asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will give further consideration to the request of ex-soldiers, pensioners from the old Army, to have their pensions augmented in the same way as soldiers now drawing disability pensions on account of the increase of the cost of living?

My hon. Friend is doubtless aware that Admiral Jerram's Committee proposed an extension of the revised scale of Naval Service pensions to all Naval pensioners on the rolls, and that the Government decided to extend it only to such existing pensioners as are now serving or have served in the War. This decision will govern the consideration now being given to the scale of Army pensions.

Is he not aware that the Admiralty are reconsidering that points

The Admiralty are bound by the decision of the Government.

Will my right hon. Friend say why the War Office should give 20 per cent. war bonus on disability pensions on account of increased cost of living and refuse a similar 20 per cent. to the ex-soldiers?

I think there is a great distinction to be drawn between disability pensions and service pensions. Disability pensions are given to compensate to some extent for loss of earning power, but service pensions are given in recognition of long service, as the hon. Member knows very well.

asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office why Private E. C. Norville, No. 2053G, A Company, 52nd Hants Regiment, at present attached to the Royal Defence Corps, Ancotts, near Doncaster, received only 7s. per week Army Pay from October, 1917, until 11th February, 1919; why from 11th February, 1919, he has received only 17s. per week instead of 21s. per week; why his mother, Mrs. Clara L. Norville, did not receive payment of the Government allowance of 2s. per week from 20th August, 1917, until 23rd July, 1918, although her son's identity certificate, No. V 522414, was received by her on 24th August, 1917, along with the authority for her to draw a voluntary allotment of 3s. 6d. per week made to her by her son; and whether further steps can be taken to quicken the settlement of outstanding questions of pay and allowances?

Pay has been credited to this soldier at the following rates: 1s. a day from 20th August, 1917, to 28th September, 1917; 1s. 6d. a day from 29th September, 1917, to 19th August, 1918; and 1s. 7d. a day from 20th August, 1918, to 31st January, 1919; 3s. 1d. a day from 1st February, 1919. From these rates a voluntary allotment of 6d. a day has been deducted in each case, and has been paid to the man's mother throughout. From 23rd May, 1918, she has been paid, in addition, dependant's allowance of 2s. a week, which was increased to 5s. a week from 5th November, 1918. Dependant's allow- ance is issuable from the date from which a claim is made, which date in this case was 23rd May, 1918.

asked the Pensions Minister if he will explain why the 20 per cent. bonus is payable on disability pensions awarded under the warrants of 1917–18 and not on pensions granted under earlier warrants; and if he will say upon what authority the bonus is refused on the latter?

My right hon. Friend is looking into this matter, and I should be obliged if the hon. Member would repeat his question in a week or two.

asked the Pensions Minister if he will say whether a man who on dispersal was medically examined and assessed a 40 per cent. disability, and who transferred to Army Reserve, is entitled to pension; and, if not, will he give the number of the Army Order or Regulation under which his claim is invalid?

A man who on demobilisation and transfer to the Reserve is found to have a disability caused or aggravated by his military service is entitled to a pension or gratuity according to the extent of his incapacity. If he is refused pension by the Ministry on the ground that his disability was neither caused nor aggravated by service, he can appeal to the Pensions Appeal Tribunal.

Can the hon. and gallant Gentleman say whether the assessment by the medical officer on demobilisation as to the percentage of disability pension governs the pension, or whether it is decided later by the Ministry of Pensions without seeing the man?

In the first instance, on demobilisation, as far as possible, the necessary form is filled up, but, where it is not, the medical referee is asked for his opinion, and on that opinion the pension is assessed.

Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that, a very large number of men who were assessed a percentage disability on demobilisation are receiving less pension without seeing anyone?

No; I do not think that is so.

It is so.

I do not think it is so. Of course, the hon. Gentleman will understand that at present there is a great pressure on account of demobilisation, and, sooner than have cases delayed, we are doing everything we possibly can to catch up all cases on demobilisation, and any pensions awarded of a temporary nature will be reviewed at a later date after demobilisation.

asked the Pensions Minister whether a decision has been come to with regard to men who were invalided from the Royal Navy before the War for tuberculosis; and whether he will consider granting a pension to these men in view of the additional medical evidence on this disease brought to light during the War?

My right hon. Friend is not prepared to revise the findings of the Admiralty in the case of men invalided from the Royal Navy before the War, nor is lie aware of any additional medical evidence which would justify him in doing so.

May I ask why a man who was invalided from the Navy with tuberculosis before the War, gets no pension, whereas a man invalided from the Navy with tuberculosis during the War receives a pension?

I have just explained to my hon. and gallant Friend that it would be impossible to revise all cases that were settled by the Admiralty before the War.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has made himself acquainted with the Regulations governing the release of soldiers on compassionate grounds; whether he is aware that the conditions laid down are almost impossible of fulfilment, especially the Regulation relating to a widow claiming the release of her son; whether ho is aware that many of these widows are seventy years of age; whether he knows that to successfully claim release of her son a widow must have two children dependent on her as well as being unable to earn anything herself; and whether he is prepared to make any changes in the conditions of release on compassionate grounds?

As the House was informed in the Debate on the Army Estimates on the 29th May, my right hon. Friend is considering whether compassionate cases on other than purely family grounds cannot now come into consideration, at any rate, for a limited number. In addition to the information which was given to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for York on the 6th June with regard to the probable number of soldiers who will be demobilised as a result of the recent Regulations, I may say that the actual number demobilised during the first month after the issue of the Regulations was 5,252.

Will the new Regulations extending compassionate grounds be published shortly?

Yes, very shortly indeed now.

Does he really expect widows of seventy years of age to have two children of school age dependent on them?

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state how many officers were demobilised between 11th November, 1918, and 1st June, 1919; and how many are now employed or serving on full pay?

As my hon. Friend was informed on the 5th instant, the number of officers demobilised up to the 3rd June was 103,672, and the number still serving was, approximately, 71,000, of whom about 11,000 were either in hospital or awaiting demobilisation. I may add that the latest return up to the 18th June shows 109,494 officers demobilised.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he can now state the result of his inquiries into the allegation of soldiers in the Army of Occupation that mechanical transport men in the Royal Army Medical Corps are not being released fairly according to length of service, etc., under the terms of the Government scheme of demobilisation; whether men are being retained solely because their unit is in general headquarters troops; whether men from other mechanical transport units are being demobilised with less service than men in such general headquarters units; anwhat steps he proposes to take?

The General Officer Commanding-in-Chief the Army of the Rhine has been asked to inquire into this matter and report whether there is any basis for the allegations to which my hon. Friend alludes. A reply has not yet been received.

Was not that request made three weeks ago?

Yes; the reply has not yet been received.

Can he expedite this reply?

Yes, I will.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he can yet make any statement as to the early liberation of the men who enlisted under the Derby scheme?

I. regret I can add nothing at present to the statements which my right hon. Friend made in the House on the 29th May and 5th June regarding the release of "Derby" men, of which there are some 300,000. As he stated on the 29th May, he cannot release the whole number immediately, but when Peace has been signed he hopes it will be possible gradually to diminish the military forces which we are keeping at our disposal. The claims of the 1914 and 1915 men for release must not, however, be forgotten.

Am I right in supposing that no Derby men will be sent out in drafts in India?

Yes, that pledge has been given in the House.

Will he also consider the cases of conscript men who were refused enlistment repeatedly on medical grounds but were subsequently conscripted under the Conscription Acts?

Yes, that category will also be considered.

Is he aware that Derby men are at present being sent out in drafts, although medically rejected in 1914 and 1915?

Not to India.

If I give him information as to that, will he do his best to avoid sending back the stereotyped answer, which is the answer I have received?

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the large number of expansions of industry which could be brought about by the liberation of specialist and expert workers who are still retained in the Army; and whether, in view of the existing unemployment, he proposes to press upon the Secretary of State for War the early consideration of all these cases?

I am aware that there are men still serving in the Army whose return to civil life might promote opportunities of work for others; and in suitable cases that have been brought to my notice, I have made representations to the Army Council with a view to obtaining early demobilisation.

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for War what relaxations will be made in the existing Regulations governing the demobilisation of men in the Army consequent on the consent of the German Government to sign the Peace Treaty?

I regret that I can add nothing at present to the statement which my right hon. Friend made on this subject on the 29th May, but I can assure my Noble Friend that the whole matter is engaging the attention of the Secretary of State.

asked the Secretary for Scotland the number of applications which have been received from ex-Service men for settlement as small holders in Scotland under the Small Holding (Colonies) Act; the date when each parcel of land was purchased; and the number of small holdings which can be provided out of the land so acquired?

As the answer is somewhat lengthy, my right hon. Friend is circulating the information in the Official Report.

Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say if a single man has been placed on the land under the Small Holding (Colonies) Act?

I think the information that will be circulated will meet the point.

asked the Secretary for Scotland whether any special official of the Scottish Board of Agriculture is at present charged with the supervision of the schemes for land settlement of ex-Service men in Scotland; whether any schemes have yet been completed under which particular small holdings have been allotted to individual applicants; and the number of small holdings to which entry will be obtained by Martinmas, 1919?

This branch of the Boards work is in the charge of the Small Holding Commissioner, who has the assistance of four sub-commissioners and four assistants; and these numbers are in process of being materially increased. Several schemes have been completed, and thirty-five holdings and one enlargement bad been allotted to ex-Service men as at 31st May last, in addition to which employment has been given on farms in the Board's occupation to eighteen prospective holders who are discharged soldiers. The number of holdings to which' entry can be given at Martinmas, 1919, depends so largely on the practicability of equipping them with buildings that any estimate now given would be unreliable. It is hoped to overcome the difficulty in part by the use of Army huts, of which the Board have acquired a large number.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that the thirty-five men to whom he refers were registered smallholders before the War and have only been put back? Can he say whether any single new man has been put on the land?

I am not sure I can accept the suggestion that the whole of these thirty-five men were smallholders before the War. I have no further information to give my hon. Friend than I have already given him.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction which exists with regard to the slow progress made in the provision of small holdings; and what steps he proposes to take to expedite it?

The Board are fully aware of the dissatisfaction referred to, and every effort is being made to expedite progress. Forty-five thousand acres have already been acquired, and negotiations are in progress for an additional 100,000 acres, but it is urgent that the Land Settlement Bill should be passed into law, so that the process of acquiring land and obtaining vacant possession may be expedited. In the meantime, the Board are urging county councils to use their existing powers of acquisition to the fullest possible extent, but, as no land could be purchased prior to the Armistice, some time must elapse before the necessary houses and buildings can be erected and the holdings are ready for occupation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the estimate, amounting to about £106,000,000, of the increased cost of running the railways under Government control to 31st March, 1920, as compared with the year 1913, includes any cost of making good maintenance in arrears and provision for extra wear and tear; and, if the above estimate be accepted as a reasonable forecast, will he say what will be the total sum to be borne by the taxpayer after the shareholder has received his guaranteed dividend in respect of the year ending 31st March, 1920?

The estimate of increased expenditure referred to is an estimate of the effect of increased cost of labour and materials, and does not include any allowance for abnormal maintenance work. The amount that will be borne by the taxpayers under the Government agreement with the railways does not depend solely on the increased cost of railway working, and I am not prepared at present to say what it is likely to be. I may add that railway dividends are not guaranteed by the Government, but the railways are guaranteed the aggregate net receipts of 1913.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether before the Transport Bill comes on for Report we can have accurate figures of the estimated loss on the railways, subject to present conditions in regard to necessary expenditure?

That question is under consideration.

In arriving at these figures can the hon. Gentleman tell me whether the War Office has been charged with the full rates for carrying troops and munitions?

I am not clear what the hon. Gentleman means by full rates. Are they the rates chargeable under the Act?

The current rate. The 50 per cent. increase.

I do not think so. I will inquire, and let my hon. Friend know. But I think the War Office are charged according to the provisions of the-Cheap Trains Act.

Does the hon. Gentleman not see in that case that putting the entire loss upon the shoulders of the travelling public is putting a special tax upon that public as distinguished from the whole of the country?

I see the point,

I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for that!

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Railway Executive Committee have been able to form any estimate of the total revenue that will be earned by the railways for the year ending 31st March, 1920, in respect of goods-train traffic and passenger-train traffic; if so, how do these amounts compare with the year 1913; and are they made on the assumption that the travelling public are still charged a 50 per cent. increase and the charge for goods traffic is not increased?

My right hon. Friend is consulting the Railway Executive to see if it is possible to frame a satisfactory estimate, but is not very sanguine that any useful result will be obtained.

Are we to take it that before the statements in reference to the Transport Bill were given to this House that no estimate was made of the realities of the situation?

The estimate to which ray hon. and learned Friend refers was not made by the Board of Trade, but it is naturally one that, to a large extent, is a matter of opinion.

While the Government are making up their minds in this connection, will the hon. Gentleman represent to the Department that hundreds and thousands of small children are prevented, owing to the increase of fare, from going into the country?

That does not arise on the question, but I am doing all I can to get the fullest possible facilities for the children.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the accounts for the railways working under Government control have only been partially completed for the year 1917; will he say when the audit for 1917 will be completed and that for 1918 undertaken; and in what way will the result of the audit for these two years be made known to the shareholders and to the taxpayer?

Railway companies' accounts for 1917 and 1918 have already been completed as required by the Railway Companies (Accounts and Returns) Act, 1911, so far as that Act now applies. Any sums which, as the result of the further investigation of those accounts on behalf of the Government, may be found to be payable to or by the railway companies would be brought into account later. They will be published in due course.

Will the hon. Gentleman answer the last part of my question; in what way will the result of the audit for these two years be made known?

I have said it will be brought into the accounts later and published in due course.

When is "due course"?

When all these things are brought into account.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what members of the staff of the North-Eastern Railway Company have been, are, or are proposed to be employed in connection with the Ministry of Ways and Communications; what remuneration they were receiving at the railway; what it is proposed they should receive at the Ministry; and what are the other terms of their employment?

Sir Francis Dunnell and Lieutenant-Colonel Beharrell, of the North-Eastern Railway Company, have been, and are being, employed in connection with the Ministry of Ways and Communications. It is proposed that when the Ministry is established Lieutenant-Colonel Beharrell should leave the service of the company and be appointed to a post in the Ministry with a salary of £2,500 a year.

Have these gentlemen been drawing salaries both from the North-Eastern Railway Company and the Government?

No, Sir; they are still lent, and are not paid any public money.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what remuneration Sir Francis Dunnell was drawing from the North-Eastern Railway Company and what he is going to receive from the Government as general secretary to the Ministry of Ways and Communications?

As stated in my reply to my hon. Friend on Wednesday, 4th June, Sir Francis Dunnell will continue to receive, while his services are loaned to the Government, the same salary as he was drawing from the North-Eastern Railway Company. If, at a later date, Sir Francis Dunnell is permanently transferred to the Government service, his salary will be such as the Treasury may approve. The emoluments which he is now receiving are a personal matter between the directors of the company and Sir Francis Dunnell.

Can the hon. Gentleman say, in the event of this gentleman going to the Ministry, he will receive ft lump sum from the railway company under any contract?

Of that I have no knowledge, and it could not possibly come within my Department.

If that were so, would it not ultimately be paid by the taxpayer?

That is a question which should be addressed to the Minister of Ways and Communications.

Is there such a Ministry?

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he will state the number of the staff of the Admiralty on31st May, 1919, as compared with the number on the date of the Armistice, 11thNovember, 1918?

According to a revised Return, the total number of civilian staff, excluding messengers and charwomen, employed by the Admiralty on 11th November, 1918, was 8,312. On 31st May, 1919, the number was 7,642, a net reduction of 670. The gross reduction was 1,331, but against this must be set an increase of 661 In the Departments and branches of the Admiralty dealing with demobilisation and reconstruction problems.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Munitions whether he will state the number of the staff of the Ministry of Munitions on the31st May, 1919, as compared with the number on the date of the Armistice, 11th November, 1918?

My hon. Friend proposes to deal with this matter in the course of the statement on the Munitions Estimates this afternoon.

asked the Undersecretary of State to the Air Ministry the number of the staff of the Air Ministry on 31st May, 1919, as compared with the number on the date of the Armistice, 11th November, 1918?

The number of persons of all types employed in the Air Ministry at the Armistice was 4,646 and on the 31st May 3,289. It will be understood that the large amount of work due to demobilisation has necessitated the retention of a large clerical staff.

asked the Prime Minister if he is now in a position to state the policy of the Government for the prevention of dumping and the protection of key industries?

The proposals of the Government are in course of preparation, but I am not at present in a position to make any statement on the subject.

Is it not a fact that the United States has now intimated its intention to withdraw from the Supreme Economic Council, and therefore this matter is one of very great urgency and importance?

I cannot add anything to my answer.

In view of the answer I have received I beg to give notice that at the conclusion of questions I shall ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House.

(by Private Notice) asked the President of the Board of Trade if he can state the object of his Department in holding an exhibition of a great variety of brushes of recent Japanese manufacture; whether it is for the purpose of encouraging the importation into this country of Japanese manufactures; and to whom invitations to inspect such goods have been sent?

The Department of Overseas Trade will answer this question.

(by Private Notice) asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in opposition to the advice which he received from the Advisory Council of Imports, he has withdrawn all restrictions against the importation of a very large number of articles of manufactured woodwork; whether there is not at present great unemployment in the wood-working trade, and whether such unemployment will not be aggravated by the action which he has taken?

In the absence of sufficient evidence that the maintenance of restrictions on wood manufactures (other than those specially reserved for restriction) would be in the interest of the trade of the country viewed as a whole, my right hon. Friend decided that articles of this description should be admitted freely. They consist mainly of semi-manufactures forming the raw material of further industries. This decision was taken after a careful consideration of the position, with a view to reducing the total amount of unemployment in the country.

(later): I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, "That the uncertainty as to the future economic policy of the country in the absence of definite steps for the prevention of dumping, and the protection of key industries, promised at the recent General Election, is a matter of great urgency to this country and calls for immediate action by the Government."