asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Allies or any of them have given an assur- ance that Kiao-Chau shall be returned to China; if so, on what date was it given; and when the promise will be redeemed?

The exchange of Notes which took place in 1915 on the subject between China and Japan was published at the time in both countries and reproduced in the British Press. His Majesty's Government are not aware of any other assurance.

Will the British Government inquire of our Japanese Allies the state of this question, so that we may know what is being done?

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the policy of the Allies still remains that stated by the British Ambassador at Petrograd on 9th December, 1917, when he stated that as soon as a Government is recognised by the Russian people as a whole the Allies would examine with that Government the aims of the War, or whether recent events have led to a with drawal from the position taken up three months ago?

The conclusion of a separate peace between the Government at Petrograd and the Central Powers has obviously altered the whole position of affairs.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will lay upon the Table Papers relating to the proposals for Japanese intervention in Russia?

No, Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is in a position to make any statement about the state of affairs in the kingdom of the Hedjaz, the Sultanates of Riad and Hail, and the countries adjoining these?

In reply to the first part of my hon. Friend's question I will, with the permission of the House, describe as briefly as possible the course which the operations of the forces of our Ally, the King of the Hedjaz, have followed since the declaration of Arabian independence was announced at Mecca in July, 1916.

At that time the Turks had in Hedjaz an army of 20,000 picked Regular troops with a proportional complement of artillery and plentiful supplies of transport, food and ammunition, besides having a military railway in direct communication with their northern bases. The Arabs, who rallied to the standard of liberation, were neither organised nor equipped with modern weapons, nevertheless the towns of Mecca, Taif, Jeddah, Yambo, Wedj, Akaba and Teima were seized at the commencement of the national movement. Consequent upon this numerous Arabian tribes and a number of officers and men prisoners of war in our hands joined voluntarily the army of the King of the Hedjaz and were organised by him into a permanent and disciplined force for the purpose of holding what had been won and extending the area of Arab independence. The result of the efforts of this national army under the leadership of the Sherifs Ali, Abdullah, Feisal and Zeid, are that the Red Sea coast of the Hedjaz has been completely cleared of Turks along a distance of 800 miles. The military railway has been continuously interrupted and severe losses inflicted on the material and rolling stock. The city of Medina has been blockaded for the last twelve months. The Sherif Feisal's force has advanced its front from Mecca to North of Tafileh on the shores of the Dead Sea, a distance of some 800 miles, and General Allenby's recent raid at Ammaw had the effect of assisting the Arabs to maintain their position.

The casualties inflicted on the Turks up to date are very considerable, and it may be safely said from the declaration of Arab independence up to the present time the Arab forces have occupied, isolated, or accounted for fully 40,000 Turkish troops and over 100 guns.

Although engrossed in this difficult military struggle for national liberty, the Government of the Hedjaz have been able to inaugurate a new era of civil order and justice unknown in the Hedjaz since its subjection to Turkish rule.

The national Arab Government have moreover succeeded in arranging for two consecutive pilgrimages to the Holy Places. On these occasions the pilgrims were, as never before, accorded comfort and medical care, and both pilgrimages were marked by a complete absence of epidemics or any of the usual concomitants of robbery, extortion, and disorder.

In Eastern Arabia the Emir of Riad Ibn Saud has proved our unswerving ally, and has established the independence of the greater part of Neid.

The Emir of Hail is still personally under Turkish domination, but has not been in residence in his capital for a year.

asked the President of the Board of Agriculture if his attention has been called to recent purchases of agricultural land in Essex by foreign syndicates; what steps the Government will take to protect the interests of the tenant farmers; and whether an alien who would be prevented from residence in the areas concerned would be allowed to purchase land there?

I am aware of recent purchases of agricultural land in Essex by a company called the County Farm and Lands Company, the directorate of which is, I understand, to be composed of Belgian and British subjects. I am informed that none of the tenant farmers who were in occupation of the land have been disturbed. The general point raised in the last part of the question is one for consideration by the naval and military authorities. I may add that the War Office has been informed of the purchase.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether it is by his authority that an instruction has been issued by the Liverpool Portal Committee to steamship companies trading with Ireland not to accept any cattle feeding-stuffs for Ireland without first making application to the Feeding-Stuffs Department of the Ministry of Food through the portal committee; and, if so, whether notice of this intended stoppage of the shipment of feeding-stuffs to Ireland was given to Irish merchants; and whether he will at once have this instruction withdrawn and a fair proportion of the available feeding-stuffs allocated for Irish farmers?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The issue of this instruction was necessary for the equitable allocation of cattle feeding-stuffs between Great Britain and Ireland. Permits have been granted for the shipment to Ireland of all feeding-stuffs for which freight had been engaged, and permits are being issued for the shipment of further quantities on a proportionate basis of the shipments in the corresponding period of last year.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he will state for each of the last six months for which complete returns are available the amount of cake and cake-meals made in Great Britain; the amount of cake and cake-meals imported into Great Britain; the quantities of these that have been shipped to Ireland; and on what basis the allocation to Ireland has been made?

I am sending the hon. Member such figures as are available, and these will be printed in the Official Report.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food what action is being taken on a memorial from Mr. Andrew Beattie, a butcher, of Denholm, in the county of Roxburgh, and for twenty years past a dealer in cattle and sheep, complaining of the refusal of Mr. C. Ritchie, deputy live-stock commissioner at Edinburgh, to grant him a cattle dealer's licence, although Mr. Beattie sent letters from three live-stock auctioneers certifying that he is a regular dealer and extensive buyer of both fat and store sheep and cattle, and although the refusal causes hardship and loss of income?

In order to simplify as much as possible the arrangements for the distribution of live-stock, it has been found necessary to reduce to a minimum the number of dealers' licences issued, and it is not as a rule considered advisable that a person carrying on a butchering business should also operate as a cattle dealer. Inquiries are, however, being made into the case described by the hon. Baronet, and any action found to be necessary will be taken.

Is it not a fact that one of the largest dealers in England, living in Oldham, with which town the hon. Gentleman is acquainted, was both a butcher and a Catholic?

I am fairly familiar with the conditions in that town, but that incident has not come to my notice.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he has received representations urging him to set up one of the proposed potato-flour factories in Perth; and whether, in view of the favourable position of Perth both as regards adjacent potato-growing districts and as regards railway communications, he will accede to this request?

Representations to this effect have been received. I cannot at present indicate with certainty the precise localities in which these factories will be established, but the intention is to instal them in districts which produce potatoes in excess of their own requirements, for the purpose of economising in transport.

Are these factories being established under the control of the Ministry of Food?

Certainly.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food whether he has yet been able to take measures to relieve the position of small confectioners?

A scheme has been prepared which would have the effect of diverting supplies of confectionery from large concerns to those whose livelihood is solely or mainly dependent on its sale. Certain objections to this scheme have been urged by the Consumers' Council, and it is intended to consider alternative proposals before definite steps are taken to afford relief.

Will the hon. Gentleman give preference to the small British shop-owner as distinct from the alien shop-owner?

That matter will be considered by those who finally have to determine what will be done.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether he has prohibited the sale of sweets in cinemas, theatres, and such places in order to help the small dealer?

That step has not been taken. It has been found that many of the contracts for the sale of sweets in cinemas are in the hands of poor people, and not in the hands of the big traders.

To what extent are the small shopkeepers represented on the Consumers' Council?

On the Consumers' Council there are representatives who represent collectively the general interests of the consumers.

Is there one small consumer on the council?

I think there is nobody coming under that description on the council.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he has received representations from the associations of anglers in the county of Roxburgh and other parts of the Vale of Tweed as to the need of making the salmon and trout in its waters and tributaries available as human food in the present time of restrictions for those who wish to go forth with rod and line; and whether he is taking any sort of action in this matter?

I have received the representations referred to, and I have been in communication with the Fishery Board and with the Scottish Freshwater Fisheries Committee regarding them. Both of these bodies are of opinion that no material addition to the food supply would result from the course of action suggested. I see no reason to differ from their conclusion.

asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that there are about 4,000 acres of un-tenanted and non-residential lands in the Creggs district, near Roscommon, less than 200 acres of which are under cultivation and less than 40 acres of which are unfit for cultivation, all the rest having been tilled heretofore with advantage though now, it is understood, represented to the Department as unarable; whether he is aware that representations have been made to the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) by the Creggs district branch of the United Irish Tillage League on behalf of five or six hundreds of uneconomic landholders in that district on the look-out for conacre lots; whether he is aware that the Department has been requested by this branch to have those lands inspected by the Department's inspector and the Tillage Regulations enforced thereon; whether he has received copies of such requests from the honorary joint secretary of the Creggs district branch; and whether he will direct the Department, should they not have already done so, to commandeer for tillage purposes all lands referred to herein, as affected by the Department's Tillage Order, 1918, and remaining unfilled on 15th March, so that persons in need of tillage and anxious to cultivate the soil can have an opportunity of helping the Government and the Department in their cry for more food?

The Department of Agriculture have received communications from the branch of the Tillage League referred to in the question to the effect that certain occupiers of lands in the district were not complying with the Tillage Orders, and asking for inspection of the lands, with a view to letting in conacre. Inspection has been made, and the results are under consideration. In all cases in which there is reason to believe that occupiers are not complying with the Tillage Orders the Department take, and will take, action to enforce the requisite cultivation; but they have no power to take possession of land unless the occupier fails to comply with Tillage Orders.

asked the Minister of Munitions whether charges have been brought to his attention that an engineering firm in Aberdeen engaged in the manufacture of munitions were faking 6-inch shells and were in the possession of special marking tools for this purpose, a consignment of shells costing £4,000 being involved; whether Colonel Stansfield, of Woolwich Arsenal, was sent to Aberdeen by the Ministry; whether it was discovered that discarded shells were being marked as if they had been passed and approved; whether these engineering works have since been taken over by the Government after a military investigation had taken place; whether he is aware of the name of the electrical engineers in Aberdeen who produced a tool for markings similar to the inspector's mark; and will he say whether there has been or will be prosecution of any or all concerned?

The answer to the first parts of the question is in the affirmative. No definite information has been obtained as to the manufacture of a tool for reproducing an inspector's mark. The question of a prosecution of the persons concerned has been under consideration, but the Ministry are advised by the legal authorities whom they have consulted that, owing to the circumstances in which the works were taken over as a national factory, they are, unfortunately, precluded from instituting a prosecution.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether, having regard to the seriousness of the charge made against this firm, he will afford the firm an opportunity of producing the ample evidence which they have to rebut the charges made at an independent inquiry?

In view of the seriousness of these charges, will the hon. Gentleman have a full investigation made into all the facts of the case involved?

I quite agree as to the serious nature of the charges. They were, in fact, investigated at the time the arrangement was come to. As to whether any further investigation is required, I will consider.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the result of the investigation made at the time the changes were carried out was. in fact, to substantially substantiate the charges involved in the question?

Will the hon. Gentleman not admit that the investigation was made by the Minister of Munitions, and nobody else, and that the firm had no opportunity to meet these charges, which they say they have ample evidence to rebut in every detail?

The firm had full opportunity of stating their side of the case when it was investigated by the local committee, and the decision was come to. On the other point, I will consult the hon. Member (Mr. Anderson) as to whether further action should be taken

Is it not a fact that when the local question arose the investigation was made by an inspector of the Ministry of Munitions, and that they had no appeal?

I am not aware of that.

asked the Prime Minister whether the various Departments have now considered the questions connected with the position of Russians in the Army and resident in this country; whether a decision has been arrived at by the War Cabinet; whether Russians will be conscripted here or deported abroad; and whether a full statement can now be made as to whether Russia is a neutral or an Allied State?

The Russians of military age who were transferred to the Reserve in September were given the alternative of military service or repatriation to Russia, and they deliberately accepted the first alternative. I can add nothing in answer to the last part of the question to statements already made.

In approaching this problem will the Government appreciate that they are not dealing with the Russian nation as Russians, but that Russia is now under the heel of the international Jew?

I beg to move, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make further provision with regard to military service during the present War."

We have entered the most critical phase of this terrible War. There is a lull in the storm, but the hurricane is not over. Doubtless we must expect more fierce outbreaks, and ere it is finally exhausted there will be many more. The fate of the Empire, the fate of Europe, and the fate of liberty throughout the world, may depend on the success with which the very last of these attacks is resisted and countered. The Government, therefore, propose to submit to Parliament, to-day, certain recommendations, in order to assist this country and the Allies to weather the storm. They will involve, I regret, extreme sacrifices on the part of large classes of the population, and nothing would justify them but the most extreme necessity, and the fact that we are fighting for all that is essential and most sacred in the national life.

Before I come to the circumstances which have led up to our submitting these proposals to Parliament, I ought to say one word as to why Parliament was not immediately summoned. Since the battle began, the Government have been engaged almost every hour in concerting, with the Allies, the necessary measures to assist the Armies to deal with the emergency. The proposals which we intend submitting to Parliament required very close and careful examination, and I think there is this advantage in our meeting to-day, rather than immediately after the impact of the German attack, that we shall be considering these proposals under conditions which will be far removed from any suggestion of panic.

I shall now come to the circumstances which have led up to the present military position. It is very difficult at this time to present a clear, connected and reliable narrative of what happened. There has been a great battle on a front of fifty miles—the greatest battle ever fought in the history of the world. Enormous forces have been engaged. There was a considerable retirement on the part of the British forces, and, under these conditions, it is not always easy for some time to ascertain what actually happened. The House will recollect the difficulty we experienced in regard to Cambrai. It was difficult to piece together the story of that event for some time, and Cambrai was a very trivial event compared with this gigantic battle. The generals and their staffs are naturally engaged, and have to concentrate their attention upon, the operations of the enemy, and until the strain relaxes it would be very difficult to institute the necessary inquiries to find out exactly what happened, and to furnish an adequate explanation of the battle. However, there are two or three facts which stand out, and in stating them I should like to call attention to two things which I think, above all, must be avoided. The first is that nothing should be said which would give information to the enemy; nothing should be said which would give encouragement to the enemy; and nothing should be said which would give discouragement to our own troops, who are fighting so gallantly at this very hour. And the second fact is that all recrimination at this hour must be shut out. [An HON. MEMBER: "And all prejudices!"] I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there is no one here afraid of criticism, and he understands the responsibility of the present Government.

What was the position at the beginning of the battle? Notwithstanding the heavy casualties in 1917, the Army in France was considerably stronger on the 1st January, 1918, than on the 1st January, 1917. Up to the end of 1917—up to, say, about October or November—the German combatant strength in France was as two to the Allied three. Then came the military collapse of Russia, when the Germans hurried up their released divisions from the Eastern Front, and brought them to the West. They had a certain measure of Austrian support, which had been accorded then. Owing to the growth of the strength of our Armies in 1917. when this battle began, the combatant strength of the whole of the German Army on the Western Front was only approximately, though not quite, equal to the total combatant strength of the Allies. In Infantry they were slightly inferior; in Artillery they were inferior; in Cavalry they were considerably inferior; and, what is very important, they were undoubtedly inferior in aircraft.

They had unity of command.

I am coming to all that. The Germans, therefore, organised their troops so as to produce a larger number of divisions out of the slightly smaller number of Infantry and the slightly smaller number of guns. They had fewer battalions in a division—fewer men in a battalion. That is entirely a question of organisation, and it yet remains to be seen that their organisation is better than ours. It is necessary to explain that, in order that the House may realise why, with approximately the same number of men, the Germans have a larger number of divisions on that front. According to all the facts which have come to hand as to the losses of the battle, that roughly represents the relative strength of the combatants on both sides at this moment.

The Germans had, however, one or two important advantages. The first, the initial, advantage, which is always commanded by the offensive, is that they know where they mean to attack They choose the ground, they choose the location, they know the width of the attack, they know the dimensions of the attack, they know the time of the attack, and they know the method of the attack. All that invariably gives an initial advantage to an offensive. The defence has a general advantage. Owing to air observation, concealment is difficult. At the same time, in spite of all that, owing to the power of moving troops at night, which the Germans exercised to a very large extent, there is a large margin for surprise even in spite of air observation, and of this the enemy took full advantage.

I should like to say one word here as to the difficulty with which the Allied generals were confronted in this respect. Before the battle the greatest German concentration was in front of our troops. That was no proof that the full weight of the attack would fall on us. There was a very large concentration opposite the French lines; there was a very considerable concentration—I am referring now to German reserves—on the northern part of our line after the battle began. Immediately before the battle the Germans by night brought their divisions from the northern part to the point where the attack took place. They also brought several divisions from opposite the French in the same way, and brought them to our front; but it would have been equally easy for them, whilst concentrating troops opposite our front, to manœuvre them in the same way opposite the French.

I am only referring to that in order to show how exceedingly difficult it is for generals on the defensive to decide exactly where, in their judgment, the attack is coming, and where they ought to concentrate their reserves.

Were preparations made to meet it?

My hon. Friend must really allow me to speak in my own way. I propose to give a narra- tive of the events as they happened. Another remarkable prediction was that it might probably succeed in penetrating the British line to the extent of half the distance of the front attacked. They came to that conclusion from a close examination of the offensives of the War.

There was another advantage, and here I come to the point raised by my hon. Friend below the Gangway (Mr. Lynch). There was, first of all, the advantage which the Germans had from having the initiative. There was the further advantage they had—and this is undoubtedly the greatest advantage—from having a united Command opposed to a dual one. The Germans undoubtedly relied on this to a very large extent for their success. They owe much of their success in this attack to unity. It was reported to me on good authority that the Kaiser informed the ex-King Constantine, "I shall beat them, for they have no united Command," which shows that that was what they were relying in the main upon—that, although their numbers were slightly inferior, they knew the importance to be attached to the fact that there was a perfectly united Command. And that is an obvious advantage, for if the risks in one particular part of the line be great and in another part of the line great but substantially less than in the former, with one Command, there is no hesitation in the mind of a Commander-in-Chief as to which risk he will make the greatest provision against. With two separate Commands the problem is a different one. It is more difficult to adjust the balance of risk, and a general is always naturally inclined to give to himself and his army the benefit of any doubt there may be, because if anything should go wrong there he, and he alone, will beheld responsible by his own countrymen for the safety of the army.

The enemy had another incidental, but, as it turned out, a very important advantage—that of the weather. The exceptional weather favoured his designs. It was both dry and misty. The attack which succeeded was made on a part of the line where, under ordinary spring conditions, the ground would have been almost impassable. A wounded officer told a friend of mine to-day, a general, that tinder ordinary conditions no one could walk across the part which was traversed by the Germans this time of the year. But it just happened to be absolutely dry and firm, and they were enabled to walk across the ground, which no one had any right to expect at this time of year would be in that condition. Not only that, but the fact that it was warm increased the mist, and the Germans were in some parts actually within a few yards of our front line before anyone knew of their approach—it was quite impossible to observe them. This was a special disadvantage to us, inasmuch as our scheme of organisation in that particular part of the line depended largely upon cross-line fire of machine guns and artillery. They had therefore that very special advantage, of which they made the fullest use.

With regard to the battle itself, as I have already stated, it will take some time to ascertain the whole of the facts. At one time it was undoubtedly very critical. The enemy broke through between our Third and Fifth Armies, and there was a serious gap. The situation was retrieved owing to the magnificent conduct of our troops. They retired in perfectly good order, re-establishing the junction between the two armies, and frustrating the enemy's purpose. The House can hardly realise, and certainly cannot sufficiently thank—nor can the country—the troops for their superb valour and the grim tenacity with which they faced the overwhelming hordes of the enemy and clung to their positions. They retired, but were never routed, and once more the cool pluck of the British soldier that refuses to acknowledge defeat saved Europe.

What about the generals?

When I am referring to the Army, I am referring to the whole Army—generals, officers, and soldiers—I mean the whole Army, and I draw no distinction. Their conduct has been one of incredible courage, and great coolness under the most trying conditions. I do not think any distinction can be drawn between officers and men. I am referring to the British Army and that means all. I might specially refer to what one brigadier-general did—some reference has been made in the Press already to it—where at one point there was a serious gap which might have let the enemy into Calais, and in the confusion of retreat things of that kind happen on a very wide front. He gathered together signalmen, engineers, a Labour Battalion, odds and ends of machine gunners—everybody he could find—and threw them into the line and held up the German Army, and closed up that gap on the way to Amiens for about six days.

Name!

Brigadier-General Carey. I think he deserves special mention, for one of the most brilliant achievements in the history of the British Army.

What about General Butler?

If I were to name all the generals who have distinguished themselves in this battle, it would take me a very long time to deal with them. Until the whole of the circumstances which led to the retirement of the Fifth Army, and its failure to hold the line of the Somme at least till the Germans brought up their guns, and perhaps the failure adequately to destroy the bridges—until all these are explained, it would be unfair to censure the general in command of the Army—General Gough. But until those circumstances are cleared up, it would be equally unfair to the British Army to retain his services in the field.

Is he to be court-martialled?

It was necessary to recall him until the facts have bean fully ascertained, and laid before the Government by their military advisers. After the retirement of the Fifth Army, the French Reserves came up with remarkable rapidity, when their position before the battle is borne in mind. In fact, when the final decision was taken as to the real designs of the enemy, the speed with which the French Reserves were brought up is one of the most remarkable feats of organisation in this War. And between the courage of our troops and the handling of the Army, the way the Third Army held, never giving way 100 yards to the attack of the enemy—I think it is right that that should be said about the Army commanded by General Byng. Their retirement took place in order to conform to a retreat on their right flank—what between the efforts of our soldiers, and the loyal assistance given, in the true spirit of comradeship, by the French Army, the position is, for the moment, stabilised. But it is clear that the Germans, having gained an initial success, are preparing another—perhaps even a greater —attack on the Allied Armies. The result of the fighting up to the present is that the enemy has undoubtedly obtained a great initial success. There is no good in not accepting facts. It is from; this basis that we must begin to build. But he has failed so far in his main object. He has failed to capture Amiens. He has failed to separate the British and French Armies. But we should be guilty of a great, it might be a fatal, error if we were to underestimate the gravity of the prospect. The enemy has captured valuable ground, which is too near Amiens for comfort or security, and he has succeeded, for the time being, in crippling one of our great Armies

Where was the Army of Manœuvre?

No such large numbers of men have passed across the Channel in so short a period of time. As the emergency was great, it was impossible to allow those who were summoned to France the usual leave to visit their relatives. It was with the greatest regret that we found it necessary to cancel that permission. Nothing but the gravity of the position would have justified so harsh a proceeding. But the troops accepted the position in a manner which is worthy of the fortitude, courage, and patriotism that they have shown throughout. There was an understanding as to boys under nineteen years of age, that they would only be used in case of emergency. We felt that that emergency had arisen. In so far as those who were over eighteen and a-half were concerned—those who had already received four months' training—we felt it necessary that they should be sent across to France.

As to the guns and machine-guns which were lost, the numbers are grossly exaggerated by the enemy. I am assured they have also very considerably exaggerated the number of prisoners which they have taken. The Commander-in-Chief himself assured me last week that it was a gross exaggeration. I am very glad to be able to say that the Ministry of Munitions were able, not merely to replace those guns and machine guns, but that they have still a very substantial reserve. The same remark applies to ammunition. There is an ample reserve of ammunition, both in this country and in France. Our Aircraft strength is greater now than before the battle, and we all know what brilliant service our airmen have rendered in this battle. Until the whole story of the battle is told it would be almost impossible to estimate the services they have rendered in retarding the advance of the enemy, in destroying his machinery, and in making it difficult for him to bring up his guns and ammunition. We feel confident that our armies—generals and soldiers—will be quite equal to the next encounter, whenever it may come.

No political interference!

There is another matter to which I should like to refer, and it is the suggestion that our forces have been dissipated on subsidiary enterprises. Not a single division was sent from France to the East. With regard to Italy, had it not been for the fact that there were Italian, French, and British divisions there, the Austrian Army would have been free to throw the whole of its strength on the Western Front. If there were not some there now, the Austrian Army would be more powerfully represented than it is on the Western Front. With regard to Salonika, the only thing the present Government did was to reduce the forces there by two divisions.

You increased them at first.

The present Government reduced them by two divisions. In Mesopotamia there is only one white division, find in Egypt and Palestine together there are only three white divisions; the rest are either Indians or mixed with a very, very small proportion of British troops in those divisions. I am referring to Infantry divisions. I want the House really to consider what that means. There is a menace to our Eastern Empire through Persia, because through Persia you approach Afghanistan, and through Afghanistan you menace the whole of India. Had it not been for the blows inflicted upon the Turks, what would have happened? Before these attacks, I want the House to remember, there were Turkish armies were destroyed. Had we Russia. They would have been helping the Germans now on the West, exactly as they helped them in the East. But what has happened? They were attacked in Palestine and in Mesopotamia, and two Turkish armies were destroyed. Had we remained in Egypt, and defended Egypt by remaining there on the Canal, allowing the Turks to hold us with a small force whilst they were putting the whole of their force in Mesopotamia, and menacing our position in India by that means, the Turks could now have been assisting the Germans in the West, as they did in the East.

What is happening now? Instead of the Turks sending divisions to help the Germans, the Germans have sent battalions to help the Turks in Palestine After all, if you have a great Empire, you must defend it. There was an Empire which withdrew its legions from the outlying provinces of the Empire, to defend its heart against the Goth, and those legions never went back. The British Empire has not been reduced to that plight yet. We can defend ourselves successfully in France, and we can also at the same time hold our Empire against anyone who assails it in any part of the world.

May I, before I leave this topic, say how much gratitude we owe to India for the magnificent way in which she has come to the aid of the Empire in this emergency. It is not the fact that we have got three British divisions in India and Palestine and one in Mesapotamia that has enabled us to hold our own, but that we have had these splendid troops from India—many of whom volunteered since the War—and that they have been more than a match for their Turkish adversaries on many a stricken field.

I regret to have taken up so much of the time of the House on these matters, but I now come to the point put by my right hon. Friend opposite about losses. It is too early to state yet with accuracy our losses, because in the case of a battle over such a wide front, fought with such intensity for over a fortnight, with vast numbers of men engaged, the losses sustained must be considerable. The claims; of the enemy as to prisoners have been grossly exaggerated, and Sir Douglas llaig assured me that they were quite impossible from the figures at his disposal, which he showed me. The enemy's claims seem quite preposterous from the statement which he made to me. But, still, our losses are very great, and our reserves have been called upon to a considerable extent, to make up the wastage and refit the units. And if the battle continue on this scale, the drain on the resources of our reserves of man-power must cause the deepest anxiety, unless we take immediate steps to replenish it. The immediate necessity is relieved by the splendid and generous way and promptitude in which America has come to our aid. But the American troops are simply lent to receive their training, with a view to their incorporation, at the first suitable moment, in an American Army in France; and even if they remain with the British right through the battle, the time will come when we shall need large reinforcements, should this battle continue.

I want the House to consider for a moment what the plans of the enemy may be as they are now revealed. It was never certain that he would take this plunge, because he must know what it means if it fail, but he has taken it. The battle proves that the enemy has definitely decided to seek a military decision this year, whatever the consequences to himself. There is no doubt he has overwhelming reasons. There is the economic condition of his country and the critical economic condition of his Allies. He is now at the height of his power, and Russia is at its lowest, while America has not come in yet in its strength. So that this year the enemy may put forth something which approaches his full strength. But soon he will grow feebler and weaker in comparison with the Allied Forces. Everything,. therefore, points to the definite determination of Germany to put the whole of her resources into seeking a military decision this year, and this means a prolonged battle from the North Sea to the Adriatic, with Germany and Austria throwing in the whole of their strength. There are still seven or eight months during which the fighting can continue, and everything depends upon keeping our strength right to the end, whatever may be the strain upon our resources. With American aid, we can do it, but even with American help we cannot feel secure unless we are prepared ourselves to make even greater sacrifices than we have made hitherto.

What class?

The 1920 class. [An HON. MEMBER: What age—seventeen?] No, eighteen and a half.

We are calling up men of eighteen and a half—what is the difference?

These can be thrown into the battle line before this fight is over, and we must be prepared for their advent in the struggle this year. Therefore, I have to submit to Parliament the proposals for increasing, and increasing very materially, the reserves which will be available for reinforcing our Armies in the field during this prolonged battle, upon which we are only just entering. If the House will bear with me, I will now give, roughly, some of the proposals which we intend to make, in order to increase the number of men available. We have already raised for the armed forces during the first quarter of the year more than that quarter's proportion of the original number of men which was estimated as the minimum required for the present year. We are also, as the House is aware, effecting a very strict comb-out of some of the essential industries. Very large levies have been taken from the munition works. They will amount, I think, to something like 100,000 Grade 1 men. That has been done already this year. It will, of course, involve the utilisation of other labour to a very large extent in the munition works.

A call of 50,000 men has been made already on the coal industry, and these men are being rapidly recruited. I regret to say that, the military needs will necessitate the calling up of another 50,000 men from this industry. We are convinced, after entering into the matter very carefully, that these men can be spared without endangering the essential output of coal for national industries. No one is likely to forget the fine response made by the miners at the beginning of this War, or the splendid part which they have taken in hundreds of battles since then. They are loyal in meeting the present demand of 50,000 men, and I am confident that they will meet the further call upon them in the same spirit, in view of the great national emergency under which we are making it. The transport services are also being called upon to release the greatest possible number of fit men.

Further calls are to be made upon the Civil Service. I do not think that it is realised how much the Civil Service has done already. On the one hand, it has had to release a large number of men for the Army, and on the other hand it has had to meet, and is meeting, an increased strain of work. But, even at the risk of some dislocation, we must call upon it to do more, and a clean cut of young fit men must be made. It is proposed that no fit men below the age of twenty-five should be retained [Hon. Members: "Thirty- five!" Other Hon. Members: "Forty- five !"] Twenty-five. That is the clean cut. We comb out beyond that. That is what is called the "clean cut." I shall ex plain it later. It is proposed that it should be applied to other industries as well. When we are adding to the age, and when we are extending the military age, it should not be said that there are fit young men of twenty-five who are employed in the various industries of the country. This will bring the Civil Ser vice into line and on a general level, as far as the clean cut is concerned, with the munition industries.

Under the Act passed in January this year, we are issuing Orders cancelling all occupational exemptions by age blocks in specified occupations. That is the clean cut. The first of these Orders is being laid on the Table of the House to-day, and other Orders of the same power will follow. I know the House will appreciate that it is necessary not merely to have men, but to have them quickly. It is no use raising them unless they are raised in time to take part in the struggle this year, when we shall be short of drafts if the battle be a prolonged one. The Government, therefore, have shortened the length of the calling-up notice from fourteen days to seven, and have authorised the serving of the notice by whatever method is most expeditious and convenient. It may be necessary even to curtail rights of appeal on medical grounds, but for the moment it is not proposed to do so. We have had a good many frivolous appeals, which have wasted a good deal of time, and if that should go on, it will be absolutely necessary, in the interests of the security of the country, that the rights of appeal should be curtailed in this respect. There is another consideration. The strain upon the medical profession has already been great. We are very short of medical men, and we may be driven to do it by the hard necessities of the case.

Why have any medical examination at all?

What about the conscientious objectors?

I now turn to the new proposals embodied in the Bill which I beg leave to introduce to-day. Our first proposal is to raise the military age up to fifty, and in certain specified cases we ask for powers to raise it to fifty-five; but that is only where men with special qualifications are needed. For instance, it may be necessary to do it in the case of medical men, in order to secure their services. It may be necessary in certain special classes, with special training and special experience, to secure their services for the Army. When you come to the question of raising the age up to fifty, it does not mean that men between forty-two and fifty are necessarily to be taken, in order to put them into the fighting line. It may be that there are men of that age who are just as fit as men of twenty-five, but I am sorry to say they are the exception, and we cannot therefore depend upon men of that age altogether to make the finest fighting material. There are a good many services in the Army which do not require the very best physical material, and it would be very helpful to get men of this age to fill those services, in order to release younger and fitter men to enter into the fighting line. There is also to be borne in mind the fact that we have to prepare for Home defence, so as to be able to release men from this country, and to fill their places by men between forty-two and fifty, who, I have no doubt, will fight very tenaciously for their own homes should there be such a thing as an invasion. The proportion of men from forty-two to fifty whom we expect will be available is not very high—something like 7 per cent., that is, only 7 per cent. of the men from forty-two to fifty will be available for the Army. I hope I have made that clear.

Can you give us the number?

I cannot do that.

You have already given us the number up to forty-five.

I have given the numbers of men raised up to the present time, but I do hope the House will not press me further. After all, we must not assist the intelligence branch of the enemy.

Before the right hon. Gentleman passes—

I only wanted to reassure the people between forty-two and fifty that all the men of that age are not going to be called to the fighting line. I gave a sort of rough estimate, that it would be only a small percentage of the men of that age who would be likely to come under the provisions of the Bill.

Now I come to the question of exemptions from military service. It is known to everyone who has experience of the difficulty of obtaining man-power that one of the many obstacles to success is the number of exemptions which have been granted, often for reasons which at the time appeared sufficient, but which should no longer be effective at the present time of crisis. The Minister of National Service already has power, under an Act passed this year, to cancel certificates granted on occupational grounds. It is proposed to make free use of this power by means of a Proclamation, and there will toe several of those exemptions which will be cancelled under a power which has already been conferred on the Minister of National Service. But when the existing powers have been used to the utmost, it may be necessary to go further, and to deal with exemptions granted on other grounds. Accordingly, it is provided by the Bill that His Majesty may, by Proclamation declaring that a national emergency has arisen, direct that any certificate of exemption from military service of a nature specified in that Proclamation shall cease to have effect, and that while any such Proclamation remain in force no exemption shall be granted which would fall within the terms of the Proclamation. It will be obvious that under this provision it will be open to the Government to cancel exemptions in respect of men under an age to be specified in the Proclamation. This is another means of arriving at the "clean cut," so as to secure men of military age, fit young men, for the purpose of the Army, under an age to be specified in the Proclamation. Any existing exemptions granted to such men will be superseded, and the men will be taken or left on medical grounds only. [An Hon. Member: "Tear up every pledge"'] The hon. Gentleman takes a different view of the War from the one which I take. We have to choose between either submitting to defeat, or taking the necessary measures to avert it. We will never submit to defeat.

Why not resign?

I need hardly say that this provision will not be used to set aside pledges given to discharged soldiers; they will be carefully observed. It is proposed, further, to make a change in the constitution of the Appeal Tribunals in dealing with exemptions, and to speed up their procedure. I want again to emphasise the fact that time is of the very essence of this emergency. The existing tribunals have done very admirable work, but they will be the first to admit that their work has been hampered by a number of circumstances—the number of tribunals themselves, the facilities for unnecessary and repeated applications, opportunities for delay under recurring rights of appeal, and so on. In these circumstances, it is proposed to take power by Order in Council both to reconstitute the tribunals and to regulate the areas in which they shall work; to standardise the grounds of exemption, and limit the rights of appeal. It is impossible now to specify the precise nature of the changes to be made, but I may indicate the nature of the changes we have in mind. Firstly, the areas within which tribunals may act will be reconsidered, and, in some cases, adjusted; secondly, local tribunals, like the Appeal Tribunals, will become nominated bodies, and will be reduced in size. This does not mean that use will not be made of the assistance of the existing members of tribunals who have rendered admirable service and will be willing, I hope, to continue to work under the new conditions. Further, the continuity of these tribunals staff, and officers will, of course, be preserved. We propose to make an attempt to standardise more accurately than is now done the grounds of exemption, and to prevent conflicting decisions on these matters—different decisions in different localities—which is one of the great grievances felt in the country. Changes will also be made in the procedure, but upon these I do not intend to dwell at the moment. There is also, as I am reminded, the question of the extension of the Act to ministers of religion for non-combatant purposes.

Why not also to the conscientious objectors?

There is a shortage of fit men very largely for the service of the sick and wounded, and I am perfectly certain that ministers of religion would not care to feel that they were exempted from the obligation to serve, and especially to render service of this kind on the battle field. We have consulted several authorities on the subject, and some of them with whom it has been my privilege to communicate seem to feel that ministers of religion would be the last men in the world to claim exemption from an obligation of that kind. It is obvious if this change be made, care must be taken not to put an end to religious ministration in the country, and it has been arranged for this purpose that the Minister of National Service shall endeavour to act in concert with the authorities of the defferent denominations, so that in every denomination an adequate staff shall be reserved.

Why not also deal with the conscientious objector?

I now come to the question of Ireland. When an emergency has arisen, which makes it necessary to put men of fifty and boys of eighteen into the Army in the fight for liberty and independence—

And small nationalities.

And especially, as my hon. Friend reminds me, to fight for the liberty and independence of small nationalities—

What about Ireland?

—I am perfectly certain it is not possible to justify any longer the exclusion of Ireland.

What about Wales?

You will not get any men from Ireland by compulsion—not a man.

As to Wales, may I just say that before the Act came into operation, Wales showed the highest recruiting record in the United Kingdom.

No.

What is the position? I hope hon. Members will allow me to state my case. No Home Rule proposal ever submitted to this House proposed to deprive the Imperial Parliament of the power of dealing with all questions relating to the Army and Navy. These have invariably, in every Home Rule proposal I have ever seen, been purely questions for the Imperial Parliament, so that it is no more a derogation of any national right ever claimed in this House than was the Defence of the Realm Act, which was also extended to Ireland. The character of the quarrel in which we are engaged is just as much Irish as it is English. May I say it is more so—it is more Irish and Scottish and Welsh than it is even English Ireland, through its representatives at the beginning of this War, assented to it—

Because it was a war for small nationalities.

Why would not you fight for small nationalities?

Ireland, through its representatives, assented to the War, voted for the War, supported the War. The Irish representatives, and Ireland, through its representatives, without a dissentient voice, committed the Empire to this War. They are fully as responsible for it as any part of the United Kingdom. May I just read the declaration issued by the Irish party on the 17th December, 1914, shortly after the War began?

We have had a revolution since then.

This is the declaration of the Irish party:

"A test to search men's souls has arisen. The Empire is engaged in the most serious War in history. It is a just War. provoked by the intolerable military despotism of Germany. It is a war for the defence of the sacred rights and liberties of small nations, and the respect and enlargement of the great principle of nationality. Involved in it is the fate of France, our kindred country, the chief nation of that powerful Celtic race to which we belong; the fate of Belgium, to whom we are attached by the same great ties of race, and by the common desire of a small nation to assert its freedom; and the fate of Poland, whose sufferings and whoso struggles bear so marked a resemblance to our own. It is a war for high ideals of human government and international relations, and Ireland would be false to her history, and to every consideration of honour, good faith and self-interest, did she not willingly bear her share in its burdens and its sacrifices." [Interruption.]

"Willingly!"

May I also refer to a speech delivered by the late Mr. Redmond at the Mansion House, Dublin, when my right hon. Friend was addressing a recruiting meeting there:

"The heart of Ireland has been profoundly moved by the spectacle of the heroism and the sufferings of Belgium. The other day, in London, I met the Cardinal Archbishop of Mclines-Cardinal Mercier—and I took the liberty of promising him then that Ireland would bring her arms and her strength to avenge Louvain and to uphold the integrity and independence of Belgium—aye, yes, Belgium, Poland, Alsace-Lorraine, France—those are words to conjure with by the Irish people. There never was—this is, I believe the universal sentiment of Ireland—there never was a war in which higher and nobler issues were at stake.….I have heard some people speaking of this War as an English and not an Irish war. That is absolutely and definitely untrue. Ireland's highest national interests are at stake."

The fact that America is in this War is the best proof of that. There are more Irishmen in the United States of America than there are in Ireland. They are all subject to Conscription.

Not by England.

Irishmen in Great Britain and in Canada are subject to Conscription.