Commons Sitting of 19 May 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) (Suspended Bill) (by Order),
Glasgow Corporation (Celluloid) Bill (Suspended Bill) (by Order),
Consideration, as amended, deferred till Wednesday, 9th June.
Local Legislation Committee,
Ordered, That the Local Legislation Committee have leave to sit To-morrow, notwithstanding the Adjournment of the House.—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]
Forfar Gas Order Confirmation Bill,
Considered; to be read the third time To-morrow.
Gas and Water Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill,
Gas and Water Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill,
Read a second time, and committed.
Great North of Scotland Railway Order Confirmation Bill,
Read a second time; to be considered upon Monday, 31st May.
Electric Lighting Provisional Order (No. 5) Bill,
"To confirm a Provisional Order granted by the Board of Trade under the Electric Lighting Acts, 1882 to 1909, with the concurrence of the Local Government Board, constituting a Joint Board consisting of representatives of the urban districts of Wath-upon-Dearne, Bolton-upon-Dearne, and Thurnscoe, all in the West Riding of the county of York, for the joint exercise of powers under the Electric Lighting Acts in respects of their respective districts." Presented by Mr. ROBERTSON, supported by Mr. Herbert Lewis; read the first time; referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 93.]
London Electric Railway Companies' Facilities Bill,
"To authorise the City and South London Railway Company, the Central London Railway Company, the London Electric Railway Company, and the Metropolitan District Railway Company, or any of them, to make agreements with each other and with the London General Omnibus Company, Limited, for the purpose of providing increased facilities for the interchange and alternative routeing of traffic; the application of receipts; the appointment of a Joint Committee; and other purposes." Presented, and read the first time; and ordered to be read a second time.
Weardale and Consett Water Bill,
Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Housing (Rosyth Dockyard) Bill,
As amended, considered; read the third time, and passed.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as Amended, to be considered To-morrow.
Local Government Provisional Order (No. 7) Bill,
Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time To-morrow.
Frimley and Farnborough District Water Bill [Lords],
Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Bill to be read the third time.
Ormskirk Gas and Electricity Bill [Lords],
Warwick Gas and Electricity Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Salop County Council Bill [Lords],
Reported, without Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Bill to be read the third time.
Brighton and Hove Gas Bill [Lords],
Reported, with an Amendment; Report to lie upon the Table.
Falmouth Docks Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.
Message from the Lords,—That they have agreed to—
British North America Bill,
Special Constables (Scotland) Bill,
Fishery Harbours Bill,
Immature Spirits (Restriction) Bill,
Housing (Rosyth Dockyard) Bill,
Caledonian Railway Order Confirmation Bill, without Amendment.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled "An Act to authorise the Urban District Council of Ashington to construct new waterworks; to confer further powers on the council in regard to their water undertaking; and for other purposes." [Ashington Urban District Council Bill [Lords.]
Ashington Urban District Council Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.

NATIONAL RELIEF FUND.
Copy presented of Report to His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales by the Executive Committee of the National Relief Fund on the Administration of the Fund up to 31st March, 1915 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
UNIVERSITIES OF OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE ACT, 1877 (OXFORD).
Copy presented of Statute made by the Governing Body of University College, Oxford, on the 5th December, 1914, and the 15th January, 1915 (and sealed on the 5th February, 1915, amending the Pension Scheme under Statute VI., s. 9 (Miscellaneous), of the existing Statutes of the College [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 237.]
EDUCATION (SCOTLAND).
Copy presented of Report of the Committee of Council on Education in Scotland in 1914–15 [by Command]: to lie upon the Table.
SINKING FUNDS.
Account presented of the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, showing the amount received and applied in the year ended 31st March, 1915, in respect of the Old and New Sinking Funds [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 238.]
BOARD OF TRADE (EMPLOYMENT).
Order [2nd February] that the Supplement to the Report of the Board of Trade on the State of Employment in the United Kingdom in December, 1914, do lie upon the Table read, and discharged:—Paper withdrawn.
NEW WRIT.
For Kilmarnock District of Burghs, in the room of Lieutenant William Glynne Charles Gladstone, killed in action.—[Mr. Gulland.]
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.
  WAR.

    WRECK OF STEAMSHIP "ROHILLA" (COMPENSATION).
    Mr. HOGGEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether the Admiralty has admitted liability for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act in respect of the death of the seamen drowned in the wreck of the "Rohilla"; if so, what is the cause of the delay in settling it; and whether he is aware that the delay in settling is causing great distress and inconvenience to a number of poor people who are dependants of those seamen and are entitled to compensation, and when the compensation is likely to be paid?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): I regret the delay no less than my hon. Friend, but the case has presented great difficulties owing to the many questions of principle which have arisen affecting the decision as to liability for compensation. Arrangements have, however, now been

    2303
    made for the payment due under the Workmen's Compensation Act to be proceeded with, without prejudice to the final decision as to liability. The question as to supplementary awards under the Injuries in War Compensation Scheme is also proceeding. As regards the latter part of the question, I understand that the owners of the ship, who have been in touch with the dependants since the loss, have been making temporary advances to meet cases of distress.

    STEAMSHIP "JUNO" (SALE OF CARGO).
    Mr. RUPERT GWYNNEasked if a cargo of strontia spar, seized as a prize ex steamship "Juno" in August last, consisting of 498¾ tons, was sold on or about 11th February to an unnaturalised German named Hugo Wiskemann; if so, who was responsible for this sale; to whom was the cargo resold by this unnaturalised German; and are any steps being taken to watch the dealings of this broker?
    Mr. WALTER REA (Lord of the Treasury): My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. The cargo in question was, I am told, sold to the person named, but his nationality has not been ascertained. The brokers responsible for the sale are Messrs. Henry Bath and Son. The cargo was resold to a British firm, Messrs. Blagden, Waugh and Company, who shipped it to America. Messrs. Henry Bath and Son are a well-known British firm of high standing, and every care will be taken to secure that sales are only made in a way consistent with British interests.
    Mr. GWYNNE: Are we to understand that the Government take no steps to satisfy themselves that cargoes seized in this way cannot fall into alien hands?
    Mr. REA: The hon. Member must give notice.

    AIR RAID (SOUTHEND).
    Mr. PENNEFATHERasked if any delays in reporting the presence of hostile aircraft at Southend or elsewhere have been caused by want of direct telephonic connection between the look-out stations and the nearest aeroplane stations; and
    2304
    if, in any case, the Admiralty will take steps to provide such direct telephonic connections in order to avoid any risk of delay due to the faulty or slow working of local telephone exchanges?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: I think the hon. Gentleman will see, on consideration, that it is not in the public interest to describe the details of our Air Department organisation. I can, however, assure the hon. Gentleman that, as a result of that organisation, all necessary action is taken.
    Mr. PENNEFATHER: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire into the point as to whether any aliens, naturalised or otherwise, are employed in connection with the exchange of telephonic messages?
    Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise out of the question.

    ADMIRALTY CONTRACT (BERLIN FIRM).
    Mr. FELLasked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the Admiralty have placed contracts with Messrs. Schuchardt and Schutte, of 32, Victoria Street, Westminster; and if he is aware that this is a branch of a firm whose headquarters are in Berlin?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: No Admiralty contracts appear to have been placed with this firm during the last two years.

    KELP MANUFACTURE (PROHIBITION).
    Mr. CATHCART WASONasked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, in view of the fact that the manufacture of kelp is one of importance to many poor people, he will ascertain for what reasons this industry has been prohibited in the North; and whether the prohibition is local or general?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: I understand that the prohibition is local and is directed towards a particular purpose; but I will make further inquiry.

    MURDER OF BRITISH PRISONERS BY BAVARIAN TROOPS.
    Sir JOHN LONSDALEasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs

    2305
    what action he has taken, or proposes to take, with reference to the sworn testimony which he has received from the British Minister at The Hague, as to the systematic murder of British prisoners by Bavarian regiments under the direct orders of Prince Rupprecht?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir E. Grey): As the hon. Member is aware, I have given the utmost publicity to this matter through the Press and I have no doubt that the atrocious conduct of the Bavarian troops will be duly noted by public opinion here and elsewhere. The successful prosecution of the War is the only effective action His Majesty's Government can take.
    Sir J. LONSDALEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the sworn testimony transmitted to the Foreign Office by the British Minister at The Hague that British prisoners taken by Bavarian troops have been murdered by the orders of Prince Rupprecht; if, among the prisoners now in this country, there are any Bavarian officers or men who were accomplices in these crimes; and if they are being treated in all respects as honourable prisoners of war?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Tennant): The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Neither of the officers whose names are mentioned in the document in question as having given orders for the committal of these atrocities is in this country; but it is impossible to say if any German officer or man now a prisoner in our hands took part in similar crimes.

    CONSULAR SERVICE.
    Sir J. LONSDALEasked how many persons now in the British Consular service are of alien birth; and if it is intended to institute a thorough reorganisation of the Consular service so that it may afford more efficient assistance to British trade after the War, and that none but British-born citizens may be employed as British Consuls?
    Sir E. GREY: So far as I am aware every member of the salaried Consular service is a natural-born British subject. Of those Consular officers who receive no salary and are permitted to trade, and who have been selected for appointments from
    2306
    among resident merchants, a little less than two-fifths of the number are foreigners. The process of introducing improvements into the Consular service has been pursued for some years, and will continue after the War. The question of substituting British subjects for aliens in every place in the world where the presence of a Consular official is useful, but where a salaried officer is not employed, depends a great deal on the importance of the locality, the qualifications in individuals, and considerations of expense.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Will the right hon. Gentleman give consideration to the general public wish that British subjects should be appointed as Consuls wherever possible?
    Sir E. GREY: Yes: consideration is given to that wish, but every now and then there is some part of the world where the place is not of sufficient importance to justify the appointment of a salaried officer, and where no British subject is available, and in these cases the question is whether you will have some one who will act as Consular officer and have no salary, who is a foreigner, or whether you will not appoint anyone at all. That is really the sort of case that occurs.

    PASSPORTS (NEUTRALS).
    Commander BELLAIRSasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will circulate with the Votes a copy of the written affidavits which are demanded from neutrals before they can obtain passports to visit this country; and whether our Consuls are empowered to refuse passports to neutrals of hostile origin when it is believed that their presence in this country may be detrimental to the public interest?
    Sir E. GREY: His Majesty's Consular officers do not issue passports to persons who are not British subjects. They are authorised to refuse to viser the national passports of neutrals travelling to the United Kingdom in any case in which it appears desirable so to do. There is no specific affidavit prescribed for neutrals.

    BARON VON KUHLMANN.
    Lord CLAUD HAMILTONasked whether permission has been given to

    2307
    Baron von Kuhlmann, councillor to the late German Embassy in Great Britain, to remove his personal property and household goods from this country to Holland?
    Sir E. GREY: We have not yet received a formal application from Herr von Kuhlmann for permission to remove his effects. We are, however, prepared to grant such a request provided that similar facilities shall be granted to any members of the various British diplomatic staffs lately in Germany who may desire to remove their property.
    Lord CLAUD HAMILTON: Will the right hon. Gentleman take care that the advantages in this case shall be reciprocal: that is to say, that the effects of our late Ambassador in Berlin and his staff shall be delivered in this country intact in the same manner as the effects of Baron von Kuhlmann, which are now housed in my Constituency, were delivered to him; and will the right hon. Gentleman consult Sir Edward Goschen on the subject before coming finally to any decision in the matter?
    Sir E. GREY: Yes. I will certainly consult Sir Edward Goschen on the subject. The purport of my answer was that we intended that any removal should be reciprocal, not merely in name but in fact; that is to say, that if the removal is complete in one case it ought to be so in the other.
    Mr. HOUSTON: Before the furniture is allowed to leave this country, will the right hon. Gentleman see that it is subjected to a severe and searching test by the experts to discover secret receptacles?

    BRITISH SUBJECTS IN GERMANY.
    Sir J. LONSDALEasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the German Government have given effect to the agreement that all British women and children, men over fifty-five, ministers of religion, and doctors should be allowed to return home; and, if not, how many of these classes are still detained in Germany?
    Sir E. GREY: Effect has been given to this agreement except in a few isolated cases which are receiving attention, but some of which are not free from doubt.
    2308
    There are, however, the cases of certain retired British officers over fifty-five who are detained without the slightest justification, and whose release has formed the subject of repeated representations. Negotiations for the release of military doctors are still proceeding.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of these are still detained?
    Sir E. GREY: No, I cannot say that.

  ALIEN ENEMIES IN UNITED KINGDOM.

    REPATRIATION.
    Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has approached any neutral Power or Powers with a view of repatriating alien enemies to Germany, Austria and Turkey; whether any neutral Powers have offered their good services in this connection; and whether, without prejudice to national interests, a statement can be made as to the routes by which repatriated parties will travel?
    Sir E. GREY: The answers to the first and second parts of the question are in the negative. With regard to the last part of the question, enemy aliens are repatriated by the route which is considered most convenient at the moment, and it is difficult at this moment to say which that precise route may be.

    FARM OCCUPIED BY GERMAN, PULBOROUGH.
    Mr. RONALD McNEILLasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that a German named Sehmer, who was naturalised shortly before the outbreak of war, is the owner and occupier of Toat Farm, near Pulborough, Sussex, an eminence whence signals can be made to the Channel and to hills commanding an uninterrupted view of Portsmouth; whether Sehmer is a member of the family of that name owning one of the largest armament factories in Germany; and whether these circumstances, in addition to Sehmer's avowed sympathies with the Germans in the War, afford sufficient reason for his internment as a suspected naturalised alien until he offers satisfactory proof of his loyalty?
    Mr. TENNANT: I understand that the farm in question is occupied by a man

    2309
    named Sehmer. It is not known whether Sehmer is a member of the family owning one of the largest armament factories in Germany, nor has it been reported that Sehmer has sympathy with the Germans in the War. As regards signalling, I am informed that it would be possible, though very difficult, to send messages to the Channel. But the reports that signalling has actually taken place have turned out on inquiry not to be well founded. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister explained on the 13th instant that in exceptional cases naturalised aliens would be dealt with by the advisory body which is to be set up. In these circumstances I can hardly pronounce an opinion as to whether Sehmer should or should not be interned.
    Mr. R. McNEILL: Will the right hon. Gentleman take some steps to ascertain whether it is or is not true that this man is connected with the firm in Germany?
    Mr. TENNANT: Yes, Sir, I will have inquiries made.

    MOTOR CARS AND CYCLES.
    Lord CHARLES BERESFORDasked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that well-to-do alien enemies are at present driving about the country in motor cars; and whether the Government will take, steps to prohibit the use of motor cars, motor cycles, and cycles by uninterned alien enemies?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. McKenna): The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. I am not aware that alien enemies are driving about the country in motor-cars. The possession of motor-cars and motor-cycles by alien enemies, except with the written permission of the police, was prohibited by the Aliens Restriction Order made on the 5th of August last. Further, if an alien enemy travels more than five miles from his place of residence—whether in a hired motor-car or otherwise—without a permit from the police, he is liable to arrest. I believe the law has been vigorously enforced, but if the Noble Lord has any information in his possession, I should be glad if he would let me have it.

    NATURALISATION.
    Mr. KINGasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that, on aliens becoming naturalised in this country, they
    2310
    are declared entitled to the rights, powers, and privileges of natural-born British subjects, it will be requisite to initiate legislation before British subjects who were originally aliens can be subjected to the inquiry as to their loyalty which is part of the policy adopted by the Government?
    Mr. McKENNA: In proper cases such an inquiry can be made without special legislation.
    Sir J. D. REES: May I ask whether any British can alter the fact that the German Government does not recognise the renouncing of allegiance by Germans?
    Mr. McKENNA: I think the hon. Member has in mind rather a different question.

    BRITISH POST OFFICES.
    Mr. NIELDasked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that A. J. Sasse, a German subject, carries on business as a baker and confectioner at 327, High Road, Brondesbury, on which premises branch post office business was and still is carried on, the work of which includes telegraphic and telephonic business and affords employment to five female assistants and one male assistant; and whether he has taken any and what steps to secure that public services shall no longer remain under the control or supervision of this German subject?
    The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Hobhouse): The sub-postmaster was naturalised as a British subject in 1892. Inquiries made leave no reason to suppose that he is not perfectly loyal, and I do not propose to take any action against him.
    Mr. NIELDasked the Postmaster General whether, in response to representations made to him from time to time since the commencement of the War, he has made any Departmental or other inquiry as to persons of German or Austrian birth, whether naturalised or not, holding the office of post or sub-postmasters or mistresses throughout the country, and in charge of telephonic or telegraphic systems; if so, when, and by whom, and in what manner was the inquiry held and was there any Report; and will he undertake to communicate to the House the nature of any Report or the conclusions arrived at as well as the steps, if any, taken by him to carry out any recommendations, or otherwise, to deal with the matter?
    Mr. HOBHOUSE: I would refer the hon. Member to the answer which I gave in this House on the 17th instant in reply to a question on this subject put to me by the hon. Member for the Brentford Division of Middlesex. Inquiries were made into each individual case by my own officers who, if necessary, communicated with the police and with other Government Departments. There was no general Report, and I do not see that there is anything more which I can with advantage communicate to the House.

    ANTI-GERMAN RIOTS.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to a sentence of one month's hard labour passed by Mr. Paul Taylor at the Marylebone Police Court last week upon a gunner in the Royal Field Artillery for breaking a window during an anti-German disturbance; and whether he can see his way, as the aliens are all now being interned, to remit the remainder of the sentence?
    Mr. McKENNA: I have caused inquiry to be made in this case, but am not yet sufficiently in possession of the facts to reply to the question.

    GERMAN NATIONALITY.
    Mr. BUTCHERasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to the provisions of the German Nationality Statute of 1870 and a German Imperial Statute of 1896, from which it appears that a German subject does not lose his nationality except by virtue of an order or other official document of the State of which he is a subject, or by ten years' continuous residence outside the German Empire, accompanied by omission to register himself in the proper Consular register; and whether, in view of the recent announcement of the Prime Minister as to dealing with naturalised persons of hostile origin, he will ascertain and inform the House how many Germans resident in this country and naturalised since the commencement of the War and in the five previous years, respectively, have lost their German nationality and no longer owe allegiance to the German Emperor?
    Mr. McKENNA: I am aware of the German law on the subject. With regard to the second part of the question, for the reasons which I gave recently in reply to a question, I do not think such an inquiry would be of any value.
    Mr. BUTCHERasked the Home Secretary whether an applicant for a certificate of naturalisation is at present required to state on oath or otherwise that he has lost his German nationality or ceased to owe allegiance to the German Emperor; and whether any inquiries what soever are made on this subject and, if so, of whom?
    Sir J. LONSDALEasked the Home Secretary if he will require from all persons of German origin in this country to whom certificates of naturalisation have been granted that, as a condition of their retention of such certificates, they shall forthwith formally renounce all allegiance to the German Emperor and produce proof of denationalisation as German subjects?
    Mr. McKENNA: I have nothing to add to the full answer which I gave on this subject last Monday.
    Mr. BUTCHERasked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the further facts brought to his attention, he will, before granting any further certificates of naturalisation to German alien enemies resident in this country, take the necessary steps to satisfy himself that such persons have, before the certificates are granted, lost their German nationality, and have ceased to owe allegiance to the German Emperor?
    Mr. McKENNA: As I stated in reply to a recent question, the greatest care is taken to secure, so far as is possible, the object which the hon. and learned Member has in mind.
    Sir J. D. REESasked the Home Secretary whether he has ascertained, or will ascertain, to what extent, if at all, the German Government recognises the renunciation by its nationals who are naturalised elsewhere, of their original allegiance to Germany?
    Mr. McKENNA: The German Government alone could give information on this point, and it is obviously impossible at the present time to obtain information from this source.
    Sir J. D. REES: Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that no person can renounce his German nationality unless he can produce a certificate of denaturalisation from the German Government, and is that not material to the answer he has just given?
    Mr. McKENNA: No, Sir; I am utterly unable to agree with the hon. Gentleman as to his interpretation of German practice. In practice the nationalisation laws of Germany are administered as the Government pleases.

    ALIENS RESTRICTION ORDER.
    Mr. BUTCHERasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been called to a trial at Llandudno Police Court of one Heinrich Grenwold, who was charged under the Defence of the Realm Act with being in possession of a military map and signalling apparatus and was fined £10, and to the evidence of the Chief Constable of Carnarvonshire at the trial that the said Heinrich Grenwold had, against his advice, been released from internment by the order of the Home Secretary; whether he will state whether this Heinrich Grenwold was an alien enemy and had been interned, and, if so, when; and whether he was subsequently released by his order, and, if so, when and upon whose recommendation?
    Mr. McKENNA: The person referred to was released not by my order but by authority of the War Office. I am informed that careful inquiries were made, that the Chief Constable of Oxford, where he was a student, reported that he knew no reason against his release, and that the Chief Constable of Carnarvon, where he had been staying, while he could not take the responsibility of recommending his release, said he knew nothing against him. His Oxford tutor applied for his release. The recent charge against him was not under the Defence of the Realm Act, but under the Aliens Restriction Order, and appears to have been adequately dealt with by the fine imposed.

  DEUTSCHE ORIENTBANK (ALEXANDRIA).
  Mr. PENNEFATHERasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will say whether the Deutsche Orientbank in Alexandria is confined to the liquidation of affairs actually in existence at the outbreak of War; and whether it is, with the consent of the British Controller, undertaking new business, receiving deposits, and loaning money?
  Sir E. GREY: I have no information respecting the conditions under which the Deutsche Orientbank in Alexandria is
  2314
  being permitted to carry on business beyond the fact that the Egyptian Government have appointed a Controller whose principal duty is to safeguard the interests of the depositors in Egypt. I will make inquiries regarding the points raised by the hon. Member and inform him of the result.

  ZULU REGIMENT.
  Mr. HOUSTONasked the Secretary for the Colonies whether he will communicate with the Union of South Africa Government with the object of obtaining permission for a regiment of Zulus, officered by white Colonial or British officers, to be recruited, equipped, and trained at private expense prior to their adoption by the War Office when passed as efficient; and whether he is aware that many thousands of these men have loyal aspirations and desire to take their place along with other coloured British troops in the fighting line in Europe?
  Mr. WALTER REA: My right hon. Friend, who is attending a meeting at the Guildhall, has asked me to answer this question. No, Sir. The Secretary of State cannot add anything to his reply to a similar question on 12th May.
  Mr. HOUSTON: Will the hon. Member convey to the right hon. Gentleman the importance of mobilising the entire resources of the Empire, seeing that in the natives of South Africa we have some of the finest fighting material in the Empire?
  Mr. WALTER REA: I will convey to the right hon. Gentleman what the hon. Member says.

  PRESS CENSORSHIP.
  Mr. LYNCHasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can tell the House what provisions are made with regard to censoring news destined to appear in the Australian Press; whether he is aware that news already published in London has again been subject to restriction before publication in Australia; and, if so, what are the public grounds on which such a course can be justified?
  Mr. WALTER REA: The responsibility for carrying out Press censorship in Australia rests with the Commonwealth Government, which has entire discretion in the matter of judging what may properly be published in Australia.
  Mr. LYNCH: Is there any preliminary exercise of the censorship here previous to the news reaching the Censor in Australia?
  Mr. WALTER REA: I must ask the hon. Member to put down a question.
  Mr. KELLAWAY: I beg to ask the Solicitor-General a question, of which I have given him private notice, namely: Whether it is the rule of the Press Bureau that no article will be allowed to be published which purports to describe any operation of war which has taken place during the preceding five days, as the result of observations made within twenty miles of the front, or which has been compiled under circumstances which otherwise suggest a breach, in letter or spirit, of the prohibition against the presence of correspondents at the front; whether this Regulation has been suspended recently in favour of representatives of a certain group of newspapers; and, if so, whether it is proposed to grant a similar privilege to representatives of other papers?
  The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir Stanley Buckmaster): A Regulation to the effect mentioned in the hon. Member's question was issued by the Press Bureau on the 24th September, 1914. The notice was framed to meet the conditions then prevailing. For a long time, however, our troops have occupied a position which has been comparatively stationary and the rule has not been applied strictly. Recently matter has been sent in from a number of newspaper correspondents that might be interpreted as a violation of this rule, but in the present condition of affairs these articles are not mischievous and they have accordingly been passed. The rule is a very important one and has not been cancelled because the circumstances may change at any moment, and it would then be necessary to enforce it. No distinction has ever been drawn by this office between any one paper or group of papers and any other. All are treated alike.
  Mr. KELLAWAY: Will the right hon. Gentleman say that he is prepared to grant to the representatives of other papers the privileges at present granted to the representatives of Lord Northcliffe's papers?
  Sir S. BUCKMASTER: No privilege whatever has ever been granted to any representative of Lord Northcliffe's papers by my office that has not been granted to all the other newspapers.
  Mr. KELLAWAY: Is my right hon. Friend able to speak for other Departments of the Government or for his own headquarters?
  Sir S. BUCKMASTER: Certainly.

  FREE RAILWAY WARRANTS FOR SOLDIERS.
  Mr. WINGasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if his Department can make arrangements whereby each member of His Majesty's Forces can be allowed a free pass and thirty-six hours at home before leaving for the front?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Harold Baker): Free railway warrants are issued to all soldiers once prior to embarkation or after serving three months, provided that they can be granted leave and that they have not already received the concession. Once a draft has been placed under orders to embark it is not possible to grant leave as the draft may have to start at any moment, but arrangements have been made for giving soldiers leave in anticipation of their being detailed for drafts as far as the exigencies of the Service permit.

  WAR CORRESPONDENTS.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he will say what is the objection to permitting a number of approved war correspondents to accompany the Expeditionary Force in France and Belgium under conditions which would secure that everything which they wrote would be subject to strict censorship; and whether, in its refusal to permit war correspondents to accompany the Expeditionary Force, the War Office is influenced by any motives other than a desire to prevent news of military value from reaching the enemy?
  Mr. TENNANT: I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Yarmouth on the 13th of this month, to which I have nothing to add.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to allow a number of properly accredited correspondents to go to the Front?
  Mr. TENNANT: I can add nothing further.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Can the right hon. Gentleman not say whether, in the opinion of the War Office, it would not be greatly to the advantage of this country that the public should be well informed on these matters by being able to read such articles as are being communicated by Mr. Buchan; and, as Mr. Buchan has been made an exception, will others be allowed?
  Mr. TENNANT: I regret I cannot answer.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Can the right hon. Gentleman arrange for some guests to go to the Front?

  HIGH EXPLOSIVES (SUPPLY).
  Sir RICHARD COOPERasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he has any official information showing that the want of an unlimited supply of high explosives has been a bar to the success of our troops?
  Mr. TENNANT: My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is answering a question on this point later.
  Mr. HEWINSasked the Prime Minister whether he can now make a statement which will allay public anxiety as to the supply of explosives at the Front; and whether he can assure the House that effective measures have been taken to utilise the resources of all the manufacturing firms in the country capable of assisting the Government in supplying munitions of war?
  The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd George): I must refer the hon. Member to the statement made by the Secretary of State for War yesterday.
  Sir R. COOPER: Am I not entitled to an answer to a question put earlier? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that official information does support the statements which have been made in the Press?
  Mr. TENNANT: No, Sir. I was going to say exactly what my right hon. Friend did say in point of fact to the hon. Gentleman opposite.

  GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS.
  Sir R. COOPERasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if any contracts have been placed with the firm of Hart and Levy, of 91, Wood Street, E.C.?
  Mr. BAKER: Yes, Sir. This firm has received orders for Army clothing.
  Sir R. COOPER: Is it the fact that one of the members of this firm, an hon. Member of this House, is sitting on the Committee of the War Office dealing with the very matters for which his firm is contracting, and is this desirable in the public interest?
  Mr. BAKER: No, Sir. On several occasions I have denied that in this House. The hon. Member referred to is rendering very valuable service on the Committee connected with organising work, and has no connection with contracts at all.
  Sir MAURICE LEVY: Is it not the fact that the firm in question has been a registered limited liability company for over twenty years, and is it not also the fact that the company has not accepted any Government contracts until a demand has been made for two-thirds of the output to go to the benefit of the country?
  Mr. BAKER: I cannot confirm that without notice; I do not doubt it.
  Sir A. MARKHAM: Is the hon. Member aware that the word limited is not put in the question, that it ought to be in, and that it is very unfair?
  Mr. SNOWDENasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to the statement of the chairman of Messrs. Spillers and Bakers, millers, that they were under large obligations to the Services for their food supplies; and what are the particulars of any contracts which may have been given to this firm by the War Office and by Territorial Associations, respectively?
  Mr. BAKER: This firm has received a considerable number of orders, mainly for biscuits. I will send my hon. Friend further details if he so desires, but the prices must, in accordance with the usual practice, be excluded.

  ROYAL BUCKS (TERRITORIAL) HUSSARS.
  Mr. NIELDasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that, although the Royal Bucks Hussars (Territorials) have been absent abroad on active service for some seven weeks past, no pay has been distributed to the men since they left England; whether he will state the reason for this delay; and if he will take steps to ensure payment of arrears being made at once; and ensure that future pay shall be forthcoming regularly and promptly when the same is due?
  Mr. BAKER: I have no knowledge of this case. Soldiers on active service are not paid regularly as in peace, but obtain cash as opportunity may offer and the men may require. Complete machinery for making such payments exists at the front, and if in this instance the Commanding Officer were to put it into operation I do not doubt that the desired result would be secured.

  ROYAL ARMY MEDICAL CORPS.
  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether the following surgeons, Sir G. H. Makin, K.C.B., F.R.C.S., Sir A. A. Bowlby, C.M.G., F.R.C.S., Mr. F. F. Burghard, M.S., F.R.C.S., Mr. W. T. Lister, M.B., F.R.C.S., Mr. H. M. W. Gray, M.B., F.R.C.S., and the following physicians, Sir W. P. Herringham, M.D., Sir A. E. Wright, M.D., F.R.S., Sir J. R. Bradford, M.D., F.R.S., and Sir B. Dawson, K.C.V.O., M.D., are employed at the Front at ordinary Royal Army Medical Corps salaries; and whether he has any difficulty in getting eminent doctors to serve in consulting positions either abroad or at home at the ordinary rates of pay given to the officers of the Royal Army Medical Corps?
  Mr. BAKER: The officers named are employed at the Front with pay as colonels of the Army Medical Service, and so far there has been no difficulty in obtaining eminent medical men to serve in consulting positions either at home or abroad at the rates of pay offered.
  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he will give the number of doctors in the
  2320
  Royal Army Medical Corps on the active and Special Reserve lists at the present time; and what is the number in the Territorial Medical Corps?
  Mr. TENNANT: The numbers are:—

  Army Medical Service and R.A.M.C.

  1,008

  Re-employed retired R.A.M.C. Officers

  174

  Special Reserve R.A.M.C. Officers

  623

  Temporarily Commissioned Officers

  3,100

  Territorial Force R.A.M.C

  2,122

  7,027

  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the number of lieutenants, captains, majors, lieutenant-colonels, and colonels in the Royal Army Medical Corps on 31st July, 1914, and the 31st March, 1915; and why there have been no promotions other than those arising in the ordinary course of service from the rank of captain to major?
  Mr. TENNANT: The numbers are:—

  Cols.

  Lt.-Cols.

  Majors.

  Capts.

  Lieuts.

  Total.

  31-7-1914

  29

  128

  341

  379

  127

  1,004

  31-3-1915

  99

  225

  185

  477

  —

  986

  There have been fourteen promotions from captain to major other than in the ordinary course of service.
  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: Do not these figures show a very great lack of promotion from captain to major?
  Mr. TENNANT: That may be so, but I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that he is not accurate in stating there have been no promotions; there have, in fact, been fourteen.

  NAVAL FOOD SUPPLY (DUTCH MARGARINE).
  Sir J. D. REESasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether Dutch margarine is supplied to the Navy; if so, whether it is certain that this product does not in fact come from Germany; and, if there is any doubt on the point, whether risk of poisoned food being supplied by German sellers is duly appreciated by the naval authorities?
  Dr. MACNAMARA: No margarine is supplied to the Navy by the Admiralty. His Majesty's ships' companies, however, can purchase it with their own money at

  2321
  the canteens on board. The tenants of these canteens are at liberty to stock any suitable brands of the goods they sell, provided the prices are reasonable. Samples are taken for analysis at irregular intervals in order to ensure that satisfactory quality is maintained. Among the different margarines stocked in the canteens a Dutch brand is included by certain of the tenants. Special inquiry was made into the possibility of this brand coming from Germany, and the Admiralty are satisfied that there is no ground for such an apprehension.

  TRENCH TRAINING (COMPENSATION TO FARMERS).
  Colonel LOCKWOODasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can give any information with reference to compensation to farmers for trenching?
  Mr. BAKER: I understand that the Royal Commission has already begun to consider these cases, and proposes to proceed with them as continuously as possible after Whitsuntide.

  ARMY PAY CORPS.
  Colonel YATEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if ex-non-commissioned officers of the Army Pay Corps have been refused employment in the Army Pay Department and Army Pay Corps, while young men of military age, but without any previous service in the Army or knowledge of military accounts, have been taken on; and if he will cause inquiries to be made into the matter with a view to the remedying of such a state of affairs?
  Mr. BAKER: I am not aware of any suitable applicant being refused employment. Perhaps the hon. and gallant Member will communicate to me the particulars of the cases he has in mind.

  ARMY (TRANSFERS) ACT, 1915.
  Mr. PROTHEROasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in consequence of The Army (Transfers)
  2322
  Act, 1915, the forms of attestation for the Regular Army and for short service will be so altered as to explain to a man on enlistment that he is liable to be transferred from the corps into which he is enlisting to any arm of the Service or from a non-combatant to a combatant branch; and, if so, whether he will state the words of the proposed alteration?
  Mr. TENNANT: The point raised by the hon. Member is being considered.

  PRISONERS OF WAR.

    ESCAPE OF GERMANS, DOUGLAS, ISLE OF MAN.
    Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the German officers who were tried at Chester by court-martial on 23rd April for escaping were sentenced to twenty-eight days' imprisonment without hard labour, and that the three interned Germans who escaped from the Douglas (Isle of Man) detention camp on Tuesday, 20th April, were sentenced upon conviction by court-martial to six months' imprisonment with hard labour; whether, in the opinion of the Secretary of State, there was any sufficient reason for the disparity; and, if not, whether he will advise a remission of the sentences passed at Douglas?
    Mr. TENNANT: The sentences were awarded, as stated in the question, by military courts. It is not proposed to take any action as regards these sentences.
    Sir J. D. REESasked the Prime Minister whether His Majestys Government will consider the propriety of interning selected German prisoners of war upon our Channel, Atlantic, and other passenger steamers in view of the action of the enemy in destroying unarmed ships and crews under the cover of the necessities of war, or, alternatively, if the Government will consider the propriety of using, as far as possible, captured German liners for our passenger trade?
    Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The policy suggested in the first part of the question is not in contemplation. With regard to the second part, all these ships which are capable of being utilised are now in use.

  COTTON AS CONTRABAND.
  Sir J. LONSDALEasked the Prime Minister if his attention has been called to the fact that, in consequence of the refusal of His Majesty's Ministers to declare cotton absolute contraband, Germany is able to obtain through neutral countries the material required for the manufacture of explosives; and if the Government will reconsider a policy which, whilst our own supplies of high explosive shells have been declared to be insufficient, enables the enemy to supply itself with an essential element in the manufacture of munitions to be used against our own troops?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this and following questions.
  The assumptions on which this question is based are wholly unfounded. It ought to be clearly understood that the action which is being taken since 11th March is in every respect as effective in preventing cotton from reaching Germany as a declaration of cotton as contraband could make it, and cotton is in fact being excluded from Germany thereby. I may add, however, that arrangements are being made to pay American shippers for the cotton cargoes detained by us, as soon as the necessary proof of ownership and contract price is forthcoming.
  Sir J. LONSDALE: Do I understand the right hon. Gentleman in his answer to mean that no cotton is at present being imported into Germany from foreign sources?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That is my information.
  Sir J. LONSDALE: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider that if cotton were made absolute contraband, which it is not at present, as the right hon. Gentleman admits, British naval officers would be relieved from a very unfair burden of responsibility, and the supply of cotton to Germany would be absolutely stopped.
  Mr. DENNISS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the week ended 1st May 120,000 bales of raw cotton were exported through Italy to Germany?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I will look into the matter. Our intention as to cotton is to exclude it from Germany, and every step has been taken for that purpose possible under the circumstances.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Would the making of cotton absolute contraband make any difference to the amount of cotton reaching Germany?
  Sir J. D. REES: Why, if the present prohibition is practically effective, was it found necessary to stop the export of cotton from Egypt?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I would rather have notice of that.
  Sir J. LONSDALE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say why wool was placed on the list of contraband and cotton left out?
  Mr. SPEAKER: The matter can be raised afterwards.

  HOSTILE ASSETS.
  Sir J. D. REESasked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government proposes to introduce legislation to prevent money being paid by England to any enemy country upon the conclusion of peace until the government of such enemy country has given satisfactory guarantees for the payment of its debts to England?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The hon. Member no doubt refers to German and other hostile assets which have been secured and earmarked in this country by the Trading with the Enemy Acts passed at the beginning of the War. It is the intention of the Government to prevent such assets leaving this country until proper provision is made for securing corresponding British assets now in the hands of the enemy, and steps will in due course be taken to this end.

  "ENEMY SUBJECT" (DEFINITION).
  Sir EDWARD CARSONasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the definition of "enemy subject" in the Trading with the Enemy Acts passed by the Commonwealth of Australia; whether such definition includes a company carried on or managed wholly or mainly for the benefit or on behalf of enemy subjects although registered or incorporated within the King's Dominions, and whether he will propose to Parliament a similar definition in respect of companies under similar conditions in this country?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I have not seen the Australian Statutes, but in this country emergency legislation has already secured that every company of the kind referred to is effectively controlled in the national interest, without prejudicing the interests of British shareholders with shares in the company. Any profits which in time of peace would belong to enemy shareholders are retained here, and will not be parted with save under the conditions stated in my answer to Question No. 47.

  INTOXICATING LIQUORS.
  Mr. DUNDAS WHITEasked the Prime Minister whether the system of appealing by posters and other advertisements, which has been applied to recruiting, will be applied also to induce abstinence from intoxicating liquors during the War?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: This suggestion will be considered.

  MILITARY AND INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION.
  Sir HENRY CRAIKasked the Prime Minister whether he is prepared to consider the expediency, in the present crisis, with the view of utilising the full resources of the country, whether for service in the field, for the production of munitions of war, or for the effective equipment of all branches of national work, of applying a scheme of disciplined organisation, under which service would be given under adequate supervision, each unit being bound together by the tie of common work in their special sphere, and under which each citizen would be required to give his services in the sphere in which they were judged to be most effective for the public interest?
  Mr. CATHCART WASONasked the Prime Minister if he will take into consideration the advisability of compulsory registration of all persons of military age with the view of organising the manhood of the country not only for defence, but in such other industrial matters as are necessary?
  Mr. HOUSTONasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the statements made by Lord Kitchener and Sir John French that enormous quantities of
  2326
  ammunition and arms are now and will be constantly required at the front, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer's statements regarding drink and slackness of output, and the Lord Chancellor's reference to conscription, he will consider the advisability of immediately putting the whole of the United Kingdom under martial law so that the entire resources of the country in men and material may be mobilised and properly organised whereby the skilled workman whose patriotism prompted him to take his place in the fighting line may be recalled and placed in the workshop, the shipyard, and the mine, and the unskilled, and notably the single man, may get his share of the fighting, and the overlapping efforts of patriotic persons may be properly utilised and the War brought to a speedy and successful conclusion?
  Mr. ELLIS GRIFFITHasked the Prime Minister whether, in mobilising and organising the country for war, it is proposed to obtain a register of men of military age, with such particulars as may enable the Government to have complete information as to the military power of the country?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The Government will take every step which is necessary, in their opinion, for the effective organisation of the military and industrial resources of the country. These suggestions will be carefully considered in all their aspects.

  PARLIAMENTARY VOTING LISTS.
  Mr. KINGasked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that, unless legislation is passed within a few weeks, many soldiers at the front and others will fail to be on the Parliamentary voting lists for 1916, as they would have been had not patriotic service or other circumstances intervened; and whether, immediately after the Whitsuntide Recess, he will introduce legislation to prevent the wholesale disenfranchisement which will otherwise occur?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I must refer my hon. Friend to the answer given yesterday on this subject by the President of the Local Government Board.
  Mr. KING: Can we have some answer to this question, which has been put several times, as soon as the House resumes after the Recess?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I hope it will be possible to make a statement soon.
  Mr. SANDERSON: Will the right hon. Gentleman remember that some of these claims have to be put in before 25th July?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: We are bearing that in mind.

  WELSH CHURCH (POSTPONEMENT) BILL.
  Mr. POLLOCKasked the Prime Minister if, in view of the dissatisfaction caused by the long postponement of progress with the Welsh Church (Postponement) Bill, he can name an approximate date on which he will undertake to proceed with it?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I regret I can at present name no definite date when this Bill will be taken.
  Mr. KING: In view of the fact that temperance legislation was dropped in order to secure the unity of all parties, will this legislation also be considered with a view to its being dropped?

  ARMY OFFICERS (PROMOTION).
  Mr. SHIRLEY BENNasked the Prime Minister (1) whether he is aware that many officers commanding regiments in the field are still without the rank and pay to which their duties entitle them; whether he will take immediate steps to have these anomalies removed, having regard to the operation of the present system which places them in an unfavourable position by comparison with officers commanding regiments at Home; (2) whether he is aware that the delay in promoting officers commanding regiments at the front to their proper rank affects the promotion of the officers of each regiment in which the officer commanding is not promoted; what steps will be taken to bring to an end the anomalous position of majors acting for months as officers commanding and of other officers in the regiment performing duties of the ranks above them; and asked the Under-Secretary of State for War (3) when the "Gazette" notifications will be made of the promotions of officers in the field performing the duties of higher rank to that rank?
  Mr. TENNANT: Immediate measures are being taken to give effect to the steps of temporary promotion, in accordance with the declarations already made to the House.

  GAME.
  Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the present high prices of corn, he will consider the desirability of introducing legislation or taking such other steps as he may consider necessary to prevent game being reared, in view that large quantities of wheat, barley, and maize are used for this purpose.
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Harry Verney): I understand that a considerable number of landowners and shooting tenants will not rear game this season, and in the absence of fuller information of the quantity of corn likely to be used for game food I do not think that legislation of the kind suggested by my hon. Friend would be justified.
  Sir A. MARKHAM: I had to put the question in the form of legislation according to the Rules of the House.

  COMPENSATION RISKS (EMPLOYMENT OF WORKMEN).
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the fact that, owing to the refusal of insurance companies to take workmen's compensation risks on workmen over a certain age, firms engaged on Government contracts have had to dismiss men who have arrived at that age although they are still capable of doing good work; and whether, in view of the necessity for increasing the output of munitions and Government stores, he proposes to take any action to enable the services of these men, who are willing to help their country, to be retained?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: No cases of the kind referred to by my hon. Friend have been brought to my notice. If, however, he will supply me with any specific instances, I shall be glad to have an investigation made, and, if necessary, will have the matter taken up with the companies concerned.

  MEDICAL VOLUNTEERS.
  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Under-Secretary for War whether some 5,000 medical men have volunteered their services during the War, and how many of these are now in actual service; and whether there is any scarcity of medical officers either at Home or at the front?
  Mr. TENNANT: More than 5,000 medical men have offered their services, and 3,100 have actually been appointed. This is in addition to officers of the Special Reserve. There is not at the moment any scarcity of medical officers either at Home or at the front, but a further large number will be required.

  BAYONETS.
  Mr. HOUSTONasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can state the length over all from butt-plate to muzzle of the British, the French, the Russian, the German, and the Austrian rifle, respectively, and the respective length of the bayonets from muzzle of rifle to point of bayonet used with the rifle of each of these armies; whether he is aware that, in the opinion of British and Canadian officers who have seen much bayonet fighting, the French bayonet is a far more effective weapon than the British; and whether the Secretary of State for War will consider the advisability of adopting the French pattern of bayonet so that our soldiers may not be handicapped in their bayonet fighting with the Germans?
  Mr. TENNANT: The lengths of the rifles from butt-plate to muzzle are:—

  British

  …

  …

  3 feet 8.5 inches.

  French

  …

  …

  4 feet 3.12 inches.

  Russian

  …

  …

  4 feet 3.875 inches.

  German

  …

  …

  4 feet 1.4 inches.

  Austrian

  …

  …

  4 feet 2 inches.

  And from muzzle to point of bayonet:—

  British

  …

  …

  1 foot 5.2 inches.

  French

  …

  …

  1 foot 8.72 inches.

  Russian

  …

  …

  1 foot 5.125 inches.

  German

  …

  …

  1 foot 8.35 inches.

  Austrian

  …

  …

  9.5 inches.

  As regards the second part of the question, no reports to this effect have been received, and, in the absence of any official report or recommendation on the subject, it is not intended to change the pattern of our bayonet.

  CRUCIFIXION OF CANADIANS (ALLEGED).
  Mr. HOUSTONasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has any official information showing that during the recent fighting, when the Canadians were temporarily driven back, they were compelled to leave about forty of their wounded comrades in a barn and that on recapturing the position they found the Germans had bayoneted all the wounded with the exception of a sergeant, and that the Germans had removed the figure of Christ from the large village crucifix and fastened the sergeant while alive to the cross; and whether he is aware that the crucifixion of our soldiers is becoming a practice of the Germans?
  Mr. TENNANT: The military authorities in France have standing instructions to send particulars of any authenticated cases of atrocities committed against our troops by the Germans. No official information in the sense of the hon. Member's question has been received, but owing to the information conveyed by the hon. Member's previous question inquiry is being made, and it is not yet complete.

  PROVISION FOR INSANE SOLDIERS.
  Mr. RAFFANasked the Under-Secretary for War whether, in the event of wounded soldiers becoming insane, they are dealt with as pauper lunatics and conveyed to the workhouse of their place of settlement; whether remonstrances have been received from boards of guardians on the subject; and whether arrangements could be made by which such men would be dealt with by the Red Cross Society and be eligible for pensions as disabled soldiers, thus avoiding the taint of pauperisation?
  Mr. TENNANT: The Department has endeavoured to prevent, as far as possible, any soldier who has served with the Expeditionary Force and who has become mentally affected being dealt with as a pauper lunatic and as such sent to a workhouse. Under present arrangements it is intended that all cases of mental disorder shall be retained in a military hospital until after the War. The present accommodation at Netley will be supplemented by a military hospital which will shortly

  2331
  be opened at Napsbury. Cases which, after observation, prove to be cases of mental shock or nerve strain will be sent, as I have already explained, to certain hospitals specially adapted for the treatment of such cases.
  Mr. RAFFAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are a number of cases in which these unfortunate men have been sent to a workhouse? May we take it that that will not be repeated?
  Mr. TENNANT: I will inquire as to that statement.
  Mr. DAVID MASON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in answer to a question I put to him yesterday he stated that the man was sent to a workhouse asylum on being discharged from the Army?
  Mr. TENNANT: There is a difference between sending a man to an asylum and to a workhouse. I am not certain as to the specific instance given by the hon. Member.

  SUPPRESSED NEWSPAPERS (IRELAND).
  Mr. LYNCHasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can give the list of Irish newspapers suppressed or threatened since the beginning of the War, and any indication of the nature of the offence in question; if steps were taken to ascertain whether any of these newspapers had means of acquiring information not available to all the world; and, if so, whether the offence in any particular case consisted mainly or altogether in criticism of the Government?
  The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): I have been asked by my right hon. Friend to answer this question. I do not consider that it would be in the public interest to amplify the replies already given on this subject. The action taken against offending newspapers has been under powers conferred by the Defence of the Realm Act, and I would refer the hon. Member to Regulation No. 27, made in pursuance of those Acts, for an indication of the character of the offences which have compelled such action. I am not aware that any of the newspapers in question criticised the present administration as such.
  Mr. LYNCH: Considering that the liberty of the Press is a matter which should be closely safeguarded, is this House to have no illumination whatever on such arbitrary cases?
  Mr. BIRRELL: No, Sir. I do not think the House requires any particular information with regard to these papers which were suppressed because, in the opinion of the military authorities, they interfered with the successful prosecution of the War.
  Sir A. MARKHAM: Has the right hon. Gentleman any information that these papers were subsidised with German money?
  Mr. BIRRELL: No, Sir.
  Mr. LYNCH: Were their criticisms more damaging than those of the London papers, which the Government have not suppressed?

  ARMY PROMOTION.
  Mr. SHIRLEY BENNasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, when a major's command is made a lieutenant-colonel's command, the practice is not to promote the major in command, but to supersede him by a retired lieutenant-colonel; whether he is aware that this practice causes dissatisfaction; and whether he will consider an amendment of existing regulations by which, in these circumstances, the major in command can be continued by temporary promotion as lieutenant-colonel?
  Mr. TENNANT: It is the practice not to promote from a lower to a higher rank as long as there are suitable officers of the higher rank available for absorption.

  RE-ENLISTMENT (REFUND OF PURCHASE MONEY).
  Mr. SHIRLEY BENNasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether men who have been bought out and re-enlist for the duration of the War are refused the refundment of their purchase money; under what regulation this refusal is made; and whether he will recommend its amendment by providing that re-enlistment for the period of the War shall entitle men to the refundment of purchase money as in the case of ordinary re-enlistment?
  Mr. BAKER: No, Sir. Under a special Army Order issued on the 24th February last, soldiers discharged by purchase who have re-enlisted for the period of the War are entitled to refunds of a portion of the purchase money.

  MUNITION CONTRACTS (MESSRS. MORGAN AND CO.).
  Sir R. COOPERasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if any contracts have been placed in the United States since 15th January, except through the direct agency of Messrs. Morgan and Company, of New York; and whether any shells have yet been delivered to the War Office by Messrs. Morgan and Company, of New York, under contract with this firm since it was appointed agents in the United States for the British Government?
  Mr. BAKER: The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's question in the affirmative. As regards the second part, no deliveries have yet been made, and I understand that no deliveries are yet due from any firms with whom the War Department has placed orders through Messrs. Morgan.
  Sir R. COOPER: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it was possible at the time these people were appointed to have had these goods delivered before the 1st April had the War Office so required?
  Mr. BAKER: No, Sir, I am not aware of that.
  Sir R. COOPERasked whether the War Office is in a position to place orders in the United States for munitions of war with firms who decline to negotiate in any way with or through the firm of Messrs. J. P. Morgan and Company, provided those firms are able to satisfy the War Office as to their bona fides and their ability to supply the munitions within specified time?
  Mr. BAKER: Yes, Sir. As I explained to the hon. Member last Thursday, the War Department is free to place orders with any firm in the United States, and would do so in any proper case.
  Sir R. COOPERasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if what is known generally as the Morgan group of
  2334
  financiers and manufacturers comprise only one-fifth of the potential productivity of munitions in the United States; and whether the remaining four-fifths of production is lost to the British, French, and Russian Armies?
  Mr. BAKER: The arrangement by which orders may be placed through Messrs. Morgan by the British or Allied Governments does not restrict them to any particular group of firms, and the Allied Governments are open to receive offers of munitions of war from any firm in the United States.
  Sir R. COOPERasked if the agents of the French and Russian Governments are under agreement with the British Government to place orders for munitions only with firms recommended by the International Commission; and if this commission have up to now consistently recommended these agents to place contracts only with firms in the United States that are within the Morgan group?
  Mr. BAKER: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. As to the second part, I am informed that the French and Russian Governments, in placing orders in the United States, do act to a considerable extent through Messrs. Morgan, but this does not involve any limitation of their orders to a particular group of firms.

  ENGINEERING SERVICES (STAFF WAGES).
  Mr. SNOWDENasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if, considering the fact that the wages of the clerks on the staff of the engineering services of the Army were as follows in 1831, namely, for the first seven years 4s. 6d. a day, after seven years 5s. 6d. a day, after 14 years 6s. 6d. a day, after 21 years 7s. 6d. a day, and that to-day, 84 years later, the wages are for the first three years 4s. per day, after third year 4s. 6d. a day, after six years 5s. a day, after nine years 5s. 6d. a day, and considering that the wages of most classes of workpeople have been very considerably raised in the meantime, and in consideration also of the increase in the cost of living, he will take into immediate consideration the question of advancing the wages of these clerks to something like a reasonable and living wage?
  Mr BAKER: The rates of wages quoted by the hon. Member now current are confined to clerks engaged for purely routine duties. The question of making some addition to these wages in consideration of present circumstances is already under consideration.

  SOLDIERS AND SAILORS (PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES).
  Mr. WINGasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he is aware that dissatisfaction exists among soldiers and their dependants at not receiving Government allowance from the date of the soldier's allotment of 6d. per day, they having reason to believe that that is sufficient intimation owing to there being no specific instruction on Government-published literature stating that allowances are payable only from date of filling up Army Form 1,838; and will he take steps to remove the alleged grievance?
  Mr. BAKER: It was clearly stated in the War Office pamphlets of October and January last that "Application should be made at once. The date when the allowance begins depends on this." I will arrange for an explicit warning on the point to be inserted in future prints of the form of application which is now handed to every man on enlistment.
  Mr. WINGasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if his Department will consider the question of paying allowance from the date of the soldiers allotment when ignorant of the necessity of filling up Army Form 1,838; and will he consider the payment of arrears where such payment has been withheld until soldiers had filled in Army Form 1,838, considering that they expected that their allotment of 6d. per day was sufficient intimation of their dependants requiring Government allowance?
  Mr. BAKER: These questions have been carefully considered, but I am afraid it is not practicable to make the changes suggested by my hon. Friend.

  RESERVE OF OFFICERS (INDIA).
  Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary for India whether students and others of Indian descent have applied to be placed on the list of the Indian Reserve
  2336
  of Officers; whether such persons are now on the list; and, if not, will he say why not?
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Charles Roberts): The answer to the first question is in the affirmative; to the second, in the negative. Under existing regulations such persons are not eligible.

  SOLDIER LANDOWNERS (INDIA).
  Colonel YATEasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the proposed law to prevent the selling up of land or property belonging to Indian soldiers on field service abroad has now been brought into force?
  Mr. C. ROBERTS: The Secretary of State in Council has approved of legislation for the protection of the interests of Indian soldiers on field service abroad. The law has either been already promulgated in India or will shortly be promulgated.

  CAPITAL ISSUES (TREASURY ORDER).
  Sir EDWIN CORNWALLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he intends to seek legislation to enforce the Treasury Order with regard to sanctions for proposed capital issues?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave yesterday on this subject to my hon. Friend the Member for the Bridgeton Division.

  MESSRS. SPILLERS AND BAKERS' PROFITS.
  Mr. SNOWDENasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Treasury Committee have received an application from Messrs. Spillers and Bakers, millers, to allow a fresh issue of capital of £500,000; and whether, in view of the war profits already made by this firm coincidentally with the rise in the price of bread, he will make it a condition of consent to their application that the profits on the new capital shall be on a sliding scale, varying inversely with the price of bread in the principal towns of the country, any surplus to be paid into the Exchequer?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: An application has been received from Messrs. Spillers and Bakers for approval of a fresh issue of capital and has so far not been allowed.

  ALCOHOL DUTIES (EXEMPTIONS FOR MEDICINES).
  Mr. BRIDGEMANasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how he proposes to carry out the promise made to the hon. Member for Oswestry that he would exonerate from duty spirit used by hospitals for tinctures or other hospital purposes?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I propose to deal with this matter in the Finance Bill.

  INDIAN WHEAT (EXPORTS).
  Sir J. D. REESasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the delay in announcing the arrangements made for financing the Government exports of Indian wheat has caused and is causing inconvenience; and whether he can give any information on the subject before the House rises?
  Mr. C. ROBERTS: The Secretary of State realises the importance of the subject and will make an announcement as soon as possible.

  CIVIL SERVICE (GERMAN EXAMINERS)
  Mr. R. McNEILLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Civil Service Commissioners have since the outbreak of war employed Herr Müller and Herr Haltenhoff as examiners in German; whether either of these gentlemen is a naturalised British subject, and, if so, what is the date of his naturalisation; what fee was paid to these aliens for their work as examiners; and whether it was impossible to find British scholars with a sufficient knowledge of German to act as examiners in that subject?
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Acland): I am informed that Mr. Müller and Mr. Haltenhoff have been employed by the Civil Service Commissioners as occasional examiners since the outbreak of the War. So far as they are aware, neither of these gentlemen is a naturalised British subject. Mr. Haltenhoff has been paid £29 4s. and Mr.
  2338
  Müller £9 9s. since the outbreak of the War. For testing a candidate's ability to speak a language it is the Commissioners' experience that better results are obtained by the employment of examiners who speak the language as their mother-tongue.
  Mr. McNEILL: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that at these very same examinations the examiners in French were Englishmen, and will he explain why in the other case it was necessary to employ alien enemies?
  Mr. ACLAND: It is rather more common to find Englishmen who speak French fluently than it is to find Englishmen who speak German fluently. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] But I will convey the hon. Member's views to the Civil Service Commissioners. I do not gather, however, that any employment is being given to these gentlemen at the present time.
  Mr. BOOTH: Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that at the present time there are Belgium people in this country out of work who are thoroughly conversant with German?
  Mr. ACLAND: That is rather a good idea.

  METEOROLOGICAL FORECASTS.
  Mr. DENMANasked whether the special meteorological forecasts will be available to farmers on the same conditions as in previous years?
  Sir H. VERNEY: Special meteorological forecasts will be available to farmers on the same conditions as in former years, but they will be limited to periods not exceeding twenty-four hours. The issue of forecasts for longer periods and of notifications of spells of settled weather have been temporarily suspended.

  LAND VALUATION DEPARTMENT.
  Mr. BRIDGEMANasked if in the Land Valuation Department at Shrewsbury about sixteen men applied for leave in September last to join the Army; if seven of them were refused leave, and have now been warned that their services will no longer be needed; if four of the number have already been discharged; and why any of them were refused leave to enlist in September?
  Mr. ACLAND: In September last permission to join His Majesty's forces was granted to nine members of the Shrewsbury Valuation Office out of sixteen applicants. Of the seven to whom permission was refused two have been given notice of the termination of their engagement, the notice having up to the present taken effect in the case of one of these gentlemen. As regards the last part of the hon. Member's question, I would refer him to my reply of the 20th ultimo to my hon. Friend the Member for Haggerston, of which I am sending him a copy.
  Mr. BRIDGEMAN: May I ask if the Department, being aware that the services of these men would only be required for a very short time, could not have allowed them to enlist as they wished to do?
  Mr. ACLAND: There was full work from the month of September till about the month of April, and the necessary staff had to be retained for the purpose.
  Mr. BRIDGEMAN: Will those who join now be treated in the same way as those allowed to join at that time in the matter of having their pay made up to what they were receiving before?
  Mr. ACLAND: Only those can be paid during the time they are fighting for whom there is a prospect of engagement when they come back.
  Mr. BRIDGEMAN: Were they prevented from fighting merely to save a few shillings to the Government?
  Mr. ACLAND: Certainly not, as many as could be allowed to go were allowed to go. Twenty-five per cent. of the whole staff, amounting to over a thousand, were allowed to go. For the rest, there was work that had to be done. When that work came to an end owing to the completion of the valuation, unfortunately a considerable proportion of those engaged temporarily had to be dispensed with.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: Is it the fact that the men reduced were men outside military age, so leaving those who are inside military age?
  Mr. ACLAND: No, Sir; exactly the contrary instructions were given, that the persons to be reduced were, if possible, to be men of military age and unmarried.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: Can I give a case?
  Mr. ACLAND: Certainly.

  COAL PRICES.
  Sir R. COOPERasked the President of the Board of Trade if he would cause inquiries to be made of the cost at pit-head of railway freights to London, Bristol, and Manchester, the prices charged to merchants, and the prices charged to consumers in these towns, for certain of the well-known grades of coal on the 1st March, 1915, compared with the 1st March, 1914, in order that the public many know where the additional charges are being absorbed?
  The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Runciman): Most of the information which the hon. Member desires is contained in the appendices to the evidence taken by the Retail Coal Prices Committee, which will be published shortly. Railway companies' charges for the carriage of coal have not been increased, but as regards other charges the Committee reported that they were not able to apportion the extra sums paid for coal among the different interests concerned, because the proportion sold under contract in each case could not be ascertained.
  Sir R. COOPER: Is it not the fact that the increased charges are not entirely due to the increase of price by the coal producers, but that there is also an increase by the merchants?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: I am afraid I cannot go further than the Committee. I am afraid I cannot apportion the rise in prices between the different interests.

  REGISTER OF WOMEN.
  Mr. SNOWDENasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in regard to the war register of women, and the entrance of numbers of new women into industry, he is prepared to set up an advisory committee, which would include representatives of the organised women workers, to give counsel and assistance as to safeguards and conditions respecting the transference of women from one trade or district to another?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: I have, as promised, given careful consideration to the proposal referred to by my hon. Friend. The Department is in constant communication with representatives of various women's organisations on matters connected with

  2341
  the War Register for Women, and I am of opinion that at present this procedure is preferable to the constitution of a formal committee.

  CIVIL SERVICE (LABOUR EXCHANGES).
  Mr. GLANVILLEasked the President of the Board of Trade why is it that the Board of Trade have not instructed the Labour Exchanges, when dealing with applicants for clerkships in public Departments, to adopt the line indicated by the Prime Minister in his recent speeches, namely, to eliminate the age test and send on applicants qualified to perform the duties irrespective of their ages?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Robertson): Presumably my hon. Friend's question refers to applicants for temporary clerkships in public Departments. Such applicants are interviewed by a board consisting of a representative of the Civil Service Commission and a representative of the Labour Exchanges Department of the Board of Trade. Applicants recommended to the Civil Service Commissioners for appointment by this interviewing board are selected with regard to their qualifications for the work to be performed, irrespective of age, except that male applicants of recruitable age are not recommended for appointment unless they are disqualified from military service through some physical defect which does not incapacitate them for clerical duties.
  Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are a great number of clerks in the Labour Exchanges of military age whose services might be dispensed with for the present?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: That process of substitution is going on.

  EGYPTIAN ONIONS (RE-EXPORTATION).
  Mr. TICKLERasked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the fact that Egyptian onions are being bought up largely by Dutch agents on the London market and are being shipped in large quantities to Rotterdam by the Batabier line of steamers and thence to Germany, in consequence of which the market to
  2342
  English consumers is considerably inflated, and our enemies are being supplied with a valuable source of food; and if he will take prompt measures to stop the exportation of onions?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: I am informed that the exports of onions from this country to the Netherlands have recently shown a tendency to increase. The matter is being investigated, and the hon. Gentleman may be assured that such action will be taken as may prove to be necessary.

  LABOUR EXCHANGES (POLITICAL ENVELOPES).
  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the President of the Board of Trade in how many instances within the present year notices bearing the heading of Liberal associations have been sent out by officials of the labour exchange in official envelopes and franked?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: I have no information to show that this has been done in any case. Possibly the hon. Member may have in mind the circulars issued by the Board of Trade in connection with the register of women for war service, the envelopes for which were in a number of cases addressed to their members by certain women's societies without distinction of party.
  Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: If I give the right hon. Gentleman some of the envelopes, will he look into the matter?
  Mr. ROBERTSON: Certainly.
  Mr. KELLAWAY: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are cases in which political associations have handed over their stationery, without charge, to the Government for this purpose?

  CONGESTION AT PORTS.
  Mr. SHIRLEY BENNasked the President of the Board of Trade whether, owing to the congested state of so many of our ports, he will consider the advisability of utilising such ports as the Cattewater at Plymouth, with its deep-water wharves, steam and hydraulic cranes, available warehouse and yard accommodation, and direct communication with two great railways?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: The congested state of many of the ports and the possibility of reducing it by diverting ships to other ports have been receiving my consideration and that of the Departments interested for some time. I have brought the hon. Member's suggestion for the utilisation of Cattewater and similar harbours to the attention of the Admiralty Marshal and of the Advisory Committee on the Diversion of Shipping.

  ESPERANTO.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has considered the possibilities of Esperanto as an international commercial language for the development of trade relations between this country and Russia; and whether he will consult the Russian authorities as to the practicability of improving Anglo-Russian commerce by encouraging the study and use of Esperanto?
  Mr. RUNCIMAN: The suggestion made by my hon. Friend is an interesting one, but I doubt if any useful purpose would be served by conveying it to the Russian Government at the present time.
  Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that Esperanto is very largely spoken in Russia, and that it is a very easy language to learn?

  ALIEN PASSENGERS.
  Commander BELLAIRSasked the President of the Board of Trade whether (1) the written declarations made by passengers passing to and fro from this country since the War broke out are of such a character as to disclose whether the individuals are not merely of American, Swiss, or Dutch nationality, but whether they are really of neutral or hostile orign, having regard to the violence of the propaganda carried on by so-called neutrals who are of German origin; and (2) in view of the violence of the propaganda carried on by so-called neutrals who are of German origin, whether the Board of Trade insist on all passengers passing to and fro from this country making declarations not only as to nationality but also as to the place of birth and parentage?
  Mr. McKENNA: My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply. Alien passengers
  2344
  are not required to make written declarations to the effect suggested, but they must produce papers showing their nationality and identity, and in the course of their examination by the aliens officers they are, in any case where they have changed their original nationality, questioned fully as to their origin, and the results are carefully recorded with a view to any necessary action. I may add that there are heavy penalties for false statements or representations.

  OLD AGE PENSIONS.
  Mr. ANDERSONasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the local pensions committee for the administrative county of London has informed the Government that in their opinion the pension of every old age pensioner should be increased by 1s. during the continuance of the War; whether the local pensions committee have requested the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take steps to carry this recommendation into effect; and whether any answer has yet been given?
  Mr. CROOKSasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the proposal that where in any case the 5s. old age pension is found to be inadequate, owing to increased cost of food or other reasons arising out of the War, boards of guardians might be free to supplement it without affecting the amount of the pension; and whether boards of guardians will be advised to this effect?
  Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The view of His Majesty's Government in regard to the effect of the War on old age pensions was stated in the reply which I gave the hon. Member for the Attercliffe Division on the 20th April, but the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich is still under consideration.

  PARCELS FOR TROOPS (POSTAGE RATES).
  Mr. R. McNEILLasked the Postmaster-General why the charge for sending parcels to soldiers at the front has recently been changed from inland rates to foreign rates; whether he is aware that this increase, which more than doubles the cost, is a hardship on the

  2345
  poorer friends of soldiers and in many cases prevents them sending comforts to the troops; and whether he can arrange to restore the cheaper rate of postage for parcels?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: There has been no change in the postage rates on parcels sent to the troops in France. For the reasons explained in my answers to similar questions on the 16th November and 4th February last it is not practicable to reduce the rates.

  POST OFFICE EMPLOYES (ENLISTMENT).
  Mr. BRIDGEMENasked if a notice, warning officers of the engineering staff that they must not enlist, has been issued to other employés of the Post Office besides the engineering staff at Colchester and Ipswich, and has prevented young men from enlisting who are engaged in work which could be easily performed by girls or older men; and, if so, whether this notice has been sent to all postal employés in the country?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: In view of the extent to which the skilled staff of the Post Office has been reduced by causes connected with the War and the prospects of further withdrawals to meet the postal and telegraphic requirements of the New Armies, as well as for similar purposes essential to Home defence, I recently found it necessary to issue notices to the Post Office staff throughout the country reminding them of the regulation that no officer must enlist until he has first obtained official permission. Such permission is only withheld when refusal is imperative in the interests of the public service.
  Mr. BRIDGEMAN: Is refusal imperative in cases of totally unskilled postal servants whose work could be done by old men and women?
  Mr. HOBHOUSE: I am afraid that if the hon. Gentleman contended in regard to a postal staff that any member of that staff was unskilled, he would find himself in opposition to the opinion of the whole of the staff.

  China and Japan.
  Mr. STEWARTasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether certain
  2346
  articles in the recent demands made by Japan upon China have been by mutual consent held over for discussion at a future date; and whether His Majesty's Government, when this discussion takes place, will use its influence with both Powers to ensure that any agreement arising will not infringe the sovereign rights of China as an independent State or the principle of equal opportunity for trade now existing in that country?
  Sir E. GREY: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In regard to the second part, the two Powers concerned are well aware of the importance of the principles indicated, and there is no reason to suppose that they have any intention of concluding an agreement which would conflict with those principles.

  Provisional Orders (Scotland).
  Mr. WATTasked the Secretary for Scotland whether Commissioners from both Houses of Parliament were appointed to deal with Provisional Orders promoted this Session by corporations and others in Scotland; if so, who were these Commissioners; by whom were they nominated; were they asked to certify that neither they nor their constituents had any interest in the Provisional Orders to be brought before them; and did they in point of fact make such declaration?
  The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. McKinnon Wood): The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The Commissioners so far appointed this Session to sit in Scotland are: The Earl of Galloway, the Earl of Wemyss, Lord Torphichen, Lord Ashton of Hyde, and the hon. Members for Argyllshire, Leith Burghs, South Aberdeen, and Dundee. The Commissioners are nominated in the other House by the Chairman of Committees, and in this House by the Chairman of Ways and Means, out of the panels appointed by the Committees of Selection of the two Houses respectively. The Commissioners signed the usual declaration as regards all the Orders upon which they sat in inquiry. In the case of one Order a Commissioner was unable to sign the declaration on the ground that his constituents might be deemed to have a local interest in the matter of the Order, and that Commissioner did not sit in the inquiry into that Order.

  Spotted Fever (Inoculation).
  Mr. WINGasked the President of the Board of Education whether he is aware that Salisbury teachers have, during school hours, taken children to be inoculated against spotted fever; that in one school a roll of honour has been established bearing the names of those who have been inoculated; and will he state where in the Board's regulations such a proceeding is sanctioned?
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Dr. Addison): I am aware that during the recent outbreak of spotted fever at Salisbury the local education authority, acting on the advice of the Medical Officer of Health (who is also a school medical officer), made arrangements for children whose parents wished them to be inoculated, but could not attend themselves, to be taken by the teachers. I understand that lists of the children to be inoculated were prepared, and that in one case the list was placed in a frame; but this can hardly be described as a roll of honour. I have no reason to think that the local education authority have acted unreasonably in connection with the matter.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  HOUSING (ROSYTH DOCKYARD) BILL.
  As amended, considered.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
  Sir FREDERICK BANBURY: I have read very carefully the Amendments inserted in the Bill, and they seem to me to meet all the difficulties of the case. I, personally, and I believe hon. Members on this side, have no further opposition to offer.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill read the third time, and passed.

WAYS AND MEANS [18th MAY].

  SPIRITS (CUSTOMS).
  Resolution reported,
  "That, in addition to the duties of Customs now payable on spirits imported into Great Britain or Ireland, there shall, on and after the eighteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and fifteen, be charged the following duties on spirits which are permitted to be delivered for home consumption without having been warehoused for a period of three years (that is to say):—

  —

  Where the Spirits have been warehoused for a period of two years.

  where the Spirits have not been warehoused, or have been, warehoused for a period of less than two years.

  s.

  d.

  s.

  d.

  For every gallon computed at proof of spirits of any description except perfumed spirits

  1

  0

  1

  6

  For every gallon of perfumed spirits

  1

  7

  2

  5

  For every gallon of liqueurs, cordials, mixtures, and other preparations entered in such a manner as to indicate that the strength is not to be tested

  1

  4

  2

  0

  And it is declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of The Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913.—[The Chancellor of the Exchequer.]
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
  Mr. GLYN-JONES: These duties will apply only to certain immature spirits, but, as the Resolution now stands, of course it includes all immature spirits, and I have no doubt that is necessary owing to the forms of the House. The people outside, however, are a little concerned, and I should be very glad if the Chancellor of the Exchequer would state for their information how and when it is proposed to give effect to the intention of the Government to exempt from these particular taxes the spirits used in medicine.
  The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd George): My hon. Friend is quite right. This is simply a charging Resolution. Remissions do not appear because it is not necessary to have a Resolution for that purpose. All those matters will be dealt with in the Bill after these Resolutions have been adopted by the House.
  Question put, and agreed to.

  SPIRITS (EXCISE).
  Resolution reported,
  "That, in addition to the duty of Excise now payable, for every gallon computed at proof of spirits distilled in the United Kingdom, there shall, on and after the eighteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and fifteen, be charged the following duty on spirits which are permitted to be delivered for home consumption without having been warehoused for a period of three years (that is to say):—

  —

  Where the Spirits have been warehoused for a period of two years and less then three years.

  Where the Spirits have not been warehoused, or have been, warehoused for a period of less than two years.

  s.

  d.

  s.

  d.

  For ever gallon of spirits computed at proof

  1

  0

  1

  6

  2381
  and so on in proportion for any less quantity.
  And it is declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of The Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913.—[The Chancellor of the Exchequer.]
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House doth agree with the Committee in the said Resolution."
  Mr. WATSON RUTHERFORD: It is very difficult to understand the points before the House, but I gather that this Resolution imposes an extra duty on spirits not of a certain age. I wish to point out that whisky stands in an altogether different position to other spirits. I understand that it is the intention of the Government to impose this duty upon all spirits, and if this is so a considerable injustice will be done to the West India Colonies, who produce a considerable quantity of rum as a by-product. It is well known that rum does not improve by being kept, and in the same way gin produced in this country does not improve by age. Whisky, if it is kept for a proper period, improves owing to the fusel oil being eliminated, but that does not apply to other kinds of spirits. It is very unfair, therefore, that this extra duty, with a view to keeping spirits a longer time in bond, should be imposed on spirits which are not improved by age, and this would be a gross case of injustice to our West India Colonies. This is an extremely important point, because from our West India Colonies we get thousands of pounds worth of rum, and if they have to keep it for a considerable time, and pay interest on their immense stocks, it would be a very great hardship upon them, and would convey no corresponding advantage to the general community.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill ordered to be brought in upon the said Resolutions; and that the Chairman of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Acland do prepare and bring it in.
  Ordered, That it be an Instruction to the Gentlemen appointed to prepare and bring in the Bill, That they do make provision therein pursuant to the Resolutions reported from the Committee of Ways and Means on the 17th day of this instant May and then agreed to by the House.

  FINANCE (No. 2) BILL,
  "to grant certain duties of Customs and Inland Revenue, including Excise, to alter other duties, and to amend the law relating to Customs and Inland Revenue, including Excise, and the National Debt, and to make further provision in connection with finance," presented accordingly, and read the first time; to be read a second time To-morrow; and to be printed. [Bill 94.]
ADJOURNMENT (WHITSUNTIDE).

  OPTICAL GLASSES (NAVAL AND MILITARY FORCES).
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House, at its rising this day, do adjourn until Tuesday, the 8th June."—[The Chancellor of the Exchequer.]
  4.0 P.M.
  Sir PHILIP MAGNUS: I desire to take advantage of the opportunity afforded by the Motion for the Adjournment of this House to call attention to the circumstances that have given rise to the shortage in optical glasses and the raw material employed in the manufacture of optical instruments for our naval and military forces. I hope to be able to make one or two suggestions which may be of service to the Board of Trade with a view to improving this state of things. I do not think that I need to dwell upon the importance of these optical instruments for our two Services, for they are indeed vital to the success of our operations in the field. The optical instruments which are most needed are prismatic binoculars, telescopes, dial sights, range-finders, and periscopes. The subject on which I have to speak is a very technical one, but I hope to be able to put my case before the House without entering into any of the difficult and complicated details which surround the consideration of this question. Let me briefly explain, in the first instance, that optical glass is glass of a special chemical composition. It is the material from which lenses and prisms are made, and its composition varies with the purpose for which it is intended and with the optical effect which is to be produced. There are many varieties of optical glass, and some are used in very small quantities in the making of lenses. Just as the strength of the chain lies in its weakest

  2383
  link, so the value of an optical instrument may depend on the ability to obtain some small lens the value of which is very slight. Indeed, I may say that the commercial value of a lens is often only a small fraction of the value of the instrument of which it forms a part. One-eighth of a cube of glass worth only a few pence may be made into a lens which will form an essential part of a compound lens the value of which may be several pounds sterling. I need scarcely say that all these optical instruments to which I have referred are equally essential for the use of officers in the Army and Navy. We have had very painful experience of the use to which the periscope has been put by German submarines, but periscopes of a different make are equally necessary for our gunners in the Artillery.
  Until the outbreak of the War, and indeed for some little time after the outbreak of War, we were dependent for the supply of this optical glass, which is the raw material of lenses, on two or three sources. We were able to obtain some from a Paris firm, Messrs. Para-Mantois, and from one or two other firms in France. A small quantity was also manufactured in this country by Messrs. Chance, of Birmingham, but we were almost exclusively dependent for this important material upon the German firm of Messrs. Schott, of Jena, who supplied us with almost the whole of the quantity of glass which for years we have required. Messrs. Schott, of Jena, were very closely associated with Messrs. Zeiss, of the same town, who were makers of optical instruments, and these firms received from the Prussian Government in the early days large subventions which enabled them to make scientific experiments in the manufacture of lenses and of optical instruments, which gave to their instruments a degree of perfection which it was difficult, if not impossible, to attain at the price by any British manufacturer. Messrs. Schott and Zeiss for many years had an enterprising branch in this country, and they neglected no opportunity whatever to do their best to ruin the British industry, and they partially succeeded. They have succeeded in retaining the whole of this important trade in their own hands by many subtle devices. I have here, for instance, an invoice of Messrs. Schott and Company of optical glass supplied to an
  2384
  English firm, and on that invoice is printed in red letters in German these words:—
  "Optical glass supplied by us must only be used in your own works and must on no account be sold or handed over to any other firm."
  This branch was established here mainly with a view to working their own patents, but, notwithstanding the conditions attaching to the working of foreign patents in this country, namely, that the work must be carried on exclusively by English hands, and that the whole product must be made in this country, many of the parts of the instruments which they sold were imported from Germany and were made by German workmen. I may be allowed to point out, as showing the vast extent of the operations of the firm of Messrs. Schott, of Jena, that they were able to supply over one hundred different types of optical glass, whilst Messrs. Chance, until the outbreak of the War, were unable to put upon the market more than or even as much as one-third of that number of types. I readily admit that all these types are not wanted for instruments used by our Navy or by our Army. Some are required for microscopes and for photographic purposes, but some of the rarer types are absolutely necessary. Having regard to the limited demand, these can only be supplied at a commercial loss, unless as a part of a very large trade in other varieties of glass.
  Although this industry is very small compared with that, say, of the aniline dyes, some idea of the straits to which the Government has been put by the complete cessation of imports from Germany on the outbreak of War may be gathered from the figures furnished by the Board of Trade. The imports of crude and rough pressed glass in the year 1913 from Germany were 14,300 kilos, which is about 14 tons, and worth about £6,000, and, remembering that 1 ton of optical glass may be cut up into a number of small lenses not weighing more than half an ounce, some idea of our position at the outbreak of War will be readily realised. Nothing, I venture to think, could disprove more conclusively the statement of the Germans that this War was forced upon them by us than our own unprepared condition at the outbreak of War and our absolute dependence upon Germany for a supply of materials essential to the carrying on of the War. It is quite true that the War Office in November, 1912, inquired of one or more firms making optical instruments what amount of optical glass would be

  2385
  available on an emergency. This inquiry has some historical significance, for the letter of the Board of Trade was written a few days only before the memorable letter addressed to the French Ambassador by our Foreign Secretary, which was communicated to this House on 3rd August of last year. The answer as regards the available optical glass from these firms was very unsatisfactory. I have a copy of it here, but I have been unable to ascertain that any endeavour was then made by which to increase the supply from any British source.
  Great efforts have been made within the last few months to increase the supply, and I think it right to say that we are very much indebted to the patriotic efforts of Messrs. Chance, of Birmingham, who have done all they possibly could to increase the available supply. They have opened new works, they have laid down new plant and equipment, and they have done this, so far as I have been able to gather, without any pecuniary help from the Government and without any guarantee as to what may happen to their works when the War is over. I am told that within a month or two they will be able to supply eight or ten times as much optical glass as they were able to supply at the outbreak of War. This is not enough. Notwithstanding these efforts there is still considerable delay in obtaining optical instruments, such as those to which I have referred, which are urgently required by our military forces. This delay was admitted by the Admiralty and by the War Office in their answers to questions which I put to them some few days since. It is due to several causes. It has resulted partly from the difficulty of obtaining in sufficient purity the Barium salt that enters very largely into the composition of most kinds of optical glasses. This difficulty Messrs. Chance have also endeavoured to overcome by laying down new works for the preparation and manufacture of this important chemical ingredient. But it is also due to a shortage of skilled hands who are required to make the glass and who are engaged in the delicate operations connected with the manufacture of these instruments. It is also due to the difficulty of obtaining glasses of special composition which are required in very small quantities. That this shortage still exists is proved by the answers to some questions which were put to a certain number of manufacturers by the Director of the National Physical
  2386
  Laboratory at Teddington. These are the questions and answers:—
  "Are all kinds of glass immediately required for military instruments being produced in England?—No.
  Are the kinds which are being produced available in sufficient quantities?—No.
  Are they supplied without delay?—No.
  Are kinds of glass other than those made in England necessary for military purposes?—Yes."
  I think those facts sufficiently show that a shortage still exists, and I have endeavoured to refer to the circumstances which have given rise to that shortage in this important material.
  I desire now to make a few suggestions, first as to the means that might be adopted to increase the supply with a view to our immediate requirements, and secondly—and this is perhaps equally important—as to the steps which might be taken in order to retain this important branch of industry in our own hands when the War is over. Apart from the causes of delay in production to which I have already referred, delay is also due to the absence, so far as I have been able to make out, of any organisation of the industry, which is essential to economy of effort and material. I have gathered from Messrs. Chance that they produce certain quantities of glass in excess of what is required, whereas other glasses, which are equally important, they have produced in smaller quantities than are absolutely needed.
  I would therefore suggest that the manufacturers of instruments should be brought into very close association with the makers of the glass, and I think it might be practicable for the Board of Trade to appoint an officer who should visit the works of those engaged in the making of optical instruments, and ascertain from them what glasses they particularly require, and what glasses they may have in excess of their requirements. Some arrangement might be made among the makers of optical instruments, by which an exchange of optical glass might be effected so that the production of instruments might be accelerated. Further than that, this officer should be able to report at once to Messrs. Chance and inform them, after having visited these factories, of the particular kind of glass which is urgently needed. I suggest further that the War Office and the Admiralty should give orders only to those houses which are capable with the least delay of producing the instruments that are immediately required.

  2387
  The other question upon which I wish to speak is how may this important industry be wrested from the German firms and retained in this country after the War is over. This problem, which is similar in some respects to that which we discussed not long ago in regard to the supply of aniline dyes, must be considered from two sides—the economic and the educational. I do not hesitate for one moment to say that this country must never again find itself in the position of depending upon any foreign country for the supply of a material essential, in time of peace as well as in time of war, for the operations of our Navy and our Army. It is possible that that proposition may conflict with certain well known economic theories. What measures are we to take to effect this? In the first instance, care must be taken to increase and develop the supply of optical glass from British sources. Moreover, we must assume that British manufacturers of optical instruments will be unable after the War to compete with Messrs. Schott and Zeiss. The works of these firms are far more completely organised and, what is more important, the area of their trade is very much wider, for they make not only glass which is required for optical instruments, but also glass required for medical purposes, for microscopes, for photographic uses, and indeed a large amount of glass used in chemical laboratories. If they therefore could supply instruments of better quality than could be supplied in this country, and at a less price, what would happen would be that the demand for glass made in this country would fall off, and after a time any British firm would be unable to supply the glass that might be required; more than that, they would have to shut down their plant, and gradually dismiss their operatives. The value of the glass in an optical instrument is very small indeed; consequently it would be quite easy for German firms successfully to compete wth instrument-makers in this country although making a small loss upon the value of the optical glass. How can this be prevented? I have come to the conclusion that what we desire can only be effected by some sort of guarantee on the part of the Government that, for the purposes certainly of our Navy and of our Army, British made glass, and no other, shall be used. I repeat that in considering this problem, the teachings of all economic theories must be set aside.
  2388
  They apply to ordinary commercial conditions, and not to such abnormal conditions as obtain during a war. I think we may lay it down as an axiom, which should be added to the science of political economy, that what is essential to the safety of the realm must be produced within the Empire.
  Let me refer briefly to some of the suggestions which have been made for enabling us to retain the manufacture of optical glass and optical instruments in this country. It has been suggested that the State might impose a high tariff on imports of glass and instruments. Of course, strong objection would naturally be taken to that from the Free Trade point of view. Moreover, it would be very difficult indeed to differentiate between types of glass required for the manufacture of optical instruments for our Army and for our Navy and other types of glass required for scientific and other purposes. It is also suggested that the State might give a bonus on the production of optical glass. Either of these proposals would scarcely affect the price of optical instruments, seeing that the value of the glass bears such a small proportion to the whole. Unless, therefore, the tariff or bonus could be extended to the manufacture of optical instruments, either of these proposals would seem to me to be ineffective. I may say, however, from my interviews with the manufacturers of optical instruments that they would certainly be glad to have a tariff imposed on such imports. A less drastic proposal, and one which might more easily meet the views of Members on both sides of the House, and obviate the difficulty of differentiating between the types of glass required for various purposes, is that it might be made an essential condition of the acceptance of any Government contract for the supply of optical instruments for the Admiralty or for the War Office that every part of the instruments should have been made in this country, and steps should be taken to enforce that condition. That seems to me to be a reasonable proposal, and one which might enable us after the War to retain the industry in our own hands. It has been further suggested that the State should take over the works of Messrs. Chance, who are the only manufacturers of optical glass in this country. I know quite well that Messrs. Chance would object to such a proposal, and I think that the suggestion which I have put forward would meet the case. It is possible that other proposals may be

  2389
  made. I have put forward these suggestions simply in the hope that they may be of some service to the Board of Trade.
  With regard to the educational side of the question, there are few, if any, industries more dependent for their successful working on the application of science than the optical glass industry. For the manufacture of aniline dyes a very advanced knowledge of chemistry is required, but for the manufacture of optical instruments and the glass from which the lenses are formed an advanced knowledge is required not only of mathematics, but also of chemistry, metallurgy and physics. In the application of this knowledge to this particular industry we have been very far behind Germany. The Germans have attached the utmost importance to this branch of technical knowledge, and I am sorry to say that it is a branch of technology which we in this country have too long neglected. It is possible that we found this industry too securely entrenched by German manufacturers to make it worth our while to endeavour to wrest it from them. But circumstances have changed, and I do not hesitate to say that we must do all we can to secure the carrying out of the work in our own country. Many of the advances made by German scientists have been due to direct experiments, the mathematical calculations necessary for the designing of lenses being almost too complicated to enable lenses to be prepared from theoretical designs. I may also point out that almost the entire literature on applied optics is in the German language. Anyone who wishes to make himself cognisant of the scientific theory of applied optics must be able to read text-books and papers published in the German language. That state of things must no longer exist. We must do something in this country to offer facilities for technical instruction in the sciences bearing on applied optics, so that all classes of workers may be able to obtain here the necessary preparation. I am glad to say that something has already been accomplished. It has been suggested that we should establish in this country an Institute of Applied Optics. Personally, I do not think that that is necessary; I have always objected to spending on bricks and mortar money which might be more usefully spent on the salaries of teachers.
  I believe that we can obtain all that we desire by organising and co-ordinating the facilities which already exist, and by
  2390
  supplementing them where they are found to be deficient. For some little time we have had at Clerkenwell a polytechnic institute which has established a school of applied optics under a most efficient teacher, who was himself trained in the works of Messrs. Chance, and we are very much indebted to that school for the supply of a large number of skilled hands, who have made the shortage of instruments much less than it would otherwise have been. The governors of that institution have purchased a site on which more extended buildings might be erected, and nothing is needed but further funds, which it is hoped will be provided. Besides that, we have the National Physical Laboratory at Teddington, where researches in optical science are being carried out, and where all kinds of tests necessary to this industry can be made. That laboratory will be able to extend its work so as to carry out many more tests than it has hitherto been able to do if so small a sum as £1,000 can be given for its extension.
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Dr. Addison): Is that the Northampton Institute?
  Sir P. MAGNUS: No; I have already spoken of the Clerkenwell Institute. If I had referred to it as the Northampton Institute, the House might have understood it to mean an institute in Northampton. It is called the Northampton Institute because the ground was given by the Marquis of Northampton. We also have the Imperial College of Science and Technology, where advanced instruction is given in all the sciences to which I have referred, but where, at present, no professor has been appointed who is able to apply those sciences to the practical manufacture of optical instruments. I would make this suggestion to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education: That a small committee should be appointed to co-ordinate the work of these three institutions, so as to prevent the teaching in one overlapping the other, and so that all classes of persons employed in the manufacture of these important instruments might be trained in one or other of these institutions, and that opportunities might be afforded for research work to be carried out as required, either in the Imperial College or in the laboratory at Teddington. In my opinion no advances in science as applied to this industry will avail to secure

  2391
  the retention of the industry in this country after the termination of the War unless we take into account the economic questions to which I have referred. Encouragement must be given to existing firms to continue their efforts so that they may be able, after the War is over, to maintain their equipment in the face of German competition, and to supply the materials required for the manufacture of those optical instruments which are urgently needed for our naval and military forces. I feel that some apology is due to the House for having dwelt at such length on a subject bristling with technical difficulties. Although the industry is small, its importance to us in the War we are now waging, and in any future war, is so considerable, that I have thought it worth while to bring this matter under the consideration of the House.
  Mr. ALMERIC PAGET: After the very able and interesting speech of my hon. Friend, and the exhaustive manner in which he has dealt with the question, I will cut my remarks in support of him very short. I would remind the House that this industry flourished a great many years ago and, as in the case of the aniline dye industry, for the last fifty years we have been going backward instead of forward in competition with rival countries. A great deal might be said on the subject, but inasmuch as the House is prepared for a vital and interesting statement, I will merely finish my remarks by stating that I am in full accord with everything my hon. Friend has said.
  Mr. BARTLEY DENNISS: There is a very practical matter in connection with this subject to which I wish to refer. We all deplore the large number of lives that have been lost in the trenches, especially those of officers, through the German sharp-shooters. They employ telescopic sights on their rifles, and by means of those sights the accuracy of their aim is largely increased. Our soldiers at the present time are clamouring for those telescopic sights, and they cannot be obtained. I am told that the Government have a monopoly of the supply that exists. Attempts have been made by benevolent persons to try and purchase telescopic sights for our soldiers, in order to put them on more equal terms with the Germans, who are using them every day. I would ask for some explanation from the President of the Board of Trade as to
  2392
  how matters stand in this respect. A great deal of public interest centres round it amongst those who know. It would be a good thing if the Board of Trade were able to make such arrangements so that our soldiers in the field might be supplied with the telescopic sights, by means of which they could protect themselves against the sharpshooters of the enemy more than they have been able to do in the past. Parhaps the right hon. Gentleman will tell us how many are in existence, how they can be procured, whether or not the Government will supply them to the troops, and, if not, whether private money can be used for purchasing them and sending them out to the various regiments which require them?

COALITION GOVERNMENT.

  STATEMENTS BY THE PRIME MINISTER AND MR. BONAR LAW.
  The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): Owing to another engagement, which I could not put off, I was unable to make this Motion myself for the Adjournment, but I think it right, at the earliest possible moment, to say two or three words to the House in regard to the matters which have been the subject of public report and rumour. I cannot say more at the moment than that steps are in contemplation which involve the reconstruction of the Government on a broader, personal and political basis. Nothing is yet definitely arranged, but to avoid any possible misapprehension and, as the House is about to adjourn, I wish here and now to make clear to everybody three things.
  The first is, that any change that takes place will not affect the offices of the Head of the Government or of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. They will continue to be held as they are now.
  The second is, that there is absolutely no change of any kind in contemplation in the policy of the country in regard to the continued prosecution of the War with every possible energy and by means of every available resource.

  2393
  The third and last point, one of great importance to my hon. Friends behind me, and I have no doubt also to hon. Gentlemen who sit behind the Leader of the Opposition, is this: Any reconstruction that may be made will be for the purposes of the War alone, and is not to be taken in any quarter as any reason for indicating anything in the nature of surrender or compromise on the part of any person or body of persons of their several political purposes and ideals.
  That is really as far as I can go at the moment. As I have told the House, nothing definite has yet taken place. When and if arrangements of the kind should become an accomplished fact, the House will, of course, have the fullest opportunity of expressing itself, if it so desires, upon them.
  Mr. BONAR LAW: I think it is only necessary to say on behalf of my Friends and myself that at the stage which this matter has reached our sole consideration, taking into account what further steps will be taken, will be the sole idea as to what is the best method of finishing the War successfully—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speak up!"]—and we shall leave out of our minds absolutely all considerations, political or otherwise, beyond the War. Of course, if such an arrangement should take place, it is obvious that our convictions on other subjects will remain unchanged and will be settled when this danger is over.

  NATIONAL SERVICE.
  General Sir IVOR HERBERT: After the very weighty statements to which the House has just listened from the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition it is with some hesitation that I rise to address it, but, as the Leader of the Opposition justly said, the feeling of everybody now must be to carry through this War to a successful issue and to direct every thought, act and energy to that one end. It is with that in view that I wish to draw the attention of the House to a question which is of first importance in order to attain that end—that is the provision of men for carrying on the War. We have lately had some very weighty pronouncements
  2394
  on this subject. Yesterday the Secretary of State for War in another place, after making a very high eulogium of the Armies that have already been raised, stated that 300,000 men will be immediately required. In the same place, only a few days before, Lord Haldane, the late Secretary of State for War, made a statement which may be an epoch-marking statement in the matter of the raising of our Army. Lord Haldane said that—
  "Although we may think under ordinary conditions in a time of peace that the voluntary system is the system from which it will be most difficult for us to depart, yet we may find that we have to reconsider the situation in the light of the tremendous necessities of the nation."
  He went on to say that—
  "Whilst agreeing with the Noble Lord (Lord Midleton) who has just spoken, to a certain extent, we are not face to face with that problem at present, but I think that it may come."
  If that be the position—if a man of the experience of Lord Haldane tells us that we may have to reconsider the whole question of the basis upon which our Army exists—then I think we are face to face with a problem and that it is not being considered now. It is too late to consider a problem when it is forced upon one in an acute form. We realise that at this moment, when we read the reports of the "Times" correspondent from the front—it is the third of those statements to which I refer—where he tells us that we can scatter the German armies whose offensive causes us no concern at all, but to break this hard crust we need more high explosives, more heavy howitzers, and more men. We are face to face with that question about more high explosives. Fortunately, we have every reason to believe, thanks especially to the energy of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the question of the provision of munitions is likely to be satisfactorily solved. But we cannot wait for another acute crisis to come upon us in regard to the question of men. I would urge now that it is time for the Government to make a definite statement as to what they propose to do, or what has been the result of any consideration that they have given to this matter.
  It does not appear to me that in considering the question of recruiting in this country the two inseparable factors have ever been considered together, that of the provision of men for the ranks and that of the provision of men for the workshops.

  2395
  When we are dealing with the question of munitions, we are also dealing with the question of recruits for the Army, because it is from the same source that we have to draw our supply in both cases. It is from the mass of the workers of the country that we are going to draw the men into the ranks, and it is from the same source that we are going to derive a proper supply of munitions of war. I do not wish in any way to be critical. I do not think this is a time for criticism; it is a time for action. I do not propose either to be critical or to indulge in that formula so beloved of critics, of saying I told you this, or I told you that, or so and so warned you of this beforehand and you did not pay any attention. It is no time now for such arguments as that. We have to deal with the question itself, that of the provision in a steady flow of the requisite number of men to carry out the operations of war. Without being critical I may say, speaking quite dispassionately, what everyone knows, that in the early days of the War there were regrettable incidents in connection with the raising of the New Army. I leave it at this; that there was a condition of great pressure under which a transformation had to be made such as we never before had experience of in this country. We were transforming our military force from the small professional body, which existed before the War, into a great, national Army on the basis of Continental armies. That involved tremendous change, and I think it is not unduly critical if I say that, having regard to the immensity of that change and the pressure of other important matters, the whole matter was not thoroughly and adequately considered in relation to the effect which was going to be produced on the industrial population of this country. Whatever may have been the regrettable incidents to which I refer, the results were such as we may be proud of. We have now an Army that we reckon by millions. That has been produced by patriotic efforts, and not by any elaborate and co-ordinated official effort. For that we have every reason to be proud and satisfied. We can therefore afford to look over any little incidents of which we might have been at all critical.
  But there can be no doubt that when one recalls all that has been done, I am quite sure that all Members of the House—and there are a great number—who have taken a very earnest interest and done
  2396
  very valuable work in connection with the raising of these armies, will all agree in saying that they have observed that we have used our human resources wastefully. We had a statement only a few days ago by the hon. Gentleman (Sir J. H. Dalziel), on authority which he held to be good, that thousands of men had been withdrawn from the great munition works, from Vickers, Maxim and others, and been allowed to go into the ranks. That is an instance of the wasteful use of our resources that has taken place. We have taken men from war industries and have put them into the ranks to do work which ought to have been done by other men, whilst we retained those men doing the most important work in connection with the War for which they were fit. There was, and I think there is still, a failure to realise the intimate connection that exists between what I called just now the provision of recruits for the Army and the provision by the male population of this country of munitions of war for the Army, and it is on that particular point that I should like to hear what the views of the War Office are. It is time, in my opinion, to approach this question from a purely business point of view, and to do what any business man would do in his own concern, to take stock of what we have got in the way of men in this country, and to take stock also of the manner in which they can be most usefully applied. We must lay out our resources to the greatest advantage, and they must be applied to the one and only purpose we can take into consideration at this time, that is the prosecution of this War with the utmost vigour and efficiency.
  I would suggest, approaching this question as I do, with some experience both in the past and also in the months which have lately elapsed, that we should practically register every man in this country with regard to his fitness for service in the field, and with regard also especially to those occupations in which he may be most valuably employed, and we must bring home to the men of this country that there is a duty for everyone of them. It is not to go about and say, "You must come and enlist," and "fall in," and so forth, in the way we see it expressed upon posters in every part of the country. I think many men have failed to realise that they have a special duty which they can perform even if they are not actually in the ranks carrying a rifle, and possibly

  2397
  even that duty may be as valuable, or even more valuable, to the men of the Army than that of falling in and learning a profession in which there has been no previous instruction. The principle which I should wish to see driven home and inculcated now, is national service for everybody. That term has been used in the past to designate propaganda with which I have very little sympathy. I have argued it here and elsewhere, and I have generally been in opposition to those who represent the views of what we call the National Service League. But, again, I say this is not the time for these academic discussions. I think it was very possible in those days to maintain a very strong case for the views that I adopted, but now we are not in a position to follow those interesting discussions. We are face to face with a problem, or rather, as Lord Haldane said, we are not face to face with it at present, but it is coming. I prefer to look ahead and see my difficulties before I come to them. I maintain that now we have reached that stage when the Government should take the strongest possible measures to bring home to every man and into every home that there is work of some sort for every man to do, whether it is military service or whether it is not. There are many who are not physically fit who can release those who are physically fit. But that must be laid down in a far more emphatic manner than can possibly be done by private speakers on platforms, as we have heard it all over the country of late, and more than that, the proper measures must be taken to carry this really into effect.
  Those who have advocated and do advocate now on platforms, compulsory service have, I think, often overlooked the fact that before you can put into force any enactment which would compel men to serve in the Army or Navy compulsorily you would have to set up certain machinery by which you would be able to relegate to the branches of the National Service each man according to his capacity, otherwise you are no further advanced than you were before. You will be going on in the same wasteful way which undoubtedly occurs under voluntary enlistment. Therefore the point which I wish to bring home strongly to the representative of the War Office, who I feel sure will be sympathetic, as he always is, is that, whether or not hereafter compulsory service is necessary, we have to be ready for
  2398
  it. It is no good waiting until some great crisis comes upon us, and then to find that we are unable to do that for which perhaps the whole country may be crying out. A very useful work, and a work which will not be lost in any organisation such as I have indicated, is that which has been done by Members of all parties in this House in connection with the Parliamentary Recruiting Committee. They have made very useful inquiries, and have employed agencies which we all know are so useful to us at certain periods of our career, but which for the present are not necessary for their ordinary and normal purposes. They applied to these particular organisations the work of finding out, if they could, what men were willing to serve in the Army, and I know, from my own experience, that as a result one has been able to bring in a great many men who otherwise had not realised what was going on, and who were willing to do their duty but did not know exactly how to set about it. We have to go further than that.
  5.0 P.M.
  I learn that in many districts of the country there has been a sort of inquiry set up through the police into matters connected with families—a sort of private inquiry which is not understood. I cannot pretend to know exactly what the object of that inquiry is, or the method which has been applied, but it is apparently to ascertain what men are available for military service. I deprecate these sort of half measures. They give rise to a great deal of misunderstanding, and they are contrary to the natural feelings of our people, who dislike to have inquiries made, especially by the police, in regard to their family matters. If we are to deal with this at all it should be dealt with thoroughly and with a view to scheduling right through the country every man for the work which he has got to do, and which he ought to be doing, during this great emergency. I can assure my right hon. Friend (Mr. Tennant) that I do not wish to criticise his Department, and certainly not in any hostile way. It must, however, have been patent to a great many of us that the existing official system of recruiting was altogether inadequate and ill-adapted to the conditions which arose the moment we called into being the great Armies which we have got now. The time of the old non-commissioned officer paid for recruiting was past. One of the first things I had to do was to eliminate them, because

  2399
  they very often did more harm than good. The direction of recruiting was somewhat inadequate and inefficient, not so much for the want of ability on the part of many men engaged in it—many of whom, I know, are men of considerable ability—but because it had been impossible to reconstruct the machine so as to deal with the material which they had to deal with to meet the emergency which had arisen. That is a criticism which may be applied generally, I think, to the whole of the War Office. It was a machine created for one work which was being applied to a very much greater work, and therefore we must be charitable when we criticise.
  We have had at the head of the War Office an officer of great distinction and no one would fail to give him the full meed of recognition, for the work that has been done in raising the Armies which are now popularly connected with his name. But it is a question whether his experience and his genius were altogether adapted to the circumstances which surround a Minister of War in a country under Parliamentary institutions, and whether a long residence out of this country in the East did not perhaps blind him somewhat to the immense reserve force, the immense reserve administrative force, that exists under our system of popular government. I think probably that he would be one of the first men, after his experience now, to admit that this may have been the case. We have recently seen, under the stress and pressure of the present crisis, a certain devolution to other bodies within the War Office, so as to put things on a business basis in regard to the great question of the production and supply of munitions. We want something of the same sort in connection with the supply of men. In dealing with the question of the supply of men in every district we want to have the help and the influence of those men who have to deal with the mass of the workers in this country, both the employers and the representatives of the workers. It is only by that way that we can so sort out our human material as to be able to allocate each one to the work for which he is fitted and for which he is required. I know in my own particular district there was at one time very great uneasiness as to the rush of men from works that supply the Navy, and from other works engaged in supplying very
  2400
  important munitions of war. Therefore there must always be in our present system—

ROYAL ASSENT.
Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
The House went, and, having returned, Mr. SPEAKER reported the Royal Assent to—

1. Copyright (British Museum) Act, 1915.

2. Fugitive Offenders (Protected States) Act, 1915.

3. Marriage of British Subjects (Facilities) Act, 1915.

4. Police (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1915.

5. Defence of the Realm (Amendment) (No. 3) Act, 1915.

6. Army (Transfers) Act, 1915.

7. Statutory Companies (Redeemable Stock) Act, 1915.

8. British North America Act, 1915.

9. Special Constables (Scotland) Act, 1915.

10. Fishery Harbours Act, 1915.

11. Immature Spirits (Restriction) Act, 1915.

12. Housing (Rosyth Dockyard) Act, 1915.

13. Local Government Board's Provisional Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Act, 1915.

14. Caledonian Railway Order Confirmation Act, 1915.

15. Liverpool Corporation Act, 1915.

16. London, Chatham, and Dover Railway Act, 1915.

17. Ascot District; Gas and Electricity Act, 1915.

18. Mersey Railway Act, 1915.

19. Royal School for Deaf and Dumb Children (Margate) Act, 1915.

20. Ilfracombe Gas Act.

21. Neath Canal Navigation Act, 1915.

22. Great Central Railway Act, 1915.

23. Beamish Divorce Act, 1915.

24. Denny's Divorce Act, 1915.

General Sir IVOR HERBERT: When I was interrupted I was referring to the Secretary of State for War and to the satisfactory results which had accrued during his term of office in the creation of a great Army. I do not know whether the idea may have come into my head as I listened to the Prime Minister just now,

2401
or whether it may be some idea that was flickering in my brain for some time, but it seemed to me possible that in the developments of the immediate future there might be changes which would make it possible to give to the special genius of the Secretary of State for War a sphere of action more suited to him. As an officer in command of the great Army which we have at Home, in the organising and raising to full efficiency of that mass of men which has answered the call of the country, and is now being gradually welded into a great and formidable military machine, under the executive head of that great man, in my opinion, the present Secretary of State for War, would be far more useful than at the head of a Government Department. That is a suggestion which I may make with all respect to the great talents of Lord Kitchener, though, whatever be the immediate future, I would put this to the representatives of His Majesty's Government on that Bench, that a great responsibility is falling upon them now and one which, if not fully faced, may bring upon them, in the not distant future, the very severest criticism, and possibly the obloquy of future generations.
I say that it is time that the Government should consider seriously from a wide and comprehensive standpoint the whole question of the supply of men in connection with national service in this country. I put it in the most comprehensive manner, not wishing to deal only with recruiting for the Army. We have to provide also for our great service, the Navy, and we have also, as we must recognise, that great army of workers who have to produce the material for the Army, and who are as important to be considered as the rank and file of the Army itself. Therefore I urge most strongly that steps be taken, by means I would suggest of a Committee set up for this purpose in connection with various public departments, not the War Office only, to take a census and registration of the whole of the male population of this country, noting and verifying the capacities of each one. That would be one of the most useful services you could render to the State, and if as time goes on, we have to be prepared for all emergencies, if, before we have finally crushed the enemy, it becomes necessary to bring compulsion to bear upon any class of the community, in order to make them bring their fullest strength to the accomplishment of the great purpose
2402
which we have in hand, then I say that we shall be ready to deal with the matter in a full, proper, and efficient manner.
Sir JOSEPH WALTON: There can be no difference of opinion in any quarter of the House, as to the absolute necessity of fully and completely mobilising all the forces and recources of the country, in order to enable us rapidly to prosecute this terrible and inhuman War to a triumphant conclusion. It has been brought home to me, as I have gone about the country, that there are many who do not realise even to-day the gravity of the situation in which we are placed. I have no doubt as to the final result, but I do feel that the more rapidly we bring into action the full forces and resources of the country in this conflict, the less will be the loss, of human life in connection with this War. There is one class in the community, one force, which does not appear to me to have been sufficiently tapped up to the present moment. I refer to chauffeurs and driver mechanics. There are in this country many thousands of able-bodied men acting as chauffeurs and driver mechanics. I found last Sunday four chauffeurs, able and active fellows, with a knowledge of mechanics, quite willing to volunteer for transport or other service if they could get from their employers a guarantee of re-engagement at the end of the War. The suggestion that I have to make to my right hon. Friend is this: The Government are in possession of the name and address of every motor-car owner in the country, and I would urge upon them that they should issue a circular of the strongest possible character, pointing out to motor-car owners in the country that it is their duty, irrespective of their comfort and convenience, to assist their country by releasing their chaffeurs, if they are willing to go, either for service in connection with motor transport or to assist in producing extra munitions of war.
I should say that even from the ranks of the chaffeurs alone in this country we might get a most important contribution to the increase of our Forces, and I hope that my right hon. Friend will do me the honour to listen to the suggestion that I am making, and give it his most careful consideration. I should even go so far as to say to the owners of motor-cars that, unless they make a proper response to this appeal on the part of the Government, the Government will have to consider the question of commandeering both the cars

2403
and the chaffeurs for the country's service. I believe myself that the chaffeurs are quite willing to respond. I do not believe that there is any lack of patriotism in them, but the very contrary. The Government, however, must insist that there shall be an exercise of patriotism on the part of the owners to release their chaffeurs to go and assist the country in this hour of its need, giving them a guarantee of reinstatement at the end of the War.
There is another question: My hon. Friend below the Gangway has spoken of the necessity of getting men and more men, and I want to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War whether it is not a fact that in Germany the military age is from seventeen to fifty-five? Is an Englishman not as good at fifty-five as a German at that age? We are not taking equally strong ground in this War as the Germans are doing. I certainly would not go below the age of eighteen, and I think that such an age as thirty-eight is too low a limit. You can find thousands and thousands of men in the country capable of more physical endurance at forty-five years of age than at twenty-five years. I know that to be true in my own personal experience. I only wish I were forty-five instead of my present age, and I should be fighting in the ranks at the Front. I should like to see the age raised. The Sportsmen's Battalion admit men up to forty-five. Why should that not be so in other battalions throughout the country? I believe we need every man who is willing and physically able to go, and up to the same age as the Germans have adopted, namely, fifty-five years, if we are to put forces into the field to meet the enemy and rapidly succeed in winning this War.
Another question which is seriously disturbing the country is the enormous proportion of married men who have enlisted. I have done my best in the district where I have worked to induce unmarried men to enlist, as they have no family responsibilities, but with little success, I am sorry to say, and nearly 70 per cent. of the two battalions raised are married men with families. I do not know whether and in what way the Government can make a special appeal to unmarried men, and induce them to have a higher degree of patriotism and, by coming forward, so lessen the proportion of married men. I have a case in my Division which I desire to bring before my right hon. Friend; it is
2404
that of a man who worked at the coal face, where he was sheltered from bad weather. He volunteered, giving up earnings probably amounting to £3 or £4 a week. He made a great financial sacrifice, and went into camp near Barnsley on the 11th of February. After considerable exposure to extremely bad weather, to which he had never been accustomed, he was seized with illness and died. To my astonishment, the widow, with five children under sixteen years of age, have been told that they are to have no pension, but merely the separation allowance for six months. The officer at the Record Office in York wrote to the widow a letter, in which he said that Private George Heaton did not die of a disease contracted on active service, and the widow and children were not eligible for pension from Army funds. I cannot believe for one moment that the major who wrote this communication understands what are the new regulations. I submit that the moment this man left highly paid work to enter the service of his country and undergo military training he was as much on active service for his country as a soldier at the front, and it is inconceivable that anyone will tell me that because the man contracted his disease, caused by exposure while in camp in England, instead of in camp in France, his wife and children are therefore to be deprived of the Army pension. It must be remembered that these things are talked about.
We want two or three hundred more men to complete our second battalion, and the effect of incidents like this to which I refer, through their being talked about, hinders very much our recruiting efforts. It is obvious that that must be the result, when injustice of this kind is brought to light and is being perpetrated. I hope to have from my right hon. Friend a satisfactory reply on this occasion that justice will be done and that the hardship to the widow and children of this man will be rectified. The deceased man made a great sacrifice for his country, and in all human probability if he had not enlisted he would be alive and at work to-day in the coal-mines. I submit that his widow and children should receive justice, and that a man who died in the circumstances I have described should be regarded as having been on active service, and that the pension should be given to his dependants just as it would undoubtedly be given to the dependants of one of our soldiers dying from disease in France.

2405
Then there is another matter to which I would draw the attention of the War Office, namely, the enormous waste of food that is taking place. I have evidence which I cannot put aside in regard to this—from personal observation and from very reliable friends. The waste of food which takes place in connection with concentration camps and in connection with many military camps throughout the country is very great. I know on the best authority that in some villages near camps they get jam galore, all the bread required, and many other things from those camps. Not only that, we know that you cannot go to a big restaurant or hotel in London without seeing dry toast and pieces of bread all swept away from the tables in the course of the evening; and I am afraid that in the homes of the people there is not that simple living, or rigid economy or avoidance of waste, which ought to be put into practice. I am perfectly certain that in Germany, Austria, and France things are very differently managed. I am not afraid of the Germans ever succeeding in invading our shores, but I say it is only common prudence and wise precaution that we should economise and prevent all waste of food, while inculcating among the people the necessity of self-denial and of a simple life. In my own judgment the majority of the people of the country eat more than is good for them, and if they took twice the time to eat two-thirds the amount they now consume they would be better men and better women than they are. [An HON. MEMBER: "Thirty-two bites!"] There is no question whatever, in my judgment, that we ought to take steps at once to increase the store of food supplies by an avoidance of all waste and by rigid economy, and the Government ought to give a strong lead in this matter to the country. This is no time for half measures; we are in for a struggle such as we never knew before, and we shall have, one and all, to make greater sacrifices in the country's interest than we ever did before.
I beg the Under-Secretary for War to seriously consider whether he ought not to take strong measures to warn the people as to the necessity of economy in the matter of food supplies. I am afraid that the Board of Trade, who have received from this House great powers to keep down the cost of the necessaries of life, have recently relaxed their efforts. We used to see in the papers announcements of the maximum price of such-and-
2406
such necessaries of life, and that they should not be more than so-and-so at the principal wholesale tradesmen. I have not observed any such notices in the papers for some time; I fear that the Department have relaxed their efforts. It is all very well giving bonuses to workers in various trades to meet the extra cost of living caused by the War, but it is equally important that the cost of food and of the necessaries of life should be kept down to the lowest possible limit, so that these bonuses, which, after all, are a tax on the economic strength and wealth of the country, should be needed to a less degree than they will be needed if food prices are allowed to rise unduly high.
The last question to which I desire to refer is that of racing and football, on which I hold a strong view. It is a perfect scandal that either should go on in this time of dire distress and war as they would in peace time, and what is needed is a strong lead from the Government on this matter of racing and football. Lord Derby said the day before yesterday that the Jockey Club would stop all racing in twenty-four hours if they had the word from the Government that they should do so, and he added that if racing continued, upon the Government would rest the sole responsibility. I press those words upon the attention of my right hon. Friend, and I submit that the time has come when the naval and military authorities of the country should make it clear, in emphatic terms, that in their judgment both racing and football injure recruiting and are calculated to hinder the full production of munitions of war. There are thousands and thousands of men who, when there is a football match, cannot deny themselves the pleasure of going there; but if these matches were not held next winter, then in all probability many thousands of these men would be induced to remain at work in producing munitions of war. This is no small matter. I think we ought to consider the feelings of our men in the field. Some wounded men were recently at a great football match, and one of them said, "I wish the Germans could come and throw a few bombs on this crowd; it would waken them up and would make them realise what war is." I am fond of a football match, but I felt it my duty not to attend football matches during this winter, even when pressed to do so. I think this is no time for athletic footballers to be kicking a ball about. Men like them, who are in the pink of condition,

2407
have a duty to enlist and go and fight for their King and country at the front. I have not hesitated to tell that straight to my own Constituents. I, therefore, would urge upon the War Office and Admiralty to speak out with no uncertain voice, and let us for the duration of the War have a complete cessation both of racing and football, and of everything else that would hinder the country developing its resources and bringing them into play in the interests of humanity and civilisation. The only other point I may refer to is as to trading with the enemy. Severe restrictions are put on trading with the enemy in Germany and Austria. I should like to see that policy carried much further here. I do not believe in trading at all with the enemy. When we trade with Germans in England, we increase their wealth and power to continue the War just as if we were trading with Germans in Germany. I would carry the matter further, and say that we should not trade with them either in this country or in China or elsewhere. I think it most important that we should have no half-measures with regard to any of these matters. I am not attacking the Government. I consider the Government have done splendidly in this severe crisis through which we have been passing. I do say it is the duty of every citizen to do whatever he can to produce the greatest efficiency and the greatest development of forces and strength and power in order to end this War at the earliest possible moment.
Mr. THOMAS-STANFORD: I desire to refer to the question of the continuance of racing in this country. I do not propose to enter into the merits of the question in any way. I merely wish to urge upon the Government the desirability, in case they have come to any conclusion on the subject, of giving the very earliest publicity to whatever conclusion that may be. The Prime Minister, in answer to a question the other day, announced to the House that negotiations were going on with regard to this subject, and that he did not think any legislation would be necessary upon it. In the Press this morning it is stated that an agreement has been come to at an interview between the Prime Minister and members of the Jockey Club, at which it was arranged that a large number of meetings which had no particular importance from the point of view of the business of horse breeding and the business of racing generally should be
2408
given up. There are several classes of race courses in this country. Some of them are owned by private owners, like the Duke of Richmond, who has announced the abandonment of the Good-wood meeting to-day. Others are owned by companies who, no doubt, will be guided in their decision with regard to race meetings, if the matter is left to them, by considerations which guide other people of business in carrying on their business. But there are a great number of race courses in the country which are owned by public local authorities—city and town corporations. The meetings held on those courses are, as a rule, managed for the corporation by certain lessees or trustees appointed for that purpose. Under existing circumstances those gentlemen are in a very difficult position. They probably and possibly themselves are not in favour of continuing racing in the towns in which they act. At the same time the inhabitants of the town to whom the race course belongs derive, or expect to derive, certain profits from the race course not only directly in relief of rates, but also through the influx of strangers to the meetings. Therefore a considerable amount of pressure is brought to bear on persons who are acting gratuitously in the public interest to do what perhaps they themselves would not wish to do and do not consider right in what is locally considered the public interest. I urge upon the Government, if any such decision has been come to as is reported, that it should be announced at once. It would at once meet the cases I am speaking of where probably the racing would be abandoned. If it is true that the Jockey Club has met the Prime Minister and accepted his views with regard to the matter, an announcement to that effect should be made without any further delay.
Mr. CATHCART WASON: I desire to state very shortly the very strong views which I believe are held in this country with regard to what is known as the voluntary system. I have spent a good deal of time in doing my utmost to obtain recruits for Kitchener's Army, and I have been almost invariably met by remarks from the working classes that the present system is extremely unjust and unfair. There are thousands and thousands of men in this country who would only be too glad to enlist in the Army if the Government called upon them to do so. As matters stand now, we know it is only the willing horse who goes, while the loafers

2409
and shirkers stay at home. I cordially agree with what the hon. Member for Barnsley (Sir J. Walton) has said about the enormous number of married men who go, while the single men remain at home, and engage in the inglorious occupation of making money while their heroic countrymen are dying on the field of battle. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Strand (Mr. Walter Long) made a very strong speech on the breakdown of the voluntary system, and he showed that the present system was grossly unfair. He told us of Territorials who had enlisted being absolutely coerced and forced into volunteering for abroad, with very great danger to themselves if they did not do so—and, in fact, they were absolutely forced. If we had universal service, and that is entirely a different thing from conscription, the Government would then be able to put their hands on every available and likely man in the country. Personally, I was only too glad to attend recruiting meetings, but I do not approve of Ministers from the Front Bench doing so, and especially of the Prime Minister having to go and address a meeting of shop assistants in order to persuade them to go to the front. I think it would be infinitely better if the Government were in a position to call on every person to go. With regard to what was said by the hon. Member for Barnsley as to chauffeurs, the secretary to the Automobile Club did send out a circular to all the members, I do not think myself, if the Under-Secretary for War issued a circular, that he would be very much more successful than the secretary, of the Automobile Club, because the excellent attempt of the latter was an absolute breakdown, since he got hardly any responses at all to his invitation.
The fact is that this country does not realise that within a few hundred miles, or a hundred miles or less, there is a terrible raging war going on. There is no pressure apparently anywhere. People of all sorts and conditions have more money than they want to spend. Strikes are fatally prevalent in many cases, and there is an entire absence of the realisation of the conditions. You would bring a stop to that if you brought home to every person that it is his duty to defend the country. As President Roosevelt said the other day, there is no room in the present state of civilisation for short-haired women who will not make a home and long-haired men who will not defend
2410
it. We ought to bring ourselves, and try to bring the people of this country, to face the realities of the position. We have only to look around at the example of the Colonies. I do not suggest that a Motion of this kind should be carried, but I think it should be received sympathetically by the Government, and that it would do more to knit this country and its great Dependencies together than anything that could possibly be done. Look at the sacrifices our Australians and New Zealanders and Canadians have made! The manner in which they have come forward and fought for the country while we have got here loafers and shirkers who ought to be at the front doing their duty in one form or another, is a perfect scandal for this country. The sooner we put an end to that system and give sympathetic consideration to the proposal which has been so ably put forward by two hon. Members, the better it will be for this country.
Mr. HOUSTON: I had not the faintest intention of taking part in this Debate until the intervention of the Prime Minister, and after his most momentous utterance, and in view of the fact that the House is rising now for some three weeks, I should like to say that in my opinion it is absolutely imperative that the whole resources of the country should be at once mobilised and utilised to meet the present position. I have spent a considerable time with military officers back from the front, and the position is a very serious one. There is a constant demand for guns and guns and guns and ammunition, and now for gas, and it is necessary that these requirements should be promptly met. I am a great believer in universal service, not necessarily military service. I believe that the whole resources of the country should be utilised in every possible direction to carry this War to a successful and victorious issue. If we had had at the beginning of the War universal service, the mechanic and the skilled workman would not have been allowed to go to the front, where his patriotism prompted him to proceed, but he would have been kept in the workshops, where he would have been of greater value and service than in the fighting line; and the stalwart, able-bodied young men, unmarried and without any responsibility, would have been brought to a sense of his responsibility and sent to the front. I do not believe that many of these men throughout the country, agricultural labourers and others, are devoid of either courage

2411
or patriotism; it is want of intelligence and want of knowledge; and even if their hearts are small, if they were watered with patriotism they would expand to the size their forefathers possessed. I object altogether to the censorship and to the secrecy which is maintained in our newspapers and by correspondents in regard to the heroic deeds of our men at the front. From my own personal knowledge it would require a Homer to describe the heroic deeds of our Canadians and of our citizen soldiers. Only the other night I spent three hours with the colonel of a Canadian regiment just back from the front. He told me that he took 900 men into action and brought only 291 back, and that the regiment next to his lost 270 men. The Germans drove back the French on to the Canadians, and therefore the Canadians had to fall back. These men fought back to back against the German attacks and repulsed them. At the present moment there is the greatest demand for ammunition. Very effective ammunition can be supplied at a cheap cost. I am told by men back from the trenches that they do not care two straws for the shrapnel; what they do care for is the cast-iron German shell, which is one of the cheapest, but at the same time one of the most fatal in its effects. I recommend the right hon. Gentleman to turn his attention to that point. Furthermore, the men call for guns—guns of any sort, not necessarily big guns, or guns for long distances. For fighting at short distances, as our men are, any sort of gun will do, so long as it can be handled by inexperienced men. Maxims are doing good work, but they require men who are accustomed to them. If the right hon. Gentleman would turn his attention to a gun which does not require a belt and scientific handling, but into which the soldier can simply drop his clips, it would be a very effective weapon indeed. I have called attention by means of a question to the length of our bayonet. The French bayonet is a much more effective and deadly weapon than the British. It is lighter, longer, and stronger, and the Germans dread it much more than they do ours. It is rough on our men, small in numbers as they are, that they should be handicapped in this way against the enemy.
6.0 P.M.
I trust that there will be no delay on the part of the Government in utilising in every possible direction every resource that we
2412
have. There is a great deal of waste of patriotic effort by men being in the wrong places. From my own ships, officers, who would have been useful in the Navy and elsewhere, have enlisted in the Army, in regard to which they had no previous knowledge or training. It is, of course, necessary to carry on the work of the country. We must carry on our trade and our shipping, and bring back food to this country. I pointed out years ago to the then First Lord of the Admiralty and also to the President of the Board of Trade the absolute necessity of providing more seamen, and I made an offer to the then President of the Board of Trade, the present Lord Buxton, to provide the Government at my own expense with a training ship for training boys for sea. I pointed out the danger of employing foreign seamen in our ships. Far too many foreigners have been employed, and we are now feeling the effects of it. At the outbreak of the War a great many of these German seamen who were employed on British ships, and consequently had to be interned, were handed over to the care and custody of a gentleman known as Father Hopkins. The hon. Baronet the Member for Mansfield (Sir A. Markham) had a question on this matter to-day. Father Hopkins is an official of the Seamen's and Firemen's Union. I addressed a strong protest to the Home Office against these men being left in Father Hopkins' custody outside police or military control. That protest was not attended to.
If the country had been properly organised no such act as that could have taken place. There they were, potential elements of danger to the country, and possibly developing into German spies. We have had too much of the German element loose in this country. Knowing Germans as I have done for many years, having worked in business with them and fought against them in the shipping business, I know how thorough they are in all their methods and detail, and, although I do not love them, I certainly admire the systematic and thorough methods of attending to details. Attention to detail is one of the weak points of our administration. I do not wish to criticise the Government—far from it; they are doing everything they can now, but it ought to have been done much earlier. The Opposition are only too pleased to help them in every possible way. But I am no believer in coalitions. I do not attach as much value to the word "coalition" as the old lady did

2413
to the blessed word "Mesopotamia." In fact, many people who are in favour of a Coalition Government are inclined to be like the Irishman who said, "I am all in favour of a coalition, but what does it mean?" There are many other methods which would be more effective, more benecial, and more in the best interests of the country for carrying the war to a successful issue—in fact, I am surprised that the present position has been brought about. I can only conclude that the proposed coalition has been brought about by a state of affairs which I can describe epigrammatically by saying that Reginald has done too little and Winston has done too much.
I have always found the Under-Secretary of State for War sympathetic, courteous, and willing to listen to any suggestion, and I would press upon him and upon the Secretary of State for the Colonies the desirability of employing in France some of the best fighting material in the whole Empire—I mean the Basutos from South Africa. I can quite understand that there may be very proper reasons for not employing them in South Africa, but if they were employed against the Germans in Europe no such objection could be taken. These men are patriotic and loyal, and, as I have said, some of the finest fighting material in the world. They would supply a very important factor in fighting the Germans at the front. I would press on the right hon. Gentleman the importance of considering this question. I have indicated in a question to-day that individuals are prepared privately to raise regiments of these Zulus, and, when efficiently trained and equipped, to hand them over to the War Office. This course has been followed in regard to other regiments, and I sincerely trust that the right hon. Gentleman will not turn down this proposition. It is necessary that we should utilise every resource of the Empire, from whatever part it is drawn. I do not propose to make any further remarks about the suggested coalition, but now that the House is rising for some three weeks I urge the Government to adopt the suggestion contained in various questions addressed to the Prime Minister to-day, and, if I may say so, expressed very concisely in my own, namely, that the Government should immediately proceed to put the whole United Kingdom under martial law, or to take any such course as is necessary to utilise to the very best advantage the whole resources of the country.

COMPULSORY SERVICE.
Mr. ELLIS GRIFFITH: I wish to refer to a subject which has been already touched on by previous speakers. I speak on it because the party to which I belong may have been suspect in this matter in the past. Reference has been made to a Coalition Government and to a truce which has to be observed. I think it is well that the present Government, or the reconstructed Government, should know the views of Members on both sides of the House with regard to the necessity of preparing for the great emergency in which we find ourselves. Some Members talk about a national register; others about universal service; others about conscription. The word "conscription" has no terrors for me. We are not now living in times of peace; we are living in time of war, and our leaders have told us in the best rhetoric that we are face to face with a peril, not only to our Empire, but to civilisation itself. We are, therefore, bound to utilise every energy that we can command in order to meet this great peril at the present moment. It seems to me that it is the duty of the Government—if I may say so with great respect, it was their duty months ago—to find out how best they can utilise the services of every man and woman in this country with a view to the present emergency. Especially was it their duty to do this in respect of three different matters—first, the food of the people; secondly, the munitions of war; and thirdly, the provision of men for the fighting line.
With regard to food, something has been said already to-day. There is no doubt that the high prices of food press very heavily on all classes of the community. I do not know whether any steps have been taken with a view to the coming harvest, or whether the Government are taking any steps anywhere with regard to the growing of wheat. That, however, is a very urgent matter which the Government ought to have in hand. With regard to munitions of war, I do not want to enter into a controversial matter such as this has now become, but we all know the necessity there is. The least thing we can do for the men who are now fighting for us at the front is to provide them with all the equipment we possibly can. I have some doubt myself whether, in some respects, our fighting forces are as well equipped as are those of the enemy; but I am sure that those who are responsible for the equipment of our soldiers should

2415
leave nothing undone to put them on a level with their enemy in this respect. Then there is the question of providing men. I am one of those people who, after nine months of war, do not much care to see recruiting advertisements. Advertising in capable hands may pay, and may have been useful at first, but the day of advertisements is over. I am bound to say, further, that I think that the day of recruiting meetings is gone also. It is idle for anyone on either side of the House to say that the people do not know that war is going on. It is an idle platform platitude that is all. Everyone knows that war is going on—more than ever now when to our villages are coming the wounded who have done their part in the fighting.
It seems to me that universal service or conscription—I do not quarrel about the word—is justified, not only by the necessity of having more men. That is the first and urgent justification, but that is not the ground I am going to submit. I put it not only on the ground of self-preservation, but on what I think is a better and higher ground than that, namely, the equality of service that is demanded from every citizen when his country is in peril. That duty and that obligation falls upon all. It falls upon all equally. It falls upon all equally, not according to their willingness, but according to their capacity; that is the right principle to apply to this emergency. I should like the Chancellor of the Exchequer to come to the House and say that he wanted a man to pay his taxes, and to say that he would tax him and other people, not according to their capacity, but according to their willingness!That is a perfectly analogous case to the duty and obligation of the defence of one's country. Therefore I think that if these principles are accepted, we are driven to the irresistible conclusion that every man of eligible age and available resources should feel that it is his duty to take his part, and he has no right to ask anyone else to do it.
To-day I asked a simple question—it is my habit to ask simple questions—of the Under-Secretary of State for War. I asked him why a man—and I had a particular man in view—who had gone out, fought in France, had returned wounded, and was not now convalescent, a man who had to have a glass eye instead of the eye he has lost, should have his Army pay of 2s. 7d. a day reduced to a pension of 1s. 6d.
2416
The Government may think that 1s. 1d. a day difference between the Army pay and the pension for a man who has lost his eye in the service of his country is a good move, but that is not the way to send men back to our villages. That man, who was earning £3 a week before he did his work for his country, is now receiving a pension of 1s. 6d. a day from the richest nation in the world. These are the dangers. These are the little matters that count. These are the little matters that the War Office have got to attend to, because in the absence of compulsory service all these little matters have great weight and effect in the different villages of the country.
I also submit another matter for the right hon. Gentleman's consideration. It may be accounted a very small one. I think that a man who has come back wounded, and is unable to return to service, should be allowed to wear the uniform of the King which he has honoured during the War. I dare say there are technical difficulties in the way. There always are technical difficulties in a Government Department. I never knew anything that was not a technical difficulty in a Government Department. But it is surely easy enough to hedge the privilege around with such restrictions as will make it possible for these men to wear the uniform, especially now. It would not matter if there was conscription and everybody doing his share, but at present you may confuse the man who has done his duty with the man who has shirked it. I hope the Government will take this matter into account. I was one of those who asked a question to-day, along with the hon. Member for West Toxteth. Our questions were on similar lines, and were intended to call the attention of the Prime Minister to the necessity of taking this matter in hand I am speaking now because I think there is a preponderating opinion on these lines on both sides of the House, and it is important the Prime Minister should know that—whether in this Government or in the reconstructed Government.
I believe there is an immense majority of the Members of the House of Commons in favour of compulsory service. I refer to both sides of the House. I am quite sure of this, that there is a vast preponderance of feeling in the country in favour of it. Why should those of us who have only one son send that son to fight for his country while in another house three, four, or five sons of eligible age do nothing but shirk their duty? It is neither right nor proper,

2417
and I am bound to say that I have every sympathy myself with those married men who say, "At any rate, ask the unmarried men to go out first: we are willing to take our share." I asked the right hon. Gentleman to-day another question about the house-to-house canvass connected with this sort of semi-voluntary, compulsory service that took place some time ago. What, I ask, has become of it? He told us that there were 300,000 who had put their names down on that list. I asked him, further, whether the married men were asked to join before the unmarried men, which I think ought to have been the case. He had no information upon that point.
The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Tennant): I gave my hon. Friend an answer.
Mr. ELLIS GRIFFITH: The right hon. Gentleman gave me a full answer to my question as to whether the unmarried men were applied to first; but it was the absence of information that I complain of, not that I did not receive an answer.
Mr. TENNANT: There is the Recruiting Committee.
Mr. ELLIS GRIFFITH: I do not know to what my right hon. Friend refers. It is a new thing for me to hear that a recruiting committee has a spokesman in this House. It is not a matter of question so much as a matter of fact. If my right hon. Friend is not aware whether the unmarried men were asked first or not, I think they ought to have been asked. I think the Government ought to bear in mind, when the first call is made upon this list, that it should be on the unmarried men. I feel sure of this, that the country is more and more realising its duty in the matter of this tremendous War in which we are engaged. I feel certain of this, that the best way to get men, even willingly—although it seems a paradox—is to compel everyone to enlist. Each one is waiting for the other. Ask them all! The country has a perfect right to their service, and when the call comes and the appeal is made for the men of this country to take their part, I am perfectly certain that it will meet with a glad response.
Sir J. D. REES: I should like to say how earnestly I hope that the national register referred to will be adopted, and will prove the beginning and the prelude to national service. I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his speech, which
2418
seemed to suggest his conversion to principles held on this side of the House. I would like to ask the hon. Members who have been so extremely severe upon racing to-day, before they finally make up their minds, to read the debate at the Jockey Club, and particularly the speech of Lord Villiers, in which the arguments for and against racing as connected with our great national industry were most ably marshalled and most admirably argued. I leave the subject, though I think it is worthy of being discussed at length here. [HON. MEMBERS: "NO, no!"] Only I do not think that I am worthy to deal with it. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] I would like to ask the Under-Secretary whether he will kindly—and I do not propose to reargue the matter—inquire into the wearing of the brassard. Compulsion should not be exercised in respect of men who are of some age, but who are trying to be of some use to their country. Will the right hon. Gentleman give a hint to Lord Des-borough and his Committee that they are not carrying out the wishes of Lord Kitchener or the War Office in insisting upon this symbol, which is detested by the regiments. The matter is probably due to some misunderstanding, but I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that having been out with some 1,500 of these men I can say that the men could not see why their uniforms should not be recognised instead of red, glaring, staring brassard, which, seen at a long distance, looks like some Christy minstrel kind of symbol. I am speaking on behalf of a very large number of the men who are trying to do something for their country.
The second point I wish to ask about is this: A case has come to my knowledge in which a person holding a high command in His Majesty's Service has in his service a German. In many cases, I admit, that is not necessarily unpatriotic, but in a case of an officer holding a high command it does seem to me really—to make the very least of it—to be an extremely injudicious thing that the officer should be served, at a time like this, by one who is unmistakably, and indisputably, and probably admittedly, a German in sympathies as well as in race, name, and custom. I understand from the Prime Minister that the police are not authorised to interfere in such a matter. I daresay not; but if I were to give any information to the right hon. Gentleman in a case which I thought really required to be noticed, would he be good enough to

2419
look into the matter privately, because I think one does not want to bring the names of the people concerned before the House of Commons if it can be avoided?
Mr. TENNANT: I can assure the hon. Gentleman, the Member for Nottingham, that if he will give me the names of the persons he has referred to I will have such investigation made as is necessary with regard to the German servant. With regard to the brassard, I shall certainly see Lord Desborough, and represent to him what the hon. Gentleman seems to feel strongly about, and I will also represent the matter to the Secretary of State for War, to see whether any alteration in the rules can be made. I cannot, how-over, hold out any great hope that it can be, owing to the War, and to the circumstances with which I think the hon. Gentleman is familiar. I come to the other speeches, that of the hon. and gallant Gentleman for Monmouthshire and that of my right hon. Friend the Member for Anglesey. I should like to preface my observations in dealing with these speeches by saying that I am sure my hon. and gallant Friend will understand that it was really not necessary for him to remind us of the responsibility which we are endeavouring to carry out. We are fully seized of the importance of our responsibilities and our burdens.
I, for my part, am constantly alive to the difficulties of the case, and the great responsibility which must rest upon the Department which I represent in this House. I wish to make that perfectly clear. I would go further and say when my hon. Friends and Members for Barnsley and Liverpool asks us to take every step in our power to mobilise the resources of the country, in order to provide our troops at the front with all that is requisite and necessary for the successful prosecution of the War, that that is our end and aim, and that that is what we are endeavouring to do day after day. If hon. Members think we fail it may be some other fault, but not the fault of our will. As I understand my hon. and gallant Friend's observations they resolve themselves into two portions; the first relating to the registration of all males in the country, and the second the power to direct our operations into channels in which they would be most successful for the prosecution of the War.
I am not authorised to announce any definite policy, and I dare say my hon.
2420
and gallant Friend will understand that I can only represent the feelings which have been manifested in the observations he has made and in the reception by the House of my right hon. Friend's speech earlier in the Debate, to the Secretary of State for War, and see whether any machinery can be devised for carrying that policy into effect. I recognise the desirability of imposing upon all persons in this country what my right hon. Friend has described as equality of service, and I do not think that that necessarily entails military service. Many of us are unable, owing to our age or other infirmities, to contribute military service, but we may do something to help our country in its great hour of need. I think most men are really and truly endeavouring to do that service, and they are genuinely anxious to put forward every effort which lies within them to give the best they can to their country. I think I can say that truly of most men. But we are informed, on the other hand, by hon. Members in this Debate that there are a certain number of persons in this country who do not realise the gravity of the situation in which we find ourselves. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Anglesey (Mr. Ellis Griffith) says the days of advertisement are over. He said further that the days of the platform are also gone by, and that it is idle for anyone to say that by the one process or the other the people need to be informed of the fact that this War is a very serious and grave matter.
I would like to paint in the most glowing colours possible the really remarkable achievement we have made under the voluntary system which some hon. Members are endeavouring to alter, or, at any rate, they suggest an alteration—an addition to it, shall I say? I would like the House to pause and consider with a reflective mind what it is we would be abandoning and what adopting as an alternative to the voluntary system, and I would ask the House also to reflect whether it is possible or desirable to ask men who have, of their own free will, come forward, spurred by patriotism, to join the ranks—many of them, as we know, having made great sacrifices for that purpose—to serve side by side with the man who has been driven into service, not because he likes it, but because he is told he must. Those are considerations which I would ask the House to weigh well before coming to a decision in their own mind that there is no alternative in front of us but to embark

2421
on compulsion, which is, I think, foreign to the British nation, the British character, and the genius of our people. It would be with reluctance that one would have to embark upon a policy which involved coercion. But I do not deny it may be possible that there may arise a time when such a policy may be desirable. I trust the House will not expect me to say more than that at the present moment. My hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley (Sir Joseph Walton) asked me to consider whether it would be possible for us to issue a circular to all the owners of motor cars in order to get their motor drivers and mechanics to enlist in the Motor Transport Service. I understand that that procedure has already been adopted by the Automobile Club. I think the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. C. Wason) told us that an enormous number of owners of cars belonging to the Automobile Association or the Motor Union had done so.
Sir J. WALTON: Only a minority.
Mr. TENNANT: My hon. Friend may speak with authority on that subject, but it is not in accordance with the information I have unofficially received. Perhaps he would be able to tell me whether that is so or not with definiteness and precision. I think my hon. Friend must leave us to consider whether, in the light of further inquiry, we may be able to do something in the nature of what he suggests. I must not be taken as promising to undertake it. My hon. Friend made a further suggestion that we should raise the age for service in this country to fifty-five years. This war is a very strenuous business, and I do not think I should view, nor would my hon. Friend view, exactly with complacency battalions going to the front between the ages of forty-five and fifty-five for fighting purposes. [An HON. MEMBER: "Thirty-eight"!] Fifty-five is a very different story from thirty-eight. I need only mention that fact to hon. Members in all quarters of the House and they will reluctantly bear me out. It is true we have enlisted a certain number of battalions up to the age of forty-five. The enlargement of the principle, increasing the numbers to a somewhat higher age, is, I think, deserving of consideration; but as regards fifty-five, I cannot recommend my hon. Friend to put his trust in men of that age for this purpose. My hon. Friend also mentioned the case of a man who, he considers, contracted disease or illness in training in camp from which he died, and that his widow had been refused a pension
2422
on the ground that at the time he was not on active service. If it is true that the man did contract that illness on active training, the widow will not be denied relief, but, of course, I must have proof. With regard to the wastage of food, that matter, of course, has been brought to the notice of the War Office before. Very urgent orders have been issued by the Quartermaster-General's Department to all camps, military and internment. Some small wastage is possibly necessary, or, at any rate, is very difficult to avoid, but as to wholesale waste, of course we deprecate anything of the kind in the strongest possible terms, and every effort will be made to see that that is avoided.
Finally I would say a word or two upon two pastimes raised in this Debate, football and racing. With regard to football, I myself have taken a great interest in it, and have made speeches on the subject, in which I thought it was desirable in the great struggle in which we find ourselves that such sport as a regular and professional undertaking ought to be abandoned, and I told the Football Association so. I had many meetings with the gentleman who seized upon the mace last night (Mr. Charring-ton), and with Lord Kinnaird and other gentlemen interested in this question, and I may tell the House exactly what happened. I made some impression, I am glad to say, upon the Football Association. I think they were genuinely impressed, so much so that the chairman was quite of my way of thinking. But I was informed after the meeting had taken place with representatives of all the leagues throughout the country, that if we as a Government were to forbid, under the Defence of the Realm Act, or some legislation such as we might introduce to stop football cup-ties, the only result would be the leagues would play exactly the same matches, and another cup would be given by some generous donor; that the people in the districts where football is so popular would insist upon having some match that they could watch; and that, therefore, it was perfectly futile for the Government to embark on such a policy. But they went the length of saying that they would abandon the international matches between England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales, and those were abandoned. After that had taken place I did not see any useful purpose could be served by prolonging the controversy,

2423
and, therefore, I was reluctantly compelled to abandon my point of view. That is the position to-day—that, while the international matches have been abandoned, cup ties are still going on, or just coming to an end. With regard to racing, my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has the matter in hand, I understand, and it is not for me to make an announcement upon the policy which he is adopting, but I would like to assure the House that that policy is a strong one.
Dr. ADDISON: I wish to intervene in the Debate for a few moments, at the request of the President of the Board of Trade, because the matter raised by the hon. Member for the University of London (Sir P. Magnus) and other hon. Gentlemen opposite, is one with which I have had to deal lately. He mentioned the serious deficiency which had existed for some time in this country in the facilities which we possess for supplying ourselves with optical instruments, and various kinds of special chemical and other glasses which Are very necessary for various war purposes. I quite agree—we all must agree—with the seriousness of the state of affairs. The hon. Member knows, I believe, that this has been the subject of close inquiries for some time past, but the production of these highly specialised instruments requires, as he knows, the provision of a very considerable supply of trained workers, and you cannot produce trained workers in delicate operations of this kind in a few months; in fact, it is a question of years. Then, also, the quality of the glass, of which many of these lenses and other things are made, depends upon the particular variety of sand which is available. It appears to us that there are three branches of this matter which require attention, and which are receiving attention. The first is, we must have a better supply of trained workers, capable of turning out instruments of this kind. The hon. Member mentioned Clerkenwell Institute, where excellent work has been done in this respect—I think, in this particular respect, I may say more than in any other instance in the country. He said that that Institute ought, perhaps, to be encouraged in the matter of research. I am not quite sure what he meant by research. I think he must bear in mind that the training required for skilled workers is quite different from scientific research. We do not want to mix things up. What we ought to do is, as far as we
2424
can, to promote the activity of this industry in this country with regard to the training of skilled workers and their proper instruction in trade matters. With regard to the Imperial College of Science, South Kensington, it is argued that there should be a proper Department for technical optics for the production of these special instruments which we are wholly without in this country, and in regard to which we have no provision whatever upon an organised scale. I think it is very desirable, that a Department of that kind should be promoted and assisted on proper lines as soon as possible. In connection with this we have, to bear in mind that the National Physical Laboratory is also concerned in these questions. They make tests at various times, and periscopes and other instruments are submitted to them for examination. The department for the testing of glass needs substantial development, and the necessary application has been made for this purpose, and for the furtherance of provision for the investigation of matters connected with the manufacture of the glass used for these highly technical instruments. All these institutions are concerned, but I am not in a position now to make any statement as to what provision will be made because other authorities are concerned, such as the county council and the governing body of the Imperial College of Science. All I can say is that this subject is being closely attended to, and we hope, at a very early date, to have a comprehensive scheme to deal with this somewhat complicated and technical question.

FOOD SUPPLY.
Mr. PROTHERO: The question to which I desire to draw the attention of the House is our food supply. Men cannot fight or work on empty stomachs, and therefore the organisation of our food supply is an important part of our warlike preparations. The price at which bread and meat is to be sold may be a very serious factor in the War. It is obvious that those prices may rise to a height which may weaken the nation's determination to carry this War to that complete victory which alone can justify the sacrifices the nation is making. Although I think that nothing matters to-day except the War, and although talking for talking's sake is at the present moment something akin to a crime, I venture to put before the House certain points about the food supply of this country. I may be met

2425
at the outset with the remark that we have got an efficient Board of Agriculture and a competent consultative committee whose advice the Board does not always follow, and what more do you want? The point I want to make is that you do want something more than a Department; you want to organise the food supply on a scale far greater than has yet been contemplated, and the efficiency of that organisation will depend upon the degree in which you get the co-operation, practically, of all the Departments of the State centrally directed. Before I go further I wish to guard against creating any panic as to our existing wheat supply. Quite apart from the stock which there may be in this country at the present moment, there is a visible supply which puts out of mind all risk of shortage. You can see to the bottom of the British farmer's sack, it is true, although I believe at the present moment he has something like 1,200,000 quarters of wheat; but, looking to Argentina, the United States, Canada, India, and possibly Egypt, there is sufficient corn in sight, especially if you remember that within six weeks' time the new American harvest will be on the market. I believe Texas is now cutting its wheat, and in view of supplies from Tunisia and Algeria we may expect the demand of France to slacken. I think I am justified in saying that there is not the slightest ground for panic on the subject of our wheat supply.
Then comes the question as to the existing supplies of wheat and the price at which it is being sold. The Indian wheat is coming to this country under wholly unprecedented circumstances, and yet it is reaching these shores at 67s. and 68s. per quarter. We all know that the Indian Government has absolutely prohibited private export, that the private firms engaged in the wheat trade are now Government agents, and the Indian Government has fixed the maximum price, and that is the price which their buyers are allowed to offer to the up-country seller, less the charges for bringing the wheat to the port of lading. The wheat is then sold at market prices in the United Kingdom and the difference between the official regulated price in India and the market price at which wheat is sold in this country forms part of the revenue of the Government of India. I know there is an opportunity for some conflict of interests between the financial interests of the Indian Government and the interests of the British consumer. I cannot help thinking
2426
that if we had had the organisation, for which I ask, arrangements might have been made more favourable to this country. Then there is the question of Egyptian corn, and probably hon. Members will say there is "corn in Egypt." The conditions under which there is a surplus in Egypt are something similar to those in India. I should like to ask the Government whether they are making preparations to ear-mark the whole of that Egyptian surplus, just as we have done in regard to the Indian surplus for the benefit of the consumers of this country. I would remind the House that the most successful wheat "corner" that ever was effected was in Egypt, and what I want to be sure of is, that the Egyptian Government and the British Government together are going to be their own Joseph and do this for the benefit of the British consumer.
With regard to the stock of wheat in this country which the corn merchants have already bought and imported, the stock in hand is unusually small; besides this there is an unusually small quantity of wheat in passage to this country and enterprise in the corn trade is unusually dull. There is one reason for that on which I must touch, although I am going to obey loyally the Prime Minister's request that, it should not be discussed at the present moment. The Government, I know, has bought largely, and how largely nobody knows. They have discontinued buying; I believe, so that the British corn merchants should resume their normal trade. But the quantity is unknown. Now, it is just that unknown quantity that is making the corn trade in this country anxious. British corn merchants are short, and so are the millers and bakers, and they are all living from hand to mouth. The result is partly seen in the rise of bread prices at the present moment. Corn merchants feel that at any moment the quantity of wheat which the British Government has got in its hands is an unknown quantity, and probably exaggerated, and it may be thrown on the market and prices swamped. They are waiting for the situation to clear, and obviously, if they buy too largely for the needs of the country, when prices fall, when the American harvest comes in, they will be heavy losers. I think they are entitled to this information. You cannot expect merchants to meet the future requirements of this country unless they know how far those requirements are already met. My point is that if

2427
we had the organisation to which I refer that uncertainty would not complicate the present situation. Representative corn merchants should be told approximately what the quantity is.
7.0 P.M.
So much for the existing supply, and now I will refer to future supplies. What ought to be done is to have an estimate formed, rough and approximate of course, of the total quantity of food required for the human beings and animals in this country. When once you have got that estimate formed then you can set to work to provide the necessary supply. First of all as to the Home supply. Here the labour question still dominates the situation. It is not a mere question as to whether farmers will go to Labour Exchanges or not, for it is a much bigger question than that. There is a shortage of labour, and it is felt severely in many parts of the country; it is already affecting agriculture, and affecting it seriously. It is quite true that the farmers have sown their spring wheat and set their potatoes, but the difficulty is still present, and it is affecting produce at the present moment. Let me give one or two illustrations. A dairy farmer finds that he cannot get labour, consequently he sells his cows and retires from business. The consequence is that there is less milk and higher prices. The agricultural farmer knows that he cannot get labour for hoeing and singling his roots; therefore he hesitates to drill the usual area, and if you reduce the root crops of this country the winter food for sheep is less, and you diminish the number of sheep and consequently you have dearer mutton. As to the harvest, hon. Members must recollect that each harvest, unless the weather is ideally perfect, has to be got in at high pressure, and the heavier part of the work cannot be done either by women or children. If farmers have any doubt about being able to get in their crop of hay and clover, instead of mowing they will graze that land, and the result will be that we shall be short of forage for our horses. Then there is the corn harvest. I can assure hon. Members that fanners are extremely anxious about getting in their corn. The other day the hon. Baronet who represents the Department of Agriculture (Sir H. Verney) gave, unintentionally, a rather false impression that he had tapped a new labour supply in bringing over Irish
2428
labourers. Of course, that is not the case at all. Every year the supply of Irish labourers who come to this country in May and stay till November is something like 25,000 men, and they are some of the best workers who ever come to this country. I remember a Fen farmer telling me that these Irish labourers were men who worked harder, prayed harder, and drank harder than any men he had ever met in his life, and in that part of the country, where rich crops are easily laid low by thunderstorms in the summer, those are the men who reap the harvest. Are those men forthcoming in the old quantities, or will their places be supplied? And here, if the Government can come to any arrangement with the War Office as to the release of some of the Territorials who refuse to go for Imperial service, let them announce it now, and I can assure them that it will be a very valuable thing in the agriculture of this country. If the labour question is important now, it is still more important if you are going to try and obtain an increased area of wheat cultivation. Unless the farmer is pretty secure that he is going to get the labour for the necessary agricultural operations, he cannot increase his arable land.
Besides the labour question, I would ask whether we can increase satisfactorily the wheat supply in the coming year. Of course, there is a suggestion that the State should guarantee a minimum price of wheat in the hope of inducing the farmer to plough up more land. That is a suggestion which raises controversial points and it has many objections to it, but I would like only to make two or three remarks from a perfectly practical point of view. It is no use giving that guarantee for one year; you must give it for the four years which corresponds to the usual farming shift. The justification is that if the farmer ploughs up now useful pasture land he knows that he cannot get a crop of wheat next year. He knows that perfectly well, and if two years hence, at the termination of the War, prices fall, as they may very well fall, because the wheat area in grain-exporting countries has been enormously increased, he would be a heavy loser. Therefore, you ought to give him—that is the argument—some inducement to run that risk and make that venture. I do not say whether that would be a good thing for the country or not, but, if you are anxious to get an additional wheat supply for the harvest of 1916, no guarantee that you can possibly give is at all

2429
likely materially to increase the quantity, because, as I have said, newly ploughed land will not grow a wheat crop.
The meat question is, I honestly believe, the most serious part of the problem. We do know that the very high feeding-stuff prices produced a very curious economic result. Though the farmer had to pay an enormous price for his feeding-stuff, yet that very high price made and kept meat comparatively cheap, for this reason: The price was so heavy that the farmer sold every available animal that he could sooner than go to the expense of keeping it. The result has been that meat has been cheap in this country. That cannot last. The stock of live animals in this country has been brought, as I believe, to a very dangerous point, and from now onwards the price of feeding-stuff is bound to produce its natural result and send up the price of meat. How are we going to meet it? That is a very important problem. The Board of Agriculture, no doubt, has one side of it in hand. They are probably at this moment considering whether they should not forbid or restrict the slaughter of immature animals during the veal and lamb seasons. They are also probably considering whether they should not prohibit absolutely the slaughter of in-calf cows and heifers, in-pig sows, and ewes of certain breeds of sheep. I hope that they are considering it, and considering it most carefully; and I hope also that they are considering whether the circumstances are not so grave that some risk must be taken and whether Canadian stores should not be admitted into this country and the prohibition relaxed. That is a very important point.
Besides that, there is a point outside the range of the Department of Agriculture. You must try and prevent the feeding stuffs in this country rising to higher prices so as to swell the price of meat. Why are feeding-stuffs so high? There are two reasons. One is the want of labour, and the other is the want of material. I believe that some of the most important feeding-stuff manufacturers in this country, cake manufacturers, can only put out two-thirds of their ordinary output, and, of course, feeding-stuffs therefore are dearer, and, as I say, the influence on the price of meat is direct. One of the things I would ask is that the Government should take the matter in hand, and see whether they cannot supply these feeding-stuff manufacturers with enough labour to increase their output
2430
to its normal extent. Then as to material. We ought to prohibit absolutely the export of every sort of fodder and every sort of feeding-stuff from this country, except, of course, for the use of our own Forces abroad. And, further than that, we ought to endeavour to obtain from our colonies an abundant supply of material, and to do it now, and set those cake manufacturers to work in order that when winter comes there may be an adequate supply of feeding-stuff for the cattle and live stock left in this country.
But, do what we will, the farming industry cannot possibly feed the country. Agriculture as we have it to-day is the product of sixty or seventy years of a particular financial policy. It cannot turn round and in one, two, three, or five years become an absolutely self-sufficing country. We cannot do it. It is impossible. Therefore, you must look further afield, and here again is a point I wish to press upon the Government. You must try and organise all the Imperial resources, and you can only do that by inter-Departmental action, and by communicating, for instance, with the Governments of Australasia, Canada, India, and Egypt. You want them all, and you want to get from them the promise that they will earmark for our use, and for our use only, so much of the food supply as your national Estimates show that you want. You must do it not only as to wheat, you must do it as to meat, you must do it also for all that large range of products—all of which we can obtain from some part of our Empire—maize, peas, beans, millet, linseed cotton seeds, palm-nut and cocoanut, which will go to make up all the various sorts of feeding-stuffs. You must, in fact, organise your Imperial resources as well as your Home resources, and, if I may venture to say so, it must be done now and at once. It is because it is such a big question that I venture to call the attention of the House to it to-day. It is a big question which wants big handling, and I am sure that nobody would be more pleased than myself to be told that every one of the suggestions that I have made to-day have been carried out by the Government. Nobody would be better pleased, and I am sure that the country would be enormously relieved to know that the Government has taken this question in hand with a full sense of its magnitude, or, if they have not, to have a promise from them that they will take it in hand with a full sense of its serious

2431
gravity, of its urgency, and of its vital importance to our means of prosecuting this War.
The House has listened to me so patiently that I would venture on one appeal which comes from the utmost sincere conviction and from some experience of an industry to which the best years of my life have been devoted. We have an honest co-operation in all parts of the House, and coalition is in the air. Therefore, I may put my point without fear of provoking any contentious question. There are two policies as to agriculture before the country at this moment. One is the old policy of private enterprise, and the expenditure of private capital in the least remunerative but safest of British securities. The other is the large expenditure of public money, and that indicates public control. Those two remedies are self-destructive. You cannot have both in the field at once, and I should wonder if hon. Members opposite or Members in any part of the House, are aware of the degree to which the confidence and the enterprise of the farming industry have been weakened and impaired by the policy of the present day. There is not one landlord in a thousand, there is not one farmer in a thousand, who dares spend his private capital on the land with any generosity. We agriculturists are at one with hon. Members opposite over nearly the whole range of changes which they wish to bring about in the farming industry. We are just as anxious as any other hon. Member can be to see wages raised, to see the agricultural population properly housed, and to see production increased to its fullest possible extent.
But though we agree in our aims, we differ as to the remedy, and what I would ask the Government is not to change their policy—I do not ask that—but to suspend that policy, entailing as it does a large expenditure of public money. You cannot at the present day take public money round in water tanks, you have to measure it out with teaspoons, and, in these circumstances, if you cannot carry out the policy to which hon. Members opposite are pledged, leave us for ten years or thereabouts to work out our own salvation in our own way on other lines. If the Government will adopt that suggestion, if they will guarantee that we shall be left alone for a certain period of years, and that before the new policy is adopted we shall have an opportunity of stating our
2432
case, we shall not feel that we are judged, condemned, and legislated for on partial evidence, and I believe they will be richly rewarded. The industry would take up the question of food supplies with passionate good-will, and you would find the productiveness of the country increase, your arable area enlarged, your wages raised, and the problem of housing agricultural labourers practically solved. It is on these grounds that I venture to urge on the Government to take up this great question of organising our food supplies, and to take it up as a serious, vital, important and urgent question.
Mr. PENNEFATHER: I entirely concur with what has been said by my hon. Friend who has, in fact, stated much that I had intended to say, and he has said it so much better than I could have done, that I am extremely glad that he has relieved me of that part of my duty to-night. There is, however, another aspect of the question to which I would call the attention of the Government and of the House. I do not propose to deal with the question of the prices of food, because there is an old adage which says, that you ought first to catch your hare before you discuss how it is to be cooked. Proceeding on these lines, I want to discuss first how we are to obtain adequate reserves of food in this country, before we discuss the question of the prices at which it is to be sold. This question of a reserve of food in this country is to my mind most important and most serious, but it is very difficult to discuss it without taking into account another question, how long is this War going to continue? If it is going to be a short war, it may be that the necessity to build up any great reserve of food in this country does not exist, any more than the necessity to build up great reserves of ammunition, but if it is going to be a long war, then the question of a reserve of food assumes very important proportions. I am not in a position to make any suggestion whatever as to the length of the War, but I would like to remind the House of some words which fell from the Prime Minister yesterday, in answer to the hon. Member for the Bridgeton Division of Glasgow. The question was whether the Government had considered the possibility of the War lasting for more than three years, and the Prime Minister replied that the Government could not neglect the possibility of a long continued struggle.

2433
If that is the case, I submit the Government cannot neglect the possibility of interruptions—possibly merely temporary interruptions, but at all events occasional interruptions of our oversea food supplies, due to the action of an enemy's forces, either under the sea, in the shape of submarines, or over the sea in the shape of airships. I do not suggest, for a moment, that this country is in danger of being starved out; that I believe to be impossible, but if we had occasional temporary interruptions, such as I suggest, of our oversea food supplies, it is perfectly obvious that we might have from time to time considerable rises in the prices of food in this country, due to a temporary scarcity. It is not for me to enter into the question to-night of what are the reserves of food in this country. If, however, anybody will take the trouble to read the report of the Royal Commission on Food Supplies in Time of War, which was published in 1905, they will see there set out in detail how our food supply comes to us from oversea in regular instalments. As long as those instalments continue to come in regularly and without interruption, we manage to live from hand to mouth; but I think every hon. Member of this House who is conversant with the subject is aware that, as a matter of fact, we do not in this country at any time carry any large reserves of food-stuffs.
I have referred to the Report of the Royal Commission on Food Supplies, and I would like to point out that the calculations arrived at by that Commission are vitiated by the fact that, at the time those calculations were arrived at, nobody in the world had any idea of the developments which would take place within ten years in the construction and use of submarines and aircraft; therefore, in the absence of that knowledge, the conclusions arrived at in that Report are to-day to a great extent useless. We must all admit that it is possible—I do not put it higher—that we might have very heavy losses occasionally in the shape of ships bringing food to this country, and if that were so, if we had no reserves of food in this country, it would put us in an awkward position, and inflict great suffering on the poorer classes. I do not think that this has been fully realised. We have all been misled, to a certain extent, by calculations which have been made and which have appeared in the Press. We have been told that if a certain number of vessels are sunk they only represent a certain percentage of
2434
our total mercantile marine. These percentages look so very small when the matter is worked out in that way that they convey to the ordinary mind an idea that the losses are negligible. The percentages are really not correct, because we have not to consider the percentage of loss as compared to our total mercantile marine, for the total mercantile marine is not available for food-carrying to this country. A great part is at present being used by the Admiralty, and if this War goes on, if it is protracted to any extent, we must rather expect more than less of our mercantile marine to be engaged in that way. Then, again, a large percentage of our mercantile marine is engaged, not in bringing food-stuffs or other things to this country, but in performing carrying services between various foreign countries. Putting percentages aside, the fact remains, as a simple arithmetical calculation, that if the enemy sank a certain number of our vessels per week, that number when added up may represent a serious total at the end of the year. If, for example, the enemy submarines, aeroplanes, and raiders—if there are any raiders—only capture or sink one vessel a day, that would be a very poor bag for the largely increased number of submarines which we are told are shortly to be put into commission by the enemy, yet one ship per day represents 365 at the end of the year, and if we are to view the possibility of this War lasting two or three years or more it obviously means a great danger in not having in this country adequate food reserves to meet such emergencies and to keep down prices during times of temporary interruption.
I do not want to be an alarmist. I do not feel in the least pessimistic, but, as the Prime Minister has admitted, it is the duty of the Government to have in view the possibility of a protracted struggle. I do not for a moment believe that the people of this country are inclined to fall into a panic on this or any other subject. As a nation we are not prone to panic; if we have a fault, it is in the other direction; we are apt to be a little too apathetic. But with the knowledge that we now have we certainly ought to provide some means of storing, in this country, sufficient food reserves. At the present moment I believe there is no possible way of storing any large supply of food here beyond the normal supply, because at every port the warehouses are congested.

2435
I would ask the Government most respectfully to take into careful consideration this question as to what they are going to do if it suddenly becomes apparent that they must keep larger reserves of food in this country. Where are they going to put it? Of course they cannot do the impossible, but I do suggest that this is a matter on which, with advantage, they might look ahead and endeavour to make some provision, in case the time comes when it is necessary to built up a food reserve.
I need not touch on the question of agriculture, so ably dealt with by my hon. Friend the Member for Oxford University (Mr. Prothero). I am myself a practical farmer, farming over 300 acres of land, and I am perfectly conversant with all the difficulties he has mentioned. The problem how to increase our home production of food is a very difficult one. Briefly stated it amounts to this: In order to do it you will have to increase the number of acres of arable land—land under the plough—and if you do that you will obviously reduce your acreage of grass land, and consequently we should have to apply fresh methods to increase largely the output of hay and cattle from the reduced acreage of grass. If that is true, and it is true—and is accentuated by the lack of labour—then I submit that it is all the more imperative that we should have a reserve of food. The more it is impossible to increase our Home production of food, the more are we dependent on our oversea food supply, and that being so, the more necessary it is to take the precautions which I have suggested in regard to providing storage.
There is the other point of economy. If we are going to try to build up large reserves of food, it is obvious that we would be greatly assisted in doing so if we could induce the nation to be more economical and less wasteful in regard to the food we have in our possession, or which we may produce. In that connection the suggestion made by my hon. Friend (Mr. Prothero) with regard to immature animals is well worth consideration. We have just passed a Bill to prohibit the consumption of immature spirits. Why should we not carry something on the same lines into effect in regard to immature animals? The Government might also refuse to issue any licenses for the
2436
export of food from this country until we had built up a reserve of food sufficiently large to make us feel absolutely easy in our minds. All these things of course mean organisation, and organisation takes time and money, but it is the experience of all of us that organisation is, on the whole, less costly than improvisation. We know that to improvise things in a hurry is always an expensive way. I suggest to the Government that they should not hesitate to make every man do his duty in regard to the production, importation, and conservation of food; to do his best not only in regard to military matters, but in regard to producing and conserving food. I agree with my hon. Friend also that that would be best done if the Government would do in this direction what they have done so excellently in other directions, namely, take into their confidence and consult those business and agricultural interests involved in the production, importation, and storage of food, and act on the lines of conciliation and co-operation. I must apologise for having occupied so much time, but the matter is such an important one that I thought we might well devote a little time to it before we adjourn.
Mr. JAMES HOPE: I desire to raise only one point, but it is a point of considerable importance, and it fits in entirely with the arguments addressed to the House on the question of food supplies. The point is that of the shipping reserves which we have, but which are not immediately available. The point was brought home very much to my mind by a remark made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer the other night. The question had been raised as to the number of shipwrights engaged in building new ships for the mercantile marine, and it had been suggested that these men should not be allowed to continue that work, that contracts should be allowed to be broken, and that their labour should be devoted entirely to Admiralty building. The Chancellor of the Exchequer then said that it was of great importance that the shipbuilding for the mercantile marine should not cease, because we had had very considerable losses and might expect more in the ordinary course of hostilities. The right hon. Gentleman ignored the immense number of ships that we have, which are not available for doing trade to and from the United Kingdom, but which

2437
are engaged solely in trade between foreign ports. How many of these ships are there? I recollect I asked a supplementary question of the Prime Minister in which I remarked that the well-known authority, Mr. Bruce Ismay, had stated that for every one hundred ships doing trade to and from the United Kingdom, there were forty British ships doing trade to and from foreign ports alone. I have just received a letter from Mr. Ismay, in consequence of the report of that question, and he informs me that I was mistaken, but mistaken in a direction which strengthens my point. First of all, the statement was not made on his authority, but was made on the authority of the War Risks Committee who supplied the Report upon which the whole business basis of our war risks insurance is founded. Mr. Ismay informs me that it was stated by them in their Report. What I recollected as having been stated by him as his own estimate was really the estimate of the War Risks Committee. I was further mistaken in supposing that for every one hundred ships doing trade to and from the ports of the United Kingdom there were forty doing foreign trade. The case was much stronger, because the estimate was that for every sixty ships doing trade to and from the United Kingdom there were forty British ships doing trade between foreign ports only.
In the light of that statement, I am rather surprised that the Board of Trade said that no estimate was possible, when this very authoritative Committee had given this estimate only last year. I thought two-sevenths of our mercantile marine were doing foreign trade only, but according to these figures it is two-fifths. How many would that be? I have no special means of information, and cannot go into questions of tonnage. I do not know whether any figures would be available as to the tonnage of these different ships, but I have no reason to suppose that the tonnage of those doing foreign trade only is less than that of those doing Home trade. If anything, the presumption is the other way. I can only deal with the number of ships. According to Lloyd's Register, the number of ships in the Mercantile Marine is 9,240. Allowing for those ships which have been sunk, and in order to get round figures for the purposes of argument, let us call it 9,000. If the War Risks Committee were right in their estimate, there would be 3,600, that is, two-fifths of 9,000, doing trade between foreign
2438
ports alone. Those are ships owned in the United Kingdom; I exclude Colonial vessels altogether. I suppose that a certain number of those ships which might be doing foreign trade have been taken over by the Admiralty, not only in Home waters; that is to say, that of the ships in Home waters and abroad a certain number has been taken by the Admiralty which might otherwise have been doing this trade. After allowing every deduction, if these figures are right and the War Risks Committee are right, there must be 3,000 British-owned vessels, not Colonial-owned, which are doing trade between foreign ports.
I turn from that to the shipbuilding statistics and find that there are from 500 to 700 vessels turned out for the Mercantile Marine in a year. Therefore when the Chancellor of the Exchequer spoke of the importance of continuing this output it is surely far more important to get this large number of ships available for trade to and from the United Kingdom. The strange thing is that the Government have no power in this matter. I asked the President of the Board of Trade the other day a question on the point and he said neither the Admiralty nor the Board of Trade have any powers whatever. If the question of the food supplies, which depends so largely upon shipping, is a serious one, the Government ought at once to consider the question from the point of view of taking powers to make these ships, or some of them, available. I know there are enormous difficulties in regard to time charters and the great circulation of trade and exchange throughout the world. How far the Government should act, I will not say, but that they should take some power in this matter is very obvious. If this authoritative body is right, if two-fifths of the mercantile marine are plying their trade in a way that directly has no influence on our food supplies at all, and if, when new time charters have been entered into and new contracts made, the Government have no power to lay their hands on this great national asset and resource, I submit that a very serious situation has arisen. Before the Government resume—whatever Government it be—upon Thursday, 3rd June, I hope that the officials of the Board of Trade will very seriously consider this question and see whether some immediate legislation that will give them the power to make this great national asset available should not at once be taken in hand.
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. J. M. Robertson): I particularly regret that my right hon. Friend the President, who, I had hoped, would deal with these matters, has been called away on urgent business and is unable to do so. The House will agree with me that in the circumstances the very gravity of the suggestions that have been made by hon. Members opposite precludes the possibility of my giving anything in the nature of an undertaking or even entering upon an argument. I can only promise hon. Members that every consideration they have submitted will be very carefully noted. The hon. Member for Central Sheffield (Mr. James Hope) has raised again the important question, which he raised by question in the House the other day, as to the possible utilisation for national purposes of ships under the British flag trading between foreign ports. He naturally does not expect me to add anything at this moment to the answer then given. I rather suspect some statistical confusion in the figures he has given, but I can promise him that by the time the House resumes we shall have gone into the statistical question as fully as may be and be in a position to give him what one calls a considered answer upon the question of policy.
Mr. J. HOPE: I quoted these statistics because they were the best I could find. My case does not rest upon the matter of balanced figures, because there is a considerable number of these vessels.
Mr. ROBERTSON: I admit that the case does not stand or fall upon the figures the hon. Member gave. With regard to the contention of the hon. Member for the Kirkdale Division of Liverpool (Mr. Pennefather), I agree with him that the Government ought not to neglect risks to our food supplies. The hon. Member for Oxford University (Mr. Prothero) pointed out that there is no cause for panic, and there the hon. Member for the Kirkdale Division agrees. The food supplies in sight are quite sufficient to obviate anything in the nature of extreme anxiety. Still, there remains legitimate ground for the position of the hon. Member for the Kirkdale Division when he says that the question of the food supplies becomes more serious the longer the War goes on.
2440
I can, without hesitation, assure him that the matter has been under serious consideration all along. I cannot be expected to say anything further on that head.
Mr. PENNEFATHER: Will the Government consider the question of storage?
Mr. ROBERTSON: Wheat storage is a very old and difficult problem, and every time it has been approached from a practical point of view it has been found to be beset by enormous practical difficulties. Perhaps at a later time we may have occasion to discuss these in the House. The problem of storage in regard to wheat is one of the most difficult of all, but it is not being ignored. The hon. Member (Mr. Prothero) made an interesting and suggestive speech in virtue of his wide range of knowledge of agricultural matters. Many of his propositions I considered really sagacious, but in so far as he asks for assent to his demand for what he called the organisation of all Departments centrally controlled, he will forgive me for not making a reply. I may give my meed of praise to his survey of the subject as a whole, but he will not, of course, expect me to be in agreement with all even of his more practical propositions. I do not think his suggestion of an understanding throughout the Empire for the earmarking of all forms of Colonial food supplies for this country is quite so convincing as some of the other suggestions in his speech, but I do not want to discourage the practicality of his proposal. I merely say it is quite beyond the scope of the present discussion to expect the Government to commit themselves on the subject. As regards his closing suggestions, which, if I understood them, were to the effect that we might usefully try a policy of ten years of tariffs on food imports—
Mr. PROTHERO: No, my only request to the Government would be to let agriculturists alone as regards legislation. Let them work out their own salvation. It was nothing to do with tariffs. I never suggested it.
Mr. ROBERTSON: The hon. Member's suggestion of a new land policy is again one which I cannot discuss. I can only suggest, in view of the present circumstances,

2441
that there is every prospect that all such demands as he makes will receive no less attention in the immediate future than they have received in the past.
Amendment made: Leave out "Tuesday the 8th," and insert instead thereof "Thursday the 3rd."—[Mr. Walter Rea.]
Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.
Resolved, "That this House, at its rising this day, do adjourn until Thursday, the 3rd June."
The remaining Orders were read and postponed till Thursday, 3rd June.
Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 3rd February, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."
Question put, and agreed to.
Adjourned at Twelve minutes before Eight o'clock till Thursday, 3rd June, pursuant to the Resolution of the House of this day.

PETITION PRESENTED.
The following Petition was Presented and ordered to lie on the Table:—
MONDAY.
Race Meetings—Petition from Cardiff, for prohibition during the War.