§ 1. Mr. MALCOLMasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how far His Majesty's Government has pressed the State Department at Washington to insist that the Turkish Government shall permit representatives of the United States Embassy at Constantinople to visit and report upon prisoner camps in Asia Minor; and what reply has been received to the British representations?
§ Mr. JAMES HOPE (Treasurer of the Household)The United States Government have not been approached in regard to this matter; communications with regard to British interests in enemy countries pass between the United States diplomatic representatives and His Majesty's Government and not between His Majesty's Government and the United States Government. The United States Embassy at Constantinople are well aware of the great importance which we attach to the inspection of prisoners' camps in Turkey.
§ Mr. MALCOLMHas the United States Government given no answer as to why they are not allowed to visit the camps?
§ Mr. HOPEI have said that we have not approached the United States Government, but the United States diplomatic representatives are well aware of the great importance which we attach to the inspection of prisoners' camps in enemy countries.
§ 2. Mr. MALCOLMasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his Department has exercised all possible pressure upon the State Department at Washington to secure the publication of prisoner camp reports from Germany; what is the reason for the refusal to publish them; whether the expenses of visiting such camps are defrayed by the British Government; and whether the reports in question are the property of His Majesty's Government to dispose of as it thinks fit?
§ Mr. HOPEThe reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative, and I am glad to say that we have some reason to hope that while the United States Government object in principle to the publication of such reports, we may be able to obtain their consent to the publication of individual reports; the expenses arising from the inspection of internment camps by United States officials will be refunded to the United States Government in due course; with regard to the last part of the question, we are obliged, however reluctantly, to defer to the wishes of the United States Government in regard to the publication of reports drawn up by United States officials.
§ 17. Major ASTORasked the Secretary of State for War to state, approximately, the number of German prisoners of war employed on economic work in this country; the nature of the work on which they are engaged; the rates of pay; and whether they are paid at piece or time rates?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Lloyd George)It is, as I have previously stated, undesirable to give information as to the number of prisoners of war in this country who are employed, or as to the nature of their employment. Such men as are employed are paid in accordance with Article 6 of the Annexe to The Hague Convention. Some are paid "piece rates" and some "time rates."
§ Mr. ASHLEYAre many employed? Is there any secret in replying to that portion of the question?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEYes, a good many.
§ Commander WEDGWOODIs there any reluctance to employ these men?
§ Mr. R. MCNEILLWill the right hon. Gentleman indicate the nature of the objections to knowing how these men are employed?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI have, I think, in the reply to the hon. Gentleman, said that I cannot give exact reasons. In reply to the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Commander Wedgwood), no, I do not think so, though in some cases, yes, We hope to extend their employment, and we are 1173 trying to find out whether there are any objections on the part of employers. For instance, take agricultural work—a case in point. We are instituting inquiries as to whether or not it is possible to employ them for that purpose.
Mr. SHIRLEY BENNWill there be any objection raised to these prisoners being employed on piece work?
§ Mr. HOUSTONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that very large numbers of German prisoners are employed in French ports, discharging ships, and doing other work?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEYes; that is so.
§ Mr. HOUSTONAnd on behalf of the British Government?
§ 33. Mr. JOWETTasked the Secretary of State for War if his attention has been called to the new regulations issued by the Colonel Commanding the depot, West Yorkshire Regiment, relating to the sending of parcels of food and clothing to prisoners of war, which states that after 30th November relatives and friends of prisoners of war must send money, and not parcels as they have previously been accustomed to send, to the Central Committee, 4, Thurloe Place, London, S.W.; if the near relatives of absent soldiers consider that it is a hardship to deprive them of their right to send things which they know from experience will suit the taste of the soldiers; and if he will take steps to have the new regulations referred to amended?
§ The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster)I have not seen the new Regulations referred to in the first part of the question, but I have no doubt that they are in accordance with the directions of the Central Prisoners of War Committee. On the general question, I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on 2nd November to the hon. Member for West Leeds. I would also refer my hon. Friend to the statement which was issued to the Press on 21st October. Of this I will send him a copy.
36. Mr. MacCALLUM SCOTTasked the Secretary of State for War whether the new Regulations for the dispatch of parcels to British prisoners of war in Germany were prepared without consultation 1174 with regimental care committees or other organisations which, since an early period of the War, have been engaged on this work, and that their publication on the 21st October, to take effect on 1st December, has caused great anxiety throughout the country amongst those concerned in this charitable and indispensable work; whether the financial burden imposed on these organisations, owing to the prohibition of parcels from relatives or friends and the consequent increase in the quantity required to be sent by these bodies, is such that many of them will have to abandon the work on 1st December; from what source the deficiency is to be provided; and whether, having regard to the fact that the Regulations are being altered from day to day and are extremely complicated, and indeed unintelligible to ordinary persons, he can give some assurance that their operation will be postponed until at least the 1st January, in order to provide time for fuller consideration and consultation?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe issue of the new Regulations referred to was preceded by an investigation lasting some time, during the course of which many of the organisations were apprised of what was in contemplation, but as the number of such organisations is very large it was not practicable to consult them all formally. The reception of the new Regulations has, I am informed, been, with certain exceptions, favourable. It is of the essence of the new scheme that every prisoner shall receive an adequate supply of relief and that none shall receive an excessive amount, and where the financial resources of the regimental care committee are insufficient, the Central Prisoners of War Committee will give assistance in the care of the prisoners concerned. It is not the case that the Regulations are altered from day to day. Such alterations as have been made have been in the direction of relaxation to meet the wishes of the organisations. A period of six weeks was allowed between the promulgation of the scheme and its coming into force, and I cannot promise that the appointed date, namely, 1st December, will be altered, but every endeavour will be made to meet the cases of those organisations—not many, I am informed—whose arrangements are not yet completed, and it will, I think, be possible in these cases to allow a further period of grace.
Mr. SCOTTIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Scottish Clans Association has been one of the most active in this work, and can he say whether it has been consulted at all?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEIt would be impossible for me to answer that without notice. If my hon. Friend will write me a letter upon the matter I will find out.
Mr. SCOTTIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the objections which are raised to this scheme are not objections to it in principle, but are objections to the practical working of the scheme and to the methods which are adopted?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEOh, yes that is what I understood.
§ 86. Colonel WEIGALLasked whether, in view of the necessity of immediately increasing labour on agricultural land, the Government are prepared to consider the employment of German prisoners of war?
§ 95 Viscount WOLMERasked the Treasurer of the Household (1) whether there is any objection to employing military prisoners of war in unloading food supplies and other goods at docks; (2) whether he can state who is the person who is responsible for deciding what use shall be made of military prisoners of war; whether that person has any plan for utilising them; and, if so, what that plan is; and (3) whether the Government propose to acquire or lease land, or utilise Crown lands for the purpose of employing military prisoners of war to grow food for the people; and, if not, will he state what reason there is for keeping 15,000 prisoners idle when the German Government has employed British prisoners of war in growing food for the past two years?
§ Mr. HOPEOwing to heavy calls on guarding troops, the War Office have hitherto opposed the employment of prisoners of war in parties of less than 100, and accordingly have been unable to grant the services of prisoners to work on the land where the numbers are necessarily small and the guards must be disproportionately large. A scheme is now arranged whereby small parties of men can be used, the employer being responsible for their custody, housing, and feeding. All applications for the employment of prisoners of war in any capacity are considered by a special Committee at the War Office formed by the Secretary of 1176 State. In addition to the scheme to which I have just alluded, this Committee have had under discussion questions as to the employment of prisoners on a large scale on land to be acquired for the purpose, and they hope shortly to be able to enunciate a policy. There is no objection in principle to the employment of prisoners at docks, but the practical difficulties are somewhat serious.
§ Colonel WEIGALLWill anyone who desires to employ these men on the land have to apply to the Committee of Agriculture?
§ Mr. HOPENo. I do not think that in future under this particular scheme it will be necessary to apply to the Committee, but if any further information is required I must ask for notice to be given.
§ Mr. HOUSTONWill the question of the new docks at present under construction and held up, such as the Gladstone Dock at Liverpool, be considered in regard to the employment of these Germans?
§ Mr. GWYNNEWill the trade unions object to the employment of these prisoners?
§ Mr. HOPEI know of no official objection being taken. Obviously labour questions may arise in this connection, but I should hope, seeing the serious position at the docks, that such difficulties would not prove insoluble.
§ Mr. HOUSTONTo which Government Department must employers apply for dock labourers?
§ Mr. HOPEIt is a matter for the Committee at the War Office, but obviously in the process of arriving at a decision other Departments, including the Board of Agriculture, would express their view.
§ Mr. P. MEEHANWill the right hon. Gentleman consider the advisability of a scheme of employing prisoners of war on arterial drainage in Ireland?
§ Mr. HOPEI cannot answer that question. These matters would have to be decided by the proper authority. My functions in this connection are purely grammaphonic.
§ 92. Mr. MALCOLMasked the Treasurer of the Household whether he is officially aware that about ninety British officers taken at Kut have been for many weeks put in close confinement at Yozgad, in Asia Minor; if so, what steps are being taken to provide them with food and warm clothing; and whether he has received any reliable information as to their treatment?
§ Mr. HOPEThe reply to the first part of the question is in the negative. The United States Ambassador has been requested to ask the United States Embassy at- Constantinople by telegram for information on the points referred to. I would add that we have asked the United States Embassy at Constantinople to endeavour to secure the removal of our prisoners of war at this camp to some more suitable place of internment.
§ 93 Mr. MALCOLMasked how many British prisoners of war are reported to have been sentenced to imprisonment of three years and upwards, with and without solitary confinement, penal servitude, and hard labour; and how many German prisoners in Great Britain have received similar sentences since the outbreak of war?
§ Mr. HOPEThe reply to the first part of the question is thirty-four, and to the second part is five.
§ Mr. MALCOLMShould it not at least be made known in this country that sentences of three, five, eleven, and twelve years' penal servitude or hard labour have been passed?
§ Mr. HOPEI do not think I can reply to that question. There is considerable difficulty in view of the difference between the German Code and ours, and an answer might be misleading
§ Mr. MALCOLMIs it not the fact that the War Office have received official records of every one of these sentences from the German Government?
§ Mr. MALCOLMThis day week.
§ 94. Mr. MALCOLMasked whether any reply has yet been received from the Austro-Hungarian Government to the Note sent by the British Government on 2nd September with regard to the exchange of 1178 prisoners; and, if not, what steps will His Majesty's Government take to expedite such a reply?
§ Mr. HOPEThe reply to the first part of the question is in the negative. The United States Ambassador has been requested to endeavour to obtain a reply from the Austro-Hungarian Government at an early date.