Commons Sitting of 18 February 1915

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
London County Council (General Powers) Bill (Suspended Bill), (by Order),
Glasgow Corporation (Celluloid) Bill (Suspended Bill) (by Order),
Consideration, as amended, deferred till Thursday next.
Blyth Harbour Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and committed.
Dewsbury Corporation Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till Tuesday next, at a Quarter-past Eight of the clock.
Doncaster Corporation Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till Monday next.
Friends' Provident Institution Bill (by Order),
Great Central Railway Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
Liverpool Corporation Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till Tuesday next, at a Quarter-past Eight of the clock.
London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
Methodist Church in Ireland Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and committed.
Metropolitan District Railway Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till Monday next.
Metropolitan Water Board Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till Thursday next.
Nottingham Corporation (Trent Navigation Transfer) Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and committed.
Rhondda Urban District Council (Tramways Extensions, etc.) Bill (by Order),
Second Reading deferred till Tuesday next, at a Quarter-past Eight of the clock.
Seaforth and Sefton Junction Railway Bill (by Order),
Weardale and Consett Water Bill (by Order),
Worksop and Bawtry Railway Bill (by Order),
Read a second time, and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

RIVER GLEN IMPROVEMENT BILL
"For the widening and improvement of the River Glen, and to incorporate the Glen Bank Trustees, and to confer powers upon them and upon the Deeping Fen Trustees; and for other purposes." Presented, and read the first time; and ordered to be read a second time.
NAVAL AND MARINE PAY AND PENSIONS ACT, 1865.
Copies presented of six Orders in Council, dated 3rd February, 1915, approving Memorials of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
PRIZE COURTS ACT, 1894.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 3rd February, 1915, finally approving an addition to Order 27 of the Rules as to the Procedure and Practice of Prize Courts [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
COPYRIGHT ACT, 1911.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 3rd February, 1915, applying the provisions of the Act to the United States of America subject to certain provisos [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
SPRING ASSIZES ACT, 1879.
Copies presented of two Orders in Council, dated 3rd February, 1915, constituting Spring Assize Counties Nos. 2 and 3 for the Spring Assizes, 1915 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1858.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 3rd February, 1915, approving a Statement of proposed new and revised Appointments, etc., in the Establishment of the Secretary of State for India in Council [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

FOREIGN JURISDICTION ACT, 1890.
Copy presented of two Orders in Council, dated 3rd February, 1915, entitled (1) the Maskat Order in Council, 1915, and (2) the China (Amendment) Order in Council, 1915 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 10th February, 1915, entitled the Northern Rhodesia Order in Council, 1915 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

NAVAL AND MARINE PAY AND PENSIONS ACT, 1865.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 10th February, 1915, approving a Memorial of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
MERCHANT SHIPPING ACT, 1894.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 10th February, 1915, prescribing the Form of Indenture of Apprenticeship to the Sea Fishing Service for Boys under the age of sixteen years [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
EXTRADITION ACT, 1870.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 10th February, 1915, directing that an Ordinance of the Gold Coast Colony, entitled the Extradition Ordinance (Ashanti), 1914, shall have effect in Ashanti as if it were part of the Extradition Act, 1870 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

EUROPEAN CRISIS (MISCELLANEOUS, No. 3, 1915).
Copy presented of Letter of 31st July, 1914, from the President of the French Republic to the King, respecting the
1284
European Crisis, and His Majesty's Reply of 1st August, 1914 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

PENAL SERVITUDE ACTS (CONDITIONAL LICENCE).
Copy presented of Licence granted to a Convict discharging her from Aylesbury Convict Prison on condition that she enters a home [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

SHOPS ACT, 1912.
Copies presented of Orders made by the Councils of the under-mentioned local authorities, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department:—
City of Kingston-upon-Hull;
County borough of West Bromwich [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

CITY SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS, 1915–16 (VOTES ON ACCOUNT).
Estimate presented showing the several Services for which a Vote on Account is required for the year ending 31st March, 1916 [by Command]; Referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed. [No. 127.]
CIVIL SERVICES (EXCESSES), 1913–14.
Copy presented of Statement of the sum required to be voted to make good an Excess on the Grant for International Exhibitions for the year ended 31st March, 1914 [by Command]; referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed. [No. 128.]
BRITISH PLAIN SPIRITS IN BOND (SCOTLAND).
Return presented relative thereto [ordered 8th February; Sir John Dewar]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 129.]

BOARD OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES.
Copy presented of Annual Report on the Administration of the Grant for the

1285
Encouragement and Improvement of the Light Horse Breeding Industry for the year from 1st November, 1913, to 31st October, 1014 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.
  WAR.

    PRESIDENT OF FRENCH REPUBLIC AND KING GEORGE.
    Mr. JOWETTasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the letter from the President of France, referred to in Document 110 of Miscellaneous, No. 15, 1914, can now be laid before Parliament, and if it was communicated to the Cabinet on 3rd August last?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Edward Grey): The letter from the President of the French Republic and the reply of His Majesty the King will be laid before Parliament this week.

  RUSSIAN LOAN.
  Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any conditions of a political nature will be made or have been proposed in connection with the Russian loan; and whether this bond of common objects shared by the Russian and the British Empire will be made the occasion of less restricted trade and intercourse between Russian and British subjects?
  Sir E. GREY: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The chief bond of common objects between the two Empires at present is the prosecution of the War, and I cannot make any statement as to permanent trade arrangements at present.

  JAPAN AND CHINA.
  Mr. STEWARTasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the British Government has received the text of the demands put forward by the Japanese Government to China; and
  1286
  whether in that case he is in a position to communicate them to the House?
  Sir E. GREY: I am not at present in a position to communicate to the House the information on the subject which has been given to me confidentially by the Japanese Government.

  ALLIED POWERS (FAR EASTERN CLAIMS).
  Sir WILLIAM BULLasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether there is any understanding between the four great Allied Powers regarding the time at which and the method in which all Far Eastern claims arising out of the War are to be put forward for international settlement, and, if so, can he indicate its nature?
  Sir E. GREY: An agreement was signed in London on the 5th of September, 1914, between the British, French, and Russian Governments, and was published in the Press at the time, to the effect that the three Powers mutually engaged not to conclude peace separately during the present War. They also agreed that when terms of peace came to be discussed no one of the Allies will demand terms of peace without the previous agreement of each of the other Allies. Article II. of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance has the same effect, and therefore unites all four Powers for the purpose named in the question.

  COMMERCIAL FREEDOM (CHINA).
  Mr. LYNCHasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether he has been informed that, in view of the commercial advances of Japan and the claims put forward by that Power in China, apprehension exists as to the security of development of British firms in parts of the Chinese dominion; whether any representations have been made to him either by British firms or by officials of the Chinese Government relative to the attitude of the British Government on this question; and whether he will take the matter into consideration and adopt any measures that may be advisable for securing that there shall be no infringement of any commercial freedom now enjoyed in China?
  Sir E. GREY: As regards the first part of the question, no representations have

  1287
  as yet been made to His Majesty's Government. As regards the last part, His Majesty's Government will of course take British interests into account, and, when necessary, consider what measures are required.

  FIRST-AID WORK (IRELAND).
  Mr. BOLANDasked how many first-aid and ambulance work classes have been organised officially through Government Departments in Ireland since the outbreak of war; the number of students enrolled; and what further facilities will now be given with a view to the extension of the number of classes?
  Mr. T. W. RUSSELL (Vice-President of the Board of Agriculture, Ireland): Under Regulations issued by the Department of Agriculture over 390 classes have been held, in which over 10,000 pupils in all were enrolled. Of these classes 304 wore in First Aid to the Injured, 79 in Hygiene and Emergency Nursing, and 8 in Ambulance Work. The Department do not regard the formation of classes in these subjects as any longer a matter of urgency, and accordingly they have, since the 31st December last, required that (except in very exceptional circumstances) classes should be recognised only if conducted under the conditions of a local scheme of technical instruction. If a technical instruction committee agrees to form such classes, the Department recognise them as eligible for Grants under the conditions of their programme for technical schools and classes.

  EXPORT OF GRASS SEED (IRELAND).
  Sir J. LONSDALEasked if any licences have yet been granted for the export of grass seed to neutral countries from Ireland; if applications for licences to export should be sent through the Department of Agriculture; and if the Department will do its best to facilitate the issue of licences and impress upon the Board of Trade the importance of dealing with all applications with the least possible delay?
  Mr. RUSSELL: The Department do not grant licences for the exportation of grass seed. Applications for such licences should, it is understood, be addressed to
  1288
  the Customs authorities. The Department have reported as promptly as possible in regard to the applications referred for the Department's opinion.
  Sir J. LONSDALE: Do I understand from the right hon. Gentleman that applications must in the first instance be sent to the Board of Agriculture in Ireland, or to the Board of Trade?
  Mr. RUSSELL: Applications must be made to the Special Branch of the Board of Trade. My right hon. Friend said yesterday that these applications would be forwarded to the Board of Trade for report. That has been done. I may add that I, personally, on Monday, waited upon the Commissioners in charge of this work and received from them the assurance that all applications for grants-would be issued at once.

  ANILINE DYE INDUSTRY.
  Mr. BOLANDasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the support given in Ireland to the establishment of the aniline dye industry in the United Kingdom, he will make arrangements with the Irish Department for the co-operation of research workers in the Royal College of Science in Dublin, with a view to securing that all the scientific ability of the country may be enlisted in the furtherance of a great national industry?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. J. M. Robertson): I will take care that the attention of the proposed company is drawn to the matter to which my hon. Friend refers.

  COPPER SHIPMENTS.
  Mr. LOUGHasked the President of the Board of Trade whether arrangements have been made by the British Government whereby, in order to facilitate their shipments of copper from the United States of America to neutral countries, American exporters are forced to ship through certain London firms; and if he will state who these firms are?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: No arrangements such as those suggested in the question have been made Several of the most important copper producers in the United

  1289
  States of America, and practically all the copper merchants in London, have voluntarily agreed to certain suggestions regarding shipments of copper to Europe. There is no compulsion to ship through any particular houses; their arrangements are purely voluntary, open to all, and made with the object of facilitating shipments to Europe. The Government will raise no objection to those companies and firms who have entered into this arrangement making the fact public, so that purchasers of copper in the allied countries may be in a position to discriminate when arranging for their purchases.

  ARMY CLOTH (WEAVERS' WAGES).
  Mr. JOWETTasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, having regard to the opportunity for ascertaining the facts concerning piece-wage rates paid to weavers in the Bradford district, which is now available whilst a large proportion of looms in the Bradford district are weaving cloth for the Army, he will request the War Office to furnish him with a, list of the manufacturers in the Bradford district who are weaving cloth for the Army, along with other simple particulars in their possession which would be helpful to him for the purpose of his inquiry; and, providing his request is acceded to, will he then proceed to ascertain the different prices per pick per inch paid to weavers for their work in the district mentioned?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: I will confer with my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary of the War Office on the point raised.

  GERMAN MANUFACTURED GOODS (IMPORT LICENCES).
  Sir R. COOPERasked the President of the Board of Trade whether permits have been granted by the Lords of the Privy Council to any firms or individuals authorising them to import goods known to be of German manufacture since the commencement of the war?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: Under the terms of paragraph 8 of the Trading with the Enemy Proclamation, No. 2, of the 9th September last, licences have been granted to import certain classes of goods of German origin in a limited number of cases. In issuing these licences regard has been
  1290
  had to the special requirements of this country and the difficulty of obtaining the particular descriptions of goods except from this source.

  ADMIRALTY COASTING-TRADE OFFICE (NEWCASTLE).
  Mr. EVELYN CECILasked the President of the Board of Trade whether the managers of the Admiralty coasting-trade office at Newcastle are paid a fixed salary, or whether their pay varies with the rates of freight they obtain for the interned enemy ships; and whether he will avoid any arrangement which might tend to raise freights contrary to the interests of coal consumers?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: The arrangement with these gentlemen is on the basis of a fixed sum per annum for each vessel, together with a percentage on the net profits, but subject to a maximum rate of remuneration per annum which will, I think, have the effect desired by the hon. Member.

  NAVAL BRIGADE, CRYSTAL PALACE (DEATHS FROM MENINGITIS).
  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he has had any recent report on the health of the naval troops at the Crystal Palace; and whether there have been any deaths from meningitis?
  Mr. RONALD M'NEILLasked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many men of the Naval Division are in training at the Crystal Palace; how many medical men are there available for attendance upon them; and how many cases there are among the men there in training?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): There are at present 6,578 officers and men victualled at the Crystal Palace. Fourteen medical officers are attached. There were on Tuesday 184 men on the sick list. As regards cerebro-spinal meningitis, there have been fifteen cases up to date, the first case occurring on 16th January. I regret to say that eight of the cases have proved fatal. Every declared case has, of course, been transferred to an infectious hospital, and contacts have been removed for purposes of observation to another naval hospital, where, of course, they are carefully

  1291
  isolated. A special medical officer with expert knowledge of the disease has been appointed to the division at the Palace, to devote himself solely to dealing with the matter. Further, a special bacteriologist has been attached for the purpose of elucidating the origin of the disease in this case. Apart from cerebro-spinal cases, the general health at the Palace is very good. The average number on the sick list is about 2 per cent.
  Mr. FALLE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say if the huts in which the men had lived were burnt or merely disinfected?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: I do not think it applies to the Colonial buildings attached; but we have taken every precaution.
  Mr. HOGGE: In view of the fact that since this outbreak there are also certain civilian cases outside the Palace, can my right hon. Friend say whether he can take steps until the disease has been combated to prevent general leave among the men in the district?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: I was not aware of any civilian cases, but the suggestion that the men should be confined is one that I think may very well be considered.

  PRIZES OF WAR (SALE OF STEAMSHIP "FURTH").
  Sir F. FLANNERYasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the steamer "Fürth" of Hamburg, was condemned as a prize and sold by private treaty to the Anglo-Persian Oil Company; whether public tenders were invited for the purchase of this vessel or whether she was offered by public auction as in the case of other German ships forfeited in prize; and why there was no public competition invited for the sale of this vessel?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: A certain number of firms who were considered likely to buy the "Fürth" were asked by the Overseas Prize Disposal Committee to tender, but their offers were so much below the assumed value of the ship that they were all declined. The Anglo-Persian Company then applied for the use of the ship, but owing to a difficulty in settling terms for hire, they offered to purchase on a valuation, which offer was accepted.

  LICENSED PREMISES (HOURS OF SALE).
  Mr. DUNCAN MILLARasked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many orders have been issued by the competent naval authorities under the Defence of the Realm Act and consolidated regulations for the restriction of the hours of sale for licensed premises: and if he can state the hours fixed in each case and the conditions, if any, imposed on the licence-holders?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: The information asked for is not available, but the number of cases in which such orders have been issued by competent naval aurthorities can only be very small. Such orders would usually be issued by competent military authorities.

  SHIPS' STEWARDS (ROYAL NAVY).
  Mr. WHELERasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he received in October, 1913, a petition from the ships stewards' class of the Royal Navy; and, if so, when he can give a reply to the petition?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: The various points raised in the petition referred to by the hon. Member have been carefully considered by the Admiralty, but it is impossible at the present time to give any assurance that changes such as those proposed can be made.
  Mr. WHELER: May I take it that no reply will be given at all?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: No reply. I am afraid, at the present time.
  Mr. WHELER: Is it not rather overdue as compared with many other petitions?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: The question of overdue does not settle the merits of the case. That is what we have to go upon.

  PERSIAN GULF OPERATIONS (NAVAL MEDALS AND PRIZE MONEY).
  Mr. WHELERasked the First Lord of the Admiralty when the medals for general services in the operations carried out by His Majesty's Navy in the Persian Gulf in the years 1909–12 will be granted; and whether the new proposals of the Admiralty as regards prize money will apply to prize money now due to officers and men who have been carrying out those operations prior to the outbreak of War?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: As stated by my right hon. Friend in reply to the hon. and gallant Member for East Leicestershire on the 10th instant, steps are being taken by the Admiralty to compile the medal rolls for the Royal Navy. The grant of awards for services rendered prior to the outbreak of War will not be affected by the proposed new Prize Proclamation, which will only relate to prize money earned under war conditions. I may say that the Prize Proclamation under which awards were made for services rendered in the Persian Gulf still remains in force for purposes other than the distribution of the net proceeds of prize captured from the enemy. As stated by my right hon. Friend, gratuities in lieu of prize money have been distributed for captures by His Majesty's ships up to May, 1910.
  Colonel YATE: Will the right hon. Gentleman complete the distribution of the money due up to the commencement of the present War?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: I think the hon. and gallant Member probably heard the reply, that we have to communicate with the Indian Government. I can assure him there will be no delay that can be avoided.

  INTERNED ALIEN ENEMIES.
  Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the vessels in Portsmouth Harbour containing interned alien enemies are re-moved or about to be removed?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: Orders have been issued which will result in the removal from Portsmouth Harbour of the vessels referred to by the 22nd instant.

  TEMPORARY SURGEONS (ROYAL NAVY).
  Lord C. BERESFORDasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether young medical officers are entered into the Navy as temporary surgeons over the heads of surgeons of the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve, and, on appointment, rank as senior to those officers; whether he is aware that very many of these temporary surgeons have lately been students under the surgeons of the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve, many of the latter officers being consulting surgeons with
  1294
  responsible hospital appointments in civil life; and whether the Admiralty will take steps to have this disability removed?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: The facts are as stated in the question of the Noble Lord, and the question is now receiving the consideration of the Board.

  ADMIRALTY TRANSPORTS (RATES OF PAYMENT).
  Mr. ANDERSONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether certain shipowners whose ships are in the employ of the Admiralty Transport Department have recently held a meeting to demand increased rates for the hire of those ships; whether he is aware that. Lord Inchcape, the chairman of the Arbitration Committee, in delivering his award determining the rates of payment, said that he trusted that the shipowners would not look upon the rates as a minimum on which increases might be built; whether any and all additional working expenses are to be charged to the Government by specified prearrangement; and whether the shipowners mentioned are basing their demands for advances, ranging from 25 per cent. to 40 per cent., upon the claim that others are doing much better in the open market?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Lord Inchcape was chairman of certain sub-committees of the Arbitration Board, which, on 22nd October last, reported to Lord Mersey, President of the Admiralty Transport Board of Arbitration, for his information and advice, the basis, general scale, or rate at which payment to owners of ships requisitioned for Government service should be assessed. In forwarding these recommendations of the sub-committees to the President, Lord Inchcape made the statement referred to. The sub-committees recommended that the owners should be indemnified against any extraordinary out - of - pocket expenses arising out of the requisition. The rates suggested to us on 22nd October as equitable by Lord Inchcape's sub-committee have been agreed to by the shipowners for the period from the date of requisition down to 31st December last. Many, indeed, have agreed to the rates in question for the whole period of chartering, however long. But it is the fact that a very large section of the shipowners are

  1295
  asking higher rates to meet altered circumstances since 1st January. The whole matter of these requests is at this moment the subject of careful consideration by the Board.
  Mr. LOUGH: Will my right hon. Friend say whether any suggestion was made as to the freights to be charged for the interned ships?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: That, I think, is another question, of which I should like to have notice.

  MIDSHIPMEN (ROYAL NAVY).
  Mr. MOOREasked the Civil Lord to the Admiralty if he is aware that midshipmen in the Royal Navy receive as pay 1s. 9d. a day, or, approximately, £32 per annum, and that messing alone costs on the average £4 10s. a month, while subalterns of the same age in Line regiments are now in receipt of pay and allowances approximating to £180 per annum; and if it is the intention of the Admiralty to more nearly assimilate the conditions of pay of junior officers in the two Services?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: The pay of midshipmen is as stated, but I am advised that £4 10s. a month is excessive for messing, the compulsory mess subscription being only £1 10s. a month. In instituting a comparison such as is made by the hon. Member, it must be remembered that the average age of subalterns is considerably in excess of that of midshipmen, and the conditions as regards messing and other expenses differ considerably in the two Services. I am afraid that I can give no undertaking in regard to the last part of the question.

  COST OF LIVING (SCALE OF RELIEF).
  Mr. ALDENasked the President of the Local Government Board whether, in view of the increased cost of living, any change in the typical scale of relief laid down by the Government Committee and the Committee of the National Relief Fund jointly, is contemplated?
  The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Herbert Samuel): This matter is now engaging the attention of the Government Committee for the Prevention and Relief of Distress.

  DISABLED SOLDIERS AND SAILORS (INSURANCE BENEFITS).
  Mr. WILLIAM THORNEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether all disabled soldiers and sailors who are State insured are to be paid their benefits under the National Insurance Act from the funds of their respective approved societies; if so, whether he is aware that this will result in a drain upon the funds of some societies and was a contingency that was not contemplated in their schemes of benefits for sickness and disablement: and whether consideration has been given to the advisability of the State assisting these societies, at any rate to some extent?
  The CHANCELLOR of the DUCHY of LANCASTER (Mr. Montagu): In accordance with the recommendation of the Select Committee, the Government are considering the question of giving assistance to societies in respect of the drain upon their resources directly attributable to disablement suffered by soldiers and sailors serving the State in the War.

  SOLDIERS AND SAILORS (PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES).
  Mr. HOGGEasked the Prime Minister if he can say when the full Report of the Pensions Committee will be ready; and whether, if it is not possible to lay it soon, an early opportunity will be given to discuss the separation allowances which are to come into operation on 1st March?
  The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): I am informed that it is hoped that the final Report will be ready shortly I am not aware of any general desire to discuss the pensions and allowances which come into force on 1st March, but, if there is, I will endeavour to make arrangements to meet it.
  Mr. HOGGE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are a great many points which are not met by the interim Report in regard to separation allowances, and does he also recollect that this was a Committee of the House of Commons, and that surely we ought to have an opportunity of discussing the Report before it becomes law?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I have no responsibility for the proceedings of the Committee. It is a Committee of the House; but I have said that if there is

  1297
  a general disposition to discuss the Report I will see what can be done to meet it.
  Mr. HOGGEasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the hardship imposed upon young married couples who are unable to draw separation allowance owing to the date of their marriage, the Government will consider whether the allowance lost to them can be made up by a larger payment over as many weeks as is necessary to put them on an equality with those who have been drawing separation allowance all the time?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. H. Baker): Effect will be given to the new conditions of this grant with arrears from a date to be announced shortly.
  Mr. W. THORNEasked whether the widows of soldiers killed on active service are entitled to separation allowance in respect of posthumous children?
  Mr. BAKER: Separation allowance is issuable for posthumous children up to the expiry of twenty-six weeks from the notification of the soldier's death, when pension begins.
  Mr. WHELERasked whether the wives and families of the non-commissioned officers and men of the British regiments brought from India, now serving in France or Belgium, are being brought home to England; and whether they are receiving separation allowances on the same scale as those granted to the wives and children of non-commissioned officers and men now resident in Great Britain?
  Mr. BAKER: Yes, Sir.
  Mr. HOGGEasked whether separation allowances are paid for the adopted children of soldiers?
  Mr. BAKER: Adopted children are covered by the recommendations of the Select Committee.
  Mr. HOGGE: Can the hon. Gentleman say why the adopted child of an unmarried soldier gets the separation allowance, and the adopted child of a married soldier does not get the allowance?
  Mr. BAKER: Because in the first case it is a dependant.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked whether the dependants of an unmarried
  1298
  soldier who died of wounds before the announcement of allowances to such dependants are entitled to apply for an allowance for the period of twenty-six weeks after his death, and afterwards for a pension?
  Mr. BAKER: Issues of separation allowance to dependants are not made in cases where the soldier's death occurred before the scheme came into existence. The grant of pensions to dependants is, as my hon. Friend is aware, reserved by the Select Committee fo ra further report.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: In the meantime, does the answer mean that the dependants of all those soldiers who were the first to go out, and who had the misfortune to be killed during the first two or three months, are deprived of all pension or allowance?
  Mr. BAKER: I imagine that the Select Committee will report very soon, and a scheme of pensions will then come into force.
  Mr. MORRELLasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether, in the case of soldiers on active service who are not married and have no parents living, the Government allowance will be paid to the aunt or other near relatives with whom they were living and to whose household expenses they were contributing before their enlistment; and, if so, whether he will ascertain ascertain why no allowance has yet been paid to Mrs. Eliza Longworth, of 202, Padiham Road, Burnley, in respect of her nephews, Private A. Christie and Private J. Christie, 1723 and 1724, of the 5th Battalion East Lancashire Regiment, who left her under these conditions to go on active service?
  Mr. BAKER: The case is covered by the recommendations of the Select Committee, and will now be dealt with under them.
  Mr. MORRELL: Will not the War Office deal with the case at once?
  Mr. BAKER: I imagine that the Select Committee will name a date in their Report.

  DAMAGE BY AIRCRAFT AND BOMBARDMENT.
  Mr. HOGGEasked the Prime Minister whether the Government can offer any guidance to the public in the

  1299
  matter of insuring against risks of enemy bombardments from any kind of hostile ship on sea or in air, or whether the public can rely that the Committee set up to deal with the recent damage done on the East Coast will be kept in being for similar purposes if necessary until the end of the War?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I fear I cannot say more than that, in each case as it may arise, the question of the grant of relief from public funds and, if relief is granted, of the nature of the machinery to be set up, will be considered on its merits.
  Mr. HOGGE: Are we to understand from the reply of the right hon. Gentleman that relief is intended and not compensation?
  The PRIME MINISTER: That is a verbal question. I prefer to use the word "relief."

  PARLIAMENTARY FRANCHISE.
  Lord C. BERESFORDasked the Prime Minister whether he will consider the desirability of arranging that every man who has volunteered for the War and so risks his life in the service of and defence of the country shall be entitled at the age of twenty-one to a Parliamentary vote during his lifetime, irrespective of other qualifications?
  Mr. HENRY TERRELLasked the Prime Minister whether the Government will introduce a Bill to extend the Parliamentary franchise to all men who have during the present War served in His Majesty's Navy or Army (Regular and Territorial Forces); and, if not, whether lie will give the House an opportunity of discussing the question whether the men who have recognised their duty to the country by serving in His Majesty's naval and military services during the War ought to be given a voice in the management of the affairs of the country, and those men who, not being unfit for service, have refused to serve their country in the present crisis should be disfranchised?
  The PRIME MINISTER: In reply to this and the following question, the suggestions of the Noble Lord and of the hon. Member for the Chippenham Division will be duly considered.

  NATIVE REGIMENTS (SUPPLY OF RATIONS AND HORSES).
  Sir FORTESCUE FLANNERYasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been called to an alleged hardship inflicted on the officers of native contingents now at the front, that whereas the officers of English Cavalry regiments now fighting in France (or Belgium) are supplied with rations and horses (with their food) free, officers of Indian regiments have to pay daily 7s. odd for their rations, also for horse-hire and for food for the horse; whether he will explain why there has been this treatment of officers of native regiments; and whether he will take steps to place them upon the same footing as officers of British regiments in regard to horses and rations?
  Mr. BAKER: I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave on the 9th instant to a similar question by the hon. Member for Nottingham East, of which I will send him a copy.

  SOLDIERS ON LEAVE (FREE RAILWAY TICKETS).
  Sir F. FLANNERYasked whether a War Office order was issued granting free railway warrants to all soldiers for a period beginning 4th December, 1914, ending 31st January, 1915, being-Christmas leave; whether from 4th December, 1914, till 20th January, 1915, all men of No. 4 Company, 5th Battalion Essex Regiment (R.), who obtained leave had to pay their own fares, the first free railway warrant not being issued until 21st January; and whether the money thus expended by the soldiers will be refunded to them?
  Mr. BAKER: Owing to military exigencies it was only possible to allow the Christmas leave and free railway warrants to soldiers not fully trained. Arrangements have been made for a refund to all men who were allowed leave but paid their own fares. I am having inquiry made into the case referred to by the hon. Member.

  ARMY CLOTHING CONTRACTS.
  Mr. HOGGEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can give the names of the gentlemen serving on the

  1301
  Committee appointed by the War Office to assist it in organising and placing Army clothing contracts?
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether any Scottish clothing manufacturing firms are represented upon the Advisory Committee which has been appointed to advise the War Office with regard to the organising and placing of clothing contracts for the Army?
  Mr. BAKER: As I stated on another occasion, the Committee appointed to advise as to the handling and issue of the large quantities of stores at Pimlico and elsewhere has no functions of any kind in connection with clothing contracts. The names of its members are as follows:—
  Official Members.
  Unofficial Members.
  Mr. HOGGE: What objection is there to adding to the Committee a Scottish Member to represent the Scottish trade?
  Mr. BAKER: This Committee does not represent the trade at all. It is advising purely and solely on organisation and the handling of goods.
  Mr. HOGGE: Is there no Scottish Member able to advise with regard to the Scottish trade?
  Mr. BAKER: It is not a matter of trade, but a matter of organisation.
  Mr. PRINGLE: Can the hon. Gentleman say which Member for Leeds and which Member for Leicestershire?
  Mr. BAKER: I must apologise, but my hon. Friend who put the question knew the Members. It is the hon. Member for Loughborough (Sir M. Levy) and the hon. Member for North Leeds (Mr. Rowland Barran).
  Mr. WATTasked whether orders for clothing for the Army were given out at the Ordnance Store in Stirling at the beginning of the War; if so, why this practice was discontinued; and what
  1302
  system is now adopted by his Department to ensure that Scottish tailors get a fair share of the Government contracts for clothing?
  Mr. BAKER: During the first two months of the War large purchases were made locally by the various Army Ordnance depots (including that at Stirling) to meet the immediate needs of the troops. This system was discontinued as soon as practicable in order to avoid competition between several independent purchasing agents, and to secure that all goods supplied to the troops should receive expert inspection. Orders for clothing are distributed throughout the United Kingdom with due regard for economy and capacity of production, and the services of Scottish clotheirs have been utilised to a considerable extent.
  Mr. WATT: Can the hon. Gentleman tell us whether Scottish sellers of clothing have to come to London to show their samples and to get orders?
  Mr. BAKER: I must ask for notice of that question.
  Mr. HOGGE: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a number of Scottish merchants laid down extra machinery and employed extra hands to supply this ordnance store at Stirling and now do not get any orders?
  Mr. BAKER: I have explained the reasons for the prohibition, and they are very good reasons.
  Mr. WATTasked whether shortness exists in the supply of material to the contractors making clothing for the Army; and whether, in these circumstances, care is taken by his Department that the fair share of material available is given to Scottish sub-contractors, and that they are not always the last to be served?
  Mr. BAKER: There is no present shortage except in regard to greatcoat cloth, and this, I believe, will soon be-removed. Every endeavour has been and is being made to supply material to Scottish contractors equally with others.
  Mr. WATTasked whether considerable quantities of orders for clothing for our Army have gone to America; whether these orders have gone direct from the War Office or have been sub-contracted by his intermediary agents, Glanfield and Sons, or their agent; and, in any case, were the prices paid higher than have been paid to our tailors at Home?
  Mr. BAKER: Owing to the necessity for clothing the New Army in the shortest possible time, orders for uniforms have been placed by the War Office both in Canada and the United States. No firm holding War Office contracts for clothing has been allowed to sub - contract in Canada or the United States. The prices paid have been in most cases higher than those at which contracts have been placed in this country, on account of the greater cost of raw material and labour in America.
  Mr. PRINGLE: Will the hon. Gentleman say whether these contracts have been placed with commission agents and, if so, what commission is paid?
  Mr. BAKER: Will the hon. Gentleman give me notice of that question? There are two cases concerned, the United States and Canada.
  Mr. WATT: Are we to understand that an order for clothing was sent to America while a number of our tailors were practically unemployed?
  Mr. BAKER: The orders were placed outside this country simply and solely because it was thought necessary to clothe the Army at the earliest possible moment.
  Mr. PERCY HARRISasked whether the Fair-Wages Clause is inserted in War Office clothing contracts; whether any and, if so, what steps are taken to enforce it; and whether many of such contracts are being sub-let several times over with the result that the workpeople who actually make the clothing are not paid fair wages?
  Mr. BAKER: The Fair-Wages Clause is inserted in all War Office clothing contracts, and contractors' premises are inspected with a view to ascertaining that its requirements are being carried out. Some cases of sub-letting beyond that allowed by the Department have been discovered; and in every such case prompt action has been taken to bring it to an end.
  Mr. P. HARRIS: Would the hon. Gentleman allow me to see a copy of the Report?
  Mr. BAKER: Certainly, I will send the hon. Member a copy.

  WELSH GUARDS.
  Sir IVOR HERBERTasked whether volunteers for the Welsh Guards will be
  1304
  accepted and their transfer authorised from the Royal Welsh Fusiliers, Welsh Regiment, and South Wales Borderers, including the battalions of those regiments which form part of the Welsh Army Corps, provided such volunteers are willing to accept the usual terms of service applicable to the Brigade of Guards?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Tennant): Opportunity will be given to the regiments referred to, to volunteer for the Welsh Guards, but as the required numbers to complete the battalion are rapidly being found from Welshmen in Reserves of the Brigade of Guards, the number required will be strictly limited and confined to battalions serving at home.

  TREATMENT OF WOUNDED.
  Mr. KINGasked whether the Army medical authorities have taken steps to derive advantage from the experiments directed to obtain the best antiseptic for wounds as demonstrated by Sir Watson Cheyne at his recent Hunterian lecture?
  Mr. TENNANT: Full advantage has been taken by the Army medical authorities of all recent scientific advances in the surgical treatment of wounds.

  ARMY PAY CORPS.
  Mr. GEORGE ROBERTSasked if clerks in the Army Pay Corps have to complete 30 years' service before becoming eligible for a pension, whereas clerks in all other corps are required to complete 21 years' service only for this eligibility; whether a clerk in any of the other corps voluntarily remaining on till 30 years' service is completed is entitled to 6d. per day more pension than the soldier of the Army Pay Corps of similar rank; whether he can state the reasons for this differential treatment; and whether the point will be considered with a view to bringing the Army Pay Corps pension rights into harmony with those of other corps?
  Mr. BAKER: The conditions which the hon. Member quotes apply to members of the Army Pay Corps who joined after March, 1910. The purely clerical duties of this corps can be efficiently performed to a more advanced age than those of ordinary soldiers, and it is not proper that the public should be charged with pensions for premature retirement. On the other

  1305
  hand, the men referred to have the advantage of longer employment on full pay, and can ultimately earn higher pensions than those of other corps.
  Mr. CROOKS: Is it not a fact that there are between 5,000 and 6,000 of these young men employed in the Army Pay Corps, and that their places could be better filled by wounded soldiers and older men?
  Mr. BAKER: I would ask for notice of that question.

  REMOUNT DEPARTMENT.
  Sir WILLIAM BULLasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that in certain country districts the Remount Department is employing unskilled men of military age at wages of 40s. and 45s. a week whose main duty is to lead horses on the roads; whether, although these men are not enlisted and are free to leave when they like, they are being supplied with some kind of uniform; whether he is aware that no inquiries are made of these men before they are engaged as to their reasons for not enlisting; whether he is aware that this system is causing dissatisfaction among all classes and is proving detrimental to recruiting in certain districts, men stating that they are not prepared to join the fighting ranks when others equally eligible for service are given these highly-paid civilian posts under the War Office; and whether he will consider the possibility of giving this employment to men who are not of military age or are unfit for military service and at wages somewhat more approximate to those paid locally?
  Mr. BAKER: According to the information in my possession the hon. Member appears to be misinformed. I shall be glad if he will communicate to me more specifically the statements on which his question is founded, so that I may have inquiry made.

  RECRUITING.
  Mr. HAY MORGANasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether in some districts the number of rejections among applicants for enlistment in His Majesty's Forces is as high as 30 per cent.; whether any attempt is made to remove superficial unfitness with a view to subsequent enrolment; and whether he can give the total of rejections and the percentage of rejections for the whole country?
  Mr. TENNANT: The information is not readily available and would take some time to compile, and in view of the pressure prevailing at the recruiting offices I am reluctant to throw this additional work on their staffs.
  Sir RICHARD COOPERasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he is aware that the Admiralty have issued badges to workers on Government contracts to show that they are engaged in special service to the country; and will he adopt the same principle for workmen employed on contracts for the War Office?
  Mr. BAKER: Yes, Sir, arrangements are now being made to issue badges under certain conditions to workmen engaged oft work for the War Office.

  PASSPORT REGULATIONS.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEasked the-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that the sudden imposition of new Passport Regulations without making provision for added facilities for complying with the additional. Regulations is causing much inconvenience; and whether, in view of the Foreign Office issuing passports to be viséd on this side by the French Consul prior to crossing the Channel and also on the return journey by the British Consul, he will take step to see that the British Consulate in Paris remains open until 7 p.m. and on Sundays from 2 till 4 p.m.?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY Of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Primrose): A fortnight's notice was given through the Press and by all other available means of the new Regulations, and all necessary facilities were provided by the erection of a special building-and the provision of a largely increased staff to deal with applications for passports. With regard to the second part of the hon. Member's question, the British Consulate-General at Paris is open every day from ten till four, and the staff are usually on duty till after six. Furthermore, special arrangements were made some time ago whereby passports can be "visé" on application at any hour of the evening.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Do I understand the hon. Gentleman that the office in Paris is open from ten till four?
  Mr. PRIMROSE: I will make further inquiry.

  PASSPORT REGULATIONS.

    Osier Beds (Ireland).
    Mr. BOLANDasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland what steps, if any, have been taken through official or other sources to encourage the planting of osier beds in different parts of Ireland, with a view to supplying the raw material in the future for the basket-making industry?
    Mr. RUSSELL: The Department of Agriculture have upon their Forestry staff an experienced osier grower who is available for visiting sites of proposed osier beds, and advising as to their suitability, and as to methods of planting, as well as in regard to the maintenance and development of existing osier beds. The Department have also issued a leaflet on the subject, in which are indicated the varieties of osier most suitable for planting in Ireland, and the proper methods of cultivation.

    Dublin Assizes (Release of Prisoners).
    Sir JOHN LONSDALEasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he is aware that six men who, at the last Winter Assizes in Dublin, received sentences of six months' imprisonment with hard labour, have been released by order of the Lord Lieutenant after having served only one-third of their sentences; that at the trial of these men Mr. Justice Kenny stated that thirteen cattle drives had occurred in the Geashill district of King's County in the previous eighteen months, and that in the drive which was the subject of the prosecution six policemen were wounded; that the men released, with thirty-nine others who were discharged, pleaded guilty to charges of riot and assault; if he is aware that Thomas Hynes, who struck four policemen with an iron bar, was on the same occasion sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment with hard labour, and if his sentence has been reduced; and if Mr. Justice Kenny was consulted and recommended these acts of clemency?
    Mr. RUSSELL: The facts are generally as stated in the question. It would be altogether irregular for me to give the reasons underlying the exercise by the Lord Lieutenant of his prerogative of mercy, but I may say that an opportunity was given to the judge who tried the case to express his views with regard to such exercise. No order has yet been issued as to the prisoner Thomas Hynes.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of the persons released was a county councillor, and can he say what answer has been given to the representations that he should be granted a free pardon?
    Mr. RUSSELL: I am generally aware of the facts of those cases, but I am not at liberty to enter into them.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether or not an answer has been given?
    Mr. RUSSELL: No, I cannot.

    Congested Districts Board (Ireland).
    Mr. LYNCHasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether he is aware that dissatisfaction is expressed in West Clare at the dilatory action of the Congested Districts Board and its failure to complete business which should have been disposed of years ago, as for instance in the Reeves estate, West Clare; whether any general instruction has been given to the Board to reduce its activities to a minimum at the present time; and, if not, whether he can promise the speedy completion of sales and vesting of tenants in estates in West Clare on which the Board has been occupied for many months or years?
    Mr. RUSSELL: I am aware that in West Clare—as elsewhere—there is a strong desire that the work of the Congested Districts Board should proceed at a greater rate than has been found possible in the past and than financial conditions at present allow. As regards the Reeves estate sale, agreements are now being prepared except for a small section in which rearrangement is delayed by difficulty in obtaining certain lands for enlargement of holdings. While no such instructions have been given as are referred to in the question, it has been necessary to restrict borrowing for improvement works from the Local Loans Funds and as a result the preparation of estates for resale will suffer delay.
    Mr. LYNCH: Does the answer of the right hon. Gentleman mean that the Congested Districts Board has practically suspended its operations in Ireland?
    Mr. RUSSELL: No, I do not think you can take my answer that way; but you may gather from it that the work of the Congested Districts Boards, and all classes of work of that kind, is seriously affected by the present financial situation.

    Lee Fishery, County Cork (Ireland).
    Sir J. LONSDALEasked the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture (Ireland) the amount of the Grants given by the Department to the Board of Conservators of the Lee Fishery, county Cork, in the years 1913 and 1914, and the purpose for which these Grants are given; if he will state the number of illegal and illegally used nets seized during the years 1913 and 1914 in Cork Harbour, and how many of these nets were confiscated by order of the magistrates; if he is aware of the number of nets seized which were returned by the Board's officials to the owners; if he will state the number of offences against the fishery laws reported by the Board's head water bailiff between 23rd December, 1913, and 17th April, 1914, and explain why no proceedings were taken in any of these cases; and if he will direct an inquiry to be instituted into the exercise by this Board of its powers?
    Mr. RUSSELL: In each of the financial years 1913–14 and 1914–15 a grant of £360 was made to the Board of Conservators of the Cork Fishery District. The Grants were made for the general purposes of the Board. The Clerk to the Board has reported to the Department that, in the years 1913 and 1914 the number of illegal or illegally used nets seized was ninety-three; the number of these confiscated by order of magistrates was six. Of the nets seized, none were returned to the owners by the Board's officials without a magistrate's order; one offence against the fishery laws was reported by the? Board's head water bailiff between 23rd December, 1913, and 17th April, 1914; no proceedings were taken in this case, as no defendant could be named. The Department have not had before them any information which would justify the institution of a special inquiry into the proceedings of the Board of Conservators.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Would the right hon. Gentleman inquire as to whether certain persons who subscribed to the funds of the Board were given permission to fish with nets in the close season?
    Mr. RUSSELL: Yes. I will make any inquiries that may be thought desirable.

    Birmingham Labour Exchange.
    Sir FORTESCUE FLANNERYasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to
    1310
    the case of J. Blundell, who, being in regular employment in Birmingham, was, as has been alleged, approached at his home by an official of the Labour Exchange named Long and solicited to leave his employment in order to enter other employment; whether there is any record in the Labour Exchange at Birmingham of applications from Blundell prior to the 7th January, 1915, the date when he was solicited; and whether it is with the sanction of the Board of Trade that officials should interfere, either of their own initiative or otherwise, in cases of men already in regular employment?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: My attention has been called to the matter referred to. It is not the case, as alleged, that the workman in question was in any way solicited by a Labour Exchange official to leave his employment. Having on two previous occasions, on his own initiative, spoken to officials of the Labour Exchange of his desire to obtain other employment, he registered for such employment on the 7th January and was duly submitted to another employer. With reference to the last part of the question, I may say that workpeople are not precluded from registering at the Labour Exchanges on the ground that they are already in employment, but the managers of Labour Exchanges in offering-vacancies to workpeople, naturally give a preference to those who are out of employment.

    Steamship "Highland Brae."
    Sir RICHARD COOPERasked the President of the Board of Trade (1) if he has any knowledge of the missing steamer "Highland Brae"; if she is lost, has he any information that would point to the cause of her loss; and (2) when his inspectors last made a full report of the condition and seaworthiness of the "Highland Brae"; and whether that report was completely satisfactory?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I am informed that the "Highland Brae" left London on the 31st December, 1914, for Buenos Aires and has not been heard of since leaving Vigo on the 5th January last. The Board of Trade have no other information in the case at present. The last full report of the condition and seaworthiness of this vessel was made by a Board of Trade Surveyor on the 30th December, 1914, when a survey for a passenger certificate was finished. This report was completely satisfactory.
    Sir R. COOPER: Has the right hon. Gentleman not had information this morning to the effect that the passengers and crew were landed last night in Buenos Aires?
    Mr. ROBERTSON: I have no information as yet; it may arrive later.

    Rescue Stations in Scottish Coalfields.
    Mr. DUNCAN MILLARasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he can state what progress has now been made in erecting and equipping rescue stations in the coalfields of Scotland; and when it is expected that the rescue station now in course of erection in Lanarkshire will be completed?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Cecil Harmsworth): There are at present three central rescue stations open and complete, namely, at Cowdenbeath in Fife, and at Kilmarnock and Auchinleck in Ayrshire; and a fourth, at Edinburgh, connected with the Heriot-Watt College, will be opened next week. The Lanarkshire station at Coatbridge has been erected, and, but for the War, it would, I understand, have been fully equipped by now. It will be ready very shortly.

    Welsh Church Commission.
    Mr. STANIERasked the Home Secretary if the vacancy in the Welsh Church Commission has yet been filled, and, if so, by whom, and on what terms as to salary?
    Mr. HARMSWORTH: The resignation of the hon. Member for West Denbighshire has not yet taken effect. The vacancy when it arises will be for an unpaid Commissioner.
    Mr. HEWINS: Can the hon. Gentleman say when the resignation will take effect?
    Mr. HARMSWORTH: As soon as it has been found possible to appoint a successor to the hon. Member.

    Civil Service (Assistant Clerks' Salaries).
    Mr. CHARLES DUNCANasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether, in view of the fact that the Royal Commission on the Civil Service recommended in April last immediate improvement in the salary of assistant clerks, steps have been taken to put the recommendations into force; and, if so, from what date will the recommendations take effect?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Acland): I hope that it may be possible to isolate this recommendation and come to a decision upon it shortly.

    Clerk to Justices (Lanarkshire).
    Mr. WATTasked the Lord Advocate whether the clerkship to the justices of peace for the Middle Ward of Lanarkshire is at present vacant; what has been the amount of the emoluments derived from this office by the late holder; what are the duties of the office;-and whether, under the circumstances, he can see his way to divide the duties and emoluments among at least four men or else reduce the fees of the office?
    The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Munro): The answer to the first part of my hon. and learned Friend's question is in the affirmative. I have no official information as to the amount of the emoluments of the office, which are derived from fees, but I understand that they exceed £2,000 a year, out of which the late holder paid the salaries of his deputies and the other expenses connected with the discharge of his duties. The clerk of the peace attends by himself or his deputy the Civil and Criminal Courts of the justices, and is clerk of the Licensing Court and Court of Appeal. He has also duties under various Statutes, such as the Theatres Act, the Acts relating to Game Licences, the Pawnbrokers Act, and the Army Act. With reference to the last part of the question, the suggestions of my hon. and learned Friend are already under consideration.
    Mr. WATT: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how much the salary and fees of the late holder amounted to?
    Mr. MUNRO: My hon. and learned Friend will perhaps give me notice of that.
    Sir G. YOUNGER: Does not the Lore Advocate consider that this salary is an extreme one in view of the duties performed, and will he consider the propriety of revising the salary and fees before he makes another appointment?
    Mr. MUNRO: All these matters are under consideration now.

    Telephones Damaged by Storm.
    Mr. ROWLANDSasked the Postmaster-Generel whether a considerable number of subscribers in the south-western district are still deprived of the use

    1313
    of their telephones in consequence of the snowstorm which occurred on 21st January; and, if so, can he state when the damage will be repaired and the subscribers have the use of their telephones?
    The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Hobhouse): Out of the 11,000 telephone lines in the south of the Metropolitan area which were put out of service by the snowstorm on the 22nd January, some 2,000 are still unrepaired. Great efforts are being made, by the engineering staff to push on the work of restoration, which will, I hope, be practically completed by the end of this week.
    Mr. ROWLANDS: Will the right hon. Gentleman give a proportionate reduction in the annual subscription of those who have been deprived of the use of their telephone under these circumstances?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: That is a very attractive proposition from the point of view of the owner, but, on the other hand, these repairs must be taken into consideration when the telephone rates are fixed.

    Potato Crop (Transport Facilities).
    Mr. WATTasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he has had any complaints from the southern counties of England as to the difficulty of getting forwarded from Scotland the usual quantity of seed potatoes for the coming crop; whether he is aware that the delay arises from want of facilities of transit by the railway companies and by sea; and whether he proposes to take any measures to see that the potato crop in the South of England does not suffer by such delays?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Harry Verney): The answer is in the affirmative. The Board have brought the matter to the notice of the Railway Executive Committee through the Board of Trade.
    Mr. WATT: Can the hon. Gentleman tell us whether anything effective has been done in that way?
    Sir H. VERNEY: It has only just been brought about, but I have no doubt that something effective will be done.

    Irish Model Schools (Teachers' Salaries).
    Mr. MOOREasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has received representations relative to the claims of certain teachers in Irish model schools to supplementary
    1314
    pensions, and to the inclusion in their pensionable salaries of all allowances from Parliamentary Grants; and what course the Government propose to adopt in the matter?
    Mr. ACLAND: My right hon. Friend has received and carefully considered the representations of the Commissioners of National Education with respect to the position of certain model school teachers, but he regrets to be unable to sanction them. It is not the case that any teacher is deprived by the new Rules of any benefit against his will: on the contrary, the new Rules allow the teachers to choose freely between the benefits which they already possess and the benefits offered by the new Rules. My right hon. Friend cannot, however, see his way to allow a particular class of teachers the benefits both of the old and of the new Rules.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Is the hon. Gentle man aware that the claim for these supplementary pensions and for the inclusion of allowances in their pensionable salaries is based upon the definition by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his letter of 12th December, 1913, in which he says, "The average money from Exchequer sources for the year"—
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Baronet must give notice of that question.

    Criminal Sentences (India).
    Mr. LOUGHasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether he can state the result of the appeals to the Chief Court of the Punjab of the seven British subjects who were tried for a criminal conspiracy to murder one Ram Padarath on the 17th May, 1913; whether, at the instance of the local Government, one of the accused, who was acquitted by the judge who tried him, has now been sentenced to transportation for life, and another, who was sentenced by the judge to be transported for life, has now been sentenced to be hanged; if so, upon what fresh evidence these sentences by the Chief Court have been passed; and whether it is proposed to give effect to them?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. C. Roberts): Eleven, not seven, persons were tried. The Punjab Chief Court has confirmed the three capital sentences which were passed subject to its confirmation, and has reduced two sentences of transportation for life to rigorous imprisonment for seven years. It

    1315
    has enhanced one sentence of transportation for life, passed on the man who was proved to have laid the bomb which killed Ram Padarath, to sentence of death. On appeal by the Grown against the acquittal by the Sessions judge of a seventh person, who was considered guilty by all the three Indian assessors, the Chief Court has convicted the accused and sentenced him to transportation for life. The text of the Chief Court's judgments has not been received, and the Secretary of State is not aware whether the Court found it necessary to take fresh evidence. The Governor-General in Council has power to suspend, remit or commute sentences, if memorials are presented by the condemned persons.
    Mr. LOUGH: Will this particular case be reconsidered? Is it usual to increase a sentence to hanging without fresh evidence?
    Mr. ROBERTS: The Governor-General in Council has power to suspend sentences if memorials are presented by the condemned persons in the usual way.
    Mr. MORRELL: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the accused were present when this appeal was heard?
    Mr. ROBERTS: We have not got the text of the Court's judgment. Under the circumstances I cannot answer questions about the particular incidents of the trial.
    Sir W. BYLES: Will the sentence be carried out before the memorial is received? May I also ask whether some promise has not been held out to us of a revision of judicial arrangements of so unusual a character?
    Mr. ROBERTS: I think—I am speaking from recollection—that in cases of appeal against sentence of death the memorial is always taken into account before the sentence is carried out.
    Mr. LOUGH: That will be done in this case.

    Civil Service (Royal Commission).
    Mr. CHARLES DUNCANasked the Prime Minister whether he will state the present position as regards the fourth Report of the Royal Commission on the Civil Service; and whether a Treasury Minute on the subject will shortly be laid upon the Table of the House?
    The PRIME MINISTER: Any change involving extensive reorganisation of
    1316
    Government Departments is, unfortunately, impracticable at the moment, but consideration of the Report by His Majesty's Government will proceed as far as circumstances permit. I can hold out no prospect that the recommendations of the Royal Commission in general can be dealt with during the continuance of the War.

    Office of Works (Parliamentary Representative).
    Mr. HAY MORGANasked whether any change is to be made in the representation in this House of the Office of Works?
    The PRIME MINISTER: The hon. Member for Saffron Walden (Mr. Beck) will now answer for the Office of Works.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Lord EDMUND TALBOT: May I ask the Prime Minister what business it is proposed to take next week?
The PRIME MINISTER: On Monday we shall take the Civil Service (Vote on Account), when the first topic for discussion will be the question of dye-stuffs.
On Tuesday we shall give an opportunity to discuss the Chancellor of the Exchequer's statement as to the negotiations with the Finance Ministers of France and Russia. Thereafter we shall take the Reports on the Navy Votes.
On Wednesday, the Second Reading of the Defence of the Realm Amendment Bill and of the other Bills upon the Paper.
On Thursday, the Report of the Civil Service (Vote on Account).
Mr. PRINGLE: When will the Defence of the Realm Amendment Bill be circulated?
The PRIME MINISTER: To-morrow.
Mr. KEIR HARDIE: When is it proposed to move Mr. Speaker out of the Chair on the Civil Service Estimates?
The PRIME MINISTER: Possibly in the following week.
Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Will Report be taken of the Navy Vote I?
The PRIME MINISTER: Certainly.

NAVAL AND MILITARY OPERATIONS (COMPENSATION).
Mr. RONALD M'NEILL: I wish to call attention to a mistake in the OFFICIAL REPORT, which seems to me important. It is in a question I put to the Prime Minister supplementary to one addressed to the right hon. Gentleman by the hon. Member for the Exchange Division of Liverpool with regard to compensation for damage done by the enemy raids. The right hon. Gentleman, in reply, referred the hon. Member to an answer given to me last week. I then asked, according to the OFFICIAL REPORT:—
"Will Lord Parmoor's Committee be able to consider claims arising from damage as well as occupation?"
1328
That, of course, appears to be meaningless. What I did ask was—
"Will Lord Parmoor's Committee be able to consider claims arising from damage by sea as well as land?"
To that the right hon. Gentleman answered—
"Yes, I think so, but I will look into it."
The matter is of importance, as there are many people in the country who have a live interest in this question.
Mr. SPEAKER: I am not responsible in any way for the OFFICIAL REPORT. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will communicate with the Editor. It is one of the inconveniences of asking supplementary questions that the Reporters do not get the text.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.
  SUPPLY— [10TH FEBRUARY].—REPOKT.
  Resolution reported,
  SUPPLY— [10TH FEBRUARY].—REPOKT.

    ARMY ESTIMATES, 1915–16.
    1. "That a number of Land Forces, not exceeding 3,000,000, all ranks, be maintained for the Service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland at Home and Abroad, excluding His Majesty's Indian Possessions, during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1916."
    Resolution agreed to.
    Resolution reported,
    2. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Pay, etc., of His Majesty's Army (including Army Reserve) at Home and Abroad (exclusive of India), which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1916."
    Resolution read a second time.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
    Colonel YATE: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House whether any increase of pay is to be given to officers of the Army in the near future?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Tennant): The hon. and gallant Member and the House is of course aware that an increase of pay for officers was sanctioned last year. I do not know whether the Secretary of State has in mind the bringing in of another scheme, but this

    1329
    is hardly the time when the attention of the officials of the War Office and the Treasury should be occupied with so difficult and complicated a matter. Their time is fully occupied already and such a matter might well be left until after the War is over.
    Mr. PETO: Can the. Under-Secretary give us any information with regard to the question of the deductions from the pay of officers serving with the Indian Contingent? I had an official Order on the subject, but I have unfortunately mislaid it and can only speak from memory. But I understand the officers are called upon to pay £7 per month for each of the two horses they require. They have also to provide their own servants, because in the Indian Army, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, questions of caste come in and the officers have not such good facilities for getting men from their own regiments as officers in the British Army. They also have to provide syces to look after the horses, and the total deductions amount to about £15 a month. I understand that the War Office is responsible, under the arrangements made with the Indian Government with regard to the Expeditionary Force, for the payment of all over and above the ordinary expenses in India, and I am very anxious to be assured that this additional financial responsibility undertaken by the War Office shall not be met at the expense, to a large extent, of officers actually serving at the front. But that is the effect of the deductions, and it is proposed thus to minimise the additional expense which would otherwise fall on the War Office. This is felt to be a very real grievance by officers serving in France under much more onerous conditions, as they find themselves a great deal worse off on active service than if they were fulfilling their ordinary duties in India. I cannot think that that is the intention of the War Office, and I should like information on the point. I would like also to ask your ruling, Sir, as to whether we are at liberty on the Report stage of this Vote to raise the same or, rather, similar questions, with the same latitude as on the Committee stage, or is Debate on this Vote strictly confined to the question of pay?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The Debate is strictly confined to the question of the pay of officers and men.
    Mr. BALDWIN: Is it in order to discuss the question of recruiting in connection with this Vote?
    Mr. SPEAKER: What particular point does the hon. Gentleman wish to raise?
    Mr. BALDWIN: I wish to raise a question of recruiting as it affects the drawing of men from the industries of the country, and to make a suggestion which, I think, might be productive of good by drawing men from industries where they are less required.
    Mr. SPEAKER: This relates only to pay. Unless the hon. Member proposes to increase pay all round, when perhaps recruiting would be more rapid, it would not be in order.
    Mr. JAMES HOPE: There is some misconception in the minds of Members because, on the Committee stage, there was a general discussion on the Vote for men and pay. It was not quite understood when the question regarding the Vote for men was put that all subjects which were relevant to that were not to be discussed on the Pay Vote. I understand that some latitude is allowed by the Chair on these occasions, and, possibly, it might be extended to this case.
    Mr. SPEAKER: None of the indulgence is allowed by me. The indulgence has been given by the Chairman of Committees. This question arises regularly every year. Hon. Members seem to think that they have the liberty on the Report stage to discuss the same questions as were discussed in the Committee stage. That is not so. The rule is that when the House is in Committee on the Army or Navy Estimates on Vote A a general discussion upon any matter connected with the Army or the Navy may be raised. That rule does not hold good when the House is sitting on Report stage.
    Mr. HOGGE: On the point of Order. Is it not the case that Mr. Whitley, the Deputy-Speaker, allowed a general discussion on Vote A, and particularly said we might have a general discussion on Vote 1?
    Mr. SPEAKER: I have not the faintest idea what he said. I am not aware at all of what happened in Committee.
    Mr. J. HOPE: May I suggest that the misapprehension with regard to the matter was rather that the discussion of Votes A and I was interchangeable, that the same discussion would be allowed on Report as in Committee, and that hon. Members were not sufficiently vigilant

    1331
    when Vote A was taken, or probably thought that they would be allowed to discuss the same things again.
    Mr. SPEAKER: It is quite clear that the House having passed Vote A, which is for men, the question now is whether they should pay them or not, and at what rate. That is what we are now discussing, and that may be discussed.
    Sir FREDERICK BANBURY: On the point of Order. I presume the pay of a recruiting officer and recruiting sergeant is included in this Vote? If that is so, would it not be in Order to discuss whether for their pay the recruiting officer and the recruiting sergeant are doing their duty?
    Mr. SPEAKER: If the hon. Member wishes to cut down the pay of the recruiting officer or to criticise his action, now is his opportunity.
    Mr. PETO: There are one or two little matters with regard to pay to which I ask the right hon. Gentleman's attention. One is the question of the bounty which is paid to Class 1 of the National Reserve. Several questions have been asked the right hon. Gentleman, one, I think, the day before yesterday by the hon. Member for the St. Augustine's Division of Kent (Mr. Ronald M'Neill). He was referred to a reply given upon the 4th February to the hon. Member for Chertsey (Mr. Mac-master). That question cannot be left exactly where it is. These men feel that they have a very real grievance. Those who come up for service in the Regular Army receive their £10 bounty, which, of course, in one form or another, goes to increase the pay they receive, but those who join a Territorial regiment do not get any bounty at all. The Financial Secretary answered the hon. Member for Chertsey as follows:—
    "The distinction to which the hon. Member refers is in accordance with the agreements made in each case with the men. There were good grounds for attaching the higher bounty to the undertaking to serve in the Regular Army."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 4th February, 1916, col. 143.]
    That was the whole point raised by the right hon. Member for the Strand. He would admit at once that at the time these agreements were entered into there were good grounds for some distinction. But that distinction has, in practice, vanished, because the vast majority of Territorial battalions are prepared to volunteer, and have, in fact, volunteered, for foreign service. Therefore
    1332
    most of the National Reserve are undertaking the same responsibilities and duties, yet in the one case they get the £10 as an addition to their pay and in the other nothing at all. It is a very fine distinction. If the distinction was good at the time the arrangement was made, I would submit to the right hon. Gentleman that it does not hold good to-day. At any rate, it is a case of hair-splitting which the ordinary man in the National Reserve does not understand. He does not see why, if he is fighting alongside his fellow National Reservists, under exactly the same conditions, in the same place, and undertaking the same duties, that in the one case a man should have the £10 and in the other nothing at all.
    There is one other matter on which we have not had a definite announcement from the Under-Secretary, which is also a very real grievance—that is the question of officers commanding who have only the rank of major. We were told on the Committee stage that in cases where the colonel in command of a regiment was a prisoner of war it was the custom of the War Office to give the temporary rank of lieutenant-colonel to the officer left in command, and that after three months that was confirmed and he would be given that permanent rank. We have regiments at the front which are and have been commanded for as long as five months by officers who have only the rank of major, and where there is not the slightest probability of the officer who was commanding the regiment coming back. I do not wish to mention the actual regiments—I can mention them to the right hon. Gentleman and I dare say they are well known to the War Office—but I could refer to actual cases of which I know where these officers have had all the responsibilities of commanding their battalions as long as five months under war conditions and have been left in the position of major.
    Mr. TENNANT: What happened to the real colonel?
    Mr. PETO: He was promoted to general of a brigade. The right hon. Member who raised this question asked whether there was any probability, after three, four, or five months, of the officer who had been promoted to the rank of general of a brigade coming back to command the battalion again, and, even if there were, would there be any hardship done? The only answer the right hon. Gentleman gave at the time was that if these officers were promoted

    1333
    temporarily at first and confirmed in their rank afterwards; after the War there might be a surplusage of brigadier-generals. I do not think that the House is quite satisfied with the position, and I should like to know from the right hon. Gentleman if the War Office have decided that the promotion to substantive rank of lieutenant-colonels of officers who are doing the duties now, will be carried out as in other cases after a reasonable interval.
    Mr. RAWLINSON: There are three points connected with the pay of officers to which I wish to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman. They are small points, but they are worthy of attention. The first is the case of Territorials who have volunteered for foreign service. They were mobilised in England and immediately put upon field service rations. They wished to go to the front, but they were sent to India. They make no complaint of that, but when they were sent to India the field service ration was taken away and they are, therefore, in a worse financial position than their fellows who were mobilised in England and did not volunteer for foreign service, but who still receive full and proper pay in England. It is an obvious injustice that those Territorials who volunteered for foreign service should be penalised at the expense of their brothers in the same regiment who did not volunteer for foreign service, who remain in England, and who are receiving a larger ration, than those who have volunteered for India. The second point is as regards the pay of Indian Medical Service officers. When they are working in India they get certain allowances, and they have come in very large numbers to the front. If they are in the fortunate position to be entrusted with a regiment, possibly there is no great cause of complaint as to their pay, but if they are serving with field ambulances, as a large number of them are, they are put upon what is called, I think, "unemployment pay," which means that they are in a very much worse position than they were in India, to the extent in some extreme cases of £20 a month. I asked a question on this subject, but the answer that I got did not deal with the case where a person is brought from India and is serving with the field ambulance on the Continent. If he was doing military medical work in India he would be receiving considerably more than he is receiving at present.
    Mr. SPEAKER: Would not such a matter as that come under the Medical Establishment Vote, Vote 2?
    Mr. RAWLINSON: I am not sure. I had great difficulty in finding out whether it is paid by the Indian Government or not, but I believe it is paid by the War Office.
    Mr. SPEAKER: If he is still paid by India, it is not included in this Resolution. If he is paid under the Army Medical Service and forms part of the Army Medical Service, he would be paid under Vote 2 and not under this Vote.
    Mr. RAWLINSON: I will take the opportunity of renewing, probably rather more coherently than I have clone, my application when it comes to the proper Vote. My third question, as regards the Army Service Corps, would come under this Vote. There was a rise in the remuneration of officers in the Army Service Corps not very long ago. It really seems to me more theoretical than practical, because since the time when that rise occurred two great reductions have been made from the pay of officers in the Army Service Corps which certainly there do not seem any very good reason for. In addition to the ordinary pay the officer gets what is called "corps pay," and he used to be allowed half-a-crown corps pay in the Army Service Corps. A similar fund exists in Artillery and other regiments. But that half-a-crown corps pay was reduced, for some reason or another, to two shillings, and at the same time, until recently, an officer in the Army Service Corps had his servant free of charge. That privilege was taken away as well. When he comes to captain's rank, I am told, though I have not the exact figures, that he literally is worse off than he was before the pay was raised some little time ago, because of these deductions. I ask the right hon. Gentleman for an answer on these two points.
    Colonel LOCKWOOD: There is a question I should rather like to put to the Under-Secretary for War upon which I have entered into communication with him privately. The subject is of considerable importance, and it is the digging of trenches for defensive works, especially in the Eastern Counties. The digging of these trenches, I presume, is carried out naturally under the auspices and by the command of the officer in charge of Home defence. The digging of these trenches has entailed a good deal of hardship and

    1335
    brought a good deal of trouble, especially on those small farmers on whose land they have been dug.
    Mr. SPEAKER: The right hon. Gentleman means to raise the question of compensation?
    Colonel LOCKWOOD: Yes.
    Mr. SPEAKER: I do not think that will come under the Vote for pay. I cannot say off-hand what Vote it will come under, but it will not be under the pay of the men digging the trenches.
    Colonel LOCKWOOD: No. It would come under the question of the pay of the officer who ordered these trenches to be dug.
    Mr. SPEAKER: That will probably come under the Works Vote—Vote 10.
    Mr. RONALD M'NEILL: I wish to say a word or two on the question of the payment of separation allowances before the Vote passes out of our control, more especially as I rather gathered from the answer given by the Prime Minister this afternoon that we are unlikely to have an opportunity of discussing it on another occasion.
    Mr. SPEAKER: This is entirely a Vote for the pay of the men employed. The separation allowances will surely come under non-effective charges, Vote 14.
    Mr. R. M'NEILL: I submit that the separation allowance depends upon the amount which is allotted to the wife or dependant, and that the amount paid by the Government is strictly dependent on the allotment which he makes and which comes directly out of his own pay, and therefore it would come under this Vote.
    Mr. SPEAKER: As I understand, the man allots a certain portion of his pay. The pay is under this Vote. The Government supplements that with further sums, and those further sums are taken under Vote 14.
    Mr. TENNANT: And the amount which the man allots to his wife would not alter the pay which he receives, which is the point we are discussing.
    4.0 P.M.
    Mr. HOGGE: On the point of Order. Could we not hold that the pay of the soldier should be maintained at the figure set down, and that no deduction should be made from it? Is it not possible to discuss the point that the pay in the Vote should be given to the man as we pass it?
    Mr. SPEAKER: It does not appear from the Vote that a deduction is made.
    Mr. HOGGE: Is it not assumed that the man must be given a certain sum in order to get certain allowances? Can we not discuss the point that the deduction should not be made compulsorily?
    Mr. SPEAKER: It seems to me that that would mean a very large increase in this Vote. What is suggested is that the sum which the man now sends to his wife out of his pay should be borne by the State. That would mean a very large addition, and I do not think that would be covered by this Vote. It would require another Vote altogether to enable that to be granted, and legislation as well.
    Mr. R. M'NEILL: May I submit this point? This is a Vote for the men's pay. Now a compulsory deduction is made from the pay of the soldier for the benefit of his wife or dependants. The particular point I wish to bring forward is that the payment is not made with sufficient promptitude.
    Mr. SPEAKER: That is a criticism of the Pay Department. If the hon. Member puts it in that way, what he criticises is the action of the Army Pay Department. That is borne on this Vote.
    Mr. R. M'NEILL: The particular point which I wish to bring forward, as I have done once or twice before in Debate, is that the allowance to the wife is not paid in sufficieut time. The Financial Secretary to the War Office has shown a certain amount of official complaisancy in regard to this matter. In the Debate on 10th February last, the hon. Gentleman said:—
    "I think I may fairly claim that in the case of wives and children the payment is now made much quicker than if the man had to receive it in ordinary civil occupation. I gave various causes for the delay, such as the case where a man does not declare himself properly and there is some difficulty as to identification. But, setting those cases aside, I can fairly claim that the machinery is working smoothly and well."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 10th February, 1915, col. 655.]
    That is why the other day, in answer to a question, I said that a certain amount of delay was inevitable.
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Baker): That is a quotation from the OFFICIAL REPORT. If the hon. Member will look at a further statement I made in that Debate, he will find that I was referring to the past and not the present.
    Mr. R. M'NEILL: I am not able to say at the present moment that my complaint holds good, but I do not think that the hon. Gentleman in any reply which I have been able to find has been able to show that there has been no great delay in the payments as regards wives and children in the past. I brought a number of cases before him and he has not up to the present time said anything about them. It is quite true that he contends that cases of delay have been exceptional, and that as a general rule there has been no delay in the payment of separation allowances. In one particular I am glad to be able to confirm what the hon. Gentleman said. I knew a case of an hon. Member of this House who is doing duty to his country, having enlisted as a private in the Army. I have permission to mention the very gratifying fact that within a week of the enlistment of the hon. Member for South Derbyshire (Sir H. H. Raphael) his wife was in receipt of separation allowance. Therefore in that particular case we have the gratifying knowledge that Lady Raphael was put by the War Office beyond the possibility of destitution. But when it comes to what the hon. Gentleman opposite holds out as an assurance that this very regrettable and mischievous delay will not take place again, I find that the language he used is exceedingly vague. He said:—
    "I think that now that we have direction to accept the existing machinery and the existing basis upon which dependence is to be judged, the surest way of removing the difficulty is to get some common basis established between the pension officer and the pensions committee, and also get the pensions committee to proceed with a greater knowledge of the scheme and a greater desire to deal with their cases more promptly."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 10th February, 1915, col. 686.]
    Could there possibly be a vaguer assurance than that this practical mischief will be done away with? I think the Under-Secretary said that such fault as there has been lay not so much with the pension officer as the pensions committee. It really does not matter much to the people concerned whether the fault lies with the one or the other. They look to the War Office to see that the amount cut off the soldiers' pay is handed over to the wives or dependants with great promptitude. I said last week that I was not in a position to suggest better machinery for doing this than the machinery of the old age pensions committees. I remember that a circular was issued some time ago to the pension officers or the pensions committees in which it was pointed out that this was
    1338
    purely voluntary work on their part. An appeal was made to their patriotism to put their machinery at the disposal of the War Office for this purpose. I quite understand that there may be some difficulty in the War Office bringing any real pressure to bear on the pensions committees, and, therefore, having regard to that difficulty, the committees are carrying out a purely voluntary and patriotic work. If the Government say that the delay of which I now complain is to be attributed to these committees, and then express a pious hope that the committees will proceed with a greater desire to deal with cases more promptly, that is really no assurance that the delays will be avoided.
    Mr. BAKER: I should like to point out that the pension officers are under the Treasury and pensions committees are under the Local Government Board and not the War Office, and, therefore, the point cannot be discussed on this Vote.
    Mr. R. M'NEILL: My point is that it is a matter for the War Office, but the War Office in this House puts the blame upon the pensions committees whether they have a right to blame them or not. My point is that if the War Office is not able to perform this important piece of work in an efficient manner, then they should employ somebody else. We must look to the War Office to employ the best machinery that can be got to do it with as little delay as possible.
    Mr. PRINGLE: I understand from your ruling, Mr. Speaker, that this Vote includes the pay of recruiting officers. In these circumstances I wish to draw attention to some of the methods employed by recruiting officers. Only the other day the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham (Mr. Chamberlain) drew the attention of the Prime Minister to an advertisement. There have been other advertisements of a similar kind. Only yesterday there was another advertisement addressed to patriotic shopkeepers in which they were asked:—
    "Have you shop assistants between nineteen and thirty-eight, and if so, how many?"
    The suggestion in that advertisement is that if patriotic shopkeepers have young men in their service between nineteen and thirty-eight years of age, they might be able to get women to do the work. It seems to me that this form of advertisement is highly objectionable. Here we are having a sort of indirect compulsion applied to men to enlist. It seems to me that it

    1339
    would be far better to withdraw these advertisements altogether, to abstain from this objectionable form of advertising, and to go in for an honest form of compulsion. Not only is it objectionable in principle, but by employing these methods we are incurring a very considerable waste of the taxpayer's money, while the efforts of these recruiting gentlemen are being employed in a way which is not at all profitable. Their services might be used in a way which would be of far greater military advantage to the country. We have therefore not only a waste of money, but also a waste of effort.
    It seems to me that a further point arises in regard to this matter. It is as to whether the men who are earning this pay are entitled to receive it according to the Regulations All the advertisements to which I have referred speak of the age between nineteen and thirty-eight. It is common knowledge that there are a great many people enlisting, and who are becoming entitled to pay as soldiers and to separation allowances, who are not within these ages. Obviously this money which is being voted as pay for the soldiers is being paid under present circumstances to some men who, under the definition of the War Office, cannot hope to become efficient soldiers. It seems to me that under these circumstances if men outside the age limit are obtaining the pay, it is perilously like obtaining money under false pretences. I hope, now that the matter has been brought to the notice of my right hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, and more particularly to the notice of the Financial Secretary, it will be put right. However, the matter of advertisement is one which I think it desirable to call to the attention of the War Office authorities. Either at the present time they are able to secure the number of recruits whom they are able to train and equip without any objectionable advertisement, or they are not. If they are not, then it would be better to adopt another system, and not have a pseudo voluntary system which is not in reality a voluntary system at all, but which introduces compulsion in its very worst and most objectionable form. I hope that my right hon. Friend will be able to give us an assurance on that point, and will also be able to assure the House that some sort of censorship will be exercised over the form of the advertisements which are put into various newspapers in order to obtain recruits for the New Army.
    Lord C. BERESFORD: I should like to ask a question in reference to a case of a woman in my Constituency. Her son joined the Navy, and she got a separation allowance. Her husband has now joined the Army. Is she entitled to draw for them both?
    Mr. BAKER: I imagine that in the circumstances the woman is entitled to draw the Army separation allowance. I cannot say whether she is properly drawing the Navy separation allowance. The hon. Member for Kent (Mr. M'Neill) raised certain matters in connection with the delay in the payment of separation allowances. He complains of vagueness in the statement which I made the other night. I certainly thought that I had been precise in my observations. I do not pretend that there is no delay in connection with the payment of separation allowances to wives and children, but what I did and do say is that all the delay due to the fault of the War Office is being, so far as is humanly possible, eliminated. There must remain over certain other causes of delay which it is not possible for us to remove in regard to the payment of dependants' allowances. In attempting to apportion the delay between the pension officer and the pension committee, I certainly do not intend to press heavily on the pension committee, but it so happens that in the course of the Debate the pension officer has come in for considerable censure, and I only wish to put on record the result of my own observations and information that in cases where the pension officer has been blamed, and the case has been investigated, it almost always appeared that the pension officer was not open to any censure. The hon. and learned Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Rawlinson) raised various questions to-day with regard to the disadvantages from which he said the Army Service Corps were suffering. I can assure him that his views will be considered carefully. He certainly need not think that the military or financial authorities at the War Office are likely unduly to depreciate the claims of that corps in view of the very great and valuable services which they have been rendering. He also referred to medical officers serving in India. That, with all due respect to you, Mr. Speaker, I think is a question which belongs not to the War Office but should be addressed to my hon. Friend who sits here (Mr. C. Roberts).

    1341
    The hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Peto) raised another point with regard to certain deductions from the pay of Indian officers which have been made while they are serving in France. I should point out to him that those officers are getting rates of pay which are higher than the British rates, and they are being subjected to deductions precisely the same as they would be subjected to in India, but I can assure him that the matter is under consideration and is a subject of consultation with the Government of India at this moment. He then referred to the question of the payment of bounties to reservists. There has been some misunderstanding in connection with these bounties, though there was never any ambiguity about them before the War broke out. These bounties were instituted simply to induce National Reservists to undertake specific obligations in time of peace. The object of asking them to undertake such obligations was that the military authorities might know precisely the number of men they would be able to call up for special purposes. The bounties had nothing to do with enlistment. They were given simply to assure the Adjutant-General's Department that they would be able to call on a certain number of men for a particular form of service, either abroad or at home.
    Mr. R. M'NEILL: Surely the whole difference has been made by the War, because as I understand it the principle was that bounties should be paid to men willing to engage themselves when wanted to serve with the Regular Army. That carries with it an obligation to serve abroad or at home as the case may be. The obligation on the Territorials was only for Home defence. When the present War broke out an enormous number of Territorials became practically Regular soldiers, and are being used abroad. Surely the distinction, which may have been perfectly fair before the War broke out, becomes a gross injustice. The men who joined for active service should be treated on the same footing whether they originally belonged to the Territorials or the Regular Army.
    Mr. BAKER: That would be so if it were not that the bounty was paid in respect of quite a different reason. The bounty was given in respect of the undertaking which the man took at the time. I can assure the hon. Member that there is complete agreement on the question. All the military and civil authorities agree that there
    1342
    is really no justification for altering the original purpose of the bounty and converting it to another use. These men to whom the hon. Member refers, it is perfectly true, serve abroad side by side with the others, but there are men who, when invited, did not accept the obligation to joining the Regular Army. The bounty was given for that purpose and no other. The distinction between the two classes is perfectly well founded.
    Mr. PETO: Will the hon. Gentleman reply to the point already put to him with regard to officers commanding regiments?
    Colonel SYKES: I would ask the right hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary for War, in reference to regimental sergeant-majors in Territorial Forces while serving in France—
    Mr. SPEAKER: That will come on on Vote 4.
    Mr. J. HOPE: I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the War Office have done their best to dissuade other Departments, public authorities or semi-Government Departments, from entering into competition with them in the matter of recruiting, because I have come across one or two, as I think, rather glaring cases. In one case I will confess that I have not seen the advertisement myself, but it has been reported to me that the Controller of the London Telegraph Service has actually advertised for men between the ages of twenty and thirty-five to be taken on in his Department. Another advertisement which I have seen is one by the Port of London Authority advertising for male clerks without any stipulation as to age. I submit that it is utterly wrong for a public authority to come into the market practically in competition with the Recruiting Department of the War Office, and I would suggest to the War Office that they ought to do their best to put a stop to advertising of that kind. Have they been in touch sufficiently with the Parliamentary Recruiting Committee to enable the latter to confine their energies to parts of the country where they are most wanted? For instance, I was asked to go to a recruiting meeting the other day, and when I got there I found that there was not a soul in the room who was appreciably younger than myself. There was not a man of military age there at all, and, in fact, the whole village had been most patriotically denuded. Surely it is possible to issue

    1343
    some kind of report separating the country into those areas where recruiting has been good, and all the young men have gone, and those where there is still a great deal to be done! Otherwise there will be a very great waste of energy, and I think that with the leave of the superior authorities there could be published some kind of chart of the country, not giving the numbers away, but showing the incidence of recruiting and indicating the places where it has been good, less good, and bad. That would, I think, lead to a very great saving of effort among those who are trying to improve recruiting in the Army.
    Mr. RADFORD: I would like my right hon. Friend to answer a question which has been put to me by a Constituent of mine who is serving in the Army. This constituent is a lance-corporal. Under the regulations 9d. a day of his pay is, I believe, compulsorily allotted to his wife. In the case of my correspondent he thinks that this is a grievance, the reason being that, in addition to the separation allowance, his wife is entitled to an income of about £2 a week, and therefore is in comparatively affluent circumstance, while the lance-corporal who is in the service, though before the War he was in possession of good wages, finds himself now with only a few coppers in his pocket. I should like to ask my right hon. Friend whether it is necessary that this apparently anomalous state of things should continue, or whether the Army would refer my correspondent to the unremitting generosity of the wife who is comfortably off.
    Mr. WILLIAM THORNE: I would like to ask the Under-Secretary whether he can give an explanation in regard to the West Ham Battalion. A considerable time ago the War Office gave permission to raise a battalion in West Ham. The matter was taken up by the local authorities and the result has been, as I understand, that about 700 or 800 men have already joined. They were under the impression that they were going to obtain separation allowances. It appears that the major portion of the men are allowed to reside in the borough, and the mayor and council have been told that in consequence of the men residing in the borough they are not entitled to separation allowances. This is causing a great deal of dissatisfaction, because they have joined under a misapprehension. I would ask the Under-Secretary if he can give any reason for this.
    Mr. TOOTILL: I understood the hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary for War to suggest that all the payments of dependent and other allowances have now been settled and adjusted. Is he aware that some of these dependent allowances have actually been delayed for a period of fourteen weeks? In the Lancashire area I have gone about at recruiting meetings and I have found intense dissatisfaction prevailing in respect of these delays. I do not know the cause, and the hon. Gentleman may know it better than I, but I do think that these should be entirely avoidable. They ought not to go on to the extent of thirteen or fourteen weeks, and if matters, as the hon. Gentleman suggests, are not settled on a firm and intelligent basis, I hope that once for all satisfaction will be given.
    Mr. TENNANT: I can only speak a second time by permission of the House, and there are one or two questions which I think demand an answer. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Devizes (Mr. Peto) asked me a question with regard to promotion, and what we propose to do. I do not know whether the hon. Member heard what I said last week, but I may state that I am not in a position to make any other statement than that which I made rather fully on that occasion. I do not know whether the hon. Member would care to argue the case, but, for my part, I think it would hardly be respectful to the House to repeat my observations made so recently. I can assure him of this one fact, that in regard to the case he particularly mentioned, that of a colonel promoted to brigadier-generalship, the question of making the officer succeeding him in command of the regiment a temporary colonel is a matter in respect of which we have asked permission to do so. We have to ask the permission of another authority—the Government—which has to give its full approval to the suggestion which comes from the War Office. That is now in their keeping. The difficulty which surrounds conferring full substantive rank on the man who succeeds to the command of the regiment is one which I think is not fully appreciated by the hon. Member. A brigadier-generalship has always been a purely temporary rank, and at the end of the War the brigadier-general has no brigade, and he generally reverts to the position of colonel. If he did not do so he would really be penalised in respect of his excellent service, and would not be in as good a position as he would

    1345
    otherwise have been. That being so, surely the hon. Gentleman cannot advance the argument that it is desirable to give substantive rank to the man who succeeds. It would be very hard that the man who had been singled out for promotion should be actually penalised because it is desired to do a good turn to the man who is taking his place. I do not see that there is anything further to be said.
    Mr. PETO: In the case I have mentioned it was that of an officer commanding who had continued to be major for a period as long as five months though doing the duty of colonel of the regiment. The colonel has been in command of a brigade for that period It is surely much more likely that he will be in command of a division than that he would return to command the regiment at the end of the War. There must be some period after which the officer commanding ought to be given substantive rank.
    Mr. TENNANT: All these things are hypothetical; no one can say what is really going to happen. I do think, however, that a major commanding a regiment should be given temporary rank, and I hope that will be done. My hon Friend the Member for North-West Lanark (Mr. Pringle) and the hon. Member for Sheffield (Mr. James Hope) both spoke about the question of advertising, though in rather different senses, in respect of recruiting. The hon. Member for Sheffield referred to instances where there was advertising in competition with recruiting, and my hon. Friend Mr. Pringle referred to advertisements issued directly from the War Office. The War Office is a very large place indeed. I have had a good deal to do this last year, and I confess that I have not come in contact with the advertising branch, but I hope the House will excuse me for not having had it directly under my supervision. I can only tell my hon. Friend that I think it would perhaps be desirable that the advertisements which are issued from our Departments should be viséd like a passport, and I quite agree that the case quoted by my hon. Friend is one in which it might have been desirable to use the blue pencil. In regard to the competition mentioned by the hon. Member opposite, I will mention what he says, and I hope that public authorities will not directly compete with our recruiting.
    Mr. J. HOPE: I referred to the Port of London Authority.
    Mr. TENNANT: It is difficult for the War Office to interfere with such a body as the Port of London Authority. We have no jurisdiction at all, nor should we have any over such a body as a railway company. A railway company, however, is not a good example, because railway companies are under the control of the Government; but a water company, for instance, or some company of that description, over which we really have no control. I ought to state, nevertheless, that I think there is a genuine desire among the whole of the outside working world, among those who control great industries and enterprises outside, to co-operate with the War Office, and I have always found them extraordinarily ready, as a rule, to do anything we considered desirable, and I am sure that we will be most anxious to co-operate with them. I must acknowledge those services from the outside public in a manner to which I think they are entitled in every way. Since the hon. Gentleman has raised this subject, I will see if something can be done to obviate the difficulty to which he has drawn attention. In reply to the hon. Member for Islington (Mr. Radford), it is quite within the competence of the lady to whom he refers to waive her right to any separation allotment, and if he will kindly represent the case to her in that way, I have no doubt that what I suggest will be done. My hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Mr. W. Thorne) raised the question of the separation allowance, where the men in the battalion are living at home, and do not get this separation allowance. Surely my hon. Friend will realise that separation allowance is designed to compensate the wife of a man for being separated from her husband. When he is living at home that condition can hardly be said to arise. In those circumstances I trust my hon. Friend will not think it necessary to consider that his constituents are aggrieved because they are not being paid separation allowance.
    Mr. W. THORNE: The men thought they were to have it.
    Mr. TENNANT: My hon. Friend has great reasoning power, and I have no doubt he will be able to impress upon them the facts of this matter. I do not think the Member for Bolton (Mr. Toothill) could have been in the House when the Financial Secretary for War made his observations, because the hon. Gentleman directed a great part of his remarks to explaining the reasons for the somewhat

    1347
    unfortunate delays which have occurred in the past, and he expressed the hope, which I believe to be well-founded, that those delays will be obviated in the future. That being so, I do not think it necessary that I should repeat the observations which have been made by my hon. Friend, and which will appear in the OFFICIAL REPORT to-morrow.
    Mr. RAWLINSON: Can the right hon. Gentleman say anything on the question of the Territorials in England having larger service rations than the Territorials who have volunteered for foreign service?
    Mr. TENNANT: If the hon. and learned Gentleman will put a question down, I think the Financial Secretary will be able to give a reply.
    Mr. BALDWIN: I wish to call attention to the question of advertising, and to express my ardent wish that the whole system of recruiting advertisements maybe wiped out, because I think we have now got to a point in recruiting where the continuance of the present methods, with no alteration, will lead to harm in two ways: It will lead to the harm that you will not get the men you want, and it will lead to the harm that the new men you do get will very likely be taken from those very industries which, up to now, have shown themselves to be the most willing recruiters, but which, at the same time, it is most important, for the productive part of the country, should be kept in full work. I was very pleased to hear a few words fall from the right hon. Gentleman in regard to the support he has had from the large employers of labour in this country. I do not wish to refer to what has taken place in the past, because this is hardly the occasion for it, but I do wish to call the attention of the House to the position in which we find ourselves to-day, and what I think should be done for the immediate future. There are many large industries in the United Kingdom at the present moment which have sent as many men to the Army as they can spare without seriously curtailing their powers of production. There are many industries in the country that have not done so. Where you have an industry which is wanted very much at the present time, and where you have sent all the available men into the service of the country, you are faced with this difficulty—that when you begin to take away any more from that industry you run the risk of bringing such works, or a
    1348
    large portion of them, to a standstill, and by that, not only do you cripple the productive power to that extent, but if the work is that of manipulating raw material for other industries in this country you are also penalising to that extent far more industries than you can possibly be aware of. You have to remember, further, that we have in this country to-day, and on the Continent, a very large force; we do not know the figures, and we shall be told that there are no figures at all.
    That renders it very difficult to make any criticism that I might wish to offer, and makes it practically impossible to indulge in any accurate criticism. I think, however, I may say without fear of contradiction that you have millions probably of men who are withdrawn from productive work in this country, and who have to be fed and clothed and equipped, and transported, while you have left in this country as working men a large body less those taken away for active service, and that reduced number have to carry on the trade of the country, provide additional recruits, and they have themselves to be fed and clothed. In addition to doing all this work for their own fellow countrymen they provide a very material reserve for supplies to all the allied countries. Under those circumstances it seems to me that if we go on recruiting in the higgledy-piggledy fashion in which we have been recruiting for the last few months we may do a great deal of harm. It is of the very first importance, not only to get the men, but to maintain the productive capacity of our country at the highest point possible commensurate with obtaining the necessary number of men. Is there any machinery to enable us to do that? There is no machinery that we in the country know of, but the Government may be able to tell us that there is, and I hope there is. They must know in the War Office, if they know nowhere else, what the figures of recruiting are, and which are the best recruiting districts in the country. They must know also, or they ought to know, and they do know of course, every detail of what is required for the clothing, feeding, and equipment of all those men. In other words, they can translate all those necessities in stores into figures of the men and plant requisite for the production of those necessities. But if this knowledge is confined to the War Office alone, then it seems to me, and I can assure the House that it seems so to many business men in this country, that it is not enough.

    1349
    I cannot help thinking that there is an opportunity at this particular juncture to effect a systematic co-ordination of forces that might be of very great assistance. If we could only co-ordinate the representatives of the big employers of labour, and representatives of the working classes with representatives from the War Office and the Board of Trade, it seems to me, it might then be possible to schedule all the country into districts, and as to the various industries. That committee might then know in what parts of the country they might look to get men, and that committee might also know what industries they could safely take men from, and what industries they could not take men from without seriously interfering with the production of necessities for the clothing and equipment of the Army. There would be one further advantage in the creation of such a committee. When the War comes to an end, we shall be faced with a far greater problem in the reconstruction of our industries than we have been faced in the last six months in the interruption of our industries caused by the War. The knowledge acquired by such a committee would be invaluable at that time to advise the military authorities as to how and in what proportion the men should be drafted back from the Services into civil life. At that time there will be industries which will want every man they can get hold of, and there will be other industries which for the time being will have very little work to do, and in those cases it would be of the greatest assistance if the men could be kept in the ranks of the Army for some time longer. I make those suggestions without any desire to criticise what has been done. I offer them in the hope that they may be thought worthy of consideration in this House, and in the hope that the Government may be able to take some steps in recruiting in the future on the lines which I have indicated.
    Mr. PARKES: I am very glad indeed that my hon. Friend has raised this question, which is a most important one. I think it may be said that the manufacturers of this country at the present time are hampered by two great considerations: The one is the scarcity of men and the other is the scarcity of coal. We are all, of course, delighted to see that at the commencement, and later on in the War the number of men who are offering themselves voluntary for the defence of their country. That is a most desirable thing, but I must say I speak the voice of a great many
    1350
    business men in this country when I mention that lately they have looked upon this question with something bordering upon alarm as to the extent to which it is going. I quite agree with my hon. Friend that there are certain industries in this country which are absolutely necessary for the supply of the requirements of the War, and I think those industries should be protected to a large extent from great drafts being made upon their men to such an extent that they cannot supply those requirements as desired. We must not only supply the requirements of our own country, but requirements of our Allies as well. It is almost as important to provide those supplies. There must be a great many working men left in this country for the purpose of supplying those great requirements of ourselves and of our Allies. I know as a matter of fact, that in the Midland districts certain contracts have been brought to a standstill owing to the scarcity of men and of coal. That is a very serious thing, and if it goes on in the future in the same proportion as it has gone on in the past, then it will lead in many cases to a state of paralysis in the country. I am told that there are certain areas in this country which are not touched yet scarcely in the matter of recruits, and I believe that refers particularly to country districts. If that is so, I do not see why men should be taken from the towns, and from industries where they are required rather than from places where they are not so much required.
    The Government will have to look into this matter very carefully in the future, and I think that they will have to make some arrangements about it. It may be that so many men will not be required in the future, but still I believe that men will be required right up to the termination of the War. Manufacturers would look with dismay on the future if the men engaged in industrial operations are to be taken in the same proportion as they have been up to the present. I am glad that you, Sir, have allowed this matter to be discussed, because I believe it has not been thoroughly discussed before. We are all proud of the men, but of necessity we must look at the other side of the question as well. Government requirements have to be supplied, and if that could not be done it would be very awkward. There is what is no doubt a subsidiary aspect at present, namely, the question of finance. If our industries are to be paralysed to a large extent, it

    1351
    becomes a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence as to where the resources are to come from. That is a secondary question just now, but it is one of the aspects to be borne in mind, and we certainly require industries to go on—consistent, of course, with raising a sufficient number of men.
    5.0 P.M.
    Mr. HUME-WILLIAMS: Those of us who have taken part in recruiting have, I think, more than once met with an experience of this kind: You have two employers engaged in the same trade, and often in the same locality, and one employer takes a keen view about the War, and, as far as he can, encourages his men to enlist. The other employer, engaged in the same trade, does not take the same view, and does not bring any sort of persuasion to bear upon those employed in his works. The result of it is that the loyal employer finds his works largely depleted of his workmen, while the man in competition with him, who has not shown an equal amount of loyalty, has his full complement of men. The same class of contracts go out to the two firms, and the unloyal man, as I may call him, is able to fulfil his, while the other is not. I speak from some experience of this matter, and I will give the right hon. Gentleman the names, if he cares to have them, in which that has actually occurred. It does strike the loyal employer, the man who has done his best, as a great hardship that he is handicapped in competition with the other man. I agree that the solution is not easy so long as you have got a voluntary system in the country, since, of course, you must depend on voluntary efforts, and that is hard to control. I think a solution might perhaps be found in some such suggestion, if the Government would adopt it, as that made by my hon. Friend (Mr. Baldwin), to the effect that you might have in large industrial centres, and possibly in the counties, a central committee representing the Parliamentary Recruiting Committees, which are spread over the whole of the districts. At present we have in nearly every large town, and in small towns, and certainly in every constituency, Parliamentary Recruiting Committees which are in touch with the central Parliamentary Committee in London, from which they take their orders. Would it not be possible to have a sort of clearing house in each centre, a sort of executive of those Parliamentary Recruiting Committees, which could take cognisance of the sort of facts which I
    1352
    have laid before the House, and which could bring such pressure as they could to bear upon the employers who have not put personal effort into the campaign to try and bring them into line with those who have? It might perhaps be done in this way: If you had a central representative committee of that kind the War Office might possibly think fit to consult them as to the allocation of Government contracts. That might be useful, because if this central committee knew that a particular industry was likely to receive Government contracts it would be quite legitimate, and in the interests of the country, to suggest to an employer that he should relax his recruiting efforts, because a Government contract was likely to come to him and his men would be needed for the service of the country at home. That is a mere suggestion on my part. I agree that the question is a hard one. But the grievance exists, and I have no doubt whatever that some remedy, if it could be found, would be of use.
    Mr. HEWINS: I do not believe myself that there is any reason whatever for apprehending that the numbers required for the purpose of carrying the War to a successful conclusion, and at the same time keeping the necessary production up to the necessary level, will not be found quite ample. I have no fear about that. I am sure that the suggestion of my hon. Friend has only this in view, that we should get a higher degree of efficiency and larger numbers for our purposes if the effort to obtain those numbers were more organised than it is at the present time. I may put the question this way: We have a Parliamentary Recruiting Committee, whose efforts have been extraordinarily successful, and that committee has convoyed to the country the perfectly correct impression that all parties are united, and that there is no difference of opinion as to the importance and necessity of carrying the War to a successful conclusion, and of dropping all other questions of controversy. At the same time we want to organise, not only from the purely naval and military point of view; you want also to organise the business forces of the country for the purposes of war. I cannot help feeling that if there was some kind of consultation such as my hon. Friend has suggested between the Recruiting Department of the War Office and the heads of the great labour organisations and business concerns of the country, many

    1353
    of the difficulties which occur might easily be adjusted, and the net result would be a larger number of recruits and also greater efficiency in the production which must be carried on. I only want to make it quite clear that we are interested in this question, because we believe that on the lines of organisation thus indicated you might get far better results than you do at the present time, although those results are marvellously good. But we want every possible man that we can get, and if the employers and leaders of labour felt that there was this readiness to consult the efforts they made would be even greater than they are at present.
    Question put, and agreed to.

  SUPPLY [4TH FEBRUARY].—REPORT.
    CIVIL SERVICES SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1914–15.

      Class I.
      Resolutions reported,
      1. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £40,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for Rates and Contributions in lieu of Rates, etc., in respect of Government Property, and for Rates on Houses occupied by Representatives of Foreign Powers, and for the Salaries and Expenses of the Rating of Government Property Department, and for a Contribution towards the Expenses of the London Fire Brigade.",

      Class II.
      2. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £60,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for His Majesty's Foreign and other Secret Services."
      3. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £100, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Commissioners of Charitable Donations and Bequests for Ireland."

      Class III.
      4. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £60,650, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will
      1354
      come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for the Salaries and Expenses connected with the County Courts."
      5. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £2,500, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Commissioner of Police, the Police Courts, and the Metropolitan Police Establishment of Dublin."
      6. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £13,990, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for the Expenses of the Royal Irish Constabulary."

      Class IV.
      7. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £400, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National Gallery, and of the National Gallery of British Art, Millbank, including a Grant in Aid for the Purchase of Pictures."
      8. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £5,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Institutions of Science and Art in Dublin and of the Geological Survey of Ireland, and Annual Grants to Schools and Classes of Science and Art and Technical Instruction, including sundry Grants in Aid, administered by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland."

      Class V.
      9. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £2,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for the Subsidies to certain Telegraph Companies and a Grant in Aid of the Annual Expenses of the Pacific Cable."
      10. "That a sum, not exceeding £10,759, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for making good the Net Loss on Transactions connected with

      1355
      the raising of Money for the various Treasury Chests Abroad in the year 1913–14."

      Class VI.
      11. "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £21,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, for Superannuation, Compensation, Compassionate, and Additional Allowances, and Gratuities under sundry Statutes, for Compassionate Allowances and Gratuities awarded by the Treasury, and for the Salaries of Medical Referees."
      Resolutions agreed to.

  SUPPLY.

    NAVY SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1914–15.
    Considered in Committee.
    [Mr. MACLEAN in the Chair.]

    ADDITIONAL NUMBER OF OFFICERS AND MEN.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That an additional number, not exceeding 32,000 officers, seamen, and boys, be employed for the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, beyond the number already voted for the year."
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): I ought shortly to explain why this Supplementary Estimate is necessary. In the first Estimates for the year 1914–15 we took power to work up to a maximum of 151,000 active service ratings in Vote A. On mobilisation we turned over all the Reserves to Vote A.—Royal Fleet Reserves, Royal Naval Reserves, and Royal Naval Volunteer Reserves. On the 5th August we came for a Supplementary Estimate of 67,000 men, very largely due to the fact that on mobilisation we turned the Reserves over to Vote A. Recruitment has still gone on, and will go on to the 31st March. I am speaking now of the present financial year. It will no doubt go on after that. In order that we may not have more men on Vote A. than Parliament has granted, we now ask to include 32,000 more, making the total for the year 250,000. I should explain that we do not need a Supplementary Vote for the pay, as we took £8,800,000 in the 1914–15 Estimates, and any excess beyond that we shall be able to finance out of the Vote of Credit.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Resolution to be reported upon Monday next (22nd February); Committee to sit again upon Monday next.

  IRISH POLICE.

    NAVAL AND MILITARY SERVICE (PENSIONS).
    Resolution reported,
    "That it is expedient to authorise the grant, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of certain pensions and allowances in respect of members of the Royal Irish Constabulary and Dublin Metropolitan Police who are Reservists or join the Naval or Military Forces."
    Question, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution," put, and agreed to.
    Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Birrell and Mr. Russell. Presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 31.]
    The remaining Orders were read and postponed.
    Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 3rd February, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."

  WAR OFFICE TIMBER PURCHASES.
  Mr. WILLIAM YOUNG: I desire to call the attention of the House to a matter which, since it became public, has given rise to considerable comment inside these walls, in the public Press, and generally throughout the country. I refer to the appointment of a certain gentleman, by name Mr. Montague Meyer, as sole purchasing agent for the timber requirements of the War Office—a matter in regard to which I addressed several questions to the Under-Secretary for War, which questions were answered by the Financial Secretary to the War Office. This appointment the hon. Gentleman informed the House had been made by the Office of Works after consultation with the War Office. I gather therefore that the War Office is responsible for the appointment. That, I presume, is admitted by the Financial Secretary.
  Mr. H. BAKER: No, it is not admitted.
  Mr. YOUNG: Very well then, the Office of Works made the appointment after consultation with the War Office. I do not propose to base my argument upon some kind of inquiry into what seems to me an extraordinary appointment: how it came to be made, and who is really responsible for it, but it would be an interesting thing to find out who was the person or firm who introduced Mr. Montague Meyer to the Office of Works. I do not, as I say, propose to base my argument for inquiry on his merits or demerits, his qualifications or lack of qualifications, as the case may be, for the very lucrative post which he had obtained. My own opinion, if I may venture to give it—and in passing let me say I am in no way connected with or interested in the timber trade in any direction whatever—my own opinion is that Mr. Meyer possessed no special qualifications that should have entitled him to the selection which has been made. My main reason for bringing the matter before the House is the extraordinary, and, taking into account all the circumstances, the excessive and exorbitant, terms on which Mr. Montague Meyer was able to obtain the appointment. He may or may not be an important importer of soft timber, and successful or otherwise, but I have been informed that he has been successful in obtaining a very lucrative appointment for himself and one which, looking at the matter from the point of view of the general interests and those of the British taxpayer, is the reverse of advantageous. It is certainly a matter on which this House is entitled to get more information than we already have.
  The House was informed by the Financial Secretary to the War Office (Mr. Baker), in reply to a question put by myself a day or two ago, that the value of the timber so far purchased on account of the War Office by Mr. Meyer—the hon. Gentleman was very careful to say the value as stated by him was only approximate—was £600,000. This, though only approximate, is a fairly respectable figure. On the other hand, he went on to state that Mr. Meyer's own stock had been taken over by the War Office at what he called an ascertained cost price. This having been done, I presume that Mr. Meyer's commission of 2½ per cent.—that is the figure—had to be paid on the ascertained value of his own stocks. That is a very convenient arrangement for any timber merchant. This operation therefore would, I
  1358
  think, without doubt materially, increase the figure given by my hon. Friend and at the same time increase the remuneration of the buying agent.
  What I desire to ask in this particular connection is, How comes it that this gentleman is selected by the Office of Works, or by the War Office, or by both Departments acting together, as the one and only timber merchant in London, or in the country, whose stock of timber is to be taken over at a so-called ascertained cost price, plus the commission of 2½ per cent? The figures given in the House yesterday or the day before by the Financial Secretary are, of course, as we all know, those given to him by the Office of Works. I am rather inclined to think, in view of what I have said, that they may have, not intentionally, been understated; in fact, I doubt whether they are correct or anything like correct. It is freely stated by those who know the trade, and in the public Press—and the House will remember that timber, like coffee, copper, cotton, or sugar, is one of the great staple articles of trade and industry, and the volume and movements of timber are continually being watched and are perfectly well known to timber merchants and brokers in the timber trade—it is freely stated in the market, with all the knowledge they have, that the value of the timber purchased by Mr. Meyer on behalf of the Government is at least double that of the figure given to this House. But if we take the approximate figure of £600,000 given by the hon. Gentleman—I have already stated that I believe it to be more—it means that within the short space of some three months or so, on the basis of the commission arrangement of 2½ per cent., this poor unfortunate timber-buying agent finds himself in pocket only to the extent of a miserable £15,000! Without entailing any financial responsibility whatever on the buying agent, and, so far as I have been able to find out, very little work, this gentleman makes as much as the nation—I should say a grateful nation—pays a Cabinet Minister, for example, or even the Prime Minister himself, over a period of three years, and for what, all of us admit, is most trying work, involving the greatest kind of responsibility.
  I want to ask if the House realises that even if it be admitted that a timber agent or expert was necessary and expedient in the circumstances for the requirements of the War Office—and I am not now arguing or

  1359
  stating that such was not the case—there are, at least, I imagine, a dozen or twenty—it may be more—established firms, or brokers, of the highest reputation and well known throughout the whole country who would have jumped at the business for a commission of, say, 1 per cent. I am told on the best authority that they would have done the business for even ½ per cent., and done it, in my opinion, and I think in the opinion of this House, at least quite as efficiently and quite as economically as it is being done by Mr. Montague Meyer. I leave out of account the offers which, from patriotic motives, may or may not have been made by well-known firms to the War Office to do the necessary work practically free of charge, because I consider even in time of war and stress it is advisable to pay a reasonable figure for work which is well and efficiently done. Had the War Office thought it necessary to appoint a buying expert, I am informed that probably the best timber expert in Great Britain could have been got for a salary of £1,500, or certainly £2,000 per annum. At the latter rate, for the three months' work, there would have been a saving to the British taxpayer of something like £14,500. One is inclined to ask whether this system which has been followed by the War Office or by the Office of Works is followed in other directions? I certainly hope that the case which I have given—and it is not an agreeable task to bring up matters of this kind at present—may be an isolated case. Be that as it may, it is certainly one about which this House is entitled to ask a very full explanation—if it is not forthcoming—into the whole of the circumstances of this extraordinary and unbusinesslike proceeding. It should be fully inquired into by this House so that an arrangement which is so flagrantly opposed to the public interest may be speedily terminated.
  It might be thought that out of the excessive remuneration to which I have referred for the work done for the War Office, the buying agent might be keeping up a staff—it might be a considerable staff—for the purpose of carrying on the work. I am informed that nothing of the kind is the case. I am told—and I am open to contradiction if I am not right—that a room at the Office of Works has been put at the disposal of Mr. Meyer, and that he has there the assistance of the principal architect and his assistants. It would appear, in other words, that, at
  1360
  any rate, all the detail work is done by the Office of Works, and that Mr. Meyer is enabled to keep his full commission of 2½ per cent.—this excessive commission!—without any expense whatsoever, or very little to himself and such expenses as would, if it were borne by any ordinary firm, be borne out of the commission or remuneration paid. We were reminded, in a rather timely manner, the other day, by the. Leader of the Opposition, to the very evident surprise of the Government Front Bench, and, perhaps, more than any other, to the surprise of the Prime Minister, that there are still some capable and competent business men left in this country, and even in this House of Commons. Speaking as a business man, it is certainly to me one of the most extraordinary appointments that I ever heard of in the whole of my experience. It was alleged by the Financial Secretary to the War Office, in reply to one of my questions, "that the arrangement with Mr. Meyer had also resulted in a great economy in the purchasing of the necessary material."
  If such belief exists it certainly does not extend beyond the horizon of the Office of Works or the War Office. On the contrary, there is every reason to believe that the arrangement has had the inevitable effect of sending up the price of timber in every market where it could be procured. It cannot be denied that such has been the case. This might not be a very perturbing factor in the mind of a buying agent, because it will be evident to the House that the higher the value of the timber the more remuneration and commission under this arrangement will be secured by the buying agent. There is, likewise, this important matter, that there is no evidence that Mr. Meyer, this buying agent, has stopped doing business on his own account—a most dangerous position in this connection in regard to the War Office and in the public interest, and most unfair—and I will add, most un-British towards other long-established firms in the timber trade who can lay claim to far more knowledge of the trade than Mr. Meyer can possibly lay claim to. I do not wish to go outside the specific case, but there can be no doubt whatever that a good deal of uneasiness does exist throughout the country with regard to the whole question of War Office contracts, and it would be interesting if the hon. Gentleman would, or could, inform the House whether, in connection with the purchase of other materials and supplies,

  1361
  such as equipment and Army clothing, similar arrangements for paying exorbitant commissions do or do not exist.
  It is not necessary to remind the House that the War Office has suddenly, and of course rightly, been converted into the most gigantic purchasing agency of practically all kinds of material that the world has ever seen, and it is of the utmost importance, and it is surely our duty—this House having voted hundreds of millions of money—to see that the money is expended in the most economical manner, and that the great spending Departments of the State are not being conducted by men who are really amateurs in business; and, further, that if blunders such as the one I have referred to have been committed through lack of knowledge or business experience, or, it might be, overwork, they are not allowed to pass and to continue to the detriment of the British taxpayer. We who have the great honour to be Members of this ancient and representative House, boast, and I hope rightly boast, that we are the custodians of the public purse, and we are sent here, as I understand it, in that capacity. Whilst we can, I am sure, afford to be just, we certainly cannot afford to squander those resources which are being provided for the nation at such great sacrifice by our people, especially the poorer classes of the community—sacrifices which will, I fear, have to be borne even unto the third and fourth generation of those who come after us. It is for that consideration, and that only, that I have been induced to bring this matter to the attention of the House, and I apologise for having done so at some greater length than I anticipated.
  Mr. HASLAM: The hon. Member has placed the matter so clearly before the House that I fear I have very little to add. I do not rise with any idea of casting blame upon the War Office, but I rise merely to obtain an explanation of the case which has been so ably laid before the House. We are, as the hon. Member said, in our position of Members of this House the custodians of the public purse, and in that capacity it is our duty to endeavour, to the utmost of our ability, to find out whether money which is provided by the people is spent to the best possible advantage. We are fully aware of the enormous responsibility and extraordinary amount of work and pressure which has been placed upon the Government Departments, especially upon the War Office at the present juncture. Therefore it appears
  1362
  to me the more important that we, who are the ordinary Members, should endeavour to help as far as we can the War Office and other Departments in their endeavours to spend the national revenues in the best possible manner. Now it appears that, in this particular case which has been brought before us to-day, the agent appointed is paid a commission of 2½ per cent. on all his purchases of timber, whatever the amount may be.
  The first criticism I have to make is that it appears to me 2½ per cent. is far and away more than ought to be paid for transactions of that character. I have some considerable knowledge of business, and I may say I have never heard of a business of that character being carried out at such an exorbitant commission. Whether I am right or wrong in what is to follow I do not know, but I have been informed that, in addition to the commission of 2½ per cent., a brokerage commission is also paid on each transaction, or on some of the transactions. If that is so, then the 2½ per cent. really amounts to 3½ per cent. Up to now we have been told the purchases have exceeded £600,000. That means that in a few months £15,000 of public money has been paid to one agent. It is probable that in the course of the War very much more timber will be required, and that means that the amount of commission will be continually increased. Now it is possible that arrangements might be made to pay a lesser commission for future orders than has been paid in the past. That might be some safeguard.
  I rise more particularly, however, to ask the Under-Secretary to inform the House whether this method of paying commission for purchases extends to other portions of the requirements of the War Office than timber, and, if so, I think we have a right to ask him to give us particulars of all the classes of goods for which payments are made to agents for purchases. For a week or more various questions have been asked in this House with regard to the nationality of Mr. Meyer, who is the appointed agent. So far as I am aware, we have never yet been informed. I presume he is an Englishman, but, if that is so, I am astonished the Under-Secretary was not aware of the fact and could tell the House that that was so, because, after all, if a man in the employ of the Government is getting remuneration to the extent of £15,000 you would expect, at any rate, that those in authority would know to what nationality he belongs, especially as

  1363
  he happens to have a name which, to say the least of it, is not encouraging or reassuring. In addition to that, I am told that four years ago, or a little over four years ago, he was in service with another timber merchant, I believe of the name of Bamberger. Bamberger may be an Englishman too, and probably is, but, at the same time, the name of Bamberger is hardly encouraging at a time when we are at war with Germany. I want to see if we can get some satisfactory reply from the Under-Secretary to show that this commission has really been justified, and that if there are other commissions being paid of a similar character we shall know in what direction they are being paid and the reasons for the adoption of that principle. I would certainly say, in conclusion, that I agree with the Leader of the Opposition when he stated that he considered we ought to have more business men appointed to go into questions of this kind, and that it would be a good thing if we could have more business men brought on to Sub-Committees as an Advisory Committee, I think he said, to advise the War Office on these questions.
  Mr. BAKER: I gladly recognise the very fair way indeed in which the hon. Member for East Perthshire (Mr. W. Young) presented the case against Mr. Meyer. I think he put it without any undue prejudice of any kind, and I think it is a very good thing that this case should now be withdrawn from the atmosphere of misstatement in newspapers and of innuendo in question in which it has been too long. I hope that to whatever conclusion hon. Members may come in their own minds in regard to the business methods of this arrangement, at any rate there will be no points of any importance left obscure when I have finished the observations I have to offer. It is necessary to describe in a sentence or two the circumstances which preceded the selection of Mr. Meyer by the Office of Works. The position in the early stage of the War was that the War Office found itself in need of very large quantities of timber, mainly for the huts in camps. The Office of Works is a Department which has considerable expert knowledge of the timber trade, and deals with it practically without interval, and the War Office consulted them as to what the best method of procedure would be in view of the very large purchases it was necessary to make. The Office of Works, I think in
  1364
  the spirit of pure helpfulness and no more, suggested that they should relieve the War Office of this task as the War Office had their energies very fully occupied in other directions, and the Office of Works was able to bestow its energies on their behalf. The War Office agreed to that proposal—and I say this only in order to fix responsibility—and at that point the actual responsibility of the War War Office ceased, and the Office of Works made all further arrangements. Apparently the first step that happened was that the Office of Works made inquiries from the leading merchants in the timber trade to see what timber they could get, and at what price. Almost all the answers consisted of prices so excessive and so exorbitant that it was necessary for the Office of Works, as the custodian of the taxpayer, to consider the position.
  At this stage Mr. Meyer appears. He was one of those who had been asked to quote, and he pointed out to the Office of Works that these inquiries were having a disturbing effect on the market and suggested the difficulty would be very largely overcome if the Office of Works employed the device of using one single agent to purchase, not from, merchants at home, but direct from the shippers in Sweden. The Office of Works approved of that idea, and Mr. Meyer offered to undertake the task. The Office of Works did not at once accept him in that capacity, but, in view of the obvious attempt on the part of a large section of the trade to squeeze them to the utmost they could, they agreed to give Mr. Meyer a trial and to see what he could do. Mr. Meyer, as I shall show by a few figures, carried out the trial so satisfactorily that the arrangement was continued; but I do wish the House to observe that the Office of Works did not resort to the method of a single agent until older and larger contractors had shown that the prices they were attempting to press upon the Government were so great, that really it was their duty to see what was the alternative.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: Did they ask any question as to the commission as well?
  Mr. BAKER: I will deal with the question of commission if you will allow me later on. Perhaps I ought to say a word or two about Mr. Meyer himself. The hon. Member for East Perthshire very frankly disowned any interest in the personality of Mr. Meyer, but the question of his personality has been used very largely in the

  1365
  Press and in this House, and it was referred to just now by the hon. Member behind me (Mr. Lewis Haslam). So far as my personal information goes, I think the hon. Member is asking a little too much of even the humblest Member of the Government that he should know the nationality of all the people who are working in other Departments at this time.
  HON. MEMBERS: You are speaking for them.
  Mr. BAKER: Yes, but the question was never put to me except extempore as a supplementary question, and I cannot be expected to answer it without notice. I am ready to answer now that I have had an opportunity of inquiring. I agree it is not really relevant to this Debate, but Mr. Meyer, it appears, is a British subject and is the son and grandson of British subjects. That is the answer on the question of nationality. Mr. Meyer is not an unknown personality who has obtruded himself on the Office of Works. He was known to them before and he had, as a matter of fact, executed other contracts for the War Office previously in a satisfactory manner. Apart from his nationality, the question has been raised as to his position in the timber trade. I do not know that that is of great importance, because, after all, if Mr. Meyer has performed his work efficiently and saved the nation's money, the fact that he is not a person of great eminence in the trade surely ought not to be urged as an objection against him. Various misstatements, however, have been made in that connection, therefore it is right to state that I am informed that he has had experience of the trade for eighteen years and has been in business on his own account for about eight years; I think seven or eight years. The statements which have been made in various quarters that he had only had four and a half years' experience are, therefore, like other statements, not true. His firm, I understand, has had very considerable dealings and cannot be described as unsubstantial.
  The right hon. Gentleman (Sir H. Dalziel) who interrupted me a moment ago has asked me whether other firms had offered to do similar work. I am told that two other offers were made and that they were carefully considered by the Office of Works before Mr. Meyer was appointed, and they were considered less satisfactory than his offer. Of course, in a matter like that I cannot hope to interpret to the full
  1366
  the mind of the Office of Works, but they did not take Mr. Meyer without carefully balancing the advantages of the course which they pursued. I come now to what is really the gist of the discussion, and that is the agreement itself—whether it was a good agreement or not. It has been stated, in reply to questions, that the agreement was that Mr. Meyer should receive 2½ per cent. on the purchases he made, and that the Office of Works was to receive all discounts or commissions that he might receive himself. Those have been described as exorbitant terms. I will deal with the service that Mr. Meyer renders, but before doing that, I should like to point out that the statement that the brokers from whom he buys receive 1 per cent. is in a sense true, but requires some explanation. This 1 per cent. is paid by the seller, but it was only in a very small number of contractions that the broker was employed at all. Mr. Meyer only used a broker after timber had been declared contraband, and then only when for some particular reason in the market it was necessary to conceal the fact that the Government buyer was buying at all, because the forces that were operating earlier were still operating to put up the price against the Government as far as they could. The commission of 2½ per cent. is not all profit.
  A great number of services were rendered by Mr. Meyer in return for the commission. He had to make practically all the necessary arrangements connected with the transport of the timber and other matters. It was left to him entirely to make arrangements abroad and in this country, to make arrangements at the docks and in regard to railway consignments, and to deal with the checking of the timber at each camp. Again, it devolved upon him to deal with all matters connected with the conversion of the timber, the checking of the schedules and sizes, and the arrangements for the conversion of the timber into the sizes required. He also arranged the insurance, and dealt with all complaints and with all matters of delay as well, which inevitably arose in the abnormal state of transport and the congestion of the railways. Moreover, it cannot be denied that beyond the bare fact of purchase Mr. Meyer had to spend considerable time and labour in travelling. He had to employ a very considerable staff also, and I must contradict at once the suggestion which has been made that he has been given either a room or a staff by the Office of Works. He has

  1367
  provided them himself, and any statement to the contrary I am authorised by the Office of Works to contradict. What the Office of Works have done, and all that they have done, is to put a few clerks in his office so that they may check every transaction which he is doing and see that everything is in order and that no objection can be taken. That is a very necessary step, and it would have been necessary whoever had been employed for this purpose.
  The other question is whether this has proved an expensive arrangement or not. That is really, I think, the point which most hon. Members who are doing me the honour of listening to me desire should be cleared up. Of course, it is difficult to prove definitely at this period that the arrangement has been entirely one of economy, because a good many transactions are not yet through, but I am assured by the Office of Works that in every case which they have been able to test they have found that purchasing through Mr. Meyer has led to economy and not to extravagance. When Mr. Meyer was given his trial, before he was actually chosen to carry out all these operations, the quotations made to the Office of Works by leading merchants averaged £14 10s. per standard. Mr. Meyer set to work, and bought all the timber that was then wanted at from £10 to £12 per standard. The hon. Member for East Perthshire said that employing an agent had sent up the price; but I thought it was common knowledge that what did send up the price was the declaration of contraband on the part of Germany.
  Even after the price had risen, from whatever cause, the fact remains that on every occasion on which comparison could be made it has been found that the price at which Mr. Meyer purchased was more favourable than those offered by large merchants in the timber trade itself. I will give an example. A ship recently arrived from Norway containing a consignment of timber for Mr. Meyer, and a consignment of timber belonging to another contractor. The other contractor offered his part of the shipment to the Office of Works. Now that contractor was known to be a fair man, and one who was less inclined perhaps than others to ask an unreasonable price, but if his price had been taken on that one small consignment alone, it would have meant an extra cost to the Office of Works of £850. I have given two instances, and I will not weary
  1368
  the House with more, but I will again point out that every case in which comparison has been possible, has shown that Mr. Meyer has been purchasing more cheaply than if application had been made to the ordinary trade. It has been suggested that the Office of Works should have conducted these operations in some other fashion. The alternatives, I suppose, to employing a single agent were, either to purchase direct themselves, which, in view of what did occur, would have been disastrous from the point of view of economy, or to have purchased through a committee. I agree that a committee was a possible alternative, but this House and the country are constantly urging us not to put ourselves into the hands of rings, and if we had done that I think very likely this same Debate would have taken place, but the hon. Members who have criticised would have been compelled to put their criticism upon other ground.
  In this matter I cannot be anything more than the mouthpiece of the Office of Works; but I do venture to think that after what I have said, anyone who puts aside racial and commercial bias will be bound to admit that this arrangement cannot be described as one that has been unsatisfactory to the taxpayer. No doubt there are many other people who would have been glad to stand in Mr. Meyer's shoes, and there are some no doubt, but I do not think there are many, who would have acted as efficiently as he has done, judging by results. Of course there remains the point of the 2½ per cent. commission which hon. Members seem to think is excessive. When these transactions first began I do not think it was contemplated that they would reach to the very large figure which they have reached, but recruits have come in and the amount of hutting required has been very largely increased. I believe it is now under consideration at the Office of Works whether, seeing that the transactions have reached such large dimensions the arrangement should not be modified in some way. On the facts as they stand it seems to me that anybody who cares to examine them—and you must look behind, even further behind than I have gone this afternoon—and anyone who cares to examine into all the conditions of the timber trade at that time, and sees the prices that were quoted, will be compelled to agree that, objectionable to some hon. Members in form as this arrangement may seem, in the result it can be described as satisfactory.

  1369
  The hon. Member for Monmouth (Mr. Lewis Haslam) raised a more general question as to how far this represents a common method on the part of the War Office. He suggested that the War Office was still in the position of amateurs so far as business is concerned. On the few occasions that I have had the opportunity I have endeavoured, but I fear without success, to explain to the House that we have the advantage of the assistance of a large number of men of first-rate business ability. Most of them come in from outside; they are men who know their trade, and are prepared to give advice, and disinterested advice, to us, and to suppose that the War Office, with this gigantic task which has been thrust upon it, is still conducting its operations solely through a few skilled civil servants and a few highly trained soldiers is a mistake I have endeavoured to dispel, and I am now again endeavouring to dispel. We have advice on all branches of trade. It is impossible, of course, to represent that publicly as one could wish. It is obtained, now in one quarter, now in another. Apart from invitations to individuals for advice, there is also more permanent machinery, which I hope will be made more efficient, for keeping constant check, by outside civilians, on the great problems which come up for decision. One other point asked me was whether this method of commissioning buyers at 2½ per cent. was the universal method that was employed. I stated the other day that the practice varies according to the nature of the article required to be purchased. Some buyers are remunerated on a salary basis, some on the basis of the value of the transaction, and others at so much per unit. In some cases a buyer is not employed at all. It is impossible for me to give details at the moment, but there was one striking instance published in the newspapers a short time ago, when the Government decided to appoint one buyer on percentage commission for the whole of their purchases in America. That was a decision taken after careful and full consideration by a large number of people, and it was one which I think hon. Members would approve.
  Mr. YOUNG: Will the hon. Gentleman state what was the amount of the commission?
  Mr. BAKER: I am afraid I cannot do that at this moment, but I would say about that matter, as I would about this, that the rate of commission depends
  1370
  entirely upon the services which are performed in return for it. In the particular case with which we are dealing this afternoon, the rate may be high, but, in estimating fairly whether it is high or not, you must consider that there are a large number of services being performed in return for it. I hope that I have not omitted any important questions put to me by the hon. Member. If I have it is not from any desire to avoid them. I think I have met as fairly as I can the main question whether this particular operation of the Office of Works has been properly carried out and has resulted in advantage or disadvantage to the taxpayer. The figures which I have quoted, and which, after all, are only specimens, are evidence that the Office of Works avoided a great danger which was being prepared for them and acted in the interests of the country.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: I am sure, whatever view may be taken on the subject, that the whole House will agree that my hon. Friend has been well justified in taking the action which he has taken. I am sure we all congratulate him upon the announcement which has has been made by the hon. Gentleman to the effect that the agreement to which he has called attention is to be modified. I understood that to be the statement of the Financial Secretary to the War Office.
  Mr. BAKER: I said that I understood it was under consideration by the Office of Works.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: Well, between being under consideration and being modified there is not a very great distinction.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: They might increase it.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: Not at all. I imagine that any Government office, especially the Office of Works, which gave any consideration to the matter could only come to one conclusion—that the agreement must be modified. Unless the hon. Gentleman means that it is going to be modified, he had no right whatever to make a statement of that kind that the question of its being modified was under consideration.
  Mr. BECK (Lord of the Treasury): As I have the honour, to-day for the first time, to represent the Office of Works, I do not want there to be any misunderstanding. The position of the Office of Works was this: They were asked to procure wood

  1371
  for the War Office, and to the best of their belief they made a good bargain. They were asked for a certain limited quantity of wood, but now, as my hon. Friend has very clearly explained, the amount of wood wanted has increased enormously, and seems likely to increase further. It is obvious that a sum which was handsome payment for a man whom we believe has done good service to the country becomes over-handsome as the transaction in—creases. Therefore, the matter is under consideration. I believe Mr. Meyer is perfectly willing to consider any reasonable agreement. [An HON. MEMBER: "Agreed!"] If my right hon. Friend will forgive me, he was trying to pin my hon. Friend and myself down to a definite pledge, and I cannot allow the Office of Works to be pinned down to any definite pledge.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: I congratulate my hon. Friend on his intervention, and I especially congratulate him on the rapidity with which he has assumed the official manner. We have got to this point, as far as I understand him: The Office of Works are going to consider the matter, because they consider the commission is much higher than they ever thought it would be. But not for a moment will my hon. Friend allow us to assume that any modification is going to be made. We may leave it where it is. It is a pity that the two offices could not have conferred before a matter like this was brought forward and have agreed upon the same story. The hon. Member who has just sat down said, "The War Office came to us, and asked us if we would undertake it." The Financial Secretary to the War Office, however, said, "The Office of Works went to the War Office, and they offered to undertake the responsibility with regard to the purchase of wood."
  Mr. BAKER: The War Office went to the Office of Works, who then suggested that they should undertake it.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: There still seems to be a mystery whether the War Office went to the Office of Works or the Office of Works went to the War Office. I suggest that the representatives of the two offices met half-way. At any rate, it appears to me that they are not quite agreed as to the real origin of the matter. I suspect, although I know nothing whatever about Mr. Meyer, who had some relation with
  1372
  the Office of Works before, it may be Mr. Meyer suggested that there were not sufficient brains at the War Office, and that the Office of Works, with his assistance, would really do better than they would do in Whitehall. I think we may take it that there is going to be some modification. The Government have no other alternative. The fact that a man who is almost a total stranger to the War Office should be making at the rate of £60,000 a year—it is now nearly three months, and he has made £15,000; it is good payment—is a subject for inquiry when taxation is so considerable. Let us see exactly how the matter stood with regard to Mr. Meyer, according to the statement of the Under-Secretary. He was one of those asked to quote. It would be interesting to know how many firms were asked to quote. Why was not a public announcement made as to what was required?
  Mr. BECK: Five hundred inquiries were made.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: Does the hon. Gentleman suggest that 500 different letters were issued.
  Mr. BECK: I am informed that the Office of Works made inquiries—500 inquiries—and found out the price of wood.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: I suggest to the War Office and to the Office of Works that, in stead of keeping a staff to write all over the country five hundred letters about any one little point, they should make a public advertisement of the matter in the trade papers. I would ask, further, whether Mr. Meyer was one of those asked to quote? We have it on the admission of the Government that they were not satisfied with any of the firms who made the quotation, so that Mr. Meyer's firm was much too high at that moment, from the point of view of the Government. That is obvious. If Mr. Meyer had quoted a price—
  Mr. BAKER: Perhaps my right hon. Friend—
  Sir H. DALZIEL: The hon. Gentleman must not interrupt me every minute.
  Mr. BAKER: The position is really important. He was asked to quote.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: He was asked to quote. Are we to understand that Mr. Meyers did not quote?
  Mr. BAKER: The right hon. Gentleman is assuming that he did quote.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: I am only assuming it because of the interpretation we placed on the statement of the Under-Secretary. We all took that as what he stated; then he denied that he stated it.
  Mr. BAKER: I deny that I said it then or a moment ago. I said that he was asked to quote, and that he then made a suggestion that this other method should be adopted.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: Then we may assume that Mr. Meyer did not quote, that Mr. Meyer got the invitation to quote, but said, "I will not quote. I do not think that this is a sound way of doing business. I suggest that you appoint me, and give me a commission." That is exactly the position, as I understand it. I wish to know this: Who fixed the commission? Did Mr. Meyer say, "I will take 1½ per cent." and did the War Office or the Office of Works insist upon 2½ per cent., or did he ask for 5 per cent. and compromise at 2½ per cent.? We ought to know. It is very important whether only Mr. Meyer was asked to work on commission. There are scores of great British timber firms, who, with great respect to Mr. Meyer and the War Office, have had much longer experience than Mr. Meyer, who is not a member of the Timber Trade Federation.
  Why were not all these firms asked to say what they would do this purchasing for? Surely that was a reasonable thing to do, instead of having this hole-and-corner arrangement with Mr. Meyer! I want to ask the Under-Secretary this: Was Mr. Meyer paid commission on his own stock? Perhaps the new representative of the Office of Works will answer me. Was he paid commission on his own stock? I am sorry, although they
  1374
  have been rehearsing it the whole afternoon, that they have not that bit of information. Has Mr. Meyer, on behalf of the Office of Works, buying from Mr. Meyer at the City, charged himself 2½ per cent. for the procedure? Who fixed the valuation of Mr. Meyer's stock? These are all pertinent questions with regard to this matter, and I think we ought to have answers to them. My hon. Friend really complained of this. The same complaint can be urged on many matters in connection with the War Office. No one criticised them until three or four months after the War started, and Heaven knows that no one wants to make difficulties for them now. Everyone wants to be helpful. I urge upon the Government the necessity for further inquiry, that public competition be invited, and that as soon as possible satisfactory arrangements should be made.
  It being One hour after the conclusion of Government business, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Order of the House of 3rd February, until Monday next.
  Adjourned at Fourteen minutes after Six o'clock, till Monday next, 22nd February.

  PETITIONS PRESENTED.
  The following Petitions were presented, and ordered to lie upon the Table:—

  THURSDAY.
  Prices and Coinage—Petition of John Robertson, for inquiry.
  Sale of Intoxicating Liquors—Petitions for drastic restriction during the European War, from Aberdeen and Paisley.