HC Deb 15 June 1917 vol 94 cc1305-7
31. Mr. R. McNEILL

asked the Undersecretary of State for War whether he has made further inquiry into the case of Private A. C. Downes, for whose release from the Army request was made by the Board of Agriculture; whether he is aware that it is not correct to describe this man's father as the manager of his farm, seeing that he is the owner of it and that his son, A. C. Downes, is indispensable to the management of this farm of 1,140 acres; whether he is aware that Mr. Downes did apply for and obtained the services of soldiers and also of women to work on the land, but that this labour requires constant supervision and that for this purpose the services of A. C. Downes are indispensable; and whether he will now give immediate direction for the request of the Board of Agriculture to be complied with by the release of A. C. Downes from the Army for agriculture?

Mr. MACPHERSON

Further inquiries have been made with reference to the release asked for of Private A. C. Downes for the purpose of acting as bailiff on this farm under his father. These inquiries confirm the answer previously given, namely, that the management of the father is considered sufficient and that it is not necessary to release Private Downes to assist him. It is true that Mr. Downes applied for and obtained the services of soldiers last year to help him in the special seasons of hay time and harvest, but the present staff is considered sufficient for the ordinary work of the farm. In the event of any extra acreage being broken up as stated, military assistance could again no doubt be obtained by application being made to the agricultural company for this purpose. Private Downes is an "A" category soldier, and it is only in very special cases of urgency that the release of such soldiers is granted. This is not considered to be such a case, and the Army Council is not prepared to sanction the release asked for.

Mr. McNEILL

May I take it that in regard to the sufficiency of management of this farm the Army Council consider themselves a better judge than the Board of Agriculture and the Kent Agricultural Committee?

Mr. MACPHERSON

I am not quite sure how the Army Council came to this conclusion, but I know that it was in com- munication with the local authority there. I cannot add anything to the answer I have given.

Mr. McNEILL

I will refer to this matter on the Army Vote next week.

Back to