HC Deb 01 March 1916 vol 80 cc1041-2
48. Mr. WATT

asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the action of tribunals under the Military Service Act who are refusing exemption to single men who are the sole supports of their widowed mothers; and whether, in view of his pledge given to the House and the country on 5th January on the introduction of the Military Service Bill, he will take any action in the way of instructions to tribunals or otherwise to have that pledge of his fulfilled?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE

I must refer my hon. Friend to the letter addressed by the President of the Local Government Board to the Central Appeal Tribunal on 23rd February.

Mr. WATT

Did not the Prime Minister say in this House that to take these men would be a monstrous state of affairs?

61. Mr. WATT

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether, in his letter of advice to the tribunals under the Military Service Act, he has indicated to them that in the case of only sons of widows who are dependent on those sons for financial support they ought not to be exempted where the mothers will, after the departure of their sons, have means of subsistence; whether this means that no only sons of widows will be exempted on the ground of hardship; and, if so, whether, in view of the pledges made to the country in the various discussions on the Bill, he proposes to take any action in the matter?

The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Long)

I do not admit that the interpretation given in the question of the letter I sent to the Central Tribunal is correct. In that letter I gave illustrations of the circumstances in which it seemed to me that serious hardship might be considered to arise in connection with the sons of widows. My letter could not be read as meaning that no only sons of widows will be exempted on the ground of hardship.

Mr. WATT

Has the right hon. Gentleman not said in his letter that there would be no serious hardship for widowed mothers as long as they had means of subsistence?

Mr. LONG

I do not know what words the hon. Gentleman is quoting from. I have got a copy of my letter before me, and I do not recognise his description. What I have done quite clearly is to indicate what is the duty of the tribunals. They have to consider all the facts of the case and come to a decision according to the facts and the Statute. There is nothing in my letter which justifies the assumption that sons of widows who come within the category of suffering serious hardship would not be exempt?

Mr. ANDERSON

Would the right hon. Gentleman consider it was going against the Regulations if cases are brought forward in which the sole support of widowed mothers have been refused appeal by these tribunals?

Mr. LONG

I really cannot answer a general question of that kind. As I stated, I am quite prepared to consider definite cases brought before me, but so far I have not received one.

Mr. WATT

Did not the right hon. Gentleman write that letter to stiffen up backs of the tribunals?

Mr. LONG

No. I wrote it in order to discharge my duty and in order to answer questions according to what I thought the right answer to be given. I did it after very careful consideration, and I am prepared to abide by every word contained in it.