§ Major HAMERSLEYI wish to raise the question of Christmas leave and travelling facilities for soldiers. I believe it has been laid down that no soldiers now serving at home are to be allowed to travel on the railways in England on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday at Christmas time. That will necessitate any men who are going to get leave securing it from Thursday till Tuesday, and as many men are in an advanced stage of training and almost ready to embark for service abroad it will be absolutely impossible to grant them such a long leave. The regulation will therefore result in many of them getting no leave at all. There seems to be some sense of injustice felt that similar control is not to be exercised over the civilian traveller. Surely it would be better for soldiers to have their leave than for civilians to be allowed the opportunity of spending a few days at the seaside at Christmas. It would be far better for civilians to be kept at home and for the soldier to be granted the privilege of travelling. I wish, therefore, to ask the Government to give attention to this matter, and, if possible, to make this concession to the soldiers. It may be said there is a difference between controlling civilian travelling and military travelling, but surely arrangements could be made by which a certain percentage of the soldiers may be allowed to travel and a portion of the trains reserved for their use during these days. After all, it is only a matter of management; with a little organisation it can be done, and if it were done it would remove what is felt to be a great injustice.
§ Major H. TERRELLThe order which has been issued is, I believe, similar to one which was made last year, that no soldier, except soldiers coming from abroad, should travel on the railways from the 22nd to the 25th inclusive. I know that last year the order led to a great deal of heart-burning, especially on the part of men belonging to Reserve battalions training in England. These men felt, and rightly felt, that their interests were being 991 treated with scant consideration. It was, at any rate, so far as the soldier was concerned, a real grievance. It is suggested that the chief object is to clear the lines for soldiers coming from abroad. I agree, and no soldier serving in England will dispute the right of the man from the front to proceed uninterruptedly to his destination. But the men serving in France get ten days' leave, and they could, if the military authorities chose, get that leave in good time so as to enable them or, at any rate, a large proportion of those who are coming over for Christmas, to avoid travelling during those four days. If the military authorities would take the trouble to so arrange it, the men could leave in good time, and then the soldiers who are serving in England—mainly men in Reserve battalions, many of whom have to travel from camps in the South of England up to Scotland—could also get their leave. These men, as a rule, get four or five days Christmas leave. If they are to receive it just before the 22nd, it is of no value, because they will not be allowed to travel within the four or five days referred to in the order, and they would be unable consequently to return in time. There is another point to be borne in mind, particularly with regard to the training camps. Generally speaking the 24th, 25th and 26th December are practically dies non for training purposes. There is very little training done on those days, and if the War Office have any regard to economy they should take care that as many men as possible have their leave during those three days. If the men are kept in camp at that time their services are not being used for training purposes, and their time is practically wasted so far as the country is concerned. It is very essential that as many men in the training battalions serving in England as possible should be allowed to travel on these days in order that they may take their leave and get back in due time. I accordingly appeal through the Financial Secretary to the Secretary of State for War and to the War Council to consider whether they cannot do something to remove the hardship which is caused to these men. I have had many opportunities of discussing the matter with the men. I know it is with them a real grievance, and we ought to do our best to remove even the suspicion of grievance on the part of men who are serving their country. I hope this matter will receive immediate consideration.
§ Colonel CHALONERI am certain all officers will agree with me it is impossible to get the full amount of work out of men unless they have proper opportunities for relaxation, and unless they are allowed a chance to get right away from the ranks occasionally. I should like to see these restrictions enforced on civilians rather than on soldiers. No civilian should be allowed to travel on these days unless he can prove it is a matter of illness or some other extreme urgency. It would then be possible to find room for the soldiers to travel, and this would conduce to the better training of the men and would help to fit them to take their place in the fighting ranks all the sooner. The men who are offering their lives for the service of their country should be the last to be allowed to suffer by restrictions of this kind.
§ Major CARNEGIEI only want to say a word or two on behalf of the Home Service units which have not been mentioned. It should be remembered that these men are now established units; when their duties are considered it will be seen that it is an absolute impossibility to any officer commanding to be able to grant five or six days' leave. If this Army Council Instruction is insisted upon it means that there will be no Christmas leave for these men at all.
Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTThere are two aspects of this question to which I want to direct the attention of the Financial Secreary, and to ask for information upon. From the answers which have been given I understand that at Christmas the same proportion of men from the various units are to receive Christmas leave as received it last year. There are two points in regard to that I should like to raise. The first is in respect of the ordinary week-end leave given to the soldiers serving at home. Is that to be continued? This is quite irrespective of Christmas. Secondly, may I ask if there is some exceptional provision being made: is the leave to be extended to the New Year as well as to Christmas? That is a point of very great importance to our Scottish regiments. It may not be quite appreciated in the South, but while the festival of Christmas is an English Church festival it is not in the same sense a festival in Scotland. There it is the New Year which is observed, and it is at the New Year when people desire specially to 993 see their friends. I hope that the Financial Secretary will be able to tell us that the facilities which are being given to the English regiments for leave at Christmas will also be given at the season of the New Year to the Scottish regiments. I would also emphasise this point, although perhaps, after all that has been said it is scarcely necessary: I am sure it is the unanimous feeling of this House and of the country that if there is any sacrifice to be made in respect of travelling for present purposes it ought to be made by civilians and not by soldiers. Who at the present time are the soldiers? They are not servants. They are not hirelings. They are the people themselves. They are the very best, and worthiest, and noblest of the country. They themselves, irrespective of travelling and other matters of the sort, are making sacrifices incomparably greater than are being made by any class in the country. They may, on going to the front, say in the words used of old, "Morituri te salutamus." This week-end leave may be the last opportunity that many of them may have to see their relatives before going to the front, some of them, it may be, never to return. If there are to be any sacrifices of personal convenience and personal pleasure I am certain that it is the will, not only of this House, but of the country, that those sacrifices ought to be made and must be made by civilians.
§ Mr. BUTCHERI join in the appeal made by those who have spoken to the War Office to reconsider the directions contained in the recent Army Instruction. If this prohibition upon soldiers against travelling between the 22nd and the 25th of this month is maintained you will have this, not only, I think, unreasonable but positively astounding result, that in matters of this sort you not only give a preference to the civilian over the soldier, but you give the civilian the free right of travelling in these days and put what looks like absolute prohibition on the soldier. How can that be justified? I think most people in and out of this House will agree that if there is to be any preference and priority in this matter of travelling at Christmas time, that that preference should be given to the soldier, whose sacrifices, it has well been said, are immeasurably greater than any sacrifices of any civilian who remains 994 at home comfortable and in safety, while the soldier makes this great sacrifice, in many cases of his life, for us. Is it too late to recall this order? The Government, we know, have complete control of the railways. Is it not possible for them, if they anticipate a great crowd of travellers between the 22nd and the 25th, to say either one of two things: either to say that the soldier shall travel in those days and the civilian must not, or, if that is going too far, to say that the soldier shall have priority and preference in travelling, certainly as regards the Home Service. The War Office have, if I remember aright, already said this in the Army Instruction in regard to the soldiers coming on leave from abroad. What is the difficulty about it? Let civilians take their place in the train if there is room. I do, however, urge upon my hon. Friend in this matter to meet the feelings of, I believe, the vast majority of the people of this country, and to say that preference in this matter shall be given to our soldiers. It will be for the War Office to devise means, if they can be found, to give what facilities are necessary to civilians for travelling. In the first instance, however, let us see that our soldiers have the opportunity, so far as we can give it, to go home and see their families at Christmas, and at any rate enjoy that short period of leave which their military duties will allow them to enjoy.
§ Sir H. CRAIKI was disposed to be very grateful at first—and I still am— for the concession made by the War Office in respect to this matter. But I am now learning that the concession does not go quite so far as appeared, or as it was reported to. I am told that only about one-tenth of the soldiers will get really this longer Christmas leave, and that for the great bulk of the soldiers who like to get home to see their relatives, if only for a short time, that this restriction on travelling between the 22nd and the 25th will probably prevent them from doing so. I know my hon. Friend may say that there has always been restriction in this matter of travelling between the 22nd and the 25th. It is quite true. Consider, however, the burden we are imposing upon the soldiers, and the strain that is inflicted upon their relatives who may desire to see them before they go out, and who may wish to have what may prove unhappily to be the 995 last opportunity of a family gathering. Merely because it has been a habit of past years to restrict travelling on these days is no reason why restriction should now be carried out, and so deprive a very large number, beyond that meagre tenth, from having what may perhaps be only a single day at home with their parents or families. That is a very strong point.
For myself I should like to see the matter so far stringently dealt with as to require permits for civilians if they desire to take the places of soldiers travelling. I am told that it is too late now to establish a system of permits. It is a great pity the matter was not thought of sooner. I am quite certain that civilians, if called upon, are ready to make any sacrifice in favour of the Army in this matter. I have received an enormous flood of letters about this matter. Some of my correspondents have enclosed extracts which contain very striking words. They convey a great deal of sarcasm. These enclosures are long lists of advertisements with particulars of the hotel facilities at the various watering places where there are the attractions of concerts, balls, and so on. This strikes at the very heart of the matter. Can one wonder that the soldier and his relatives are indignant at finding this Army Order in one column of the newspaper and in another these advertisements of pleasures for civilians who are at home—the soldier who is making a sacrifice and the civilian who is not making a sacrifice! If no system of permits can be established—and I am quite ready to be told, because I do not know, that it is too late—let us adopt the suggestion made by my hon. and gallant Friend opposite. Let a certain portion of every train be set aside for the use of soldiers, and until the soldiers find a place in that portion of the train let no civilian be allowed to enter the train. If a system of permits or allotment of places in the trains can be arranged so as to reserve a large proportion for the accommodation of soldiers, so much the better. At this time they deserve our first consideration and have first claim upon our attention. If there needs must be curtailment let it be on the part of the civilians who are going away for their own enjoyment.
Major HAMILTONThere have been several reasons given by hon. Members in different parts of the House as to why 996 we are pressing for this leave for soldiers. I find that my reasons are somewhat different. The life of the ordinary soldier at the present time is constantly a life of control. He is constantly under orders. His week-end leave is extremely limited. He is not allowed to go away on Saturdays and Sundays as can civilians, and he has been looking, ever since the last general holiday, to the fact that in this House at that time a promise was given that his leave should not be curtailed at holiday time. We have now arrived at the Christmas holiday to which he has been looking forward, and this order comes out — the order that the soldiers are not to travel on certain days, and also that no further week-end leave is to be granted to those in the Home-service units. These men are separated from their wives and children by an Act of Parliament compelling them to come into the Army. They are not even given-week-end leave, and so they will not see their wives or children, and especially their wives. I do feel that it is not only bad for the country, but that it is bad for the morality of the Army that these men should not be allowed periodical leave to go home. On that ground, and on the ground that this very order shows very clearly that what is wanted is not an Army Order in this matter, but action by Parliament, I put the matter forward. It is very easy for a Government to control the soldier. He has got to do as he is told. They all do that, and behave splendidly as well. What is wanted is that this House should make it clear to the Government that Parliament should now control the civilian and give the soldier a chance. The soldier has been controlled ever since he was a soldier—many of them from the beginning of the War. Some of them have been serving in units which are kept at home. It is not their fault that they are not in France. They are longing to go, but they are kept at home for the defence of this country—rightly so.
Why should these soldiers of the Home units be picked out to be controlled while civilians working in munitions or other occupations can travel about as much as they like, not only at week-ends, but at Christmas and New Year and any other time when they can bo spared from their business? I do think it is most sad that this Army Order should so clearly differentiate between the civilian employé in the Ministry of Munitions and the soldier 997 Employé, whether he be officer, non-commissioned officer, or private soldier. It is laid down in this Army Order that officers and soldiers working in the Ministry of Munitions are not to be allowed to travel on these days at Christmas, and are not to be given week-end leave. My experience of the Ministry of Munitions is that, as a rule, the hardest working men there are men in uniform. They are heads of departments, or, at any rate, in a responsible position in the departments. They work long hours, and surely if the civilians in a department can be spared at Christmas to fill up the accommodation of the railways, then the soldiers should be allowed to travel in the same way. My appeal is directly to the representative of the Government that he should realise, as I have realised since putting a supplementary question to-day, that the overwhelming majority in this House, and I believe the overwhelming majority of the people in the country, think that those soldiers who can be spared, both at the week-end and at Christmas, should be given preference over the civilians. It is the Government's duty not to take the easiest method of controlling the populace at this time by issuing an Army Order to those serving in the Army, but it is the duty of the Government to find some means of controlling both the Army and the civilian population, so that the Army should have a chance and should not always be held back while others are travelling about and enjoying themselves.
§ Mr. BILLINGI feel I should like to rise and support this, and I do so for one very particular reason. This Christmas is possibly the last opportunity that many men will ever have of getting home at all. It is always difficult for a soldier to get home at week-ends or even on leave. On the other hand, the civilians in this country can visit their homes as and when they like. It is quite an easy thing for the munition worker or any other man in civilian clothes to get leave or get home if he wants to, but it is a very difficult thing for a man once he is called up to get leave, and I do appeal to the Government to give that matter consideration. I would also like to suggest that if there is anything lying behind this, if there is some mysterious something which makes it essential for the welfare of our country that the soldiers should be kept mobilised all through Christmas, I should like to suggest that 998 the Financial Secretary to the War Office might intimate such a thing. I am perfectly certain that if the men knew it was in the interests of the country that they should be kept in the camps over Christmas, they would do it, but it does seem to me rather unfair that those men, who, for reasons either physical or mechanical, have been exempted and are working in munition factories throughout the country, and there are moreover, hundreds of thousands of men in this country who are doing absolutely nothing for the prosecution of this War, including the men who are both framing and writing the very advertisement alluded to by the hon. Member opposite, and including the men who are catering for these civilians, who are doing nothing to serve this country— I say it does seem unfair that these men should have this freedom, while men who are prepared to die for the country should be penalised on perhaps their last Christmas.
I do appeal to the War Office to give this matter serious consideration. There is a certain amount of sentiment about Christmas. It is not only a question of the men themselves. To my personal knowledge there are many families who are looking forward to sons, brothers, and in some cases husbands coming home for what possibly, some may look upon, possibly erroneously, as the last time they will see them. I think unless some very serious reason can be given, quite apart from the slight congestion of traffic, these men should not be penalised in this way. If there is going to be any congestion of traffic, let the civilian suffer, and give the soldiers the benefit of the right of way through. I would suggest that if a man can produce a leave ticket he shall be permitted to buy a railway ticket, and that no man in this country for those days who cannot produce a leave ticket shall be permitted to travel. No doubt it would put him to some trouble, but there is no reason, if anybody is going to be put to trouble, it should not be the civilian rather than the soldier.
Colonel HOPEI hope it will not be thought that any soldier would not make any sacrifice he considered necessary in the interests of the country. What I think does rankle is that the civilian is to have the privilege to travel and that the soldier is to be put under this restriction—not, I believe, on account of any 999 military exigencies, to which the soldier would cheerfully respond, but simply in order to allow the civilian to travel freely There is one small point I should like to make, and that is, the soldiers have to be kept very hard at work training now, and everyone realises it is very difficult to give them five or six days' leave; but, under this present order, it will probably be now not necessary to work them very hard on Sunday and Christmas Day. Yet they will not be allowed to leave their camps, in order that civilians may travel. I hope this order will be reconsidered, and that, if it is necessary to stick to the order that soldiers should not travel, the same disability shall be put upon civilians.
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster)I can assure the House I feel as much sympathy for the soldiers as those who have spoken so eloquently on their behalf, and, if the matter rested with the Army Council, I have no doubt that the Army Council would say that nobody but a soldier should be allowed to travel at any time. Of course, the matter does not rest with the Army Council. The decision which I had to announce the other day, and which has subsequently been modified, was a decision which was taken by the War Committee, not in order to impose unnecessary hardships, or to inflict an undeserved grievance on the soldier, but a decision which was necessitated by a review of all the facts as they stood revealed. It was found that there had been a large increase of traffic, a good deal of unnecessary traffic, a good deal of it traffic that, at any rate, might possibly be postponed until some less busy season of the year. They found that on the one hand. They were met on the other by a strong and insistent demand from France for increased railway personnel and for an increased supply of railway rolling stock, and I think that what the House has got to bear in mind is this, that when we are talking about giving Christmas leave we have got to remember the conditions under which Christmas leave can be given and under which it is possible. We have heard a good deal in the last few minutes about the hardship inflicted on the soldier in prohibiting travel between the 22nd and 25th December, the two dates inclusive. I think exactly the same restriction was imposed on the travelling of soldiers last 1000 Christmas, and we did not hear any outcry about it on that occasion. I do not think there really is the great grievance which has been represented. My hon. Friend the Member for East Herts (Mr. Billing) asked, Can the men who are left behind in camps be told that their presence in camp is necessary? I think I can give that assurance in a word. The whole question was carefully reviewed last year, and it has been carefully reviewed this year, and under no circumstances can you allow more than 10 per cent. of these units to be absent at the same time.
§ Major TERRELLDoes that apply to the training Reserves?
§ Colonel CHALONERAre civilians to be treated in the same way?
§ Mr. FORSTERI am not dealing with civilians.
§ Major TERRELLDoes it apply to the training Reserves?
§ Mr. FORSTERIt applies to all—I think it applies to all.
§ Major TERRELLCan you say why?
§ Mr. FORSTERIt has been alleged that it is a great hardship on men, who possibly may never have an opportunity of seeing their families again, that you should deny them a visit home on this occasion. I think my hon. Friend will have seen that this limitation does not apply to what is known as draft men. That is to say, men who are sent abroad are given, wherever it is possible, unless exigencies absolutely prevent it, the opportunity of going home for a farewell visit, so that I do not think it has been quite fair for my hon. Friends to strengthen their case by a reference ad misericordiam on that ground. The Army Council are just as anxious as anybody else that all the men who can be spared shall be given the fullest measure of leave, but there are certain disciplinary reasons which are present in the minds of the military members of the Army Council which I think will make the restriction on week-end leave unavoidable. What the Army Council have kept in the front of their minds is that they are giving a much larger amount of leave to the troops at the front. They are arranging for very much larger numbers of men to come home from the front on leave. We are going to give them priority. We 1001 are going, as far as possible, to keep; railways clear for them, and to give them as much of the rolling stock as is necessary in order for them to get home. My hon. Friend has said, why cannot the men from the front have their leave arranged on such dates as to prevent this congestion? The reason is this: The numbers at the front are so enormous at the present moment that, if we are to give everyone at the front an opportunity of coming home, as we hope to do, before what we call the busy season begins next spring, we have to keep the flow of men from and to the front continuous, and I understand it is essential, if we are to give the men from the front their leave, and not to make the promise illusory, that the railways must be kept as free for them as possible.
8.0 p.m.
There is one further observation, and that is, we have to deal with this traffic with a very heavily diminished 8.0 P.M. amount of rolling stock, and when my hon. Friends invite us to put a strict limit upon the quantity of civilian traffic, I may tell them that I think the civilians will find travelling very difficult during those four Christmas days.
§ Mr. BUTCHERWhy not limit it altogether?
§ Mr. FORSTERDo not let us lose sight of this, that there are civilians who are working just as hard.
§ Mr. FORSTERI will not bandy words with my hon. Friends. I can tell them that there are many civilians who are working just as hard as a great many of the troops who are now serving in this country, and there are a great many civilians who are just as much entitled to consideration.
§ Mr. FORSTERYes, a great many of them are.
§ Mr. FORSTERBecause they have to work away from where their families are residing.
§ Mr. FORSTERTo a great extent.
§ Colonel CHALONERWill it be divided equally between the soldiers and the civilians?
§ Mr. FORSTERI will, first of all, deal with the point raised by my hon. Friend who asked whether or not we were going to limit the facilities to be given to a proportion of the troops, and whether we could not also give leave to those who are now deprived of it in the New Year? I should hope that we may. I am not in a position at the moment to make any definite promise. As the railway companies were not able to make the very drastic restrictions before the beginning of the New Year I hoped we might be able to arrange so that the same opportunity should be given in the New Year's leave as is given in Christmas leave.
§ Mr. FORSTERI am not going to make that promise. I will only tell my hon. Friends that I will do my best.
§ Mr. BILLINGWill the hon. Gentleman consider the possibility of abolishing festivities, and preventing people from travelling, who do so simply for the sake of changing their position?
§ Mr. FORSTERI will represent that to my hon. Friend. The question has been raised whether or not we cannot distribute the opportunity, giving soldiers preference, or, on the other hand, restrict civilian traffic to those who have permits. That is naturally the first thing that occurred to one when it proved to be necessary to make these restrictions. The first thing one thought of was, What arrangements can we make for limiting civilian traffic to those who have a journey to go? That was inquired into, and I am told that the system of permits proved to be impossible.
§ Mr. FORSTERI cannot tell you why. It was largely a railway matter, and as I am afraid I am not a railway expert I cannot, for the moment, answer the question why. It is quite obvious what the feeling of the House really is, and I can only say now, as I said at the beginning, that I am just as anxious as any Member that soldiers should have the fullest possible facilities. I will undertake that the 1003 matter shall be re-examined in the light of the obvious wish of the House of Commons, and I do not doubt that the Cabinet will reconsider the question. But I must say this, that we shall have to face restrictions in the near future. Even if we are able to give increased Christmas leave now, which I doubt, we have got to face the fact—and it is no uses shutting our eyes to it—that the War is coming 1004 closer to our doors, and we are going to feel it more and more. We must make up our minds to put up with discomfort. We have got to make up our minds to face grievances cheerfully. I can only say that, as far as I can, I will see that the soldier does not suffer.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at Five Minutes after Eight o'clock till To-morrow, pursuant to the Order of the House this day.