HC Deb 13 July 1916 vol 84 cc508-10
2. Mr. KING

asked the Under—Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any request has been made to the Russian Government that British subjects of a military age in Russia should be returned to this country in order that they may serve in the British Army?

Lord R. CECIL

The answer is in the negative.

Mr. KING

Will the Noble Lord inform me why it is proposed to deport-beginning to-morrow—Russian subjects in order to take their place in the Army of Russia?

Lord R. CECIL

This matter was dealt with very exhaustively by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and I have nothing to add to what he said.

Mr. KING

I must press for a reply. Why, in spite of the pledge that these men were to be allowed to go before the tribunal, are the Foreign Office allowing these men to be deported to-morrow?

Mr. SPEAKER

That question should be addressed to the Home Office.

3 and 25. Mr. KING

asked the Home Secretary (1) whether a Russian subject who on 20th June was granted a permit to go to Russia at his own expense on 5th July had that permit withdrawn, and was told that he was to be sent forcibly at public expense in order to serve in the Army; whether this gentleman is medically unfit for military service; whether this action embodies the considered policy of the Foreign Office and the Allied Governments; and (2) whether a Russian Jewish subject on applying for a permit to return to Russia was told that he must go as an Army defaulter at the British Government's expense, and on the Russian gentleman stating that he had heart disease and would pay for the journey at his own expense rather than suffer the hardships of forcible deportation to Arch-angel he was informed that this did not matter; whether it is intended to deport all Russian Jews to Russia whether medically unfit or not; and, if not, whether he will take immediate steps to correct a wrong impression to which official action has already given sanction?

Mr. SAMUEL

Without further particulars the case or cases referred to by the hon. Member cannot be traced. If he will furnish me with particulars I will have inquiries made.

Mr. KING

Why is it that the man to whom this refers is to be deported to-morrow although he has intimated that he wishes to appear before a tribunal as promised by the Home Secretary?

Mr. SAMUEL

No such case is known at the Department. We do not know to whom the hon. Member refers, but if he sends the name I will inquire.

Mr. KING

Does the right hon. Gentle-man mean to deny that the man is to be deported to-morrow without appearing before a tribunal?

Mr. SAMUEL

I do not know anything about the case, but if the hon. Member gives me the name, I will inquire.

Mr. KING

Why is it that the man to whom this refers has had, late last night, a notice that he is to be deported to-morrow?

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member should give the name.

Mr. KING

I will give the name of the man either in public or immediately to the right hon. Gentleman, but I will only do so on the assurance that the man will not be deported to-morrow.

Mr. SPEAKER

This is not the time for making bargains.

Mr. KING

I wish to give notice that I shall call attention to this matter on the Adjournment.

79. Mr. KING

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Treasury has considered the financial expenditure involved in the Home Office proposal to de-port Russian subjects to Russia, presumably that they may there serve in the Army; and whether, in view of the need of Russia being for munitions and money rather than for untrained men, he will state what action the Treasury is taking on this question?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. McKenna)

It would be outside the province of the Treasury to interfere with the exercise of his discretion by the Secretary of State in the matters referred to in my hon. Friend's question.