§ 5. Captain DOUGLAS HALLasked the Secretary of State for War if the War Office can, with due regard to efficiency, arrange with the Commander-in-Chief that any officers and men of the original Expeditionary Force not now under medical treatment who have been through the whole campaign without getting home except for short leave, and who may apply in the usual routine through their commanding officers for a short period of Home service this winter, may have their application favourably considered?
§ 17. Mr. THOMASasked whether any arrangements have yet been made to grant a furlough to every soldier who has served twelve months or more in the trenches without having had a leave of absence, and especially in the case of married men with children?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Lloyd George)I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave yesterday on this subject.
§ Captain HALLIs it not a fact that only consideration was promised by the War Office? Cannot such consideration be accelerated?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe promise went further than that. Something is being done.
§ Mr. BILLINGIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that in some cases officers who have been out since July, 1915, have had no leave whatever, while other officers have been back three or four times?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEYes. I have heard of a good many cases of that kind. In some of those cases I have made investigations, and I have found that there were special reasons why they should be retained in France.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEYes; I meant officers and men. It is quite true. I get letters constantly from people about cases of that kind. There is generally some reason why the officers and the men who have been in France for a long time are kept there and no leave given—special circumstances. After all, the question of 127 leave must be decided by the Commander-in-Chief; the War Office cannot take that out of his hands. I am perfectly certain that he will show every consideration for the men who have borne the heat and burden of the day. He has that well in mind. It is a very serious thing for the War Office to lay down any rule in the face of an urgent military situation, which the Commander-in-Chief must take into account.
§ Captain HALLHas the right hon. Gentleman not noticed in my question that I ask him to confer with the Commander-in-Chief? I do not suggest that the War Office should take the matter out of his hands.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEHe was over last week, and we had a talk upon this very subject.
Sir H. DALZIELIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the French Government arrange systematic leave, so that every soldier is on the same footing as his comrades? Why cannot we have the same?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI think my right hon. Friend will find that the Commander-in-Chief is doing his very best—[SIB H. DALZIEL:"I am sure of that!"]—to arrange that there shall be absolute equality of treatment, but complete equality is almost impossible because there are certain duties which naturally bear a larger share of the burden, and there are many considerations which must be present to the mind of everybody why it is very difficult to give complete equality of treatment in all cases.
§ Mr. BUTCHERWill every consideration be given—
§ Mr. SPEAKERAny further questions must be put on the Paper.