§ 47. Mr. HOGGEasked the Prime Minister whether he has had his attention called to a case before the Edinburgh tribunal, where a father asked for the exemption of his sixth son; whether of the five other sons serving one had been killed and another was a prisoner of war; whether the man pleaded that the Prime Minister had said that last sons would be considered; whether the tribunal congratulated him on his patriotism but only exempted the son until 1st May; whether Councillors Graham and Watson protested against this action on the ground of the Prime Minister's speeches; and whether he is prepared either to order fresh instructions to the tribunals or to introduce amending legislation to prevent the conscription of last remaining sons when all the others have gone voluntarily?
§ The MINISTER of MUNITIONS (Mr. Lloyd George)I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Blackburn and himself on 9th March, which covers this case.
§ Mr. HOGGEMay I ask my right hon. Friend to address himself to the question, which is whether the sixth of a family of six, five brothers having already offered voluntarily to go, is to be conscripted or is to be retained by his father?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEWith all respect to my hon. Friend, my attention has been addressed to the question. I think the Prime Minister has dealt with the question. If my hon. Friend will only refer, as I have done, to the cross-examination to which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was subjected on the 9th March, he will find that all these points were covered by the answer my right hon. Friend gave. I can give no other answer than that. It seems to be a very comprehensive and full answer.
§ Mr. HOGGEIs it the intention of the Government, after the response of Scotland, to bleed Scotland white?
§ 28. Mr. ANDERSONasked the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the remarks of the chairman of the Tottenham tribunal when the Metropolitan Boot Company appealed on behalf of one of their managers who was the only support of his parents, both nearly seventy years of age; whether he is aware that the chairman said that they were unable to consider speeches made while the Bill was being discussed; whether he is aware that the chairman, in an interview afterwards, said that he was as sorry as anyone that the spirit of the Prime Minister's statement was not incorporated in the Act, and that therefore the tribunals were powerless in the matter; and whether, in view of the decisions being reached daily by the tribunals, it is proposed to introduce amending legislation to redeem the declaration of the Prime Minister, that it would be a monstrous thing if the State were to call for military service a man who was the sole support and stay of father, mother, or sisters?
§ Mr. LONGI am not aware of the incident to which the hon. Member refers. I do not think that any amending legislation is necessary, and I consider that the provisions contained in the Act with regard to cases of "serious hardship" fulfil the declarations which have been made.
§ 118. Mr. GLYN-JONESasked the Under-Secretary for War whether men under the Military Service Act, 1916, who have been granted certificates of exemption, have two months after the time stated in their exemption certificates has expired before they can be called to the Colours, whereas men who are voluntarily attested may be called to the Colours after the expiration of a week from the time specified in their exemption certificates; and, if so, will he 2234 take steps to see that the pledge that voluntarily attested men should have at least the same privileges as possessed by those coming within the Military Service-Act, 1916, is adhered to?
§ Mr. TENNANTAs my hon. Friend is-aware, it was pointed out during the discussion on the Military Service Bill that if a certificate expired immediately a man left his employment it would give power to deal unfairly with a man by dismissing him and thus rendering him liable to compulsory service. In the case of a man who has voluntarily attested the same conditions do not, of course, exist, as the man by offering himself for service in the Army has given the best proof that he is willing, so far as he is concerned, to undertake military service. In the case of a voluntarily attested man he is given, under the instructions issued by the Government, seven days after the individual notice for calling him up for service is sent to him. This provides that the man shall have full opportunity of making an application to a local tribunal before he actually joins the Army, and the individual notification acts as a reminder to him that he must make his application without further delay.
§ Mr. GLYN-JONESAm I right in saying that the men compulsorily attested under the Act are given privileges not open to voluntarily attested men?
§ Mr. TENNANTI do not think that is at all a fair way of putting it.
§ Mr. PRINGLEIs it not the case that the pledge was given by the Prime Minister that voluntarily attested men would have the same privileges as the conscripts?
§ Mr. TENNANTSo far as possible that has been done.
§ Mr. PRINGLEWhat is to prevent it being done in this case?