the number of different boards that were concerned with this matter?

The question is one of great complexity, involving many important considerations, and it has not yet been found possible to arrive at any final conclusion

asked the Prime Minister when Government employés in Ireland will be placed on an equal footing with Government employés doing similar work in Great Britain?

I have been asked to reply, and I would refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave to his questions on this subject on the 12th March and 1st November.

asked the Prime Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to prosecutions in which traders and others have been found guilty of deliberate evasion of the restriction of food prices; whether he is aware that various groups of farmers have withheld milk supplies from all, including invalids and children, owing to a maximum price being fixed by a local food control committee, and, in view of the hurt done to the nation by food gambling and profiteering, whether it is proposed to take any steps by disfranchisement or otherwise, to express the public disapproval of those who have been guilty of these practices during the War?

I have been asked to reply. Traders and others found guilty of evading food regulations are punished by fine or imprisonment. Supplies improperly withheld are made the subject of requisition. It is thought that these methods of expressing public disapproval are sufficiently appropriate.

Are we to understand that men who have used the chance of war to plunder people are going to retain undiminished the rights of citizenship?

I did not understand that my hon. Friend was in any circumstances in favour of disfranchisement.

asked whether, in view of the increasing gravity of the food problem and the need for further drastic steps being taken, he will assign a day for the discussion of this question, in order that the Food Controller may have the assistance and guidance of this House?

I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by a discussion of this subject at present.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the position in regard to this matter is going to be very serious indeed, and does he not think that, under these circumstances, a discussion with suggestion in the House of Commons would be entirely to the good or is it going to be left entirely to an official bureaucracy?

I quite realise the seriousness of this problem both now and perhaps still more in the future. What I said was that I do not think a discussion at this moment would be helpful, but, of course, in this matter, I am entirely in the hands of the House, and if there should he a general desire I shall try to find time.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the recent statement of the Food Controller threatening to institute compulsory rationing is causing prices to rise on account of the hoarding which is taking place?

I was not aware of that, and I am sceptical about it; but, in any case, it is the fact that we do look upon compulsory rations as something that may become necessary, and there is no harm in saying so.

Is the the right hon. Gentleman aware that, according to the " Daily Mail," people are starving at the Ritz at the present moment?

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a statement in the " National Food Journal " for 14th November, page 81, which attributes the high prices of food to the fact that currency is multiplied faster than the supply of commodities; whether, having regard to the fact that the Government control currency and also the issue of food, this contains a reflection on the Administration; and whether he will state that the Government is prepared to so adjust currency, supply, and distribution to keep the prices of the essentials of life within the scope of the wages of the working classes?

I have seen the statement referred to. I can only repeat that, as I have stated several times in this House, the relation of currency to prices receives the constant attention of His Majesty's Government.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in September last, a large number of sailors proceeding home on leave from a squadron which had escorted a convoy from America brought on shore with them at Devonport a large quantity of sugar which they had privately purchased in Nova Scotia, some men having as much as 56 lbs.; whether the Customs authorities at Devonport refused to admit the sugar duty free and refused also to accept duty for it as the incident occurred on a Saturday afternoon, and that in consequence of this attitude many thousands of pounds of sugar were thrown on to the refuse heap; and whether he will cause an inquiry to be made into the matter, with a view to preventing a similar waste occurring again?

The importation of sugar has, as my hon. Friend is no doubt aware, been prohibited for more than three years, except under licence, and sugar brought into the country without licence has, at the request of the Royal Commission on Sugar, been seized by the Customs and added to the stock available for general consumption. The destruction of the sugar referred to was the act of the sailors themselves. The Customs authorities were in no way parties to it. I understand that the Sugar Commission have since authorised the Board of Customs and Excise to waive enforcement of the prohibition in such cases.