80. Colonel THORNEasked the First Lord of the Admiralty if he is aware that the expenses paid to police officers for arresting absentees from the Navy and conveying them to their depots or ships are still at the pre-war rate of 4s. per day; if he is aware that the expenses for the subsistence of the escort and prisoner are paid out of the pocket of the police officer escorting; if he is aware that a police officer in the Midlands arrested a deserter from the Navy on the 18th January, paying the railway expenses and subsistence in escorting the prisoner back to Chatham out of his own pocket, and that several applications have been made for the refund of these out-of-pocket expenses but at the present have not been received from the Admiralty, if he is aware that police officers are granted railway warrants and travel without advancing the railway fare, but the subsistence and any other incidental expenses are paid by the officer escorting; and if he will take action in the matter?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAMy hon. and gallant Friend has put down another similar question on this subject for written reply to-day. The matter is dealt with in my answer to that question, except as regards the particular case of 18th January referred to in this question. If my hon. and gallant Friend will furnish particulars of the case, showing the name of the police officer concerned, the force to 877 which he belongs, together with amount and date of the claim raised against the Admiralty, inquiries will be made into the matter and a communication sent to my hon. and gallant Friend.