Sitting of 24 June 1915

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
Altrincham Gas Bill [Lords],
As amended, considered; to be read the third time.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 3) Bill,
Read the third time, and passed.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill,
As amended, considered; to be read the third time upon Monday next.
Irvine and District Water Board (Emergency Powers) Order Confirmation Bill [Lords],
Considered; read the third time, and passed, without Amendment.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9) Bill,
Reported, without Amendment [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill to be read the third time upon Monday next.
Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 8) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.
Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 1) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.
Land Drainage (Raveningham) Provisional Order Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Order confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.
Gas and Water Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 4) Bill,
Reported, with Amendments [Provisional Orders confirmed]; Report to lie upon the Table.
Bill, as amended, to be considered upon Monday next.
Eastern Valleys (Monmouthshire) Joint Sewerage Board Bill [Lords],
Wolverhampton Corporation Water Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Prescot Gas Bill [Lords],
Reported, with Amendments; Report to lie upon the Table.
MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS,—That they have agreed to,—
Customs (Exportation Restriction) Bill,
Consolidated Fund (No. 3) Bill, without Amendment.
Skegness Urban District Gas Bill, with Amendments.
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to dissolve the marriage of Hugh Eyre Barton Massy, of Stackallan, Navan, in the county of Meath, esquire, with Gladys Massy his now wife, and to enable him to marry again; and for other purposes."—[Massy's Divorce Bill [Lords.]
Massy's Divorce Bill [Lords],
Read the first time; to be read a second time.

FINANCE ACCOUNTS.
Copy presented of Finance Accounts of the United Kingdom for the year ended 31st March, 1915 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 273.]

NAVY (SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE, 1915–16).
Estimate presented of the Additional Number of Officers and Men required to be voted for the Navy for the year ended

1311
31st March, 1916 [by Command]; referred to the Committee of Supply, and to be printed. [No. 274.]

NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.
Copy presented of Provisional Regulations, dated 22nd June, 1915, made by the Insurance Commissioners, entitled the National Health Insurance (Durham and Darlington Insurance Committees) Regulations, 1915 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 275.]
Copy presented of Provisional Regulations, dated 22nd June, 1915, made by the Insurance Commissioners, entitled the National Health Insurance (Combination of Insurance Committees) Regulations, 1915 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 276.]

HARWICH HARBOUR.
Copy presented of Abstract of Accounts of the Receipts and Expenditure of the Harwich Harbour Conservancy Board from the time of their incorporation down to and inclusive of the 31st March, 1915 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
ELECTRIC LIGHTING ACTS, 1882 to 1909 (PROCEEDINGS).
Copy presented of Report by the Board of Trade respecting the Applications to and Proceedings of the Board of Trade under the Electric Lighting Acts, 1882 to 1909, during the past year [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 277.]

SHOPS ACT, 1912.
Copies presented of Orders made by the Councils of the undermentioned local authorities, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department:—
County of Cornwall (village of Troon);
County of Glamorgan (parishes of Pyle and Tythegston Higher);
Urban district of Tottenham (Tottenham (remainder) area)
[by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

EAST INDIA (LOANS RAISED IN INDIA).
Copy presented of Return of all Loans raised in India, chargeable on the
1312
Revenues of India, outstanding at the commencement of the half-year ended on the 31st March, 1915, etc. [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 279.]

CONSOLIDATION BILLS (JOINT COMMITTEE).
Report from the Joint Committee in respect of the Government of India Bill [Lords], pending in the Lords, brought up, and read.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.
  WAR.

    TRADING WITH THE ENEMY.
    Sir JOHN LONSDALEasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is now prepared to advise that all trading between British traders in the United Kingdom and China and German, Austro-Hungarian, or Turkish subjects, and firms commercially domiciled in China should be prohibited?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord Robert Cecil): His Majesty's Government have decided to prohibit trading with persons, of enemy nationality in China and certain other countries, and a Proclamation is about to be issued prohibiting such trade as from a date to be specified.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that certain eminent bankers are discounting bills from alien enemy firms in foreign Colonies?
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: I am not aware of that, but I will make inquiries.

    BRITISH PRISONERS IN GERMANY.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will publish all reports received as to the treatment of prisoners in the different places of internment in Germany?
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: We propose to lay on the Table of the House immediately

    1313
    a White Paper containing a further series of reports by members of the United States Embassy at Berlin on various detention camps in Germany in which British prisoners of war are interned. All reports received subsequent to the reports contained in the forthcoming White Paper will, if the House approves, be published immediately and as they are received, after the consent of the United States Embassy to their publication has been obtained.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: "If the House approves." May we take it that, if the House does not show any disapproval, that course will be adopted?
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: Yes, Sir; that is the intention. Of course, if disapproval is expressed, we shall reconsider the matter.

    FOOD PRODUCTION.
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will say to what extent the Irish Government is co-operating with the effort now being made in this country to increase food production, especially the rate at which the distribution and re-peopling of the evicted ranches have been carried on since the outbreak of the War, as compared with the progress in previous years; how many new parcels have been vested each month since the 1st August, 1914; how much land of this class the Estates Commissioners now hold ready for distribution in time for the autumn tilling; whether they have let such land for terms hampering their freedom of action in this respect; what practical steps they are taking to acquire all such land now for distribution before next autumn, as their contribution to the increase of food production; and, if their powers are inadequate, whether he will move for emergency legislation to enlarge them?
    The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell): A Committee has been formed, with the Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction in Ireland as chairman, to consider what steps can be taken to increase the production of food in that country and the question of making lands now used for grazing more productive must necessarily come before that Committee. The information asked for in the second, third and fourth parts of the hon. Member's question is not available, but I am assured that the Estates Commissioners
    1314
    are using all possible dispatch in the resale of lands purchased by them, and are making it a practice to recommend tillage when circumstances render that course desirable. I do not consider that there is any need to extend the powers of the Commissioners on the lines indicated by the hon. Member.

    DEFENCE OF THE REALM ACT.

      CONVICTION OF JOHN KINSELLA.
      Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will say by whose direction, in the case of John Kinsella, tried under the Defence of the Realm Act at Cahirciveen, Police Officer Hicks, prosecuting on behalf of the Crown, asked in succession three male witnesses for the defence how much German money he received to go there to give evidence for the accused, and on their denying that they had got any ordered them down with further insult, and also insulted the lady witness who had called the police in the same case; if this conduct was not ordered by Dublin Castle and is disapproved there, in what form the disapproval has been communicated to Mr. Hicks; whether the defendant was, nevertheless, sentenced to imprisonment with hard labour; whether this is one of cases of such sentences on uncorroborated evidence of armed servants of the Crown; whether it is by his direction that the Dublin daily Press is closed against reports of such cases; how many policemen are under the control of Mr. Hicks; what remedy, if any, a policeman has when reported or punished for disobedience by an officer of Mr. Hicks's rank; and what action has the Lord Chancellor of Ireland taken with reference to the magistrates who allowed such conduct in their Court?
      Mr. BIRRELL: No instructions were issued to the district inspector as to the line to be followed in his cross-examination of the witnesses for the defence in this case, and in framing the questions put to them he was guided by information in his possession. I understand that the district inspector told one of the witnesses to stand down, but I am not aware that he insulted them. The prisoner was sentenced to fourteen days' hard labour by the unanimous decision of the magistrates after hearing the evidence of three men in the Royal Navy. No directions were issued to the Dublin Press against reporting the case. The number of police in charge of the district inspector is thirty-six.

      1315
      He has no power to punish the men under his command, and any instance of misconduct would be reported and investigated under the orders of the Inspector-General. The Lord Chancellor has taken no action in the matter.
      Mr. GINNELL: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will produce the evidence upon which Mr. Hicks asked those questions?
      Mr. BIRRELL: No, Sir; the district inspector asked such questions as occurred to him in cross-examination. He received no instructions.
      Mr. GINNELL: Did they occur to him as pure inventions, and, if so, on what grounds did he base them?
      Mr. BIRRELL: The hon. Member must consider the practice of an advocate. He asked such questions in cross-examination as he thought best in the interests of justice.

    POLITICAL PRISONERS (IRELAND).
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland if he will give the House the latest account of the number, health, and present treatment of the political prisoners now in Irish prisons and especially of Mr. Sean MacDermott?
    Mr. BIRRELL: I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member of the 17th instant on the subject of the health and treatment of prisoners then in custody on conviction of offences under the Defence of the Realm Acts. The prisoner referred to in the question has received certain privileges on medical grounds. A Return of the numbers actually in prison at a given date can only be given after reference to all the local prisons, for which there has not been time since the hon. Member put down his question.

    ADVANCES TO FARMERS (IRELAND).
    Mr. HORNERasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, having regard to the desirability of increasing the agricultural output of Ireland, especially during the War, advances by the Department of Agriculture in Ireland to farmers for the purchase of fanning implements can be continued as formerly or made under some other regulations?
    Mr. BIRRELL: Owing, among other causes, to the effect of the War on the Department's finances, they have been obliged temporarily to suspend their scheme of loans for the purchase of agricultural implements. So far, however, as the funds at their disposal permit the Department continue to make advances to small holders in the poorer districts of the country who would otherwise be unable to procure implements necessary for the cultivation of their holdings. Unless additional funds are provided specially for the purpose, the Department regret that it will not be possible to extend their present operations.
    Mr. HORNER: Out of what fund did the Agricultural Department formerly meet these grants to farmers, and is it out of that fund that the limited grants will be made?
    Mr. T. W. RUSSELL (Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture, Ireland): We set aside £80,000, as an endowment fund, for the Department.

    RECRUITING.
    Mr. KELLAWAYasked the Lord Advocate if he will state whether any persons have been prosecuted in Scotland for making statements calculated to prejudice recruiting; and, if so, how many?
    The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Munro): One such prosecution has taken place in Scotland in the ordinary Criminal Courts. I cannot, however, say whether any, and, if so, how many such prosecutions may have been instituted by the naval and military authorities.
    Mr. KELLAWAYasked the Attorney-General if he would state how many persons in England and Wales have been prosecuted for making statements calculated to prejudice recruiting?
    The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir F. E. Smith): I have been asked to answer this question on behalf of my right hon. Friend. Since the Attorney-General answered a question on Thursday last on this subject he has tried to obtain the information which the hon. Member desires, but he is informed that to obtain the information required would involve extended inquiry throughout England, amongst the various police and naval and military authorities.
    Mr. KELLAWAYasked the Attorney-General whether he is aware that the group of newspapers controlled by Lord Northcliffe have endeavoured to prejudice recruiting by refusing to publish Lord Kitchener's appeal for 300,000 more men, and that they have described this appeal as a disgraceful one which Lord Kitchener must withdraw; and whether it is proposed to take any proceedings against these papers?
    Sir F. E. SMITH: The hon. Member has sent the Attorney-General a copy of an article which appeared in the "Evening News" of the 20th May, and which criticises the appeal made by Lord Kitchener to recruits, mainly on the ground that the military age is raised from thirty-eight to forty years, while a number of younger men have abstained from enlisting. It is not proposed by the Attorney-General to take any proceedings in reference to the article.
    Mr. KELLAWAY: Does not the hon. and learned Gentleman consider that the language quoted in the question must be prejudicial to recruiting?
    Sir F. E. SMITH: I think it must be assumed that my right hon. Friend, on behalf of whom I am answering this question, has considered that.
    Mr. KELLAWAY: I beg to give notice that I will raise this question on the first opportunity.
    Sir A. MARKHAM: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, before making any alteration in the answer he has given, that many people in this country, including Members of Parliament, think it is disgraceful to appeal to married men of forty years of age to enlist, when young men have not enlisted and are doing nothing?
    Sir LEO CHIOZZA MONEYasked the Prime Minister if, in view of the interest in our methods of recruiting, he will grant a day for the discussion of the subject by the House of Commons?
    The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): I cannot promise any special opportunity for this discussion.

    GLASGOW OBSERVATORY.
    Sir E. CORNWALLasked the Secretary for Scotland whether Professor
    1318
    Becker has control of the Glasgow Observatory; and whether he has any information as to the nationality of this gentleman?
    The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. McKinnon Wood): Dr. Becker, into whose case full inquiry was made last autumn, has been Professor of Astronomy at Glasgow since 1893, and in that capacity has charge of the university observatory. He is of German origin, but was naturalised in 1892.

    ALIEN ENEMIES.
    Mr. WATTasked the Secretary for Scotland how often the Advisory Committee for Scotland dealing with the internment and repatriation of alien enemies has sat, and with how many cases it has dealt; and how do these figures compare with the similar Committee's work dealing with England and Wales?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: Comparisons would be misleading, as the circumstances are different. Much preparatory work has been done. I am informed that the Committee sits in Edinburgh to-day.
    Mr. WATT: Will the right hon. Gentleman explain why Scotland is far behind in this matter, seeing that the English Committee have sat fifteen times and have dealt with 2,500 cases?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: Scotland is not at all behind in the matter, and in fact is in advance.
    Mr. HOGGE: Are naturalised British subjects in Scotland who have been removed from military areas without any reason being given to them, entitled to appeal to this Court?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I do not think there is any appeal when the naval and military authorities consider that anyone, whether alien or British subject, should be removed from a district.

    MUNITIONS.

      SPELTER SUPPLIES.
      Sir E. CORNWALLasked the Minister of Munitions whether he is taking any steps to secure all possible supplies of spelter, whether for immediate delivery or for delivery over the first six months of 1916?
      The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MUNITIONS DEPARTMENT (Dr. Addison): Steps have already been taken in the direction indicated by my hon. Friend.
      Sir E. CORNWALL: Will the hon. Gentleman answer the last part of the question?
      Dr. ADDISON: I do not think that under the present circumstances I can usefully add anything to my reply.
      Sir E. CORNWALLasked the Minister of Munitions whether he is aware that the Emu Spelter works, near Neath, are now under rental to the English Crown Spelter Company, who are keeping them idle; whether he has any information as to this company's refusal to let the works to a practical firm who would make full use of the same; whether there is any loss of spelter caused thereby; and, if so, whether such loss is warranted when the country is so much in need of this metal?
      Dr. ADDISON: My right hon. Friend will have inquiry made and will communicate with my hon. Friend.
      Mr. WATT: Will the hon. Gentleman kindly expand his diaphragm and speak a little louder?

      MANUFACTURE IN IRELAND.
      Mr. GINNELLasked the Minister of Munitions if any increase has been made in the manufacture of munitions in Ireland in consequence of the War; and will he say where, and the extent of the increase as measured by the increase of the number of persons employed and the amount of money spent there?
      Dr. ADDISON: I observe that the hon. Member has put down similar questions to the Admiralty and the War Office and I have no information on the subject apart from that in possession of those Departments.
      Mr. GINNELL: May I ask whether any increase at all has been made in Ireland?
      Dr. ADDISON: We have made arrangements for a committee in Belfast, but the time has been short to get the work into operation.

      DEPARTMENTAL STAFF.
      Mr. GOLDSTONEasked the Minister of Munitions whether he is experiencing any difficulty in obtaining by way of Loan from other Government Departments the necessary clerks to
      1320
      complete his staff; and, if so, whether he will invite the heads of those Departments whose work has been considerably curtailed by reason of the War to release such members of their staff as may be required to carry on effectively the work of the new Department?
      Dr. ADDISON: No difficulty has yet arisen in obtaining the staff required for the Ministry, and my right hon. Friend is confident that the heads of other Departments will continue to assist him, as far as they possibly can, by the temporary loan of members of their staff. I may take this opportunity of stating that no new permanent posts are being created for the purposes of the Ministry, and that any established officers transferred to us temporarily from other Departments come to us at their existing rates of pay, without promotion or increase of salary.

    WEEK-END FARES.
    Mr. HOGGEasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has received representations from the churches in Scotland with reference to the hardship imposed upon churches and probationers by the withdrawal of week-end fares; and whether he is prepared to allow the old charges to stand?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Pretyman): I have received the representations referred to, but I am afraid that I cannot hold out any hope of the restoration at present of the facilities to which my hon. Friend alludes.
    Mr. HOGGE: Is my hon. Friend aware that this is a perfectly usual practice in Scotland, and these congregations are scattered all over Scotland, and are depleted on account of the number of men who have joined the Army, including ministers, and this is the only means by which they can receive spiritual service on Sunday, and under those circumstances will he make a point to consider the question?
    Mr. PRETYMAN: The matter has been fully considered and with very great sympathy, but there are so many similar requests also deserving great sympathy that it would be impossible to grant this.
    Mr. SNOWDEN: Seeing that there are so many cases where hardship is being

    1321
    inflicted by the withdrawal of week-end facilities, would not the best way be to restore the lot?
    Mr. PRETYMAN: From that point of view yes, but the first consideration now is the national necessity for the use of the railways.
    Mr. HOGGE: Is my hon. Friend aware that the facilities to commercial travellers are continued because theirs is a regular profession, and this is the same, only it applies to the Sunday observances in Scotland, and may I ask the hon. Gentleman if it is not in the same class with week-end fares for special camps or anything of that sort?
    Mr. SPEAKER: I think that is all argumentative, and all round the same point.
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the President of the Board of Trade if he will approach the railway companies with a suggestion that the widows and children of fallen soldiers should be given free tickets or very cheap tickets to enable them to obtain a seaside or country holiday, which they very much need after the awful strain and suspense they have endured?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster): I will bring to the notice of the railway companies my hon. Friend's suggestion, but while I sympathise with his object I am afraid that it will not be found to be practicable.

    ARMY AND NAVY CONTRACTS (IRELAND).
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Secretary to the Admiralty if he can give any measure of the increased contracts placed in Ireland by the Admiralty since the War began, either by the extent of the increase, the additional hands employed, or the increased amount of money spent there?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): I do not doubt that there has been a considerable increase, but to give the exact figures asked for by my hon. Friend would involve an amount of labour which I fear could scarcely be undertaken at the present time. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will be interested to read an answer I gave the hon. Member for St. Stephen's Green on 4th May, a copy of which I am sending him.
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he can give any measure of the increased Army contracts placed in Ireland since the War began, either by the extent of the increase, the additional hands employed, or the increased amount of money spent there?
    Mr. FORSTER: The total value of contracts recorded in the War Office as having been placed with Irish firms since the War began is about £2,110,000. This figure does not include the value of contracts placed locally, except for building works. On the basis of a calculation made in 1912, the annual value of the corresponding contracts placed with Irish firms before the War is estimated at about £134,000. There has, of course, been a very large increase in the value of the contracts placed locally for consumable supplies, etc., but I have no figures as to these. I regret that I have no information as to the additional number of hands employed in Ireland in connection with Army contracts since the War began.

    CUSTODIS, LIMITED.
    Sir ARTHUR MARKHAMasked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether since the War, Custodis, Limited, have banded a chimney shaft at the Royal Dockyard, Portsmouth; whether this German company were also given orders to repair No. 1 and No. 3 smitheries chimney shafts at the same dockyard; whether this work was given to this firm on day-work rates, and was discontinued owing to this firm sending in false time sheets in connection with the work; whether the Admiralty were aware at the time they gave the order to Custodis, Limited, that this was a German company, and managed by German alien enemies living in London; and whether he will now strike this firm, which falsely purported to be a British firm, off the list of Government contractors?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: The works referred to were carried out by the Alphons Custodis Chimney Construction Company, Limited—not Custodis, Limited—under two small lump sum local contracts, amounting together to less than £60. As regards the charge of presenting false time sheets, it appears that on a small item done on day-work rates the time claimed did not agree with the yard record, and on its being pointed out to the firm they accepted the calculation made by the yard officer.

    1323
    These two small contracts were placed locally under a rule which devolves upon the responsible local works officer at the large yards the power to place a contract on his own authority up to the value of £500. The first of the two contracts, amounting to £42 10s., had been placed before the outbreak of hostilities; the second, for £13 7s. 6d., was placed in September. They have received no orders locally since. The firm were known to the Admiralty as a German-American firm, who manufactured in this country the special materials used in their work They had some years ago executed a piece of work under a contract placed from the central office in this locality and also at Portland; but they had received no contract made centrally either since the outbreak of hostilities or for some considerable period before that time. It is not proposed that this firm should receive further contracts from the Admiralty, and instructions have been issued to local officers of works that no local contracts must be placed with them.

    OLD AGE PENSIONS (DEDUCTIONS).
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the President of the Local Government Board if he is aware that old age pensioners are being informed that the acceptance of additional assistance during the War will proportionately reduce their old age pensions; that this applies to soldiers' separation allowances and amounts allocated by soldiers from their wages to their aged parents, and any special allowance made in war bonuses, or from war relief funds to old age pensioners; and will he, in view of the reduced purchasing power of the old age pension in recent years, and especially during the War, give instructions that such small extras as those mentioned shall be ignored in estimating the amount of the pension?
    The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. McKenna): My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. It is not the practice to issue instructions or circulars to old age pensioners, and no such instructions as are indicated in the question have been issued to the pension officers. With regard to the measures taken or to be taken in these cases, I cannot usefully add anything to the reply given on Tuesday last, by my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to the hon. and learned
    1324
    Member for York, except that separation allowances are included in the classes of temporary increases of means to which he then referred.
    Mr. BUTCHER: Have instructions been given that the separation allowance is to be deducted? If so, when were they given?
    Mr. McKENNA: No such instructions have been given to the pension officers.
    Mr. RAFFAN: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether these facts are communicated to the pensions committee. Will he give instructions that the separation allowance is not to be deducted?
    Mr. McKENNA: I do not think it is necessary as no deduction has been made on account of it.
    Mr. BUTCHER: Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to the fact that, owing to some temporary voluntary allowance having been made to these pensioners in certain cases, the amount of their old age pensions has been diminished? Will he issue instructions to the pension officers to prevent such an abuse?
    Mr. McKENNA: I think, if the hon. Gentleman will look at the answer given by my right hon. Friend on Tuesday last, he will see all the points which he is now raising fully answered.

    WAR LOAN.

      STOCK EXCHANGE AND BANKS.
      Mr. TOUCHEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that dissatisfaction prevails amongst members of the Stock Exchange in consequence of the preferential treatment of banks in connection with the issue of the prospectus of the present and the previous War Loan; that the bankers had prospectuses before the brokers; that after a certain hour on the evening of 21st June brokers were told that no more prospectuses were to be issued that night except to bankers, and that the market for the previous War Loan was in some measure prejudiced because a similar course was adopted and brokers were not encouraged and assisted in looking after the subscriptions of their clients; and will he give an assurance that, in any future Government issues, the interests of the Stock Exchange will be duly considered?
      Mr. McKENNA: The answer to all parts of the question except the last is in the

      1325
      negative. I have made inquiries and find that there is no foundation for any of the suggestions contained in the question. As regards the last part, I can give the House an assurance that the interests of the Stock Exchange will in future, as heretofore, be duly considered, together with those of all other classes of the community.

      POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANK DEPOSITS.
      Mr. GODFREY COLLINSasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the new 4½ per cent. War Loan, he intends to raise the rate of interest allowed to depositors in the Post Office Savings Bank?
      Mr. WALTER REA (Lord of the Treasury): The answer is in the negative.

      BANK OF ENGLAND ADVANCES.
      Sir CHARLES HENRY: I beg to ask the following question, of which I have given private notice: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any arrangements have been agreed to with the Bank of England to make advances for the full value of the 4½ per cent. War Loan: and whether the Bank of England will continue to make advances on the 3½ per cent. War Loan on the terms set forward in the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he gave the House of Commons particulars of this Loan?
      Mr. WALTER REA: The arrangements made for advances by the Bank of England upon the 3½ per cent. War Loan will continue to hold good in respect of any portion of that Loan which is not converted into the new 4½ per cent. Loan. No arrangements will be made for similar advances upon the new 4½ per cent. Loan Stock or Bonds, whether they represent new money or converted 3½ per cent. War Loan.

    POST OFFICE SAVINGS BANK (MINORS' DEPOSITS).
    Mr. KINGasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that a number of persons have started Post Office Savings Bank deposits in the names of children under circumstances precluding any withdrawal for a term of years; and whether he has considered any proposals by which this form of saving and investment for future years may be converted into War Loan Stock?
    Mr. McKENNA: If applications are made for withdrawal with a view to investment in War Loan, arrangements will be made to meet the applicants' wishes.

    FIXING RENTS.
    Mr. HOHLERasked the President of the Local Government Board whether, having regard to the fact that rents have been and are being raised upon the men in His. Majesty's Forces, both at sea and upon land, their wives and widows, he will at once introduce a Bill to fix these rents at the amount payable at the outbreak of the War and, in cases in which the rent was inclusive of rates, to prevent the burden of the rates being cast upon these tenants, and to prevent any steps being taken to determine such tenancies so long as the original rent is paid until after the determination of the War, and further to provide for the repayment to such tenants of any increase of rent or any rates the burden of which has been cast upon them since the outbreak of the War?
    The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Long): Legislation on the lines suggested by my hon. Friend would, I am afraid, prove to be of a controversial character, and I cannot promise to introduce a Bill on the subject.
    Mr. HOHLER: Is it suggested that it would be controversial to raise this question with regard to our soldiers and sailors serving at the front?
    Mr. LONG: I cannot imagine a more controversial question than that of dealing by legislation with either rent or rates. It would be obviously impossible to confine it to the limited class referred to.
    Mr. PRINGLE: If the Government are fixing maximum prices for labour, can they not fix maximum rents?
    Mr. OUTHWAITE: Is it not a fact that in Germany no rent is charged to soldiers or sailors?
    Mr. LONG: I cannot say.

    GAMBLING CLUBS (LONDON).
    Mr. FELLasked the Home Secretary if his attention has been called to the prosecutions of proprietors of private gambling clubs in London and to the recent loss by a Canadian officer of £1,200

    1327
    at one of them, and to the fines which are imposed on the proprietors; and if he will consider the desirability of introducing legislation to inflict imprisonment without the option of a fine, at least in such prosecutions as arise during the War?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Brace): Imprisonment without the option of a fine may be imposed upon proprietors of gaming houses under the Gaming Act of 1845 and the Gaming House Act, 1854. In a recent case a sentence of four months' imprisonment without option of fine was passed by the London Court of Quarter Sessions and confirmed by the Court of Criminal Appeal. Further legislation does not therefore appear to be necessary. The incident quoted, in which a Canadian was concerned, occurred in 1911.
    Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE: Is it not the case that the hon. Gentleman has referred to the only case that has occurred where a man was committed without the option of a fine?
    Mr. BRACE: That I cannot say.
    Mr. FELL: Is the hon. Gentleman certain that this case arose in 1911? I am instructed that it occurred last week. May I ask, further, whether anything can be done to inflict imprisonment in connection with these scandalous clubs in the West End of London?
    Mr. BRACE: These are the facts as advised; but if the hon. Gentleman will let us know of any case, we shall be exceedingly obliged to him.

    HAY HARVEST (EMPLOYMENT OF SOLDIERS).
    Mr. SANDERSONasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether he is aware that the military authorities are refusing to give furlough to soldiers of the New Armies and of the Territorial Force for work in the hay harvest on the ground that such soldiers are armed or can be armed; and whether, in view of the shortage of agricultural labour and the desirability of obtaining for the hay harvest the services of soldiers who are experienced in agricultural work, he will take steps to obtain the removal of the above-mentioned restriction?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Tennant): All soldiers who are unarmed and who are accustomed to farm work will be allowed to go and help in the hay harvest.
    Mr. SANDERSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the military authorities have made a rule that soldiers who are now armed are not allowed to go on furlough to help the farmers? Is he also aware that in many instances these are the very men who are wanted by the farmers?
    Mr. TENNANT: That is entirely in accordance with the answer I have just given to the hon. Member.
    Mr. MOUNT: To whom should these applications be made?
    Mr. TENNANT: To the military authorities of the district.

    ULSTER DIVISION.
    Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been drawn to a speech made by Major-General Powell, commanding the Ulster Division in Belfast, on 8th June, to the effect that the Ulster Division was still short by 12,480 men to complete the First Division; and whether this statement was authorised?
    Mr. TENNANT: My attention had not been drawn to this speech, and I have been unable to obtain a copy of it, but if it was made and if it contained the statement of shortage alleged, it was inaccurate, as the Ulster Division is considerably over strength.
    Sir A. MARKHAM: May I send my right hon. Friend a copy of the "Ulster Guardian," of the 12th June, in which General Powell's speech is reported. Is he aware that in that speech General Powell is reported to have stated that the War Office had ordered him to raise three reserve battalions, and that the total strength of the Ulster Division at the present time is 17,100 men?
    Mr. TENNANT: I shall be happy to receive the newspaper to which my hon. Friend refers. If the commander in question made the statement, no doubt it is correct; but that does not show that the Ulster Division is not up to strength.
    Sir J. LONSDALE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that already 535

    1329
    officers and 17,200 men, besides the necessary number of Engineers and Artillery, have enlisted in the Ulster Division; that the Division is now fully made up and ready for the front, and that the numbers referred to in the question of the hon. Gentleman only refer to the reserves?
    Mr. TENNANT: I think all that has been made very plain by the question and answer which has just been given.
    Mr. PRINGLE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many these people promised to raise?
    Mr. MacVEAGH: Two hundred and thirty thousand.
    Mr. TENNANT: I do not know that there was any promise in that respect.
    Mr. WATT: Can my right hon. Friend say how many of these have gone to the front? [An HON. MEMBER: "None."]
    Mr. TENNANT: Yes, Sir, I can say, and I will tell my hon. Friend—in confidence!

    HOUSE OF COMMONS (PAYMENT OF MEMBERS).
    Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Prime Minister when he will give an opportunity to the House to express an opinion on the question whether payment of Members should be continued?
    The PRIME MINISTER: I am not aware that there is any general desire for this discussion.
    Sir A. MARKHAM: Did not the Prime Minister, in reply to a question that I addressed to him on Tuesday, say that the House would have an opportunity of expressing an opinion on the matter? I now ask him, in reply to this further question, to give me an intimation as to when the House will have that opportunity?
    The PRIME MINISTER: No, Sir, I must be guided by the general sense of the House.

    NATIONAL RESOURCES (REGISTER).
    Sir HENRY CRAIKasked the Prime Minister if he can now announce a date when the policy of the Government
    1330
    with regard to the registration and subsequent organisation of the national resources will be made?
    The PRIME MINISTER: I hope that a Bill will be introduced by the President of the Local Government Board, under the ten minutes' rule, in the course of next week.
    Sir H. CRAIK: To save valuable time could not the machinery in possession of the Registrar-General be used?
    The PRIME MINISTER: All these things are being carefully considered.

    RED CROSS SOCIETY (HEATH LODGE, ENGLEFIELD).
    Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether it is the intention of the War Office, through, the Red Cross Society, to erect a hospital of 120 beds in a field near Englefield Green, Surrey, on Crown property; whether Baron Bruno von Schroeder,. Baron von Laurentz, Messrs. Gunthers, Donners, Schwartz, Nelke, and Baumanns are the promoters of this scheme; if so,, will he say why Heath Lodge, Englefield, a new house recently completed, belonging to Baron von Schroeder, which has accommodation for at least 120 beds, and is equipped with ten bathrooms, should not be used for this purpose, seeing that the baron is living at a large house close by; and whether, seeing that it was only at the request of the Governor of the Bank of England that Baron von Schroeder, a then German alien enemy, was naturalised after the War for financial reasons, he will now ask Baron von Schroeder, seeing that he has not been interned, to hand this new house over to the Government for a hospital?
    Mr. TENNANT: Her Royal Highness Princess Christian is organising a hospital of 120 beds near Englefield Green. We have no knowledge of the other circumstances mentioned in the question.
    Sir A. MARKHAM: Does not my right hon. Friend think that as this larger house of an alien, who was unnaturalised at the time of the War, is available, the country might be saved this money? Cannot we first use this German Jew's money, instead of finding British capital for this hospital?
    Mr. TENNANT: I do not think that is a proper description of the gentleman in question, who belongs to a quite different faith. I think my hon. Friend should address his question to Her Royal Highness the Princess Christian; she is organising the hospital.
    Sir A. MARKHAM: Is it not a fact that Her Royal Highness has a son fighting with the Germans?

    TREATMENT OF BRITISH AND GERMAN WOUNDED.
    Mr. WATTasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that, on the hospital ship "Oxfordshire," from Havre to Southampton, on 19th March, sixty British soldiers, the majority of them from the Black Watch and 6th Gordon Regiments, were taken out of their cots to make room for sixty Germans; that one of the British soldiers so removed subsequently died; and that, in addition, the Germans were supplied with fresh eggs and bread, while the British wounded soldiers had only biscuits; and if in the future he will see that the British soldier when wounded is not subjected to any worse treament than wounded German prisoners?
    Mr. TENNANT: I am making inquiries. Perhaps my hon. Friend would put the question down again in about a week's time.

    FUEL SUPPLIES.
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Prime Minister, in view of the dearth and increased cost of fuel for domestic, business, and public uses, and also of charcoal, why an inquiry has been instituted into the supply of coal only, instead of the supply of fuel; whether he is aware of the extent and present nominal price of the latent sources of efficient fuel for all purposes, and of first-class charcoal, in the peat bogs of the United Kingdom; whether there is any other than the coal interest opposed to the development of these natural resources; and whether he will institute an immediate inquiry into the utilisation of peat by a Committee not connected with coal-owning or with the coal trade?
    Mr. PRETYMAN: The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question. I have no reason to think that the development
    1332
    of the manufacture and distribution of peat fuel has been in any degree impeded by the action of coal owners. I doubt whether any steps that could be taken would be likely to result in an appreciable addition to our fuel supplies from this source in the near future, and as at present advised I see little advantage in appointing a Committee to consider the problem.

    GERMAN ATTACKS ON UNFORTIFIED TOWNS.
    Mr. KELLAWAYasked the Prime Minister how many open towns and unfortified places in the United Kingdom have been attacked by Germany, and how many civilians have been killed and wounded, respectively, as a result of these operations?
    Mr. BRACE: This question has been referred to the Home Office. The reply made on 22nd February last to a question by the hon. Member gave the number of civilians killed and injured in the bombardment of the Hartlepools, Scarborough, and Whitby by hostile warships. The figures were 127 killed and 567 injured.
    There have been altogether fourteen attacks by hostile aircraft, extending over wide areas and chiefly directed against undefended towns, villages, and country districts. The total casualties in these raids are:—

    Killed, 56, of whom 24 were men (all of them civilians), 21 women, and 11 children.

    Wounded (so far as can be ascertained), 138, of whom 86 were men, 35 women, and 17 children.

    MESSRS. JACKS AND COMPANY.

      STATEMENT BY MR. BONAR LAW.
      Mr. GINNELLasked the Prime Minister whether any Member of His Majesty's Government holds, or held until recently, a financial interest in the firm of Jacks and Company, recently convicted of trading with the enemy?
      The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Bonar Law): As this question refers to me, perhaps I may be permitted to answer it myself. I was for many years a member of the firm referred to in the question, and I was still a

      1333
      partner in it when I entered the House of Commons in 1900. For some months afterwards I continued my connection with it, but I came to the conclusion that I had to choose between business and politics, and at the end of the year 1901 I gave up my business, and I gave it up absolutely. Since then—that is for more than thirteen years—I have had no control over the business. I have had no knowledge of the way in which it was conducted, and, although I have from time to time put money on deposit with them at a fixed rate of interest, I have had no share, direct or indirect, in the profits or losses of the firm.
      Sir A. MARKHAM: May I ask whether an inquiry will be held into the mind of the hon. Member opposite who asks this kind of question in the House?

    MEDICAL AND SURGICAL TREATMENT OF WOUNDED.
    Mr. LYNCHasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in order to deal with wounds at the front in cases where immediate operation is indicated, motor theatres are in use; if not, whether he can state any objections that have arisen as to their employment; and whether he will cause to be submitted to study, with a view to adoption, the best features of the Belgian system, which has given excellent results?
    Mr. TENNANT: Motor operating theatres are not in use; they are not considered necessary, as facilities for carrying out operations are available as near the front as is deemed advisable. The Belgian practice in this matter has been duly considered.
    Mr. LYNCHasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether his attention has been directed to a discussion in the French Academy of Medicine on the treatment of wounds, in regard to which sharp difference of opinion was shown as to the value of antiseptics in infected wounds; and whether he can state what is the practice in the British Medical Service, both as to infected wounds and uninfected wounds?
    Mr. TENNANT: The discussion in the French Academy of Medicine on the treatment of wounds has been considered by our consulting surgeons in France, and a report on the result of their experience in the treatment of both infected and non-infected
    1334
    wounds is being prepared for circulation to all military hospitals. The treatment of each wound must depend on many circumstances, but the practice in the British Medical Service is that known as the antiseptic method.
    Mr. LYNCHasked whether the mode of treating wounded which is known as the Watson-Cheyne treatment, by means of cresol paste, has given satisfactory results; and, if not, whether its use has been discontinued in the Army service?
    Mr. TENNANT: The results obtained by the use of cresol paste in the treatment of wounds have not been satisfactory, and its use has been discontinued.
    Mr. LYNCHasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he can state the rate of mortality due to abdominal wounds at the Western front; and also the rate in cases of compound fractures in which it has been found necessary to sacrifice the limb?
    Mr. TENNANT: No, Sir, I am afraid that information is, not available.

    SPECIAL RESERVE (ACTIVE SERVICE PROMOTION).
    Mr. LYNCHasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether any case has arisen in which, by reason of all the senior officers having been killed, a battalion has been commanded by a subaltern or temporary captain; and whether, in the case when he has distinguished himself in such command, no promotion has been given to him on account of his having been transferred from a Special Reserve unit of which the senior officers had all remained in England?
    Mr. TENNANT: It is possible that for short and quite temporary periods battalions at the front have been commanded by subalterns in some instances. This does not in itself entitle an officer to promotion. Special Reserve officers serving in Regular battalions receive promotion, as I have before explained, either through the occurrence of vacancies in their Special Reserve battalions or through their selection for temporary rank in the Regular battalion, in accordance with the new rules.
    Mr. LYNCH: Will the right hon. Gentleman carefully consider the whole system, with a view to making changes in it?
    Mr. TENNANT: I have already explained that changes have been made, and that the present system is not only a reasonable, but a proper one.
    Mr. LYNCHasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that senior officers of Special Reserve units are kept in England while the subalterns are sent to the front, the promotion of deserving officers who have distinguished themselves at the front is blocked; and whether he proposes to take steps to remedy this state of affairs?
    Mr. TENNANT: I do not think there has been a blocking of promotion owing to the causes suggested. For one thing the establishments of the Special Reserve Battalions since the outbreak of war have been increased, and this has accelerated promotion. Captains also go from Special Reserve Battalions to the Expeditionary Force and are eligible for temporary promotion in the battalion they join, in accordance with the new rules. Those who from their position are able to survey the whole field of promotion, assure me that Special Reserve officers have not anything to complain of at present as regards the rate of promotion.

    LIEUTENANT WARNEFORD'S DEATH.
    Mr. HOHLERasked the Prime Minister whether he will take steps to confer on the mother of the late Lieutenant Warneford, R.N., V.C., a substantial annuity as a mark of the nation's appreciation of his distinguished career and gallant conduct?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: The Regulations provide for the award of pensions to the mothers of naval officers who are killed on duty, but the grant of any such pension is subject to the condition that pensions may be awarded only to mothers who are widows in distressed circumstances. In view of the wording and intention of the Regulations, I do not think that any award could be made in this case.
    I take this opportunity, on behalf of the Board of Admiralty, of expressing our sense of the great loss which the Service has sustained through the death of this heroic young officer, and of our deep sympathy with his relatives.

    GOVERNMENT PROPERTY (THEFTS AND MISAPPROPRIATIONS).
    Mr. SAMUEL ROBERTSasked whether thefts and misappropriations of Government property have been discovered in some commands recently, costing the public many thousands of pounds; and, if so, what steps have been taken to preclude the possibility of a recurrence of such thefts and misappropriations and to protect the public in future?
    Mr. FORSTER: I do not know what particular thefts and misappropriations my hon. Friend may have in mind. The steps taken most clearly depend on the circumstances of each case; but he may rest assured that all possible steps are taken to protect the public whenever the necessity is disclosed.
    Mr. ROBERTS: Has there not been a recent inquiry into this matter by a Board of Officers appointed by the War office: what is the result?
    Mr. FORSTER: There has been an inquiry into every case where there was a suggestion of misappropriation or theft.
    Mr. ROBERTS: Has not there been an inquiry just recently?
    Mr. FORSTER: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will give me notice of that question.

    ROYAL ARMY MEDICAL CORPS (PAY OF LIEUTENANTS).
    Mr. HORNERasked what is the total pay, with allowances, of a man in the Royal Army Medical Corps holding the temporary rank of lieutenant in the Regular Army and the pay, with allowances, of a man holding a lieutenant's rank in the Royal Army Medical Corps Special Reserve; and what are the reasons for the difference in pay?
    Mr. FORSTER: The civil surgeon serving under a special contract, with the rank of lieutenant, receives 24s. a day, inclusive of all cash allowances. The Special Reserve officer of lieutenant's rank receives pay and allowances of 17s. at home and 20s. in the field. The latter is serving on an engagement made in advance, at the pay of the Regular officer,

    1337
    as in all other branches of the Special Reserve. The former is engaged on an emergency contract.

    RETIRED ARMY OFFICERS.
    Mr. HORNERasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if he is aware that paragraph 675, Allowance Regulations for the Army, provides that in the event of a retired Army officer being recalled to the Regular Forces during a time of national emergency a sum of £100 is granted him in aid of his outfit; that this grant was announced by the Army Council in the various command orders at the time of mobilisation in August last; that this grant has been refused to certain retired medical officers, by order issued some three weeks after mobilisation, when these officers had incurred the expenditure consequent on their rejoining the Regular Forces, on the ground that at the time of mobilisation they were employed under the War Department; that, prior to mobilisation, these retired medical officers were performing for the small remuneration of £150 per annum duties which, if performed by an officer of the same rank on the active service, would cost the State three or four times the amount; that up to recently no obligation as to the provision or maintenance of uniform was imposed on these officers; that the position and remuneration attached thereto was accepted by them on the distinct understanding that no uniform was required; and that when called on by the War Office letter from the Director-General, Army Medical Service, issued in May, 1914, to provide themselves with uniform no allowance whatever was made to them for this expenditure; and will he have instructions issued for the payment of the £100 outfit allowance to these officers?
    Mr. FORSTER: If the hon. Member will read again the paragraph of Allowance Regulations which he quotes, he will see that it expressly states that it does not apply to officers who are—as these officers were—upon the effective establishment of the Army at the time of re-employment. The letter of May, 1914, warned the officers concerned that under the Regulations then existing they were required to maintain uniform. I can find no record of any distinct understanding that no uniform was required to be maintained by these officers, such as is suggested in the question; but if the hon. Member can produce to me evidence of such an understanding I shall be happy to consider it.

    ROSS RIFLE.
    Sir A. MARKHAMasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether he has any information that the Ross rifle supplied to the Canadian troops is unsatisfactory; and, if so, will he say what steps he proposes taking?
    Mr. TENNANT: Certain difficulties have arisen in the use of this rifle; the matter is being investigated, and meanwhile some men of the division have been armed with Lee-Enfield rifles.

    AMERICAN DU PONT POWDER TRUST.
    Mr. SNOWDENasked if the Government have any contracts with the American Du Pont Powder Trust; if so, have these contracts been made with the knowledge that this company have close business arrangements with the German United Rheinisch Westphalian Gunpowder Mills, under which the Du Pont Company undertake to inform the German company of the full particulars of any contract accepted by the Du Pont Company, giving in detail quantity, price, time of delivery, and all the requirements the powder has to fulfil; and, if the Government have no contracts with the Du Pont Company, will they make inquiries about this agreement before placing any contracts with the Du Pont Company?
    Mr. FORSTER: I am inquiring into this matter, and will let the hon. Member know the result in due course.

    NAVAL AND MILITARY SERVICES (PENSIONS AND GRANTS).
    Mr. WINGasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if an Order has been issued to the effect that unless a soldier makes an application for dependency allowance within one month after enlistment, his dependants are debarred from any allowance at present or any future date?
    Mr. FORSTER: I dealt with this question in Debate on the 21st instant, and I think the hon. Member was present on that occasion.
    Mr. JONATHAN SAMUEL: I should like to ask if the hon. Gentleman is aware I that a very large number of these men

    1339
    are ignorant that there is such an allowance? It is very hard if the mothers are deprived in consequence.
    Mr. FORSTER: As I explained on Monday, we are doing everything we can to clear off arrears and prevent arrears accruing in the future.
    Mr. J. SAMUEL: That is no reply to my question, which is that, in the case of a man who is ignorant of the fact that dependants can get such allowance and he does not apply within one month, are the family to be deprived of it?
    Mr. FORSTER: I know the circumstances pretty well, but I understand that matter is going to be raised on the Motion for adjournment to-night, and if my hon. Friend is present he will have an opportunity of raising the question.
    Mr. HOGGE: Is my hon. Friend aware that the difficulty is due to the fact that the Special Committee of this House laid down a hard and fast rule? Cannot he approach the Prime Minister with regard to that Special Committee rule and get it altered?
    Mr. FORSTER: I think my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be introducing a Bill dealing with the whole question very shortly, and I hope my hon. Friend will have an opportunity of discussing the matter on that.
    Mr. RAFFANasked whether an Army Order has recently been issued to the effect that no separation allowance will be payable to the wives or other dependants of soldiers unless application is made within one month after enlistment; whether the imposition of such a time limit is an entirely new procedure; and whether, in view of the hardship involved in many cases, an opportunity will be given for the discussion of the matter in the House of Commons before the Order is made finally operative?
    Mr. FORSTER: This matter was discussed in this House on 21st instant, when I explained the reasons why the Order was issued. As I said then, it will not be unreasonably or harshly applied where special cause to the contrary is shown.
    Mr. WINGasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if his Department will remit to soldiers' dependants the sums of money due to them from the date the
    1340
    soldier made allotment, but which allowance to dependants due to them has been paid only from the date of soldiers filling up Army Form 1,838, which in many instances were several weeks apart, involving financial loss to expectant recipients, seeing that this has caused disappointment and irritation, as both soldiers and dependants were unaware of such rule and regulation?
    Mr. FORSTER: I can add nothing to the reply given to the hon. Member by my predecessor on the 19th May.
    Mr. WING: Arising out of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the question on the Adjournment.

    HEYTESBURY CAMP, HERTS (SUBLETTING OF LINING).
    Mr. TYSON WILSONasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if he is aware that the firm of Sir John Jackson, Limited, is sub-letting the lining of the inside of the huts at Heytesbury Camp at so much per hut to individual workmen; whether this is being done with his sanction; and, if not, whether he will inquire into the matter with the object of preventing a dispute at the camp?
    Mr. FORSTER: I am informed that the lining of some of the huts has been let to a man who was a foreman in the employment of the firm named, but who now employs his own men.
    Mr. WILSON: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a very large number of British workmen refused to take the work under the conditions?
    Mr. FORSTER: No, Sir, I am not aware of that.
    Mr. WILSON: Will the hon. Gentleman make inquiries?
    Mr. FORSTER: Certainly I will make inquiries.
    Sir A. MARKHAM: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that many of the huts erected on Salisbury Plain want relining all over, and are simply one mass of holes from top to bottom?
    Mr. FORSTER: That does not correspond at all with my information.
    Sir A. MARKHAM: I saw them last Sunday.

    BRITISH CONSUL AT DUNKIRK
    Mr. BAIRDasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has ascertained whether there is any ground of suspicion as to the loyalty or competence of the British Consul at Dunkirk?
    Lord ROBERT CECIL: I have inquired into the charges made against His Majesty's Consul at Dunkirk and find that they are entirely baseless. Mr. Sarell has rendered most valuable services to His Majesty's Government for which he has been officially thanked. I am glad to have this opportunity of stating that the Secretary of State has the most complete confidence in Mr. Sarell's loyalty and competence. Perhaps I may be allowed to add that the hon. Member for West Toxteth, who originally gave currency to statements of an opposite character, desires me to say that he fully accepts what I have just said about Mr. Sarell, and that he desires to express his regret for any pain or annoyance which he may have caused to that gentleman. My hon. Friend is, unfortunately, somewhat seriously indisposed and is peremptorily forbidden by his doctor to leave his house, or he would have been personally present to say this for himself.

    COMMISSIONS FOR CHEMISTS.
    Sir JOHN JARDINEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in order to deal with such things as poisonous gases, poisonous wells, and new explosives, any commissions in the Army have been given to persons skilled in analysis and other chemical arts, as distinguished from those who have medical qualifications; and whether Fellows of the Institute of Chemistry are eligible for such commissions?
    Mr. TENNANT: Arrangements have been made to employ on such duties, both as officers and non-commissioned officers, a number of persons having these qualifications. Fellows of the Institute of Chemistry are eligible for commissions for this purpose.

  Procurator Fiscalship (Dunblane).
  Mr. WATTasked the Lord Advocate whether he will state the salary at present paid to the procurator fiscal at Perth; is
  1342
  it a term of his appointment that he does not engage in private practice; has it yet been decided whether any and, if so, what addition shall be made to his salary ore taking over the duties of the Dunblane procurator fiscalship; and will it be a condition of that increase that he does not engage in private practice?
  Mr. MUNRO: The figure asked for in the first part of my hon. and learned Friend's question is £800; the answer to the second part of the question is in the affirmative; the salary to be assigned in respect of the conjunction of the posts has not yet been fixed. The last part of the question does not arise.
  Mr. T. RICHARDSON: Is the report correct that this man was a political agent before he received his appointment, or when did he receive his appointment?
  Mr. WATT: What proportion of additional work will be given to this gentleman, a fifth more or a sixth more, or what will it be?
  Mr. MUNRO: It would be impossible to state the proportion at this stage, but with regard to the additional salary that will be fixed by the Treasury.
  Mr. RICHARDSON: Will the right hon. Gentleman reply to my question?
  Mr. MUNRO: I would like notice of that question.

  Telephone Service.
  Mr. WILKIEasked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that there are complaints amongst the commercial and business circles in Newcastle-on-Tyne as to the frequent breakdowns in the telephone service and the delay in having them repaired; and if he will make such arrangements as will ensure a quicker and more effective service?
  The ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Pike Pease): There have, of course, been special causes of disturbance in the North-East of England, and there is great pressure of telephone work there in connection with naval and military requirements and the supply of munitions. But my right hon. Friend is not aware of any general complaints in respect of the telephone service at Newcastle-on-Tyne, and he would be obliged to the hon. Member if he would send him further particulars.
  Mr. WILKIEasked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that recently the Chief Constable of Newcastle-on-Tyne arranged with the Post Office authorities at Newcastle for an additional telephone in one of the superintendent's residence, and, after arrangements had been come to as to cost of the same, the Post Office authorities resiled from the arrangement without giving any adequate reason and charged 25s. more than the original arrangement, while a telephone was installed in the house next door at a lesser figure; and will he make inquiries into the matter?
  Mr. PIKE PEASE: My right hon. Friend's attention had not been called to this case prior to the hon. Member's question, but he is making inquiry, and will communicate with the hon. Member.
  Mr. SNOWDENasked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that there is disaffection among the women clerks in the office of the Controller of the London Telephone Service on account of the alleged favouritism on the part of the lady superintendent, and that on the recommendation of this official a clerk has just been specially appointed to the post of principal clerk though she had only twelve months' service as first-class clerk, to which post also she was specially promoted, and that in making the appointment of this clerk to the post of principal clerk twenty-six first-class clerks of greater experience and seniority were passed over; if, among these clerks, there were many who have performed the duties of principal clerk temporarily; and will he cause an inquiry to be made into these allegations?
  Mr. PIKE PEASE: All the circumstances were known and duly considered before the promotion was authorised. The clerk in question was selected for promotion on the recommendation of the Controller of the London Telephone Service because she had shown herself to possess outstanding abilities superior to those of any other member of her class.

  Closing of Post Office (Newcastle-on-Tyne).
  Mr. WILKIEasked the Postmaster-master General if he is aware that the post office at Blackett Street, Newcastle-on-Tyne, has been closed for some time, causing inconvenience to the buiness people in the locality; and can he state when it will be reopened?
  Mr. PIKE PEASE: The post office was closed in the first instance on account of a fire which occurred on the premises. The staff thus released is now required to replace men who have been withdrawn for military service, and my right hon. Friend is afraid it will not be possible to reopen the office while the War continues. There is another office within 300 yards. My right hon. Friend trusts that any inconvenience that may be caused will, in the circumstances, be readily borne.

  Drug Supplies.
  Mr. WATTasked the Secretary to the Treasury whether medical insurance committees can be sued for supplies of drugs which they have purchased, received, and passed, or whether these committees have the privilege of Government Departments of not being amenable to the Courts of the land; and, if the latter, will he introduce legislation altering the principle of a purchasing body being able to pay or not pay, as seems to them convenient, for goods purchased?
  The COMPTROLLER of the HOUSEHOLD (Mr. Charles Roberts): The circumstances under which insurance committees contract for the supply of drugs are not as stated in the question; but I may, however, refer my hon. Friend to Section 30 of the National Insurance Act, 1913, which provides that every insurance committee shall be a body corporate and may sue and be sued.
  Mr. O'GRADYasked the hon. Member for Lincoln, as representing the Insurance Commissioners, how many cases of inaccurate dispensing of prescriptions have occurred within the last six months: whether the Commissioners are satisfied that any inaccuracies which have occurred arose from the fact that dispensing has been carried on by unqualified men and boys who have not been apprenticed to a registered chemist and druggist; whether in all such cases of inaccurate dispensing the registered chemist who is responsible in law will be struck off the panel of insurance dispensers; and whether, in view of the danger arising from the fact of inaccurate dispensing, a committee of inquiry will be set up to go into the whole matter and report to this House with recommendations to remove the danger?
  Mr. ROBERTS: The particulars asked for in the first part of the question are not available, but I have no reason to

  1345
  suspect the existence of any circumstances which call for such an inquiry as is suggested. If, however, my hon. Friend has any specific case in mind and will let me have particulars, I shall be happy to make inquiries and let him know the result.

  Land Valuation Department.
  Mr. KINGasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that persons employed in the Land Valuation Department have received notice that their services will be no longer required, as further valuation work is to be suspended; whether this notice has been given by his authority or order; and, if so, whether the decision to suspend land valuation has been decided on since the Finance (No. 2) Bill was introduced?
  Mr. McKENNA: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative, and the second and third parts do not arise. In view of the positive form in which my hon. Friend puts his question I should be glad if he would inform me on what statement or supposed facts his inquiry is founded.
  Mr. KING: I shall be happy to do so privately.
  Mr. WATT: Are we to understand that the Land Valuation Department is to go on in the future as it has done in the past, as far as this number of employés is concerned?
  Mr. McKENNA: No, that could not be the case, as already a considerable number have enlisted.

  Registration of Voters (Cost).
  Mr. LOUGHasked the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state approximately the total amount of remuneration paid annually to the revising barristers for settling the list of voters throughout England and Wales, and the estimated cost incurred by the various local authorities in preparing the annual registers of voters?
  Mr. LONG: The total amount of remuneration paid annually to revising barristers in England and Wales is approximately £25,000. The total annual expenditure of local authorities in England and Wales in respect of the registration of voters (not including the moiety of the remuneration of revising barristers which is borne by the local authorities) is rather over £270,000.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  Mr. CHAPLIN: May I ask the Prime Minister what is the business for next week?
  The PRIME MINISTER: On Monday we shall take the Second Reading of the Munitions Bill and a Supplementary Estimate for men for the Navy.
  On Tuesday, the Committee stage of the Finance Bill.
  On Wednesday, the Second Reading of the Pensions Bill.
  On these three days we shall also make progress with other Bills on the Paper.
  On Thursday, Supply—probably several Civil Service Votes.
  Mr. LOUGH: Will the Bill dealing with Registration be introduced next week, having regard to the pressure of time?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I doubt whether it can be introduced next week, but I will consider it.

  SUPPLY.— [FOURTEENTH ALLOTTED DAY.]

    CIVIL SERVICES AND REVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1915–16.
    Considered in Committee.
    [Mr. WHITLEY in the Chair.]

    LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD.—Class II.
    Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £234,791, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1916, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board. [NOTE.—£127,000 has been voted on account.]
    The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Walter Long): I propose, with the consent of the Committee, to make as brief a statement as I can dealing with the history of the past year. I think it is convenient that this course should be adopted because it enables the responsible Minister to place the chief facts connected with the Department before the Committee, thus avoiding the discussion of minor questions. This
    1350
    year there would seem to be a special reason why I should say something about the work the Department has done in connection with the War. Will the Committee forgive, if, before I embark upon my task, I indulge in one personal reminiscence? It is now twenty-nine years since I first went to the Local Government Board, and was first connected with that Department, and associated with the Debates in Committee of Supply. Those twenty-nine years have seen great changes, both in the Department and its personnel. I am afraid there are very few Members of this Committee present here, or indeed Members of the House, who were in it at the time to which I refer; but there must be many in this House and outside who will be glad to know that the distinguished servant who at that time was the head of the Department, the wisest of counsellors and the most indulgent of friends, Sir Hugh Owen, is still in the enjoyment of health and activity, and is still able to lend his incomparable services to our Department in connection with the management of the Metropolitan Poor Fund.
    Although the Department has changed very much during those years, and although naturally there are many new men to be found in it and many old faces missing, and although I have been there but a very short time on this occasion, I have been there long enough to learn without doubt that there is in the Department to-day the same public spirit as ever there was before, and it is manned by men as capable and as devoted to public duty as ever were their predecessors. How the Department has changed may be proved by a very short reference to the figures. In 1886 our Estimates were £174,000, and they rose in 1904, the last year I was connected with the Department, to £227,000. This year they are £360,000, of which £50,000 is a new Vote secured by my predecessor, the Postmaster-General, for the promotion of the interests of infants and the care of infantile life. In 1886 the staff was 400, while the staff of my Department now is 990, and that includes everybody, male and female, old and young. Out of that number I am very proud to be able to say that somewhere about 200 have volunteered their services, and are now serving their King with the Army either abroad or in this country. The subjects to which I desire to call the attention of the Committee are, first of all, the special work which this Department has done in connection with the War. It seems to me at

    1351
    first sight improper that the Department of the Local Government Board should, in any way, be associated with the work which the Government of this country have been called upon to do during the past year in connection with this awful War. Although this Department is called the Local Government Board, it is in reality the Ministry of the Interior, because there is hardly anything connected with the health and the daily life of the people of our country which is not closely connected with our Department. It is very difficult to find a Bill brought in by any Department which does not touch ours, and in which we have not to take some part in considering its provisions or defending it in this House.
    The status of the office has been raised since I was there before, but I think there is room for a little improvement in this respect. I know it is the duty of the Treasury to proceed very cautiously in these matters, and they never give with both hands; but, in rearranging my Department, they left something to be completed, and I hope when happier and more peaceful times come and we are able to consider these comparatively minor questions, the Government of that day and this House will be willing to do justice to the men who gave their best services to the country, and who certainly are entitled to treatment equal to that accorded to many other branches of the Civil Service The work which my Department has been called upon to do during this year, which is of a special character connected with the War, refers chiefly to sanitary questions, the provision and maintenance of hospitals and to another most important question, the provision of food supplies both for our Army abroad and for the vast number of troops who are quartered here at home. Of the Local Government Board officers who have been assisting the local authorities and co-operating with the War Office in this important work, there have been twelve medical inspectors constantly at work. They have paid no less than 730 visits to nearly 500 different places where troops have been quartered, and the object of their visits has been, in the first place, to prevent undesirable billets being selected for the troops; secondly, to secure that there should be satisfactory sanitary services for the troops, water supply, sewerage, etc.; and thirdly, that there shall be adequate hospital accommodation
    1352
    for infectious diseases, and prompt action taken both by the local and military authorities.
    Perhaps the last matter I need to mention is the prevention of conditions which generally might be dangerous to the health of the troops. In this work the Local Government Board and the local authorities and the War Office have, throughout, worked cordially together, and, as the result shows, satisfactorily; and I do not hesitate to say, speaking with some personal knowledge, that the thanks of this country are due to the officers of this great Department for the invaluable services which have been rendered to the country in a time of great need, and which, I believe, has resulted in securing the very satisfactory results which are to be found at the present moment as regards the health of our troops. In expressing my thanks—and I am sure that the Committee will allow me to express their thanks—to these distinguished officials, I desire to include all the local authorities, and especially, if I may say so, the boards of guardians in the country. The Committee will be interested to know, in connection with hospital accommodation for the soldiers, that my Department has been instrumental in supplying no less than 30,000 beds; it is not only, indeed I venture to say it is not mainly, in the actual provision of beds for soldiers, whether wounded or sick, that the local authorities have done good work. Anyone who has taken an interest in the provision of hospital accommodation for troops knows that people are very willing to provide accommodation and to render personal service so long as it is to be given to troops, preferably to men who come back wounded from the front, but if they are not sent to them, then to soldiers belonging to units serving with the Colours here. Many of the boards of guardians have done even more than this, and, in order that accommodation should be available and that certain buildings should be placed at the disposal of the War Office, they have done that which is not so agreeable to them, and that which does not bring to them so much apparent credit; they have pooled their resources, and they have taken in the inmates of establishments in adjoining unions. In this way alone they have made it possible for these buildings to be placed at the service of the War Office, and for this very large accommodation to be provided for the soldiers.

    1353
    In paying this tribute, which I gladly do, to the work of the local authorities, and especially to the work of the boards of guardians—indeed, to the work of all the local authorities, county councils, urban and rural districts councils and boards of guardians—I hope they will not think that the end of their service has come. We are extremely grateful to them for what they have done; we appreciate that they have thrown all their resources into a common fund and made them available for this great purpose, but, under the shadow of this terrible War, it is inevitable that much more will have to be asked both of local authorities and of individuals. I have no doubt whatever that it will be my duty to appeal to local authorities for further help, for further sacrifice of time, and for further work in connection with what the Government may think it necessary to do in relation to the War, and I am confident that, ready and generous as has been their response hitherto, so it will be in the future, and that they will do everything they can by placing their resources at our disposal or by undertaking fresh work if they believe that we are asking them to do it in the real interests of our country and in order that this War may be successfully pursued to its only possible termination.
    I have said that the condition of the health of the country is to-day unquestionably satisfactory, and it is in no small measure due to the work of the local authorities and to the work of the officers of my Department. It really is an even more remarkable fact than may at first sight appear to hon. Members. Let me ask the Committee to remember what has been going on. You have had the sudden creation of a new Army; you have had men in thousands quartered in different parts of the country; in some cases you have had the population of a small town almost doubled; you have had enormous aggregations of soldiers camped in places where there was no local provision—no water supply, no drainage, and no roads. Everything had to be provided, and it is really almost a marvel that you should have had all these conditions, so utterly different from the conditions normally prevailing in the country, and that you should be able to say at the end of ten months that not only has there been no evidence of unsatisfactory results as regards the health either of the soldiers or of the civil community, but that the general condition in regard to health is as satisfactory as it possibly could be. I should like, in regard
    1354
    to this service, to read a letter which was addressed to my Department before I came to it by the War Office. After stating that they have had under consideration the assistance which local health authorities, under the guidance of the Local Government Board, have rendered since the outbreak of War to troops stationed in their administrative areas, they state that:—
    "This assistance in the unexampled circumstances of the last eight months has been invaluable in safeguarding the health of the Forces and in preventing the spread of infections disease to an extent which would otherwise have been impracticable."
    4.0 P.M.
    They inform us that they are anxious to convey to us and to the local authorities the warm thanks of the Army Council for the work which has been done. I have already told the Committee how much has been done in regard to hospital accommodation, and I have only this to add. While I am able to congratulate the country and the Committee upon the present satisfactory condition of things, I would take this opportunity to remind them that with the arrival of the hot weather and possibly with the return of large numbers of wounded men, some of them, it may be, suffering not from wounds but from disease, there may be great risks and new difficulties to be safeguarded against, and it behoves our local authorities, and may I venture to say that it behoves all those who live either in town or in country and who take an interest in the local welfare of the people, to see that unremitting attention be devoted to these important local works, and that no effort is spared to see that the health of the community is guarded against any possible invasion and is secured at the high level at which, I am happy to say, it stands at the present moment. We have also had the strongest expression of thanks from the War Office for the co-operation which our Medical Department Food Inspectors have been able to give in regard to the food supplied to the troops, and I think the Committee will remember that on previous occasions where large quantities of food have been supplied for troops there have often been very considerable difficulties in regard to the character and quality of that food and also in regard to its suitability. We, of course, lay no claim to any share of the wonderful and vast amount of credit which belongs to the Quartermaster-General for the supply and distribution of food to our troops, whether at home or abroad. But we are entitled to say that the action of our experts has been of the

    1355
    greatest value to the War Office, and it has resulted, so far as we know, in the food with which the troops are supplied proving to be not only wholesome and satisfactory but of a character that has been most suitable for troops engaged either on active service abroad or training here at home. Proof of it is to be found in the fact apparent to the most casual observer throughout the country, and in the evidence received from abroad, that so far as the physical condition of our troops goes, it is as good as it possibly can be. The remark has been generally made, and it must have occurred to hon. Gentlemen here when travelling about the country, that our troops have shown the most wonderful results from training and living in camp, notwithstanding the hard work and the extraordinarily heavy rains they had to live under in the months of August and September last. Although they were living under such conditions, which could not be expected but to be most unhealthy, the results have been most extraordinary. We can see for ourselves how these men have improved, and that in itself is evidence that the food with which they have been supplied has been the most wholesome and the most suitable that could have been provided.
    There is one other matter specially connected with the War, but not perhaps to be regarded as an ordinary departmental matter, to which I feel I should refer. At the beginning of the War, in those terrible days when Belgium was the scene of such inhuman and awful treatment, many Belgian refugees came to this country, and it was necessary to provide for them. It was decided by the Government that a Committee should be appointed to care for and make arrangements for the Belgian refugees. The work of this Committee, although not actually forming part of the ordinary business of the Local Government Board, was handed over to my right hon. Friend the present Postmaster-General, who was then President of the Local Government Board, and he has presided over it ever since. He has devoted to the work an immense amount of personal labour and a great deal of time, and we have the most abundant testimony, from those entitled to speak for the Belgians, that his work has been done with remarkable success. They are, I know, one and all profoundly grateful to him and his Committee for all that has been done. When I succeeded my right hon. Friend,
    1356
    I thought the least I could do, in the interests of the Belgians, and for the credit of this country, was to ask him to continue the chairmanship of that Committee and the performance of those duties, and he was good enough to concede to my request. I am confident that, although he has changed his Department, he will go on with that magnificent work with the same devotion that he has hitherto given to it, and we shall, I hope, be able to feel that, at a time of special suffering, when Belgium was called upon to bear more than her share of the devastation consequent on this awful War, we in this country did all we could to lessen her suffering and to make some provision for her. We owe it to my right hon. Friend and his Committee that this work has been done as economically and as satisfactorily as it has been accomplished.
    With regard to the general business of my Department, I am anxious to say some words which I hope the Members of the Committee will be good enough to carefully consider themselves, and I hope also they will be good enough to carry them to those whom they represent. I have been in this House a good many years, and there are two special features connected with the House which a change in the individual representation of constituencies has never seemed to affect. However many new Members there may be in the House, there is one special line which is always taken. When they are talking at large, they are advocates of economy, and I have heard more speeches in this House on the advantages of and the necessity for economy in public administration than I have heard upon any other single subject. But when it comes to the individual Member and his constituency, while he is quite prepared to make a strong speech on public economy on Monday, on Tuesday he will come to the President of the Local Government Board, or to the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and he is apt to get really cross if he is not able to secure assurances that expenditure which his constituents wish to carry out will be immediately sanctioned and the necessary loan provided. This is one of the sweets of office. It is our duty to preserve a stern front on those occasions; to make it easy for Members of Parliament to return safely to their constituents, while at the same time we protect the public purse. Never has that duty been so incumbent upon Ministers of the Crown as it is to-day. I believe this

    1357
    House and the country are prepared to make any sacrifices within their power in order that we may maintain the privileges of liberty and good government to which we are entitled; but we cannot find the necessary resources unless the most rigid economy is practised in every Department of the Government.
    I know hon. Gentlemen are subjected to great pressure by their constituents to secure sanction for particular lines of expenditure. I felt it my duty to issue a Minute to my Department when I took office, reaffirming the action taken by my predecessor, to the effect that it was only in the most urgent and in the most pressing cases that it would be possible for the Local Government Board to sanction loans to local authorities. I have had already to refuse many loans when, I have no doubt, hon. Members, or some of them, were of opinion that circumstances were pressing. But it must be for the President of the Local Government Board alone to judge what is the nature of the case presented to him. I will do my best to exercise my power with full consideration for the needs of localities, but I do want it to be understood that, so long as I have the honour and privilege to speak for this Department, and to be its representative here, I shall do all in my power to enforce the most rigorous economy in regard to all local administration. I shall feel it my duty to refuse application for loans unless the circumstances be of a very singular character.
    I am fortunate in having in this and other parts of my Departmental work the assistance of my right hon. Friend the Member for Fulham, who has exceptional knowledge on these questions of local government and special knowledge in connection with financial questions of that kind. He has this branch of our work under his special care. I can therefore answer for it that, if proposals are rejected, it will not be because they have not been fully considered, both by the experts of the Department and by its Parliamentary representatives. Fully considered they will be, not only from the old point of view that sanction can only be given provided that certain conditions are fulfilled, but from the new point of view that, until the War is over, in view of the burdens we have and shall have to bear, we must economise in public and in private, and therefore can only give our sanction when we feel that the circumstances are so exceptional as to justify it.
    1358
    In addition to economising we did our best before I came to the Local Government Board, and we are continuing that policy, to advise the local authorities to place, so far as they can, those whom they employ at the service of the State. We have suggested to them that where possible, where men are by age and physical condition suitable, they should be allowed to join the Colours, that temporary appointments be made in their place, that satisfactory provision be made in regard to the payment of, at any rate, a portion of their salaries, and for keeping their places open for them. We have advised them, as far as possible, to release all young men, to allow them to be free to offer their services where they can be most usefully applied, and to put in their places older men who can, at all events, adequately discharge the work which has hitherto been done, so that the younger men may do work of greater use, either in the Army or in factories where munitions are manufactured. The local authorities have most cordially responded to our suggestion, and have done their best to place at the disposal of the country all their employés who can by any possibility be spared.
    I want to say one word about a Committee appointed to deal with distress arising out of the War. This, again, is not strictly a matter for which the Local Government Board is responsible, but the president of that Committee was at its commencement the President of the Local Government Board. I have succeeded to the chair vacated by my right hon. Friend, although, of course, the work of that Committee is not work for which we are responsible in the sense that I am responsible in other respects for everything done by my Department and accountable here for it. I only speak now as chairman of a Committee composed of a variety of Members. I had the honour to be a member of the Committee myself on the invitation of my right hon. Friend at the commencement of the War, and at a time when I was sitting on the opposite side of the House. On that Committee are many Members of the Government and some of the expert representatives of Departments, and others whose services it was thought would be valuable because of their previous experience. I should like to say, having been a very regular attendant at the meetings of that Committee—I have not missed very many—although the work has been done, I believe, in a thoroughly satisfactory way—

    1359
    and it certainly has been carried out most harmoniously—we are indebted to my right hon. Friend for the conduct of the Committee, which, at its very commencement, had an element of difficulty owing to possible divergence of opinions, but which has throughout done the work which has fallen to its lot with advantage to the community.
    I think this Committee should know the view which was taken by that body. Although I cannot, as I say, answer for the Committee, as I can for the Department, the view we took was that it ought to be our duty to prevent if possible suffering as a consequence of the War, rather than to relieve suffering after it had been created; but we also took another view, and that was that we ought to be extremely careful to avoid spending public money, whether it comes out of the Exchequer or whether it comes from charitable sources such as the National Fund started by His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales—we ought to be extraordinarily careful that funds of this character were not used under the cover of alleviating distress alone.
    Sir GODFREY BARING: I should like to ask whether, in view of what the right hon. Gentleman has said, the whole policy of the Committee in allocating money to various districts will be open to discussion? If the right hon. Gentleman is going into that matter, I suppose we shall have a right to consider the way in which the Committee have allocated the fund?
    Mr. LONG: On that point of Order, may I say I made it perfectly clear that my Department is not in itself responsible, but I regarded it as an act of courtesy to the Committee to make a general statement on this subject. Of course, if that is to be taken advantage of in order to open a general discussion on the policy of the Committee, it is quite obvious I should not continue.
    The CHAIRMAN: I was watching very carefully what the right hon. Gentleman was saying, because I was well aware of the difficulty. I think he carefully guarded himself against bringing a Committee, which is not responsible to this Committee in which we now sit, into the sphere of Debate. Of course the hon. Member is quite right in saying that if the President began to discuss the reasons and methods of allocation, then other
    1360
    Members might follow him, but I think, if I may say so, he is too old a Parliamentary hand to fall into that trap.
    Mr. LONG: I am very grateful to you, Sir, for your remark. I had really reached the end of my story. I only proposed to tell the Committee in very general terms what had been the action of the Public Distress Committee, and I was giving an illustration of the way in which it had sought to prevent the creation of artificial poverty which was the case with many public funds in days gone by. It is a remarkable fact that to-day, after ten months of War, and when this country has been called upon to make enormous sacrifices, that the general condition of the country in regard both to unemployment and to poverty is better than it has been for forty years. I was looking today at the figures for England and Wales and for the Metropolis in regard to pauperism, and it is a remarkable fact, for which I think we have great reason to congratulate ourselves, that the figures in regard to England and Wales are 16 per 1,000, and for London 20.3, which are-the lowest figures in the returns for a period of forty years. As regards unemployment, it is not necessary to quote figures, because the facts speak for themselves far more eloquently than any figures can do. Everybody who has made even the most cursory examination of the question of labour and unemployment knows that the country is not at present in a condition of unemployment, but that the difficulty is to find adequate labour for the work there is to be done.
    I think my Department, which, after all, is to a large extent responsible for the administration of the various laws of this country which govern these questions and which has been very closely identified with all that has been done since the outbreak of War, may congratulate itself to-day that the condition of the country, both in regard to health and in regard to the sufferings which result from either unemployment or poverty, is as satisfactory as we find it. We may go further than that. We as a country may congratulate ourselves upon this great fact, because it has often been my lot before, when I have been dealing with Local Government Board Estimates, to point out that although our Department is essentially, if I may so term it, a peaceful Department not closely connected with the defences of this country, yet in reality it is to these great Departments and to

    1361
    these local authorities and to their wise and careful administration that the country must look if they are going to have at their command in times of crisis and emergency an unfailing supply of strong and healthy men and women to do the work without which no country can hold its own when it is overtaken, as we have been overtaken, by a great situation such as that with which we are now confronted. Therefore, we may congratulate ourselves, not only as a Department and as the House of Commons, but as a country as a whole, that the record is as good and as wonderful as it is revealed by the figures in regard to pauperism which I have quoted and the facts known to everybody in regard to unemployment and to labour generally.
    As to the general health of the country, I have said that in the districts where we have had large collections of soldiers it has been satisfactory. That may be said of the country generally. There has been a curious outbreak of measles among the grown-up people, which largely affected the soldiers. We believe that the reason for that is probably to be found in the constant movement of soldiers which takes place as part of their military business and which has, no doubt, taken infection from place to place. That, however, is being carefully watched. It will probably be necessary to make some fresh departure in regard to dealing with the disease of measles, which has been looked upon as an almost harmless complaint mainly affecting children, but which has turned out to have a serious result in regard to some men it has affected. It will be necessary to strengthen our position in regard to that particular disease, but otherwise the position is one upon which we may congratulate ourselves. There were 2,500 cases of cerebro-spinal disease, commonly called spotted fever, but they are rapidly decreasing.
    There was an apprehension in the country, shared by some hon. Gentlemen in this House, that there had been a sudden increase in infantile mortality, due to a want of proper nourishment or proper care. I believe there is no foundation whatever for that view. There has been an increase in infantile mortality in the earliest days of the infant's life, but that increase was traceable at once to particular diseases—measles and whooping cough—which account for it all. There is no justification whatever for the suggestion that this increase has been due to any
    1362
    privations from which the people have suffered. I am confident, and I am sure my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General will confirm me in saying this, that our Department has been most persistent in watching the course of events in the country, and has continued to feel the pulse of the people in regard to poverty, suffering, or disease, and I believe we may truthfully say to-day that we have come through these ten months stronger and better than we could ever have hoped to do. Suffering the country has had to meet. Suffering the country must undergo in a great War like this; but such suffering as there has been has been reduced to a minimum. On the whole, reviewing all the circumstances, the condition of the people is far better than we could have anticipated, and that is one thing upon which, as a great national fact, we may congratulate ourselves.
    It only remains for me to make a very short reference to one matter upon which we shall all feel no small pride. Almost immediately after the War broke out, when it was doubtful how suitable our resources would prove to be, our Oversea Dominions sent us, in the most generous manner, gifts of all kinds. Foods of all kinds were sent. I have only a few of the figures here, and they include 1,000,000 bags of flour from the Government of Canada, 250,000 sent by Ontario, 4,000,000 pounds of cheese from Quebec, 25,000 cases of canned salmon from British Columbia, 100,000 bushels of potatoes from New Brunswick, besides gifts of all kinds from Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere. These were sent at once. Like the troops, they came unasked. They were volunteered at once from all parts of the British Empire, so that at the same time, in addition to sending men and munitions, they thought there might possibly be want in parts of what they regarded as the over-crowded Mother Country, and with both hands they sent us these splendid gifts which have been distributed in what we thought to be the best method throughout the country and which have tended largely to aid us in avoiding any poverty or suffering. I am sure that the Committee will desire to recognise to-day this splendid generosity on the part of these great Oversea Dominions, and if at times we are inclined to feel more bitterly than at others the burden of the great trial with which our country has been confronted, there is, even in this great sorrow, a very bright silver lining in the fact that it has revealed, as has never been revealed

    1363
    before, the wonderful love of the Oversea Dominions for the Mother Country and their extraordinary power of helping us not only in men and munitions, not only with these splendid gifts to which I have referred, but with the sympathy and love which they have given to us in such large measure and which has helped us materially in the discharge of our great task.
    Mr. CHAPLIN: The right hon. Gentleman commenced his very interesting statement by paying a most charming tribute to Sir Hugh Owen, who has so long presided over the Local Government Board, which, if I have the permission of the Committee, I should like most heartily to endorse, because if I remember aright on the last occasion when my right hon. Friend represented the Local Government Board he succeeded me—I, like all those who have ever had to do with Sir Hugh Owen, who have had the advantage of his invaluable aid and assistance, and everyone who has been in any way connected with him, have been delighted to hear what my right hon. Friend told the Committee just now, that he was still in the full vigour and activity of life and intellect. So far as I am concerned, I only wish to add, long may he live to enjoy those gifts! No less gratifying was it to me to learn from my right hon. Friend that he finds the existing staff at the Local Government Board distinguished by all those admirable qualities which, as long as I can recollect, they have invariably possessed. If he is pleased with them, of this I am quite sure, that they will as warmly welcome his return to an office which he represented twenty-nine years ago. When these are the relations which prevail between the chief of the Department and the men who serve him, it is the best possible augury for the satisfactory conduct of the public business with which that Department is concerned. We all heard with the greatest interest what has been done by this Department in connection with the War. We are delighted to know how satisfactory the accommodation and the provisions made for them by the Local Government Board have been with regard to the health of the troops, and to anyone who has seen them, as I have seen them, in one of these towns which has been crowded with troops almost since the commencement of the War, namely, Northampton, they all appear to be in the very pink of condition—fit to run, if I may use a sporting expression; and this is the
    1364
    position in which we find these coming heroes, these men who at no distant time will be fighting for us at the front with the same gallantry as the men who are there to-day. This is the condition in which they find themselves after the provisions made for them by the Local Government Board.
    I am sure the Committee will entirely agree with every word that fell from my right hon. Friend with regard to the exercise of the most rigid economy with regard to loans under all the conditions in which we find ourselves to-day, and still more heartily, if possible, will they endorse everything that fell from him with regard to our Overseas Dominions, which I am sure went home to the hearts and feelings of every man who heard his statement. Nothing can exceed the patriotism and love of the Mother Country which was exhibited by all the Overseas Dominions the very moment the War broke out, and it will be remembered in the heart of every Englishman and woman in the country for the rest of the life of any one among them.
    In what my right hon. Friend said of the staff by which he is served at this moment, I had hoped that we might have heard something on the subject of the vaccination officers, who serve under the Local Government Board, for that is a subject to which my attention has been repeatedly directed, and two years ago I raised the question and made an appeal on their behalf. Their position at present is undoubtedly one of very considerable hardship. It arises from the fact that much of their resources on which they have to live were derived from fees which they received from vaccination. The Vaccination Bill, of which I was the author, had the most triumphant results, for as long as I remained at the Local Government Board, in spite of the admission of the conscientious objectors, I believe vaccination was trebled or quadrupled. That, of course, gave these gentlemen who accepted the position under the terms of the then Act of Parliament a salary that they were thoroughly entitled to. But then came the time when, under the auspices of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. John Burns), the law was altered, with the effect that the number of vaccinations has fallen off in the most deplorable manner.
    The CHAIRMAN: I must warn the right hon. Gentleman that he is discussing legislation, and will no doubt invite a reply. I cannot allow the merits of past

    1365
    legislation to be discussed in Committee of Supply. We are only concerned with how the laws are carried out.
    Mr. CHAPLIN: I apologise. In my anxiety to be of service to a worthy and deserving number of officials who find themselves placed in a hard position perhaps I have gone strictly beyond the line of order, but I think you have allowed me to say enough to show what their position is, and I was anxious to hear whether it might not be possible for my right hon. Friend under the existing provisions of the law to do something to ameliorate their position, and place them on a more satisfactory footing. A right hon. Gentleman before he left the House asked me to say something on the question of infantile mortality, but that question has been absolutely disposed of by my right hon. Friend, and I have nothing more to say than to express the general satisfaction with which I heard his statement.
    Mr. TURTON: I hope I shall not be considered presumptuous if I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his able, interesting, and eloquent survey of the Local Government Board, and I hope, in addition, he will forgive me if I say it was with the very greatest satisfaction that those of us who have spent many years of our life in local administration found that we were to have the right hon. Gentleman as President of the Local Government Board. It is no disparagement to my right hon. Friend (Mr. Herbert Samuel) to say that in the present right hon. Gentleman we have one whom we can trust to assist us in our administration of the affairs of the different localities, and we have one whom we know we can approach with every sympathy when we come to ask him for assistance. The right hon. Gentleman paid a tribute to the local authorities. I can only thank him and assure him that it will be an incentive to those of us who try to administer the affairs that we have met with such recognition at his hands.
    The right hon. Gentleman told us of the very large increase which had taken place in the Estimates during the period to which he alluded. Unfortunately those of us in the country who are responsible for the finances of the district cannot view those increases with the same equanimity. The right hon. Gentleman said that the Treasury never gave with both hands. The Treasury very frequently fails to give with any hands at all, because we are repeatedly obliged to call their attention to the fact
    1366
    that we are continually having fresh duties imposed upon us and at the same time we are not receiving that which we have a right to expect, a countervailing Grant from the Treasury in respect of those duties. The right hon. Gentleman also told us, which is only very sound and good advice at a time like this, that it was our duty to be as economical as possible. I can promise him that whatever my Constituents may have desired to get out of the Local Government Board, I shall not ask him for anything which will cost him a fraction of a penny. These are matters of comparatively small importance. We have had this week two very large matters, and of course it cannot be expected that the same attention can be given to these minor matters, but still to us in the country they are all-important, and although they may seem minor matters to discuss in the Imperial Parliament, yet in themselves they are of relatively great importance to the local authorities.
    I should like to thank him for his courteous and sympathetic reply to me a fortnight ago, when he said he was prepared to consider applications from boards of guardians to allow an increase in the amount which had been previously sanctioned by the Local Government Board from 5s. to 6s. in the case of children who had to be boarded out. It is extremely difficult, owing to the increased cost of the necessities of life, to properly feed and house a boy eight or nine years old for 5s. a week, and it would be the very worst economy on the part of the Local Government Board if they did not see that the rising generation were properly fed and that their boarding-out committee had a free hand to see that they got proper food and nourishment. I have had considerable experience in local government, and I make this admission to the right hon. Gentleman: You can very frequently get round one of the Government Departments, and if he had not seen his way to make this concession to the board of guardians by increasing the allowance of boarding-out committees, I will tell him exactly what we should have done. The Local Government Board have no authority over the allowance for the outfit of the boy, and therefore it would have been very easy for the boarding-out committee to have gone to some house and said, "It is quite true the Local Government Board has limited us to 5s., but we will give you a good outfit allowance, and you can take it out of that and make up

    1367
    the deficiency in the cost of feeding the child." I am glad the right hon. Gentleman did not insist on us descending to any matters of that sort.
    I want to call the attention of the Committee to some questions connected with roads. I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman, because I know he will hear a good deal of this question to-morrow, and the succeeding days; but perhaps he will forgive me if I take him for a preliminary gallop over the course this afternoon. I want to ask who is responsible for withholding the grant for a road unless there is some certificate given that all the roads in the district are adequately maintained. It is an entire innovation. For the first time we are told that these grants will not be payable unless all the roads are adequately maintained. What roads does this refer to? Are these the county council roads or the district roads? Who is to inspect them? Is a new office to be created? The right hon. Gentleman speaks of economy. Are we to have now an entirely new class of official who is to go round all the roads of the country? Under whose supervision are they going to give this certificate before we are able to get the grant? If the official is under forty years of age he would be much better employed in the trenches in Flanders. If he is over that age, he is probably some old woman whom it is quite unnecessary to employ under these circumstances. I want to know by what authority that grant can be withhold. It is money that has been collected by us and sent up to London and we have a perfect right to get it back, and I ask the right hon. Gentleman, who is the custodian of the roads of this country, to give us some intelligible answer to that question. I would like to know whether his Departmental Committee is still sitting to deal with the question of the classification of roads. In regard to roads, there are two matters which, at any rate, have created considerable interest in the North Riding. There is the question of tractions upon the roads and there is also the question of the service of motor buses and charabancs which go over our roads. Is the right hon. Gentleman and the Departmental Committee still receiving evidence in regard to the question of tractions? We think—and I should like to know whether he will be able to express an opinion on this point—that the annual licence charged for these tractions ought to be increased. We also think
    1368
    that the daily permit should be left at the discretion of the county council, with a maximum of 10s. per day. In regard to motors and charabancs which make no contribution whatever to our local rates, is that question going to be considered by a joint Committee of both Houses? We were told, several months ago, that a joint Committee of both Houses was about to be appointed. I would like to know why that Committee has not been appointed in order that some recommendations might be brought up so that some fair contribution might be obtained from those companies which run the motor buses and charabancs towards the cost of these roads, which, at the present time, cannot carry the traffic that is placed upon them. In the North Riding there are 534 miles of main road, and we have only twenty-one miles that are calculated to bear traffic of this sort, and it is a monstrous injustice upon the ratepayers of the North Riding that they should be called upon to put their roads into such an adequate state as to carry motor-'bus traffic and char-a-bancs. I know I am laying myself open to the taunt from the right hon. Gentleman, as a director of the North-Eastern Railway, that we are one of the worst offenders in this respect, but at the same time I can only say that the railway company will bear its fair contribution, and it is only just that a contribution should be paid by these companies which reap a profit out of their traffic upon the roads.
    I would also draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the question of nursery Grants. Amongst the many misfortunes of this War it has been a very great misfortune—I am not complaining of it—that these Grants cannot be given, and I do ask the President of the Local Government Board, speaking as I do on behalf of the county councils, to turn his attention to this suggestion that the administration of these Grants ought to be in the hands of the county councils. We were led to understand that if these Grants had been given they would have been given to the different insurance committees throughout the country. I do not want to say one word against the insurance committees. I was honoured by being selected as chairman of our first insurance committee, and I worked on it as well and as properly as I could, but I would point out that the insurance committees can only deal with a limited number of people. They can only deal with insured persons and their dependants, whereas the county

    1369
    council has charge of the whole inhabitants of the place. Already many county councils subscribe to the different nursing associations; already we give nursing scholarships and other Grants; and I ask the right hon. Gentleman to interest him self in this question, and to say that the county councils are a better authority for administering these Grants than the insurance committees can possibly be. There is another matter to which I desire to direct the attention of the right hon. Gentleman, and that is the question of the appointment of the clerks of county councils. County councils have been in existence twenty-six years, and I would ask the right hon. Gentleman does he not think that the time has almost arrived when county councils could be trusted to engage and appoint their own clerks? As the Committee is no doubt aware, at the pre sent time the clerk of the peace is ex officio the clerk of the county council. In our own North Riding I do not wish to suggest that there is any difficulty about that, and I do not want to say that perhaps there are no reasons why the Standing Joint Committee should not appoint them, but I would ask the right hon. Gentle man's attention to this—
    The CHAIRMAN: I understand that the matter now being raised by the hon. Member comes under the existing law and is a matter affecting legislation. The hon. Member will see that in Committee of Supply we deal only with the administration of matters within the existing law.
    Mr. TURTON: I hoped that I should have been in order in asking the right hon. Gentleman to direct his attention to a matter which we consider a grievance under this Vote and in suggesting that the time of the right hon. Gentleman might be usefully occupied in considering something which hereafter unquestionably should be a matter of legislation. If I am not out of order on that point I do desire to suggest that the right hon. Gentleman's time might be usefully employed, in consultation with the Home Secretary, to discuss the question whether an office which is admittedly to-day a freehold office is in keeping with our democratic time. Would it be believed that at the present time the clerkship of the county council is a freehold office? Nothing in the world can dislodge him. He can behave exactly as he likes. He can tell you, "I have got a freehold office." Nothing short of misconduct can get rid of that man. Probably
    1370
    he is too senile to commit any misconduct, and the result is that he can continue in his freehold office. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to give his careful attention to that fact and see whether it is not time that the clerk of the county council should be appointed on more democratic lines and on the usual business lines of being liable to six months' notice. I do not know whether it would be in order to discuss the question of local taxation on this Vote, but I would like the right hon. Gentleman to tell us that when we collect the local taxation licences we should be entitled to return the net amount and not send up the gross amount and have to meet all the cost. I do not know whether I shall be going beyond what is allowed under this Vote, but I cannot help thinking that the right hon. Gentleman has a golden opportunity at the present time, and that in the interests of local government he would be very well and usefully occupied, at a time when all parties are together and practically unanimous, if he could devise some large scheme of decentralisation and devolution by which so many matters which are brought to this House might be dealt with by the local assemblies and by local opinion on the spot. I have been sitting during this Session upon the Local Legislation Committee, and there is nothing on that Committee that has impressed me more than the fact as to how much could be done by the local authorities, and how unnecessary it is to bring them up to Westminster to discuss matters here which could be very well dealt with in their own localities. We spent considerably more than half a day in discussing in what particular part of a street a urinal should be placed. Another time we were discussing for ever so long whether a disused burial ground might be used as a tramway shelter. Witnesses are brought up and counsel are paid fees out of all proportion to the service they render, and public time is being wasted in this way, and I do venture in all humility to suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that he might see whether both parties in this House could not agree upon some large scheme of devolution and decentralisation, thereby relieving this great Imperial Parliament of unnecessary work, and giving to the local assemblies work which they could do most properly and most efficiently.
    Sir GEORGE TOULMIN: I am not sure whether the speech we have just heard

    1371
    is a maiden speech or not, but if so, it shows we have got a Member who is very well up in local affairs and who, when legislative proposals are before us, will be able to give us some very good advice upon the various matters raised as a result of his experience. Although the President of the Local Government Board is not the President whom we expected a few months ago would be in that position to-day, I have no doubt that we shall meet with a sympathetic ear from the right hon. Gentleman, and we shall not by any means be looking for the cloven hoof in regard to any departures from the steps of his predecessor. We do not expect that there will be any change in the progressive improvement of the condition of children, except in those very necessary measures of economy to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred in respect of applications for loans for buildings. That, I think, is one of the directions in which he will carry the general sentiment of the House with him. We may congratulate ourselves that the right hon. Gentleman's Department has a much smaller number of people dependent upon it than we might have expected some nine or ten months ago would be the case to-day, and that there is so much less poverty and less unemployment than we feared. This has to a certain extent freed his inspectors to take some part in the work which has been cast upon public officials in providing for the Belgians and in looking after other matters. I think that a remark which the President of the Local Government Board made in regard to the position of his inspectors ought to meet with the sympathy of the House. Of course, they ought to be treated in all respects on an equality at least with other Civil servants. I do not by any means regret the extra expense which this Vote shows in comparison with the years to which the President referred. That expense is very largely due to the increase in the inspectorate, and that increase has been amply repaid by increased efficiency, by the avoidance of suffering, by the saving of life, and by the improvement which they have been able to effect in the administration of workhouses and workhouse infirmaries. There is no class of Civil servant that has duties requiring more tact and discretion and greater care and patience than that of the inspector who goes round to visit boards of guardians. They meet with what some of
    1372
    us are rather inclined to think ignorance and stupidity and a tendency to be penurious.
    Mr. W. CROOKS: Have you ever been a guardian?
    Sir G. TOULMIN: I have been a guardian for probably twenty years.
    Mr. W. CROOKS: That's better.
    5.0 P.M.
    Sir G. TOULMIN: If I had not been a guardian I would not be inclined to say that perhaps at times they were ignorant and sometimes stupid. From all I have observed in connection with the advice given by the inspectors of the Local Government Board, the boards of guardians were very slow to adopt improvements I think the inspectors have deserved very well of the State. They have carried out their duties with very great tact and very great skill. I think the compliment which was paid by the President to boards of guardians most gratifying and it was well deserved. More can be done, and more will be done, by boards of guardians, and I feel sure if they are called upon to perform further duties they will willingly perform them. My own feeling is one of regret that they were not called upon in the very early weeks of the War to undertake some special duties, such as housing recruits and so on, which I believe would have been a means of avoiding certain scenes and certain inconveniences which occurred and which we all regret. If it should be necessary I am quite sure that everyone will be glad, for instance, to accommodate himself so as to free some of the workhouse buildings which are suitable for hospitals. And I know that there are even some of the old refugees in the workhouses who feel that they would be doing a bit if they themselves were put to some inconvenience in order that the places where they now are well looked after could be used for the wounded soldiers. Now that there is a much greater number of children who are boarded out or sent out to homes in which there is a fixed sum paid, there was a fear that the children might suffer if the limit of payment which the guardians were allowed to make was not raised owing to the increased cost of provisions, coal, and so on. I was very glad to learn that this limit had been raised some months ago by permission being given, when applied for, to increase the allowance up to 6s. per week per child. There are also institutions where, I think, the Board had not

    1373
    seen its way to increase the limit. But a sort of middle course was adopted in one case into which I looked which proved valuable—that is by permission for a subscription to be given to the institution. In that particular case it was absolutely necessary for the welfare of the children that there should be additional funds at the disposal of those who were conducting the institution, the alternative being the return to the guardians of a number of children who have been very well looked after. In that event the board of guardians themselves would have had to make other provision, and, I feel quite sure, would have been put to a great deal more expense than they were put to by the additional subscription which they were allowed to give.
    I do not quite agree with the hon. Member who spoke last as to the great ease with which Local Government Board inspectors and auditors are got round. I am not very much afraid, even as an economist, of boards of guardians getting round them in the way of spending money. My fear rather is that boards of guardians will get round them by not spending enough money—for instance, in the payment for boarding out. There were some of the very backward unions which were paying only 3s. 6d. per week per child boarded out. I agree with the hon. Member as to the inadequacy of such a sum for properly building up and clothing a growing lad or girl. It is altogether inadequate, and is not economy. I would rather like the Local Government Board to ask its inspectors, when they do go round, to impress upon boards the necessity for an adequate allowance. In reference to the supervision of scattered homes which are now being adopted in some of the smaller unions, the question arises as to who shall be appointed as superintendent with the oversight of the homes. It seems a very easy solution to make the workhouse master the superintendent and let him supervise the homes. It may be felt that his chief duty is to look after the supervision of the accounts, and he knows how to keep the workhouse accounts, and could very easily add the keeping of the accounts of the scattered homes. So far as the accounts are concerned that may be true, but I do not think that the workhouse master is the type of official who should have the care of a family of children. These scattered homes are really little families of children, with boys and girls of different dispositions, characteristics
    1374
    and feelings, and I think that ins many of these cases the advice of a woman would be most valuable to the mothers. If there could be appointed a woman visitor for boarded-out children or the infant life protection visitor, if that officer is a woman, then I think that she would be able to have those little talks with the mother of the children which would benefit both her and the little family in her charge.
    I wonder whether the Local Government Board could give us, without a great deal of trouble and expense, a statement as to how many unions there are in which women have been appointed infant life protection visitors, and in how many have the relieving officers been appointed? I do not think that the relieving officer is quite the best man. He is frequently very busy. He has a tendency to look very much to economy and to the discovery of cases of imposition, on the guardians and so on, and I think in regard to this class of work that a woman is a much better officer. Coming to the regular work of the inspectors of the Local Government Board, I hope that the inspection of the workhouses and workhouse hospitals will not be relaxed. The women inspectors there who have been round I think have done good in the hospitals, but if deterioration once sets in in one of these institutions it is very rapid. In many of these places nurses have left for patriotic reasons—we cannot regret that they have gone where the need for them is greatest—and the attention of the other nurses is distracted by the circumstance in which the nation now is, circumstances of war and the coming of wounded soldiers, from the humdrum duties of looking after chronic or tedious cases. I hope that attention will be paid to this matter, so that they may feel that these visitors are coming, that their coming will not be intimated, and that the inspection which they make will be as thorough and as careful as possible. The President of the Board made a strong declaration of policy in regard to economy. I think that the House is sure to support him in refusing loans and in deferring all new work which can possibly be put off, and I think that we may trust him and his Department to consider carefully the real economy of granting sufficient sums for the completion of work where not to grant them would keep unused building or work which would be useful if they were completed. With that exception—and I will not say that it is an exception, because I have no doubt

    1375
    that it is in the mind of the right hon. Gentleman—the House will not in future ask the reason for refusing a loan, but during the stress in which we are now living we shall rather ask the reason for granting a loan. In those circumstances I think that the right hon. Gentleman may rely on the support of the House.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: I desire to join in congratulating my hon. Friend (Mr. Turton) below the Gangway on the speech which he has delivered, rather move perhaps on the manner of it than on the matter. I cannot agree with him in everything which he said in regard to the question of roads, but I congratulate him on his having made a speech on this occasion which other Members might not have been able to make. However, I am not going into the matters with which he dealt. I put down a notice to reduce the salary of my right hon. Friend by the sum of £100, but on consideration I will not move it. I do not want to reduce his salary by £100 or by any amount, and I do not want to throw the whole Cabinet into chaos by obliging them to allocate the difference in the way in which they would have to do it. But I put down the Motion because I want to call attention to a particular case, and I think that this shows the use of the House of Commons, because it shows that while we are engaged in a great war the House of Commons is not unable to take cognisance of injustice done to a single subject of His Majesty the King. I desire to call attention to the treatment accorded to a lady in the Westminster workhouse. I must begin by telling the House how this unfortunate lady got there. The lady in question is a certain Mrs. Close—I do not think one need go into her antecedents, but, she is a woman of position—who had views similar to those which I hold on the subject of the German alien perils, in our midst, the result of which was that she made various inquiries and had a great deal of communication with the police. On a certain day, the 15th November, she went down to Scotland Yard and was induced at Scotland Yard to enter a cab, and shortly afterwards found herself in Westminster workhouse. I am not going into the question here as to her treatment at Scotland Yard: that is entirely a matter for the Home Office Vote, and it is not necessary for the purpose of what I am going to raise in regard to her treatment in the workhouse to assume whether the lady was perfectly sane or slightly insane.
    1376
    The view of Scotland Yard was that she was slightly insane, and that for her own benefit it was desirable she should be taken to the observation ward of the workhouse, and should remain there until it was decided whether she was sane or not. Whether that was desirable or whether she should have been removed I am not debating this afternoon. I am quite willing to assume in what I have to say in regard to what happened in the workhouse that the police were justified in taking her to the workhouse. But I am going to ask the right hon. Gentleman, after he has heard my statement, as to what this lady underwent at the workhouse to issue a circular to workhouse authorities, or take such steps as will prevent any such treatment being accorded to any of His Majesty's subjects in future.
    This lady committed no offence of any kind. She had not been brought up at the Police Courts or anything of that sort. She was not mad in any sense of the term. The police thought it desirable that, for her own benefit, she would be taken charge of in the workhouse infirmary. She was taken to the Westminster workhouse infirmary on the 15th November last year. When she went there she did not realise where she was; she was not told where she was going. She was put into a cab and taken away by two officials of the police. When she got to the workhouse, she was asked by somebody in authority whether she would like a rest. She said, "I do not want a rest; I am going on to get a couple of tickets for the funeral of my cousin, Lord Roberts." This was a few days before the funeral, and this lady was a cousin of the late Field-Marshal. Then the official replied, "Do you want to be put into a separate cell?" She then found out clearly that she had got into some kind of a place which she did not expect, and without any immediate opportunity of appealing to her friends, she was then and there placed in what is called the observation ward for lunatics. I do not think that I can do better than quote the letter which this lady wrote to the First Commissioner of Police, setting out the treatment accorded, in an English workhouse, to this woman, against whose character there was no possible complaint, in the year 1914. She writes:—
    "I was conducted down a narrow passage into a room where there were several beds. A nurse stripped me of everything, put me into bed, took my rings off my hand, and the combs and hairpins out of my hair, and then the doctor came and examined my body. Then I was given a hot bath, my head was washed, and I was allowed to dry myself, given a rough striped flannel vest, and cotton nightdress to put on."

    1377
    The only suggestion made was that it was for her own benefit that she should be taken care of. She goes on to say:—
    "Upon asking where I was, the nurse told me I was in the lunatic observation ward of the Westminster Workhouse. I was given hot milk and bread and butter."
    An HON. MEMBER: This lady was removed to the workhouse by direction of the police, and not by the workhouse authorities.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: I have said that I am not complaining of the action of the police; what I am complaining of is the action of the workhouse authorities which allows a lady, or anybody else you like, who is suspected, to be treated in this way.
    Mr. LONG: My hon. and learned Friend says he cannot raise this question, where it relates to the action of the police, except on the Home Office Vote. What I cannot understand is what charge is made against the workhouse people, who were acting on an intimation from the police. If the police gave wrong information, that was the fault of the police and is a question for the Home Office. So far as the officials of the workhouse were concerned, they were acting, as they were bound to act, on the instructions of the police.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: The right hon. Gentleman had better allow me to complete my statement before interrupting me.
    Mr. LONG: I beg unreservedly to apologise and to express my regrets. I rose in the hon. Gentleman's interest, and not to annoy him.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: The case I am making is against the Westminster guardians. There was no need whatever for this lady to be brought by the police to the workhouse infirmary for the purpose of detention, or that she should have been subject to these indignities. There was no need to place her in a lunatic ward, where there were seven or eight other lunatics, in order that they might find, by observation, whether she was a lunatic or not. Such a procedure is the likliest thing in the world to send a woman insane. Supposing any one of us were taken to such a place. There might be a complaint or a suggestion by the police that one was not quite compos mentis when taken to the workhouse, and put into a ward where all our clothes would be taken from us, and
    1378
    we would be put among six or seven lunatics, some of them raving, in order that the doctor might ascertain whether or not one was a lunatic. I am making no complaint against the police. What I am drawing attention to is the system of workhouse administration which enables anybody merely on suspicion to be put into a ward, as was this unfortunate lady. Her statement goes on to say:—
    "At 8 p.m. the lunatics came into the room, and night was made hideous by their ravings, one being put into a padded cell. I did not sleep. Next morning, before dawn, I was given coarse workhouse clothing, and after breakfast saw the doctor, who asked me why I had gone to Scotland Yard, and I told him. Afterwards I was permitted to write three letters to my friends, having been assured by the nurses that the police were bound to communicate with my friends and make the proper investigation."
    This lady went in on the 15th and was there until the 18th, when a lady, her friend, came to see the doctor, and on the 18th she was taken out of the observation ward, the doctor and magistrate finding that she was not insane in any sense whatever. But the case does not rest simply and solely on this unfortunate lady's own statement. I have not seen her, nor have I been able to see her, because she has gone to Italy, where she is living, naturally being frightened after what occurred to her. I may state that I am not professionally interested in this case, and that I have taken it up because a very well-known gentleman in London, who was greatly touched by her treatment, asked me to bring it before the House of Commons. Mrs. Close sent two letters to friends. I have seen Miss Rose Gordon Hake, a cousin of the well-known General Gordon Hake. This lady received a letter from Mrs. Close three days after that lady was taken to the workhouse infirmary. Miss Gordon Hake went to see Mr. Ramsden, a magistrate for Devonshire, and they went down to the workhouse infirmary to see this lady, against whom there was no charge whatever except that the police thought that she was not of sound mind. Miss Hake in her statement says:—
    "We arrived at the workhouse and were shown into the observation ward, where we found Mrs. Close dressed in workhouse garb, with her hair unkempt, as the result of a bath she had previously had, with no facility for putting it in order again, in the company of seven or eight more or less lunatics. One of them was perfectly obviously a raving lunatic, walking up and down the room, swearing, spitting, etc. … … Mr. Ramsden and I then went round to an adjoining building to see the doctor, who was quite courteous, and told us it was clear a mistake had been made, but that it was very foolish of Mrs. Close to have troubled herself about spy-hunting. …. I then agreed that I would come back at half-past four to vouch for Mrs. Close, and see the magistrate. I came back, and before the magistrate came saw Mrs. Close in the ward, and sat there with her from half-past four till nearly

    1379
    six, before her turn came to see the magistrate. While there I heard cries and moans proceeding from the padded room, which adjoined the dormitory, the ravings from the lunatic confined there being continuous and horrible. Mrs. Close informed me that this kind of thing had gone on while she was there particularly during the two nights: and while I was there the woman who was cursing and raving had to he taken away by two nurses."
    After that she was seen by the magistrate and taken home by her friend. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board asked me what complaint I had against the guardians. It is against the guardians or against the system, and my object is to ensure that the sufferings of this lady, and the indignities to which she was subjected, shall have at least the good effect of leading to arrangements in future which will secure that anybody who gets into the hands of the police, like this lady, as a suspected lunatic, will receive different treatment. I am accepting, for the moment, the case put against this lady, though after her three days' detention it was proved that she was perfectly sane; but assuming the case was correct, my complaint is that anyone suspected to be a wandering lunatic should be taken to a place where he would receive quite different treatment from that which this lady suffered, and should not be put into a ward with seven or eight lunatics. Not merely on the evidence of Mrs. Close, but on the evidence of Miss Gordon Hake, I ask my right hon. Friend whether this is not a case which should receive attention? I am not bringing it in any hostile spirit, and this is the only opportunity we have to put a case of this kind before the House of Commons. I should have thought that the right hon. Gentleman, instead of saying that there was no complaint against the guardians, would have at once stated that if the facts I have put before him were correct—and I submit that there is no possibility of doubt as to the correctness of the facts, and after she got to the workhouse ward there is no dispute whatever as to the facts—a mistake had been made, that such a thing would not be allowed to occur again, and that when people were brought in by the police under such circumstances they would in future be put into a separate room, where they would be taken care of, and where they would be seen by their friends, instead of being locked up for three days, which this lady was.
    Mr. CROOKS: The hon. and learned Member has brought a charge against the
    1380
    Workhouse officials, but this matter has nothing whatever to do with the Local Government Board. The observation ward is licensed by the Home Office. This lady was put under three days' detention under police order, and at this institution she was stripped and bathed and examined by a medical officer in the usual way, and was discharged after three days. It should be remembered that her position might have been worse had she been left to wander about in an excited state, getting into serious trouble. If the hon. and learned Member would join with some of us in trying to get a private receiving house for such cases, where it is uncertain whether a person is a lunatic or not, he would do far more good than by bringing forward a case of this kind. This lady is well off, but there can be no difference of treatment whether the woman be rich or poor. The police have no place to which they can take either a man or a woman in circumstances such as those which have been stated, except it is a place licensed by the Home Office. I rose, however, for the purpose of calling attention to the fact of the marvellous progress made by the Local Government Board within the last nine or ten years. Years ago I used to call attention to the treatment of pauper children, with a view to avoiding the idea that once a pauper always a pauper. The right hon. Gentleman, now the President of the Local Government Board, laid the foundation of the better treatment of young children, and if a system is properly managed and supervised it has a chance. In previous Debates it used to be said that there were nothing like scattered homes with a foster-mother to look after the children; but those homes became little workhouses, containing as many as sixteen children, and they called that home "just like a workman's home." I know workmen's homes, but I do not know of any workman's home with sixteen children under twelve years of age in it. What marvellous proof we have of the enlightened treatment of the child! In every department nowadays, instead of being called a "wicked little cub," or something of that sort—

  ROYAL ASSENT.
  Whereupon the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, having come with a Message to attend the Lords Commissioners, the Chairman left the Chair.
  Mr. SPEAKER resumed the Chair.
  Message to attend the Lords Commissioners.
  The House went, and, having returned,
  Mr. SPEAKER reported the Royal Assent to:—

  1. Consolidated Fund (No. 3) Act, 1915.

  2. Customs (Exportation Restriction) Act, 1915.

  3. Forfar Gas Order Confirmation Act, 1915.

  4. Great North of Scotland Railway Order Confirmation Act, 1915.

  5. Highland Railway Order Confirmation Act, 1915.

  6. Irvine and District Water Board (Emergency Powers) Order Confirmation Act, 1915.

  7. Brighton and Hove Gas Act, 1915.

  8. Falmouth Docks Act, 1915.

  9. Ormskirk Gas and Electricity Act, 1915.

  10. Metropolitan District Railway Act, 1915.

  11. Seaforth and Sefton Junction Railway Act, 1915.

  12. Streatley and Goring Bridge Act, 1915.

  13. Bristol Tramways Act, 1915.

  14. Halifax Corporation Act, 1915.

  15. Sheffield Corporation (Tramways) Act, 1915.

  16. West Gloucestershire Water Act, 1915.

  SUPPLY again considered in Committee.
  Question again proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £234,791, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1916, for the salaries and expenses of the Local Government Board."
  Mr. CROOKS (resuming): I am told that I left off at an extremely awkward point. What I wanted to say was that these children were considered to be unworthy of notice. We hear a lot about education. One often hears a man say, "What's the good of education? I have done very well without it." That always brings to my lips the reply, "Honesty is the best policy, but some people have done very well without it." You have to take the best of the different systems for the treatment of children and pick out the satisfactory elements. It is a remarkable thing, and I
  1382
  am proud of it, that a Poor Law boy has won the Victoria Cross, and another in the East of London has got the Distinguished Conduct Medal. In the girls' department you have similar results. As we have heard from the right hon. Gentleman the President, pauperism has gone down, and that is because of the self-reliance of the enormous number of children for whose training the Local Government Board have been responsible. I might also refer to the training of mentally deficient children. The setting up of institutions to treat them outside the workhouse is all to the good. I could give half-a-dozen instances of the beneficial results of this training. I am never tired of giving examples of Poor Law children who have excelled.
  When some of us were going round the world I met a girl on the other side of the globe. She said to me, "You did not think you would see me here when you gave me my prize." I asked, "Where was that?" She told me that I gave her a prize at the Poplar Training School. I asked her what she was doing. She said she was a lady's help. I said, "I really have not time to speak to you now, but if you will come and see me in the morning I shall be glad. Will your mistress allow you to come?" She replied, "If she does not allow me to come, I will get another place." Who said that there was no self-reliance in these children? One girl in a mentally deficient home, who was looked upon as silly and foolish, went straight away and became cook of the institution in which she had been. Another case is that of a silly, stupid boy who was trained in one of these homes and is now a petty officer in the Navy. I could multiply instances showing the advantages of the better system and the better opportunity given to these children. I think we ought to notice the good work of the institutions as well as all the carping criticism that we hear. I have done as much as anybody else in that way, and I hope it has done some good. I think it has. People have sometimes hastened to do good for fear I should brag that I had made them do it. Personally, I do not care who does the job so long as it is done.
  A plea has been put in with regard to vaccination officers' fees. I wish the Department would issue an order enabling guardians to pay these men by salary and not by fees at all. It would be much better and fairer. Questions have been asked in regard to old age pensions. The

  1383
  late Chancellor of the Exchequer promised me months ago that he would consider the point which I then raised and which I wish to bring forward again. It may be perfectly true that the increased income here and there from allotments by sons has caused the pension officer to recommend a reduction of the pension. But I want the Committee to remember that that is only a reduction on the 13s. limit. The people for whom I am pleading are those on the 5s. limit. The heroism of these men and women in making efforts to remain outside the Poor Law and to keep their little homes together is wonderful, and they are now, in the midst of a War for which they certainly are not responsible, and in which they can take no part, trying to eke out a miserable existence on 5s. a week. It is starvation. You cannot argue the matter. For an old man or woman to live on 5s. a week is next to an impossibility. They simply linger on and then die of starvation. But the courage is there all the time in their endeavour to keep free from the stigma of pauperism.
  What can be done? I hope the right hon. Gentleman will talk over with his officials the possibility of helping old age pensioners during the War by not being too particular in the definition of medical comforts. Old age pensioners are allowed to get medical relief without becoming disqualified for their pensions. The Board can do it if they like. I hope they will issue a circular to the guardians saying that where they think it desirable in the case of old age pensioners unable to maintain themselves, I will not say in decency, but unable to procure sufficient food, they may include within the purview of medical assistance bread and meat, or something of that kind, to the extent of 2s. or 2s. 6d. a week. That would make all the difference between life and death to many of these old people. I know an old man who gets 5s. a week and has not a friend in the world. He pays 1s. 9d. in rent and has to feed and cloth himself on what is left. The Committee can readily see that he cannot go on living very long. He just picks up an extra shilling here and there. Who can refrain from giving such a man a shilling? He has all the bravery and courage of our race. He is starving for his independence.
  Surely these are the people who have a claim upon us! After all, these old veterans built up the commercial supremacy of Great Britain, and we have no
  1384
  right to desert them, especially in days like the present. These are the patriots who have made our liberty worth having. Medical comforts cover a variety of things. I have shoals of letters from these men and women saying, "You are thinking of this man and that man. Is not the industrial veteran worth thinking about?" To that I reply that we are always thinking about him, but we never do anything for him. This is our annual chance. I should have said the same to any other President. I do not know any board of guardians in the Kingdom now, whatever may have been the case twenty years ago, who would not be willing to make such an allowance as I have suggested, if they had an assurance from the Local Government Board that they would not be surcharged for it. The auditor is a pretty strict person. You are bound down considerably by certain rules. I once had to pay a surcharge. The master of the poor-house with which I was connected put currants in the bread of the old people to save butter. The Department said that it was a shame, and made us pay back the money. But you do not do that nowadays. I hope I have said enough to induce the right hon. Gentleman to issue such an Order as I have suggested.
  Sir G. BARING: No one speaks with more authority on a subject of, the kind we are discussing to-day than the hon. Member for Woolwich (Mr. Crooks). Years ago he was a pioneer in the East End of London of humane workhouse treatment. The difference in the way that workhouses are conducted to-day as compared with twenty years ago is very remarkable. I have served on boards of guardians for many years. Twenty years ago there were workhouses which were not only as bad as prisons, but infinitely worse. All that has been swept away, not only by the activity of the Local Government Board, but also by the work of boards of guardians themselves. That is why I was rather sorry to hear an hon. Member say that some members of boards of guardians were ignorant and stupid. That could be said of any public body. It might even in the past have been said of this august Assembly. Of course it could not be correctly said of it now. The board of guardians on which I had the honour of serving was not an ignorant or stupid board; it was a very intelligent and well-conducted board.
  I should like to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman who has assumed the office of President of the Local Government

  1385
  Board on his return to that great Department. These are difficult times for every Department, and not least for the Local Government Board, and I think the country may be congratulated that the affairs of that Department are once more in the hands of the right hon. Gentleman, who is peculiarly able to direct them in these difficult times. We are glad also that he is to be assisted by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Fulham (Mr. Hayes Fisher), who before assuming office was engaged in the work of the London County Council. I am sure that under the supervision of these two right hon. Gentlemen we shall get through the present critical period. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Long) paid a well-deserved eulogy to the work done by the officials of his Department. The time has long gone by when it was supposed to be necessary that there should be hostility between the Local Government Board and the public bodies of the country. I have had twenty years' experience of local government, and I have always found the officials of the Local Government Board exceedingly anxious to help the work of those public bodies by every means in their power. I am sure that the present officials can be trusted to help us with the difficult problems with which public bodies are at present faced.
  One problem with which local authorities were confronted at the commencement of the War was that of providing suitable and sanitary camps for troops in different parts of the country. I think the health record was extraordinarily satisfactory, and that was due to the energy with which the surveyors of the various bodies assisted the military authorities in seeing that the water supply and sanitation were everything they should be. I wish to say one word with regard to the administration of the Prince of Wales' Fund. I understand that it would not be in order to go into the actual allocation of money under the fund. I hope the right hon. Gentleman did not think me discourteous in raising a point of Order when he was speaking.
  Mr. LONG: Not at all.
  Sir G. BARING: I was only anxious to know how far we should be allowed to go. The only remark I will make is, that I wish those who control the fund had not been quite so parsimonious in their grants to the various local committees. I hope they will recognise that
  1386
  6.0 P.M.
  these committees consist of extremely experienced men and women, with full local knowledge, and of sure local position. I hope they will be inclined to trust them a little more than they do at present. Wisdom does not reside only in Downing Street. It is sometimes to be found on our local bodies. I hope also that the much appreciated visits of Local Government Board inspectors to the various Poor Relief committees will be continued. These committees have to deal with very difficult matters and in many cases they have derived the greatest possible assistance from the visits of the inspectors. With regard to economy, I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that the greatest possible economy is now being practised by almost every public body in the country. In connection with the county council of which I have the honour to be chairman, we have carefully scrutinised and revised every item of our expenditure. Only the other day, to the great anger of motor-car owners, we reduced our expenditure on roads by £2,000. The Isle of Wight is, of course, a very small county. That shows that we are making every effort to economise and to carry out the recommendations of the Local Government Board. I wish the right hon. Gentleman would see his way to issue another circular—circulars are not unfamiliar to the Local Government Board—once more drawing attention to the extreme urgency for the need of economy. It would help the party of economy on various councils. The way of the economist is always rather hard. It is hard here, and it is doubly hard on the local bodies. I know of nothing more unpopular, whether it be in the House of Commons or upon a local body, than to advocate economy. But if economists can point to advice issued by the Local Government Board, I think it would be a real service at the present time. I should like to make one reference to the recommendations which are sometimes made to boards of guardians by Local Government Board inspectors. As I have said, these are an admirable body of men; extremely able, and extremely courteous, but they sometimes recommend things which, though not intended, cost a great deal of money. I hope the Local Government Board will suggest a close time for fads, because they always end in a rise in the local rates. The hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton alluded to the way in

  1387
  which the North Riding County Council would be able to get round the regulations of the Local Government Board. I was rather shocked to hear that suggestion. I should like to say that in the Isle of Wight County Council we have never infringed any of the regulations made, in their wisdom, by the Local Government Board inspectors.
  I should like to conclude by drawing the right hon. Gentleman's attention to a question which, I think, is very likely to be a very urgent one in the future. We all know, unfortunately, that week by week and month after month large numbers of men are coming back from the War permanently incapacitated from serving in the Army, and also for all except the very lightest possible employment. I am told on good authority, a few months ago, that the number of men permanently incapacitated in that way amounted to over 2,000. By the end of the War, which we are afraid may be long, that number will be enormously increased. I hope the Local Government Board will consider carefully whether they can in any way assist these men to obtain employment. Perhaps more men might be employed by the various great Departments of the State in light work which can be easily performed. Unless a scheme is carefully devised and carefully administered, we shall be confronted at the end of the War, if unfortunately it goes on for a long time, with an almost unsurmountable problem. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will consider whether something cannot be done to prevent what in the past has been a scandal—that is to say, men who have served their country and given of their best, who perhaps have been a little improvident, reduced to begging their bread or going to the workhouse. We must see that after this War that dreadful state of things no longer exists. I hope we shall hear from the right hon. Gentleman that he has that problem in view and will be able to deal with it.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I should like to add one word in the support of the case brought forward by my hon. Friend. I do not personally know anything about it, except what I saw in one of the newspapers and from what my hon. Friend has said. He has made out a case for some alteration in the customs of the observation room in the different workhouses. I do not want to go into the question as to
  1388
  whether the police or the workhouse authority was bound to receive the lady in question. Of course they were bound to receive her. There can be no question about that, but were they bound, when they had got her, to take off her clothes and wash her? We hear about economy. Soap and water costs something. Was it absolutely necessary in the case of this lady to wash her, seeing she was clean? There seems to be no reason why she should have been washed and her hair taken down and the ordinary workhouse clothes put upon her. The hon. Gentleman opposite has given a reason. There is, he said, a regulation that everybody who goes in has to be stripped and given a bath. But such a regulation ought to be carried out with discretion. Unnecessary observation of rules of this sort is absolutely absurd and takes up the time of the officials. If I were, to be taken by the police and sent in to an observation, ward, should I be immediately stripped, and bathed, and have my hair brushed? I hope that my two right hon. Friends—one shakes his head, and the other is taking no notice—I do not know whether that means divided opinion—but I do hope they will point out to the persons in authority that they should use a little discretion, though if a very dirty person comes in it is quite right that he or she should be washed.
  I heartily agree with the proposals of economy to which the hon. Gentleman below the Gangway has alluded. I am sorry that he thinks it unpopular to advocate economy. I have been a supporter of economy ever since I had the honour of a seat in this House. It does not matter to me whether it is popular or unpopular. I have done what I thought to be right, and I hope my hon. Friend will do so. It is news to me to learn that local authorities have suddenly become economical. It must have been since the day before yesterday—no, yesterday!—for they have been by no means inclined to economy. It may be that the hon. Baronet's council is the only one; if so, I trust it will set an example to other local authorities.
  Sir ALBERT SPICER: I want to emphasise two points which already have been referred to. Before doing so, may I say how extremely pleased I was to hear the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board refer in such appreciative terms to the work of boards of guardians. The longer I am in contact I with boards of guardians the more I feel

  1389
  that they never have had proper respect paid to them. They are doing extremely useful work, a work which, if it were more widely known, and they themselves were more widely known as guardians, would lead to a prevention of waste and overlapping in a great deal of the work that is being regularly undertaken by philanthropic and religious bodies. It is a strange thing that I have never been able to find a directory of guardians. I can find the names and addresses of every other local authority and public authority; I have never succeeded in finding a directory of boards of guardians. The consequence is, that when I have wanted to find out who were the guardians in any particular district, I have had to go to the clerk of the guardians and trust to his courtesy to give me the list I required. I have been amazed in how many districts where one discussed different questions with residents in the districts to find that though they knew who were the Members of Parliament, who their members of the borough or the municipal council were, they had not the least idea who were the members of the board of guardians. I believe the absence of that knowledge leads to a great deal of waste of power and overlapping in work, because when people make application for work to one, and are asked what is the view of their local authority, their guardians or municipal authority, as a rule I find that so far as the guardians are concerned no notice whatever has been taken of them.
  As to the two points I just want to emphasise: I do not put forward my remarks as criticisms; they are merely suggestions, because I know perfectly well that the President of the Local Government Board has a good deal of sympathy in this direction. The plan of rearing children in large institutions is no longer regarded with favour by educationists, or by the medical profession. There is a growing, thoughful public opinion in favour of individual methods by which dependent children can be dealt with in small groups. Many boards of guardians who have desired to go in this direction, have been hindered, because having institutions which have been built and paid for by the public money, they did not know what use to make of these buildings if they adopted newer and more progressive measures. Now that the military authorities are in such need of accommodation, it would seem a unique opportunity
  1390
  of utilising some of these "barrack" buildings for more appropriate uses. The Brentford Board of Guardians are arranging for the upbringing of their children in scattered homes, a system which is growing in favour with the pubilc. It is certainly most economical, when it is kept within proper dimensions, to have ten or twelve children with a suitable foster mother as supervisor. This is the next best plan to boarding-out in proper genuine homes, and the nearest approach to bringing up children in the most natural conditions. I know that these arrangements will require a great deal of consideration, but it seems to me a time when a great deal might be done in this direction. I hope the President will facilitate any transference of school buildings in this direction.
  The other point is the possible danger of overcrowding. Owing to the dilatoriness of some boards of guardians in removing their children from the workhouse before the Treasury thought it expedient—and only right—to restrict the granting of loans for building purposes the children are being sent to children's institutions of other unions, which unions, of course, gladly receive them, because it naturally reduces the cost per head of maintenance and establishment charges. There will be great need of strict supervision if there is not to be overcrowding in these institutions. A word of warning may be given by the inspectors in this direction, because such overcrowding, we know perfectly well, inevitably leads to outbreaks of epidemic diseases. I ask the President's kind consideration of these two points.
  Mr. JAMES MASON: The President of the Local Government Board, at the conclusion of his very satisfactory and interesting speech, referred to the satisfactory position in which this country stands in respect to the figures which deal with pauperism, unemployment, and so forth. We all feel highly satisfied that these figures are as they are. But I am also sure that the Department cannot fail to realise that the satisfactory figures of unemployment certainly are very largely due to the artificial stimulus in employment caused by the War, and that though we may have a considerable amount of employment, directly and indirectly, connected with the War, the Local Government Board will have to prepare for a very careful review and stringent administration when the War comes to an end. I cannot help feeling that a great deal of

  1391
  difficulty will arise, not only when we have the cessation of the necessity for making munitions for war, but when we are gradually disbanding the men who are employed in the Army, and the other industries which are more or less connected with that special position. That leads me to think that very great care should be exercised in the administration of any such funds as that to which allusion has already been made, and which is commonly known as the Prince of Wales' Fund".
  The right hon. Gentleman, in the early part of his remarks, referred, in a manner which was to me highly satisfactory, to the very strong action that he intends to take as regards forcing economy upon local authorities. I am sure that, after the statements which have been made within the last few days in this House and the facts which have come to our knowledge in the last few weeks throughout the whole of Europe, if is perfectly obvious that not only all the money but all the available labour in this country is absolutely essential, not only for military purposes and for creating munitions of war, but for carrying on those industries which are essential to the country, such as the production of food and so forth, and that there is no labour or money left over for carrying out unproductive work which is not absolutely necessary. I am afraid that there are a very large number of individuals throughout the country who have still not realised the necessity for cutting down unproductive expenditure. When you see employment of people in various directions which are not necessary, it makes one really wonder whether those people have really realised that this country is engaged in such a serious struggle as is actually the case.
  Besides the unfortunate way in which this matter is dealt with by the private individual, it is undoubtedly the fact that a very considerable number of local authorities throughout the country seem to be equally imbued with the same idea, and I am extremely glad to hear the right hon. Gentleman means to be very stiff about the granting of loans. I do not think it is quite fair or advisable to mention any particular authority, but within the last few days I have seen strenuous efforts made by local authorities with which I am acquainted to raise money for the purpose of road improvement. Of course we all admit that roads have got
  1392
  to be kept in repair, but I absolutely deny that anything in the shape of permament improvement, or even doing anything to the roads which can possibly be postponed for a year or two, is justified under the conditions in which we find ourselves. I do not know exactly what is being done by the Development Board with regard to assistance of these things, but it is quite possible I should be out of order in mentioning the question of the Development Board. If it can be done, I should certainly suggest that the authorities who administer that fund should not be encouraged to give anything towards the carrying out of that part of their work.
  There is one other point which I should like to press upon the right hon. Gentleman. I cannot help thinking that, when we look round and see the necessity for making use of every possible man for useful employment in some direction or another, we cannot fail to come to the conclusion that the first step towards making the best use of our labour and our resources is to have some accurate knowledge, not only as to the numbers of men available in the country, but also as to their capabilities and their occupation. I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be possible in order to save time, because I feel sure sooner or later this will happen, that he should bring pressure upon or instruct the county councils throughout the country to commence to make a national inventory of their manhood, with a view to using such information if the time and necessity later on arise? I feel sure that the formation of such a register would absolutely commit this House or the country to no definite line of action afterwards. It is by no means necessarily connected with any system of compulsion at all; but I say if, later on, an emergency comes upon us, it may cause this House unanimously to decide that some form of compulsion or organisation is necessary, and then everybody will be equally agreed that the time had been lost in not having this information at their disposal. I therefore press on the right hon. Gentleman that some steps should be taken, and taken immediately, with the object of ascertaining facts and figures which, later on, we may find to be indispensable, and if not required will mean very little loss.
  Sir JOHN SPEAR: I desire very heartily to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his return as President of the Local Government Board, and I can

  1393
  assure him that local authorities who remember his policy when last an that position are looking forward with confidence that his power will be used to help local authorities to perform their important duties with efficiency and yet with economy. It is very gratifying to hear the right hon. Gentleman bear testimony, and I think just testimony, to the work of Poor Law guardians. It leads us to believe that he is not a disciple, or at any rate a supporter, of the phrase which five or six years ago was prevalent, advocating the scrapping of boards of guardians and the putting of the duties which were performed by them in the hands of the county councils. I hope that fallacy is being dispersed, and I am confident that the advent of the right hon. Gentleman to the Local Government Board will do something to destroy such an idea, which is contrary to every principle of democratic government, and contrary, I believe, to the best interests of the poor and the truest interests of economy. There is one point I would suggest to the right hon. Gentleman, and that is if he would see fit to advise the Home Office to make chairmen of boards of guardians ex-officio magistrates. That dignity has been placed upon the chairmen of district councils, and I certainly think the time has come when an equal compliment should be paid to the chairmen of boards of guardians. The position which they occupy prove their capability and worthiness to take a seat on the bench with advantage to all concerned.
  The right hon. Gentleman, I understand, and I am glad to know, has determined to give an increased grant towards the expenses of boarding out children. It is a movement, as the hon. Member for Woolwich (Mr. Crooks) said just now, which has effected very great purposes. Another hon. Member suggested that women inspectors should be appointed to visit those institutions. If it were necessary on the ground of efficiency, so important is it that our children should be well cared for, I would not oppose it, but where boards of guardians appoint committees and include lady guardians—and I wish all boards of guardians had some lady guardians among their members—they constitute a regular visiting committee of the scattered homes. I venture to say that secures efficiency and care, which could not be excelled if we had women inspectors, and the appointment of those officers would be a waste of money. With reference to economy, I have been for forty years a member of most
  1394
  local bodies, and I have found that as a rule local bodies study economy so far as it is consistent with efficiency. But I quite agree that the stumbling block in the way hitherto of our greater success in that direction has been the sometimes unreasonable demands of the inspectors of the Local Government Board, and I am confident, because the right hon. Gentleman has inculcated the principles of economy, that he will give the inspectors in his Department advice in the direction of paying greater respect to the opinions of local administrative bodies than hitherto has been the case. Boards of guardians certainly know best what is needed for their particular district, and it is extremely irritating for their decison to be overruled by the inspectors who are sent down.
  There are two other points I should like to bring before the notice of the right hon. Gentleman. First of all, I would like to say, in reply to the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury), who seems to be scandalised because vagrants coming into the workhouse have to submit to a bath, that I think would be a very serious dissemination of disease if that operation were not carried out, and I am bound to say it is a very useful deterrent to so many vagrants going about, because the last thing they like is to have a good wash down. On that point, may I suggest it would be desirable if the policy adopted in some parts of the country of giving vagrants a "way ticket" to obtain some food, were made general throughout the country? It has had a very beneficial effect on the Tavistock union. We know vagrants are encouraged by sympathetic people giving them food and sometimes money, and it is very difficult for anyone who sees a vagrant looking wet on a rainy day to avoid doing so. But when we know he has some food in his pocket, or a ticket that will secure him food, then charitable feelings do not prevail, and the result is that less encouragement is given to the professional tramp system. I believe it would be well if that principle were extended.
  I would appeal to the right hon. Gentleman for local authorities to be given a larger grant towards the cost of pauper lunatics. It is of the greatest importance that they should be well taken care of, and with reference to the case mentioned by the hon. Member for Brentford (Mr. Joynson-Hicks) I am bound to say I have observed how careful guardians are to have full medical examination and

  1395
  sanction before a person is removed to an asylum, and I do not think any harm or injustice often occurs in that direction. With reference to the income of local bodies, there is just one point I would like to mention. We know that the Government have taken over a large number of premises in the country for the purposes of munitions of war, and not only are they taking over premises, but in some cases they are building premises. Hitherto the occupiers of those premises paid rates towards the expenses of the boards of guardians and other local bodies. Surely these bodies ought not to lose by the occupation of those premises by the Government, but that rates ought to be paid by the Government while they are in occupation. I think it would be an injustice if the local bodies were deprived of this source of income. It would not affect us much in the rural districts, but in the large towns it would mean a serious reduction of income. I am afraid it would be out of order to say anything with reference to the local authorities and the withdrawal of Grants where the roads are out of condition. The county council cannot claim the cost of the maintenance of the roads until the surveyor gives a certificate that the work has been carried out. Although it is unpleasant for a local authority to be mulcted in the cost of part of the maintenance of a road, it is the only weapon we have to secure complete efficiency, and I do not think it should be with drawn. Many local bodies are anxious to maintain the roads in a good state of efficiency—
  The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Mr. Maclean): The hon. Member must not pursue that point. It is a matter for the Treasury, and not for the Local Government Board.
  Sir J. SPEAR: Another hon. Member raised this point, and I was only suggesting where he was wrong. I am certain guardians are anxious, both in relation to the care of the children and the older people, to do their duty as between the poor and the ratepayers. I am confident that the President of the Local Government Board will help us in that direction, and that his advent to the office he now holds will be good both for the local bodies and the country.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: I heartily join in the expressions of pleasure in reference to the right hon. Gentleman's appointment,
  1396
  and his promise to keep a tight rein upon the borrowings of local authorities. Nobody can doubt the vast importance of stopping able-bodied men doing any kind of work which is not absolutely necessary except for the purposes of the War. I would remind the hon. Member for Windsor (Mr. Mason) and other hon. Members that a similar kind of work to that which is done by the local authorities has to be done by one of the most extravagant bodies I know, namely, the London County Council, and I hope the Department will see that the loans to the London County Council are dealt with in the same way and that an equally tight rein is kept upon their expenditure. It is useless to ask the Local Government Board to do things which we are very remiss in doing ourselves. There is a kindred point which arises on this subject. I think it is highly undesirable to employ young men who are fit physically for service in the field in ordinary clerical work. There are in the offices of the Local Government Board a large number of men between nineteen and thirty-eight years of age. The number is so large that when I asked the Prime Minister how many men between those ages were working in Government offices in London he asked me not to press the question, because it entailed so much expense and trouble to ascertain. The usefulness of this great Government Department is now very much reduced, because the more they refuse to sanction loans the more they are holding up the men who are physically fit to do work elsewhere. I should like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board the number of men there are in the Local Government Board offices between the ages of nineteen and thirty-eight. I think the right hon. Gentleman will find the number is very large. Those men are doing work which can be done by much older men. The work they are doing could very well be done by educated men much above that age. There is a very large number of educated men pressing on all sides for an opportunity to do this work, which would relieve and set free other men who are younger to do work which they are physically capable of doing.
  Mr. LONG: I am sure the hon. and learned Member does not wish to pass a wholly undeserved slur on the patriotism of my Department. Does he mean that there are in the Local Government Board offices men of this particular age who

  1397
  ought to go to the front, and who are either unwilling to go or are being kept back by us; and does he assert that they are not required for the performance of the work of the State?
  Mr. RAWLINSON: I am sorry that I did not make myself absolutely clear. There is a large number of physically fit men between the ages of nineteen and thirty-eight employed by the Local Government Board whose work could be equally well done, for instance, by barristers at the age of fifty, such as sanctioning loans to local authorities and—
  Mr. LONG: I do not admit it for a moment.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: I have already asked the Prime Minister a question on this point, and I have referred to the answer which I received. I am now asking for the number of men employed at the present time by the Local Government Board between those ages. The work they are doing could very well be done by professional men. Much of it is largely clerical work which could be done by anyone with a knowledge of municipal law—a knowledge which is possessed by a large number of barristers. The right hon. Gentleman seems angry with me for making this unpopular remark, but the fact remains. I am aware that a large number have already gone to the front. I think this is a most important matter to bring before the House, because if we are preaching this kind of thing to local authorities in the country it is well that we should be able to show that we are clear ourselves as far as central administration is concerned. I have brought this up as a general question on this Vote because I have had no opportunity of bringing it up in relation to other Departments. It is vital that there should be some organisation to deal with this large number of volunteers, whose services could be used in many ways to set free younger men. I wish to endorse what has been said by the hon. Member for Windsor upon the question of a register, but I am not quite sure how it is proposed to carry it out. In August last I suggested that there should be a census taken of the male population of England, and I do not see how you could carry out the proposal which has been suggested simply by asking the local authorities to make a register. Unless there was some compulsion to make the register complete, I do not see how you could make a return
  1398
  merely by asking for statistics from the local authorities in their particular districts. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will tell us whether he thinks it is necessary that there should be a census, or whether he is of the opinion that this can be done by a direction from the Local Government Board.
  With regard to the case of Mrs. Close, I realise that the Local Government Board are in no way responsible for what happened to this lady before she came to the infirmary, and the Home Office would be responsible. Directly the woman is brought to the infirmary, then the responsibility of the Local Government Board begins. I wish to ask, when a woman of that kind is brought to the infirmary, under what power is she received in the infirmary at all? In this case I would like to know, was there any magistrate's order or other authority before she was brought in, and under what power was she detained for three days? When she arrived there apparently she was not a person who appeared to be in want, and when such a case is brought to a workhouse, why is she detained there without any communication with her friends? Is there no regulation which makes it necessary, when a person is taken to a Poor Law infirmary, that some communication should be made to friends, notifying that the person is in the workhouse at that particular time? The last question I wish to ask is, how is it that a person only under observation came to be detained in the same ward as lunatic?
  Sir H. CRAIK: I am afraid I must dissociate myself somewhat decidedly from the views expressed by the hon. and learned Member for the University of Cambridge (Mr. Rawlinson) with regard to volunteering for service in the field on the part of officials of Government Departments. I know nothing of the inside of the Local Government Board, but I do know the general position in relation to Civil servants, and I know how anxious they are to serve in large numbers. In the case of the office with which I was connected, I know that nearly 30 per cent. of the whole of the officials employed there have gone to the front. It is all very well to speak of bringing barristers of fifty years of age into those offices. I wonder how the work of the nation would be carried on if you brought in a number of men in that way. You must have men familiar with the work with which they have to deal, and it is all nonsense to talk about

  1399
  searching through the chambers in the Temple in order to bring in a few lawyers who presumably have retired from their own business, or from whom their business has retired. To manage the affairs of the nation, familiarity with the details, constant practice, and a knowledge of the people with whom you deal are essential points.
  There are only two further points to which I wish to refer. They were raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Windsor (Mr. James Mason). One is the check which I hope the right hon. Gentleman will exercise and which I think I am confident from what he said he will exercise upon the extravagance of local bodies. I am going to be bold, and, as one who has spent all his effective work in the sphere of education, I say that the education authorities are by no means free from the charge of extravagance. There is not a single thing good for the children or the teachers in the schools that I would deny. Money that can be spent in increasing the comfort of the pupils and in increasing the status and improving the position of the teachers I would gladly see spent; but I am perfectly certain—and I speak with knowledge—that in late years there has grown up a tendency to be extravagant in school buildings which must and which ought to be checked, and which often arises from the conceit and self-aggrandisement of the local bodies themselves, rather than anything demanded in the interest of education itself. There were never schools that did more than the old parish schools of Scotland. They were not the parish schools which are now considered necessary—palaces erected without any regard to economy and very often without really adding to the comfort or to the health or to the good teaching of the children in them.
  I hope that not only will this be checked by the right hon. Gentleman at a time of emergency like this, when the need is unquestionable, but that it will also be checked for the future. After the War we must economise and be thrifty in every particular, and we must economise not in regard to the health or the well-being of the children but in regard to those extravagant buildings which are erected often without any check upon them by those responsible. I recall that in my old days we used to consider a capital expenditure of £10 per head was a very fair allowance for the building of a school. That,
  1400
  of course, was in Scotland where expenditure is not on such an extravagant or expensive scale; but we built very good schools at a capital expenditure of about £10 per head. I wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman could bring the expenditure down to anything like three or four times that amount at the present day?
  The last point to which I wish to refer, with great solemnity and earnestness, is the necessity of a register of our national resources. I would be the last to criticise, to carp at, or to oppose any measures that the Government wish to take, but I do wish they would not try our patience or the patience of the nation by delaying doing what is of urgent and immediate public importance. We are often told that we should proceed on good business methods. Surely the first business method is to take stock of our national resources. I am not going to speak of what we should do with those resources, or say whether we should use them compulsorily or not, though I have my own opinion upon the matter. I have asked two or three questions of the Prime Minister on the point, and he has always put me off by saying that something will be done either next week or the week following. I was told only to-day that it would come next week. This cannot wait for days, or even hours. The nation will not carp at it and will not criticise it, but it will be intolerant of criticism of or opposition to anything the Government may think necessary. The nation sympathises with our objection to anything like paltering or indecision, or that a clear note to which we can respond should be lacking at this moment. I know that the right hon. Gentleman agrees with what I say, and I do trust that he will allow no time to be wasted in taking this preliminary step of the registration of our national resources. The expense compared with the immense issues of life and death involved will be trifling. Proceeding naturally according to business methods, let us, as every good business man would, take stock of our national resources, but remember that this is not a matter of mere business failure or success. It is for the nation a matter of life and death, and this preliminary step towards organising our national resources ought to be taken without a day's or an hour's delay.
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Hayes Fisher): My right hon. Friend commenced his survey of work of the work

  1401
  of the Local Government Board by informing the Committee that it is twenty-nine years since he first entered the Department. He might have been a little more reminiscent and have informed the Committee that this is the twelfth year which he has been connected officially and Parliamentary with that great Department. Nobody else has that record in connection with any other Department. His predecessor in office, the present Postmaster-General (Mr. Herbert Samuel), when he stood at this box a year ago to make his first statement on the Estimates of the Local Government Board, pleaded with the Committee that he had only occupied that position for four months. If he pleaded that he had only occupied the position for four months, I must plead that I have not yet occupied my position for four weeks, find therefore, if to-day my answers to the many questions which have been put are not so complete and perhaps so convincing as hon. Members would like, if they will another time come and see me or address themselves to me I may be able to make the answers more complete in conversation or correspondence than I am able to do in the House to-day.
  The right hon. Gentleman's speech must have been noticeable for its entire contrast to the speech which was made by his predecessor last year. To-day the War call is over the Local Government Board as it is over every Government Department. Last year we had an interesting Debate. Housing occupied a very large part of the time given to that Debate. The Poor Law and many other questions which cannot find any room to-day in any speech which may be made were also dealt with. But if, after all, the work of the Local Government Board is less in housing, in many other respects the work of the Local Government. Board has in other directions taken a novel form and a very complete form, as the right hon. Gentleman told us when he described the war work of the Board at the present time. My hon. and learned Friend the Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Rawlinson) rather boldly and dogmatically laid it down that there are many men between nineteen and thirty-eight now working for the Local Government Board who could be well spared and who could undertake military service. He has hardly given sufficient attention to the fact that the Broad is now engaged doing and performing a very valuable task of an extraordinary character not ordinarily associated
  1402
  with the Local Government Board, and the work therefore is rather more than less and requires a staff fully adequate to discharge all the new burdens which it has undertaken. When my hon. Friend suggests that the work could be equally well done by barristers of fifty years and upwards, I must say that is not my experience, and I have had considerable experience now of Government Departments. You want trained men for this work. When I ring my bell I expect somebody to come who has had a long acquaintance with the particular subject on which I wish to consult him.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: He would be over thirty-eight.
  Mr. HAYES FISHER: There are very brilliant men in our Government Department who are not over thirty-eight and who are well qualified to advise raw Parliamentarians who have to cram up a great deal of knowledge in very quick time to give to the House of Commons. I do assure my hon. and learned Friend that he ought to revise the view which he has taken of the Local Government Board. When something like 200 of our staff have undertaken military or naval duties, I believe that we have spared quite as many as can possibly be spared, considering that while the work has diminished in one direction it has very much increased in another. I do not say that of all Departments, because I have not the same knowledge of all Departments, but I do say it of the Department with which I am connected, and I do not think that we can spare more men of military age to undertake military duties.
  The first question was addressed by a veteran of the Local Government Board, the new Leader of the Opposition to His Majesty's Government (Mr. Chaplin). He asked me whether we could not sympathetically consider the position of the vaccination officer. It is quite true that the vaccination officer has had reason to complain ever since 1907 of the manner in which he is paid. The question was taken up by the hon. Member for Woolwich (Mr. Crooks) and by one other Member to-day. They pleaded for a review of the position of the vaccination officer, and they said practically the same thing: "Cease paying him by fees. Those fees have become very inadequate, and adopt a different system and pay him by salary." I have the authority of my right hon. Friend to say that he

  1403
  sympathises with that view. Undoubtedly many of these vaccination officers have lost very heavily by reason of the change that was brought about by the law of 1907. He sympathises with their grievance. He thinks that it ought to be remedied, and he thinks that the remedy ought to be upon the lines which have been advocated to-day of paying the vaccination officer not by fees but by salary, but whether that can be done this year, or whether it may not have to wait for a more favourable opportunity, is a matter which my right hon. Friend would like a little time to consider. The next speaker was my hon. Friend the Member for the Thirsk Division of Yorkshire (Mr. Turton), if he will allow me to call him so, because I see that we have much in common, who made his maiden speech to-day. I do not know whether it would be presumption of me to congratulate him on that speech, but, seeing that he has served on the London County Council, and that he got his early training on that body, I cannot help recognising in him a friend and a brother. He has shown already to-day he is likely to make a most useful Member of this House in all matters pertaining to local government, and it is to be hoped that he will be able, for many years, to impart to Committees the fruits of the long experience he has gained by serving on more than one county council. The hon. Gentleman made a speech which I might have made myself. He complained of the Treasury as not only not giving with both hands, but that sometimes it had withheld both hands. I am not at all satisfied that I have not used much the same expression on many occasions. But I may remind him we ought not to be ungrateful to the late Government who, in their pre-War Budget, did bring forward a large scheme involving a considerable addition to the grants to be made to local authorities. What, however, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was willing to give the Kaiser has taken away from us. The hon. Gentleman also argued the question as in whose hands the administration of the grant ought to be placed, but that point I think I may dismiss, seeing that in consequence of the War we are not to have the grants, and it will be some little time before any can be forthcoming. When they are, that will be the proper occasion on which to discuss the question who shall administer them.
  7.0 P.M.
  1404
  Another hon. Member made many complaints in regard to roads and road administration. But if I were to pursue that point I am afraid I should be called to order, and be informed that that is a matter which cannot be discussed on the Vote for the Local Government Board. Questions have on many occasions been put in this House on matters connected with the roads, and it has always been stated in reply that they are subjects for the Road Board and not for the Local Government Board, and they have usually been referred to the Secretary to the Treasury instead of to the President or the Parliamentary Secretary of the Local Government Board I am prepared to repeat now what I often said in opposition, namely, that I think, personally, the Road Board ought to be officially connected with the Local Government Board, and it is the Local Government Board that should answer these questions rather than the Road Board. [An HON. MEMBER: "Get it altered."] The hon. Member also asked whether there was any Departmental Committee sitting on the classification of roads. I am informed there is not, but a Joint Committee of both Houses was promised to deal with another question, namely, the licence duties in connection with the very heavy user by motor traffic of the roads, and that went the way of many other things because of the War. It was to be a Joint Committee of both Houses, but up to the present we have not been able to man it. I do not know whether we shall be able soon to do so, but I will certainly bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman has said, and will see whether it cannot be set up in order to deal with that portion of the question.
  I come next to the speech of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Bury (Sir George Toulmin). He commenced by saying that he entirely endorsed the views of my right hon. Friend as to economy, but he went on to express a hope that there would be no change in the progressive improvement in the treatment of children, and that they, at any rate, would not be barred out from the line of progress which it is desirable to pursue. I would like to assure my hon. Friend that there is no subject nearer to the hearts of those who preside at the Local Government Board than the improvement of the condition of children. I heard my right hon. Friend the President address one deputation—I know he has addressed two—and in his speeches he has given every

  1405
  encouragement to those who are working in the interests of infants, of the provision of maternity benefits, and of homes for mothers, and of kindred subjects which have now so caught on in the country, although for a long time they were merely considered as the fads of those who promoted them. I am delighted that these questions are now becoming a part of the Government action. While it is most necessary to rigidly enforce economy on the part of the local authorities, I should like to point out that a very great deal can be done for the improvement of the health of the community with very little expenditure, by harnessing to your coach all those men and women, many of whom give their time and their conscientious sense to the promotion of the health of the people. If you do that, if you avoid by any official recognition, or by any official grant, stultifying or thwarting voluntary effort in any way, if you make a combination of official with voluntary workers, I am sure you will proceed a very long way in the direction of improving the health of the people, and particularly in the direction of saving infant life. Nothing is more necessary at the present time than that.
  The hon Member also asked one or two questions especially about the treatment of widows and children. Let me assure him that in every circular issued by the Local Government Board we urge kind, sympathetic, adequate treatment for widow and child alike. The hon. Member further asked whether I could give him information as to the number of women visitors appointed and the number of infant life protection visitors. I will endeavour to get him that information, but I may tell him that the policy of the Board is in every way to encourage these women visitors—to encourage the work of women in these particular departments. Suitable progress is being made, and I hope we may be able to say that this, too, is not a matter which requires much money, if any at all.
  Then I take the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich (Mr. Crooks). I have already dealt with the question of the salaries of vaccination officers. The hon. Member referred to the old age pensions, and the desirability of an increased Grant. He no doubt is very well aware that questions have been asked on this subject several times, and have always been transferred from the Local Government Board to the Chancellor
  1406
  of the Exchequer, who says that they relate to his Department, and that he, and not the President of the Local Government Board, is responsible for answering them. I cannot, therefore, add to any information which has been given in answers to questions in this House. But this I may say. I am quite aware that the hon Member for Woolwich puts this question in a very limited form. He asks whether medical comforts cannot be provided without in any way diminishing the amount of the pension? That is a matter for the Treasury, and not one that can be decided by the President of the Local Government Board. But at all events, I will see that it is carefully considered from the point of view whether some relaxation in that way cannot be made. I quite admit it is a kind of relief that would take a very limited form.
  When the hon. Member says how desperately hard it is for people to live on 5s. a week, I cordially agree. So it would be to live on 7s. a week. But at the same time we must remember that when old age pensions were given, and when the amount of 5s. was fixed upon, it was never supposed that the old age pensioner would live on his pension. It was never suggested that 5s. was sufficient to keep body and soul together. The whole idea was that it should form the nucleus of the amount which the old age pensioner would receive, and that his relations would be able to make some little contribution to the sum and thus enable him to keep out of the workhouse. No doubt we have to bear in mind, at the present time, how the great rise in the prices of the necessaries of life affects those with small fixed incomes. But, after all, the working classes generally are probably making more money than they have been making for years past, and, consequently, the relations of the old age pensioners are really in a better position to do something more for them than they could before the War. The hon. Member for the Barnstaple Division (Sir Godfrey Baring) spoke of the necessity for economy, and he also dwelt on the great importance of appointing some Department to look after those who are already coming home incapacitated by wounds or disease after serving their country in this War. My hon. Friend will be aware no doubt that as chairman of the Royal Patriotic Fund, as vice-chairman of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Families Association, and as a former Commissioner of Chelsea Hospital, who acted

  1407
  throughout the Boer War, I take a deep and earnest interest in this question. There will be opportunities—next week in all probability, when I understand a Pensions Bill is to be introduced—for discussing this question. I hope, indeed, that it will be pressed on the attention of the Government, and that some Department may have it placed under its supervision. Personally, I cannot conceive any better Department than that with which I have the honour to be connected. I know that my right hon. Friend the President of the Board has already intimated that this particular branch of the question might well be placed under the supervision of his Board. I had better say nothing further on that question, inasmuch as there will be a fuller opportunity of discussing it next week.
  I come to a smaller, but not unimportant, question relating to one person. I do not see my hon. Friend the Member for the Brentford Division of Middlesex (Mr. Joynson-Hicks) in the House. I am sorry the hon. Member is not here. He raised the question of the treatment by certain authorities, over whom he thinks the Local Government Board has some control, of a certain lady. I think he gave the name. I am not sure that he was acting in her best interests to bring this case before the Committee. As it turned out, a very regrettable mistake was made by certain police officers. I should like to remind the hon. Member, if he were here, that he seemed to give away the case against the Local Government Board when he said that he was not going to dispute the matter and that he was going to assume that this lady had been pronounced to be insane, or was thought to be insane, by the police doctors. She was brought in as an insane person under the Lunacy Acts, and in accordance with those Acts she was taken to Westminster Infirmary, where she was first seen by the doctor on admission, and then the usual practice was followed. Most of the unhappy persons who are either lunatics or, through some conduct on their part, are suspected of being insane are put to bed—probably the best place for them. Apparently she had to undergo the process of having a bath. Does anybody here argue that at that stage there could be some discrimination made between different classes of persons who are dealt with by the police in this way, and that one person, being a lady, is not to be put
  1408
  to bed and not to be washed or will not have her hairpins taken away from her, or that she will generally be treated in an entirely different way to the ordinary person who is taken care of by the police as either being insane or likely to topple over the line and become insane?
  I cannot see that anybody over whom we have any control acted wrongly in this matter. A most unfortunate mistake was made. My hon. Friend ought to have told the House that a very full apology was made by Sir Edward Henry, on behalf of the police, to this lady for the treatment she received. I have a fairly wide experience of cases of ladies of this kind, and I know it is exceedingly difficult to deal with them. The police have to deal, for instance, with persons who think they are being followed by somebody, or that somebody is in love with them, and who generally behave in a way which tends to show people that they are off their balance for the time. These cases are very difficult for the police, and it is possible that a young policeman may make a mistake now and again. The police admitted that they were wrong, and an apology was tendered for their mistake, but I have no apology to tender for the treatment of this lady in Westminster infirmary. She was treated exactly as an ordinary person would be treated under the present system, seeing that she was brought along by the police and that information was given to those in charge of Westminster infirmary that she was insane, although she was not insane. For some years when I was on the London County Council I was connected with the movement that was set on foot for establishing special receiving houses for all these cases. That is the direction in which we should move. I know that on the London County Council they are moving in that direction, and I hope that before long special receiving houses will be set up for cases of this kind. It is a lamentable thing that sometimes those who have temporarily lost their balance are shut up, as this unfortunate lady was, with four or five other lunatics, some of them raving lunatics. It is lamentable to think that those who have temporarily lost their balance may permanently drop over the line. I think the system is wrong, but I do not say it only because of the case of this lady. Even in the case of all these other lunatics it would have been better if there had been a proper receiving house for them in the early stages and they had been separated from the rest

  1409
  and not brought into contact with them, and if more merciful and humane treatment had been accorded to them in the hope—and the hope is justified in some cases—that the mind could be saved and the person restored to sanity.
  I should like to deal with two other topics. My hon. and learned Friend the Member for Cambridge University (Mr. Rawlinson), the hon. Member for Aberdeen University (Sir H. Craik), and the hon. Member for Windsor (Mr. James Mason), dwelt upon the enormous importance of bringing in, without delay, some measure to establish a national register. I am authorised by my right hon. Friend to say that he has gone a long way already towards meeting their wish. It is certain he will bring in a Bill next week, unless the Prime Minister has good reason to alter the course of business, and when my hon. and learned Friends see that Bill they will find in it an answer, and I think a very satisfactory answer, to the questions they have addressed to me to-day. It would ill become me, even if I knew them, to divulge the contents of that Bill to the Committee, or to give any forecast at all of the speech my right hon. Friend will make on that measure. It is only for that reason, an ample reason in my opinion, that I do not answer the questions put to me as to the nature of that Bill. I will conclude by saying how satisfactory it was to me that my colleagues with whom I served for so many years on she county council, without exception, declared that all local authorities and municipal bodies ought to fall into line with the advice tendered to them by the Treasury and the Local Government Board and ruthlessly cut down their expenditure and restrict demands for loans. We have to deal not only with money. The hon. Member for Windsor pointed out that it means more than money; that it means labour. It means material as well. One of the most disappointing things in the whole of my life is to find myself at the Local Government Board at a time when we have to call halt to almost all measures of social reform. There are few things I have cared for more than housing. There is no question in regard to which I should like to take big steps forward than in respect to the housing problem, yet it is absolutely necessary that we should now refuse to sanction loans for housing schemes, even where they are necessary, because it takes away money, material, and labour.
  1410
  I hope the Committee will understand that so far as I am concerned it does not indicate any reactionary policy. It does not mean that either my right hon. Friend or I delight in marking time. If anything, it is quite the contrary. It was only a day or two ago that I had to make my first appearance at this box to bring in a Bill to postpone the operation of the Milk and Dairies Acts for England and Scotland. Why was that? Because to carry out those Acts and the more stringent regulations under those Acts for a systematic inspection would have meant that the local authorities would have to largely add to their staff. That is impossible at the present moment. I do not say it would be true in normal circumstances, but there is no doubt about it that if, in the present circumstances, we were to put those Acts into operation the result would be to raise the price of milk. That would not be doing a service to the State and the community, and it would not be carrying out a measure that would operate for the benefit of the community. At the present time we must hold our hands and forego the advantages which would otherwise be conferred by those Acts, and in many other ways—for instance, housing schemes, sewerage schemes, water schemes, and matters of that kind—we must, for the time being, forego the benefits which we might otherwise confer. I hope that by all Departments alike this Treasury rule will be enforced. It will be very hard indeed upon us at the Local Government Board if, while my right hon. Friend instructs me to refuse loans for proper schemes of housing and sewerage, other Departments are allowed to embark on large expenditure for matters which are superfluities and luxuries and which should wait for better days. I hope that when the next Local Government Board Estimates are moved by my right hon. Friend, or somebody standing in his place, that his arms will be no longer paralysed, and that we shall be no longer crippled by the cruel regulations we have now to make, but that we shall be allowed to go forward, if only a little way, with that progressive work in social reform which is so dear to all our hearts.
  Colonel YATE: I should like to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his speech, and to refer to two points. The first is with regard to the Road Board. He told us that the Road Boad is not represented by any Department in this House.
  Mr. HAYES FISHER: I did not say that it was not represented in this House. It is very doubtful how far the Road Board is independent of any Department; but the Department which undertakes to speak for the Road Board in this House is the Treasury.
  Colonel YATE: I trust the right hon. Gentleman will succeed in bringing the Road Board under the Local Government Board. We all know the tremendous delay that has taken place in regard to the great arterial roads of London. We know that splendid plans have been drawn up, and how those plans have been banded from authority to authority; but the Road Board has no particular head, and nothing has been done. I sincerely trust the right hon. Gentleman will bring it under his authority with the least possible delay and get something practical done. In the second place, I should like to congratulate him upon what he told us about the new Registration Bill. The whole country is looking to the new Government to do something in the matter and are waiting anxiously to know what is to be done. The information that we are to have a Registration Bill next week will cause great joy throughout the country. I should like to say a word in support of what was said by my hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen University (Sir H. Craik) as regards the enormous expenditure by local authorities on school buildings. I know no one in the world who pays so little consideration to the rates and ratepayers as the education enthusiast. If he has unbridled power he will run to any expense without the least hesitation and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will put a break upon his expenditure. I would say a final word in consequence of what was said by my hon. Friend (Sir J. Spear) as to the advisability of continuing and enforcing throughout the whole country the system of food tickets for vagrants. That system has been of the greatest use, and I would ask my right hon. Friend to take this opportunity to try and do something to round up the habitual vagrant. He is a nuisance all ever the country, and under the present circumstances he must be an incorrigible rogue. I trust the right hon. Gentleman will round up all these incorrigible rogues and will adopt some system by which they can be collected together and put to work out their living.
  Sir G. BARING: There is one point my right hon. Friend omitted in his admirable
  1412
  and explicit speech, namely, the request I made to him to issue a circular to local bodies dealing with their ordinary expenditure, and exhorting them to go over it carefully and see where economies could be made.
  Mr. HAYES FISHER: That I consider a very important matter, and my right hon. Friend will look into it immediately and, if he thinks it would serve a useful purpose, will reinforce the circular which has been sent out by his predecessor.
  Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next (28th June).

  MUNITIONS OF WAR [EXPENSES].
  Resolved, "That this House will on Monday resolve itself into a Committee to consider of authorising the payment, out of moneys provided by Parliament, of any Remuneration and expenses which may become payable under any Act of the present Session to make provision for furthering the efficient manufacture, transport, and supply of Munitions for the present War, and for purposes incidental thereto." King's Recommendation to be signified—[Mr. Walter Rea.]
  PRIVATE BUSINESS.
    LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) BILL [By Order].
    As amended, considered.

    CLAUSE 4.—(Provision of Rifle-ranges Grounds and Apparatus for Games in Parks and Open Spaces.)
    (1) The Council may in any park garden or open space belonging to or controlled by them set apart provide lay out and maintain such rifle-ranges lawn tennis courts croquet lawns bowling greens and grounds for cricket hockey football and other games and recreations as they may think fit and may provide apparatus and equipment (including lockers and other conveniences) for use in connection therewith.
    (2) For the removal of doubts it is hereby enacted that the Council shall have and shall be deemed as from the first day of November One thousand nine hundred and fourteen to have had power to allow subject to such conditions as they may think fit rifle-clubs and others set apart provide lay out and maintain rifle-ranges in any such parks gardens and open spaces as aforesaid.
    (3) The Council may do all such acts and employ such persons as may be required for any of the purposes referred to in this Section and may make such reasonable charges as they may think fit for the use of such rifle-ranges courts lawns greens and grounds (so far as the same are specially laid out and maintained for the purpose) and of such apparatus equipment lockers and conveniences and may make and enforce conditions by-laws or regulations with respect to such rifle-ranges courts lawns greens grounds apparatus equipment lockers and conveniences and for regulating the use thereof and the conduct of persons using the same or resorting thereto.
    (4) The provisions of Sections 14 to 19 of the London Council (General Powers) Act 1890 shall extend and apply to any by-laws made in pursuance of this Section.
    Mr. RAWLINSON: I beg to move, in Sub-section (1), to leave out the words, "lawn tennis courts, croquet lawns, bowling greens, and grounds for cricket, hockey, football, and other games and recreations."
    The effect of my Amendment is to take away a power which is sought to be conferred by the Bill. The Clause gives two powers. It gives power to lay out grounds in public parks for rifle ranges, lawn tennis courts, croquet lawns, bowling greens, and grounds for cricket, hockey, football, and other games and recreations, and in a subsequent Sub-section it gives power to make charges for these purposes. The effect of my Amendment would be that it would strike out that power and would only leave power to erect and make charges for rifle ranges in public open spaces. The objection to this very wide power which is sought to be given by the Bill are obvious to anyone. It is highly undesirable that a large amount of space in public parks should be taken up for such purposes as football, cricket, and lawn tennis grounds at an expense which no doubt must be incurred, and which is sought by this Bill to be put upon tenants who would pay the amount necessary to secure the ground. That is an undesirable use of the parks, and it is an undesirable power to give to the county council to make charges to people for these rights. There are ample means for people who can afford to pay for them for getting such ground in and around the neighbourhood of London. It is an undesirable state of
    1414
    affairs to give the county council power to use public parks for that purpose and to make charges for the use of the ground.
    Mr. BRUNNER: I beg to second the Amendment.
    Mr. PERCY HARRIS: The powers of this Clause have been passed by the Local Legislation Committee, but the council has agreed to make some further amendments to meet the objection that has been taken to the Clause. I feel it necessary to point out that the council is not asking for any powers which are not possessed by many local authorities in the country. My hon. Friend has objected to certain powers which are either possessed by Cambridge or which are available for Cambridge if it likes to have them, because under the Public Health Amendment Act, 1907, which is an adoptive Act, not applicable to London, local authorities can get the very powers which are asked for in Sub-section 1 of this Clause. Under this Act local authorities can get power to set apart ground for the purposes of cricket, football, or any other game or recreation, and to exclude the public from the part set apart while in use. Why should London be refused powers which are available for local authorities throughout the country? Under the same Act local authorities can get power to provide apparatus for the purpose of games, and charge for it. Again, why should London not have that power? I understood that the main objection to this Clause was the proposal to make a charge for the use of the ground. There are any number of precedents for that. Leicester, for example, got powers in 1913 to lay out and maintain bowling greens, lawn tennis courts and croquet lawns, and "to make such reasonable charges for the use of such ground and the apparatus used in connection therewith as they may from time to time prescribe." Derby has power to do the same thing with regard to ground used for the purpose of cricket, football, or any other game or recreation. They also got power to make such further charge as they may think fit for the admission of the public thereto while so set apart.
    There are any number of precedents which I could quote for these powers which are now asked, but an objection was taken to the full extent of the powers asked for, and this is not the time for any needless discussion, the council has agreed with the London Playing Fields Committee, which originally raised the

    1415
    objection, to strike out the powers so far as they relate to cricket, hockey, football and games of that sort, and to limit the power to rifle ranges, lawn tennis courts, croquet lawns and bowling greens. I have a letter from the London Playing Fields Committee, saying they raised no further objection to the Clause provided the Amendments of which I have given notice are moved on behalf of the promoters. Therefore I hope the House will not refuse these powers to the London County Council when they have been granted to any number of municipal corporations. I might give examples of what the municipal corporations are doing in the matter. Take the case of bowls. I have a list of various corporations which are actually making charges for bowls—corporations like Birmingham, Croydon, Edinburgh, Glasgow, and West Ham. I have also a list of corporations which are making charges for lawn tennis. In the same way with croquet. Why should London be refused these powers? I do not think my hon. Friend gave any reason. The reason why the council is asking for these powers is, in the first place, that very special expenditure is required in connection with some of these grounds. For example, the average capital cost of a bowling green is £25, and the average maintenance runs to £10 for a rink, or £60 for a green. It does not seem unreasonable that some small charge should be made for the use of these grounds. Then there is the demand at present for better grounds. That is an additional reason why some small charge should be made.
    There may be some difference as to whether or not it is desirable to make charges for these grounds, but that surely is a matter for the local authorities and for the ratepayers. Surely it is not reasonable for Parliament to say, "We will give these powers to Derby, Leicester and other corporations, but we will not give them to London." I am sure if these powers are granted to the London County Council they would be used in a reasonable and moderate manner, as they have been by other local authorities. The administration of parks and open places by the London County Council will bear comparison with that of any other town for the generous way in which they have treated the people using them. What they have done in regard to providing grounds for games has met with the entire approval of the people
    1416
    of London. If this were stopped I feel sure there would be a volume of indignation. The Council has done a tremendous business in the matter of games. They provided last year 435 cricket pitches, on which 13,157 matches were played. They provided 309 football grounds, on which 13,263 matches were played; and they also provided 530 lawn tennis courts, 50 hockey grounds, and 121 bowling greens. I think they have done a very good work and one which is approved by the people of London. I ask, therefore, that the powers which are already possessed by many local authorities should be given to the London County Council. I propose to move Amendments, of which I have given notice, in order to carry out an agreement with the London Playing Fields Association, and as we have satisfied that body I hope my hon. and learned Friend will not think it necessary to press his Amendment.
    The CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES (Mr. Whitley): After the statement made on behalf of the London County Council I hope the hon. and learned Gentleman will not press his Amendment. The Amendments that stand later on the Paper embody an agreement arrived at between the Playing Fields Association and the London County Council, and I think under the circumstances they represent a very reasonable settlement. The things that will remain in the Clause are those that take up only a small area of the parks, and those that in particular require special attention to the turf for the upkeep of that small area; also the parts which are used by the older people and not by children. It seems to me that the proposal of the London Council Council is a very reasonable one and might be accepted.
    Mr. RAWLINSON: I do not intend to press the matter on a night like this after what the hon. Member has said. I think the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Whitley) is not putting it quite fairly. The powers in the Amendments which have been offered by my hon. Friend are to give power to lay out such grounds, and not only that, but to charge for accommodation in connection with those grounds. Of course, that is a serious matter from my point of view. I should not have raised that point had that particular Amendment not been raised here to-day. The effect of the Amendment is that you give ample powers to charge for cricket and football grounds. If you let these grounds and make a

    1417
    charge for storage for posts, etc., and the necessary accommodation, such as lockers and so forth, you are in effect charging rent for the grounds. That is the real crux of the matter, and that is the real reason of my Amendment. However, after the hon. Member's appeal, I shall not press the Amendment.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Amendments made: In Sub-section (1), after the word "lawns" ["rifle ranges, lawn tennis courts, croquet lawns"], insert the word "and."
    Leave out the words "and grounds for cricket, hockey, football, and other games and recreations" ["croquet lawns, bowling greens, and grounds for cricket"].
    Mr. HARRIS: I beg to move, in Sub-section (1), to leave out the words "including lockers and other conveniences."
    Mr. RAWLINSON: I think some explanation is required in regard to this Amendment. It is really this Amendment that I am opposed to more strongly than anything. If you are going to charge for lockers and other conveniences for the purpose of cricket and football then I think the whole benefit of the Amendment that my hon. Friend has moved is taken away entirely. I think he will agree with me that I am putting a proper construction upon his present Amendment. If this Amendment is carried you will have the power to charge for conveniences and lockers in connection with cricket and football grounds, and as it is alleged they have power already the Amendment moved by my hon. Friend is illusory unless he strikes out this Amendment.
    Mr. HARRIS: The hon. and learned Member is very suspicious. If the county council should desire to get rent for ground by making excessive charge for a locker then they could do it by making an excessive charge for apparatus. It is only a power they might apply, but I do not know that it is an obligation on the part of those using the ground to take a locker or to take apparatus. I think the hon. Member must trust a public body to act reasonably in this matter, and just as other local authorities who have these powers have exercised them reasonably I think that he can trust the London County Council to act reasonably.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Further Amendment made: In Sub-section (1), after the word "therefore" ["for use in, connection therewith"], insert the words "and lockers and other conveniences for the purposes aforesaid and in connection with other games and recreations in such parks, gardens, and open spaces."
    Mr. BRUNNER: I beg to move, in Sub-section (3), to leave out the words, "courts, lawns, greens, and grounds" ["rifle ranges, courts, lawns, greens, and grounds"].
    I have received from the hon. Member who is in charge of the London County Council's affairs in this matter (Mr. Percy Harris) an assurance that the public will not be excluded from looking on at these games as is frequently the case in connection with certain local authorities in other parts. I understand from him that the charge will not be a profit rental but only a reasonable remuneration for the cost of laying out the grounds. On behalf of the Commons and Footpaths Preservation Society I may say that we are content to leave it at that, but if the county council had not promised to make this only a small charge for the cost of laying out the grounds, it would have been a breach of faith with the donors of many of these grounds, who have given them to the public absolutely without condition. I wish to put this statement on record, and if the statement is put on record I do not wish to press the Amendment.
    Sir G. TOULMIN: I beg to second the Amendment.
    Mr. HARRIS: We have not the smallest intention to exclude the public. As a matter of fact, the public find the games a very great attraction. If that were not so it would not be possible to get so much of the parks set aside for the purpose of games. Our intention is only to make a small charge towards the upkeep of the grounds. I think, therefore, I have met the point raised by the hon. Member.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Further Amendments made: In Sub-section (3), after the word "lawns" ["rifle ranges, courts, lawns"], insert the word "and."
    Leave out the words "and grounds" ["lawns, greens, and grounds"].
    Leave out the word "grounds" ["lawns, greens, grounds, apparatus"].

    CLAUSE 6.—(Visiting Committee of the Council may receive Boarders at Maudsley Hospital.)
    (1) The Visiting Committee of the Council may if they think fit receive and lodge as a boarder and maintain and treat at the asylum known as the Maudsley Hospital on such terms and conditions as to payment and otherwise as they may determine any person suffering from incipient insanity or mental infirmity who is desirous of voluntarily submitting himself to treatment therefor.
    (2) The Council may if they think fit defray the whole or any part of the expenses of the maintenance and treatment in the said asylum of any such person as a voluntary boarder.
    (3) Rules made under Sub-section (1) of Section 338 of the Lunacy Act 1890 may prescribe the books entries reports notices and other documents to be kept and made in respect of boarders in the said asylum.
    Mr. HARRIS: I beg to move, in Subsection (1), to leave out the words "asylum known as the" ["asylum known as the Maudsley hospital"].
    Mr. KING: The Amendments which the hon. Member for Paddington has given notice of in connection with this Clause raise a very important question, and I think that it is only right that some notice should be taken of the changes and the peculiar circumstances of this question here in Debate. They all refer to the hospital known as the Maudsley hospital. Some years ago Dr. Maudsley gave, during his lifetime, and he is still living, a sum of £30,000 for the establishment of a mental hospital, and his idea was, and it was a very great one, that insipient insanity might be treated in the hospital with great prospects of cure. There are very few cases where preventive treatment of this kind can be adopted, and it was a very great idea and a very generous public act that induced Dr. Maudsley to found this hospital. It ought to be clearly understood that his idea was that this hospital should not be an asylum. Unfortunately, the London County Council have already turned this hospital into an asylum. As a matter of fact, the Amendments of which the hon. Member has given notice are really brought forward in order that they may have the name of asylum attached to it in ordinary parlance. As a
    1420
    matter of fact, it will be an asylum under the Lunacy Acts, as may be clearly seen if anyone will turn to the Preamble of the Bill, where they will read—
    "Whereas the council acting as the local authority under the Lunacy Acts have established in the administrative county of London an asylum known as the Maudsley hospital."
    It is perfectly obvious, therefore, that the main and first intention of Dr. Maudsley's generous action is being thrown to the winds. The place is no longer to be a hospital for mentally curable cases, but it is to be an asylum under the Lunacy Acts. I see a very distinguished Member of the Government and of the medical profession on the Treasury Bench (Dr. Addison), and I trust that he will give us the benefit of his views on this subject. The suggestion of treating insipient mental cases in places which are not asylums where people go who are not certified as lunatics is a very great thing, and to throw aside this opportunity and this unique chance of doing something for this class of mental disease is very unfortunate, and it is particularly unfortunate at the present time, because there are a great number of soldiers returning from the War who are exactly in that position. A number of questions have been put recently in the House to the Under-Secretary of State for War by the hon. Member for the Thornbury Division, who has interested himself very much in the subject. Unfortunately he has not been able to be here to-night. All these questions have been directed to this point, that it is undesirable to send soldiers who have had nerve shock and who are in an unbalanced and dangerous mental condition, not actually certifiable, to lunatic asylums. It is very painful to their friends and relatives, and it is very undesirable in every way. This hospital is now an asylum and only a hospital in name, and a very large number of our soldiers are being sent there. I very much regret that this step has been taken by the London County Council. I know it is extremely difficult for a private Member to get up and oppose the London County Council, because it is a very powerful body, the biggest municipal body we have got, and its proposals are well thought out and discussed beforehand; but I think in this case they have been led far more by the object of getting the benefit of this great gift, and saving the necessity of providing lunatic asylum accommodation elsewhere, than by

    1421
    the real interests of science, of the treatment of lunacy, and of the country at large. I very much regret that this whole part of the Bill, part three, has been brought forward at all. I am not going to oppose it, but I certainly think some justification ought to be put forward. I am very sorry that the hon. Member who moved this Amendment, which is very material and important, should have done so sub silentio. There should certainly be some justification of a policy which, though possibly in favour of the ratepayers of London, is certainly against public policy generally.
    8.0 P.M.
    There is one other point to which I desire to call attention. The Maudsley Hospital will now undoubtedly be an asylum under the Lunacy Acts. This private Bill is going, in two respects at any rate, to take it out of the provisions and regulations of the Lunacy Acts. First, with regard to having a resident superintendent, which I think is in the next Clause of the Bill, but also in this very important respect that in a lunatic asylum you are not allowed to have voluntary patients. Those persons who are taken in lunatic asylums must all be certified as actual lunatics, and it is absolutely against the Lunacy Acts to take into a lunatic asylum patients who are not certified. This hospital is going to take such patients, and it is really a way of dodging the public Acts to bring this Clause into a private Bill. I shall not take the formal objection which I believe might be taken to it, but call attention to it, because it does not seem fair or right that a Bill of this nature raising these very important questions should be allowed to slip through without being fully discussed and justified.
    The CHAIRMAN of WAYS and MEANS: I am quite unable to make out whether the hon. Member is opposing the Amendment or the Clause or the Bill, or is suggesting something that was not in the Bill at all. The Amendment now before the House—in fact, the series of Amendments in the name of the hon. Member—represents a suggestion that I myself made to the county council in order to meet the views of certain hon. Members who came to see me on the matter. I agreed with them that it was desirable that the name "asylum" should not be attached to this institution which is going to be used for the treatment of incipient mental cases, the very thing for
    1422
    which I understood all medical people were most anxious. I may inform the hon. Member that I have information that Dr. Maudsley is perfectly agreeable to the proposals of the Bill, so that I think he need not exercise himself quite so much in the matter. The Amendments are, in fact, that the institution be known simply as the Maudsley Hospital. In order to save the House any further discussion I might refer to the fifth of the series of Amendments, and say that the hon. Member has agreed to move that Amendment without the words in brackets:
    "(After the expiration of such period from the date of his reception as he shall have agreed in writing to remain therein, which period shall not exceed six weeks.)"
    to which the Home Office took certain objection; but together all these Amendments were advanced in a direction to which I thought the hon. Member for North Somerset would not have been opposed.
    Mr. HARRIS: I was chairman of the London County Council when Dr. Maudsley first made this very generous offer. I remember that it was explained to him that the county council had no power to build asylums except under the Lunacy Acts. He quite accepted that position. I may point out that, though technically this will be an asylum, it will not be run on the lines of a county asylum. In the first place, there will be a very small number of inmates; and in the second place, it will not have what Dr. Maudsley called, I think, the atmosphere of lunacy, which it is almost impossible to get rid of in a large asylum. There is going to be an outpatients' department to which people can come to get advice and treatment, which I think is a very valuable institution, because there are many people probably suffering from slight mental disturbance who would avail of its treatment. I hope that permission will be given to have voluntary boarders in this hospital. It is all an experiment, and I think a very interesting experiment, and one that deserves well. I am surprised that the hon. Member should think that the object of the county council was to get something in favour of the ratepayer. The fact is that this is going to be a very expensive thing for the London County Council, because, though Dr. Maudsley gave £30,000, the asylum is going to cost more than double that amount and is going to be a

    1423
    very expensive institution per patient. The question of soldiers does not arise. The Government may take the building and use it for soldiers, but that is all. I hope that the hon. Member may be satisfied to some extent with what I have said. The fact remains that technically this is an asylum, but that everything will be done to avoid treating it in the ordinary sense as an asylum.
    Colonel YATE: As this building is to be used for soldiers I trust that the word "asylum" may be separated from it. If a soldier suffering from nerve shock, neurasthenia, or any such disease comes home from the War, and is put into an asylum, people may say afterwards, "So-and-so has been in an asylum." I want to prevent that if I possibly can. If the word "asylum" is taken out of this Clause, as the Amendment suggests, I would also ask, if it is possible, that the word "asylum" should be taken out of the Preamble as well.
    Question put, and agreed to
    Mr. P. HARRIS: I beg to move, "In Sub-section (2), to leave out the word 'asylum,' and insert instead thereof the word 'hospital.'"
    Mr. KING: I desire to reply very briefly to the remarks of the Chairman of Committees. I thought that I made my position quite clear. I said that I could not oppose this Bill, or the Clause or the Amendment, but I said that I did feel that such a change and such a policy ought to be discussed and justified. That is just what I have succeeded in achieving, and a very judicious and a very effective defence has been put forward for the Clause as it stands. I am sure that all who take an interest in private Bills know what very great attention the Chairman of Committees give to all suggestions that are brought to him, and especially at this time when these Bills are practically unopposed, and we all feel that his way of looking at things, and considering them in all their lights, is a great safeguard and, if it does not afford satisfaction to every one, does on the whole secure that a fair solution is arrived at.
    Question put, and agreed to
    Further Amendment made: "In Subsection (3), leave out the word 'asylum,' and insert instead thereof the word 'hospital.'"
    Mr. HARRIS: I beg to propose, at the end of the Clause, to add the following new Sub-section:—
    "(4) A voluntary boarder in the said hospital shall be at liberty to leave the said hospital on giving twenty-four hours' notice of his intention to do so."
    Mr. KING: No defence was attempted either by the Chairman of Committees or by the hon. Member for Paddington with regard to my point that an asylum is a place for patients certified under the Lunacy Acts. Voluntary patients are not admitted, and this is getting round the Lunacy Acts in a private Bill. There is not only a technical objection to it, but there is an essentially important point. If there are patients in the hospital who are certified as insane it would be much more difficult to get voluntary patients. If yon want persons to come and say that they will undergo treatment in a mental hospital of this kind for several weeks—and the great hope and the great value of this experiment lies in being able to give treatment of that kind to persons voluntarily-giving up their freedom for a certain limited time—you will not get those people if there are in that institution certified lunatics. It is that mixture of the two classes, the voluntary patient and the certified lunatic, which in my opinion is objectionable and is diametrically opposed to Dr. Maudsley's first intention. In the case of soldiers here again there is the strongest objection to sending them to this hospital, because somebody may come along and say, "So-and-so was certified as insane, and was in that place. It must be a lunatic asylum." This mixture of the two classes is a thing which ought to have been avoided, and it is the great objection to the policy underlying this part of the Bill.
    Colonel YATE: May I ask whether it is possible, as the word "hospital" has been substituted for "asylum" in the latter part of the Bill, that it should be substituted also in the Preamble?
    The CHAIRMAN of WAYS and MEANS: I am advised, for legal reasons, that we cannot do that. The Preamble is not part of the legislative effect of the Bill. It is merely a recital.
    Mr. RAWLINSON: I agree that it is desirable to have an explanation, because so many people seem to have misunderstood this Bill, judging from the letters which I have received from persons opposing this Clause. Generally, I am

    1425
    thoroughly an accord with the hon. Member who brings on this matter. Many people misunderstood the effect. This will probably supply a long-felt want, namely, a place where voluntary borders can go, but under the safeguards which the Lunacy Act applies to such places. Attempts have been made to make private houses do this work, and that would be very objectionable, because none of the safeguards would apply. In this case this scheme will be carried out in accordance with the way which has been put before the House in an institution which can call itself a hospital, and which I hope shall be run on the lines of a hospital, but with the safeguards of a lunatic asylum. No one will have any pecuniary advantage in keeping patients longer than necessary. The danger of a private house is that there may be somebody who is interested in keeping a patient longer than necessary. In this case that will not occur. I can hardly believe that anybody would be sufficiently brutal to suggest that a person who has gone voluntarily to such an institution as this would make reference to the fact. I think that the provision, as it stands, will really meet all that the hon. Member requires.
    Question, "That those words be there added," put, and agreed to.

    CLAUSE 7.—(as to Medical Superintendent of Maudsley Hospital.)
    "Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 276 of the Lunacy Act, 1890, the medical superintendent of the Maudsley Hospital shall not be required to reside in that asylum so long as arrangements approved by the board of control are made for his residence elsewhere."
    Amendent made: Leave out the words "in that asylum" ["in that asylum so long as"], and insert, instead thereof, the word "therein."—[Mr. P. Harris.]
    Ordered, "That Standing Orders 223 and 243 be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the third time."—[The Chairman of Ways and Means.]
    King's consent signified.
    Bill read the third time, and passed.

  CENTRAL CONTROL BOARD (LIQUOR TRAFFIC).
  Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 3rd February, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."
  Mr. HOGGE: I take the opportunity of the Adjournment to get an answer from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Munitions Department on a point which I raised in Debate last night. It is unnecessary to repeat the remarks I made last night, but it is only fair to recapitulate them shortly. They were, in effect, that the Central Control Board obviously comes within the purview of the new Minister of Munitions. The work of the Minister of Munitions and his Department is enough in all conscience for them to do, and if anything is going to be done with regard to the control of the liquor traffic in the munition areas it is obvious that the work shall be taken away from this Department and given to some other Department of the State which is not so preoccupied with so important a piece of national work. I very much hope that can be done, and that something can be speedily undertaken to put into operation the powers of the Central Control Board. I pointed out last night, with regard to the prospectus which I had seen of the National People's Palaces Association, that on the face of that prospectus the statement is made that Mr. Lloyd George, and Mr. Bonar Law, and Mr. Steel-Maitland have given their express approval to the work that was going to be undertaken, indeed, in the middle of the prospectus, they say that the work "is being done at the request of the Central Control Board."
  I have no complaint against the National People's Palaces Association or any other organisation. My point is that the Government ought to be doing the work which Parliament asked them to do, and I want to be assured that nothing is said in that prospectus from which the public might take it that the Central Control Board is delegating its powers. I am concerned about this for the reason that the Secretary of State for the Colonies and the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, so I am told, have a nominee on the committee of this organisation. If that be true, I do not know whether it is or not, it involves the Government in a connection which is not fair to any other organisation who desire to do similar work. This organisation offers to the public a certain dividend on capital which the public can subscribe. It is their affair. I think I could say something, if I cared to, in relation to the nature of that prospectus, but I am not so

  1427
  much concerned with that as with learning that the Government intend to do this work for themselves.
  The only other remark I have to make in view of what I said last night is that to-night we are again discussing this subject with less than a dozen Members present. I remember that when we discussed the liquor problem, as a result of the speech which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lloyd Georges) delivered at Bangor, the House was crowded, more crowded than at any period since the War broke out, but now that we are determined to deal with the liquor traffic by committing power to the Central Control Board, it looks as if nothing is being done; the House is not interesting itself in the question, and it appears to me that the whole subject is going to be dropped. The Minister of Munitions told us that ten munition areas are to be created. Are those areas in which the Central Control Board is going to operate? If not, what are the areas in which it is going to operate? What has the Board done since it was appointed? How often has it met? Has it set up any organisation anywhere? Has it invited the co-operation of any local committee anywhere? In point of fact, is it not true that the Central Control Board is in the hands of a Department of the State which, for the moment, has no time to devote to any other subject than the provision of munitions of war. The real point at issue—and I do hope my hon. Friend (Dr. Addison) will make representations in the proper quarter—is that the Central Control Board shall do its work, and that it shall be handed over to some other Department who can put energy behind it, and see that something is done. By all means let organisations with power to help give it help, but only as accessories. Let the main object of the Central Control Board be that they themselves shall do this work on the large scale for which the House gave power, and let them get that done as speedily as possible, or, as an alternative, come to the House and say, "When we set up this Central Control Board we really did not mean to do anything, and if we would do anything, we cannot do it because we have not got the time."
  Mr. DUNCAN MILLAR: I think the hon. Member who has just addressed the House has very properly drawn attention to the great importance of the matters which have been placed in charge of the
  1428
  Central Control Board. He pointed out that it is not very long since this question of the provision of proper opportunities and facilities for the refreshment of those engaged in munition work was regarded as of the first importance. I submit that the question has become not less important, but much more important, since the statement made in the House in regard to munitions. Since then we have had an appeal to the country to provide an enormous army of munition workers, who will have to be specially considered and provided for. I do not want to mention the figure, but I believe it is very large, and I hope it will be reached. It does add to the importance of the duties which are thrown upon the Board. The hon. Member for East Edinburgh has very properly requested some information as to what the Board have done so far. It is quite true they have large discretion placed in their hands, and I think the House is entitled to know what has been done during the interval which has elapsed since we were told that it was of the utmost public importance that this matter should be dealt with without a moment's delay. The question was then regarded as one which required immediate settlement. Are we to set it aside for other questions which have been raised since? I am quite sure that the hon. Gentleman who represents the Ministry of Munitions here to-night will be quite anxious to enlighten us as to what is being done and will give us some assurance on the subject. I do not know that I quite agree with my hon. Friend the Member for East Edinburgh that this matter should be taken out of the control of the Minister of Munitions and the hon. Gentleman who along with him represents the Department here. I am quite sure that so far as the hon. Member who is here to-night is concerned this matter will receive his very careful and full attention, and there is no man better fitted to deal with the question. The Minister of Munitions has not the time, and I have no doubt the hon. Member also is extremely busy. I feel sure he will approach the question with a very fair mind and a desire to see that everything is done to meet the situation. I agree that we ought to have this matter in the hands of those who have full time to devote to it and to give full answers to the House as occasion arises.
  The point I specially wish to refer to is this: The duties which are thrown on the Board are very considerable, and I

  1429
  hope that they will take every possible means of availing themselves of those voluntary agencies which may be prepared to come to their assistance in making provision for the workers. The hon. Member for East Edinburgh referred to the National People's Palaces Association, which is holding itself out at the present moment as the one, if not the only, agency which up to the present time has received the blessing of the Minister of Munitions. I think it is very undesirable that any association of this character should be singled out and should be allowed to make this claim in public. There are many other voluntary agencies which are not seeking a 6 per cent. dividend which will gladly do this work. My hon. Friend is no doubt aware of the magnificent services rendered by the Y.M.C.A. in connection with canteens in the Army during these recent months. They have been able to deal with the exceptional situation which has arisen with a marvellous degree of success. I believe they have been welcomed in every quarter by the military authorities and by all those who have the welfare of the soldiers at heart. It seems to me that in a matter of this kind every effort should be made to enlist the assistance of the Y.M.C.A. I believe offers have been made in certain quarters and I hope they have been accepted. In addition to the Y.M.C.A. there are many other voluntary agencies connected with temperance and other social work. I believe they could be used to very great effect in providing the necessary facilities, and that their work would be attended with more success than any policy which could be adopted with regard to the existing liquor shops under the Regulations which have been issued.
  My hon. Friend is no doubt aware of the very full powers which are conferred under the Regulations upon the Central Board. There seems to be no reason why they should not avail themselves of the services of any one of the many voluntary agencies which may come to them and place their services at their disposal, and their powers could be to a certain extent delegated to them under Regulation 5 and Regulation 16. I hope we may be able to get some assurance from my hon. Friend that these associations will be considered. May I also ask if he can give us some indication as to what the policy of the Central Board has been up to the present time? Are local committees to have full power in each district in regard to the
  1430
  exercise of the powers conferred on the Central Board or is the Central Board itself going to deal in each area with the many questions which will have to be considered and with the conditions which will have to be laid down? May I suggest to him in regard to the many powers which are conferred upon the Central Board that the simplest and most effective of these is that empowering the Board to lay down the necessary restrictions which they think desirable to be laid down in each district with regard to the existing refreshment houses and to see that the trade carry into effect those restrictions and agree to them. In that way you would avoid the necessity which might otherwise arise of involving the country in heavy expense and also the considerable difficulties in adjusting the situation to a larger policy. I believe myself there is every indication on the part of those who carry on the trade at the present moment to accept any reasonable restriction which may be laid upon them. So far as new buildings and houses are concerned, I believe those could be best provided by voluntary agencies. Perhaps my hon. Friend will be good enough to tell us what is being done in Scotland, and particularly in the West of Scotland, where we have a very large industrial community and where the question is one of very real urgency.
  The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MUNITIONS DEPARTMENT (Dr. Addison): Let me say quite readily that the work falling on my right hon. Friend the Minister of Munitions is very great indeed. At the same time, he is deeply interested in this question, because it is of the first importance if we are to look after the workmen in the munitions area that they should be properly seen to and have proper facilities for getting food in decency when they get there. The Minister of Munitions is exceedingly anxious that this should be done well and as promptly as possible. My hon. Friend will not forget that the Central Control Board was only formally constituted a fortnight ago, 10th June, although they had been surveying the ground before that. You cannot, however, expect very much to be achieved in that length of time. They have, I am informed, been negotiating with various authorities in the munitions areas where munitions are produced with a view to seeing what areas should be first defined as munition areas, because they are not able to exercise their powers until the areas have been defined by Order in Council.
  Mr. HOGGE: Are they not the same as the ten munition areas?
  Dr. ADDISON: The ten munition areas referred to yesterday are, for the purposes of engineering and for geographical purposes, grouped round certain centres, and have no relation whatever to the areas to be defined in connection with the Central Control Board. I have here the draft of an Order in Council, which, when it is issued, will define at least six areas in connection with the work of the Board of Control. The Board have been doing a good deal of work of a preliminary kind, and they are, I think, fully alive to all the considerations which have been advanced here this evening. Time is of the first importance in this matter. It is quite evident that no centralised body, getting its staff together, could properly institute canteens and run them in the great number of places where they are required to be arranged for, without invoking the aid of properly constituted voluntary and other associations. I know that the Young Men's Christian Association has done a great deal of work in this respect, and the Board of Control certainly look forward to being greatly helped by that association. As a matter of fact, the Young Men's Christian Association is already undertaking some of this work in various munition districts. I believe that the association referred to by my hon. Friend is also doing very good work. I agree with him that the issue of this circular, containing the words, "The Association is now, at the request of His Majesty's Government, etc.," as a preliminary to the issue of preference shares, is very improper. The Board of Control are only too glad that this association, which has done very good work indeed, should continue that work. I have here a letter which I think the House will regard as a proper letter to be sent by the Board of Control to this association:—
  "… . . The Board of Control may say that they are fully in sympathy with the object which your Association, in common with other associations, have in view, namely, the establishment of canteens, in which both food and drink can be supplied at reasonable prices, to men employed on Government work. The Board are anxious that no time should be lost in the establishment of such canteens, where the existing facilities are inadequate, and they will be glad if your Association will inform them, from time to time, of the arrangements made by them for this purpose, and the extent to which the men use the facilities provided."
  It will be seen that the Board of Control welcome the assistance of this body, just as it welcomes the assistance of the Y.M.C.A. or any other body of a proper
  1432
  kind. For that reason I regret that anyone should receive the impression that this association has been singled out by the Board of Control or by any other Department of the Government as specially concerned in this matter.
  Mr. HOGGE: Can the hon. Gentleman say definitely whether the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies have a nominee on the committee of this organisation?
  Mr. TYSON WILSON: Will the Minister of Munitions communicate with this association, pointing out how improper is the issue of a prospectus of this kind?
  Dr. ADDISON: I think that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies is simply one of a group of distinguished public-spirited people of all kinds whose names are associated with this work.
  Mr. HOGGE: My information is that the Secretary of State and the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies have a definite nominee on the committee of this association. If that is so, my point is that the Government is committing itself.
  Dr. ADDISON: I am sure that my right hon. Friend is only in the same position as the other gentleman to whom I have referred. The Board of Control has not delegated its powers to this or any other association. As time is pressing, they desire the help of the Y.M.C.A. and other bodies or persons experienced in setting up catering arrangements of a suitable kind in different localities, and I have no doubt they will work with and through such bodies in the future. That does not at all exclude the Board of Control from themselves setting up canteens. No doubt they will do so from time to time where necessary. It is too early to ask the Board of Control, after having turned to this work for not more than about a fortnight, to formulate a policy and state what lines they are, going to take in different munitions areas. We must allow for experiments and the lessons of experience. I am sure that the Board of Control have no intention whatever of parting with the powers which Parliament has given them, or of letting out of their own control this very important matter.
  Mr. MILLAR: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether any areas have been defined in Scotland?
  Dr. ADDISON: No areas have yet been defined, because the Order in Council has

  1433
  not yet been issued. Of the six areas mentioned in the draft Order, none are in Scotland.
  Mr. HOGGE: That means that Scotland is sober.

  CENTRAL CONTROL BOARD (LIQUOR TRAFFIC).

    NAVAL AND MILITARY SERVICES (PENSIONS AND GRANTS).
    Mr. WING: I wish to call attention to a matter which has caused a large amount of soreness, particularly in the North of England, so far as the action of the War Office is concerned. I am not raising this question in any spirit of fault finding with the Financial Secretary to the War Office (Mr. Forster) or his predecessor (Mr. Baker). They have both been exceedingly courteous and obliging in all the inquiries in which I have been engaged. A set of circumstances have arisen which I think ought to be cleared up. That is to say, in the question of allotments and allowances the two payments do not run parallel. It arises something like this: When a soldier enlists he is generally asked about making an allotment to his people at home. He is in a generous and confidential mood, and he is told that if he makes an allotment there will be the advantage of a certain allowance to his dependants—in the case of the son, his parents; and in the case of the husband, his wife and children. The soldier leaves it there, saying, "That is all right!" The 3s. 6d. per week finds its way home. In the course of a few weeks those at home, or where they are having the Government allowance, discover that the allowance is not coming as well as the allotment, and write to the soldier to know why. The soldier approaches the commanding officer, and is told that he has not filled up Form 1838. The soldier says that he does not know about that, but he made the allotment and understood the matter to be settled. However, he fills in Form 1838, which finds its way to the place where the soldier lives when he is at home. It is discussed by the pensions committee, the dependants are interviewed by the pensions officer, a decision is ultimately arrived at by the pensions committee and finally the pay comes from the paymaster.
    Then the dependants are surprised, for they imagined that the amount of money they would receive would be the allowance from the date upon which the soldier made the allotment. Seven or eight weeks have elapsed between the allotment and the filling in of the form, and they find that they have only got the amount of money
    1434
    due to them from the signing of Form 1838. I had yesterday a letter from the wife of a soldier stating that her money came to £5 7s. 2d.—I do not know how they get the pennies, twopences, and eightpences—and she suggests that if the amount received had been given as from the day of the allotment, she should have received £13 odd. These people have very good reason to complain. By an Army Order of 27th October, 1914, certain conditions were made and certain forms have to be filled up; but those who are not aware of these technicalities are being penalised on account of their ignorance of the circumstances, which are only known to those who have inside information. I can assure the hon. Gentleman on the Front Bench that I am not exaggerating. I have had scores, I think I may say hundreds, of letters, and I have chosen one or two which are generally representative of the others and which show the impression that the people have. Here is a woman who is speaking of her son who has been away for many weeks. She says that the amount should have been £5 7s. 2d. He was told when he enlisted that the allotment would be all right. Another letter says that the man went away with the non-commissioned officer and saw the paymaster as soon as he arrived at Taunton. He allotted his mother 6d. a day, and the paymaster told him that the separation money would be all right. Instead of receiving nine weeks' separation allowance, which she reckoned to be £4 13s., she received six weeks' pay—£2 15s. 9d. The paymaster said he had raid from the date of the application. I have a third letter, in which the woman says that none of the boys in Durham know anything about Form 1838. I might go on reading letter after letter.
    There is good excuse for this ignorance. There is nothing special in the literaturs of the War Office about this particular form, and I have gone through the literature very carefully. Everything in the literature is based on the making of the allotment. "Married men and widowers may be accepted for service, and will be eligible for separation allowance for their wives and children from the date of enlistment." The only indication that one can find in the War Office literature is that application for allowance is to be made to the officer. Not only to-day have I put this question to the hon. Member, but on preceding days, and the answers have been totally unsatisfactory. What I ask is that

    1435
    the Department will undertake to pay the dependants of the soldiers the amount of money which they think they have a right to expect—and which I think they have a right to expect—from the information they have obtained from the literature of the War Office. I ask that such dependants as have not received the money from the date of allotment, but only from the date of filling up Army Form 1838, should receive the balance. It would be an act of generosity—nay, an act of justice! We are to have in addition this difficulty: I notice the Army Order says if the soldier does not fill in the paper within a month of his enlistment he will not be able to make any allowance whatever; yet on the average, as I have shown, six, seven, eight, and up to ten weeks elapses before this Army Form is filled in. This is calculated to bring about a great injustice, and I hope the hon. Member will seek some means of showing generosity on the part of the War Office to those who have come forward in such large numbers, while at the same time he will endeavour to see the time for filling in Army Form 1838 is extended beyond the month.
    Mr. RAFFAN: I desire briefly to support the general case made out by my hon. Friend, more especially the case which he developed in the later portion of his speech. It is unquestionably a very great hardship to a very large number of men who make this allotment, and suppose that they have then fulfilled all the requirements necessary for separation allowance to be paid to their dependants. They find when the matter is rectified that their arrears are not paid. That is a real hardship. That hardship will be intensified tenfold if under this new rule it is found not only that they are not to be paid the arrears, but that their dependants are not receiving any separation allowance at all. If rigidly applied, in the cases quoted by my hon. Friend, the effect of this new rule would be that during the whole period of the War these dependants—and this is a serious matter—will not receive a single penny of separation allowance. Perhaps the Financial Secretary will correct me, but I understand that the application required by this new rule is to be made within a month of the allotment.
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster): No, I think you are wrong.
    Mr. RAFFAN: I am delighted to hear it. I think I may take it in any case from the hon. Member that if there is any doubt about the matter the case of the wives is so overwhelming that it will be set at rest?
    Mr. FORSTER: I can assure my hon. Friend at once on that point. Under this Army Order application for separation allowance for soldiers' dependants does not apply to the wives.
    Mr. RAFFAN: I am extremely pleased to hear that, for that does to some extent meet the case which I am making. I will put then, very briefly, a point with regard to other dependants. The hon. Gentleman who answered me to-day was good enough to say that the Order will not be unreasonably or harshly applied, and I am very much obliged indeed for that concession, and if nothing more is possible, I am certain it would be very much better if the period were extended to three months. If that were done, such cases as my hon. Friend has quoted tonight would be met—the overwhelming majority of cases would be met. You would keep then within reasonable limits, cases which require special consideration, and I believe it would be a concession which would be very much appreciated. I must not be taken as weakening in my attitude at all, for I do press that very strongly.
    Assuming for the moment that the hon. Gentleman is unable to give me this concession, I should like to ask him in what manner a person who finds a month has elapsed and desires to put forward an application, can see it reaches a tribunal which will deal with it. He makes an application, and the pension officer may say, and rightly so, "I decline to deal with this case. It is bound by the regulations, and my instructions are not to deal with cases where a month has gone by." An appeal may be made to the Pension Committee and they may reply that it is impossible for them to overrule a pension officer where he is clearly within his rights and instructions. If that happens I should like to ask in what way an appeal is to be made. When the hon. Gentleman's predecessor was in office I pressed for some proper body to which appeal could be sent. I never got any satisfaction with regard to the matter, and I am quite sure it would be a very valuable reform if the hon. Gentleman would institute it. I do not want to make any general charge

    1437
    against paymasters, who have done very well, but they are not altogether a satisfactory sort of appeal. I have a case which I will send to the hon. Gentleman with reference to a rather different point, but a case in which five, six, or seven letters have been sent to a paymaster at intervals extending over several weeks, and no answer has been sent to any. What is the position of such an applicant whose month is exceeded? I take it, of course, that if the good offices of a Member of Parliament can be invoked, I am sure that the courtesy which is so universally extended by the hon. Gentleman would lead him personally to attend to the case.
    9.0 P.M.
    But, after all, a great many of these poor people do not think of invoking the good services of Members of Parliament, and there surely ought to be some method by which, in these exceptional circumstances, they ought to be able to put their case in such a way that it can be heard. If that is not done, I am quite certain that many cases of great difficulty will arise, and I am quite certain of this, too, that if no separation allowances are received until the War is over that will be a very great deterrent to recruiting in many districts, and those of us who are endeavouring to assist recruiting will feel we are very much handicapped in our efforts. I would be very glad if the Financial Secretary to the War Office would be good enough to give attention to these difficulties and if he could find a solution for them.
    Mr. T. WILSON: I agree with a good deal that has been said by the two previous speakers, but I must say—
    Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Maclean): May I point out to Members desiring to take part in the Debate that the Debate must close at seventeen minutes past nine? I have no doubt that, as they will wish to hear the reply of the hon. Gentleman representing the War Office, they will bear that point in mind.
    Mr. WILSON: There are one or two points I would like to put. One is the case of the wife of a soldier, and owing to difficulties—a quarrel or something of that sort—she has left her husband for a short period and taken the family with her. She has been refused the allowance as the husband has said he refuses to make an allotment from his pay. It is supposed to be compulsory upon the husband to make an allotment to his wife, but the wife, having left him, he has refused, and the War Office
    1438
    refuses to give any support. I know of a case of the wife of a soldier who took one child with her and lost her employment, and she is now dependent on the generosity of relatives. I was successful in getting an allowance for the child, but, in my opinion, where a wife is dependent on relatives, the husband ought to be compelled to help her, unless she is leading a disorderly life or something of that kind. Another point on which I would like inquiries relates to instances where a soldier has died whilst in training, and the War Office or the Territorial Association have failed to make any allowance towards the funeral expenses. I believe an order was issued whereby the War Office agreed to contribute a certain amount to the funeral expenses of any soldier who died at his training quarters. I have a case in mind of a man who died last February and the mother has not received a single farthing towards the funeral expenses. I think the payment ought to be expedited as much as possible. There are other cases I could bring before the attention of the hon. Gentleman, but these are points which should not be lost sight of, because they create an amount of feeling and affect recruiting.
    Mr. FORSTER: I will certainly make inquiries about the soldier who died on service, but the hon. Member will forgive me if I do not carry in my mind the rules and regulations relating to these matters. I am afraid that in the case of the wife who left her husband, unless the husband makes an allotment she has no claim to separation allowance. In the case where there is a child or children the husbands, I think, has to make an allotment in respect of them. With regard to questions raised by the other hon. Members, I honestly do not think I can carry the matter much further than I took it on Monday night last. We discussed this question of the new Order as to the limit of time within which application for dependant's allowance must be made. I have indicated the reasons why we thought the limit of time was necessary, and I have told my hon. Friend quite frankly that we did not intend to administer this in any harsh or overbearing spirit, but that where there was any good cause shown to us why delay had occurred in making application, we should take that into full consideration.
    The view expressed, and I am sure it was genuinely held, is that a month is altogether too short. I should like my

    1439
    hon. Friend to reflect on that for a moment. They are judging by what has happened during the past few months, and I do not think it is fair to apply that test to the future. Everybody knows that there have been great rushes periodically to the Colours, and vast bodies of men have swarmed into the recruiting offices. I am not divulging any secret when I say that recruiting officers have had to carry out their duty under conditions which were extremely difficult. There have been a number of cases in which recruits may not have had their attention called to the necessity of making a prompt application for these allowances. It is because the hon. Member for Houghton-le-Spring (Mr. Wing) has been greatly troubled by complaints from his constituents, and from other parts of the country, that he and his Friends have drawn attention so strongly to this question. The delay that has occurred has been largely caused by the difficulty of making investigations. Claims for separation allowances have been made by soldiers some considerable time after they have joined the Colours, and the longer the delay between the man joining and the time he makes his application, the more difficult is the investigation, and the more difficult it becomes for the pension committee to ascertain the facts. The House must realise that it is essential to proceed in these matters upon facts. You cannot proceed upon a mere statement on the part of those who are interested, because occasionally there are people who take rather an exaggerated view of the degree of dependants. We are bound to stick, as far as we possibly can, to the facts of the case. The longer the period between enlistment and the application, the more difficult it is to carry out the necessary inquiry. With regard to the future, that is why we have fixed the period of June before which applications must be made in respect to men who have enlisted before a certain time. Recruiting is proceeding in a more or less satisfactory manner, but not an overwhelming number of men are coming forward now, and the recruiting officers are no longer submerged to the extent they were. What happens when a recruit joins? When he goes into the recruiting office he is given a form, and he signs his name to one or two simple statements. One is:—
    "I do not wish to make any allotment from my pay, and I make no claim for separation allowance."
    1440
    That is quite definite. If he wishes to make an allotment, he signs the following statement:—
    "I wish to make an allotment from my pay to, who is dependent upon me, and I intend to claim a separation allowance for him [or her] as soon as I join my depot."
    That is a definite indication of his intention to claim a separation allowance. That paper is given, or ought to be given, to every recruit who joins. What happens to this paper? It is sent direct to his regimental paymaster on the day he joins. At the same time the recruit signs this form he is given Form 1838, and this is the form upon which he makes his definite application for the allowance. He is given this form on the day he enlists. If he loses it, he can get another from his commanding officer, and the commanding officer is informed by the paymaster that no Form 1838 has been received. It is the commanding officer's business to see that the recruit is given an opportunity of filling up Form 1838, and I can assure my hon. Friend that soldiers, although they may not be fully aware of all the forms that have to be filled up before they enlist, very quickly become aware of the forms that are necessary immediately after enlistment. There is a whole month in which to fill up these forms, and they are pressed upon the soldier's notice, and I think it is rather straining a point to ask us to believe that a man who actually contributed substantially from his wages to the upkeep of his dependants will not be anxious, now that he knows about these things, and as soon as his attention is called to these forms in the recruiting office, to fill them up and make sure of getting the separation allowance. I have looked into this question most sympathetically—
    Mr. WING: How about the period between the allotment and the filling in of the form?
    Mr. FORSTER: This form calls attention to that matter, and it reminds the soldier that it is very important to fill this up as soon as possible. It reminds him that in the case of a soldier serving at home the allowance begins from the date of application or of enlistment, if the application is made within ten days. If he signs this form within ten days of his enlistment the allowance begins to run from the date of his enlistment.
    Mr. WING: The hon. Gentleman is now quoting from a document which the recruit has not seen.
    Mr. FORSTER: No.
    Mr. WING: The recruit does not see that document until he asks for it.
    Mr. FORSTER: I think opportunities are given to him to see it before he asks for it. At any rate, opportunities are certainly given to him in regard to the present and the future, and I hope that will meet my hon. Friend's contention on that particular point. With regard to the point raised about the pension officer, it does not depend upon the pension officer, but upon the paymaster who has to record the date on which this form is signed. It is for the paymaster, I think, although I speak without absolute certainty, to send them on to the pension officer. The pension officer cannot carry out his investigations without these forms. With regard to the question of a court of appeal, I think that the most prompt and efficacious appeal would be the man's own commanding officer. If a man had any complaint to make with regard to the non-receipt of allowance to which he is entitled he would naturally take that complaint to his commanding officer, and it would receive sympathetic and speedy consideration.
    Mr. RAFFAN: Would the hon. Gentleman say something with regard to my point. The commanding officer might stand to the strict letter of the regulations, and hardship might result.
    Mr. FORSTER: I think that people who suffer hardships generally find some method of calling attention to their hard lot. I cannot say on the spur of the moment whether the fear which my hon. Friend has expressed is well founded, but I think not.
    Mr. KING: The hon. Gentleman has not yet said anything about back payments.
    Mr. FORSTER: I am afraid that payment of allowance can only run from the day on which application is sent.
    It being one hour after the conclusion of Government Business, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Maclean) adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 3rd February.
    Adjourned at Seventeen minutes after Nine o'clock till Monday next, 28th June.

  PETITION PRESENTED.
  The following Petition was presented, and ordered to lie upon the Table:—
  WEDNESDAY.
  Race Meetings—Petitions to withdraw prohibition—From Cobham (Surrey); and Wood Green, N.
WAR.
  LOSSES FROM DEATH OR INVALIDATION THROUGH DISEASE.
  LOSSES FROM DEATH OR INVALIDATION THROUGH DISEASE.
  HABITS OF ECONOMY (PUBLIC OPINION).
  HABITS OF ECONOMY (PUBLIC OPINION).
  MILITARY CAMPS (WASTE PREVENTION).
  MILITARY CAMPS (WASTE PREVENTION).
  WAR SERVICE BADGES.
  WAR SERVICE BADGES.
  ARMY VETERINARY CORPS (EGYPT).
  ARMY VETERINARY CORPS (EGYPT).
  MILITARY CAMPS (REMOVAL OF MANURE).
  MILITARY CAMPS (REMOVAL OF MANURE).
  Children Departments.
  Children Departments.
  Post Office Holidays (Bangor, County Mayo).
  Post Office Holidays (Bangor, County Mayo).

Preamble
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House, That the Clerk of the Parliaments had laid upon the Table the Certificates from the Examiners that the Standing Orders applicable to the following Bills have been complied with:
Electric Lighting Provisional Orders (No. 2).
Gas and Water Provisional Orders (No. 1).
The same were ordered to lie on the Table.

LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL (TRAMWAYS AND IMPROVEMENTS) BILL.
  WEARDALE AND CONSETT WATER BILL.
  Read 2a, and committed: The Committees to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.
SKEGNESS URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL.
Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.
CONSOLIDATION BILLS.
First Report of the Joint Committee made, and to be printed. (No. 99.)
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA BILL. [H.L.]
Reported from the Joint Committee with Amendments, and re-committed to a Committee of the Whole House, and to be printed as amended. (No. 100.)

RETURNS, REPORTS, ETC.
Navy (Supplementary Estimate, 1915–1916)—An estimate of the additional number of Officers and men required to be voted for the Navy for the year ending 31st March 1916: Presented (by command) and ordered to lie on the Table.
India (Loans raised in India)—Return of all loans raised in India chargeable on the revenues of India, outstanding at the commencement of the half-year ended 31st March 1915, &c.:
Finance—Finance Accounts of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland for the Financial Year 1914–1915, ended 31st March 1915:
Post Office (Foreign and Colonial Parcel Post, Canary Islands)—The Foreign and Colonial Parcel Post Amendment (No. 71) Warrant, 1915, dated 11th May 1915:
Electric Lighting Acts, 1882–1909 (Proceedings)—Report by the Board of Trade respecting the applications to and the proceedings of the Board under the said Acts during the past year:
Shops Act, 1912—Orders made by the following Councils and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, affecting certain classes of shops within their respective areas—

1. Cornwall County Council (Troon Village);

2. Glamorgan County Council (Parishes of Pyle and Tythegston Higher);

3. Tottenham Urban District Council (Tottenham (remainder) area of Tottenham Urban District):

Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) and ordered to lie on the Table.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Moved, That Standing Order No. XXXIX be suspended for this day's sitting (The Lord President (Al. Crewe)); agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (No. 3) BILL.
Brought from the Commons, endorsed with the Certificate from the Speaker that the Bill is a Money Bill within the meaning of the Parliament Act, 1911; read 1a, and to be printed.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE): I asked your Lordships to suspend Standing Order No. XXXIX particularly in respect of this Bill. As the House is aware, from time to time until the Appropriation Act authorises the full expenditure of the money voted for the service of the year it is the custom to pass Bills of this character empowering the Treasury to issue such sums of money as have been voted for the

139
various services. As a rule one of these measures is passed in the month of March and the other one towards the end of an ordinary session, just before the Appropriation Bill comes up to your Lordships' House. But in this abnormal year expenditure is so frequent and so large that it is necessary now to ask your Lordships to pass another of these Bills. I therefore ask your Lordships to read the Bill a second time and to pass it through its remaining stages to-day.
Moved (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended), That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Marquess of Crewe.)
On Question, Bill read 2a.
Committee negatived: Bill read 3a, and passed. (No. 97.)

MILK AND DAIRIES ACTS POSTPONEMENT BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday next (The Lord Hylton). (No. 101.)

ELECTRIC LIGHTING PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 5) BILL. (No. 102.)
GAS AND WATER PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL. (No. 103.)
LAND DRAINAGE PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL. (No. 104.)
LAND DRAINAGE (OUSE) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL. (No. 105.)
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1) BILL. (No. 106.)
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and referred to the Examiners.

IRVINE AND DISTRICT WATER BOARD (EMERGENCY POWERS) ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to.
TRAMWAYS PROVISIONAL ORDERS BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bill to be read 3a on Tuesday next.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order), and Bill to be read 3a on Tuesday next.
MASSY'S DIVORCE BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed, and sent to the Commons.

CUSTOMS (EXPORTATION RESTRICTION) BILL.
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE CIVIL LORD OF THE ADMIRALTY (THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE): My Lords, in asking the House to read this Bill a second time I do not think it necessary to weary your Lordships with any prolonged statement on the details and technicalities involved in this matter. The question of trade at this moment is a peculiarly difficult one, and as far as possible we have to aim at what are to some extent two rather discordant policies. In the first place we have to aim at restraint of enemy trade, and in the second place, as far as we possibly can, at the promotion of our own; and I think your Lordships will agree that the first consideration is the one which ought to be paramount in our minds.
Under the present system there is published a list of articles which are prohibited from going into neutral countries. That list is already an extensive one. It was partly compiled in pursuance of Acts passed prior to the outbreak of war, and as time has gone on it has been found necessary that the list should be increased. The present system is that it is possible to allow an article prohibited under the list to be sent to a neutral country under a licence issued by the War Trade Department, which is under the presidency of my noble friend Lord Emmott. That has, I believe, involved a great amount of work; it is a task of considerable delicacy and difficulty, but it has been carried out with a marked degree of success. That is the general system which is in operation. It is obvious that the difficulty arises when the article in question reaches the neutral country to secure that it shall not be allowed to pass through to an enemy destination. The task which has devolved upon my noble friend and his Department has been to judge, from the character and standing of the consignee, whether a licence should be given. This system must necessarily to some extent create delay and a certain amount of congestion at the ports. Consequently a considerable amount of inconvenience has been caused not only to British traders but to traders in neutral countries. This was especially so in the case of Holland, and led by degrees to the formation there of the Netherlands Over-sea Trust, which undertook the responsi-

141
bility of receiving goods and of taking every step they could to see that prohibited goods which had passed through their country under a licence should not find their destination in enemy territory. An additional safeguard is that the whole of their transactions are to be subject to the approval and the investigation of the British Consul.
This system has, I believe, worked well as far as licensed exports are concerned, and it is now proposed that the system should be extended so as to include no, prohibited goods. The Netherlands Oversea Trust have agreed to accept consignments of all goods, and have given their undertaking that such goods shall be limited to the neutral country and shall not find their way through to the enemy country. We have, I think, experience and information enough to justify us in asking the House to sanction this. It is not really a departure from any previously recognised principle, but an extension of principles which have already been adopted in connection with this subject. Taken in conjunction with other legislation this Bill will enable us to prohibit the export of any goods; it will enable us to confine the prohibition to any particular country; and, further than that—and this is the particular power which will be obtained under this Bill—it will enable us to prohibit goods going to any country except to a particular consignee.
If, as I hope will be the case, your Lordships allow this Bill to be read a second time and to be passed through its remaining stages at this afternoon's sitting so that it can receive the Royal Assent forthwith, it is intended by Order in Council to make the Netherlands Oversea Trust the consignee in respect of all goods passing from this country to Holland. Naturally no reference is made to any one country in particular, but as a result of the machinery set up by this Bill it will be possible by Order in Council, if the Bill passes, to make Holland the consignee. It will be further possible, I hope, later on, when the principle gets more firmly established, to have in other neutral countries similar bodies to that which has been set up in Holland, which should act as sole consignees in respect of that particular territory. The machinery proposed to be set up will be carried out through the Customs, which possess the necessary knowledge and information to enable them to do so. I admit that the system may not be as watertight
142
in every respect as one might desire. At any rate when this Bill is passed we shall be able to take another step in advance in helping our own exporters to carry on their business, at the same time having a reasonable amount of security that goods which go from this country into neutral countries will not be allowed to pass through to the service of the enemy.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Duke of Devonshire.)
On Question, Bill read 2a.
Committee negatived: Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bill read 3a, and passed.

THE ROYAL MARINES.
LORD LATYMER LORD LATYMER had the following Question on the Paper—
To ask His Majesty's Government whether officers of the Royal Marines are now competent to sit on Courts-Martial on their own men when held on board ship.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have been requested by the noble Duke who represents the Admiralty in this House not to put my Question. He thinks that it would not be in the public interest that it should be pressed at the present time, and, of course, in such days as these one can only acquiesce in whatever one is asked in that way. But I wish to make a remark or two on the subject without asking the Question. I know that the noble Duke has taken a kindly interest in the Royal Marines, and I hope that he will bear in mind that the Admiralty have always what I would call shirked and burked questions of this kind with regard to the Royal Marines. I do not for one moment mean to draw a likeness between the present and past occasions of the same sort, but I trust that the noble Duke as time goes on will cause inquiry to be made into the many grievances under which the Royal Marines suffer. I would also draw attention to the fact that there is no representative of the Royal Marines on the Board of Admiralty, and therefore they have no voice in the internal arrangements of their Force. No doubt public interest is a very important matter, but there is one other matter which is of quite as great importance—that is that justice should be done to all sections of His Majesty's Forces.
THE DUKE OF DEVONSHIRE: I am much obliged to my noble friend for allowing his Question to be postponed. I can assure him that there is no antipathy whatever to the Royal Marines, and that any references which he makes concerning them will be sympathetically received.

ILLEGITIMATE BIRTHS.
THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether the Local Government Board can furnish any statistics relating to the alleged probability of an increase of illegitimate births in this country owing to war conditions.
The most rev. Primate said: My Lords, in asking the Question which stands in my name I desire to be allowed to preface it by a few words of explanation as to the circumstances which have rendered it, in my judgment, desirable that we should have an official answer to this particular inquiry. Most of your Lordships are familiar with the facts. Some few months ago there was considerable circulation of representations and reports to the effect that the war conditions, as they are called, in England to-day—alluding especially to the billeting of soldiers in towns and villages—would have undoubtedly the consequence, before many months were over, of a particular increase in the number of illegitimate births in all parts of the country. The reports took a very substantial form, and specific statements about particular places in which even the numbers, amounting in some instances to many hundreds of cases about which definite knowledge was supposed to be already available, were current. In those circumstances the attention of those who, like myself, have some central responsibility with regard to moral as well as social questions was constantly called to the topic.
We entertained from the first, some of us, a good deal of doubt as to whether the reports which were so widely current had a substantial basis in fact, but it was impossible to speak in general terms about it with any degree of knowledge, and we were naturally most cautious as to expressing an opinion on the matter. We could only say that, familiar as we were with that kind of subject and with the
144
moral problems which arise in town and country places—and I was in communication with all the Bishops in England on the subject—we were unable to find sufficient ground for giving credence to the allegations which were made. Further, I felt that it was unsatisfactory that such a matter should be in the hands simply of an ecclesiastical authority in the way of inquiry. I therefore ventured to ask for the co-operation of certain ladies and gentlemen, not all members of the Church of England, and we agreed that it was desirable to invite that great organisation known as the National Union of Women Workers, which is neither politically nor denominationally restricted, to appoint a few ladies to look into the subject in different parts of the country.
The President of the National Union of Women Workers, though it is a completely undenominational body, happens to be Mrs. Creighton, widow of the late Bishop of London, a most capable and efficient worker and a student of all social problems. She, with those whom that society associated with her, looked into the question in all parts of England. They appointed a lady who went from place to place to make investigation; and they themselves have branches of their organisation in almost every part of England, and received reports from them. In the result they drew up and sent to the two Archbishops a full report of such information as they were able to obtain. But we felt that their report would be very much weightier if it were submitted to a larger committee of men and women conversant with these subjects who should weigh the report, test what seemed to them to be its value, and then themselves make a report to the public upon what the outcome was of the consideration they had given to the work of those investigators. That committee was a large one, presided over by the Archbishop of York, and to it was submitted the report drawn up by the investigators of the National Union of Women Workers. The result has been in the hands of the public for some little time in an abbreviated form. I am not aware that it has had any wide circulation in its full form, but those of your Lordships who have looked into the matter at all will have seen what the outcome was
We were abundantly justified in the scepticism we had entertained as to the

145
nature of the allegations made, and as to the basis on which they rested. We found that not only were those statements incapable of being verified, but some were of a kind of which it was impossible to understand the origin. Statements, for example, were made to the effect that in particular Poor Law unions the number of unmarried expectant mothers was so large that it would he necessary to build new wards in addition to those existing in the infirmaries or workhouses. There were other allegations of the same kind. In one of these eases, in which we were told that the number of apprehended births was so largo that new wards had been already acquired, we found there was not only no requirement of new wards but not one case in the existing wards. There were others cases in which the numbers of expectant mothers were put at 600, 700, and 800: these were reduced to 11, 8, and 3 respectively, or something of that kind. I do not profess to know and do not offer any explanation as to how the original figures had seen the light. But the matter was obviously one of supreme importance, and and others with me felt that the report of the Archbishop's Committee, based upon the investigations of the ladies I have mentioned, would of itself be no doubt important, but that it would be immensely increased in value wore we able to ascertain front the Local Government Board whether any inquiry which they had made substantiated or refuted the kind of conclusions to which the committee had arrived. I therefore venture to ask tonight whether the Local Government Board can give us any information supplementary to what we have obtained by voluntary investigation—most careful and most thorough-going, but of course quite inferior to the kind of inquiry which can be conducted by a Government authority.
I am particularly anxious that I should not be supposed, as spokesman in this matter, to be saying that we are satisfied that all is perfectly right, or that we are able to prove that there is no ground whatever for such apprehensions as were entertained. That they were immensely exaggerated is absolutely certain, because the statistics given were capable of being tested and, being tested, are found to break down entirely. But do not let it be supposed that we are therefore saying that there is no apprehension justifiable of the kind that there will be some more ille-
146
gitimate births, or that we are the least professing to say there has been no wrong doing of the sort which would lead to such births. All we say is that the statements made have broken down on investigation, and as far as the knowledge now in our possession extends we have not the slightest reason to believe there will be any material increase during the coming months to the ordinary number of illegitimate births that take place throughout the country. It is possible that something may come to light of which we have no knowledge. It is possible even that there may have been some misapprehension on the part of some of those who have made inquiry, or that mistaken information may have been given to them. All that we state is that the inquiries we have made fail to substantiate the statements which were published, and we are particularly anxious to know whether the reassuring report which we have received from voluntary sources can be supplemented from official sources in a way that the Government alone can do.
LORD HYLTON: My Lords, the Local Government Board have no statistics in their possession at the moment which would justify them in saying that the proportion of illegitimate to legitimate births in the current year will be affected by what are called war conditions. The Board have instituted special inquiries in various directions with a view to answering the most rev. Primate's inquiry, and the results of all the inquiries converge to one conclusion—namely, that the allegations which have been made and to which the Archbishop referred are grossly exaggerated. The General Inspectors of the Board were asked to make inquiries in their districts; Miss Wamsley, one of the woman Inspectors, was directed to make full investigation in six selected towns; and further inquiries have been made front medical officers of health, from the Salvation Army, and from other sources. The reports of the General Inspectors with one accord indicate that, so far as present evidence goes, there is not likely to be any alarming increase in the number of illegitimate births, and the replies received from the local medical officers of health are to the same effect. Of the information obtained from societies particular reference may be made to that from the Salvation Army, the Charity Organisation Society, and the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to

147
Children. The Charity Organisation Society circulated a letter to the Press as a result of their inquiries, in which they state—
"The replies from forty-four centres are unanimous in describing the common report as a great exaggeration."
They give some instances, and add—
"Furthermore many inquirers are doubtful whether even this very small increase in the illegitimate birth rate can fairly be attributed to soldiers, as in many places large numbers of strangers have come into the district for the building of hats, etc."
The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children state—
"Out of 202 inspectors, we have received replies from 161, and almost every one says that, after making most careful inquiries, there is little or no likelihood of there being an increase in illegitimate births."
The information from all sources, in so far as it is definite, indicates that there is not likely to be a very large increase of illegitimate births.
From more than one quarter it has been stated that the allegations which have been made have done harm, and since they appear to be without foundation it is important that they should be rebutted. I venture to think the House will agree that the fact that the most rev. Primate has put this Question and made the remarks he did on the subject will have a valuable effect in the country in this direction. In dealing with this question people are apt to overlook the fact that normally the number of illegitimate births in this country is considerable. In England and Wales the number in 1913 was nearly 38,000; in Scotland in 1912 the number was nearly 9,000; and in Ireland, in 1913, nearly 3,000.
I may, I hope, be allowed to quote one or two extracts from the reports received on this subject from medical officers of health. The medical officer for West Kent states that the number of expected births was exaggerated, and the medical officer for Bromley says that the statement that 800 were expected was characterised as an "impudent scandal." The Luton medical officer of health could find no cases reported or expected. In Portsmouth the statement that 400 extra births were
148
expected was found to be quite untrue. The reports received from the Salvation Army and from the Charity Organisation Society are to the same effect. I hope that the statement I have made of the result of the inquiries conducted by the Local Government Board will satisfy the most rev. Primate that the official information, so far as it has been received, entirely corroborates the conclusions arrived at by his own committee.
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The following sixteen Bills received the Royal Assent—

Consolidated Fund (No. 3).

Customs (Exportation Restriction).

Forfar Gas Order Confirmation.

Great North of Scotland Railway Order Confirmation.

Highland Railway Order Confirmation.

Irvine and District Water Board (Emergency Powers) Order Confirmation.

Brighton and Hove Gas.

Falmouth Docks:

Ormskirk Gas and Electricity.

Metropolitan District Railway.

Seaforth and Sefton Junction Railway.

Streatley and Goring Bridge.

Bristol Tramways.

Halifax Corporation.

Sheffield Corporation (Tramways).

West Gloucestershire Water.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
VISCOUNT ALLENDALE: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do adjourn, except for Judicial business, until Tuesday next, June 29.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned at a quarter before Six o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.