asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on what date Mr. Lockhart returned from Russia; whether he has yet presented his Report; if so, can its main purport be stated; if he has not yet reported, what reason can be given for this delay; and whether he will be asked to expedite it?

Mr. Lockhart reached this country on 19th October, and has submitted a Report, which is now under consideration by His Majesty's Government. The answer to the third part of the question is in the negative, and the rest does not arise.

Is it proposed to issue through the Press Bureau or otherwise any of the contents or results of Mr. Lockhart's Report?

So far I have not come to any decision on that point. It is possible I may publish something.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether diplomatic relations between Russia and Germany have been broken off and the Russian Minister has left Berlin; whether the reason is the alleged attempt of the Russians to stir up propaganda against German autocratic rule; and, if so, whether the Government will withdraw their assertions that the Russians are paid by secret allies of Germany?

I have seen the report to which the hon. Member refers in the first two parts of his question. I do not know what assertions he refers to in the last part. There has never been any suggestion that the Russians as a whole were the paid allies of Germany. But there are very strong grounds for believing that many highly placed personages in the Soviet Government were the conscious agents of the German military autocracy.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the Russian Government has made an approach through neutral Powers for a cessation of hostilities; and whether any statement can be made as to the conditions tinder which our hostile operations in Russia may be concluded?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. The Maximalist authorities in Russia have, I understand, inquired whether a neutral Government would promote negotiations between them and the Allied Powers. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Versailles Council or the British Government has considered or decided on a policy towards Great Russia; whether military or political action is to be brought to bear in order to remove or to obtain terms from the present Soviet Government of Russia; and whether the military expeditions in Russia will be pressed when and although armistices with all the enemy States of Germany, the Dual Monarchy, Bulgaria, and Turkey have been concluded?

I can make no statement.

asked the Home Secretary whether the official who was so ill that the inquiry into the case of Mr. D. Chrysin was delayed is well enough now to allow the inquiry to be concluded; if so, with what result; and whether an apology will now be offered to Mr. Chrysin?

The officer who was responsible for a mistake in his report which led to the statement that Mr. Chrysin had left this country is still ill. I am, however, informed that Mr. Chrysin showed by certain actions some months ago that he was then closely identified with Mr. Litvinoff, and that though subsequently, as he now says, he severed that connection, he did not bring this change in his position to the notice of the authorities, and when Mr. Litvinoff was interned for a time as a hostage he was interned also. It was therefore proposed that when Mr. Litvinoff was repatriated Mr. Chrysin should go with him. Eventually he was allowed to stay here. It is not a case in which, in my opinion, any apology is due.

Is not the whole point that the Home Office said he had been deported when he had not been deported? Is it not a gross injustice to declare to the public that a man was deported when he was never deported at all?

A great deal of this trouble arises from the man himself.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the ratification of the agreement negotiated by Lord Newton and General Sir Herbert Belfield is unconditional, or whether any and, if so, what conditions are attached?

In view of the armistice, this question does not arise.

Is it a fact that all offices relating to our prisoners, held by Lord Newton and General Belfield before the armistice, automatically lapse with the armistice?

No, Sir.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will reconsider the question of refusing chevrons to unwounded officers and men for the year or years of their captivity; and whether he will recommend the granting of such chevrons on conditions similar to the granting of the Mons star to unwounded officers and men?

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any distinction is made between wounded and unwounded prisoners of war with regard to the wearing of the 1914 star and ribbon and service chevrons; and whether he will state the reasons for such distinction, if any?

I am informed by the military authorities that the Army Council have decided that both wounded and unwounded prisoners of war shall count time spent in captivity towards the award of additional chevrons. No distinction is made in the award of the 1914 star.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the alleged harsh treatment by the War Office of British soldiers who have returned after escaping from Germany; and, if so, can he make any statement in regard to the matter generally, and also in regard to the specific instances mentioned?

In connection with this question my hon. Friend has brought to my notice certain statements which appeared recently in the Press. The first was that an escaped officer prisoner of war is ruined in his military career. This is not true. The conditions of the promotion of officer prisoners of war are laid down in Article 47 of the Royal Warrant for Pay, Promotion, etc. The Army Council have decided that one step in rank only shall be given while an officer remains in captivity, and that, after release, promotion should be given, as far as practicable, by promotion to the substantive rank—such promotion being antedated—for which officers would have been selected had they not been taken prisoners.

The next point was that officer prisoners of war whilst in captivity are charged with the cost of their food. My right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary is answering later which deals with the matter. I would add to his reply that, as far as I am aware, the same arrangements are made by the Dominion Governments. I cannot say what the position is as regards all our Allies, but I understand that, in the case of the French Army, officers do not receive full pay while they are prisoners of war. A further statement dealt with the treatment of an escaped prisoner of war on arrival in this country. I have no knowledge of the case referred to, but I know that every assistance and kindness is extended to escaped prisoners of war. They are received by civil and military officials on arrival at a British port, and sent to London where they report to the War Office. They are detained in London only long enough to complete their interviews with officials at the War Office and with the Government Committees which inquire into the treatment received whilst in enemy hands. They are then given three months' leave, and issued with free travelling warrants to their own homes. As to the other points, if my hon. Friend means the same officer as I mean, it is not true that he was sent for by the War Office, nor is it true that he was placed under arrest, nor called a fool with an expletive by a high War Office official.

Will it be possible now for the War Office to recognise the escaped officer and men prisoners who behaved with such extraordinary gallantry, by the granting of honours and awards?

I think my answer shows that we are very fully alive to this question. With regard to the granting of honours, prisoners of war are entitled to wear the Mons ribbon. Certainly repatriated prisoners are entitled to wear it, and both wounded and unwounded officers and men are entitled to wear the chevrons.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider whether escaped officers and men who ran such tremendous risks should not be eligible for the Distinguished Service Order, the Military Cross, and the Military Medal?

No, Sir; I cannot add anything to the answer that I have given.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to the case in which a party of German prisoners were found stealing potatoes from fields at night; whether these prisoners were supposed to be under military guard; and what steps have been taken to deal with those responsible and to prevent the recurrence of such an incident?

I am informed by the military authorities that the report asked for on this case has not yet been supplied.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether these guards are provided with ammunition or not?

I imagine that they are provided with ammunition.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether a farmer's son was recently fined for giving a shot-gun to German prisoners; what form of supervision was being exercised over these prisoners at the time; and what action has been taken in the matter?

In view of the particulars supplied by my hon. and gallant Friend, the War Office have called for an early and detailed report on this case, but it has not yet come to hand.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether a party of German prisoners driven in a motor lorry through Edgware on the 30th October gave offence to local inhabitants by singing, whistling, and shouting to passers-by; what form of control or discipline was being exercised over this party at the time; and what steps have been taken in this matter?

The military authorities inform me that they have been unable to obtain any confirmation of any such incident as is suggested in the question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has ascertained if escaped and exchanged prisoners of war are forbidden to give information regarding their treatment as prisoners in Germany; and, if so, by whom and on whose instructions such orders are given?

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the statement which I made on Wednesday last.

I beg to give the right hon. Gentleman notice that I shall raise this question in the Debate on the Vote of Credit.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether officer prisoners of war have had deductions made from their pay for food supplied to them in Germany; whether this food was practically non-existent, necessitating large expenditure by their relatives on parcels; and whether any steps will be taken to refund these deductions?

Deductions are not made from the pay of officers for food while prisoners. They receive a regulated amount of pay from the captor Government and purchase with it such food as they may require, and can obtain, the rest of their pay and allowances being credited to them at home.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether officers commanding units who have been prisoners of war are allowed to bring to notice the names of officers, non-commissioned officers, and men under their command who especially distinguished themselves in the field but on such occasion were taken prisoner; and, if they are not so allowed, whether he will state the reasons?

I am informed by the military authorities that it is permissible for an officer commanding a unit who has been a prisoner of war to bring to the notice of his superior commander in the field such cases of conspicuous bravery, provided the responsible commander is satisfied that the individual has been captured through no fault of his own.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the reports of disorder in the Armenian vilayets; and whether the Allies will take steps to place without delay detachments of Allied troops at the chief centres of population, in accordance with the provisions of the armistice, in order to prevent the occurrence of massacres on a large scale requiring the employment of large forces?

The hon. Member may rest assured that the Allied Governments and their executive officers on the spot will exercise the utmost vigilance in regard to Armenia, and that all possible steps will be taken to protect the population.

May we assume that the Allies are in a position to send relief wherever it is necessary to prevent starvation?

I can hardly give any promise of that kind. If my hon. Friend will reflect upon the gigantic area of the country in Europe and in the East where food conditions are unsatisfactory, he will see that I can give no pledge that food will be allocated to any particular district.

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) whether, as His Majesty's Government has recognised the political independence of Poland as far back as May, 1917, he can inform the House if it is by arrangement with the National Polish Committee that Poles continue to be conscripted in this country and forced into labour battalions; whether such action is authorised by any convention or other act of the State; if not, by what authority has his Department informed the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice that these persons are still to be regarded as Russian subjects?

(2) Whether he is aware that resentment has been aroused by the persistence of the Ministry of National Service and of the military authorities in treating the subjects of Poland in this country as the subjects of Russia for the purpose of Conscription; whether, with a view to encourage feelings of amity and international good will, these men will be given the right to serve in combatant units, and will not be compelled to serve in labour battalions?

(3) The Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Polish subjects, the political independence of whose country was officially recognised as far back as May, 1917, are still being recruited compulsorily under the guise of Russian subjects and, instead of being permitted to join ordinary Infantry units, are being forced into labour battalions in the same manner as though they were incapable of any intelligent military service and were mere serfs; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

(4) The Minister of National Service whether he proposes to continue to press for compulsory enlistment of subjects of Poland, the independence of whose country has been officially recognised by His Majesty's Government as far back as May, 1917; whether he claims to conscript these men under any convention; if so, what; if he will state what the military value of these men is either as members of labour units or otherwise; and whether he will explain why money is spent in conscripting them and in endeavouring to insist upon the Courts regarding them as Russian subjects in view of the recognition of Poland's independence?

I propose to answer together the four questions which the hon. Member has on the Paper with regard to Russian subjects of Polish origin, and would refer him to the replies returned to the hon. Member for North Somerset on 24th June last, and to the hon. Member for Perth on 29th July. I think that the military authorities must decide the corps in which such persons can be most usefully employed.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that Farrier John Johnson, No. 8282, Army Service Corps, aged forty-nine, Category B2, who was invalided home from Salonika as unfit for further service, after severe attacks of malaria and rheumatism, is now serving in France and sleeping under canvas; and whether, in view of his age and low medical category, he would make arrangements to send this man home, where employment is waiting for him?

I am making inquiry in this case and will write to my Noble Friend as soon as I am in a position to do so.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, under the present system of granting honorary rank to officers on retirement, an officer who is granted temporary or acting rank for the command of troops, and who fails to hold such rank for six months owing to wounds sickness, or the arrival of a senior officer, will not receive such honorary rank on retirement, whereas officers granted rank for non-fighting services run no such risks of losing it; and whether he will state the grounds upon which this discrimination is shown against the fighting officer?

There is no discrimination in this matter. No officer loses his temporary or acting rank when sick or wounded, but any officer relinquishes his acting rank when the permanent holder of the appointment returns.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the order under which officers who fall sick or are wounded retain their acting rank is a comparatively recent issue, and that many hundreds did lose their rank at the beginning of the War owing to being wounded or falling sick? Is there not therefore a distinct favour shown to those who did not undergo those hardships of war?

I do not think so. I think that a Committee investigated the matter.

What Committee?

I do not know. I will make inquiries and inform my hon. and gallant friend.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if men who are classed B2 can only obtain six days' leave in every nine months while B1 men are granted the same privilege every six months; and, if so, whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

I presume my hon. and gallant Friend refers to the issue of warrants for free railway journeys. Troops who are liable for service abroad may be allowed a free railway journey to proceed on leave every six months while those who who are not available for service overseas may be granted the same concession once every nine months. In addition to these free journeys, all soldiers serving in the United Kingdom may be granted not more than six return journeys or twelve single journeys a year at one-half the old rates.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if, on the declaration of peace, he will immediately release from military service all men who, prior to enlistment, were engaged in single-men businesses and also key men who are necessary for the re-establishment of ordinary business pursuits?

The scheme of demobilisation provides that special consideration shall be given to the claims for early release of those men who, prior to the war, were engaged in single-men businesses, or are key men who are necessary for the re-establishment of important trades or industries.

Would that apply to ploughman and skilled men generally in agriculture?

I will look into that question. I am not quite sure of my facts, but I will put forward the representation.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War why the discharge from the Army is being delayed of Private W. W. Lee, No. 339549, Army Service Corps, Mechanical Transport, who was invalided from France, and, after being in hospital at Halifax, Norwood, and Croydon, has again been admitted to hospital in this country; and whether this man is now totally unfit for military service?

I am afraid my hon. Friend is misinformed. Private Lee is fit for military service in category B2, and I regret therefore that his discharge on medical grounds cannot be sanctioned.

Is the right hon Gentleman aware that this man is again in hospital now?

All I know is that he is fit for military service in category B2.

asked the Home Secretary if he will place upon the Table of the House the recent correspondence he has had on the question of the conscientious objectors now imprisoned?

The answer is in the negative.

Can copies of this correspondence be obtained, and has the right hon. Gentleman any objection to placing them in the Library?

It is a correspondence we do not think ought to be placed on the Table of the House. If the hon. Member wants it, he will find copies in the Press.

asked the Home Secretary if he will say how many conscientious objectors are now imprisoned and how many are under medical treatment?

There are 1,382 such prisoners at present in custody in the prisons in England and Wales. To ascertain how many of these are under medical treatment would require reference to every prison.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if his Department will, after a reasonable time has passed and peace been declared, consider some scheme whereby those who have sons, husbands, or brothers buried upon the battlefields of France may have free passes to visit the graves at the nation's expense?

This proposal shall be very carefully considered.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that there is anxiety among the troops serving abroad as to the plans of the Government for demobilisation of the forces; and if the Government will circulate the outlines of their plans for demobilisation among the troops before the cessation of hostilities?

I am fully aware of the importance of the diffusion amongst the troops serving abroad of information as to the Government plans for the demobilisation of the forces. Arrangements have been made by which full information concerning the method of demobilisation will be given to the troops when the situation is suitable. Lectures are already being given at the front dealing with the outlines of the procedure to be adopted.

asked the Under-Secretary for War if he can now state what decision has been arrived at by the Army Council regarding the promotion of officers of the General Reserve of the rank of lieutenant-colonel who have hitherto been refused promotion in spite of the provisions of the Royal Warrant and the Army Council Instructions under which they are eligible for it?

I stated the decision in this matter in reply to a question by my hon. and gallant Friend on the 22nd October. The regulations governing the selection of lieutenant-colonels for promotion to full colonel are not applicable to officers on the reserve of officers, but such officers are eligible for brevet promotion to colonel.

Where is it stated that these lieutenant-colonels are not eligible for promotion to colonel?

I cannot recollect at present, but I will find out and inform my hon. and gallant Friend.

I will put down another question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if it is possible to release early a large number of miners, in view of the shortage of coal?

This question is constantly receiving attention, and coal-miners are released from the Army from time to time in accordance with the decisions of the War Cabinet. In view of the present situation, as many additional miners as possible who are serving at home will be released, and I understand some are being released from France.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that the majority of the male population between the ages of eighteen and fifty are serving in the forces, he will amend, for the period of the War, King's Regulation No. 451, which the Government has announced is to be rigorously enforced and which will prevent any soldier attending any political meeting if in

It has been decided in the event of a General Election taking place that officers, non-commissioned officers, or privates will in no case be allowed to appear in uniform as candidates, agents, members of election committees or canvassers. Officers and soldiers home on leave or stationed at home when off duty will, however, be allowed to attend meetings in uniform to learn the views of candidates.

Will it be a breach of the Regulations if a soldier in uniform does any work for a candidate?

Yes, certainly, in uniform.

Will a soldier in uniform be permitted to ask a question or to make a speech?

I should certainly think that the making of a speech was within Regulation 451; but as to asking questions, in my judgment he would be quite justified in doing so.

Who is going to decide where a question ends and a speech begins?

If application is made, will permission be given to wear private clothes?

I think so, certainly.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War the number of civilians employed under the Canteen Board in Ireland who have never served in the armed forces of the Crown, and how many of these are of military age; whether there have been a number of applications from ex-Service men for these appointments; and whether men of military age who have never served will be replaced forthwith wherever ex-Service men are available and qualified?

The total number of men employed by the Navy and Army Canteen Board in Ireland who are between the ages of eighteen and fifty-one is 919. This number includes ex-Service men and unfit. Owing to the fact that there is no compulsory medical examination in Ireland, it is impossible to state what proportion would have been fit for military service. Arrangements have been made whereby ex-Service men who are available and qualified are given employment in preference to any others.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he can give any reason why the War Office refuse commissions to women doctors; and if he will take action in the matter?

As regards the first part of the question, I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which I gave on Wednesday last to my hon. Friend the Member for London University. I am informed that, even if the Government agreed to the proposal, there is no possibility of the necessary legislation being introduced this Session.

asked (1) the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has any official information showing that the Young Men's Christian Association huts in France are being used as propaganda centres for certain political views; and whether he will make full inquiry into this matter, so that huts provided by national generosity may not be used in promoting, directly or indirectly, any political cause; (2) the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in the Young Men's Christian Association huts in France, trading is carried on at a profit; whether there is independent auditing of the funds of this society; and, if so, who is the independent auditor?

I have no official information which would enable me to answer No. 33, but I will make inquiries if my hon. and gallant Friend will furnish any information he possesses. The other question does not concern my Department, and I am not in a position to answer it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell me what Department is responsible for looking into the question whether the Young Men's Christian Assosiation is trading in France; and is it not a fact that they are trading under a charter from the War Office?

I am afraid this is purely a financial question. I cannot answer straight off. I will make inquiries.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the men now coming home on leave from Salonika travel from Taranto to Cherbourg in box trucks, thirty per truck; whether the journey takes eight days and the men get no hot meal on the journey; and whether men who have served over three years without leave get only three weeks' leave?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of the accommodation provided. Unfortunately, it is the best which we can provide. The wagons are covered in and are heated during the winter. The journey takes eight days, including the various halts, which vary from twelve to twenty-four hours. Hot meals are served to the troops at the halts. The period of leave is limited to twenty-one days to enable as many as possible to obtain leave.

Are there no rest halts in Italy, or are they only in France?

I am not quite sure about that. I know there are rest halts along certain parts of the line, but whether or not there are any in Italy I cannot say. I will inquire.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War how many patients at the Prince of Wales's Hospital, Great Central Hotel, Marylebone, have died from influenza during the recent outbreak; and whether any attempt has been made to isolate the cases?

I am having further inquiries made, and will communicate with my hon. and gallant Friend as soon as possible.

Are not some of these deaths due to the paucity of food, which has become quite proverbial?

I cannot say that, but I do assure my hon. and gallant Friend that I got a very full report from the investigation officer, and I should like to show both my hon. and gallant Friends that report.

Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire?

Yes, I will, certainly.

Will the right hon. Gentleman suggest to the heads of the Medical Department of the War Office the advisability of considering a general inquiry into the arrangements for sending new patients to hospitals where this influenza is rife, and also the advisability of taking steps to prevent men being sent there when it would risk their getting influenza?

I do not think my hon. and gallant Friend's supplementary question arises out of the original question, but I will certainly ask the medical authorities of the War Office to look into the matter.

In view of the repeated doubts in regard to this hospital, would it not be wise to get rid of the German-Swiss manager there?

I do not think that point arises out of the question. I have written my hon. and gallant Friend on the question.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that there has been a serious epidemic of influenza at the cadet depot, at Hampstead, and that the friends of boys who have died have made serious complaints of the breakdown of medical requirements, to which they attribute the deaths of the boys, and will he at once institute inquiries into these statements and say under what conditions cadets are now being housed, and medically treated?

I only got notice of this Private Notice question this afternoon and I have no information as to the facts, but I will make inquiry the moment I return to the War Office and communicate the result to my hon. Friend.

I beg to give notice that I will raise this matter on the Estimate.

Will the right hon. Gentleman make representations to the National Service Department and get as many coffin-makers as can be got back as soon as possible in consequence of the deaths from the influenza epidemic, as there are hundreds of bodies in this country uncoffined?

My hon. and gallant Friend came to see me about this matter at the War Office and I think that he will find that we have endeavoured to assist his branch, and I am quite sure that any representations made from any other branch will receive consideration.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Thomas Lee, late private No. 78614, Middlesex Regiment, has been refused the bounty usually granted to men retained in the Army beyond their period of service, on the ground that the time during which he was a prisoner of war could not be counted as service in the British Army; whether he was retained in the Army until his discharge in May, 1918, after his period of service had expired; and whether he will take steps to remedy this case of hardship?

Inquiry is being made, and I will acquaint my hon. Friend of the result as soon as possible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he will consider the advisability of so extending Army Council Instruction 1,187 of 1918 as to include provision, if desired, for dental treatment prior to discharge of all soldiers returning from abroad whose teeth have deteriorated during their period of active service, and also to provide for the dental treatment, if desired, of all returned prisoners of war whose teeth have deteriorated during captivity?

This suggestion is not free from difficulty, but I will consider the question.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether under the existing Royal Warrant many Regular officers who have held lieutenant-colonel's and brigadier-general's commands in the field will have to retire on annual retired pay varying from £80 after fifteen years' service to £300 after twenty-eight years; and whether, in view of the altered conditions since 1914, the whole question of retired pay will be reconsidered?

As regards the officers who commanded a brigade, I would refer to my reply of the 21st October to the hon. and gallant Member for Christchurch promising consideration. I do not think that retirement on £80 after fifteen years' service is likely to overtake any Regular officer who has held a lieutenant-colonel's command in the field.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office the reasons why only one railway voucher is allowed when a father and mother of a wounded son or relative wish to travel to a military hospital in the various parts of the country; and whether he will take action in the matter?

I am not quite sure what my hon. Friend has in mind, as under present arrangements the voucher enables a father and mother to travel at reduced fares in this country in the circumstances narrated in the question. Perhaps my hon. Friend will give me the particulars of the case in point.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the childless wife of a soldier receiving family allowance can claim the supplemental allowance of 6s. 6d. if the conditions laid down in the new regulation are fulfilled?

The answer is in the affirmative.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Government intends to declare an amnesty for political prisoners?

asked the Prime Minister whether before the General Election the Government will order an amnesty of those prisoners who are at present in prison for offences under the Defence of the Realm and Military Service Acts on charges involving no moral turpitude and many without trial; and especially whether the Irish political prisoners in English gaols will be allowed freedom and facilities in cases where they are Parliamentary agents or candidates?

I am unable to make any statement on this subject at present.

Can we be assured that the case of the Irish prisoners who are candidates for Parliament is under consideration, or does the Government intend to put all political opponents into prison in order to secure a walk over?

Oh, no! To put some of them in prison would increase their chances. All I can say is that the subject is being considered.

Where will the line be drawn?

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he will give a decision on this matter; will it be when he makes an announcement about the General Election?

I cannot make any promise about it.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the Regulation 40D is regarded as offensive by the female sex, is unjust between male and female and between female and female, and is moreover futile as a health measure, the Government will take steps to withdraw the Regulation?

My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. I cannot accept the hon. Member's statements, but a Committee is now inquiring into the working of the Regulation.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman, in common justice, suspend the operation of this Regulation until the Committee reports, or until the House of Commons has had an opportunity of discussing the matter?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this question will militate very largely against the success of the Prime Minister at the next election, unless he removes it?

As this Committee has been sitting for several weeks, can the right hon. Gentleman say when it will report?

I cannot say, but I will see if we can expedite the Report.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my question: Will he suspend the operation of this Regulation pending the Report of the Committee, or an opportunity being afforded the House of giving a decision on the matter?

No; I cannot promise what nay hon. Friend asks.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the disappointment caused to the country at the non-inclusion of a representative of our Overseas Dominions at the recent Versailles Conference; and will this omission be rectified at any similar Conference which it may be necessary to summon?

asked the Prime Minister if the self-governing Dominions overseas were represented at and participated in the recent discussions in Paris with regard to an armistice; if so, who respectively represented those Dominions; and, in any event, will these Dominions be fully consulted in regard to the terms of peace and enabled to be represented at the Peace Conference, and to participate in the discussions previous to the signing of the Peace, or to the making of any other arrangements for securing the preservation of the peace of the world in the future?

asked the Prime Minister whether steps were taken to ascertain the views of the Dominion Governments principally concerned before the recent Conference at Versailles at which the terms were agreed upon which the Allies were prepared to grant an armistice; and, if not, whether at any future important conferences arrangements will be made for the opinion of the Dominions to be represented, in view of the efforts and sacrifices made by them in the present War?

I would refer my hon. Friends to the statement which appeared in the Press on Saturday, in which the position is fully explained.

Is it not a fact that the statement which appeared in the Press on Saturday made no reference to the representation of the Dominions at the Paris Conference; and will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Dominions were directly represented at that Conference, when the question of the fourteen points of President Wilson was under consideration?

No; they were not. It must be obvious to my hon. Friend that the Dominions, as a whole, could not possibly be there. A definite promise was given by this Government that they would have their full share in the Peace negotiations. The Armistice terms is quite a different subject.

Why was not Mr. Hughes, who was in this country, not invited?

I really do not think one can go into details. I do not think it would be wise for me to add anything.

Are not the Peace negotiations perfectly distinct from the question which was under consideration at the Conference, that being how far the Conference was able to assent to the terms laid down by President Wilson—the fourteen points?

In my view there is no real connection between the Peace Conference and the Armistice terms, because with the exception of one clause everything that the Allies and ourselves and the Dominions have ever asked can be claimed under these conditions.

asked the Prime Minister when the promised statement of Government policy with regard to the restoration of trade union conditions will be made; whether an opportunity will be given to the House to discuss the statement; and, if so, when?

I cannot add anything to the answer which I gave to the hon. Member for York on the 7th of November.

Will the right hon. Gentleman endeavour to give a reply on the question before the House rises?

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the delay of the Government in dealing with the matter is arousing an immense amount of suspicion in the country?

I hope not. I think I have already given a definite reply, which is that the Government intends to introduce a Bill but has no hope of doing so this Session.

asked the Prime Minister what obligations the oath of allegiance imposes on Civil servants; if he is aware that various trade union bodies in Ireland have passed resolutions against the taking of it under compulsion; and if he will have the order withdrawn or made optional for Civil servants to take?

The obligation of the oath of allegiance in this case is precisely the same as in the case of a Member of Parliament.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in considering the League of Nations as one of President Wilson's fourteen points, any definition of the term "nation" has been reached; if so, what is that definition; and whether it is to be taken that the Yugo-Slavs are a nation and the Irish and Scottish peoples are not a nation?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The latter parts do not, therefore, arise.

asked the Prime Minister whether the propaganda in enemy countries directed by Lord Northcliffe includes propaganda in Russia; and whether propaganda in those enemy countries with which armistices have been concluded is being restricted, modified, or discontinued?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part, this propaganda will be discontinued.

asked the Prime Minister if he can now make his promised statement on the numbers of commercial treaties which have been denounced with the object of getting rid of the Most-Favoured-Nation Clause; and what provision is to take the place of this Clause?

A statement on this subject will be made before the House rises, but I cannot yet name the exact day.

asked the Prime Minister whether the Committee appointed to consider means of increasing the gold production of the Empire has reported; and if the Government will be in a position before the Dissolution of Parliament to announce as a result of that Report any measures which it may contemplate taking in conjunction with our Oversea Dominions?

The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, but I understand that the Committee hope to be in a position to report at an early date.

asked the Prime Minister if he has received a communication from the insurance agents asking that their companies may be empowered to grant them a war bonus; if so, what is the position in relation thereto, seeing that this is already being done by some companies; whether he is aware of the unrest among the thousands of these men because they are being told that the large companies have not the power under their charters to grant bonuses; and, if so, whether he will take such steps as will enable the companies to put their men on a war bonus basis as other workers?

asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that a Committee was appointed by the Ministry of Labour to inquire into the request for a war bonus by the superintendents and agents of the Prudential Assurance Company, and that the Report of the Committee has not yet been issued, but a statement has been made that the company cannot afford to pay a war bonus through the effects of the War; is he aware of the dissatisfaction which has been caused amongst the staff who have to meet the increase in the cost of living out of pre-war incomes; whether the Government intends to give the matter further consideration; and, if there are any difficulties in the way of the company paying a war bonus, will the Government take the necessary action to remove them?

I have been asked to reply to these questions. I understand that my right hon. Friend has received a communication from the insurance agents, but I am not in a position to add anything to the replies which I have already given on this subject. I would refer specially to the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Newbury on 12th June.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a good deal of unrest amongst this intelligent and industrious class of the population, and that if something is not soon done the Labour Department will be up against a great problem with which they will have great difficulty in dealing?

Does the hon. Gentleman's, answer mean that nothing whatever is going to be done to meet the claims of this deserving class, and are they not, in his opinion, equally deserving as other classes of industrial workers?

I am aware of the unrest which exists among these agents, but of course it is difficult to decide what the Government can do in the matter, which ultimately resolves itself into a lack of organisation on the part of the men themselves.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some companies are paying a war bonus, and that in some parts of the United Kingdom already a strike has been precipitated?

I think I am aware of those facts.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this House twelve months ago appointed a Committee to look into the matter, and it made a recommendation asking the Government to insist on the insurance companies paying a bonus, and what has become of the Committee's recommendation?

Was the hon. Gentleman replying to No. 54 or No. 60 in his second reply?

No. 60. I am aware that one of the Industrial Unrest Commissions raised the question of the wages or salaries of insurance agents. I then did all that was possible within my power to get an arrangement between the parties, but, having failed in that purpose, I am afraid I have exhausted all my powers. Any further suggestion which is made to me I shall be very glad to consider.

asked the Prime Minister whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce legislation in the near future dealing with the Law of Naturalisation and the status of Aliens?

No, Sir, not at present. There are, however, certain questions arising under the law of nationality, which were not dealt with in the Act passed last August, and which are under consideration in consultation with the Overseas Dominions with a view to legislation if necessary at a convenient time.

When is this legislation likely to be introduced?

I am afraid not this Parliament.

asked the Prime Minister if he is aware that in the Royal Navy I engineer official out of 23, 1 medical officer out of 12, 1 accountant out of 9, and 1 executive officer out of 4 have received honours; if he can explain and will inquire into this difference which gives the engineer officers less than half the honours given to the accountants' branch; and if he will consider the matter?

I have been asked to answer this question. The numbers mentioned in my hon. and gallant Friend's question are not concurred in as accurate, and therefore I am unable to follow him closely in his comparisons. It is, however, undoubtedly the fact that, owing to the different duties of the various branches, individual acts of gallantry, initiative, leadership, and so forth, come more prominently into view in some branches than in others. The Board recently decided that this question required consideration, especially with reference to the engineer branch, and it is now engaging their attention.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why no cargoes of sugar, tea, or tobacco have been sent to the Custom House Docks, Dublin, during the current year, thus depriving the Dublin Port and Docks Board of their fair share of the storage; and whether he will take steps to remedy this state of things?

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Shipping Controller why no cargoes of sugar, tea, or tobacco have been sent to the Custom House Docks, Dublin, during the current year; why the Dublin Port and Docks Board is deprived of this trade; and if he will take steps to prevent Dublin traffic being diverted to other ports?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can state what measures have been taken to prevent the diversion of traffic from Dublin and to restore its normal conditions of importation?

asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of a complaint made by the manager of the Port and Docks Board, Dublin, with reference to the diversion of trade from Dublin to other ports; if he is aware that in the statement published by the secretary of the Port and Docks it is alleged that the stock of sugar on 31st December, 1917, was 48,000 bags, and on the 30th October, 1918, 1,379 bags; that no foreign sugar cargo has been sent to Ireland during the current year, although many have been sent to London, Liverpool, Manchester, Bristol, and Glasgow, involving transhipment, expense, and delay, and incidentally depriving the Board of their share of the storage; if he is aware that the normal stock of tobacco was 2,800 hogsheads, but that it is now 558 hogsheads, whilst the total imports into the United Kingdom were 170,000 hogsheads, 178,000 hogsheads, and 106,000, respectively, in 1915, 1916, and 1917, and 78,000 this year; that all tobacco is now being handled for Ireland at Liverpool and Manchester, where congestion is rife and delays vexatious, and the cost of cross-Channel freights have to be borne by the importers in Dublin, so that the Board are again deprived of their share of storage; if he is aware that the normal stock of tea was roughly 700,000 lbs., whereas the present stock is only 35,000 lbs.; that all Irish teas are now handled exclusively at Liverpool and Manchester, and the same remarks as to cost and delay apply as in the case of tobacco; whether he is aware of the proportions that the pilferage of tea has assumed; whether he is aware that the total stock of tea in bond in the United Kingdom on the 30th September was 90,000,000 lbs. against a normal 150,000,000 lbs. of five months' supply; that the proportion of the normal was ½ per cent., and the proportion of the present stock is only 1/25th of 1 per cent.; whether he is aware that the Board have exhausted every effort in making their representation to the Tea and Tobacco Controllers of the inconvenience and expense caused to the Irish consumers by reason of the neutral traffic being diverted to English ports, and the loss of revenue thereby caused to the Board; that the Sugar Commission informed the manager of the Dublin ports that they cannot see their way to send another sugar cargo direct to Ireland at present; and that this is detrimental to the port of Dublin and the Irish trade generally; and, if so, what action he intends to take in the matter?

I have been asked to reply to these questions. We are fully aware of the difficulties referred to in these questions, which have been caused, as I explained to the hon. Member for the St. Patrick's Division of Dublin on 6th November, solely by the exigencies of war. With regard to sugar, not only are supplies restricted, but for a long time past only unrefined sugar has been available, and this has had to be brought first to England to be refined. In the case of tea, I am informed that it was never delivered direct to Ireland in any quantity. Tobacco is still shipped direct by the Head Line, but calls are unfortunately fewer owing to losses and necessary diversions. We earnestly hope, however, that in the new situation which now obtains normal conditions can presently be resumed.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the cause of the delay in carrying out the inquiry into the affairs of the Acetate of Cellulose Company; what procedure has been settled by the Commission of Inquiry; and whether the proceedings will be conducted in public?

I am not aware that there has been any delay on the part of the British Cellulose Inquiry Committee in carrying out the inquiry. It has been found necessary to examine a large number of documents, and preliminary statements have been received from various persons, some of whom have been granted time in which to prepare their statements and evidence. It has been decided for the present to take evidence in private.

Are counsel allowed to appear on behalf of the various interests, and why has it been decided to take evidence in private?

I cannot answer the first question. I have not made inquiry recently. But it was left to the tribunal itself to decide. As regards the second part, it was also left to the tribunal to have it in private or in public as it thought best. In any case the object was to have the report, and that will be given.

Was not the object stated in the House to be to enlighten the public and clear away misunderstandings, and how can you clear them away if the public do not see the evidence?

From the very first it was put to me in the House when the Committee was set up, and I said then I would leave it to the discretion of the tribunals whether discussions should be public or private.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been drawn to the speech of the chairman at the annual meeting of the British South Africa Company on 8th August, in which he is reported to have said that the administrative deficits of the company had been adjudged by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the recent case to be the liability of the Imperial Government, and that those deficits exceed £10,000,000 sterling; and whether he will give an assurance that no obligation will be assumed by the Imperial Government for any such deficits until a statement has been made in this House and an opportunity given for its discussion?

I have seen the speech referred to. With regard to the last part of the question, I do not understand that any immediate question of settlement arises under the recent judgment, but I feel certain that whenever a question of payment does arise, the Government of the day will hesitate to commit themselves to make any payment such as is suggested without the authority of the House of Commons.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when it is proposed to circulate the Annual Statement of Revenue and Expenditure, England, Scotland, and Ireland?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury why the Annual Returns of Revenue and Expenditure in Great Britain and Ireland, respectively, ordered by the House and usually laid upon the Table in the month of August, have not been furnished this year; and when will they be in the hands of Members?