Sitting of 10 August 1916

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.
MEAT AND SUGAR PURCHASES.
Copy presented of Treasury Minute, dated 20th July, 1916, making arrangements for financing the purchase of Sugar and Meat abroad on behalf of His Majesty's Government [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.

SHOPS ACT, 1912.
Copy presented of Order made by the Council of the undermentioned local authority, and confirmed by the Secretary for Scotland:—
Burgh of Perth
[by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

EXPERIMENTS ON LIVING ANIMALS.
Address for return, "showing the number of Experiments on Living Animals during the year 1915, under Licences granted under the Act 39 and 40 Vic, cap. 77, distinguishing the nature of the Experiments (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 326, of Session 1914–16)."—[Mr. Brace.]
ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.
  WAR.
    PRISONERS OF WAR.

      DELIVERY OF LETTERS.
      Mr. MALCOLMasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to Ambassador Gerard's Report of 3rd July, on his visit to the prisoner camp at Giessen, in which he states that letters are delivered after the usual delay of six weeks; whether this regulation obtains in German prisoner camps in Great Britain;
      1196
      and, if not, will he advise the same delay in the delivery of letters from Germany as is considered proper for prisoner camps in that country?
      The UNDER-SECRETARY Of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Lord Robert Cecil): We have no reason to suppose that this delay of six weeks is habitual; but if we find that this is the case, we shall have to consider the advisability of treating German correspondence in a similar way.
      Mr. MALCOLM: Is the Noble Lord aware that Ambassador Gerard says this is the usual delay? Those are the words in his dispatch.
      Lord R. CECIL: I will look into that, but I think, as a matter of fact, it is not usual.
      Mr. G. FABER: Can the same treatment be accorded here as in Germany in regard to delay, if any?
      Lord R. CECIL: Speaking from recollection, I do not think there is any great delay.
      Mr. CHANCELLOR: Is it desirable to make ourselves as contemptible as Germany?

      TREATMENT IN TURKEY.
      Sir E. CORNWALLasked whether, in view of the failure of the Turkish Government to reply to the British Note of 6th July, any intimation has been conveyed to the Turkish authorities of the good treatment accorded to Turkish prisoners in our hands; and whether the good offices of the United States representatives are still being invoked to ensure similar treatment for British prisoners in Turkish hands?
      Lord R. CECIL: United States officials have since October last been at entire liberty to inspect camps where Turkish prisoners of war are interned, and their reports, which have been sent to Constantinople, have been most favourable. The Porte can be in no doubt as to the excellent treatment received by Turkish prisoners of war in our hands; the reply to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.
      Sir E. CORNWALL: Have the Turkish Government replied?
      Lord R. CECIL: So far as I know, they have not yet replied.
      Sir E. CORNWALLasked the Secretary of State for War how many Turkish prisoners have been captured by the Allies?
      The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Forster): According to the latest returns in possession His Majesty's Forces have taken and there, are now held as prisoners of war 425 Turkish officers and 9,598 of other ranks. These figures do not include those recently captured in Egypt, about which the Department has as yet no information other than that obtained in the published communiqués.

      DANISH GOVERNMENT'S PBOPOSAL.
      Mr. MALCOLMasked whether proposals have been made by any neutral countries other than Switzerland to receive prisoners of war for internment, or whether any negotiations on this subject are proceeding between His Majesty's Government and such countries?
      Lord R. CECIL: His Majesty's Government have recently received a proposal from the Danish Government for the transfer of wounded British and German prisoners of war to Denmark. His Majesty's Government are grateful to the Danish Government for their interest in the matter, and the proposal is receiving their careful consideration.

      TRANSFER OF WOUNDED TO SWITZERLAND.
      Mr. HUME-WILLIAMSasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can state with whom it rests to determine which individual wounded prisoners shall be sent to Switzerland from Great Britain and from Germany, respectively; whether Switzerland has given any and what number as the maximum of such wounded prisoners which she is prepared to receive; if not, why a larger number is not sent; and whether each batch is the subject of separate negotiations, or whether they are sent at stated intervals and in agreed numbers?
      Lord R. CECIL: The arrangements for the transfer to Switzerland of British and German wounded and sick prisoners of war are described in White Paper, Miscellaneous, No. 17 (1916). I would explain with regard to Paper No. 8 in that White Paper that in the case of France and Germany, the country holding the prisoners has a majority of members on the final board and that, consequently this is the case in the United Kingdom; Switzerland has fixed no maximum number of prisoners to
      1198
      be accepted; time is required to examine the prisoners who are scattered about all over Germany, but we understand that 764 British prisoners are to arrive in Switzerland on the 11th instant. We are proposing that the Swiss Medical Commissions shall visit this country and Germany every quarter.

      EXCHANGES.
      Mr. RONALD McNEILLasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether thirty-six British exchanged prisoners of war passed through Holland on 7th August, while eighty-five German prisoners of war were being returned in exchange for this party; and, if so, will he say for what reason such a disparity of numbers to the advantage of the enemy is permitted in the exchange of prisoners of war?
      Mr. MALCOLMasked the Secretary of State for War whether the last exchange of prisoners of war was thirty-six British for eighty-five German soldiers; and will he state the principle upon which such unequal exchanges are based?
      Mr. FORSTER: My right hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs has asked me to answer this question, and I will, at the same time, answer question No. 92. The actual numbers on each side passing from England to Germany and from Germany to England were thirty-six British and sixty-two Germans, respectively. Of these sixty-two Germans, nine were sanitary personnel. I would remind my hon. Friend that the repatriation of invalids is based on a certain standard of physical or mental disability, and not on equality of numbers.
      Mr. McNEILL: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is no sort of relation between the numbers on one side and those on the other, and that any number of Germans might be sent home as against a very much smaller number of British?
      Mr. FORSTER: I think that would be so, because it depends on disability, and not on numbers, and I think I am right in saying that on a recent occasion when prisoners were sent to Switzerland the rule operated in our favour—there were more British than Germans.
      Mr. G. FABER: Are we to take it that the disability of the Germans returned from this country to Germany was greater than the disability of the British returned to this country?
      Mr. FORSTER: I do not know whether it was greater, but there were more of them.
      Sir E. CARSON: Are we to understand there were only thirty-six British subjects who came up to the standard?
      Mr. FORSTER: I think that is so—thirty-six selected by the Selection Board in Germany.
      Mr. MALCOLM: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in one sanatorium there are still about sixty who have got their discharges signed, most of whom are in a deplorable condition, and who cannot get to Switzerland?
      Mr. McNEILL: Does the hon. Gentleman seriously ask the House to believe that in Germany there were only thirty-six British prisoners of war who reached the standard of incapacity for exchange, and that His Majesty's Government accept that on the statement of the authorities in Germany?
      Mr. FORSTER: I do not ask my hon. Friend to accept that, and he knows I do not. What I do ask him to accept is that thirty-six was the number passed by the Selection Board.
      Mr. PRINGLE: Why are thirty-six equivalent to eighty-five?

      AMERICAN REPORTS.
      Mr. MALCOLMasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how soon he will circulate the American reports on prisoner camps in Germany received since 31st March; and what is the cause of the delay in the issue of this White Paper, whose contents were in the printer's hands on 17th July?
      Lord R. CECIL: The White Paper containing the reports will be laid on the Table to-morrow. I regret the delay which has occurred, but the causes of it have been unavoidable.

      BOOKS TOR PRISONERS IN GERMANY.
      Major Sir C. HUNTERasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if any fresh and more stringent Regulations have lately been issued as to the sending of books to prisoners of war in Germany?
      Mr. FORSTER: The instructions on this matter which are in force were communicated to the Press on the 23rd June, and came into force from the 1st July, since
      1200
      which date no fresh, and consequently no more stringent, Regulations have been issued. I will send my hon. and gallant Friend a copy of the Regulations, and he will then be able to see exactly how the matter stands.
      Major Sir C. HUNTER: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that very simple books, such as nursery rhyme books, have been refused?
      Mr. FORSTER: I am not aware of it.

      BRITISH PRISONERS IN TURKEY.
      Sir E. CORNWALLasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the failure of the Turkish Government to reply to the British Note of the 6th July regarding the treatment and condition of British prisoners, the Government proposes to warn the leaders of the Young Turkish party that they will be held personally responsible for any untoward results which may happen to the British officers and men in their hands?
      Lord R. CECIL: The Porte were warned in July, 1915, that all Turkish Ministers and officials would be held personally responsible for damage and loss of whatever kind suffered by individual British subjects detained in Turkey. We are renewing this warning with special reference to our combatant prisoners. I must, however, point out that in time of war it is futile to expect words to be effective, and that the defeats which the Turks are now suffering are much more likely to be effective than any threats used by the Foreign Office.

      DECLARATION OF PARIS.
      Sir J. D. REESasked, in view of the facts that the Declaration of Paris, 1856, was signed by Lords Clarendon and Cowley without authority from Her late Majesty Queen Victoria, that in has never been ratified, that by the two conditions attached to its first four Articles the signatories undertook not to enter thenceforth into any arrangement not resting at the same time on all those four Articles and that the Declaration should not be obligatory except between Powers which have acceded to it, that the United States have not acceded to it and that it is therefore not binding either between the United States and Great Britain or between the United States and any one of the present belligerent Powers, and that Articles III. and IV. of the Order in Council of 11th

      1201
      March, 1915, are contrary to Article III. of the Declaration, have the Law Officers of the Crown been consulted on the question whether the Declaration is now of any effect or binding force; and, if not, will the Law Officers be consulted on that point.
      Lord R. CECIL: His Majesty's Government cannot admit that the terms of the Order in Council referred to are inconsistent with the obligations assumed under the Declaration of Paris. There is, accordingly, no occasion to consult the Law Officers, as suggested. The hon. Member is mistaken in supposing that Her late Majesty Queen Victoria did not give her approval to the participation of this country in the Declaration of Paris. As regards his further point, namely, that the Declaration has not been ratified, I would beg leave to point out that the instrument contains no provision for ratification, and that ratification is not always an essential formality in order to give effect to an international arrangement.
      Sir J. D. REES: May I ask whether it is not the case that this Declaration was never before, her late Majesty Queen Victoria in its completed form, and also whether it is not the case that the Prize Courts have frequently condemned goods on the sole ground that they are enemy property?
      Lord R. CECIL: As to the latter question, I think my hon. Friend is in error, but as to the first my recollection of the document is that her late Majesty gave a distinct authority to the representatives of this country to conclude the arrangement that was afterwards embodied in the Declaration.

      RELIEF IN BELGIUM.
      Mr. EVELYN CECILasked whether His Majesty's Government is satisfied that the funds of the National Committee for Relief in Belgium are in fact devoted to the relief of loyal Belgians in the occupied territory, and not to that of Germans or of Belgians working for the German Army; and whether the Government will continue to take steps to ensure the application of the funds to the purposes for which they were given?
      Lord R. CECIL: The answer to both parts of the question is in the affirmative. The work in the so-called "Zone of Occu-
      1202
      pation" in Belgium, under civil government, which comprises the bulk of the occupied territory, is now proceeding under satisfactory guarantees covering all domestic food produce. In certain respects violations of these guarantees by the Germans still arise, but the United States, Spanish and Netherlands Representatives at Brussels, as patrons of the Relief Commission, are taking energetic steps, and the Germans are well aware that a continuance of such violations will endanger the whole work. In the military zone, d'Etape, comprising East and West Flanders, and in the French provinces, the question of domestic supplies has been put on a clear basis by a demand made by the Allied Governments that the yield of the coming harvest shall be reserved for the civil populationֵ This demand is being and will be energetically pressed. In the whole territory His Majesty's Government are satisfied that the foodstuffs imported by the Relief Commission run no risk of appropriation by the enemy.
      Mr. PRINGLE: Do they not indirectly set free supplies which are of advantage to the Germans?
      Lord R. CECIL: I would not like to say that that never happens, because it is dangerous to speak so absolutely, but I do believe that on the whole the House may rest assured that the precautions taken are satisfactory.
      Mr. WARDLE: Is it a fact that the Germans are now deporting women from Belgium?
      Lord R. CECIL: I do not know how far that policy has been applied to Belgium. It has been applied in France, and a terrible and scandalous state of things has arisen.
      Mr. SHIRLEY BENN: Are we to take it the Government are still satisfied that the funds collected by the National Relief Commission for Belgium should be handed over to the neutral Commission for administration?
      Lord R. CECIL: The Government are fully satisfied.

      INTERNED CIVILIANS (BRITISH AND GERMAN EXCHANGES).
      Commander WEDGWOODasked whether any further steps are being taken or will shortly be taken with a view to exchanging the 4,000 British interned in

      1203
      Germany for the 20,000 Germans interned in this country; whether His Majesty's Government is aware of the wish of the British to get rid of these Germans once and for all even at the risk of presenting such material to Germany?
      Lord R. CECIL: The German Government having inquired whether we are prepared to exchange all British and German civilians over forty-five years of age, we have agreed to do so in principle on certain conditions, the most important of which is that the remaining British civilians interned in Germany should be exchanged against an equal number of German civilians interned here.
      Sir C. HENRY: May I ask whether the Noble Lord has received from the Home Office a classification of the civilian prisoners interned here?
      Lord R. CECIL: Not a complete classification. I have received an estimate of the number of German prisoners over forty-five. Further inquiries are being made.
      Sir C. HENRY: Can the Noble Lord give the number above forty-five years of age?
      Lord R. CECIL: I am told there are about 4,000 out of the 26,000 who are over forty-five, but I ought to warn the House that this is an estimate and not an absolutely certain figure.
      Mr. HUME-WILLIAMS: Is it intended to exchange an equal number?
      Lord R. CECIL: The proposal which is the basis of discussion now is that all civilians over forty-five, irrespective of numbers, should be repatriated on the ground that they are not of so great military value, but that all civilians of military age should be exchanged in equal numbers?
      Mr. G. LAMBERT: Can the Noble Lord say when he expects a reply?
      Lord R. CECIL: It is very difficult to expect anything from the Gorman Government. I think the answer went off to Germany through the American Embassy two or three days ago
      Mr. R. McNEILL: Does the Noble Lord say that men over forty-five in Germany are not liable for military service?
      Lord R. CECIL: I do not know technically, but the Germans assert very strongly that that is so. We do not however, base
      1204
      ourselves on that but on the great desirability of getting British prisoners over forty-five out of Germany if we can, and on the relatively small military value of those we send back.

      PERSIA.
      Sir E. CORNWALLasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can give the House any information as to the present general condition of affairs in Persia; whether any recent arrangements have been concluded between Persia and His Majesty's Government relating to the financial and military reorganisation of that country; and whether Anglo-Indian officers will be employed in Southern Persia in officering the gendarmerie?
      Lord R. CECIL: The general condition of affairs in Persia has recently shown a decided improvement, and the arrest or dispersal of most of the German parties and agents in that country give good reason to hope that this improvement may be maintained. In regard to the second part of the question while no agreement has yet actually been concluded, I hope that an arrangement on financial and other questions may very shortly be arrived at with the Persian Government, who have shown a sincere desire to work with the Allied Governments. The answer to the last part of the question is in the affirmative.

      HON. BERTRAND RUSSELL (PASSPORT).
      Mr. PONSONBYasked on what grounds the Hon. Bertrand Russell has been refused a passport to enable him to proceed to the United States to take up his duties as lecturer in philosophy and mathematics at Harvard University?
      Lord R. CECIL: His Majesty's Government do not consider it to be in the public interest to issue a passport to enable Mr. Russell to leave the United Kingdom at the present time. No application from him has, however, been refused since, I am informed, he has made none.
      Mr. PONSONBY: May I ask the Noble Lord whether the Ambassador at Washington has received any representations from the authorities of Harvard Uni-

      1205
      versity on this subject, and whether, considering that this is a purely academic appointment, the Foreign Office cannot see their way to reverse their decision?
      Lord R. CECIL: I should like notice of the first part of the question. As to the second part, I do not see any prospect of His Majesty's Government reversing their decision.
      Mr. LEIF JONES: Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that the refusal to allow this distinguished philosopher to fulfil an engagement made long months ago to lecture to the students at Harvard University is likely to cause a great deal of misunderstanding in the United States?
      Sir H. CRAIK: May I ask whether the resources of Harvard University will be so destitute in philosophy and mathematics if the services of this gentleman are lost to them?
      Mr. SPEAKER: This seems to be leading to a debate.

      DETENTION OF ENEMY GOODS (UNITED STATES).
      Sir J. D. REESasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in view of the declaration made by the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in his statement of 23rd July, 1915, to the United States that we are not detaining enemy goods on the sole ground that they are the property of an enemy, if he can say whether that is the policy now being pursued; whether orders to that effect have been issued to the Fleet and to others concerned in the detention of goods brought into port on the ground of probable liability to confiscation; and, if so, can he explain how it is that, while neutral goods suspected of being contraband of war are detained and submitted to the Prize Court, enemy goods are not even detained but are allowed to go free without submission to such Court, and on what ground or for what reason enemy goods are treated with an indulgence not extended to neutral goods?
      Lord R. CECIL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. With regard to the second part of the question goods are not brought into port on the ground of probable liability to confiscation, but in order to facilitate the
      1206
      belligerent right of search as was explained in the last note on the subject to the United States Government. No orders in the sense indicated are now in force. No such indulgence as is apparently suggested in the last part of the question is now or ever has been shown to enemy goods.
      Sir J. D. REES: Is my Noble Friend quite sure that the Prize Court have not condemned goods on the sole ground that they are enemy property?
      Lord R. CECIL: I do not think that arises out of this question. I am not quite sure about it, but my recollection is that no such case has, in fact, yet been brought before the Prize Court, but I do not know.

      GERMAN RUPEES.
      Commander WEDGWOODasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether German rupees are being accepted as legal tender in East Africa and Mafia; whether he is aware that they are only worth 8½d. in silver, so that there is a 50 per cent, loss on such acceptance; whether German paper money is being accepted at a discount, thus bolstering up German credit; and, if so, will he say which Government Department is responsible for this action?
      The SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Bonar Law): The provisional arrangements as to currency have been made by General Smuts, who, however, has directed that German currency notes and Imperial German coin are not to be recognised. I consider that his action is necessary, for the present, to avoid loss to the natives and consequent unrest; and I have approved the adoption of similar measures in the southern portion of the occupied territory under the immediate control of General Northey.

      ADMIRALS OF THE FLEET (PROMOTION).
      Admiral of the Fleet Sir H. MEUXasked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether there was an Order in Council some time in 1914 before the War altering the regulations governing the promotion of Admirals to Admirals of the Fleet; and, if so, why was this Order in Council kept secret and withheld from the knowledge of the admirals it affected?
      The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): The King's Regulations prior to August, 1914, contained the following provision:
      "Admirals of the Fleet will be selected by His Majesty from the Admirals on the Active List who have served as Commander-in-Chief or who have commanded at sea as Flag Officer for two years."
      This was changed so as to read—
      "Admirals of the Fleet will be selected by His Majesty from the Admirals on the Active List who have served with distinction as Flag Officer, without regard to seniority."
      At the same time the Board decided that in selecting officers for promotion the following qualifications should be required:
      "To have served as First Sea Lord for upwards of twelve months,
      or
      To have commanded the principal Fleet, for a period of twelve months,
      or
      To have performed special war or other conspicuous service since the attainment of captain's rank."
      No specific Order in Council was necessary and none was obtained.
      The change in the King's Regulations was promulgated to the Fleet by Admiralty Monthly Order of 1st August, 1914, and as all the admirals affected were then serving they had access to the Order in question.
      Sir H. MEUX: Does the right hon. Gentleman not see that one of the conditions that he has to serve at least one year as First Sea Lord of the Admiralty makes the First Sea Lord during that period absolutely at the mercy of the First Lord?
      Dr. MACNAMARA: No.

      NAVAL COURTS OF INQUIRY.
      Colonel GRETTONasked whether, in the cases of Naval Courts of Inquiry where civilian witnesses may be criminally implicated, it is intended to take powers to add civilians to the Court as in the Army Act Amendment Bill of this Session?
      Dr. MACNAMARA: Should the circumstances contemplated in my hon. Friend's question arise, the Board of Admiralty will consider what additional powers, if any, are required.

      WAR BONUS (DOCKYARD TIMEKEEPERS).
      Mr. HOHLERasked the Secretary to the Admiralty whether he is aware that on 22nd July, 1915, in reply to a question, he
      1208
      stated that the grant of a war bonus to the timekeepers employed in His Majesty's dockyards was under consideration; and is he now in a position to state whether any, and what, decision has been come to?
      Dr. MACNAMARA: It is regretted that a decision has not yet been arrived at.
      Mr. HOHLER: Will a decision ever be come to?
      Dr. MACNAMARA: Yes, I hope so. I think my hon. Friend knows that the whole question of the clerical staff is a very difficult one, and raises issues very much wider than those raised in this particular case.

      MERCANTILE MARINE (CHINESE CREWS).
      Mr. T. WILSONasked whether a few days ago a Chinese crew signed on for a ship chartered by the Admiralty at Cardiff was paid off and a British crew engaged instead; if so, will he state the reason for this action; and whether the Admiralty have now definitely decided to engage British seamen whenever and wherever they are available?
      Dr. MACNAMARA: A British crew was engaged for a ship in Cardiff, the Chinese crew of which had been paid off. The Admiralty prefer, and have always preferred, a British to a foreign crew whenever it could be obtained.

      LIGHTING REGULATIONS (JEDBURGH).
      Sir JOHN JARDINEasked the Secretary for Scotland, anent the trial and conviction of Mr. David Cockburn before Sheriff-substitute Baillie, in the Royal burgh of Jedburgh, and the fine of £15 imposed for an infraction of the Lighting Order No. 1 for failing to obscure sufficiently the light in his premises, whether any previous conviction or malice or atrocity or connivance with the enemy was charged, proved, or admitted; and whether the learned judge found any specific act to be a reason for the amount of the fine inflicted?
      The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. Tennant): I would refer my hon. Friend to the statement made by my right hon. and learned Friend the Lord Advocate in the Debate on Scottish Estimates yesterday in this House.
      Sir J. JARDINE: Will the right hon. Gentleman answer that part of the question as to what the circumstances were, and whether Sheriff-substitute Baillie found any specific act to justify such a tremendous fine? I want an answer to those two points.
      Mr. TENNANT: My right hon. Friend the Lord Advocate dealt with those points in his speech yesterday.
      Sir J. JARDINE: No.
      Mr. TENNANT: I understand that he did.
      Mr. PRINGLE: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Attorney-General was only fined £1, while this poor man was fined £15?
      Mr. OUTHWAITE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in England and Wales these prosecutions are undertaken by the Home Office, and that the Under-Secretary for the Home Department was recently fined only 5s. for an offence such as this; and will he try to establish equality of treatment?
      Mr. TENNANT: I am aware of all those circumstances, but the matter is entirely within the discretion of the Court.
      Mr. HOGGE: Why is it that the Attorney-General is fined £1, and the Under-Secretary to the Home Office 5s., while this man in Jedburgh is fined £15?
      Sir J. JARDINE: If the right hon. Gentleman will consider the information given as regards this specific case he will find that it was answered by the Lord Advocate yesterday by putting specific questions.
      Mr. TENNANT: I will endeavour to get the information. I understand that the whole question was the subject of debate in the House yesterday, and that my right hon. Friend the Lord Advocate gave a specific answer.
      HON. MEMBERS: And there was a Division upon it.

      GLASGOW TOWN COUNCIL.
      Mr. HUGH LAWasked the Secretary for Scotland whether the Glasgow Town Council is about to fill by co-option a vacancy now existing by reason of the death of one of its members; and whether he will represent to the council the advisability of giving direct representation on
      1210
      that body to the 120,000 unrepresented Irish Nationalists, 15,000 of whom have joined the Colours since the outbreak of War?
      Mr. TENNANT: I am not officially informed of the occurrence of such vacancies, and it would be quite beyond my province to make any representations to s the corporation as to the exercise of the power conferred upon them by Statute to fill by co-option as they think fit the vacancy in question.

      COCAINE.
      Captain DOUGLAS HALLasked the Home Secretary if, owing to the restrictions put on obtaining cocaine and its preparations by the Home Office, nearly 2,000 members of the Incorporated Dental Society are unable to obtain this anæsthetic, and consequently suffering is inflicted on the general public; and if he can see his way to remedy this state of affairs?
      Mr. G. LAMBERTasked the Home Secretary if he will modify the Order prohibiting the sale of cocaine to unregistered dentists who are genuinely utilising the drug for dental purposes?
      The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Herbert Samuel): I would refer the hon. Members to the reply which I gave on Monday last to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme. In response to the representations which; have been made to mo from many quarters of the House, I propose to extend the temporary permit which I have already granted for the purchase of; cocaine preparations by unregistered dentists, and in the meantime to make further inquiries into the subject.

    DISTURBANCES IN IRELAND.

      INTERNED PRISONERS.
      Mr. HACKETTasked the Home Secretary whether the cases of James Hefferman, New Birmingham, Thurles, and Michael Morris, New Birmingham, Thurles, have been investigated by the Advisory Committee; whether these men were arrested ten days after the surrender in Dublin for an offence of a non-political character and not in connection

      1211
      with the rebellion; and whether, as they have been three months interned, he will now order their immediate release?
      Mr. SAMUEL: James Hefferman and Matthew Morris, of Thurles (not Michael Morris, of whom I have no record), were released on the 2nd August, on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee. I am informed that both these men were arrested on the 11th May for offences in connection with the rebellion.
      Mr. HACKETTasked the Home Secretary whether the case of Willie Ryan, Turraheen, Rosmore, county Tipperary, who was arrested at North Strand Street, Dublin, on the premises of his employer where he had been employed for three months previous, has been investigated by the Advisory Committee; and will he order the release of this young boy?
      Mr. SAMUEL: Willie Ryan, of Rosmore, county Tipperary, was released on the 22nd July, on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee.
      Mr. HACKETTasked the Home Secretary whether the cases of Edward O'Dwyer, Ballagh, county Tipperary; John Sheehan, Dundrum, county Tipperary; Patrick Gautly, Roscrea, county Tipperary, have been investigated by the Advisory Committee; whether he is aware that these men had no connection with the recent rebellion, further than that they were members of the Irish Volunteers, which was a legal body previous to the rebellion on Easter Monday; and whether, as there was no outbreak of rebellion and only four persons in all in Mid Tipperary arrested for their connection with the Irish Volunteers, he will order the immediate release of these three men?
      Mr. SAMUEL: The cases of Edward O'Dwyer, Patrick Gautly, and Michael Sheehan, of Dundrum (not John Sheehan, of whom I have no record), have been considered by the Advisory Committee, with the result that they recommended the release of Sheehan and Gautly. These two persons have been released. The Committee recommended that O'Dwyer should be retained in internment.

      MR. SHEEHY SKEFFINGTON.
      Mr. KINGasked the Prime Minister whether he has settled the reference to the Commission which is to inquire into the
      1212
      circumstances connected with the death of Mr. Sheehy Skeffington; and when the Commission is to open its sittings?
      The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): I hope that the terms of reference will be announced in a day or two and that the Commission will begin its sittings before the end of the month.
      Mr. SNOWDEN: Will the other members of the Commission beside the Chairman be announced at the same time?
      The PRIME MINISTER: Certainly.

      RACE MEETINGS (IRELAND).
      Major NEWMANasked the Homo Secretary whether, in view of the cancelling of all race meetings in Great Britain, it is proposed to cancel or carry out the full autumn and winter list of fixtures in Ireland?
      The FIRST COMMISSIONER of WORKS (Mr. Harcourt): My right hon. Friend has asked me to answer this question. No action in regard to racing in Ireland has been taken by the Board of Trade, and, so far as I am aware, no action is at present contemplated.
      Sir H. MEUX: Is not that question rather incorrectly worded? I understood that the autumn meeting at Newmarket is to take place as previously arranged. Is that so?
      Mr. HARCOURT: Yes, Sir; the statement in the hon. Member's question is incorrect, but I cannot undertake to correct all hon. Member's misstatements.

      GRAND HOTEL, FOLKESTONE.
      Mr. T. WILSONasked the Home Secretary if his attention has been called to the case of a man and his wife named Leppail who are acting as hairdressers at the Grand Hotel, Folkestone; if he is aware that these persons claimed to be of French nationality but, when before the local tribunal, the man admitted that they were both Germans; and whether, seeing that a large number of British officers and their wives have been staying at this hotel ever since the outbreak of war, he will, in the interests of this country, cause these two Germans to be removed from this hotel?
      Mr. SAMUEL: I am informed that the hairdresser at the hotel named is a man named Zoller, who is a naturalised British subject of German origin. I am not aware that he has ever concealed his origin. He attested under the group system, and has recently been granted conditional exemption by the local tribunal. If the hon. Member has any facts which would enable me to identify and investigate the case of the man named Leppail, I shall be glad to receive them.

  MUNITIONS.

    WOMEN WORKERS (REFRESHMENTS).
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the Minister of Munitions if two women named Mrs. Allen, a war widow, and Miss Dicker have been dismissed from the shell-filling factory in Middlesex for having accepted a cup of tea during working hours; if he is aware that it was formerly the practice to allow the women twenty minutes in the morning and in the afternoon for refreshments, this practice being stopped by the new manager; and, as under the present arrangements the women have in many cases to go seven hours without food, will he have an inquiry made into the provision for the welfare of the women workers at this place, and also into the complaints about the conduct of the new manager there?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of MUNITIONS (Dr. Addison): I am informed that the reason for the dismissal of the two women in question was not as stated, but was due to their refusal to go to another part of the factory. Apparently it was not the practice to allow the women twenty minutes in the morning for refreshments, though at one time twenty minutes was allowed for this purpose in the afternoon. As he is aware, a Women Welfare Supervisor has been appointed at the factory to see that the women under their care do not suffer hardship from lack of rest or refreshment. I am clearly of opinion that an interval should be allowed for workers in this class of employment under the conditions prevailing in this factory, and steps are being taken to secure this.

    DEPORTATIONS FROM CLYDE DISTRICT.
    Mr. BARNESasked the Minister of Munitions if he is yet in a position to say if the Clyde deportees are to be allowed to
    1214
    return to their homes; and, if not, what steps can they take to enable them to conform to any reasonable requirement of the Government?
    Dr. ADDISON: My right hon. Friend has received representations in regard to these men, both from the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, to which society all or most of the men belong, and from the National Labour Advisory Committee on War Output. We have naturally attached great weight to these representations and have decided accordingly to permit certain of the men to return, provided they will accept the employment which will be offered to them there and are prepared to sign an undertaking embodying among other matters a promise to submit any grievances through the recognised machinery of their trade union, and to abstain from any act in any way likely to prejudice the supply of munitions or other war work. In coming to this decision as to these particular men, the Minister of Munitions has been guided by a careful examination of records, and by the fact that since their removal they have all taken other employment, and, according to our information, have worked loyally up to the present time. In no circumstances can he proceed to deal with the cases of the other men for a period of three months, and then only if he is fully satisfied that their conduct has for a substantial period been comparable to that of the men who will now be allowed to return.
    Mr. BARNES: Does not the hon. Gentleman think that this distinction between one man and another will only lead to further trouble? Would it not be better to take the cherry at one bite? Will he make (representations to his right hon. Friend in that direction?
    Dr. ADDISON: I cannot undertake to do that. We have examined these cases with every possible care and are confident that we have arrived at the right decision.
    Mr. PRINGLE: Can the hon. Gentleman say who are the men who are not to be allowed to return?
    Dr. ADDISON: Yes, the names will be published in a short time.
    Mr. BARNES: Can the hon. Gentleman say what these men have to do in order to place themselves in compliance with the conditions in three months?
    Dr. ADDISON: They should take work and continue quietly at it as the other men have done, and be prepared to observe the requirements as to conduct.
    Mr. BARNES: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that some of them are not at work?
    Dr. ADDISON: One of them has refused to take any work, and we cannot in any circumstances allow a man to return who will not undertake to work.

    SOLDIERS (CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT).
    Mr. ANDERSONasked the Minister of Munitions the precise terms on which soldiers are temporarily lent by the War Office for industrial employment; whether they remain during their work in the factory under military law; and whether they receive the standard wage paid to other workmen doing similar work or whether they receive the ordinary Army rate of pay irrespective of the rates in the factory in which they are employed?
    Mr. FORSTER: I have sent to my hon. Friend copies of the instructions dealing with the release of soldiers for industrial employment. Soldiers released, as distinct from military working parties, receive the standard wage paid to the workman doing similar work.
    Mr. W. THORNEasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office if a number of soldiers have been sent to the Llanelly Steel Works, South Wales; if the men in question are only receiving a few pence per day over and above their Army pay; if the War Office are charging the employer the full rates of wages in accordance with the trade union rates paid at the works in question; in what way and for what purpose the money is being used that the War Office are receiving over and above the rates of pay paid to the soldiers working at the steel works; if such an arrangement is a violation of all the agreements that have been agreed to between the trade unionists and the Treasury; and if he intends taking any action in the matter?
    Mr. FORSTER: As the Secretary of State informed the hon. Member for Stockport yesterday, he has the whole question under consideration. I hope to be in a position to make a statement early next week.

    BEER AND SPIRITS (HOME CONSUMPTION).
    Mr. CHANCELLORasked the Minister of Munitions the quantities of beer and spirits cleared for home consumption in each of the months of the present financial year, with the figures for the corresponding months of the previous year?
    The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. McKenna): My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. With my hon. Friend's permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPOET the information for which he asks.
    Sir G. YOUNGER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he cannot give any information whatever?
    Mr. McKENNA: I hold a long table in my hand, and I assume that I can.

    AIRCRAFT WOODWORKERS.
    Mr. O'GRADYasked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that discontent exists among the woodworkers in the aircraft industry owing to the refusal of the committee on production to grant an increase in wages; and whether, in view of the increase in the cost of living, he will appoint a small committee of practical men with a knowledge of the industry to inquire into the wages and conditions of the workmen in the factories and to report?
    Mr. T. WILSONasked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether he has received a request from the executive committees of the societies whose members are engaged in the woodworking trades in aircraft factories to meet a deputation to discuss with them the question of wages and conditions in these factories; if he is aware that there is discontent and unrest among the workmen owing to the refusal of the committee on production refusing them an advance of wages; whether, in view of these circumstances, he proposes to receive the deputation; and, if not, whether he will appoint a small committee of practical men to inquire into the grievances of the men employed in controlled aircraft factories?
    Mr. HARCOURT: I have been asked to answer these questions. I am informed that the Committee on Production have

    1217
    recently had referred to them claims advanced on behalf of woodworkers in the aircraft industry in the London and Glasgow districts to be paid the highest rates of wages of men in the building trade and that the committee decided that claims to follow the building trade in this respect had not been established. I understand that the men generally have had advances of wages by way of "war bonus" or "war wages" since the outbreak of War, and there seems to be no reason for appointing a committee.
    Mr. O'GRADY: May I ask if the right hon. Gentleman is aware of the fact that woodworkers engaged in this special aircraft work are receiving something like 2d. an hour less than they would receive for making ammunition boxes?
    Mr. HARCOURT: I was not aware of that.
    Mr. O'GRADY: It is a fact.
    Mr. WILSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that quite a number of these skilled men are receiving very little more than unskilled men are receiving?

    ENEMY ALIENS (INTERNMENT).
    Mr. G. FABERasked the Prime Minister what are the lines definitely laid down in Parliament on the subject of the internment of alien enemies, to which he referred in his recent letter to a Glasgow committee asking him to receive a deputation on the matter?
    The PRIME MINISTER: In reply I beg to refer my hon. Friend to the very full statement made in this House on 29th June, 1916, by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.
    Mr. FABER: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that there is a very general feeling in this country that Germans here, whether interned or uninterned, have received remarkable tender treatment?

    HOME-GROWN FOOD SUPPLIES.
    Captain C. BATHURSTasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to a Yellow Book recently issued by the Board of Agriculture describing the agricultural development of
    1218
    Germany and showing, by comparison with German methods and statistics, the serious under-production of human food on the land of the United Kingdom; and whether, in view of the peril to the nation disclosed thereby, the Government propose to take any steps to stimulate greater food production at home?
    The PRIME MINISTER: The Government have instituted inquiries as to what methods should be adopted for increasing home-grown food supplies in the interest of national security after the War.
    Mr. OUTHWAITE: Has the right hon. Gentleman taken into consideration the effect of taxation levied upon land in compelling landowners to let go their land for use?

  MILITARY SERVICE.

    APPRENTICES.
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the President of the Local Government Board if the indentures of a youth called up under the Military Service Act are cancelled, or if he can compel the employer to complete the contract on his release from the Army; and if the employer can compel the apprentice to complete the unexpired period of the apprenticeship when the young man is released from the Military Service Act?
    The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Long): The question is not one on which I could give an authoritative opinion. Much might depend on the terms of the particular indenture.

    LOCAL TRIBUNALS.
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the President of the Local Government Board if he will state what action he has taken upon the letter addressed to him by Mr. Fenner Brockway, in which he complains that the Stockport Appeal Tribunal dismissed his appeal on 26th July, although notice had been sent to the tribunal that Mr. Brockway could not attend the hearing on that date as he was confined in Pentonville Prison; and if he will order the Appeal Tribunal to hear Mr. Brockway's appeal at a time when Mr. Brockway is free to attend?
    Mr. LONG: I am in communication with the Appeal Tribunal on the subject of the letter to which reference is made.
    Mr. G. LAMBERTasked the President of the Local Government Board if

    1219
    he will send to the local tribunals the communication that has been sent to the Appeal Tribunals, that under certain conditions the hearing of agricultural cases may be postponed until after the harvest?
    Mr. LONG: The arrangement indicated in my circular was one made between the Board of Agriculture and the War Office, and it related only to Appeal Tribunals. My action in the matter was confined to communicating the arrangement to those tribunals.
    Mr. LAMBERT: Will the right hon. Gentleman ask the War Office to send the communication to the local tribunals as well?
    Mr. LONG: I will communicate my hon. Friend's views to the War Office, but I think they would be much more effective if he communicated them himself.

    CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.
    Mr. ANDERSONasked the President of the Local Government Board whether he will order an inquiry into the cases of Messrs. Narraway, Alexander, Sparkes, and Armfield who, at the Purley (Surrey) Local Tribunal, asked for exemption from military service on grounds of conscience, but express their willingness to do work of national importance; whether he is aware that the tribunal ruled that their willingness to do work of national importance proved that their claim respecting military service was insincere and refused exemption; and, having regard to the provisions of the Act of Parliament and the policy of the Government, will he say what action he will take?
    Mr. HUDSONasked the President of the Local Government Board whether his attention has been called to the case of John Mitchell, of 232, Ladykirk Road, Newcastle-on-Tyne, an accounts clerk, in the employ of the corporation, the circumstances being that Mr. Mitchell applied for absolute exemption from the Military Service Act on the grounds of conscience; that the chairman admitted the sincerity of his conviction, but said that the tribunal was not at liberty to grant absolute exemption; and that a copy of the Act was procured, when the chairman admitted that the applicant was correct, but said that his conscience would not allow him to grant exemption, with which the tribunal agreed; and whether he will order
    1220
    a rehearing of this case on the grounds of evident misinterpretation of the letter and spirit of the Act?
    Mr. LONG: In reply to this question, and to that of the hon. Member for Newcastle-on-Tyne which follows it, my attention had not previously been called to either of the cases, but I may point out that if any applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the local tribunal his proper remedy is to appeal to the Appeal Tribunal.
    Sir W. BYLES: You cannot always get leave.

    IRISH MUNITION WORKERS.
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the President of the Local Government Board if the Irish Labour Exchanges are inviting Irishmen to volunteer for munition work in Great Britain; if copies of questions put by the hon. Member for Blackburn to him are being distributed which assure volunteers that they will not come under the Military Service Act by coming to Great Britain for that purpose; and, in view of these facts, what action he proposes to take about the case of two Irishmen who, induced by these replies, volunteered for munition work at Clydebank, and being ignorant of the National Registration Act did not register within the required time, and on 3rd August were fined £1 or ten days' imprisonment, and the day following were sent a notice by the military authorities to join the Army?
    Mr. LONG: I have no knowledge of the facts stated in the question, and I can only refer to the replies given yesterday by my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the War Office.

    ONE-MAN BUSINESSES.
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the President of the Local Government Board if he is receiving letters from one-man business men who complain about the way in which the tribunals are treating them; if he is aware that numbers of men of fairly advanced age who have worked up a business are being required to leave it; that in most cases this means that the business must be closed down and the owner financially ruined; that in some cases this decision is made by the man's competitors on the tribunals; and, in view of the fact that the promise given in Parliament that the one-man business should be sympathetically considered by the tribunals, he

    1221
    will again call the special attention of the tribunals to the instructions upon this matter, and also send copies of his promises on this subject in Parliament during the Debates on the Military Service Bill?
    Mr. LONG: I receive, not unnaturally, many letters from men who consider that, in their opinion, their claim for exemption has not been adequately met, letters from, among others, "one-man business men." I have no reason to think that on the whole the cases of these men do not receive proper consideration, and I do not propose at present to issue any further directions in the matter. I would remind the hon. Member that there is an unrestricted right of appeal from the decision of a local tribunal.
    Mr. SNOWDEN: When an appeal tribunal reverses the decision of the local tribunal, does that alter the fact that a great many businesses have to be closed down, and the owners involved in financial ruin, and is that consistent with the pledges which the right hon. Gentleman gave when the Military Service Bill was before the House?
    Mr. LONG: I do not know what pledges the hon. Member refers to; my experience is that I have to be very cautious in accepting any statement from the hon. Gentleman about my pledges. I made a definite statement, and so far as I know that has been accurately followed by the tribunals.
    Mr. RAFFAN: Is it not a fact that the decisions of the tribunals are operating very unequally in the case of one-man businesses?
    Mr. LONG: I do not know if it is the fact, but I think it is almost inevitable that it should be so.
    Mr. PRINGLE: Does it not depend to some extent on the fact that competitors of applicants are on the tribunal?

    MEDICAL RE-EXAMINATION.
    Mr. PRINGLEasked the Secretary of State for War whether, in accordance with his recent statement regarding medical re-examination, full instructions have yet been issued to recruiting officers to proceed along the lines of that statement in deciding which rejected men are to be required to undergo medical re-examination; and, if not, will be forthwith issue such instructions and take steps to ensure that recruiting officers shall act in
    1222
    accordance with them and with the numerous pledges given to Parliament regarding medical re-examination?
    Mr. FORSTER: Full instructions were, of course, issued on this matter to the recruiting authorities, and I may also inform my hon. Friend that within the last week further instructions have been issued pointing, out that complaints have been received that men obviously permanently unfit have been summoned for re-examination by medical boards, and attention has been directed to the relevant portions of the instructions previously issued. They have, moreover, been reminded that discretionary power in this matter must be exercised in suitable cases, on production of documentary or other evidence of a satisfactory kind. I will ask my hon. Friend also to take into account the fact that last year recruiting authorities were overwhelmed with work, with the inevitable result that in many parts of the country full records of what happened do not exist.
    Mr. PRINGLE: Can we now assume that all the recruiting officers have received these instructions?
    Mr. FORSTER: I think that will be quite a safe assumption.
    Mr. PRINGLE: Can the hon. Gentleman account for recruiting officers when they are approached regarding this matter saying that any statement by Mr. Lloyd George in Parliament is of no account to them?
    Mr. FORSTER: No, and I find great difficulty in believing it.

    AGRICULTURAL LABOURERS (ARRESTS).
    Mr. H. LAW(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary for War whether there are still a large number of Irish agricultural labourers being arrested in Glasgow and elsewhere for military service and handed over to the military authorities; if that is contrary to the Act, they being persons not ordinarily resident in Great Britain, and if he will take immediate steps to prevent these occurrences?
    Mr. FORSTER: I have not received notice from my hon. Friend, but I will have inquiry made.
    Mr. LAW: I gave the hon. Member notice. I hope he will be able to consider the matter during the afternoon, otherwise I am afraid I shall have to raise it on the Adjournment of the House.
    Mr. BYRNE: Can the hon. Gentleman give the House some guarantee that the Military Service Act will be carried out as it was passed by this House?
    Mr. FORSTER: I hope the Military Service Act will be carried out properly.

    POOR RELIEF (SOLDIERS' DEPENDANTS).
    Mr. G. LAMBERTasked the President of the Local Government Board if his attention has been directed to the fact that certain boards of guardians are reducing out-relief to old and infirm parents on account of allowances made by sons now fighting at the front from their Army pay; and whether he will issue regulations forbidding this practice?
    Mr. LONG: The power of a board of guardians is restricted to the relief of destitution, and in arriving at a decision whether an applicant is eligible for poor relief it is their duty to take into account all the means of support possessed by or available for the applicant, from whatever source such means of support may be derived. The only exceptions to this rule recognised by law are the case of relief to a person in receipt of benefit from a friendly society and the case of relief to a person in receipt of or entitled to any benefit under the Natianal Insurance Act, and in both these cases a board of guardians is still bound to take into consideration any benefit which exceeds 5s. a week. No instructions which I could issue would make it lawful for the guardians to give relief in cases in which relief is not in fact necessary to remove destitution.

    SOLDIERS IN ASYLUMS (PENSIONS).
    Mr. BYRNEasked the Secretary to the Local Government Board if he will state the pension and allowance to dependants in the case of a lieutenant who is certifiable and has been discharged from the Army direct to an asylum, and what in the case of a certifiable private soldier consigned, after discharge, direct to a pauper asylum; is the pension in the former case paid to the patient's petitioner and in the latter case is the amount due for the maintenance of a pauper patient paid by the pension office direct to the asylum authorities; in the event of
    1224
    the latter being transferred, owing to an increase of pension, from the pauper to the private patient class, will the pension be paid to his next of kin as representing the petitioner; and will the rights of the petitioner, as defined by the Lunacy Act, be secured to him?
    Mr. FORSTER: In the case of a lunatic officer or soldier, the State provision takes the form of retired pay or pension, and there is no special provision for dependants. The legal position is in both cases the same. If the Masters in Lunacy appoint a committee or receiver of the patient's estate, the pension or retired pay is paid in accordance with the terms of the Order. If no such appointment is made, the War Office administers the pension or retired pay, which has to bear the cost of maintenance as a first charge. Any balance is available for the assistance of the patient's dependants. The transfer of a patient to the private patient class does not increase the amount at the disposal of the War Office, and if the additional payment required comes out of the pension, a smaller sum is available for dependants, unless the Statutory Committee makes a supplementary grant.
    Mr. BYRNE: Will the hon. Gentleman not consider the hardship on dependants of a soldier if he is put into an asylum and they only get the balance of his pension?
    Mr. FORSTER: The pension of a soldier or officer is intended primarily for his own support, and any balance left over is available for his dependants. The Statutory Committee is empowered to make supplementary grants.

    CUSTOMS WATCHERS (PORT OF LONDON).
    Mr. W. THORNEasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury when the Customs watchers employed in the Port of London may expect to receive the 3s. a week increase in their weekly wages which the Treasury have decided to concede to the watchers employed in the out-ports; whether the Committee on the Customs Waterguard Service and the Customs Watchers, which reported in May, 1912, distinctly laid it down that there should be a differential rate of wages for watchers employed in the out-ports and those in London owing to the rents

    1225
    and the daily travelling expenses which London watchers have to pay, caused through the extensive area over which London watchers are employed; and if an addition of 3s. 6d. per week is paid to soldiers' wives drawing the separation allowance when they are resident in the London area to meet the higher rents prevailing.
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. McKinnon Wood): As I stated on the 27th ultimo, in reply to my right hon. Friend the Member for Woolwich, the concessions already made will benefit a considerable proportion of the London watchers. I cannot find in the Report of the Committee on the Customs Waterguard Service and Customs Watchers any recommendation of the kind referred to; on the contrary, Section XII. of the Report indicates an opposite view. I am aware of the fact referred to in the last part of the question, but I do not think that it affects the decision of the present case.

    OLD AGE PENSIONS.
    Mr. EVELYN CECILasked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether he can now make his promised statement with regard to a revised scale of old age pensions during the War?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The statement referred to is being presented to Parliament to-day. I would point out to my hon. Friend that it refers to administrative concessions.

    NERVE-SHAKEN SOLDIERS (CERTIFIABLE).
    Mr. BYRNEasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board whether it is in contemplation to institute convalescent homes, affording cheering surroundings and suitable employment, for uncertifiable nerve-shaken soldiers of the rank and file who, after discharge from the Army, are no longer under military control and who, being civilians, cannot legally be placed under lunacy control without formal certification?
    Mr. JAMES HOPE (Treasurer of the Household—for Mr. Hayes Fisher): The Statutory Committee are giving very careful consideration to the question of institutions or some alternative treatment for
    1226
    uncertifiable nerve-shaken soldiers. My right hon. Friend is informed that under the arrangements made by the War Office such men are retained in military hospitals as long as they require specialist medical in-patient treatment.

    NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.
    Mr. HAZLETONasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board how many local war pensions committees have been set up in Ireland or are now being arranged for?
    Mr. HOPE: Fourteen schemes for the establishment of local committees in Ireland have been approved by the Statutory Committee. Four of these committees are now discharging their duties under the Naval and Military War Pensions, etc., Act, 1915.
    Captain BATHURSTasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Local Government Board what provision, if any, is being made by the Statutory Pensions Committee for the training of partially disabled ex-Service men in agricultural processes?
    Mr. HOPE: The Statutory Committee have been in consultation with the Board of Agriculture with regard to proposals for the establishment of agricultural colonies and the training of disabled men, in order to fit them to become small holders. The Board of Agriculture have offered for a limited number of disabled men a course of training in an agricultural college. The men will be provided with board and lodging in the college free of charge to themselves, and no deduction will be made from their State pensions. The Statutory Committee have informed the local committees that applications on behalf of men who appear suitable for such training may be made to the Board of Agriculture. The Statutory Committee have also been in communication with the Joint Committee of the Land Settlement Scheme, who are submitting further proposals.
    Captain BATHURST: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this experiment was started about twelve months ago and has proved a failure?
    Mr. HOPE: I must ask my hon. Friend to put that question down for a day when my right hon. Friend can be here.
    Mr. WATSON: Will the hon. Gentleman also communicate with the Scottish Hoard of Agriculture?
    Mr. HOPE: Again I must ask my hon. Friend to put that question to my right hon. Friend.

    MERCHANT SERVICE.
    Mr. PETOasked the President of the Board of Trade whether any decision has been arrived at with regard to an officially recognised uniform for officers of the merchant service which can be worn ashore and form a proper indication of their status and the service in which they are engaged?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: My right hon. Friend has asked me to reply to this question. As stated in my reply of the 26th July to my horn Friend, the whole question is receiving consideration, but a good many difficult points are involved, and a decision has not yet been arrived at.
    Mr. PETO: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to communicate to me the decision as soon as it is arrived at; and can he give me any idea when the decision is likely to be made?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: I will communicate it to the hon. Member with pleasure immediately it is arrived at, but when that will be I cannot say.
    Mr. PETOasked the President of the Board of Trade whether any decision has been arrived at as to the issue of silver service badges to officers and men of the merchant service who are invalided on account of wounds or sickness due to the operations of the enemy?
    Mr. HARCOURT: This question is still under consideration.

    MEAT SUPPLY.
    Mr. FIELDasked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the losses of fresh meat consigned to London from Scotland; whether such losses are due to delays in transit or to lack of properly refrigerated cars; and whether steps are being taken to ensure that such avoidable waste shall not be repeated, having regard to the scarcity and dearness of all kinds of meat?
    Mr. HARCOURT: I have not received any complaints in this matter, but I shall
    1228
    be happy to make inquiries if my hon. Friend will send me particulars of the cases he has in mind.
    Mr. G. FABERasked the President of the Board of Trade why the Government is taking no steps to deal with the increasingly urgent question of meat shortage in this country; and whether a Bill has recently been passed into law in Russia prohibiting the consumption by civilians of any form of meat throughout Russia on four days of the week?
    Mr. HARCOURT: The measures taken by the Government in connection with frozen meat supplies have been explained to the House from time to time. In view of the near approach of the season at which home-bred meat becomes more abundant I doubt if it is quite accurate to say that the question of meat shortage is increasingly urgent, but the general question of food prices and supplies is now under the consideration of a Committee presided over by my right hon. Friend the Member for the Tyneside Division. I have seen in the newspapers references to the Russian measure to which my hon. Friend alludes.
    Mr. FABER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that already meat is passing outside the purchasing power of great numbers of the people of this country?
    Mr. HARCOURT: I much regret the present price of meat, but I am hopeful it will go lower soon.
    Mr. FABER: Could not some advantage be derived from the institution of what are called "meatless days"?
    Mr. HARCOURT: I do not think it would improve the position of people who want more meat or cheaper meat by telling them they must not eat meat at all.
    Mr. FABER: If we had meatless days, would that not tend to lower prices and bring meat within the purchasing power of the poorer classes?
    Mr. HARCOURT: That is a matter of opinion.
    Mr. OUTHWAITE: Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been called to the fact that the Russian Government has prohibited grain being used for the production of alcohol so as to increase the production—
    Mr. SPEAKER: We are not now talking about drink.

    TRADING WITH THE ENEMY.
    Mr. HUDSONasked the President of the Board of Trade if it is his intention to bring in a further amending Bill to the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1916, in order to safeguard that in the winding-up of all enemy alien companies British and neutral creditors shall have first claim?
    Mr. HARCOURT: As at present advised I do not think it desirable to extend the priority given to creditors who are not enemies in a winding-up under the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1916, to liquidations carried out under the ordinary law.

    ADNIL ELECTRIC COMPANY, LIMITED.
    Mr. HUDSONasked the President of the Board of Trade if a winding-up order was made by the Court on 30th July, 1915, nearly twelve months after war was declared, in the case of the Adnil Electric Company, Limited, the bulk of the capital being of German origin; whether this company was practically the English branch of the Bergmenn Company; and in what position the creditors of British, neutral, and enemy countries stand with regard to priority of claim on the assets?
    Mr. HARCOURT: The facts stated with regard to the Adnil Electric Company, Limited, are correct. As the liquidation is not being carried out under the Trading With the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1916, but under the ordinary law, the claims of British, neutral, and enemy creditors rank equally against the assets, but any amount due to an enemy creditor will be paid to the Board of Trade.

    PETROL (VETERINARY SURGEONS).
    Mr. WATTasked the President of the Board of Trade whether the quantity of petrol granted to any veterinary surgeon has been reduced; whether in some instances half of their normal month's supply has been given to last for three months; whether some members of this profession have been charged 6d. extra duty while others have only paid 3d.; and, if so, whether those veterinary surgeons who have not joined the Army are by these means enabled to carry on the extra work on much smaller supplies?
    Mr. HARCOURT: Registered veterinary surgeons who apply as such are entitled to an allowance of 3d. per gallon on the duty in respect of a licence for motor spirit used for the purposes of their profession, and to licences to be supplied with the full amount of their requirements up to 50 gallons a month. If the Petrol Committee are furnished with particulars of any case in which a registered veterinary surgeon's application has not been issued on these terms the matter will be considered.
    Mr. PETOasked the President of the Board of Trade whether the case of farmers using petrol to drive milking-machine engines has been considered; whether he will see that a sufficient supply of petrol for that purpose is allowed in all cases and a more adequate supply in the case of all other uses of petrol for agricultural purposes; and whether, in the case of farmers who through inadvertence or ignorance have not put in any claim for petrol, he will allow claims put forward and substantiated during the present month to be considered?
    Mr. HARCOURT: Persons needing petrol for agricultural and industrial purposes receive licences for a larger proportion of their requirements than most other classes of applicants. I hope that it may be possible to consider applications from farmers which are received out of time.
    Mr. PETO: Will the right hon. Gentle-man bear in mind that if the proportion of petrol allowed for an engine-driven milking machine is not sufficient to drive that machine it will stop the supply of milk?
    Mr. HARCOURT: All the petrol available in this country will be issued to applicants in the largest possible measure.
    Mr. HOUSTON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are several substitutes for petrol on the market?
    Mr. HARCOURT: I know there are, but they are not the subject of distribution by the Petrol Committee.

    PATENT LAW.
    Mr. PETOasked the President of the Board of Trade whether he intends to introduce a Bill to amend the Patent Law so as to give further period for working patents the operation of which has been

    1231
    interfered with by the War; and, if so, whether such legislation will be introduced before the Adjournment of the House?
    Mr. HARCOURT: I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply which I gave him on the 20th of last month. I shall not be in a position to introduce legislation amending the Patents and Designs Act before the Adjournment.

    POST OFFICE (CLERICAL CLASSES).
    Mr. ANDERSONasked the Postmaster-General (1) whether a number of the Post Office clerical staff are now serving in His Majesty's Forces, and that promises were made to these men, before enlistment, by statements in the Post Office circular and otherwise, that the recommendations of the Holt Committee would be duly carried out, but that, in the absence of these officers on active service, the Government have refused to carry out the pledges given, notwithstanding that the money necessary has been twice voted by Parliament; whether these soldiers consider it a case of refusal on the part of the Government to carry out honourably pledges given prior to their joining the Army; and whether, in these circumstances, the Government will now introduce at once the conditions laid down by the Committee in question; and (2) whether the Post Office clerical classes have now waited for two and a half years for the introduction of the Holt Committee's recommendations, which came into force for all other Post Office classes on 2nd February, 1914; whether it has been decided that the cases of the classes affected will not be decided upon until the Government deal, after the War, with the Report of the Royal Commission on the Civil Service; if so, whether this means that the officers concerned may have to wait for a further period of two to four years, making a total of four to six years, during which time they have suffered financially owing to the withholding of the conditions promised; and whether, in these circumstances, the Government will now agree to introduce the conditions in question immediately without prejudice to anything that may be done later in connection with the Report of the Royal Commission on the Civil Service?
    The POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. J. Pease): No pledge was given that the recommendations of the Holt Committee regarding the clerical classes would be adopted. The Report of the Royal Commission on the Civil Service necessarily, has a close bearing upon the conditions of service of the Post Office clerical classes, and the Government came to the conclusion that in the circumstances they would not be justified in deciding whether or not the recommendations of the Holt Committee should be adopted independently and in advance of the decision upon the Royal Commission's Report. The expediency of adopting or rejecting the recommendations of the Committee does not appear to me to be affected by the fact that some of the men concerned have joined the Army.

    DEUTSCHE BANK.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKSasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many British creditors have been paid off by the receiver of the Deutsche Bank and how many remain to be paid off; what amount of securities have been transferred to the Public Trustee and how many remain to be so transferred; and whether arrangements will be made for all this remaining work to be done by Sir W. Plender without employing German clerks, who will preserve the information for use after the War is over?
    Mr. McKENNA: Since the outbreak of war the Deutsche Bank, London Agency, has discharged its indebtedness to British, Allied and Neutral creditors to the extent of about £10,000,000. The amounts still unpaid approximate to £200,000 and there are certain contingent liabilities. Steps are being taken to vest the bank's securities, amounting to several million pounds, in the Public Trustee, but some time must elapse before the vesting is completed. It is necessary, in order to complete this work as rapidly as possible, to retain certain responsible officials of the bank, bat they are not in a position to acquire any valuable information other than that they possessed at the outbreak of war.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: How is it that it takes two years to transfer securities from the bank to the Public Trustee?
    Mr. McKENNA: I shall be happy to pass the question on to the Public Trustee. I am unable to answer it myself.

    TRADE WITH RUSSIA.
    Mr. HUME-WILLIAMSasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any and, if so, what steps are being taken to form a corporation, with Government support, to encourage and develop the trade between Great Britain and Russia on the lines recently adopted in the formation of a corporation with similar objects in regard to the trade between Great Britain and Italy; whether he will consider if the time is now ripe for the formation of such a corporation; and whether he will take immediate steps to encourage its development?
    Mr. McKENNA: No such proposal is at present before me. As I explained in reply to a supplementary question on the 31st July, I should be prepared to consider such a suggestion if a suitable arrangement were proposed. My hon. and learned Friend will, however, understand that in this matter the Treasury is bound to act in the first instance on the recommendation of the Board of Trade.
    Mr. HUME-WILLIAMS: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think there is a promising yield, and is not this the time to start operations?
    Mr. McKENNA: I think that question should be addressed to the Board of Trade.

    COLONIAL EXCHANGE.
    Sir JOHN SPEARasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will arrange with a bank at each port where Colonists going to the War land in this country for the exchange of their money, so as to avoid the inconvenience and loss of their having to go to the office of the High Commissioner in London to secure exchange at face value?
    Mr. McKENNA: I understand that arrangements have already been made by the Commonwealth Government under which Australian money tendered by Australian soldiers can be exchanged at face value by any naval or military command paymaster, transport master, or agent.

    AIR RAID.
    Mr. T. FERENS(by Private Notice) asked if it is a fact that in one important city on the East Coast in which lives were lost early yesterday morning through an air
    1234
    raid that there was only one gun and one poor searchlight used; and will he take means to ensure that adequate defences against air raids are provided and brought into action when necessity arises?
    Major BAIRD(representing the Air Board): The Zeppelin which crossed a portion of the town referred to was fired at during the whole of the time that it was within effective range of the anti-aircraft defences. It passed high over the town and at great speed. The searchlight used was of a recent and powerful type. The anti-aircraft defences of the locality have been strengthened during the last month, and further improvements are being made in accordance with the general scheme of anti-aircraft defence, which is being carried out as rapidly as circumstances permit.
    Sir J. WALTON: Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the searchlight failed at another point on the coast? I will not say where it was, but if the hon. and gallant Gentleman will have the matter inquired into I will give him information privately as to where the searchlight was.
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Baronet is making an offer and not asking a question.
    Major BAIRD: I shall be very glad to have any matter connected with searchlights investigated if the hon. Baronet will be kind enough to give me details.
    Mr. FERENS: Would the hon. and gallant Gentleman be good enough to inquire into the allegation that the searchlight used was very weak and ineffective?
    Major BAIRD: Certainly!
    Mr. G. FABER: Considering what a well-known mark this place is, was one gun sufficient?
    Major BAIRD: I hope my hon. Friend will not think me discourteous, but it is most undesirable to discuss it now.
    Mr. PRINGLE: In view of the number of raids which have taken place in this town, could the Department not have done better in the matter of the provision of guns by this time?
    Major BAIRD: I do not think so.
    Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS: As we have been at war for two years, when may we hope that the scheme my hon. and gallant Friend has adumbrated will really be carried out?
    Major BAIRD: The hen. Member seems to have overlooked the fact that this is only one portion of the work which has to be discharged by the Munitions Department. We are dependent on the capacity for turning out munitions to satisfy the demands of the Army in the field as well as demands at home.

    HOME-SERVICE MEN.
    Mr. SNOWDENasked the Secretary of State for War whether men who have been passed as unfit for general service in the Army, and have been drafted to home-service garrison duty, are compelled to undergo strenuous active-service training; whether it has been brought to his notice that the active-service training which the men of the East Surrey Regiment, now stationed at Dover, have to undergo has resulted in the breakdown of a number of the men; whether he is aware that in the case of a private in No. 2 Company of this regiment the severe training brought on hæmorrhage with fatal results, and that in another case a private in the same company who asked for permission to remove his pack before marching up a hill, which permission was refused, with the result that the man fainted, and on his removal back to barracks had a severe epileptic fit, notwithstanding which he was ordered to parade the next morning; and whether he will have an inquiry made into these matters?
    Mr. FORSTER: I am not aware of the incidents referred to in the last part of the question, but inquiry shall be made, and the hon. Member shall be informed of the results. On the general question, I may say that men of Garrison Battalions at home and those intended for Garrison Battalions overseas, undergo a much shorter and lighter course of training than is given to men found fit for general service. I understand battalions of the East Surrey Regiment at Dover are draft-finding formations, training drafts for overseas, and not for garrison duty.

    TIME-EXPIRED MEN (RE-ENLISTMENT BOUNTY).
    Mr. WALTER ROCHasked the Secretary of State for War if he can state precisely which time-expired soldiers whose
    1236
    service is continued or renewed are entitled to a bounty on such re-enlistment; and if he will also state the amount of such bounty in each cast?
    Mr. FORSTER: I am afraid I can only refer my hon. Friend to Army Order 209, of which I am sending him a copy.

    MESOPOTAMIA FORCE.
    Sir E. CORNWALLasked the Secretary of State for War if he can make any statement as to the general health and condition of the British force now in Mesopotamia; and whether the utmost steps are being taken to supply them with the necessary equipment to alleviate the effects of the climatic conditions?
    Mr. FORSTER: A statement was made yesterday by my right hon. Friend, in reply to the hon. Baronet the Member for Roxburgh, which answers to a large degree the last part of this question. As regards the first part I cannot, I fear, say that the general health of the troops in Mesopotamia has been good. Every effort is, however, being made to combat the sources of disease, and the Sanitary Committee in the Mediterranean has been sent to Mesopotamia to assist the local military authorities.

    DOVER ANTI-AIRCRAFT CORPS.
    Mr. R. McNEILLasked the Secretary of State for War if it has been decided to disband the Dover Anti-Aircraft Corps and to replace it by a corps drawn from London electrical engineers; whether the Dover Anti-Aircraft Corps has been serving for twenty months, during which it has been repeatedly congratulated on its efficiency and never censured; whether he is aware that the intimate local knowledge possessed by the men is of great value in enabling them to distinguish the sound of hostile aircraft from similar local noises, and that an incentive to zealous service is afforded by the fact that as a local corps the men are charged with the protection of their own homes; whether on the only three occasions when Zeppelins have approached Dover the corps detected the enemy and illumined the aircraft so as to give full opportunity for the anti-aircraft gunners, who were thus enabled on one of the three occasions to damage the invader; whether the intended change will

    1237
    involve considerable increased expenditure; and if he will say why, under these circumstances, the change is to be made?
    Mr. FORSTER: The disappearance of this corps, which was composed partly of naval active-service ratings and partly of local men who were able to give only part-time service, has resulted automatically from the introduction of the Military Service Act, and from the transfer of the anti-aircraft defences from the Navy to the Army. The result is that the naval active-service ratings have been handed back to the Admiralty, by whom they were required; the members of the corps eligible for general service have been enlisted for general service, and those eligible for Home service only have been enlisted in the London Electrical Engineers and will be employed as far as possible at Dover. The good work done by this corps in the past is fully recognised.
    Mr. McNEILL: Does my hon. Friend realise that there is very great local dissatisfaction?
    Mr. FORSTER: I am very sorry to hear it, but I am afraid under the circumstances which I have narrated in my answer the proceedings were inevitable.

    Land Purchase (Ireland).
    Mr. COSGRAVEasked the Home Secretary whether the Congested Districts Board purchased a farm containing about 400 acres at Brackloon and Palathluggar, county Galway, Smith estate; whether he is aware that this farm was purchased for the purpose of relieving congestion in the district; if he will state what right the Board has to continue working this farm for their own benefit instead of dividing it up amongst the uneconomic holders of land in the district; and whether, having regard to the action of the Congested Districts Board, he will say what steps he proposes to take in the county Galway?
    Mr. T. W. RUSSELL (Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture, Ireland): The Congested Districts Board have purchased about 400 acres of untenanted land in the townlands of Brackloon and Pollat-luga on the J. J. Smith estate, county Galway, which will be utilised for the purpose of relieving congestion. The Board are not legal owners of the estate, and
    1238
    until they become legal owners they cannot make any arrangements for the disposal of the land. In the meantime, the Board have placed grazing stock on the lands.
    Sir E. CARSON: Will any of this land purchased at the public expense be reserved for returned wounded soldiers?
    Mr. RUSSELL: I could not answer this question without consultation with the Congested Districts Board.
    Mr. HAZLETON: Is any land in Ulster being reserved for returned wounded soldiers?
    Sir E. CARSON: They have not bought any there.
    Mr. COSGRAVEasked the Home Secretary what steps the Congested Districts Board has taken to compulsorily acquire six farms on the Clanricarde estate at present occupied by planters, namely, Messrs. A. G. Elliott, Hugh Nesbett, James Clarke, representatives of G. B. Drury, Edward Horseman, and Mrs. John Horseman; if all the planters on this estate have voluntarily surrendered their holdings with the exception of the abovementioned; and if he will, in the interest of the peace of the district, direct the Congested Districts Board to acquire these farms either compulsorily or voluntarily?
    Mr. RUSSELL: The Congested Districts Board have made an offer in Court for the purchase of the farm of the representatives of G. B. Drury, and notice to quit, which will expire on the 1st May next, has been served in the case of Hugh Nesbitt. Otherwise, there is nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Member's question of the 21st March last.
    Mr. COSGRAVEasked the Home Secretary whether the Congested Districts Board compensated an occupier named Cooke for a farm at Trunerleigh, county Galway, and re-let him the grazing on the same farm afterwards on the eleven months' system, while the local congested inhabitants were willing and prepared to take the same grazing temporarily or otherwise; and whether, with a view to the peace of the district, he has sanctioned this arrangement or is he prepared to recommend that this grazing be given to the people for whose eventual benefit the purchase of the farm was concluded with Cooke?
    Mr. RUSSELL: The Congested Districts Board have agreed to the purchase of Mr. Richard A. Cooke's tenancy interest in the farm of Treananearla on the Clanricarde estate, subject to title which has not yet been finally settled. Under the arrangements for purchase Mr. Cooke has been let the grazing of the lands up to 1st November next, and this arrangement cannot now be altered.

    Metropolitan Police Force.
    Mr. GILBERTasked the Home Secretary if members of the Metropolitan Police Force are punished by taking away their one day's rest in seven; and, if so, the number of policemen who have been so punished; and if he will consider if this form of punishment could be stopped?
    Mr. SAMUEL: This punishment is occasionally imposed instead of a fine. The number of men who have been punished in this way is small, but the exact number cannot be ascertained without a special search through the daily records which would involve much labour. The stopping of this form of punishment would necessitate an increase in the number of fines, which is not considered desirable.

  NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT

    DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE.
    Mr. BOOTHasked the Prime Minister if he has received a letter from the Scottish Clerks' Association condemning the methods of the Departmental Committee on the National Insurance Act as premature and unjust; whether he is also aware that a voluntary Committee containing seven Members of this House, together with leading employers and workmen, are investigating matters not within the Treasury reference to their Committee; that facts not previously known are being brought to light; and whether the Government will wait until this process is complete before attempting to hurry through legislation which will be resisted in every part of the House?
    Mr. CHARLES ROBERTS (Comptroller Of the Household): The Prime Minister has asked me to reply to this question, and has forwarded to me the letter from the Committee of Management of the Scottish Clerks' Association to which my hon. Friend refers. I do not think that the views of the committee of this association have been correctly summarised in the question, but their representations will be considered in conjunction with the
    1240
    opinion of other approved societies, very many of which representing the great majority of insured persons have expressed themselves in a contrary sense. I cannot at present make any statement in regard to legislation, but due notice will be given as to the intention of the Government.
    Mr. BOOTH: Is my hon. Friend aware that the summary, as he calls it, is in the exact words of the resolution; the words "premature" and "unjust" both occur in it; and is he prepared to give a better answer to the latter part of the question?
    Mr. ROBERTS: In that case, I do not think I have received the same resolution. The epithets which the hon. Member applies to them I took to be his own, and not part of the resolution which the committee has sent.
    Mr. BOOTH: Will the hon. Member promise to read it if I get it from my locker?
    Mr. ROBERTS: Certainly; I have got a copy here.
    Mr. BOOTH: Well, the words are there.

    APPROVED SOCIETY FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION.
    Mr. BOOTHasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has received the resolution from the Employers' Parliamentary Association to the effect that the committee is of opinion that His Majesty's Government should not adopt the recommendations of the Departmental Committee on Approved Society Finance and Administration, but that the Government should appoint a Special Commission of experts charged with the duty of framing a scheme of national health insurance, the terms of reference of which Commission should be to consider and report as to the whole financial and administrative structure of the National Insurance Act, with a view to the remodelling of the present measure so as to provide for the due representation of employers in its administration and a more equitable incidence of taxation as regards employers' and workpeople's contributions, and that, pending the appointment and Report of such a Commission, no valuation of approved societies shall take place according to Section 36 of the Act of 1911; and will he say what reply he proposes to make to this representative body?
    Mr. McKENNA: I have received the resolution referred to, but I have been unable to come to the conclusion that it would be practicable to set up such a far-reaching inquiry at the present time.
    Mr. BOOTH: Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider it very advisable that the great employers of the country should be brought into harmony with this Act—does he not remember their opposition to it when it was passed, and does he not welcome their co-operation?
    Mr. McKENNA: I am afraid my hon. Friend has taxed my memory too much in putting three questions at once. Perhaps he will put them on the Paper.
    Mr. BOOTH: I will put them down for Monday if my right hon. Friend will undertake to answer them and not pass them down the bench.

    Registration of Firms Bill.
    Mr. RENDALLasked whether, in view of the unanimous Report of the House of Lords Select Committee in favour of the Registration of Firms Bill being passed into law without delay and of the fact that no opposition has been expressed against its proposals, the Government are prepared to take steps to secure the enactment of the Bill?
    The PRIME MINISTER: The Government are considering whether any steps can be taken to facilitate the passage of this Bill, and I hope to arrive at a decision soon.

MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS.
That they have agreed to,—
Army Act (Amendment) Bill,
Trading With the Enemy (Copyright) (No. 2) Bill, without Amendment.

BILL PRESENTED.
BRITISH SHIPS (TRANSFER RESTRICTION) BILL,—"to amend and extend the British Ships (Transfer Restriction) Act, 1915," presented by Mr. PHETYMAN; supported by Mr. Runciman and Dr. Macnamara; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 88.]
ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  Mr. STUART-WORTLEY: Can the Prime Minister give us information about business next week?
  The PRIME MINISTER: On Monday we shall introduce the Parliament and Local Elections Bill, and, if time permit, the Committee stage of the Small Holding Colonies Bill will be continued.
  On Tuesday we shall take Reports of Supply, the first being the Vote for the Ministry of Munitions;
  On Wednesday, the Second Reading of the Parliament and Local Elections Bill, and, if the House will agree, the further stages of that Bill;
  On Thursday, the Second Reading of the Dublin Reconstruction (Emergency Provisions) Bill, the Committee stage of the Law and Procedure (Emergency Provisions—Ireland) Bill, and the Second Reading of the Time (Ireland) Bill.
  Sir E. CARSON: Can the right hon. Gentleman say on what day the Registration Bill will be introducefd?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I hope to make a statement on Monday in connection with the Parliament Bill.
  Sir E. CARSON: Shall we have it before the Parliament Bill obtains it final proceeding in this House?
  The PRIME MINISTER: Yes, Sir, I think so. In fact, I am pretty sure we shall. We shall lay it on the Table. We do not intend to advance any further stages of that Bill.
  Sir E. CARSON: I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to reconsider that, as we hope we may get the Second Reading of the Registration Bill before the Parliament Bill passes its final stage.
  Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR: Will the Dublin Reconstruction Bill be the first Order on Thursday?
  The PRIME MINISTER: We hope so. That is our present intention.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: Will the Registration Bill be printed before we adjourn?
  The PRIME MINISTER: Yes, Sir.
  1264
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That, notwithstanding anything in Standing Order No. 15, Supplementary Estimates for New Services, Army and Army Ordnance Factories Excess Estimates, 1914–15, and Navy Excess Estimate, 1914–15, may be considered in Committe of Supply this day, and that Business other than Business of Supply may be taken before Eleven of the clock, and that the Proceedings on Government Business be not interrupted this night under the Standing Order (Sittings of the House), and may be entered upon at any hour though opposed."—[The Prime Minister.]
  Mr. BOOTH: I should like to know whether there is any departure from the settled policy of the Government not to introduce controversial legislation which affects the rights of private Members. One or two subjects on the agenda to-day were subjects dealt with by private Members from time to time. When the Government took the whole time of the House there was an understanding that they would not deal with matters of controversy which had been taken up by private Members until they had given private Members an opportunity of bringing them in. I want to know whether there has been a change of policy, and whether there is any intention during the Autumn Session to introduce legislation of a highly controversial nature?
  Mr. SPEAKER: This is a Motion dealing with Supply and not with the business of the Autumn Session.
  Mr. BOOTH: But there are many points included in this Motion which we would like to raise. If we accede to this Resolution and give the Government these facilities, and we refrain from making points we should make in time of peace because these are exceptional circumstances, will advantage be taken of those private Members who refrain from raising points in which they are interested, and will the Autumn Session be made one of controversial legislation?
  The PRIME MINISTER: I do not in the least understand to what my hon. Friend refers.
  Mr. PRINGLE: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many Orders he intends to take to-day?
  The PRIME MINISTER: We propose to take Orders 6, 7, 8, and 9.
  Sir H. DALZIEL: Do you propose to take all the Supplementary Estimates today?
  The PRIME MINISTER: Yes.
  Question put, and agreed to.

SUPPLY.— [14TH ALLOTTED DAY.]
Considered in Committee.
[MR. WHITLEY in the Chair.]

CIVIL SERVICES AND KEVENUE DEPARTMENTS ESTIMATES, 1916–17 (AND OTHER ESTIMATES).

  TREASURY AND SUBORDINATE DEPARTMENTS.—Class II.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a sum, not exceeding £74,457, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and other Expenses in the Department of His Majesty's Treasury and Subordinate Departments, including Expenses in respect of Advances under the Light Railways Act, 1896." [NOTE.—£47,000 has been voted on account.]
  Sir C. HENRY: I beg to move, "That Item A be reduced by £100."
  4.0 P.M.
  By questions addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer I have sought information respecting the policy of the Government in regard to the issuing of Treasury Bills. In reply to those questions the right hon. Gentleman has informed me that it would not be in the public interest to make a statement. I should be the very last to insist upon any information being given that would be against the public interest, but I think it must be recognised that it is the primary function of the House of Commons to have control over finance, and I cannot see why the Chancellor of the Exchequer should be permitted to embark upon an extensive system of borrowing without this coming under the purview of the House of Commons. I think my right hon. Friend will be the first to admit that the House of Commons has given him every facility for proceeding with his finance proposals. He brought forward a Budget which imposed taxation to the unprecedented amount of £500,000,000, and he received the hearty co-operation
  1266
  of the House. In anything I am about to say I wish it to be clearly understood that I recognise to the fullest extent the satisfactory financial position of the country. I will go further, and say that I consider our financial position just as invulnerable as the position of our forces. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced his Budget and he made his proposals to tax the country to the extent of £500,000,000, it was always understood that in order to meet the expenditure that taxation would have to be supplemented materially by loans. The last occasion on which my right hon. Friend issued a loan was soon after he assumed his present office in June, 1915, and the response on that occasion I consider was most satisfactory. Since that time, in order to obtain the necessary finance, instead of having recourse to loans for a stated period, he has resorted to what may be called short-date securities, such as Exchequer Bonds payable in five years, or two years, War Expenditure Certificates, payable in five years, War Savings Certificates, and Treasury Bills. It is to the last category that I wish to draw the special attention of the Committee.
  Finance by Treasury Bills has for a long time past been recognised, and hitherto it has been fully justified. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has recourse to the issue of Treasury Bills in order to meet the payments necessary to tide him over until the revenue is available. I have always regarded my right hon. Friend as a great purist in finance. I remember that when an hon. Friend of mine and myself brought forward a proposal as regards Premium Bonds, he held up his hands in horror and expressed himself in indignant terms, and stated that it would lower the financial prestige of the country. I am inclined to take the view that his present policy is just as detrimental to the financial position of the country. What is the position to-day? The amount of the Treasury Bills at present outstanding is about £850,000,000. The issue of these Treasury Bills represents a policy of opportunism, temperising, and of financing the country from week to week, and I might almost say from day to day. It may be urged that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is getting the requisite money, but that is not surprising. Behind these Treasury Bills he has the security of the British Government, and the terms which he is offering

  1267
  on these Treasury Bills are such an inducement that it is no wonder that he is obtaining a response.
  He is paying for Treasury Bills to mature in one year at a discount of 6 per cent., which gives a return to the holders of these Treasury Bills of 6⅜ per cent., and it is not surprising that there should be a ready demand for all these Bills. That is not all. There is another objection to this. Whereas in the case of a loan the Treasury has control of the Income Tax and can deduct before the interest is paid; under this system the Income Tax is not deducted at the source, and therefore the Treasury lose control of it. My right hon. Friend stated, in answer to a question, that these Treasury Bills ware subject to Income Tax. I fully realise that banking institutions would regard these profits as subject to Income Tax, but I am not so sure whether private holders of these are compelled to make a return of these profits, because they are discount and not interest. I will not dogmatise on that, but this I will say: A large number of these Treasury Bills are bought by neutral countries. I asked my right hon. Friend last week the amount of these Bills held by neutral countries, and he was unable to give me a reply. My right hon. Friend will have to admit that as these Treasury Bills are bought and sold by neutral countries, the Income Tax is not recoverable.
  The result is that the Income Tax today at 5s. on a 6 per cent, basis is worth 1½ per cent., and therefore, instead of getting the money on a 4½ per cent, basis less Income Tax, as was the case in the loan of June, 1915, he is now paying to these neutral countries interest at the rate of 7⅞ per cent. In any event, he loses control of the Income Tax. It may be urged by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that against this large issue of Treasury Bills he has collateral by the loans which he has made to the Allies and to the Dominions. I would be the last to say that these loans are not first-class security, but in a statement made the other day, on the Vote of Credit I think, he said that these loans were renewable and had no definite maturity and no fixed time for repayment. I think that I am right in saying that when the Treasury Bills mature, the money represented by the loans to the Allies and the Dominions will not be available to meet these Treasury Bills. These loans are not what you
  1268
  might call at present liquid assets. The Chancellor of the Exchequer may say, and say quite rightly, that under the scheme for the compulsory sale of American securities, those who have sold their securities have invested their money in these Treasury Bills. That is largely the case, but I never could understand, why, when he made it compulsory to sell American securities, he did not take a little more courage and make it compulsory to have the payments made by a British Loan. I have been endeavouring to fathom the reason for the course pursued by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and have come to the following conclusion: When he made this loan in June, 1915, he committed himself to the holders of that loan, quite unnecessarily, as I think, to the pledge that if he made any subsequent loan upon more favourable terms, the holders of the 1915 Loan should be placed upon the same basis; and I have often thought one of the reasons why the Chancellor of the Exchequer has not made any fresh loan in the ordinary course of events is that he was afraid of this additional commitment, and that it would have necessitated redeeming his pledge.
  But there may be another reason why the Chancellor of the Exchequer has had recourse to these short-date securities. He may have been somewhat optimistic as regards the duration of the War. I am far from being a pessimist, but I think now that he must recognise that, favourable as the conditions are at the present time, he cannot expect a very early conclusion of the War, if we are to obtain the peace which the country has decided is necessary. Therefore, with ail respect, I say to him that the sooner he recognises that he has made a mistake in that respect the better it will be. My opinion, and the opinion of other people, is that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was of opinion that, if the War came to an end in a reasonable time, he would be able to float a loan on more advantageous terms than he would be able to do so at the present time. I venture to say that that is also a mistake. People have subscribed to loans in the past out of a sense of patriotism, and would have done so again, but after the War that feeling will be considerably reduced, and the public will be inclined to husband their resources for their own financial requirements and business and for different enterprises. It occurs to me that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has proscrastinated somewhat

  1269
  too long, and has missed his opportunity of obtaining the amount which he required to fund these short-date securities by a voluntary loan, and I consider, though I say it with some hesitation, that the only course open to him now in order to have this enormous amount of Treasury Bills and other short-date securities funded will be a forced loan. I am one who does not think that this will be in any way derogatory to the financial prestige of this country. If you have compulsory Income Tax at its present high level I see no earthly reason, in the condition in which we are at present, why a forced loan should not be instituted. In the circumstances in which we find ourselves, in the entanglement in which the Chancellor is placed, owing to his system of the issue of Treasury Bills, the only outcome will be a compulsory or forced loan.
  The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Whitley): For fear that this should become the subject of debate, I intervene to point out that it would be a matter of legislation. So far the hon. Baronet has been quite in order in criticising the action of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to Treasury Bills.
  Sir C. HENRY: I will pass from that. I consider that the House of Commons should receive at once from the Chancellor of the Exchequer some idea as to his policy. I think that he should say to what extent he intends to proceed with these Treasury Bills. Will he stop at £1,000,000,000 or £1,500,000,000, or what is the limit? Also he should give us some idea as to when he means to come here with a fixed and permanent loan, by which part of his large total indebtedness may be arranged. There is another matter on which we should have some information—that is the present relations existing between the Treasury and the Bank of England. I know that the Bank of England is a separate institution, and that in normal times the relations between the Bank of England and the Treasury are not so very close; but since the War it is common knowledge that the Treasury act in the closest co-operation with the Bank of England. My right hon. Friend admits that. I would ask my right hon. Friend, Did the Treasury give their sanction four weeks ago to the raising of the Bank rate to 6 per cent.? If they did, I think that it was a great error of judgment. There was absolutely no reason
  1270
  why the public should be frightened—I am not using too strong a word—by raising the Bank rate to 6 per cent. What was the excuse given? For a very few days there was a temporary flurry in New York, and people anticipated dear money. I think that that lasted three days. Since that time money in New York is cheaper than ever. To-day you can obtain call money in New York at from 2 per cent, to 2½ per cent.
  Why, then, did the Treasury give sanction to the Bank rate being raised to 6 per cent.? I think that the reason is this: Having got into this entanglement with Treasury Bills and being forced to continue their sale, in order to make them more attractive, they had to offer a higher rate of discount. But I think that there is another reason why the Bank rate has been raised to 6 per cent. It is this: Whether the Chancellor likes it or not, a loan is inevitable before very long, and a part of that loan will have to be financed by bankers who will have to have recourse to the Bank of England. I believe that the Bank of England persuaded the Treasury, and the right hon. Gentleman permitted the Bank rate to be raised, so that when any financial assistance was required in connection with the loan, and the Bank was asked to give substantial financial assistance, they might obtain an increased rate of interest. I hope there may be some explanation forthcoming from the Chancellor of the Exchequer as regards that. I have moved an Amendment to reduce the Vote, but I trust that the statement which the Chancellor of the Exchequer is to make will render it unnecessary for me to go to a Division. I assure him that I am not bringing forward this criticism in any captious spirit. I recognise the unparalleled difficulties with which he has been and will be confronted, but he is aware that there is a feeling of uneasiness and apprehension prevailing in different financial circles, and I think that it is only fair to the country that the right hon. Gentleman should face these problems, and give some idea of the course of policy he intends to pursue concerning future borrowings. I do not say that his taxing power is at an end, and I will be the last to say that. But, so long as the War lasts, I submit that large amounts will have to be obtained by borrowing, and I do trust that he will not persist in the course of piling up these short-dated

  1271
  Treasury Bills, which I regard as a menace and danger, and inconsistent with sound finance.
  Sir F. BANBURY: The hon. Baronet has raised an extremely important question, which I hope will have a well-considered reply from the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I think that, on the whole, I agree with nearly everything the hon. Baronet has said, with the exception of his remarks about the Bank rate. The question as to whether or not the Bank rate should be raised or lowered is very difficult to discuss, even in the parlour of the Bank of England, and still more difficult in the House of Commons. I do not know, as a matter of fact, how far the power of the Chancellor of the Exchequer extends in regard to any question dealing with the Bank rate. It is to a great extent a Bank of England question, and I do not know how far the Chancellor of the Exchequer would deem it his duty to interfere in the matter. I do not quite agree that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would desire at the time he was issing Treasury Bills that the Bank rate should be raised. My own idea is that he would desire exactly the contrary. I think myself, though it is with a good deal of diffidence, because I am not actually in business in the City at the moment, that the raising of the Bank rate was necessary, though of course it is regrettable that there should be a high Bank rate. It is very often necessary, after a certain period, not to let the high rate go too long, for if you let it go too long a much higher rate has to be imposed later on. I think the hon. Baronet made an extremely good point about the Income Tax charged on Treasury Loans taken by neutrals. I did not quite understand the interruption of the right hon. Gentleman, but I understood him to say that it would apply to short forms of securities. I do not think that is so. In a neutral country the holder of Consols has to pay Income Tax just the same as if he were an Englishman, but as a matter of fact, the hon. Baronet, I think, was quite right when he said that, so far as regards Treasury Bills, the holder in a neutral country has a rate of interest of 7¾ per cent., instead of 4½ per cent, if held by an Englishman. That is a question which must be carefully considered by any Chancellor of the Exchequer.
  1272
  With regard to the amount of the Treasury Bills outstanding, I believe it to be something like £850,000,000, and I must say that, so far as I know, the general opinion in the City is that this is a very dangerous position. As a rule, what is called the discount market likes a certain amount of Treasury Bills, or what is called floating debt. It provides a convenient means to invest money not required to be invested permanently, but which it is desired to invest for a short time, and there are many other conveniences which I need not go into at the present moment; but it all depends on this fact, that the amount is a negotiable amount and not too large an amount. If you get an enoromus amount like £850,000,000 which all falls due within a year from now, it might be that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would find it extremely difficult to renew that large sum. Of course, I recognise that the position is very different at the present moment from what it was on former occasions, but I do not believe that any Chancellor of the Exchequer would ever have allowed, or that any Chancellor of the Exchequer ever should allow, the floating debt to get to such an enormous amount as it is now. The hon. Baronet said that in his opinion one of the reasons was that if a new loan was issued the holders of War Loan would have a right to higher interest provided the new Loan was issued at a higher rate instead of 4½ per cent. I do not know whether that is so or not. I am not in the confidence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I myself think that it was a wrong provision to have introduced into the War Loan. I have spent many years of my life in the City, and I cannot recall a single Loan that contains such a provision, and I think it was a great mistake to introduce it. But, having introduced it, is it not right to abide by it, and are not the people who invested their money on the understanding that if there was a further Loan they should receive a higher rate of interest, entitled to that higher rate? I will not say that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is not treating them quite fairly, but there is no doubt a feeling such as the hon. Baronet has referred to among a large number of people who hold War Loan, that they ought to have an opportunity of subscribing to a permanent Loan, if there was to be a permanent Loan issued.

  1273
  It seemed to me that there was a very great opportunity for the right hon. Gentleman a short time ago to issue a permanent Loan. I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree with me that if you want to make a Loan a success you must issue it when the public are on the qui vive, as they say in the City, to make investments of money they have lying at the Bank. When the right hon. Gentleman made his proposals with regard to American securities there was a considerable rise in the value of all securities, but the Government did not see that this money was lying at the Bank and that people would immediately proceed to reinvest it. The right hon. Gentleman did not take advantage of that opportunity to issue a Loan. I do not want in any way to contravene the ruling of the Chair by discussing whether or not a Loan should be introduced, or on what terms it should be introduced, for that would not be in order; but I would venture humbly to suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that it is not advisable to put this off too long, in view of what may happen in the future. There may be a very great demand for Loans later on. I do not know whether at the end of the War the country is going to have cheaper money, or going to have more money available, or whether the reverse will take place; but I trust that the right hon. Gentleman will not forget that point, and that he will consider the remarks of the hon. Baronet with which, with the one exception I have stated, I thoroughly agree.
  I want to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer one or two questions on another matter. I think that the right hon. Gentleman is illegally raising Income Tax upon a certain class of the community, namely, the farmers. The right hon. Gentleman is claiming Income Tax from the farmer, and the second instalment was claimed on the first of last month. This claim for Income Tax from the farmer under paragraph (b) is for the whole of the year 1915–16. If the Committee will look at Clause 20 of the Finance Act of 1915–16 they will see what it says:
  "In order, as far as may be, to provide for the collection of Income Tax for the last six months of the current Income Tax year at rates exceeding by forty per cent, the rates at which it is
  1274
  charged under the Finance Act, 1915, the following provisions shall have effect."
  And then a variety of provisions are set out. One of them is paragraph (b):—
  "An assessment of any such Income Tax not already made shall be made for an amount exceeding by twenty per cent, that for which it would have been made if this Act had not passed."
  Therefore, later on, there is a provision which raises the farmers' assessment from one-third of the whole amount under Schedule (b). My contention is that the whole of this is governed by the first Clause which I have just raised, that is part of Section 20, and, further, that paragraph (b) confirms that statement. I have had a little discussion with the officers of the Inland Revenue upon this point, and I presume I must not say what passed between us, but, from that discussion, I found that a Clause had been introduced into the Act of this year, to the following effect. It was Section 23 in the Act of this year, but it became Clause 37 later on. It is as follows:—
  "It is hereby declared that paragraph (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section twenty of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1915, does not affect the operation of Section thirty-seven of that Act as respects the application of amendments made by that Act for the current Income Tax year, and that that paragraph is accordingly to be construed as if the words 'if this Section had not passed' were substituted for the words 'if this Act had not passed.'"
  I do not know whether any hon. Member who has listened to me understands what that means. It took me a very long time to understand it, and I find that the Inland Revenue thought my reading of the Act of 1915–16 was correct, and that all that could be taken was the amount of the last six months of that year on the full value, and not for the whole year, and it was to put that right that they put this Clause into the Act of this year. I have looked back into the matter. I may say there is nothing in the Resolution about this, and there was nothing whatever about this Clause in the Chancellor's speech on the Finance Bill. I find that the Clause was passed in Committee on the 21st June without any explanation of any sort or kind. On that date Clauses 22, 23, and 24 were passed without any explanation, and the right

  1275
  hon. Gentleman said nothing whatever about them on the introduction of the Bill or on the Second Reading. I do say it is not fair to the House to put into a Finance Bill an incomprehensible Clause of this nature which may or may not have a very considerable effect upon the taxpayer, and not saying a word about it, and leave it in the hope that towards the end of the sitting it may creep through without anybody having observed it. I admit I ought to have found it out. An hon. Friend says "Hear, hear!" I make a great many mistakes, and this was one of them. I think it is evident that this Clause was not put in for nothing. It must have been put in for something. I think it was put in—
  The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Baronet is criticising the Act.
  Sir F. BANBURY: They put it in without any explanation.
  The CHAIRMAN: The House decided that the Clause should stand part, and the hon. Baronet is criticising the Act.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I will not do so, but I will say that the House, trusting in the Chancellor of the Exchequer, did not know what it was doing. I think the Chancellor is doing something illegal, because I do not think that this Clause effects what he desires, and I will give my reasons. I am aware that anything which requires legislation cannot be argued in Committee of Supply, but what I say is that he is doing something which he ought not to do, and exercising administrative provisions to make a Charge which he is not authorised to make by any Act of Parliament. I say that this Clause has no effect, first, because it was not in the Resolution; therefore it did not become law until the Bill became an Act on the 19th July. The right hon. Gentleman has made the charges at the beginning of July before this came into operation, and therefore I say that he has illegally made a charge upon all farmers of double what they ought to pay. I have gone into this matter very carefully and consulted some legal authorities, and I am quite certain I am right with regard to everything except as to whether or not, as the Act did not become law until the 19th July, it gives the Chancellor of the Exchequer any power of action. I do not think it does. My belief is confirmed by a lawyer, an eminent Member of this House, on the
  1276
  grounds which I have just laid down. This is a very important question because the farmers of this country are paying not only an increased Income Tax, but on two or three times the amount on which they used to pay before. If, as I believe, the right hon. Gentleman makes that charge illegally, I think it is absolutely necessary that a protest should be made in this House, and that the illegal charge should be at once stopped. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will consider this. I do not know whether it is possible to give me a reply now. I think that the matter is of such importance that it ought to be considered by the Law Officers of the Crown.
  Mr. G. FABER: I should like to refer to the questions raised by the hon. Baronet the Member for the Wellington Division of Shropshire (Sir C. Henry). How are we to carry on the War? Without the money this country and its Allies fail. It is no good using the old glasses for examining a question of this kind—scrap them. It is no good talking about how many Treasury Bills we had for the purpose of finance in time of peace. We are face to face with the most terrific catastrophe in the whole history of this globe, and immense questions of finance such as nobody ever dreamt of. We used to talk in thousands and now we talk in millions. We have an expenditure of £5,000,000 per day, and when it will end God knows! It has got to go on. Is the Chancellor right or is he wrong? It is very interesting to know and very important. Is he right or wrong, because I suppose he has a financial policy in the matter, in this policy of hundreds of millions by short-dated securities? What is the danger of short-dated securities? It is that at the end of three, six, nine, or twelve months, as the case may be, the man who has lent the money can say, "Pay me my money." The Chancellor of the Exchequer knows that. Why did he do it? I am rather inclined to think that the hon. Baronet opposite hit the spot. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is an optimist. I am constitutionally and temperamentally a pessimist. I am glad we have some optimists, but an optimist is rather dangerous when he is cast in the person of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. If it is going to be a short war, no doubt he was right, for the reason given by the hon. Baronet, that with a short war there is no necessity for a loan at a high rate of interest, and, if the War

  1277
  ended, financial conditions would be better, at any rate for the time, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be in a better position. It is easy enough to be wise after the event. I am not sure that the Chancellor himself, if he knew what he knows now, would adopt that policy. I rather doubt it. These 850 millions of short-dated securities is not a nice position. It was not easy when the Treasury Bills were started on a large scale—at least I doubt if it was easy—to raise a great loan. And why? Everybody who happens to know the position knows that the banks were immense subscribers to the first and second loans, and, therefore, it was wise to give a time of rest to the banks to collect fresh resources from their customers all over the country.
  Now that the Treasury Bills have assumed alarming proportions, what are you going to do? I think it is fair to ask that question. I do not want to inconvenience the Chancellor in his stupendous task, but, if he is able, perhaps he will tell us, though I expect he will not be, whether he intends to go on with this policy of ever increasing and increasing Treasury Bills, or whether the time may come when he will have to have a new loan. I cannot believe the explanation suggested by the hon. Baronet, that the reason why there was not a third loan was that some time ago the holders of the second loan were put in the comparatively happy position of being able to take up a third loan by paying for it with the second loan, and that, therefore, the Chancellor did not want to give the improved terms by the issue of a third loan. That explanation is too small, too petty, and I cannot believe it. The Chancellor must have thought largely, and, viewing the matter largely, with his optimistic temperament, he thought he would get through the War. Now he has got to put on his thinking cap, with the best opinion in this country to help him, as to what the future ought to be. It is easy to be a critic. It is easy to say, "I would have done this, that, or the other." Next to position of Secretary for Ireland, which is the worst position imaginable, I would as little like to be Chancellor of the Exchequer as any other man on earth, to keep on getting the money and at the same time to keep the pockets of the people open. The Chancellor has been very successful in keeping the pockets of the people open. He has appealed to the little man, and the man
  1278
  with the moderate pocket and the man with the big pocket, and has tapped them all, and has been extraordinarily clever up till now. He may come to this conclusion: that as long as the money keeps flowing in, better stick to that line and not go in for a big loan.
  Let me say a few words on another question which is very important—that is, the alliance between the Bank of England and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, at any rate for the period of the War. It is most necessary that they should march hand-in-hand, irrespective of pre-war custom, but I refer to the recent raising of the Bank rate to 6 per cent. Again, it is so easy to be wise after the event. I think we all feel now that it need not have been done. It ought not to have been done; and why was it done? No one wants lightly to upset the Money Market. I think the Governor of the Bank of England had a scare. He saw that there was a rise in the value of money in the United States, and he felt that it was not safe to wait. He played the same tune over here, and raised the Bank rate to 6 per cent. I will not say it was disastrous, because it is no use using such a word at a time like this in regard to an incident of that kind, but it was unfortunate. Stocks were rising, and confidence was rising too. But both stocks and confidence were shattered by the raising of the Bank rate. Stocks went down, and bankers looked at each other, scratched their heads, and wondered what was coming, and what, if the Bank rate was to be 6 per cent., was going to be the rate on Treasury Bills. It affected enormously the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself if he was going to have a new loan, and it was extremely important if he was going on with the policy of Treasury Bills. I forget whether it was at that time that he did raise the rate on Treasury Bills. [Mr. MCKENNA: "It was!"] Why did the right hon. Gentleman do it? Because he had to follow the 6 per cent. Bank rate, and the tap that had flowed freely, stopped. See how prejudicially it reacted on the Treasury. The Chancellor of the Exchequer may say, "How could I tell; things would have been worse if there had been a real lasting stringency in America." But we expect our great financial magnates to see rather further than the ordinary individual. I remember the late Chancellor of the Exchequer calling me, about three weeks before the outbreak of war, a common or garden banker; and only because I

  1279
  ventured to tell him that if there were a European war it might cost a thousand millions. It is strange to look back upon that now. We expect the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his advisers to know more than the common or garden banker, and ought your advisers in America, therefore, not to have informed you that this was only a temporary matter, and that the money rate there was likely to drop? If they did that the Chancellor was extremely unwise to do as he did, and if they did not he has been very unlucky. That is about all I have to say. Very rarely since the War began have I said anything at all. I have only made one or two speeches, although I may have interrupted during Question Time. I have felt all through that it is human to err, and that in this, the most appalling situation of which humanity ever dreamed, we have to make great allowances, whether in the financial or in any other line.
  The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. McKenna): My hon. Friend who has just sat down has made a speech showing great sympathy for the difficulties of the task of the Exchequer at the present time. He appreciates, as I think many Members of this House do appreciate, the extraordinarily difficult task with which we are confronted in raising day by day, on the average, £5,000,000. A sum which in a week amounts to £35,000,000, which we should have regarded and did regard at the time of the South African War as in itself a large and alarming loan—we do not have to raise the whole of that amount by loan, week by week, because we have the revenue to assist us. Particularly at this period of the year, as I shall have occasion to mention later, the great bulk of the money has to be found in some form or another by borrowing. My hon. Friend who opened the discussion (Sir C. Henry) thinks that we are running great risks by the policy of borrowing on short-dated securities. I understood that in his opening observations he included Exchequer Bonds under that, but I rather gathered that he did not pursue that argument but confined himself exclusively to Treasury Bills. I will only touch for a moment upon the motives which he suggested guided me in adopting this policy. It is very remarkable how short is the memory of man. I am supposed to have adopted this policy
  1280
  because he believes me to be an optimist. The immediate answer to that is that I did not adopt it: I found it.
  Mr. FABER: You enlarged it.
  Mr. McKENNA: I found that hundreds of millions have been borrowed by this method of issuing Treasury Bills on tap before I ever went to the Treasury, or had any idea that I was going to the Treasury. Optimism had, I think, long since vanished by June, 1915, and I think my hon. Friend will agree that that particular period was not the moment to encourage optimistic views.
  Mr. FABER: You had a loan.
  Mr. McKENNA: I had a loan. It was not optimism, and so far from adopting this policy on grounds of optimism, I did not adopt it at all. So far from pursuing it at the time when I went to the Treasury in 1915, when there was little time for optimism, I adopted the opposite policy of a big loan. I obtained a big loan, and from that month was able to finance the greater part of the expenditure of the War out of the proceeds of the loan.
  The second motive that is said to have guided me is a desire to avoid fulfilling a pledge. I do not think my hon. Friend can seriously put that forward. Surely he must think that at the Treasury it is our object, and our desire, to do the best we can for the country's credit. I cannot conceive why he should suppose that I should have a personal motive in wishing to deprive somebody of the rewards of a promise I had made. If he attributes the adoption of the policy to such a motive, let him remember that I do not pay for it, and on his principle what conceivable inducement have I to fail to fulfil a pledge I have given? No, it is not so.
  Sir C. HENRY: I have never suggested that.
  Mr. McKENNA: I understood my hon. Friend to suggest that it was the result of a desire on my part to evade a pledge I have given. There can only be the interest of the public in my mind, and if I have not asked the public to subscribe to a large loan since June, 1915, a little over a year ago now, my hon. Friend must assume that there are public reasons for it, and not some private desire to evade the fulfilment of a pledge, the fulfilment of which would cost me nothing.
  Sir C. HENRY: Quite so!
  Mr. McKENNA: Very well. Let us dismiss that from our discussion, and only proceed as the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Faber) did, purely and simply from the point of view of the public interest. I have been pressed to take the public more into my confidence. Besides being a man of business, my hon. Friend knows the price on the Stock Exchange at the moment of the War Loan, and he knows that if I announced a date for issuing a new loan it would immediately become the subject of immense speculation on the Stock Exchange. Does he really press me, as a man of business and in the interests of the public, to announce now the date of issue of a new loan to be made which would start gigantic speculation in War Loan stock on the Stock Exchange? Of course he does not. He asked me to take the public more into my confidence. No man knows better than he does the limits of possible communication of business facts to the public. After all, statements of the kind he asks me to make would affect men's private fortunes. Some would make fortunes, others would lose them; and clearly it is not in the public interest for me to make any statement which could be made a basis for Stock Exchange speculations.
  Sir C. HENRY: There are none.
  Mr. McKENNA: There would be at once.
  Sir C. HENRY: There could not be under the Regulations.
  Mr. McKENNA: I think my hon. Friend is a little at fault.
  Sir C. HENRY: No.
  Mr. McKENNA: I think so. There are means of doing it. You can buy the stock and pay for it, and then sell it at three points higher, and make the difference in profit. There is no difficulty in making a profit if you have sure information as to the probable cost of the stock. But let us put all these questions on one side. I desire to make as clear a statement as I can of what the actual position to-day is with regard to Treasury Bills, and why we feel on the whole that in circumstances like these we are perfectly safe in financing the War—under existing circumstances—with Treasury Bills. I would like to take the time from the beginning of the present financial year, the 1st of April, down to the 29th of July, the latest date for which I have exact figures. During that
  1282
  time, practically four months, the Treasury Bills have increased by £275,000,000, which I think is the largest, the most rapid increase that has taken place since the policy was first adopted a very long time ago. The increase in Treasury Bills since the 31st March has been £275,000,000. We must examine that account, and split it up into its various heads, and see what the account really means. We issue Treasury Bills in a way which I would like to divide into three categories: short-dated, three months; middling, six and nine months; long-dated, a year. I am dealing now with what we have issued since the 1st April last, the beginning of the financial year. During these four months the actual short-dated Bills, the actual number of short-dated Bills, has been reduced, not increased, but reduced by £46,000,000; so that of the new issue of £275,000,000 not only have we not included therein any new short-dated Bills, but we have reduced the outstanding amount by £46,000,000. My hon. Friend will agree that the Treasury Bills which he regards as dangerous, and the great increase of which alarmed him, were primarily short-dated Bills.
  Sir C. HENRY: All of them?
  Mr. McKENNA: From my hon. Friend's point of view the three months Bills must be the most dangerous. It is all a question of degree.
  Sir C. HENRYmade a remark which was inaudible in the Reporters' Gallery.
  5.0 P.M.
  Mr. McKENNA: We have reduced them by £46,000,000. The middling bills have been increased by £122,000,000, so that if you take the two together the actual increase in Treasury Bills of nine months and under has been £76,000,000. The increase in the yearly bills over the same period has been £199,000,000.
  Mr. FABERmade a remark which was inaudible in the Reporters' Gallery.
  Mr. McKENNA: Not only that. It is quite true that the yearly bills bear a slightly higher rate of interest than the three months' bills. The yearly bills also appeal to a different class of investor. Yearly bills are regarded, and fairly regarded, with the great bulk of those who invest, as truly invested, and not intended to be drawn in the course of the year for the discounting of bills, and probably intended to be reinvested. The point at

  1283
  issue is that when any war continues, as this War is continuing, the investor prefers to have his money in a form of security in which his capital is guaranteed. If the War goes on long enough there is a time when all loans depreciate in value, the consequence being that the genuine investor likes yearly Treasury Bills better than any other form of investment. Well, now, that is on the side dealing with the total issue of Treasury Bills. We have had to finance the War during that period. Treasury Bills alone have not done it. We have during that four months sold £154,000,000 of Exchequer Bonds. We have sold £16,000,000 of War Expenditure Certificates. We have sold £13,750,000 of War Savings Certificates. All these securities have at least two years' currency and the great bulk five years' currency. So that we have raised during this period £184,000,000 with a currency of two years and upwards; £199,000,000 with a currency of one year; and £122,000,000 with a currency of six or nine months; and we have paid off £46,000,000 of three months' securities. In addition to the sources that I have named, of course we have the revenue. During these four months the actual revenue received by the Exchequer has been about £100,000,000. I would ask the Committee to bear this very important fact in mind, that the early part of the financial year, the whole of the first half of the financial year—almost the first nine months—is the worst from the Treasury point of view as regards revenue. If, during these four months we had received our revenue at an average we should have obtained not £100,000,000 but £168,000,000. During this period, therefore, we have had to find an additional £68,000,000 by borrowing, but the borrowing of which we shall be in a position to pay off out of the revenue of £68,000,000 additional which we shall obtain when the bills become due for payment. If the Committee have kept well in mind the earlier figures which I gave in regard to the Treasury Bills, and bear this deficit in mind, and the average revenue for the period, it will be seen that the £68,000,000 almost, not quite, but very nearly, covers the whole of our borrowings in any form of Treasury Bills of less than a year. We had a shortage—that is to say, we borrowed the balance at six and nine months; after repaying the three months' Bills we borrowed the excess of £68,000,000, and we had a shortage of
  1284
  £68,000,000 revenue during the same period. That revenue will come into the Exchequer at a period of the year when these bills become due for payment. The result is that we have been financing ourselves, on a true appreciation of the facts of the case, exclusively, and almost exclusively with yearly Bills, and with securities of a longer maturity than one year.
  Sir F. BANBURY: May I interrupt the right hon. Gentleman—
  Mr. McKENNA: I like to have criticism, and I like to answer it.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I do not wish to interrupt; I merely said that I thought yearly bills were just as dangerous as three years.
  Mr. McKENNA: They are not.
  Sir F. BANBURY: The real point is this: that it all depends on the Money Market when the bill comes due. A three months' bill may become due when the Money Market is easy, and therefore there is no danger. A yearly bill may become due when the Money Market is bad, therefore there is danger. There is no necessary advantage in a yearly bill.
  Mr. FABER: As the right hon. Gentleman has invited an observation, may I say that I rather agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. A yearly bill is held by those who are assumed to be permanent investors. Three months' bills are held more by bankers. If a customer says across the counter, "I want my money," it, has got to be paid to him at par. That is why the banker goes in for three months' bills and as many short-dated loans as he can get. The man who is in as a permanent investor, in view of the continuance of the War, says, "I am going to invest for longer than a year."
  Mr. McKENNA: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. In present circumstances, in the existing condition of the Money Market, and the state of the country, yearly bills supply a form of investment most satisfactory to the investor.
  Sir C. HENRY: Not with a rate of 6⅜?
  Mr. McKENNA: That really does not touch the argument. My hon. Friend knows that. How can it?
  Sir C. HENRY: The yearly bill pays a higher rate of discount.
  Mr. McKENNA: Slightly, but when the hon. Member says 6⅜ he does not touch the argument at all. The Bank rate has only been put up during the last few weeks; therefore it does not touch the argument. That is, at any rate, what we have done and what we are doing, and that is our view as to the situation. The question is whether we could' have done better. Hon. Members may think we ought to do better if we issue a long loan. I think the considerations which lie with the Treasury in issuing a long loan are something quite different from those which have been raised by the hon. Member. The main point that we have to take into view, in my judgment, in issuing a loan, is whether or not the state of the Money Market at any given moment discloses a condition of inflation, and if credits are being heaped up which do not really and truly represent real money. If we got a condition of inflation, and if these yearly Treasury Bills were in truth not invested money, but were going to be discounted and made the basis of new credit, we should have to issue a loan, it would not matter what the price. It would not be the price that would determine our judgment: it would be the whole condition of trade and the state of the country. The problem we have to face is not merely the financial problem. Day by day at the present time we are spending—I am not dealing with money—we are consuming in goods of all kinds more than we produce. We can only make good that deficiency by obtaining supplies from some other country which is consuming less than it produces. Our task, however, is not only to obtain from some other country that which makes up our own deficiency, but we have to make good the deficiency in the production of our Allies. That is the real difficulty and the gigantic task which falls upon us. With great respect to my hon. Friend, may I say that all these questions of internal finance, large and difficult as they are, fall into insignificance in comparison with the larger task of financing our foreign supplies. We have to pay out day by day—I do not want to exaggerate—sums of money abroad which are certainly more than £1,000,000 a day, probably nearer £2,000,000. If my hon. Friend will think of the difficulty of that task—
  Mr. OUTHWAITE: Are the figures of the £6,000,000 ourselves and our Allies as well?
  Mr. McKENNA: I am talking of the foreign payments we have to make, whether on our own account or our advances to our Allies, because we have to make good our own deficiency in production in relation to our consumption, and we have to pay for that somewhere abroad. Some other nation has to be induced to supply us with goods. We have to pay for those goods. If it is a difficult task day by day to raise credits in this country, how much more difficult is it likely to be in raising credits day by day in a foreign country? I do not want to go into detail in that, but I would ask my hon. Friend, and hon. Members opposite, when they criticise the rise in the Bank rate to 6 per cent., to remember that we must not look at it as an internal problem of finance, but as a question of what is necessary to ensure our foreign credits. No one can tell—for nobody knows the figures except myself and those who are immediately associated with me—what we have to pay in dollars day by day, and we alone are able to judge what is the effect of putting up the Bank rate. Of course, I cannot take any responsibility for putting up the Bank rate, because that is a matter exclusively in the control of the Bank of England. I would like to say at once that the Governor of the Bank of England spoke to me about an advance, and I entirely agreed with his action. I felt it was necessary to secure ourselves partly against inflation, but much more against the drain upon our dollar funds abroad. My hon. Friend deprecated borrowing abroad on Treasury Bills because we thereby lost the Income Tax. I am afraid he has not considered the difficulty of the problem. I have to raise £2,000,000 a day abroad. Can I expect that the foreign creditor is going to lend me money and have Income Tax deducted from the interest? Does my hon. Friend think the problem can possibly be solved in that way? I asked the House this year to authorise the issue of Exchequer Bonds to be held abroad without payment of Income Tax, and this House recognised the necessity of having a security upon which we can borrow abroad, because you never can borrow abroad on a security on which the holder pays Income Tax. It is one of the merits of the Treasury Bills instead of being a defect.
  Sir C. HENRY: My ground of criticism was the great cost to the Treasury.
  Mr. McKENNA: I have got to borrow. It is a great cost to the Treasury, it is true, to lose Income Tax on money borrowed from abroad, but does my hon. Friend conceive that I could borrow abroad without remitting the Income Tax?
  Mr. D. MASON: Surely the right hon. Gentleman could borrow at a lower rate of interest. My hon. Friend's point was that the terms were extravagant.
  Mr. McKENNA: Does my hon. Friend conceive that the Dutch Bank is going to lend me money at 5 per cent., from which I proceed to deduct Income Tax, so that the Dutch Bank would then get 3¾ per cent.? If he does, then he is not familiar with the charges for a foreign loan. If we borrow money abroad we have to pay the current rate of interest without deduction of Income Tax. If you ask a Dutch bank, an American bank, or a Scandinavian bank to lend money here, or in Russia, or in France, you will not find one who will look at you under 5 per cent. and upwards. Therefore, the Treasury Bills, as a matter of fact, form a very good security for foreign loans.
  Mr. BRYCE: Very good indeed.
  Mr. McKENNA: That is what we want. My hon. Friend does not understand my point.
  Mr. BRYCE: I understand your point perfectly.
  Mr. McKENNA: If we have to raise abroad a Loan of £2,000,000 a day on some security or other, how does my hon. Friend think it can be done? You have to find a security which the foreigner will take. You have to pay what the creditor insists upon. I should like to understand the point my hon. Friend puts forward, but I can assure him that those who act on behalf of the Treasury, the Bank of England on their own behalf, or the joint stock banks, who are in daily touch with this business, and who are all of them either discounting foreign bills or borrowing money abroad upon securities, will all tell my hon. Friends that the rates at which money can be borrowed to-day abroad is far higher than what they regarded as customary rates in peace times. There is no relation between them. This country is fortunate, inasmuch as we are able to borrow abroad at a cheaper rate than any other of the belligerent Powers.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: The right hon. Gentleman will perhaps remember also that the rates before the War were much higher than here, and therefore you must not compare the rate at which you borrow now with the rates you pay here.
  Mr. McKENNA: That is perfectly true. The right hon. Baronet said that we had missed a very good opportunity of issuing a loan when we introduced the scheme of buying American securities, and I understood his argument was that we should have issued a loan in order to lock up the proceeds for the sales of those securities to the British Government. Would that have been of any real serious use to us? What use would the locking up of some £30,000,000, £40,000,000, or even £50,000,000—I do not think more, if as much—have been to us in issuing a great loan? It would have been a mere fleabite. Although that sum would have been useful, in order to get the large sums we require, we have to look to other conditions. Then he raised a legal question on the construction of Section 20 of the Finance Act, 1915–16. I did not know he took that view about that Section, but if the law is against the Inland Revenue we shall not, of course, endeavour to enforce the tax, but if the law is clear, as I understand, the tax will have to be enforced, unless the law is altered. I should be happy to answer any questions that are put to me on this subject of the issue of Treasury Bills, but I am quite unable to name any date as to when we are likely to issue a loan—whether a loan consolidating the short-dated securities only, or whether a loan in which we look for a larger amount of money, but certainly, whenever the opportunity is favourable, and whenever the general conditions of our finance not only warrant it, but indicate that it ought to be done, we shall do it without hesitation, and shall be perfectly ready to fulfil the pledge which we gave of the right of conversion attaching to the holders of existing stocks. I would only like to say in conclusion one word about the total sums. As my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham (Mr. G. Faber) said, our ideas ought all to undergo a radical change in consequence of the War. This figure of £800,000,000, which is now so startling, is not really very startling in relation to the other figures. Our total indebtedness on the 31st of March next, we estimate, will be £3,440,000,000.
  Colonel F. HALL: Will the right hon. Gentleman say what is the amount at the present time?
  Mr. McKENNA: I can readily calculate it, but the hon. and gallant Gentleman can easily calculate it for himself.
  Mr. BRYCE: The exact amount of the debt at the present moment is £2,554,000,000.
  Mr. McKENNA: That is the figure. The total indebtedness at the end of March next is estimated, as I have said, at £3,440,000,000. Prom that you may fairly deduct the amount of our advances to Allies and Dominions, which I will put at the same date at £800,000,000, leaving our own indebtedness at the end of March at £2,640,000,000.
  Mr. BRYCE: At £5,000,000 a day?
  Mr. McKENNA: At £5,000,000 a day, taking the Budget estimate, which I have not changed. The figure of our total indebtedness on 31st March next is out of proportion to anything we have known or thought of before. Is it a burden which we are unable to meet? Our revenue—I am speaking now not of the Exchequer revenue, but of the national income—may probably be put at about £2,500,000,000, or perhaps £2,600,000,000.
  Mr. FABER: Is that anything like a reliable estimate?
  Mr. McKENNA: I think it is fairly reliable. Higher prices, of course, raise the values, which compensate for the diminution of production. It was estimated by one authority at £2,400,000,000 in 1913–14, and at £2,700,000,000 at the present time, or within a month or two. Another authority has put it as high as £3,000,000,000, but we think that is an exaggerated figure, and that we are fairly Within the mark if we put the figure of national income at the figure I have stated. That is to say, our total national indebtedness on 31st March next would just about equal one year's national income, which, of course;, is not a burden intolerable to contemplate.
  Sir C. HENRY: Will the right hon. Gentleman say what he means by "the national income"? It is rather a vague term.
  Mr. McKENNA: I have always thought it was a very well understood term. It means the aggregate of the income of every person in the country.
  Sir C. HENRY: Supposing I pay employés wages, then my income is included in that sum and theirs also?
  Mr. McKENNA: I do not know my hon. Friend's practice, but I assume he does not regard as income his, gross receipts, out of which he pays his employés.
  Sir C. HENRY: I am speaking of personal service.
  Mr. McKENNA: All payments for personal service, of course, are counted twice over, but that is not a large proportion of the whole. The great bulk, of course, is not paid in personal wages to my hon. Friend's butler and footman.
  Mr. FABER: I hope he has parlour-maids now.
  Mr. McKENNA: It is quite true that allowance must be made for all these things, but the term is thoroughly well understood.

  ROYAL ASSENT.
  Whereupon the Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod (Captain T. D. Butler) having come with a message to attend the Lords Commissioners, the Chairman left the Chair.
  Mr. SPEAKEK resumed the Chair.
  Message to attend the Lords Commissioners. The House went, and, having returned,
  Mr. SPEAKERreported the Royal Assent to—

  1. Army (Courts of Inquiry) Act, 1916.

  2. Trading With the Enemy (Copyright) Act, 1916.

  3. River Glen Act, 1916.

  4. Yeadon Waterworks Act, 1916.

  5. Gore's Divorce Act, 1916.

  SUPPLY, again considered in Committee.
  Mr. McKENNA(continuing): I was just concluding my observations in reply to the Motion of my hon. Friend, and I had got to the point of suggesting—I will not put it higher—that our total National Debt at the end of March next would be rather less than our total estimated national income;

  1291
  in other words, we should be in the position of a man whose income was £5,000 a year and whose total debts amounted to £5,000 a year—a position which would not be considered extremely alarming.
  Mr. G. FABER: But you have to keep the nation alive.
  Mr. McKENNA: If we compare it with the best estimate we can obtain of our total national wealth—I am speaking now of capital wealth—the proportion of our indebtedness is not really very large. It is estimated that our capital wealth is £15,000,000,000.
  An HON. MEMBER: That is a low estimate.
  Mr. McKENNA: Yes, that is a low estimate. All our estimates are very conservative estimates, and I do not want to overstate the case, and I am certainly within the mark when I say that our national indebtedness will be less than one year's national income, and not one-sixth of the total national wealth. We shall be collecting in one year a revenue equal to 20 per cent. of our whole debt, and we shall be able to pay out of existing taxation the interest on the debt and a considerable sinking fund and still leave a large margin for reduction of taxation.
  Mr. FABER: That is on 31st March next?
  Mr. McKENNA: Yes, on 31st March next. I do not wish to be open to the charge of optimism, and therefore I express no opinion as to when the War will come to an end. I am merely giving figures as to our position at the end of the financial year. We have every ground to be proud of the way in which British credit has stood the strain. We have raised a gigantic revenue, and we are borrowing these gigantic sums. Of course, we have had difficulty and strain and stress, both internal and external, in working the mere machinery for getting these huge sums, but we are getting the money. We have succeeded in obtaining it at reasonable rates for two years, and I have not the slightest doubt that the British public will continue to show the same readiness and willingness to support their country, both by paying taxes and lending money. I have not the slightest doubt that that we shall be able to maintain our credit right to the end of the War, no matter how long it lasts.
  Sir F. CAWLEY: I agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that we have every reason to congratulate ourselves upon the fact that, so far, we have been able to finance this War as we have done. It is perfectly marvellous how it has been done, and I am very glad that the Chancellor of the Exchequer takes the view that we can go on financing it as well in the future as we have done in the past. The right hon. Gentleman rather misunderstood my hon. Friend (Sir C. Henry). The real point of my hon. Friend was that we are paying too much for the money. The Chancellor of the Exchequer did not quite answer the criticism why we had not raised any money since; 15th June, 1915, by loan instead of resorting entirely to Treasury Bills and Exchequer Bonds. The Chancellor of the Exchequer rather took my hon. Friend to task because he suggested that he had to take into consideration in raising any new loan the fact that he would have to raise the interest on the old loan as well. I do not know that my hon. Friend suggested that was a petty or mean thought, but the hon. Gentleman opposite distinctly said that it was a paltry and petty thing.
  Mr. FABER: If the hon. Member refers to me, I am sure that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not have had any small motive of that kind.
  Sir F. CAWLEY: I will take it at that. I do not see where the small-mindedness comes in. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had to consider the cheapest way of raising money for the country, and it was his duty to consider the fact that in raising any new loans the interest on the old loan would have to be raised to the price of the new loan. That does not seem to me mean, paltry, or anything else. I do not quite see why the Chancellor of the Exchequer should be so cross with my hon. Friend. The point is whether it is a desirable thing or a necessary thing for this country to finance the War by paying 6⅜ per cent. These Treasury Bills are becoming a very favourite security in foreign countries, particularly America, and taking into account the fact that the people who buy them have not to pay Income Tax it really costs this country about 7¾ per cent. I do not think we ought to have to pay 7¾ per cent. for money from America. I know something about the exchange, but I do not think that explains it. I do not think it is necessary for the country to pay 6⅜ per cent. for the money it borrows. It is not very difficult to raise money

  1293
  when you have the security of the British nation, and you pay a very high rate of percentage as you are doing now. We are financing this War by paying an exorbitant interest for money which has the security of the British Empire behind it. That is the point which my hon. Friend wanted to make. I quite appreciate and agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer that these one year Treasury Bills have become a favourite security with regular investors. I am not surprised, because it is a very splendid investment. The British Government are finding everybody with an investment now. It has the security of this country behind it, and it gives an interest which in the past could only be obtained -with a very "dickey" security. I apologise for the use of that word; I mean securities which were considered not quite first class. It may be desirable to get all the money that we can from permanent investors or from the people who have the money, but it is not necessary to pay so much for it. The money might be raised at a less price than it is raised. I will not enter into the question whether short-dated bills are dangerous; but for America or any other nation to hold several millions, as possibly they will do, of Treasury Bills which may become due during a monetary crisis is rather dangerous, and for my part I would rather get the money, if possible, in some way whereby we shall not run the risk of this claim from a foreign country coming upon us at a time when we can least meet it.
  Colonel F. HALL: I have listened with rapt attention and great interest to the speech which has been made this afternoon by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and as far as I am concerned I am not desirous in any way of criticising the general policy of the Government, but I cannot help looking at the position in which we find ourselves. The right hon. Gentleman said that before he came to the Treasury he was fully aware that hundreds of millions had been raised by Treasury Bonds. I cannot help thinking that the right hon. Gentleman must have meant in the aggregate and over a long period, because I cannot call to mind anything which hitherto has made it necessary for this Government to borrow hundreds of millions sterling by Treasury Bills for one specific purpose. The right hon. Gentleman is exceedingly optimistic, and I congratulate him, because these are the days when we have got to be optimistic; these
  1294
  are the days when we have got to tell our friends and our enemies that, come what may, we are in a position to foot the bill, and we will foot it whatever the amount may be. That does not deter us from dealing with these matters to the best of our ability. We are paying 8½ per cent. for money borrowed from foreign countries. The Chancellor of the Exchequer shakes his head, and I dare say he is wondering what I mean. I am not perhaps a lightning calculator and I am not a financier, but I am a business man, and, if I get 6 per cent. for my money and get my interest in advance, that yields me 6⅜ per cent., and to enable me to get 6⅜ per cent. net with an Income Tax of 5s. in the £, the right hon. Gentleman will find, if he looks into it and works it out, that I must have a dividend of 8½ per cent.
  6.0 P.M.
  I do not like this system of continually borrowing money for these periods. I have no doubt, judging by the patriotism which has been shown by all classes of the community, that people are prepared to invest their money and to lend their money in order that there shall be no financial difficulty with regard to seeing this War through to a satisfactory conclusion, but we have been able to raise £650,000,000 at 4½ per cent., and that loan,. at the present time, stands in the market at only a small discount. We do not know what money we may require by the end of the War. We have got £850,000,000 at the present time in Treasury Bills. It may be reinvested or it may not. That depends upon the basis on which the holders of these Treasury Bonds will place their money in the future when you realise it. The right hon. Gentle man undoubtedly has most carefully considered and weighed what in his opinion, and in the opinion of his advisers, is going to be the outlook of the Money Market in the future. From my knowledge of business, I find money gets stiff, the rate becomes heavy, and it is difficult to negotiate on reasonable terms at the approach of autumn. I cannot help thinking that the Government would do well to carefully consider whether it would not be advisable in the near future to issue a loan bearing a reasonable rate of interest. Undoubtedly, such a loan would be taken up by the investing public, by the bankers, the insurance companies, and the people who have money, and the Government would be certain that they had

  1295
  got the use of the money for a specific period. If, for instance, they say, "We are going to issue a loan of £1,000,000,000 sterling on a basis of 5½ per cent." I do not suggest that the whole investing public is going to say, "All right, I am coming in, and am going to invest my money at considerably less than I can get elsewhere." There is a point even with patriotism.
  The right hon. Gentleman forgot to look round and see what return investors can obtain on their money. If he issued a loan for, say, £1,000,000,000 (using that figure for the sake of argument) he does not know whether he will want it all; I hope he will not, but we do not know how long this War is going to continue. But it would be perfectly easy for the right hon. Gentleman to say that he would take, say, 10 per cent. of that loan on application and 5 per cent. and 10 per cent. at later periods, spreading it, say, over a period of three months. The right hon. Gentleman could in fact arrange to call in his money as and when he wanted it. He would know the state of the Money Market, and would be able to place his hands upon the amount that had been subscribed to the loan when he wanted it. I would suggest that the right hon. Gentleman should consider whether that is not worth some consideration. The right hon. Gentleman spoke lightly, if I may say so to him, when it was a question of anything like £50,000,000. In these days, when stupendous work has been thrown on the Treasury, they seem to be in the habit of brushing aside a sum of anything like £50,000,000 or £100,000,000 sterling. But those are not small sums. One of them may perhaps be only sufficient to enable the War to be carried on for six or seven days, but at all events £50,000,000 is not to be thrown away. It is by obtaining £50,000,000 here and £50,000,000 there that we are going to get the loan. We must conserve our various interests, and not say, "I am going to leave that market open because it is only a matter of £50,000,000 which would be derived from the sale of certain securities." The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that the percentage of outstanding Treasury Bills was quite small—more or less infinitesimal. To use his own words, I think he said quite small.
  Mr. McKENNA: I did not say so.
  Colonel HALL: If the right hon. Gentleman looks at his speech, I think he will find that he said something like that. At all events, he led the Committee to suppose that the amount of the Treasury Bills standing at £850,000,000 sterling was a small percentage of the outstanding debts at the present time.
  Mr. McKENNA: I gave the figures. I could not state it was a small sum, and I did not. I gave the actual figures.
  Colonel HALL: The right hon. Gentleman, in carefully reading his speech tomorrow, will, I think, find that I am correct, because I was particularly careful to note what he said. He will find at least that he led the Committee—whether that was his intention or not I do not know—but he led the Committee to think that the £850,000,000 sterling was only a small portion of the outstanding debt. The right hon. Gentleman shakes his head. I would ask him to look into it. I was not desirous of interrupting him while he was making his speech, and I received a reply from him that I could make my own calculations. It is quite true that I could do so, but when he was dealing with the £850,000,000, the amount of Treasury Bills standing to-day, I wanted to make it clear that that was not to be put against the percentage of what would probably be the amount of the total indebtedness of the country at 31st March, 1917. Those figures show me, at all events, that at the present time something like a third of the total amount of the War expenditure is being raised in Treasury Bills. These Treasury Bills go into all sorts of countries. We are prepared to find the money in this country for carrying on the War, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman will carefully consider whether the time has not arrived—I am not asking him to reply, and commit himself now—when we might, and should, be able to obtain the money that is necessary without paying such a huge rate of interest as 6⅜ per cent. net, and which I put down as 8½ per cent. gross. I would also like to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman most sincerely upon the work he has done up to the present time. The work must have been enormous, while as to the machinery we cannot even imagine what it has been. But do not let the advantages which have accrued up to the present lead us into a difficult position. Let us review the circumstances exactly as they are, and follow the maxim I have always been

  1297
  taught as a business man, "Look ahead, and in making your contracts and subcontracts, see that you never get out of your depth." I do hope the right hon. Gentleman will consider in the near future the issue of a sufficiently large loan to carry him on for a considerable period, not calling in the money till he really wants it, so that the country may get the full advantage from it. I have no hesitation in saying that the patriotism and the self-sacrifice that have been shown by all parties in the past will continue, and that the right hon. Gentleman will have the confidence and assistance of the country in the future as he has had it in the past.
  Mr. D. MASON: I join in the appreciation which has been expressed at the lucid statement of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Before I make any observations upon what he said, I would like to support what the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down said in drawing attention to this large floating Debt. I agree with the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his optimism. I was struck the other day by a memorable passage of Emerson which was applied to the position of Great Britain in the past, when she was in some financial straits. It seemed to be appropriate to to-day, and perhaps I may quote it. Emerson said:
  "I see her (Great Britain) not dispirited, not weak but well remembering that she has seen dark days before, indeed with a kind of instinct that she sees a little better in a cloudy day, and that in storm of battle and calamity she has a secret vigour and a pulse like a cannon. I see her in her old age not decrepit but young and still daring to believe in her power of endurance and expansion."
  I quite agree with this sentiment, and I quite agree with the right hon. Gentleman in his temperament. At the same time, while agreeing with that sentiment, I am sure, from the courteous way in which the right hon. Gentleman has always welcomed criticism, that he does not think there is any doubt of our ability to foot the bill, and that our criticism is given in the spirit in which, I am sure, it is received, and with the object of making suggestions for the future.
  It seems to me particularly appropriate that we should now, after two years of war, have a survey of the position. While agreeing with the criticism of my hon. Friend the hon. Baronet the Member for Wellington with regard to the floating debt, I find myself not agreeing with what he said with regard to the raising recently of the Bank of England rate of discount.
  1298
  I agree rather with the Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury) and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Of course, I know all of us are not in possession of all the facts that were in the knowledge of the Court at the Bank of England when they came to this particular decision, but with the knowledge that we possess I think we are able to say that the principal motive which animated the directors of the Bank of England was that they were faced with a considerable gold drain to America. The Chancellor of the Exchequer lightly referred to that. Certain demands had to be met here, and the Bank were anxious to avert that gold drain, and therefore took what has generally been regarded as the most potent method of restraining it, namely, the raising of the rate of discount. I think the effect has justified the action of the Bank of England, because it has had some influence, though, perhaps, not as great an influence as it might have had, for reasons which I have formerly referred to, and which, perhaps, I may again touch on—but it has had a very beneficial effect on this market in attracting capital to London. Already very considerable sums have, I believe, been attracted to London, and the fact that money was quoted cheap again in New York is, I think, one of the reasons for the Bank of England endeavouring, by a change in the rate of discount, to attract some of that capital to London, where, of course, it is much in request. As far as we know the action of the Bank of England has been thoroughly justified.
  With regard to the question of floating debt, the total of it has been given by a number of Members, and we may take it as approximately correct when we say it is something like £850,000,000. But we have to add the other floating debt issued by the Treasury in the shape of currency notes, which now amount to something like £127,000,000. That gives us a total of £977,000,000. I would like just to refer briefly to the second part of the floating debt. I do not know if any hon. Members have observed that last week this issue was increased by no less a sum than £2,118,000; that was in one week alone. As some reference has been made to the recent bank discount and its object, to check the gold drain and raise the value of money here, I think the Members who are cognisant with finance and have a knowledge of the Money Market must know that when the Bank of England

  1299
  raised the rate of discount with the object of attracting capital here, the Treasury was a competitor of the Bank, as it were, fey adding to the aggregate amount of currency at the rate of something like a million or two millions in a week. The Bank of England action is thereby crippled to a large extent, and its beneficent effect is certainly threatened by this continual addition to the floating debt in the shape of an addition of Treasury currency notes. Dilution seems to be rather a feature of the present Government. The hon. and learned Member for North-East Cork (Mr. T. M. Healy) spoke of the dilution of Courts of Inquiry by the addition of lay members. We have had the dilution of the Army by the addition of conscripts, the dilution of skilled labour with unskilled labour and women, the dilution of Free Trade with an injection of Tariff Reform, the dilution of the currency, and a dilution of the Liberal Government by the addition of many Conservatives. Dilution seems to be the order of the day. This may well be termed a "Dilution Government." The effect which this large addition to the currency has had on prices and other things is worthy of the attention of this Committee. The Government has recently appointed a Committee to consider the rise in the cost of living, which has for its chairman that Free Trade economist the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Tyneside Division (Mr. J. M. Robertson). Here is one very serious contributing factor to the cost of living. It is well known to those with any knowledge of the subject that if you continue to add to the floating debt by an addition to the amount of currency paper that, of course, affects prices and makes the cost of living dearer for the poor and the old age pensioners.
  The Debate has largely turned upon the question of Treasury Bills. What is the position with regard to short-dated paper? The issue of Treasury Bills represents about £850,000,000, and currency notes £127,000,000 odd. I have particulars here of the issue of £10,000,000 of French bills and £10,000,000 of Russian bills which have matured, and which, I believe, have been renewed. I am referring, of course, to the amount of short-dated paper that is in the market. I know that this is
  1300
  not liability of the British Treasury, but to arrive at the menace—as many of us think it to be—of haying this large mass of short-dated paper in existence, we are justified in totalling up all the loan amounts. I understand that the Allies and the Dominions have given us bills for £450,000,000 for our advances. Perhaps the Chancellor of the Exchequer will give me the correct figure. I think he said that the recent amount of loans to the Dominions and the Allies is much larger.
  Mr. McKENNA: I gave the figure as at the end of this year of probably £800,000,000. My hon. Friend must deduct a proportionate amount for the period of the year that has yet to elapse. Of course, that covers two years and nearly three years.
  Mr. MASON: For the purposes of my argument I will take the sum of £500,000,000, plus the French bills £10,000,000, and the Russian bills £10,000,000, and our own Treasury Bills of £850,000,000. That will give us an aggregate of short-dated paper existing on the Money Market of something like £1,370,000,000. It was hardly worthy of the right hon. Gentleman that he should enlarge upon paying off some paltry amount of three months' bills as compared with the twelve months' liabilities. That was beside the point. The real point which appeals to many of us about short-dated paper is not the difference between three, nine, and twelve months, but as between twelve months' paper and a loan running for twenty or twenty-five years. If you fund this short-dated paper you have it behind you, and, to a certain extent, your feet are clear. No one suggests that the right hon. Gentleman should not be in a position to finance the War in the future or to finance his purchases in America or elsewhere by means of Treasury Bills. If I apprehend the sense of many of the criticisms that have been offered, it is that hon. Members feel that this enormous mass of short-dated paper is becoming top-heavy. We wish to see a large part of it funded or consolidated into a permanent loan, so that we may feel easier to go forward and be ready to meet any other troubles or events which may still await us. That is the gravamen of the criticism of those who do not like the present position at the Treasury. I do not think the right hon. Gentleman has met that difficulty. I particularly noted what he said in

  1301
  his reply. He did not meet the arguments of the hon. Baronet the Member for the Wellington Division. He said that the reasons for or against a long loan depended upon whether the market disclosed inflation and whether the Treasury Bills were held by investors, and he also referred to the financing of our foreign supplies, with which I have dealt. He entirely missed the point put before him. It is not that one objects to this method of financing the country. AH Chancellors of the Exchequer have used this very valuable method of short-dated paper for tiding over crises and enabling them to carry on. We think it is being abused, and that it is the aggregate and the overwhelming mass of short-dated paper which makes us vulnerable in many directions.
  We do not know who holds this paper or what use may be made of it. We were told when we entered upon this War that our enemies took advantage of the position of the London Money Market. Probably that is true. We cannot always tell when a war is likely to occur, but we do know that we are going to have peace at some time or other. While we cannot always be prepared for the identical day upon which there will be an outbreak of war, we can prepare, to some extent, for peace. What will be the position if we are left with the large mass of short-dated paper to which I have referred? When we are at war, our minds are concentrated on carrying it to a successful conclusion. We may have differences of opinion as to the methods adopted with regard to it, but there is only one feeling in this country as to the object for which we all stand. Peace may come more or less suddenly. When it does come, in this country there will be a hundred and one projects that will call for capital, which will be very much reduced and not at all plentiful. People holding this short-dated or long-dated paper will have very attractive demands for their money, probably more than the Chancellor of the Exchequer has imagined. There will be an enormous demand in the market for money from all quarters of the globe. Now is his opportunity to consolidate or refund this vast mass of paper. It is not so much a question of fresh capital. It would be well if he were to issue a consolidated or unified loan on favourable terms, and to offer to investors who are the holders of this short-dated paper a
  1302
  fairly attractive loan, not necessarily at a high rate of interest. We have seen that New South Wales is borrowing to-day at 5¼ per cent. More than one speaker has referred to the exorbitant terms—6¼ or 6¾ per cent.—now offered. Those terms are too exorbitant for the British Treasury to pay when New South Wales can borrow at 5¼ per cent. I do not see why the right hon. Gentleman cannot offer a consolidating loan to refund a portion of this paper, say, on a 5 per cent. basis, with a term of five to twenty years, with an option to the Treasury to repay in five years even at a premium which gives the attraction of a fairly long term to the investor. The right hon. Gentleman has told us that a number of these twelve months' Treasury Bills are held by investors. If that is so—the right hon. Gentleman speaks with knowledge—and if the investor is given an attractive loan the right hon. Gentleman will be able to refund, and we shall get rid of a considerable portion of this mass of paper. That will clear the right hon. Gentleman's way for further demands that may be made upon him. The right hon. Gentleman has shown himself thoroughly sympathetic. I think his concluding words were that he would consider the possibility of funding the loan. I hope that he will take that into serious consideration, and that at an early date he will bring forward some proposal of the character I have described.
  When considering our own floating Debt we might look at the floating debt of Germany. Finance is international, and when we have peace the barriers will be broken down. Money will not be governed by economic conferences. I have not heard of any economic conference proposal that German money is to be prohibited from coming into this country. Every banker knows that it would be impossible to organise any sort of legislation to place an embargo on the money of Germany or anybody else if it were available in any part of the world. It is very difficult to obtain reliable information as to the floating debt of Germany up to date. I have here an article from the "Gazette de Lausanne," which was quoted in the "Times," and which may be regarded as reliable. Really it discloses the very pitiable condition to which Germany is now reduced. According to this

  1303
  article, Germany's floating debt at the time of the issue of the fourth German War Loan
  "Exceeded 1,400 millions sterling, made up as follows:

  Drawn credits, Treasury bonds and bills and notes of private banks

  £719,000,000

  Reichsbank notes

  224,500,000

  Treasury notes

  18,000,000

  Loan Bank bonds

  88,000,0u0

  Municipality of Berlin notes

  7,500,000

  Old Prussian bonds, replacing Loan Bank bonds

  75,000,000

  New Prussian bonds

  150,000,000

  Former fiduciary circulation

  150,000,000

  £1,432,000,000

  I do not suggest that the right hon. Gentleman would meet with the same result as the German refund did, because I think he would be successful, but know that German financiers have been very able, and some of them might make an attempt to follow the lines upon which they have achieved success in peace time. They tried to refund this enormous mass of floating paper. The quotation proceeds:
  "In order, really, to provide new money for the War, observed the 'Gazette,' it was necessary that the result of the fourth German War Loan should exceed the amount of the short-term obligations—i.e., 719 millions sterling. Well, the amount actually announced by Dr. Helfferich last week was only 530 millions. This, no doubt, is why the Continental critics call it a fiasco."
  A country which has a floating debt that is funded and put behind them for a period of twenty years, would stand much better before the world in the matter of credit in the future than one which has not. Although we know that Germany has failed, that is no reason why the right hon. Gentleman should not attempt it, because I think he will succeed. I believe the credit of this country would stand better with a refunding or consolidating loan. We do not know how long the War is going to continue, and it behoves us to put through such a measure now when there is concentration of mind upon it. Opportunities for investment have more or less been closed up in other parts of the world, but that will disappear when peace is announced and competitive borrowing and the demand for capital will increase. Now is our opportunity. Germany will be trying to borrow in the United States, and will enter into competition with us because, remember, we shall have to borrow in the United States when peace is established to enable us to refund and properly finance ourselves for some time to come. As an intending borrower going to the United States, surely we should get our finances in good order now so that we
  1304
  shall stand better and be able to command the best terms and to borrow on very much more favourable terms than we are doing at present. I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his clear and frank method of meeting our criticism, and I would ask him to give to the views which have been submitted to him his most favourable consideration.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: While I am sure there is no difference of opinion with regard to the desirability of consolidating our loans as soon as possible, surely everyone must disagree with the hon. Member (Mr. Mason) in thinking this is a time when that is possible. We have just had an advance in the Bank rate. With a 6 per cent. Bank rate it would be the height of lunacy to attempt to consolidate debt and, large though it is, it is a satisfactory feature in the debt that the right hon. Gentleman is able to tell the House that so large a proportion is in one-year bills and not three or six months', which constituted so great a proportion of it in the past. That has arisen, no doubt, from the fact that certain people prefer that form of investment who may invest again after the year has expired, but it was also, no doubt, largely encouraged by the very handsome rate which is paid. But do not let the House forget that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was forced to raise his rates. He had reduced the rates on Treasury Bills when the Money Market permitted him to do so. He had the fullest advantage of that reduction in the plethora of short money which was then available, and if he has been compelled to go to 5 per cent., 5½ per cent., and 6 per cent. rates of discount, he has done it for the best of reasons, that the Money Market more or less compelled him to do so.
  Mr. MASON: Issues have been brought out in peace time and in war time at rates lower than the Bank of England rates of discount. I gave one instance of the New South Wales Loan. It does not depend entirely on the Bank of England rate of discount.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: Issues of bonds are one thing and issues of bills are another. No doubt it is perfectly true that at present New South Wales is borrowing at 5½ per cent. No doubt the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when ho, comes to borrow, is confident that he can borrow at much less than that. It is cheaper to pay 6 per cent. now if he can borrow a little later on at 5 per cent., than to borrow

  1305
  just now at a higher rate. What the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Hall) appeared entirely to ignore was the fact that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has so strongly enlarged upon, namely, that he is governed by his foreign necessities and his foreign commitments. That is the important part of the situation. What is the good of comparing this country with Germany? Germany's foreign commitments are very small. They are self-supporting, they produce their own munitions, their own guns, and their own everything, and they grow a very great part of their own food. That is an internal question. If we had only an internal financial situation to deal with the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be in a bed of roses, but he has a foreign situation to deal with. That is the factor which governs the whole situation, and it cannot be ignored by anyone, and certainly the Chancellor has every excuse and reason for taking up the attitude he did to-day and in making the statement he did on the rates he is paying. I hope the increase in the Bank rate is only a temporary measure. It had an immediate effect anyhow. It saved the situation when it was put on. We do not know whether the situation would not have saved itself, but the immediate effect was that gold was not withdrawn from this country, as it threatened to be, and our position is to that extent all the stronger. I could not follow the calculation of my hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Hall) when he said that 6¾ per cent. discount was equivalent to a gross return of 8½ per cent. Does he think no Income Tax is paid?
  Colonel HALL: I was particularly careful to say that Treasury Bills which are held by foreigners who pay no Income Tax whatever yield 8½ per cent.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: Doubtless they do, but that does not meet what my hon. and gallant Friend said all the same, because the gentleman who holds these foreign bills has to pay internal taxation, where there is Income Tax, and therefore it is not a fair analogy.
  Colonel HALL: It is perfectly right, though.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: I do not think so. There is a Dutch tax or a Swedish tax, and therefore it is not the equivalent of what the hon. and gallant Gentleman said
  1306
  it was. I was particularly interested in the last part of the Chancellor's speech when he told us what the estimated income of the country was, what the estimated capital resources were, and what relation that bore to the debt which we expected to be accumulated against us on 31st March next. He put it truly when he said that a man with £5,000 a year would not seriously feel the burden of a debt of £5,000. Of course he would not, but there is one point about that on which the State differs from an individual. The £5,000 a year is liquid money out of which he can pay the debt and our capital assets are not altogether liquid. That brings me to the point I want to make. Everything depends in this matter on the position we take up after the War with regard to the organisation of our industries and of our whole position. We have to create credit in some sort of way, no doubt through the operations of banking, through the co-ordination of our capital and the comparative ease with which advances can be made by bankers. The whole thing depends on that—upon our treating this £2,600,000,000 of debt as part of the capital invested in the productive industries of this country. If you treat it, apart altogether from the very interesting treatment of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as capital in addition to the money at present invested, and if you organise those industries properly, if the Government does not stand aside, as it did before, but rather takes a leaf from the German book and assists industry in every way and encourages individual effort and co-operative effort and all that sort of thing—if they see that every possible facility is rendered to the traders in order to increase productivity, I have no fear whatever of that £2,600,000,000 of debt yielding a very large income to this country and very soon liquidating itself. It all depends on that, and I am glad to think that on all hands we are leaving aside our past controversies. I was never a very keen Tariff Reformer at all, and I am not talking of Tariff Reform now, but I am thinking far more of organisation and encouragement, far more of the use of the power and influence of the State and the support of the State in helping individual effort and co-operative effort to so increase production in this country, because it all depends on production. We shall find that this £2,600,000,000, a large part of which has undoubtedly been

  1307
  wasted in the past, will be more productive than anyone can possibly expect, and will not be a very serious burden in the future.
  Mr. BRYCE: I do not think the hon. Baronet would find any very large number of people in the City to agree with him that the piling up of floating debt is not at present a danger.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: I did not say it was not a danger. I said we all agreed that it is unfortunate to have too large a floating debt.
  Mr. BRYCE: I do not agree with the hon. Baronet. I think a better means might be found of raising money than the method which the Chancellor of the Exchequer adopts. My right hon. Friend described quite truly the attractiveness of the Treasury Bond method, but it has another advantage which has not been alluded to at all, and that is, that it does not really pay Income Tax at all. I am perfectly aware that my right hon. Friend says it does pay Income Tax, and he quoted a Section of the Act of 1832, but that is his interpretation of the Section. It does not follow that the Law Courts would give the same interpretation, and, as a matter of fact, the Commissioners of Income Tax hold that Income Tax is not payable on Exchequer Bonds. Of course, a certain amount of it pays Income Tax. What goes into the coffers of discount owners and bankers and actually contributes to their profit does pay in a sense, but suppose a discount owner holds £100,000 of Treasury Bills and he has a loss in his business. He pays no Income Tax at all on the Treasury Bills. The same thing applies to all bankers and all commercial institutions which deal in money, and which theoretically pay Income Tax on the Treasury Bills. As for the private holders, I am perfectly certain that not one in a hundred pays Income Tax. The Chancellor of the Exchequer says a very large amount of private money has gone into these bills. Certainly, in the course of the last two months a very large amount has gone. People are told they have to pay Income Tax, but they go to the lawyer and he says no, and they do not pay it. Curiously enough it was expected that my right hon. Friend would introduce legislation this year to make it clear, but he did not do it because he was very much afraid that if he did he would stop traffic and would not be able to sell
  1308
  any more bills. All this question of raising money appears to depend largely upon the way of making most attractive this form of investment. At the present moment the Treasury Bill is the most attractive form of investment, but what does the Chancellor of the Exchequer get out of it? It costs 6⅜ per cent. nominally, and Income Tax at 5 per cent. reduces the net return to 4¾ per cent. or 4⅜ per cent. I did not follow the hon. Baronet and the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Hall) in their 8½ per cent.
  Colonel HALL: It cost the country 4¼ per cent.
  Mr. BRYCE: No. Five shillings Income Tax is 1½ per cent. One and half from 6⅜ leaves 4⅞.
  Sir G. YOUNGER: Five shillings Income Tax is 2½ per cent.
  Mr. BRYCE: If my right hon. Friend were to issue five-year Bonds free of Income Tax do not tell me he would not be able to borrow as much money as he liked at 4¼ per cent. He would. It is the uncertainty that makes people doubt about funded loans and about Exchequer Bonds. They do not sell Exchequer Bonds now except at a discount. There is no market for them, because you can always get an Exchequer Bond by going to the Bank of England. No one can sell them. A seller has to pay brokerage and so on, and find a buyer. The result is that an Exchequer Bond is not worth 5 per cent. in the market. It is practically unmarketable. But a 4¼ per cent. Bond without Income Tax would be a splendid saleable thing. A man would know that at the end of five years, or whatever the term was, he would get his money intact, and he would know exactly where he stood, and that is what no one knows with regard to any of the Government investments at present in the market. They do not know where they stand and what it is going to be worth after the War is over. I recommend not what the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Hall) recommended—an Income Tax paying security with the payment spread over a certain time—though that is a good idea in itself—but I recommend a non-Income Tax paying security. As regards Income Tax, the Chancellor of Exchequer is limited to a certain amount, and as regards Exchequer Bonds he will not deduct Income Tax at the source. He is getting on.

  1309
  I want him to declare that in the next quasi-funding Bill which he issues will be a security which will not pay Income Tax, and will not depreciate. What is the position of other securities? The 3½ per cent. stands at 8 per cent. discount, and the 4½ per cent. at 4 per cent. discount. For Exchequer Bonds there is no market. Treasury Bills are renewable at a discount. If you want to get your money you do not get it on a Treasury Bill. What the country wants is a security of a certain value. That is one reason why the War Savings Certificates have not gone as well as we would have liked. The amount of War Savings Certificates issued is about £14,000,000. It looked like an attractive investment. You have not got at the working classes, for whom these certificates were designed. You have got at people like the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury). I do not know whether he has done it, but I know of lots of people who have done it, who are in as good a position as the hon. Baronet, rich people, who have taken up to the amount of £500. The working man does not see the benefit of it. He is offered for his 15s. 6d. £1 in five years' time. He does not understand that. He wants income, and he will not take it in that way. If the Financial Secretary to the Treasury will inquire, he will find that of the amount of War Savings Certificates issued very little has gone to the working classes. A certain amount has gone in schemes introduced by banks, insurance companies, and others for inducing their staffs to take these War Savings Certificates. I know of one bank which has invested £40,000 on behalf of its staff. That is a capital thing; but out of the total amount of £14,000,000 up to 5th August, I think the Financial Secretary to the Treasury will find nothing like one million has been taken by the working classes. What they want is a 4½ per cent. interest investment of the nature of the Savings Bank interest, something that they can go and draw when they want. You will not get the working classes to come forward with their money by any of the ingenious dodges devised by the Treasury.
  Sir F. BANBURYmade an observation which was inaudible in the Reporter's Gallery.
  Mr. BRYCE: I think that is quite possible. There is another question. Have the Government been paying too much? I find considerable difficulty in coming to a
  1310
  conclusion with regard to that. I think on the whole they have paid too much. I do not say that at any particular moment it may be said they have paid too much. Three Months' Treasury Bills at present are worth 5½ per cent. You can go to the Bank of England and get three months' Treasury Bills at 5½ per cent. discount. I know that to-day in America Bank Bills were preferred at 5⅜. I know that an offer was made to-day by a bank of Treasury Bills at 5½ per cent., and Bank Bills at 5⅜ per cent., and they took the Bank Bills at 5⅜. That surprised me. It does not look as if the credit of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in Treasury Bills was so extraordinarily brilliant in America as against Bank Bills. Of course, that is only a momentary position. Looking at the whole position generally, I think it will be seen that we have been and are paying too much. What is the value of day-to-day money in America to-day? Two and a half per cent. In Paris day-to-day money is worth 3 per cent., in Rome 4 per cent. I do not know the price in Holland, but I think it is 3½ or 4 per cent. We are paying 5½ and 6 per cent. interest when money in all these other centres is worth very much less. I think an artificial value of money has been created in England. It is largely created by the necessity we have of maintaining a free market for gold. We are financing our Allies, and I think it is a most extraordinary thing that two of our Allies are hoarding gold. I presume there are bargains made with these Allied countries with regard to our getting advantages for the financial facilities we are giving them, apart from the general support they are giving in the War by fighting for the Allies. I suppose there are some financial advantages. Two of these countries whom we are financing, Russia and France, have got enormous stocks of gold. France has £200,000,000 and Russia has £200,000,000. What in the name of wonder is the use of these hundreds of millions of gold to these two countries? They say it is to maintain their credit after the War. Their credit now is not being maintained by themselves, but it is being maintained by us. We are paying. Why in the world do not they give us some of that gold at a pinch? What is the use of gold except at a pinch? What is the use of bank reserves except at a pinch? Suppose we locked up in a fortress like Spandau one hundred millions of gold. Should we keep

  1311
  it there like the talent in the napkin mentioned in the Scriptures, and make no use of it? No! We should certainly put it out. When you want your reserves is when the pinch comes. Here these other people are storing up their gold and doing nothing with it. If they gave us 50,000,000 or 100,000,000 of gold it would make an enormous difference in the financial position. I think it is a monstrous thing that while we are financing these countries two of them who are storing gold do not give us any assistance to help us in this gold difficulty. I wish the Chancellor of the Exchequer would impress upon these countries the necessity of doing this. I do not think we have had from Russia and France put together more than 20,000,000 of gold. We want the gold during the War. I do not believe that their having 200,000,000 of gold at the end of the War will make the slightest difference to their credit. I do strongly impress upon the Government the necessity of doing something in this matter.
  7.0 P.M.
  I cannot help thinking that the position of the floating debt is a dangerous thing. It is all very well for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to say there are permanent investments, and so on, and that the bills will be all right. How does he know? Suppose there is bad news? Suppose there is a defeat? He might not find it easy to get his maturing bills renewed. With respect to currency notes, the position has become quite different from what it was in the past. In the old days I did not think there was much danger. Now the currency notes have become a danger, because they are part of the body of floating debt. I do not quite agree with the hon. Member (Mr. D. Mason). He said there was £127,000,000 of them. He ought to have deducted the gold held against them, which amounts to £28,000,000. Therefore the amount of floating debt involved in these notes is at present £99,000,000. That added to the £856,000,000, which is the exact figure of Treasury Bills, or was on 5th August, makes a floating debt of £955,000,000, or nearly £1,000,000,000 of pure floating debt. If you add the short-term loans of £345,000,000, you get a total floating debt of over £1,300,000,000. If you add to that the funded debt, old Consols, annuities, War Loan, etc., amounting to £1,252,345,000, you get a total debt of
  1312
  about £2,554,000,000 at the present time. With regard to what the position is going to be at the end of 1916, I cannot help thinking that the right hon. Gentleman is unduly optimistic. I calculate, allowing for all the remedies which are going to be adopted, that the amount of floating debt outstanding will be very much larger than he thinks it is going to be. It is of the greatest interest to this country that we should see its finances put into a sound condition, and, if possible, the immense amount of floating debt greatly reduced.
  Sir JOSEPH WALTON: There is no subject of greater importance than the policy of war finance. The hon. Member who has just spoken gave some startling figures towards the close of his speech, but I would like to take a somewhat different view. The deficits for the two years ending 31st of March next are £2,545,000,000. Towards that we have £600,000,000 Loan, £50,000,000 Loan, and £312,000,000 of Exchequer Bonds. That is a total of £962,000,000. Therefore, we have to find no less than £1,583,000.000 to clear us to the 31st of March next. Towards that we have War Savings Certificates £15,500,000, and War Expenditure Bonds £17,500,000—that is £33,000,000—reducing the amount undealt with to £1,550,000,000. When I say undealt with, I mean undealt with in a permanent fashion. Towards that we have issued short-dated Treasury Bills to the amount of £860,000,000, and after setting aside those altogether we still have to raise, either by loan or by a further issue of Treasury Bills, a further sum of £700,000,000 to clear us to the 31st of March next, or, with the Treasury Bills already issued, £1,550,000,000. The question is, if the policy which has recently been pursued continues to be pursued and no long-dated loan is issued, we may ultimately be face to face with the fact that we owe £1,550,000,000 on short-dated Treasury Bills. That would, indeed, place us in a very serious financial position.
  I am able to congratulate the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the remarkable strength and buoyancy that the country has shown so far, and it must have been a source of deep gratification and some amazement to some of us that the financial position has been found to be so absolutely sound. There is no question of our ability to finance the War, but what I want is that we should finance the War on lines that will enable us to raise the

  1313
  money at the least cost to the taxpayers of this country, and will also leave us in a position to go in for trade and commercial development at the end of the War to the fullest possible extent. If £1,550,000,000 ultimately becomes a floating debt on short-dated Treasury Bills and the end of the War appears in sight, what will happen? The greater part of the people holding those £1,550,000,000 of Treasury Bills will want the payment of their money, when it becomes due, for commercial extension and development, the purchase of new ships to replace the great losses which we have had, and for promoting our general economic recovery. I should be sorry if we ever drifted into the position that the Government of this country had to default—default only in the sense of deferring payment—and had to say to the holders of their Treasury Bills that they could not pay them then. That is a most undesirable position. If the Government were not in a position to pay off those £1,550,000,000 and had to go to the holders of these Treasury Bills and arrange for a renewal of them when the holders wished to have them paid and use the money for commercial and other reasons, that would be a sorry position into which to let this country drift. Therefore I have advocated for some time past that we ought to raise by long-dated loans a substantial portion of the cost of this War.
  If this had been done nine months ago there is no question that a loan could have been issued successfully for a large amount at a lower rate of interest than it is likely to be raised at in the near future, or whenever, it is raised. The fact that we are already paying for twelve months Treasury Bills 6⅜ per cent. whether or not they are subject to Income Tax, certainly debars us from having any hope of raising a long-date loan at the same rate as that at which we could have raised it nine months ago, and I think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be well advised, and it would be the soundest financial policy in this country, if at the earliest suitable opportunity a big loan were issued. We do not want in this country to have a compulsory loan, but if we drift along on the lines on which we are going, piling up this huge floating debt of short-dated Treasury Bills, it may become absolutely necessary to have either a compulsory loan or a compulsory renewal of Treasury Bills. Both,
  1314
  to my mind, would be equally objectionable to the spirit of this country, which has been prepared financially and otherwise, and is still prepared to make every possible sacrifice that is necessary to enable us to achieve the triumph that we must have in this War. I think that this has been a most useful and informing Debate. It was high time that we had this matter of the methods by which we are going to finance the War, whether by short-date or long-late loans, threshed put in this House, and we owe a debt to the hon. Baronet who raised this discussion for having secured this opportunity to the Committee. There is no doubt whatever as to our ability to finance the War, however long it lasts, but that is no reason why we should not endeavour to do it on lines which will impose the least cost on the taxpayers of this country, and will leave us in a position to have that enormous commercial expansion and economic development which we shall need at the end of the War to restore real and lasting prosperity to the country.
  Mr. SAMUEL SAMUEL: I have spoken on the subject of Treasury Bills before, and I pointed out the great danger which the country runs in accumulating a large floating debt, which may have to be met at Very short notice. The Chancellor of the Exchequer told me, and he was correct in saying so, that I did not represent the banking and the commercial houses in the City of London; but I told him then that I have been engaged in business and was in contact daily with the banking interests and the commercial interests. There is a great difference between the commercial and the banking interests, and I believe that I am correct in saying that the Chancellor of the Exchequer acts almost entirely on the advice of the banking interests of this country. They mix up two things with these Treasury Bills. They mix up the question of raising money for the purpose of carrying on the War, and we have been told in this House and we have been told in the City over and over again that the other object of these Treasury Bills is to regulate the exchanges in the different markets of the world. I do not wish to say anything offensive against the great bankers of this country, but I may point out that there are very few, if any, of them, who, before the War, had had any experience at all as to exchange in international business, and the consequence is that they have made blunders in the way

  1315
  in which they have manipulated the rates which the Government have had to pay for borrowing the money.
  We commenced at the beginning of the War with a Loan at 3½ per cent. There was no difficulty in raising that loan. The amount was £850,000,000. As I pointed out to the Chancellor of the Exchequer before, the Bank of England, presumably acting in conjunction with the Treasury, put' up the Bank rate and sold Treasury Bills over the counter at 4½ per cent. That was not an unreasonable rate of interest to pay seeing the enormous demands that the Government was making on the country, but without any reason at all the Government set to work, and in the City of London we were alarmed to see that without notice—I pointed this out before—the rate for Treasury Bills raised and the bills put on the market at a very much higher level. The hon. Baronet the Member for Ayr Burghs (Sir G. Younger) said that the Government were compelled to pay 6 per cent, for the Treasury Bills which they had just issued. There is nobody connected with the City of London, outside perhaps the Bank of England and one or two large joint stock banks, who will agree with that opinion. The whole circumstances were well known to those houses which are in constant communication with different parts of the world. In the New York market there were certain negotiations going on. The English Government had to renew certain bills, and the French Government were negotiating a loan, and the consequence was that, pending those negotiations, the rates in the United States were advanced. The Bank of England, knowing little of international commerce, were afraid that they were going to lose gold. They do not appreciate the conditions of war, at least, judging from the way the finance has been carried on. They thought that the methods which were adopted in peace to attract gold to this country would act at the present time. The Bank of England, without knowing the reason of the advance of money in the United States, immediately raised their rates by 1 per cent., compelling the Treasury, if they wanted to issue new Treasury Bills, to give the Bank rate.
  Now we have seen throughout every operation which has taken place a desire to control the Money Market in this country. The hon. Member on the Front
  1316
  Bench opposite pointed out the low rates which are prevalent in Paris, Amsterdam, New York, Stockholm—everywhere but in this country. Why is that? Because the Government of this country have taken it into their heads to control the Money Market of Great Britain, thinking that by that they could control the Money Market of the world. We have been a great factor in the finance of the world, but at the present time, when we have lost our power of commerce, which the Government, of course, knows little or nothing about, we have lost the power to control the finance of the world, or at least the rates which money obtains in the different markets. The Government will realise that, with imports enormously against them, having virtually stopped the exports of this country, and having stopped international commerce by which were affected the exchanges on which different parts of the world have to rely, even with their action in regard to securities, it will be difficult for them to maintain any fixed rate of exchange in any part. In reference to the Treasury Bills which they are putting in circulation, the Chancellor of the Exchequer has presumably analysed them to see where the money is coming from. We know perfectly well that at the outbreak of war this country had been doing an enormous commerce, that we had debts owing to us all over the world, and that trade having stopped a great deal of that money is coming back to this country in different forms. We know that we have lost a large number of steamers and vessels which have been torpedoed, and we know that there are various directions in which money used to be invested which are stopped at the present time. The money which would have been so used is, to a large extent, the money that is being put into Treasury Bills. We know that there are certain sums coming from neutral countries, owing by this country, that are in Treasury Bills. That is always a danger, because the Government know that, so far as neutral countries are concerned, that they may withdraw the support that they have given to our exchange. I know of one instance where the people of a neutral country, friendly to us, have agreed to leave the money in Treasury Bills until after the War. After the War we have to expect a great extension of our trade. I would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer is he going to wait to float a permanent loan until the War is over

  1317
  when we know that there will be a demand from all sides, that our merchants will require facilities to take up the trade that has been lying dormant, and that the shipowners will be withdrawing their money for the construction of ships?
  The Government will find, I do not doubt for a moment, all the money that they want, but instead of being able to get it as they would have got it, at a reasonable price, they will have to pay what is called "through the nose" for any financial accommodation they require. We see before us the time when there may be a financial crisis in this country if our liabilities are allowed to accumulate in the proportion in which they are accumulating at the present time. There is not the least doubt that, had the Government taken the course of raising a permanent loan, our financial position would have been very much better than it is at the present time. Had the Government not tried to control the Money Market by manipulating the Bank rate, and doing a most outrageous thing for the express purpose of driving up the price of money, we should not have seen that 6 per cent. Bank rate. Had the Government consulted the merchants of this country, who are used, to carrying on international commerce, they probably would have been able to save themselves some of the alarm which they have experienced in regard to the question of exchange. I know perfectly well that measures could have been taken in the first twelve months or so of the War which would have steadied exchange without having to resort to means which the Government adopted, or rather, probably, were advised to adopt; and I am perfectly certain that I am expressing the wish and the opinion of commercial men, if not the banking community entirely, in saying that they would like to see the debt of the country, as at present expressed in Treasury Bonds and short-dated bills, put into a loan for as long a period as possible, so that we shall be in a position to further continue this War, and raise the money we may require, and shall require, without difficulty and without having to resort to a forced loan. We undoubtedly shall have to receive assistance from the Government in regard to currency. I pointed out to the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer and to the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, on a former Budget, that it was of no use thinking we could see this War through and pay
  1318
  everything in gold, because we cannot do it. In regard to the Treasury Bills which are in circulation, how much gold have they to redeem them with, if they are asked to redeem them? Under these circumstances it is of no use flattering ourselves that the whole of our liabilities can be redeemed in gold, and the sooner the Government realise the position in which they are placing the finances of this country, and the sooner they take the matter seriously in hand, the better it is going to be for the country while carrying on the War, and when we are in competition with Other countries in the markets of the world after the War.
  Sir J. D. REES: The praises passed on the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which are so thoroughly well deserved, make me all the more regret that I feel called upon to point out one or two blemishes, in an otherwise praiseworthy record, or, at any rate, take into account certain points of administrative action. I shall be very brief, because I have already communicated with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the subject. I showed him, and he admitted that, so far as the existing law as regards excess profits is concerned, a firm may make £50,000 one year profit, and lose £50,000 another year. Nevertheless, they will have to pay on excess profits £5,000, because of the provision in the last Finance Act, and because of the fact of the 50 and 60 per cent. calculation in different years. I say nothing more upon that subject beyond the passing statement of the case. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has most courteously answered the letters I have sent him, and has stated that he will endeavour to set it right another time. But that will be too late. What is to prevent his issuing instructions now?
  The CHAIRMAN: The Chancellor of the Exchequer cannot give instructions contrary to the Act. We are in Committee of Supply, and we cannot deal with questions of legislation.
  Sir J. D. REES: I am well acquainted with the fact that we cannot deal with matters of legislation, but I would submit that it is competent for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to issue instructions to his subordinates which would lead to the removal of this hardship, because the construction of the law is not certain, and it is possible that it might be so construed so as not to have the result which I have stated. Therefore, I submit that it would

  1319
  be competent for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to issue such instructions. I do not wish, however, to argue the point further, but I would urge upon the right hon. Gentleman that, if he can issue such instructions, in common justice he ought to do so. I believe he could do it by administrative instructions, and, so far as I am aware, no legislation is needed to deal with the case. I now deal with the case of the Income Tax collected here from persons resident in England, but deriving their incomes from capital in America. A person has property there, and pays on the three years basis. In reply to the urgent call of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that person, like a patriot, sends home part of his capital, in order to facilitate exchange, to meet the present financial position, and to save the country, and he pays the Income Tax on that capital, which he invests in Government securities here. While he is paying Income Tax here on that portion of the capital he has sent home, and invested in War Stocks, he nevertheless has to pay the full, or only less than full, rate in America, because he is charged under the three years rule. I have put this case before, but I have received no answer, and I take this opportunity, without going into it further, of bringing it before the right hon. Gentleman. If he cares to look up the Debates on the point he will see that I fully stated the case on a former occasion. I trust he will be good enough to look it up, and see whether or not it can be dealt with. I fully believe it can, and without legislation. The only other matter to which I wish briefly to refer is the commission to brokers in connection with War Savings Certificates. The Chancellor of the Exchequer says that we must pay the bankers commission, but we need not pay the brokers, who bring in only small amounts. When a man may not be making his luncheons by his profession, he does object very much that he should not have his little bit of commission on his business, small though it may be. The broker procures money in small sums which in the aggregate is not so large, perhaps, as the bankers bring in, but I cannot see any essential justice in not giving the broker his percentage of commission as well as the banker, and I submit to the right hon. Gentleman that in a matter of this sort this injustice should be remedied, and
  1320
  there should be little adjustments made in regard to the matters to which I have referred.
  Mr. HOHLER: I desire to raise a very short point, though one of great interest, which has already been referred to by the right hon. Member for the City of London (Sir F. Banbury). I want, however, to raise it in a somewhat different form, and I trust that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury will give me an answer. Under the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1915, for the first time, by Section 22 of that Act, agricultural land was put under the full assessment instead of a third. Had it not been for that Act the occupier would have only been taxed on a third of his assessment. Section 20 (b) of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1915, provides as follows:
  "An assessment of any such Income Tax not already made shall be made for an amount exceeding by 20 per cent, that for which it would have been made if this Act had not passed."
  I contend that those words clearly mean that the Treasury have no right, as they are at present seeking to do, to charge 20 per cent. on the two-thirds increased assessment. This is a matter of great importance to the country, and I am sure the Government would not wish to take money which the Act does not give to them. Before that Finance Act was passed all that the occupier of land was liable to pay was upon one-third of the assessment. Section 22 of the Finance Act of 1915 provides:
  "Sections twenty-six and twenty-seven of the Finance Act, 1896 shall as respects Income Tax under Schedule B have effect as if references to one-third of the annual value were references to the annual value."
  The Treasury are claiming, without any right of any sort or kind, to add the 20 per cent, to the two-thirds additional assessment which they are empowered to make by the Section I have just quoted. They could not make the assessment if the Act had not passed, and could not make the farmers liable for the additional two-thirds. I may be very wrong and stupid, but I have looked into the matter very carefully. The point concerns me as an executor and trustee, and therefore I am deeply interested not to go wrong on it. It is also a matter which is most important to the whole agricultural community.

  1321
  Assuming I am wrong on the point I have made, there is another point I wish to submit. Parliament only gave authority to make provision for the last six months of the then current year, while the Treasury are charging 20 per cent, for the period of twelve months. Thus, say, on a sovereign the 20 per cent. would be 4s. for the twelve months, while I contend it should only be 2s. on the sovereign, which would represent the charge for six months. I rely most strongly on my first point that they have no right to make this charge at all, and if I am right in that contention the second point does not, of course, arise. But, even if they are entitled to make the charge, I submit they can only do so for the six months with which Parliament dealt. I would ask the Financial Secretary to give a clear and distinct answer on the point, which is one of such importance to the agricultural community, who have been badly hit over their wool.
  Mr. OUTHWAITE: The matters raised by the hon. Baronet (Sir C. Henry) seem to me to be of first class importance. I listened to the reply of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and to my mind he did not meet the hon. Baronet on one single point. I should not have risen except to enter a protest against the tone of the Chancellor of the Exchequer's reply—a tone of what I may call undue optimism and almost of levity in regard to the matter before us. He argued that it was unnecessary at the moment to meet what seems to me is the very grave crisis which has arisen through this enormous piling up of these short-dated securities by saying, "Look at what our position will be at the end of the financial year in March. Our war debt will then only be £3,400,000,000, whereas our national income is £2,700,000,000, and really what does it matter? It is scarcely a matter worthy of our attention, or of any concern." I think that is altogether a wrong point of view for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take up. Whatever view we may take with regard to the War or the objects of the War, the debt must determine very largely the future of the country. We should hope to have a Chancellor regarding with the greatest concern every question in connection with that debt, because unless it is so you will have extravagant expenditure and the national interest will not be conserved. What I was looking for from him was an explanation in reply to the opinion of every authority, bankers and others as to the action he has taken or non-action, and he provided no
  1322
  explanation whatsoever about the bankers opinion that these debts should be funded. Why is it that he does not do so? There can be only one reason, and that is that he does not think that he can get the money at what he thinks to be a fair rate of interest. It can only be that he thinks that at this juncture he will be held up to ransom by the financiers and compelled to pay a higher rate than he thinks should be paid in the national interest or that it is fair should be paid. There can be no other reason except that he hopes for an early termination of the War, and that then he will be in better circumstances than to-day. I am rather doubtful as to the wisdom of that point of view. I think it is more likely that he would be able to raise the money under favourable circumstances during the time of war, when we are spending these gigantic sums, than in the time that will come with the cessation of hostilities. Be that as it may, if the Chancellor considers that he should adopt the view so widely expressed that the floating debt should be funded, and that he cannot through administrative methods float his loan at a reasonable rate, then I say he should come down and ask for such powers as have been suggested by several speakers, including the hon. Baronet. By your ruling, Sir, we are not able to discuss the suggestion of a forced or compulsory loan, but I hope that the Chancellor will come to the House and not allow this vast accumulation of floating debts to proceed.
  Sir C. HENRY: I am certain that every Member of the House was pleased to hear the satisfactory statement of the Chancellor as regards the financial affairs of the country. Personally I have never had any doubt, and I have none now, of the fact that, however long the War may last, that the national position is assured. I do not think, however, that the Chancellor quite answered the point I endeavoured to raise, and which is the gravamen of what I said—namely, that the manner in which he is borrowing money and financing by Treasury Bills is expensive, and should be put an end to as soon as possible. He also misunderstood me rather with reference to my criticism as regards the amount of Treasury Bills that were taken by neutrals. Neutral countries are buying those Treasury Bills, for which this country is paying an excessive rate of interest, and that could be avoided, I think, if more logical

  1323
  and rational means were found of obtaining the money necessary for our finances. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was very indignant at my suggestion that one of the reasons why he did not float a loan was that he was under a commitment to pay any more favourable terms on any future loan to the holders of the loan of June, 1915. Of course I was not criticising him personally. But I do not withdraw the criticism, because it is only reasonable that, in the interests of the Treasury and in the interests of the State, he should not be called upon to pay extra interest on the previous loan until he was absolutely obliged to do so. I think that on the whole we have every reason to be satisfied with the way the matters which have formed the chief subject of this Debate have been dealt with. I understand from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that he fully recognises the undesirability of these Treasury Bills mounting to a much larger figure than at present, and that he is prepared whenever the time is opportune to fund the Treasury Bills by issuing a loan. Tinder these conditions, I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Original Question again proposed.
  The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. McKinnon Wood): Perhaps I may now reply to various points which have been raised. The question of excess profits has been dealt with, and I do not think I need dwell on that. The next point was in regard to a man who brings capital over from America to invest in Government securities and finds that he has to pay Income Tax on those securities, while he is still paying in America. I cannot say that I am familiar with the position in America, that particular case, not having been brought to my notice. But it is evident that we are not in a position without legislation to exempt such a man from the Income Tax payable on investments here. The third point was in reference to paying brokerage to stockbrokers in regard to War Savings Certificates. The idea of these certificates was that they should be issued in the most convenient way possible, primarily through the Post Office, and that a brokerage should be given to bankers because they actually performed services, and assisted the Post Office in the issuing of these securities. No such case has been put forward in support of the claim of stockbrokers. The
  1324
  hon. and learned Member for Chatham (Mr. Hohler) raised exactly the same point as the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir F. Banbury) and supported it with the same arguments.
  Mr. HOHLER: I raised two points.
  Sir F. BANBURY: I thought that you could charge the 20 per cent. only for six months, and not for twelve. My hon. and learned Friend goes further, and says not only that you cannot charge it for twelve months, but that you cannot charge the 20 per cent. for six months.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: My hon. and learned Friend put before us a very elaborate argument to which I listened with great attention. I think he will appreciate that if this charge is, as he contends, illegal, and such a matter as may be brought up in the Courts to be tested, it would be exceedingly hazardous and rash for me to attempt to enter into a legal argument.
  Mr. HOHLER: May I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to Section 34 of the Finance Act, 1916!
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: The point is that the Inland Revenue authorities do not agree with the interpretation of my hon. and learned Friend.
  Mr. HOHLER: Then why amend the law? You have it right for the current year, but that will not do for the past.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: My point is that if it is a question of such legal nicety, I do not think my hon. and learned Friend will expect me to enter into a legal argument. It is a matter upon which my legal advisers do not agree with my hon. and learned Friend, and I think he must excuse me from entering into an argument on the subject. There is only one further point. I think it was a fallacious argument to say that because Treasury Bills bear interest at 6⅜ per cent., and no Income Tax is payable, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is paying 8½ per cent. As a matter of fact, the great difficulty at the present moment is to deal with the question of foreign exchange. Though it may be quite true that you can raise money in this country so that the ultimate cost to the State is a great deal less than 6⅜ per cent., it does not follow that you are entitled to add the taxes, thereby arriving at the figure of 8½ per cent., and say that the raising

  1325
  of the money costs the Treasury 8½ per cent. If it is looked at from that point of view, I think the criticism entirely falls to the ground.
  Original Question put, and agreed to.

  INSURANCE AND LABOUR EXCHANGE BUILDINGS, GREAT BRITAIN.—Class I.
  Resolved, "That a supplementary sum, not exceeding £95,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, in respect of Insurance and Labour Exchange Buildings, Great Britain."
  HARBOURS UNDER THE BOARD OF TRADE.—Class I.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,431, 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, 1917, for maintaining certain Harbours under the Board of Trade, and for Grants in Aid of Harbours." [NOTE.—£5,000 has been voted on account.]
  PETERHEAD HARBOUR.—Class I.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £14,000, 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, 1917, for constructing a new Harbour of Refuge at Peterhead." [NOTE.—£8,000 has been voted on account.]
  RATES ON GOVERNMENT PROPERTY.—Class I.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £488,500, 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, 1917, for Rates and Contributions in lieu of Rates, etc., in respect of Government Property, and for Rates on. Houses occupied by Representatives of Forign Powers, and for the Salaries and Expenses of the Rating of Government Property Department, and for a Contribution towards the Expenses of the London Fire Brigade." [NOTE.—£420,000 has been voted on account.]

  PUBLIC WORKS AND BUILDINGS, IRELAND.—Class I.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £101,354, be granted to His Majesty, to
  1326
  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, 1917, for the Erection, Repairs, and Maintenance of Public Buildings in Ireland, for the Maintenance of certain Parks and Public Works, and for the Maintenance of Drainage Works on the River Shannon, and sundry Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£90,000 has been voted on account.]

  RAILWAYS, IRELAND.—Class I.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £41,867, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will comein course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for payments under the Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, 1883, etc., the Railways (Ireland) Act, 1896, the Marine Works (Ireland) Act, 1902, and for other purposes connected with Irish Railways." [NOTE.—£7,000 has been voted on account.]
  HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICES.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £22,288, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices of the House of Lords." [NOTE.—£20,000 has been voted on account.]
  HOUSE OF COMMONS.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £200,162, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the House of Commons." [NOTE.—£85,000 has been voted on account.]
  HOME OFFICE.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £166,801, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of His Majesty's Secretary of State for the Home Department and Subordinate Offices." [NOTE.—£100,000 has been voted on account.]
  FOREIGN OFFICE.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £36,271, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of His Majesty's Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs." [NOTE.—£30,000 has been voted on account.]
  PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £5,631, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council." [NOTE.—£5,000 has been voted on account.]
  BOARD OF TRADE.—ClaSS II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £180,011, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Committee of Privy Council for Trade and Subordinate Departments." [NOTE.—£180,000 has been voted on account.]
  MERCANTILE MARINE SERVICES.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £72,634, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of certain services transferred from the Mercantile Marine Fund, and other services connected with the Mercantile Marine, including Merchant Seamen's Fund Pensions." [NOTE.—£75,000 has been voted on account.]

  BANKRUPTCY DEPARTMENT OF THE BOARD OF TRADE.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £5, 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, 1917, for meeting the Deficiency of Income from Fees, etc., for the require-
  1328
  ments of the Board of Trade, under the Bankruptcy Act, 1914." [NOTE.—£4 has been voted on account.]

  CHARITY COMMISSION.—Claw II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £15,777, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Charity Commission for England and Wales." [NOTE.—£13,000 has been voted on account.]
  GOVERNMENT CHEMIST.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £15,383, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of the Government Chemist." [NOTE.—£11,000 has been voted on account.]
  CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £25,866, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Civil Service Commission." [NOTE.—£20,000 has been voted on account.]
  EXCHEQUER AND AUDIT DEPARTMENT.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £41,720, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of the Comptroller and Auditor General." [NOTE.—£26,000 has been voted on account.]
  FRIENDLY SOCIETIES REGISTRY.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £12,337, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Registry of Friendly Societies." [NOTE.—£10,000 has been voted on account.]
  BOARD OF CONTROL (MENTAL DEFICIENCY), ENGLAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £43,092, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Control (Lunacy and Mental Deficiency), England." [NOTE.—£40,000 has been voted on account.]
  THE MINT.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £46, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Mint, including the Expenses of Coinage, and for the Expenses of the preparation of Medals, Dies for Postage and other Stamps, and His Majesty's Seals." [NOTE.—£15 has been voted on account.]
  NATIONAL DEBT OFFICE.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £7,439, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National Debt Office." [NOTE.—£6,000 has been voted on account.]
  PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum not exceeding £12,995, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Public Record Office, and of the Office of Land Revenue Records and Inrolments." [NOTE.—£10,000 has been voted on account.]
  PUBLIC WORKS LOAN COMMISSION.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum not exceeding £4,000, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Establishment under the Public Works Loan Commissioners." [NOTE.—£4,000 has been voted on account.]
  REGISTRAR GENERAL'S OFFICE, ENGLAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £26,715, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of the Registrar General of Births, etc., in England." [NOTE.—£21,000 has been voted on account.]
  STATIONERY AND PRINTING.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £276,959, 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, 1917, for Stationery, Printing, Paper, Binding, and Printed Books for the Public Service; for the Salaries and Expenses of the Stationery Office; and for sundry Miscellaneous Services, including Reports of Parliamentary Debates."— [NOTE.—£750,000 has been voted on account.]
  OFFICE OF WOODS, FORESTS, AND LAND REVENUES.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £12,150, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses in the Office of His Majesty's Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues." [NOTE.—£10,000 has been voted on account.]
  SECRET SERVICE.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £320,000 (including a Supplementary sum of £300,000, 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, 1917, for His Majesty's Foreign and other Secret Services." [NOTE.—£180,000 has been voted on account.]

  HOUSEHOLD OF THE LORD LIEUTENANT OF IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,784, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and

  1331
  Expenses of the Household of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland." [NOTE.—£2,000 has been voted on account.]

  CHIEF SECRETARY FOE IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £13,447, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the offices of the Chief Secretary in Dublin and London, and of the Inspectors of Lunatic Asylums, and Expenses under the Inebriates Acts." [NOTE.—£11,000 has been voted on account.]
  DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNICAL INSTRUCTION, IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £73,170, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of Agriculture and other Industries and Technical Instruction for Ireland, and of the services administered by that Department, including sundry Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£75,000 has been voted on account.]
  CHARITABLE DONATIONS AND BEQUESTS, IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,243, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Commissioners of Charitable Donations and Bequests for Ireland." [NOTE.—£1,000 has been voted on account.]
  CONGESTED DISTRICTS BOARD FOR IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £105,750, 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, 1917, for the Congested Districts Board for Ireland, including sundry Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£64,000 has been voted on account.]

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD, IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £65,528, be granted to His Majesty, to com-
  1332
  plete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Local Government Board, Ireland, including sundry Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£50,000 has been voted on account.]

  PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £3,830, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Public Record Office in Ireland, and of the Keeper of State Papers in Dublin." [NOTE.—£3,000 has been voted on account.]
  PUBLIC WORKS OFFICE, IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £24,871, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Works in Ireland." [NOTE.—£18,000 has been voted on account.]
  REGISTRAR GENERAL'S OFFICE, IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £8,360, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of the Registrar-General of Births, etc., and for the Expenses of Collecting Emigration Statistics in Ireland." [NOTE.—£5,000 has been voted on account.]
  VALUATION AND BOUNDARY SURVEY, IRELAND.—Class II.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £14,672, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the General Valuation and Boundary Survey of Ireland." [NOTE.—£12,000 has been voted on account.]

  LAW CHARGES.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £35,038, be granted to His Majesty, to

  1333
  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, 1917, for the Salaries of the Law Officers' Department; the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of the Solicitor for the Affairs of His Majesty's Treasury and King's Proctor, and the Department of the Director of Public Prosecutions; for the Costs of Prosecutions, of other Legal Proceedings, and of Parliamentary Agency." [NOTE.—£50,000 has been voted on account.]

  MISCELLANEOUS LEGAL EXPENSES.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,404, 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, 1917, for certain Miscellaneous Legal Expenses, including Grants in Aid of the Expenses of the Incorporated Law Societies of England and Ireland." [NOTE.—£26,000 has been voted on account.]
  SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE AND COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £177,416, 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, 1917, for such of the Salaries and Expenses of the Supreme Court of Judicature and Court of Criminal Appeal as are not charged on the Consolidated Fund." [NOTE.—£150,000 has been voted on account.]
  LAND REGISTRY.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £23,147, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Land Registry. [NOTE.—£15,000 has been voted on account.]
  PUBLIC TRUSTEE.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £5, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of Public Trustee." [NOTE.—£5 has been voted on account.]
  COUNTY COURTS.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £65,174, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses connected with the County Courts." [NOTE.—£45,000 has been voted on account.]
  POLICE, ENGLAND AND WALES.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £58,282, 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, 1917, for the Salaries of the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioners of the Metropolitan Police, and of the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District, the Contribution towards the Expenses of the Metropolitan Police, the Salaries and Expenses of the Inspectors of Constabulary, and Expenses in connection with Special Constables and the Police Reserve." [NOTE.—£50,000 has been voted on account.]
  PRISONS, ENGLAND AND THE COLONIES.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £280,090, 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, 1917, for the Expenses of the Prisons in England, Wales, and the Colonies, including a Grant in Aid of certain Expenses connected with Discharged Prisoners." [NOTE.—£400,000 has been voted on account.]
  REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS, GREAT BRITAIN.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £165,384, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the office of the Inspector of Reformatories, and for the Maintenance of Juvenile Offenders in Reformatory, Industrial, and Day Industrial Schools, and in Places of Detention under the Children Act, in Great Britain." [NOTE.—£170,000 has been voted on account.]
  CRIMINAL LUNATIC ASYLUMS, ENGLAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £28,524, 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, 1917, for the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics in the Criminal Lunatic Asylums at Broadmoor and Rampton." [NOTE.—£24,000 has been voted on account.]
  REGISTER HOUSE, EDINBURGH.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £24,789, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Offices in His Majesty's General Register House, Edinburgh." [NOTE.—£17,000 has been voted on account.]

  PRISONS, SCOTLAND.—Class III.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £50,635, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Prison Commissioners for Scotland, and of the Prisons under their control, including the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics, Defectives, and Inmates of the State Inebriate Reformatory, and the Preparation of Judicial Statistics." [NOTE.—£50,000 has been voted on account.]
  Mr. HOGGE: Can the late Secretary for Scotland tell us whether it is true that the authorities in various parts of the country are taking away the prison warders who are trained particularly for the work of the prisons, and substituting for them soldiers, many of them certified as medically unfit, to do the work of the warders? Would it not be much better economy if these men, who are not accustomed to look after prisons and prisoners, were left to their own occupations, and the prison warders, who take a long time to train and who are particularly efficient men, were kept at their own work? It is understood that a big reduction has been made in these men.
  Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I am sorry I cannot give my hon. Friend any information. If he had given me notice I might have been prepared.
  Mr. HOGGE: I did not know that you were going to spend quite so much just now.
  Question put, and agreed to.

  PRISONS, SCOTLAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £50,635, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Prison Commissioners for Scotland, and of the Prisons under their control, including the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics, Defectives, and Inmates of the State Inebriate Reformatory, and the Preparation of Judicial Statistics." [NOTE.—£50,000 has been voted on account.]
  LAW CHARGES AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS, IRELAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £32,911, 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, 1917, for Criminal Prosecutions and other Law Charges in Ireland, including a Grant in relief of certain Expenses payable by Statute out of Local Rates." [NOTE.—£30,000 has been voted on account.]
  SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE AND OTHER LEGAL DEPARTMENTS IN IRELAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not; exceeding £67,570, 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, 1917, for such of the Salaries and Expenses of the Supreme Court of Judicature and certain other Legal Departments in Ireland as are not charged on the Consolidated Fund." [NOTE.—£45,000 has been voted on account.]

  IRISH LAND COMMISSION.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £433,918, 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

  1337
  day of March, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Irish Land Commission." [NOTE.—£320,000 has been voted on account.]

  COUNTY COURT OFFICERS, ETC., IRELAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £66,284, 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, 1917, for the Salaries, Allowances, and Expenses of various County Court Officers and of Magistrates in Ireland, and the Expenses of Revision." [NOTE.—£35,000 has been voted on account.]
  DUBLIN METROPOLITAN POLICE.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £39,293 (including a Supplementary sum of £100), 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Commissioner of Police, the Police Courts, and the Metropolitan Police Establishment of Dublin." [NOTE.—£55,000 has been voted on account.]
  ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £729,775 (including a Supplementary sum of £400), 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, 1917, for the Expenses of the Royal Irish Constabulary." [NOTE.—£650,000 has been voted on account.]
  PRISONS, IRELAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £65,190, 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, 1917, for the Expenses of the General Prisons Board in Ireland and of the Establishments under their control, the Registration of Habitual Criminals, and the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics confined in District Lunatic Asylums." [NOTE.—£45,000 has been voted on account.]

  REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS, IRELAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £49,788, be granted to His Majesty, to
  1338
  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, 1917, for the Expenses of Reformatory and Industrial Schools in Ireland." [NOTE.—£60,000 has been voted on account.]

  DUNDRUM CRIMINAL LUNATIC ASYLUM, IRELAND.—Class III.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £4,740, 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, 1917, for the Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics in the Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum, Ireland." [NOTE.—£4,000 has been voted on account.]

  BOARD OF EDUCATION.—Class IV.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £9,736,732, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Board of Education, and of the various Establishments connected therewith, including sundry Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£5,450,000 has been voted on account.]
  Mr. HOGGE: On that point, can anybody on the Front Bench tell us what arrangements are now being made in view of the resignation of the President, for the conduct of the Education Department?
  Question put, and agreed to.

  BRITISH MUSEUM.—Class IV.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £68,599, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and other Expenses of the British Museum, and of the Natural History Museum, including certain Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£60,000 has been voted on account.]

  NATIONAL GALLERY.—Class IV.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £6,489, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National Gallery, and of

  1339
  the National Gallery of British Art, Mill-bank." [NOTE.—£5,000 has been voted on account.]

  NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY.—Class IV.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,485, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National Portrait Gallery." [NOTE.—£2,000 has been voted on account.]
  WALLACE COLLECTION.—Class IV.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £2,591, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Wallace Collection." [NOTE.—£2,000 has been voted on account.]
  LONDON MUSEUM.—Class IV.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,570, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses in respect of the London Museum, Lancaster House." [NOTE.—£1,000 has been voted on account.]
  SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION, ETC.—Class IV.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £66,671, 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, 1917, for sundry Grants-in-Aid of Scientific Investigation, etc., and other Grants." [NOTE.—£55,000 has been voted on account.]
SCIENTIFIC INVESTIGATION, ETC.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £20,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for sundry Grants-in-Aid of Scientific Investigation, etc., and other Grants."

UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES, GREAT BRITAIN, AND INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION, WALES.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £211,200, be granted to His Majesty, to
1340
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, 1917, for Grants-in-Aid of the Expenses of certain Universities and Colleges in Great Britain, and of the Expenses under the Welsh Intermediate Education Act, 1889." [NOTE.—£110,000 has been voted on account.]

PUBLIC EDUCATION, IRELAND.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £832,704, 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, 1917, for the Expenses of the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland, including Grants-in-Aid of the Teachers' Pension Fund, Ireland." [NOTE.—£980,000 has been voted on account.]
INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION, IRELAND.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £40,000 be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for the Grant towards the Salaries of Teachers in Secondary Schools in Ireland."
ENDOWED SCHOOLS COMMISSIONERS, IRELAND.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £505, 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, 1917, for the Expenses of the Office of the Commissioners for managing certain School Endowments in Ireland." [NOTE.—£400 has been voted on account.]
NATIONAL GALLERY OF IRELAND.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £845, 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the National Gallery of Ireland." [NOTE.—£1,000 has been voted on account.]

SCIENCE AND ART, IRELAND.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £124,453, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the

1341
Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Institutions of Science and Art in Dublin and of the Geological Survey of Ireland, and Annual Grants to Schools and Classes of Science and Art and Technical Instruction, including sundry Grants-in-Aid, administered by the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction for Ireland." [NOTE.—£25,000 has been voted on account.]

UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES, IRELAND.—Class IV.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £59,000, 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, 1917, for Grants under The Irish Universities Act, 1908." [NOTE.—£55,000 has been voted on account.]
DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR SERVICES.—Class V.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £372,290, 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, 1917, for the Expenses in connection with His Majesty's Embassies, Missions, and Consular Establishments Abroad, and other Expenditure chargeable to the Consular Vote." [NOTE.—£310,000 has been voted on account.]
COLONIAL SERVICES.—Class V.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £506,197, 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, 1917, for sundry Colonial Services, including certain Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£120,000 has been voted on account.]
TELEGRAPH SUBSIDIES.—Class V.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £12,875, 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, 1917, for Subsidies to certain Telegraph Companies." [NOTE.—£16,000 has been voted on account.]
CYPRUS (GRANT IN AID).—Class V.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, 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, 1917, for a Grant in Aid of the Revenue of the Island of Cyprus." [NOTE.—£49,000 has been voted on account.]
SUPERANNUATION AND RETIRED ALLOWANCES.—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £455,694, 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, 1917, for Superannuation, Compensation, Compassionate, and Additional Allowances, and Gratuities under sundry Statutes, for Compassionate Allowances and Gratuities awarded by the Treasury, and for the Salaries of Medical Referees." [NOTE.—£380,000 has been voted on account.]
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £7,743, 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, 1917, for certain Miscel-cellaneous Expenses, including certain Charitable and other Allowances, Great Britain." [NOTE.—£12,866 has been voted on account.]
HOSPITALS AND CHARITIES, IRELAND.—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £778, 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, 1917, for Hospitals and Infirmaries, and certain Miscellaneous, Charitable, and other Allowances in Ireland, including sundry Grants-in-Aid." [NOTE.—£16,000 has been voted on account.]

TEMPORARY COMMISSIONS—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £2,000, 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

1343
day of March, 1917, for the Salaries and other Expenses of Temporary Commissions, Committees, and Special Inquiries." [NOTE.—£15,000 has been voted on account.]

REPAYMENTS TO THE LOCAL LOANS FUND.—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £3,219, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for making good certain sums written off from the Assets of the Local Loans Fund."
IRELAND DEVELOPMENT GEANT.—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £5,000, 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, 1917, for the Ireland Development Grant (Grant-in-Aid)." [NOTE. £180,000 has been voted on account.]
REPAYMENTS TO THE CIVIL CONTINGENCIES FUND.—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £27,311, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, to repay to the Civil Contingencies Fund certain Miscellaneous Advances."
HOSPITALS (SPECIAL GBANTS).—Class VI.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £10,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for Grants to Voluntary Hospitals in respect of Duty on Spirits."

OLD AGE PENSIONS.—Class VII.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £7,654,000, 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, 1917, for the payment of Old Age Pensions in the United Kingdom, and for certain Administrative Expenses in connection therewith." [NOTE.—£5,000,000 has been voted on account.]
Mr. HOGGE: Could we now have a reply from the Secretary to the Treasury in regard to what it is proposed to do to
1344
assist the old age pensioners who cannot exist on the Grants which this Report allows? The right hon. Gentleman knows the arguments. I think he promised that if any information could be given, he would give it. If he could give us that information I think it would be convenient to give it to us, and we should be very much obliged.
Mr. McKINNON WOOD: A Paper is being distributed to hon. Members to-day, and that Paper deals with the administrative concessions which are being made. The most important of these is the one which allows an old age pensioner to earn money up to quite a reasonable amount without forfeiting his pension.
Mr. HOGGE: Or his civil rights?
Mr. McKINNON WOOD: Of course, he will not forfeit his civil rights by working. That statement will be in the hands of Members immediately. I had a copy at Question Time. The other question as to the scale of pensions is a matter under consideration.
Question put, and agreed to.

LABOUR EXCHANGES AND UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE.—Class VII.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £618,282, 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, 1917, for the Salaries of the Staff and other Expenses of Labour Exchanges, including the Contribution to the Unemployment Insurance Fund and Repayments to Associations pursuant to Sections 85 and 106 of The National Insurance Act, 1911." [NOTE.—£300,000 has been voted on account.]

HIGHLANDS AND ISLANDS (MEDICAL SEBVICE) BOAED.—Class VII.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £42,135, 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 3st day of March, 1917, for the Expenses of the Highlands and Islands (Medical Service) Board, and for a Grant in Aid of the Highlands and Islands Medical Service." [NOTE.—£2,000 has been voted on account.]
Mr. HOGGE: Could my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland tell us

1345
what is happening now with regard to the Highlands and Islands Medical Service since the district has been taken as a military area? Can he say whether that makes any difference to the expedition with which doctors and nurses can reach families in the Highlands, and that, although the military can close this area, it does not interfere with the usual medical service?
Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I am not aware that it has interfered with the medical service, but, of course, the difficulty has been the withdrawal of a large number of doctors to the Service. That has made it more difficult to set up an efficient service, which it is hoped to set up, and undoubtedly in the end will be set up.
Question put, and agreed to.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES' DEFICIENCY.—Class VII.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £15,307, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for making good the Deficiency on the Income Account of the Fund for Friendly Societies."
MINISTRY OF MUNITIONS.
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £900, 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, 1917, for the Expenses of the Ministry of Munitions." [NOTE.—£100 has been voted on account.]
MINISTRY OF MUNITIONS (ORDNANCE FACTORIES).
Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £90, 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, 1917, for the Expense of the Ordnance Factories, the cost of the production of which will be charged to the Army, Navy, Ministry of Munitions, and Indian and Colonial Governments, etc." [NOTE.—£10 has been voted on account.]
REVENUE DEPARTMENTS.

  CUSTOMS AND EXCISE.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,374,513, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the
  1346
  Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Customs and Excise Department." [NOTE.—£1,100,000 has been voted on account.]

  INLAND REVENUE.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,536,350 (including a Supplementary sum of £150,000), 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, 1917, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Inland Revenue Department. [NOTE.—£980,000 has been voted on account.]
ARMY.

  MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT: PAY, ETC.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Pay, etc., of the Medical Establishment, and of Medicines, etc., which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  Mr. HOGGE: Is that a special Vote for a special purpose?
  The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Gentleman will remember that all the Army Votes are in the form of token Votes.
  Question put, and agreed to.

  SPECIAL RESERVE.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Pay, Bounty, etc., of the Special Reserve and of the Officers' Training Corps, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  TERRITORIAL FORCES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Grants, Pay, Allowances, Training, and Miscellaneous Charges of the Territorial Force, and Channel Islands and Colonial Militia, including the Expense of Permanent Staff, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  ESTABLISHMENTS FOR MILITARY EDUCATION.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Establishments for

  1347
  Military Education, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  QUARTERING, TRANSPORT, AND REMOUNTS.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Quartering, Transport, and Remounts, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  SUPPLIES AND CLOTHING.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Supplies and Clothing, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT ESTABLISHMENTS AND GENERAL STORES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Ordnance Department Establishments and of General Stores, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  ENGINEER STORES AND AVIATION.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Engineer Stores and Aviation, including Technical Committees, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  WORKS AND BUILDINGS.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Works, Buildings, and Repairs, Lands, and Miscellaneous Engineer Services, including Staff, in connection therewith, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  MISCELLANEOUS EFFECTIVE SEEVICES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Miscellaneous Effective Services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  HALF-PAY, RETIRED PAT, AND OTHER NONEFFECTIVE CHARGES FOR OFFICERS.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceednig £1,000, be granted to His Majesty to defray
  1348
  the Expenses of Rewards; Half-Pay; Retired Pay; Widows' Pensions; and other Non-Effective Charges for Officers, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  PENSIONS AND OTHER NON-EFFECTIVE CHARGES FOR WARRANT OFFICERS, NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICERS, MEN, AND OTHERS.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expenses of Chelsea and Kilmain-ham Hospitals; of Out-Pensions; Rewards for Distinguished Services; Widows' Pensions; and other Non-Effective Charges for Warrant Officers, Non-Commissioned Officers, and Men, etc., which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 3lst day of March, 1917."
  CIVIL SUPERANNUATION, COMPENSATION, AND GRATUITIES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Civil Superannuation, Compensation and Additional Allowances, Gratuities, Injury Grants, etc., which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
NAVY ESTIMATES.
  VICTUALLING AND CLOTHING FOR THE NAVY.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Victualling and Clothing for the Navy, including the cost of Victualling Establishments at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENTS AND SERVICES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Medical Services, including the cost of Medical Establishments at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  CIVILIANS EMPLOYED ON FLEET SERVICES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Civilians employed

  1349
  on Fleet Services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  EDUCATIONAL SERVICES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Educational Services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  SCIENTIFIC SERVICES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Scientific Services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  ROYAL NAVAL RESERVES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Royal Naval Reserve, the Royal Fleet Reserve, and the Royal Naval Volunteers, etc., which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  SHIPBUILDING, REPAIRS, MAINTENANCE, ETC.—PERSONNEL.
  Resolved, Sec. 1. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Personnel for Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc., at Dockyards and Naval Yards at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  SHIPBUILDING, REPAIRS, MAINTENANCE, ETC.—MATERIEL.
  Resolved, Sec. 2. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Materiel for Shipbuilding, Repairs, Maintenance, etc., at Dockyards and Naval Yards at Home and Abroad, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  SHIPBUILDING, REPAIRS, MAINTENANCE, ETC.—CONTRACT WORK.
  Resolved, Sec. 3. "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Contract Work for Shipbuilding, Repairs, etc., which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  NAVAL ARMAMENTS.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Naval Armaments, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  WORKS, BUILDINGS, AND REPAIRS, AT HOME AND ABROAD.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Works, Buildings, and Repairs, at Home and Abroad, including the cost of Superintendence, Purchase of Sites, Grants-in-Aid, and other Charges connected therewith, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  MISCELLANEOUS EFFECTIVE SERVICES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of various Miscellaneous Effective Services, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  ADMIRALTY OFFICE.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of the Admiralty Office, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  HALF-PAY AND RETIRED PAY.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Half-Pay and Retired Pay to Officers of the Navy and Marines, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."
  NAVAL AND MARINE PENSIONS, GRATUITIES, AND COMPASSIONATE ALLOWANCES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Expense of Naval and Marine Pensions, Gratuities, and Compassionate Allowances, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  CIVIL SUPERANNUATION, COMPENSATION ALLOWANCES, AND GRATUITIES.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £1,000, be granted to His Majesty, to

  1351
  defray the Expense of Civil Superannuation, Compensation Allowances, and Gratuities, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1917."

  ARMY (ORDNANCE FACTORIES) (EXCESSES), 1914–15.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £10, be granted to His Majesty, to make good Excesses of Army (Ordnance Factories) Expenditure beyond the Grants, for the year ended on the 31st day of March, 1915."
  ARMY (EXCESSES), 1914–15.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £10, be granted to His Majesty, to make good Excesses of Army Expenditure beyond the Grants, for the year ended on the 31st day of March, 1915."

  NAVY (EXCESSES), 1914–15.
  Resolved, "That a sum, not exceeding £100, be granted to His Majesty, to make good Excesses of Navy Expenditure beyond the Grants, for the year ended on the 31st day of March, 1915."
  Resolutions to be reported upon Monday next; Committee to sit again upon Monday.

ANGLO-PORTUGUESE COMMERCIAL TREATY BILL.
Order for Third Reading read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
Mr. HEWINS: I should not like this occasion to pass without some reference to the circumstances which have led to the delay in carrying the Third Reading of this Treaty. When the Treaty came up some months ago, I think it was some time in May, I raised objections to it on three grounds. In the first place, I thought it was undesirable, in view of the approaching Conference of the Allies in Paris, that we should adopt a Most-Favoured-Nation Treaty of the old pattern which we were likely to abandon. I objected to the ten years' period required for a denunciation of the Treaty itself, and the difference in the treatment of the United Kingdom and the British Dominions. In deference to the objections which I then raised, negotiations
1352
took place between our Foreign Office and the Portuguese Government, and I am very glad to know that a satisfactory arrangement has been come to. The Treaty was actually ratified, and it simply requires us to pass this particular Clause defining port wine, and that was the one thing that stood in the way of the Treaty coming into operation.
But for the fact that we had to define port wine, the House of Commons would have had no locus standi in regard to this Treaty at all. These negotiations took place, and I am very glad to know that an exchange of Notes has been agreed upon between the British and the Portuguese Governments to the effect, as I am informed, that if in pursuance of the Paris Resolutions—that is, the Resolutions of the Allied countries represented at the Paris Conference—either Great Britain or Portugal should propose a new international arrangement, nothing in this Treaty is to stand in the way, and that meets my views entirely. It does not require, therefore, that there should be any kind of period mentioned. We can pass this Treaty without having any anxiety as to its possible effect upon the relations of the world as determined by the application of the Paris Resolutions. It is an interesting incident in the development of our history, because I believe it is the first practical application of the Paris Resolutions. In conclusion I should like to say that my criticism of the Treaty and my objection to passing it had not the slightest reference to our gallant Ally the Portuguese. I am of opinion myself that we could make a better Treaty with them under a new policy than this particular Treaty, and my objection has had no reference to the country concerned, but it was simply an objection to a principle in the Treaty. I should like to say how very much we are indebted to the tact and the kindness of our Portuguese friends for this happy solution of what might have been a difficulty, and we can now consider the incident closed with perfectly easy minds.
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Pretyman): I cannot allow this opportunity to pass without thanking my hon. Friend (Mr. Hewins) for the attitude he has adopted, and without recognising that his intervention has been very valuable. Without his intervention this Treaty, if this Bill had passed its Third Reading,

1353
would have become part of the international law between Great Britain and Portugal, with the result that we might have been seriously hampered in carrying out the policy of the Paris Resolutions. It was my hon. Friend's intervention which called our attention to that position, and negotiations have, as he has described, taken place, with the happy result which he has mentioned to the House, and which I now desire to confirm. Therefore, I think we are much indebted to him. I endorse everything he has said, and I hope this Bill will now become law, and that it will have an immediate effect on Portuguese trade. We desire to get this measure working as soon as we can, and we now know that we shall do that without jeopardising our action in regard to the operation of the Paris Resolutions.
Mr. KING: I have read this Bill, and I have listened to the two speeches which have been made upon it, and I confess I am rather puzzled. As far as I can gather the Bill has nothing to do with anything but port wine, and there has been no mention of port wine in the speeches which have been delivered.
Mr. HEWINS: I mentioned it.
Mr. KING: Then I am very glad to hear it. As far as I understand the hon. Member for Hereford (Mr. Hewins), he referred to this Bill in its connection with the Paris Conference. I understand the Treaty in regard to port wine and our commercial relations with Portugal were of an earlier date than the Paris Conference, and therefore I do not see what the Paris Conference has got to do with this Bill, for there is nothing about it in the measure before us. The Treaty was certainly in conception, if not in actual form, before the Paris Conference was held, and how you can drag the Paris Conference in I do not know. I will only say that I am afraid the hon. Member for Hereford has got the Paris Conference and Tariff Reform on the brain—
Mr. HEWINS: My hon. Friend has not listened to the Debate, or he would have known that it is not necessary to describe the whole of the matters relevant to this Bill. It goes back to a period before the War, and it is a very much larger thing than the hon. Member has stated.
Mr. KING: That is exactly what I am saying. What I said was that the whole of this policy of our commercial relations
1354
and Treaty with Portugal went back a great deal earlier than the War, and the idea of the Paris Conference has only developed quite late in the War. Therefore, it seems to me that the hon. Member's speech is quite off the line. I do not want to hinder the progress of this very useful Bill, because it is going to give us genuine port wine when we want port wine. That is a very good argument, with which I entirely sympathise, and I am sure all of us who have the sense to appreciate the value of a glass of port wine will do nothing but welcome this Bill.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read the third time, and passed.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (AMENDMENT) BILL [Lords]
Order for Second Reading read.
Sir J. D. REES: As I shall not be here when the Bill comes up for the Third Reading, I wish now to express my great satisfaction at the form in which this measure comes before the House without the Clause to which very strong exception was taken, and concerning which representations reached me from innumerable quarters in India, including chambers of commerce and other bodies of a highly influential character. When India was transferred to the Crown the rights of the subject to sue the Secretary of State were preserved, and they were saved by the Act then-passed. A Clause in this Bill, as it first of all came before the House, encroached upon the right of the subject in that respect. In Committee, Lord Islington, the Under-Secretary of State, and the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Charles Roberts) met the objections raised to this Clause in the most conciliatory spirit, and finally, after it was fully discussed, they withdrew the Clause altogether. That result gives very great satisfaction to all those concerned with this Bill, and it is perhaps desirable that the earliest opportunity should be taken of expressing satisfaction which is so universally shared in India in all quarters. There was one other provision which, I am sure, will be acceptable to hon. Gentlemen opposite, and it is that which provides for extending to the subjects of the native States certain benefits which hitherto had been restricted to subjects of British India.

1355
Happily, it is unnecessary to say anything on the present occasion as to the extent to which subjects of native States are or are not subjects of British India. I think the extension that is provided to native States will be very gratifying to the native princes and to the subjects who owe them immediate allegiance. The question of extra territorial jurisdiction was also satisfactorily dealt with, though I am not sure that the peculiar character of the case was altogether grasped by the Committee satisfactorily, as the general discussions were and wholly satisfactory as they were in their results.
Question put, and agreed to.
Bill read a second time, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House for Monday next.—[Mr. James Hope.]

MERCHANT SHIPPING (SALVAGE) BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
The purpose which this simple measure proposes to achieve will at once be gathered by examining its one executive Clause—
"Where salvage services are rendered by any ship belonging to His Majesty and that ship is a ship specially equipped with salvage plant, or is a tug, the Admiralty shall, notwithstanding anything contained in Section five hundred and fifty-seven of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, be entitled to claim salvage on behalf of His Majesty for such services, and shall have the same rights and remedies as if the ship rendering such services did not belong to His Majesty."
I am afraid I must ask the House to follow me a moment or two while I seek to explain the necessity for this modification of the existing law. The first Statute which provided a reasonable reward for salvage was passed in 1713. It imposed a duty on men-of-war and merchant ships belonging to Her Majesty Queen Anne, and private ships to give salvage assistance to vessels in distress. It made no distinction between Queen's ships and private ships as regards either the duty
1356
to render assistance or the right to salvage reward. In the days of sailing ships salvage claims used to be made by or on behalf of the master and crew of the rescuing ship and were recognised by the Courts. The owners of the rescuing ships were not considered to have any interest in the matter. They did not incur any material expense—
Mr. HOUSTON: Except delay.
Dr. MACNAMARA: They did not incur-any material expense by the delay and by the action taken by the masters and the crew in giving assistance. It was not-until 1825 that owners of rescuing ships, by a judgment of Lord Stowell, were admitted as having any title to consideration in the matter. Since that date, of course, the value of ships has risen out of all knowledge, and the interest of the owner in any salvage work done by his ship has become very real and has rapidly grown, in importance. The time taken in the work, the coal and other stores expended have become considerations of great value. So much is this the case that it has gradually become the practice of the Courts in making salvage awards to allow something like 80 per cent, to the owner and something like 20 per cent, to the master and crew. It was still in the early days of steam that the Merchant Shipping. Act of 1854 was passed, and in this, without any discussion, the Crown renounced-any claim for expenses incurred by one of Her Majesty's ships rendering salvage service. My hon. Friends will be pleased to observe that was long before there were any vessels in existence like the powerful, tugs of the present day or like the highly special salvage vessels which are now employed to rescue ships in distress. It certainly could not have been contemplated that the term "ships belonging to-Her Majesty," used in 1854, could apply to the vessels for which provision is made in this Bill—powerful tugs and specially-equipped salvage vessels. That brings me to the reason for introducing this Bill. The need for the Bill has arisen because-the Admiralty has established, apart altogether from the fighting snips, a salvage service comprised of vessels fitted with-specially designed salvage plant, pumps, and gear for the purpose principally of salving vessels in Government employment that are in distress through marine or war risk during the War. We have also taken upon requisition a large number of tugs and vessels and plant of the Liverpool Salvage

1357
Association, the great institution supported by the Marine Insurance Societies and underwriters of this country for the salvage of ships in distress. The Admiralty, therefore, has become during the War the greatest salving organisation in the United Kingdom. Of course, although our efforts in that direction are primarily designed to salve ships in Admiralty employment, it is clear that cases of salvage services being rendered to private ships as time goes on may often arise. At present not one penny of the expense incurred by the salvage vessels employed by the Admiralty can be refunded by the underwriters or the other parties responsible for the ship that is assisted, because of the wording of Section 557 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, which states:
"Where salvage services are rendered by any ship belonging to His Majesty or by the commander or crew thereof, no claim shall be allowed for any loss, damage, or risk caused to the ship or her stores, tackle, or furniture, or for the use of any stores or any articles belonging to His Majesty supplied iii order to effect those services or for any other expense or loss sustained by His Majesty by reason of that service."
We have no wish whatever to abate the practice thus enshrined in the Statute Book by which His Majesty's ships of war when going about their proper duties are expected to render gratuitous service to vessels in distress, but the creation of an Admiralty Salvage Service has brought about a new situation. It is evident that the words of the Statute go further than was intended. It was not intended that no expenses could be claimed in respect of services rendered by specially equipped salvage vessels. We have discussed the matter with representatives of the underwriters, who are in complete agreement with the, proposal to amend this Section of the Merchant Shipping Act, with a view to removing the anomaly that, while the private salvage vessel can make a claim for salvage, one in Government employment cannot. This short Bill has been drafted with the sole object of removing that anomaly, and enabling claims to be made on behalf of the Crown for services rendered by these special vessels, which are really commercial vessels, and not ships of war at all. I should add that the rights and privileges of the officers and men of the Royal Navy are in no way interfered with by this measure.
Mr. HOUSTON: What does the right hon. Gentleman mean by not interfered with? Are not the officers in command and the crew of these special salvage steamers belonging to the Crown to be entitled to a proportion of the salvage, just as the crews of merchant ships would be?
Dr. MACNAMARA: I was not dealing with that point at the moment. I was dealing with officers and crews of His Majesty's ships. If the hon. Member will read the full Section 557 of the Merchant Shipping Act, he will see that we are not amending that part of it which gives captains and crews, subject to the consent of the Admiralty, the right to pay in respect of services rendered, but only that part dealing with the rights of ships. I also warn the House that this Bill is not limited to the duration of the War, and is not, in that sense, the kind that we call emergency measures, although it became necessary owing to circumstances which have arisen during the War. It is, nevertheless, quite possible that the Admiralty Salvage Service will be continued in the future as a permanent institution.
Mr. HOUSTON: I have not risen, as my right hon. Friend is aware, to oppose this Bill, for I am heartily in accord with the principle that it contains. I think it is only right that where specially constructed or equipped vessels are provided for salvage services they should be entitled to claim for those services. My right hon. Friend has made it quite clear in respect of His Majesty's ships that no claim for salvage will be made by those ships for any services rendered to merchant ships, and that it is only in connection with specially equipped ships that these services will be charged for.
Dr. MACNAMARA: Hear, hear!
Mr. HOUSTON: So far as the rest of His Majesty's ships are concerned, I should like to take this opportunity of saying that I know how very anxious and willing naval officers are to render assistance in every possible case, without any thought of recompense or remuneration. They are only too anxious to do that. But in these cases, where special ships are-specially equipped for this service, I should desire that the officers and crew of these ships should be treated as though they were in the merchant service. But there is one point I should like to have made clear, and I should like the right hon. Gentleman to amend his Clause

1359
slightly. Although the Bill says that these ships are to be treated as though they did not belong to His Majesty, still they are King's ships, and therefore belong to the Crown, and in the event of the owners of a salved or assisted steamer, considering that the charge made by the Admiralty is exorbitant, the owner has no means of resisting that or seeking protection because a subject cannot take action against the Crown, except by means of one roundabout process of applying to the Attorney-General for the King's fiat for leave to present a Petition of Right, and that is a very cumbrous and costly thing to do. I therefore suggest to the consideration of the right hon. Gentleman that this Clause might be easily and effectively amended by giving protection to the owners of assisted ships by the insertion of two words in the Clause. I will read the Clause and indicate where I desire my Amendment to be made:
"Notwithstanding anything contained in Clause 557 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, be entitled to claim salvage on behalf of His Majesty for such services, and shall have the same rights and remedies."
and I should like to insert the words "and conditions,"
"as if the ship rendering such services did not belong to His Majesty."
I should like the owners or underwriters of salved steamers to have the protection of the Admiralty, Probate, and Divorce Court in the case of disputed salvage cases. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be prepared to accept this Amendment, either the words I suggest, or words with the same effect. If he will not agree to their inclusion, although I will certainly not resist the Second Reading of the Bill, I shall have to move Amendments later on.
Dr. MACNAMARA: I can only speak again by the consent of the House. I am much obliged to my hon. Friend for his speech, and for the assistance he has rendered in this matter, but his apprehensions are entirely unfounded. His case is this: "How do we know that the Crown will not make an exorbitant claim and be in a position to enforce it; are we shipowners to have no remedy?" And he says, quite rightly, "We cannot adopt the cumbrous and costly remedy of a Petition of Rights." And therefore he suggests amending the Clause by inserting
1360
the words "and conditions." I have gone into the point he makes very closely indeed. My hon. Friend will notice at the end of Clause 1 of the Bill the words—
"and shall have the same rights and remedies as if the ship rendering such services did not belong to His Majesty."
That places it in the same position as a private-owned ship. We only amend Section 557 of the Merchant Shipping Act, and he will remember that all parts of that Act dealing with the right of private owners to take matters in dispute to the Court stand untouched in this Bill. Procedure with regard to salvage will stand in respect of the Crown just as in respect of any private owner. I am quite sure about that, and my hon. Friend need have no fear. But I am so much obliged to him for the assistance he has given that I will go into the matter again, and if it is necessary to add any words I will do so.
Mr. HOUSTON: May I thank my right hon. Friend? This Bill clearly gives His Majesty the same rights and remedies as the private owner, but it does not bind His Majesty to the same limitations as a private owner; I hope the matter will be made quite plain in the Bill.
Mr. KING: This little Bill is, of course, a technical one, and the discussion upon it has been conducted by two specialists, Gentlemen with very high technical marine knowledge. The practical man may also have his point of view. I observe that this Bill is not emergency legislation.
Dr. MACNAMARA: I told you so.
Mr. KING: That is quite right. What does the Bill mean—that after the War the Government is going to carry on a big salvage business?
Dr. MACNAMARA: Of course we are.
Mr. KING: Very well, I do not mind. It is worth while calling attention to the fact, which I have mentioned before, that the Government is developing on large lines of State Socialism. I think they are right in doing so. Salvage concerns are highly profitable and pay large dividends. [An HON. MEMBER: "Sometimes!"] They do when they are well managed. As this is going to be managed by right hon. Gentlemen like the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty, it will be very profitable, and it will help us to pay for the War. In that sense I am quite in accord with this Bill, which is another step towards the

1361
State Socialism that is coming after the War. I observe in line 5 of the Bill that we are referred to
"Any ship belonging to His Majesty."
Is a ship which is requisitioned a ship belonging to His Majesty—I presume it is?
Dr. MACNAMARA: For the purposes of this Bill it is not; unless the ship is demised or unless there is a stipulation giving the Crown the right of salvage.
Mr. KING: I am not quite sure whether the right hon. Gentleman sees my point. It is that we want to have made quite clear in this Bill what is "a ship belonging to His Majesty." Is a ship belonging to a railway company, or to a salvage company, which has been taken over for the purposes of the War and that only, a ship belonging to His Majesty's Navy?
Dr. MACNAMARA: If demised to the Crown.
Mr. KING: This is a very good Bill, and it only remains to see it passed.
Question, "That the Bill be now read a second time," put, and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read a second time; and committed to a Committee of the Whole House for Monday next.—[Mr. James Hope.]

WAR CHARITIES BILL.
Considered in Committee. [Progress, 7th August.]
[Mr. MACLEAN in the Chair.]

WAR CHARITIES BILL.

  CLAUSE 1.—(Prohibition against Baiting Money for War Charities unless Registered.)
  It shall not be lawful to make any appeal to the public for donations or subscriptions in money or in kind to any war charity as hereinafter defined, or to raise or attempt to raise money for any such charity by promoting or taking part in any bazaar, sale, entertainment or exhibition, or by any similar means, unless the charity is registered under this Act and the approval of the committee or other governing body of the charity has been obtained, and if any person contravenes the provisions of this Section he shall be guilty of an offence against this Act:
  Provided that this provision shall not apply to any collection at divine service in
  1362
  a place of public worship nor to any charity which may, subject to any Regulations made under this Act, be exempted by the registration authority from the provisions of this Section.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move to leave out the words "committee or other governing body," and to insert instead thereof the words "the governing body or a committee or sub-committee."
  This is so simple an Amendment and so thoroughly understood by the hon. Member in charge of the Bill that it is not necessary for me to say any words on the subject.
  The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Brace): I agree with the Amendment in substance and have put down an Amendment to the next line, which I believe meets the point of my hon. Friend altogether. Therefore, I hope that he will withdraw it.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendment made: After the word "obtained" ["of the charity has been obtained"], insert the words "either directly or through any person duly authorised to give such approval on behalf of such governing body."—[Mr. Brace.]
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move, after the word "obtained," to insert the words "in writing."
  It is extremely important that the approval should be given in writing, not only in order that the person who receives the approval should have a document to show, but also in order to enable the charity itself, in some cases, to impose conditions. For that reason I hope the Government will accept the Amendment.
  Mr. BRACE: I accept the Amendment. Amendment agreed to.
  9.0 P.M.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move, after the word "Section" ["any person contravenes the provisions of this Section"], to insert the words "or falsely represents himself as being an official or agent of a war charity."
  Owing to the Amendment which has just been accepted by the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill, I think that instead of the word "an" before the words "official

  1363
  or agent" the words "duly authorised" sho.uld be put. I leave the matter to the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill.
  Mr. BRACE: This is a good Amendment in substance, but it will be more in place in Clause 7. I have accordingly put down an Amendment to that Clause which will deal with the matter when we reach it. I understand that my hon. Friend would prefer to have the words "duly authorised" instead of the word "an," therefore when we come to Clause 7 I think I can accept the Amendment.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: On that understanding, I beg to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Mr. BRACE: I beg to move, at the end of the Clause, to add a new Sub-section,
  "(2) This Section, so far as it relates to registration, shall not apply to any charity until the expiration of one month after the passing of this Act, nor pending the consideration by the registration authority of an application for registration made within such month."
  I will endeavour to make clear the effect of this Amendment in a sentence or two. It is that the bulk of the Bill will come into operation immediately on passing, and, as soon as Regulations are issued, applications for registration may be made under Clause 2. The provisions in Clause 1, however, prohibiting appeals, etc., on behalf of unregistered charities, will not operate until after one month has elapsed. This will give the registration authorities time to consider applications and prepare for the actual registration. Further, in the event of a registration authority being unable to deal with all the applications immediately, charities applying within one month for registration will be protected until the registration authority arrives at its decision. Lastly, these provisions will not delay the operation of the powers of the Charity Commissioners as regards doubtful charities proposed to be conferred by the new Clause down in my name.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on a very excellent Amendment which greatly strengthens and improves the Bill, but I notice that in explaining it he used the expression "decision of the registration authority." The word in the Amendment is "con-
  1364
  sideration." I suggest that the word "decision" is much more appropriate. The words in the Amendment may mean a very great deal, or very little. We do not know when the consideration will come, but we know when a decision has been arrived at. I suggest that he should consider whether the word "decision" is not a better word.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put,, and agreed to.

  CLAUSE 2.—(Registration of War Charities.)
  (1) The registration authority shall—

  (a) as respects the City of London, be the Mayor, Aldermen, and Commons of the City of London in common council assembled;

  (b) as respects a county borough or a borough having a separate police force, be the borough council;

  (c) elsewhere, be the county council:

  Provided that any such council may act through a committee of the council, which may, if the council think fit, comprise persons (including women) who are not members of the council.
  (2) Applications for registration under this Act shall be sent to the registration authority for the area in which the administrative centre of the charity is situate, and any question as to where the administrative centre of any charity is-situate shall be finally determined by the Charity Commissioners.
  (3) The registration authority may,, before registering any charity, make such inquiries with respect to the charity as they think fit, but shall not refuse to register any charity having its administrative centre within the area of the authority unless they are satisfied that the charity is not established in good faith for charitable purposes or will not comply with the conditions imposed by this Act, or that it will not be properly administered.
  (4) An appeal from a refusal by a registration authority to register any charity shall lie to the Charity Commissioners, and if as the result of such-appeal the Charity Commissioners determine that the application for registration ought not to be refused, the registration authority shall register the charity.
  (5) Every registration authority shall keep a register of the charities registered by them under this Act, and shall send to the Charity Commissioners a copy of such register and a list of all charities registration of which has been refused by thorn, and shall from time to time notify the Charity Commissioners of any changes in the particulars entered in the register.
  (6) The Charity Commissioners shall keep a combined register of all charities registered under this Act, and of all charities in respect of which applications for registration under this Act have been refused.
  (7) Any expenses incurred by a council as registration authority under this Act may be paid out of any fund or rate, out of which the expenses of the council are payable.
  Mr. HOGGE: I beg to move, in Subsection (1), after the word "shall" ["The registration authority shall"], to insert "(a) as respects all charities providing similar relief to that obtained under any Government scheme of pensions be the Statutory Committee."
  I move this Amendment in order to raise an issue which deserves some consideration in a Bill of this character, which was not really discussed on Second Reading, because the Second Reading was taken at an hour when no one wanted to speak at any length. In connection with schemes for relief of various kinds in connection with the War certain objects have been specified in these attempts, many of them successful, to raise money. A public fund is now being raised to commemorate the bravery of the boy Jack Cornwell in the Jutland battle, and one of the objects for which money is being raised is the provision of cottages for disabled soldiers, and sailors. Under legislation which this House has already passed, particularly the Naval and Military War Pensions Act, one of the objects which is specially committed to the care of that Committee is the care, training, and employment of disabled soldiers and sailors, and it is obvious from the literature which has been issued by that Committee that it will have to deal with a great many phases of disablement, which in some cases will actually mean the housing of these men. In one part of Scotland there is a scheme by which veterans who have been disabled are to have special housing arrangements. I am glad that is being done voluntarily, but there is an extreme danger of over-
  1366
  lapping unless some one authority has a complete knowledge of what is being done-all over the country, and while the suggestion of my Amendment may be put in the wrong way, I want to feel sure that in what is being done that body whose-special care it is to look after the pensions of our soldiers and sailors shall have-complete knowledge of everything that is-being done. A great deal of direction could be given to local authorities and others who care to raise extra money for extra purposes if they were informed by the Committee that had cognisance of the whole facts how and for what purpose that money could be best contributed. I believe the hon. Gentleman is going to-reject the Amendment, I being the only-Member present who has not had an opportunity of meeting him and persuading him that my Amendment is as-good as anyone else's. I put it to him that is a point that he has overlooked, and unless the statement he makes is satisfactory, I am certain this must be raised on future stages of the Bill, because the sooner some authority recognises that after the War you are going to have a tremendous number of schemes which will overlap, it will be better for the men who are going to enjoy those benefits and better for the administration.
  Mr. BRACE: I am sorry the hon. Member did not join with his colleagues-in meeting me to discuss an Amendment of great importance and substance, and I am equally sorry that I am unable to accept his Amendment. What he is proposing is to set up the Statutory Committee as an additional registration authority for the purpose of this Act. We have devised the scheme of this Bill upon a broad basis of registration by the public-authorities—the councils and the urban councils, which I shall accept in an Amendment later on, and the borough councils—which seem to me the best kind of registration authority you can have as a check against any exploitation of the-public through the medium of touting funds. The hon. Member raises a great point of principle which would be quite good if we were introducing an entirely different kind of Bill, but to ask us to recast our Bill and to give the Statutory Committee the powers of a registration authority would, in my judgment, be-quite wrong, bearing in mind how we propose to administer the Bill when it-becomes an Act. The right hon. Gentle-

  1367
  man (Mr. Hayes Fisher), who is the chairman of the Statutory Committee, discussed with me at considerable length to-day the situation in which the Statutory Committee under the Naval and Military Pensions Act and the Royal Patriotic Fund would find themselves unless they were exempted from the provisions of this Amendment. The Statutory Committee and the Royal Patriotic Fund are institutions created by Act of Parliament and are controlled by Parliament, and to ask that body, which is controlled by Parliament, and whose funds and business can be the subject-matter of discussion of this House, to come under the operation of this Bill and to be placed for registration purposes under the control of an urban council is, of course, quite an impossible thing to think of. I feel that the Royal Patriotic Fund and the Statutory Committee have a right to ask to be exempted. I therefore propose, inasmuch as their case is altogether different and exceptional to any other case I have been asked to consider, to consider the matter further before tabling a proposal to exempt them. It is only right that I should bring the matter before the Committee on this Amendment. If, after further consideration, I determine that the Royal Patriotic Fund and the Statutory Committee ought to be exempt from the operations of this Bill for the reasons I have laid before the Committee, I will make the alteration in another place. I regret I cannot accept the Amendment, and I hope the hon. Member will not think it necessary to take it further.
  Mr. ANDERSON: I am very glad that the Under-Secretary for the Home Department has decided to reject this Amendment, which appears mainly to have been moved because the hon. Member lost the opportunity of discussing the Bill on its Second Reading. [Mr. HOGGE dissented.] At any rate, that was one of the reasons the hon. Member put forward for moving the Amendment. A fundamental objection to an Amendment of this sort is that you are proposing to establish as a registration authority a committee in competition with the very charities that are going to be judged by that committee. Clearly your registration authority ought to be an absolutely impartial body, and ought not to have any loyalty to one party as against another, but that would be quite impossible if you make the Statutory Committee a
  1368
  registration authority. I am sure they do not want to have their work added to in this way. I agree entirely that the Statutory Committee and its work is altogether in a different category from private charities. Therefore, I would very readily support any Amendment which proposed to place the Statutory Committee in a special position. We cannot for a minute entertain the Amendment put forward.
  Mr. HOGGE: After the speeches which have been made I do not intend to press this Amendment to a Division, but before I ask leave to withdraw it I should like to say that I am perfectly certain the House will ultimately come round to the view I have advanced to-day. It would be an excellent thing both for the House and the Statutory Committee. We had a long discussion the other day, which lasted from four o'clock until eleven, upon the question as to which local funds the Statutory Committee should take into consideration in awarding pensions. If the Statutory Committee had power to say that charities could not be registered which were for purposes similar to those for which they were affected, then at once every other local fund would be for a different purpose, and could not be considered by the Statutory Committee at all. It would wipe out of existence half the difficulties that this House has been discussing. However, the prophet is always before his time. I am sorry that my hon. Friend who represents Labour so well on the Front Bench has to resort to the expedient of attempting to pacify me by promising to promote an Amendment in another place. That is a real declension of the powers that used to reside in my hon. Friend. I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendment made: In paragraph (b), leave out the words "county borough or a borough having a separate police force, be the borough council," and insert instead thereof the words "municipal borough or urban district be the council of the borough or district."—[Mr. Brace.]
  Mr. A. WILLIAMS: I beg to move, in paragraph (c), to leave out the word "county," and to insert instead thereof th word "district."
  As far as an urban district council is concerned, this point is covered by the Amendment just inserted. I am very anxious that the rural district councils

  1369
  should be the authority in the rural districts. My reason is that it ought to be easy for the people in small village committees to get at the registration authority. The place where I live is thirty-five miles distant from the county town, and it is practically a day's work to get there and do any business and get back. We have not a county councillor, so far as I know, living within eight or nine miles, while, on the other hand, the district council is near our home, and application could be made and the information given quite easily. I think that a near-at-hand body with whom we are in touch should be substituted in rural places for the county council which is so far away that we are not in touch. They know nothing about us and we do not know much about them.
  Mr. BRACE: I think my hon. Friend should be satisfied with what we have accomplished in his previous Amendment. We had intended making the boroughs and the county councils the registration authority, but, in reply to strong appeals on the Second Reading by my hon. Friend, we have altered that part of the Bill, and have brought into the Bill not only boroughs which control the police, but all boroughs and all urban councils, the county council to be the registration authority for the rest of the county. I think my hon. Friend has accomplished quite a good stroke of business in getting urban councils put in, and I would ask him to withdraw his Amendment.
  Sir G. TOULMIN: I do not see why rural district councils should not have these powers. You are sending some very trivial details to the county council. It is not a mere matter of local government in which the oversight of large bodies is necessary. This power is wanted in order to prevent fraud, and in order to secure that local opinion is properly consulted in regard to these charities, so that no one is deceived. It appears to me that this is one of those small matters in which a rural district council might as well have this power.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: The hon. Member (Mr. A. Williams) is under a misapprehension. The work which is put upon the councils is simply the registration of the charity once for all. There is no necessity under the Bill that the bazaar, or concert, or other local entertainment has to be registered. Therefore, it only means one journey to the county town if he has the
  1370
  good fortune to have in his district a charity which requires registration. Unfortunately, as some of us think, there is-no Clause in the Bill which requires registration of the concert or the bazaar or other entertainment in the local district.
  Mr. A. WILLIAMS: The registration authority is supposed to know whether the people who are making the application are reputable, and is supposed to grant or refuse registration on that account. Our district councillors who live amongst us know who we are, but the-county councillors do not. Therefore they will have to refer the matter to the police, or somebody like that, and it will be a very much less desirable state of things, than if the district councillors, who really know us by personal touch, were allowed to be the judges in this matter. However, I do not wish to divide the House, and I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Further Amendment made: In Subsection (2), after the word "registration" ["applications for registration"], insert-the words "or exemption."—[Mr. Brace.]
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move, in Sub-section (5), after the word "shall" ["Every registration authority shall"], to insert the words "give to each charity registered or exempted a certificate of registration or exemption, and shall."
  The object of this Amendment is to make it incumbent upon each registration authority to give to each charity registered or exempted a certificate of registration or exemption. I think it is obvious that it is absolutely necessary for a charity which is-registered or exempted to have something in the way of a certificate to that effects.
  Mr. BRACE: As the hon. Member has made out such a good case, I have pleasure in accepting the Amendment.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Further Amendments made: After the word "Act," insert instead thereof the words "and lists of all charities registration of which has been refused by them and of all charities which have been exempted from registration by them."
  Leave out the words "a list of all charities registration of which has been refused by them," and insert instead thereof the words "such lists."
  After the word "register," insert the, words "and of changes in such lists."
  In paragraph (6), after the word "and," insert the words "a combined list."
  At the end of paragraph (6) insert the words "and a combined list of all charities which have been exempted from registration under this Act."—[Mr. Brace.]
  Sir E. CORNWALL: I beg to move, at the end of the Clause, to insert the following new Sub-section:
  "(8) Any expenses incurred by the London County Council under this Act shall be defrayed out of the County Fund as expenses for general county purposes."
  This is a small Amendment affecting London. It is proposed that the expenses shall be paid out of county funds as expenses for general county purposes. That would cover the City of London as well as the general county. I understand that the City people have no objection.
  Mr. BRACE: I should be glad to accept that Amendment.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

  CLAUSE 3.—(Conditions to be Complied with by Begistered Charities.)
  Charities registered under this Act shall comply with the following conditions—

  (i) the charity shall be administered by a responsible committee or other body consisting of not less than three persons; and minutes shall be kept of the meetings of the committee or other body in which shall be recorded the names of the members of the committee or other body attending the meetings;

  (ii) proper books of account shall be kept, and the accounts shall be audited at such intervals as may be prescribed by Regulations under this Act, and copies of the accounts so audited shall be sent to the registration authority;

  (iii) all moneys collected by or on behalf of the charity shall be paid into a separate account at such bank as may be specified as respects the charity in the register;

  (iv) such particulars with regard to accounts and other records as the registration authority or the Charity Commissioners may require
  1372
  shall be furnished to the registration authority or the Charity Commissioners, and the books and accounts of the charity shall be open to inspection at any time by any person duly authorised by the registration authority or by the Charity Commissioners:

  Provided that the registration authority may, subject to any Regulations made by the Charity Commissioners under this Act, exempt from the first of the said conditions any charity, or charities of any class or description.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: I beg to move, in paragraph (ii), after the word "kept," to insert the words "and such accounts shall include the total receipts and the total expenditure of any collection, bazaar, sale, entertainment, or exhibition held with the approval of the governing body of the charity."
  The object of this Amendment is this: As the Bill stands there is control by the central charity which may be registered, possibly in London, but there is no control over the local people who collect the money which maybe collected, either in the streets or at a bazaar or a sale; and so on. All you require by the Rill is that the central charity shall approve of the sale or bazaar being carried on. I am proposing that the accounts of-the central charity shall include, not merely such accounts as the local people send them, possibly £5 being forwarded when £100 was collected, £95 going in expenses, but shall include both sides of the account. Everybody will agree that this is not an unfair Amendment, and will be of great use in avoiding maladministration, and in certain cases avoiding fraud.
  Mr. BRACE: The hon. and learned Member has given much attention to this phase of the Bill, and he has put down an Amendment in language which I can accept, and an Amendment which, I think, will be useful and helpful. It is the desire of the promoters of this Bill, and I am certain of the House altogether, that a check shall be kept upon any attempt to use the finances of the nation at a time of war either through the medium of bazaars or entertainments or anything of that character to raise more money for the promoters of the entertainment than for the charity on behalf of which it is supposed to be organised. It is because I believe that the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. and learned Member

  1373
  will do something to effect this object that I have great pleasure in accepting it.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Mr. A. WILLIAMS: I beg to move, in paragraph (ii.), after the word "Act," to insert the words "by some person or persons approved by the registration authority."
  The Bill, as drawn, provides that the accounts shall be audited, but it says nothing as to who is to audit the accounts. Everyone would be willing to have his accounts audited if only he were allowed to choose his own auditor. My suggestion is that the registration authority should be instructed to approve of the auditor, so that the accounts could not be audited unless by some person or persons who are approved for the purpose, though not necessarily members of any particular society.
  Mr. BRACE: I accept the Amendment.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move, in paragraph (iii.), to leave out the words "collected by or on behalf of," and to insert instead thereof the words "received by."
  This is merely a drafting Amendment, to which there is no objection.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: I beg to move, after the word "bank," to insert the words "or banks."
  Amendment agreed to.
  Mr. ANDERSON: I beg to move to omit the words "Provided that the registration authority may, subject to any regulations made by the Charity Commissioners under this Act, exempt from the first of the said conditions any charity or charities of any class or description."
  I think that these words are altogether too wide. I hope that the Under-Secretary will accept this Amendment. It would only mean that all charities would be placed on the same footing and that there would be no unfair differentiation between one and another. If there is some specially large public organisation, like the Statutory Committee, that I think could easily be met by the name itself being inserted in the Bill or in the Regulations, as the case might be. But, apart from that, I think the fewer exceptions the better. I think that the conditions are
  1374
  very moderate and very reasonable. I do not see any reason why every bonâ-fide charity should not be prepared to submit to so reasonable a measure of control.
  Mr. BRACE: I had a very strong case put to me on the part of a newspaper owner, a perfectly bonâ-fide legitimate case, in which it was thought that the keeping of minutes, and so on, would be a serious inconvenience and expense, but having looked carefully into the matter since then and had the privilege of a discussion with my hon. Friend, I felt that the conclusion of the Clause, as it stands, was too wide and on the whole that it was safer to withdraw it, and I therefore accept the Amendment.
  Sir E. CORNWALL: How would that apply to such things as Lord Mayor's funds? Would they come under the jurisdiction of the Bill?
  Mr. BRACE: Yes.
  Mr. G. THORNE: No one desires to discourage existing organisations which are thoroughly well managed, and all I would ask is that in the interpretation of this Clause it shall not be read so as to produce that effect.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: In regard to the Royal Patriotic Fund, is it quite clear, unless those words are kept in, that its case would be met?
  Mr. BRACE: Yes.
  Mr. J. W. WILSON: The essence of Subsection (1) of the Clause is to do away with one-man management.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
  Mr. A. WILLIAMS: I wish to point out to the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill that there is one thing which I think is a decided blemish upon the measure—it is that there is no provision for making the accounts public. Under a subsequent Clause there is the right to inspect the accounts, but that is a very formal and difficult business, and people do not very often suspect the accounts at all until they see them, and find reason to suspect them. I do hope that in another place the hon. Gentleman will make some provision for either placing these accounts outside the door of the town hall, or on the church door, or publishing them in the newspapers, or in some other way making them

  1375
  public, so that hundreds and thousands of people may see them and have a chance of detecting anything wrong if there be anything wrong. It is perhaps too late to do it here now, but I earnestly commend the matter to my hon. Friend before the Bill has finally passed through the other place.
  Mr. BRACE: I hope my hon. Friend will not think it discourteous on my part if I cannot promise him consideration of putting in an Amendment in another place. There will be an auditor who must receive the approval of the registration authority, and in addition there is the right of anybody to examine the accounts, which I should think ought to be enough in all conscience. We are dealing with money given by the charitable public, and we do not want to saddle them with any unnecessary expenditure that could not be justified. I hope my hon. Friend will not think I am discourteous in not bringing his Amendment before another place
  Mr. A. WILLIAMS: I did not mean that the expense should fall on to charity.
  Question put, and agreed to.

  CLAUSE 4.—(Regulations.)
  The Charity Commissioners may, subject to the approval of the Secretary of State, make regulations—

  (a) prescribing the forms for applications under this Act and the particulars to be contained therein;

  (b) prescribing the form of the registers to be kept under this Act and the particulars to be entered therein;

  (c) providing for the inspection of registers kept under this Act, and the making and the furnishing and certification, of copies thereof and extracts therefrom;

  (d)prescribing the fee (not exceeding ten shillings) to be paid on registration, and the fees for inspecting, and for making or obtaining copies of, and extracts from, registers;

  (e)requiring notification to the registration authority of any changes requiring alterations in the particulars entered in the register;

  (f)generally for carrying this Act into effect.

  Amendment made: In paragraph (b), after the word "registers" ["registers to be kept"], insert the words "and lists."— [Mr. Brace.]
  Sir E. CORNWALL: I beg to move, in paragraph (d), to leave our, the words "fee (not exceeding ten shillings)," and insert instead therof the words "annual fee as in the opinion of the Charity Commissioners will be sufficient to cover the expenses of the registration authority under this Act."
  This is an Amendment which the London County Council would like to have in the Bill, and they think the expenses in regard to the Bill should not be a local expense. It is merely a financial matter between the county council and those carrying out the provisions of the Act. There is another point I should like the hon. Gentleman to consider, and that is whether it is not advisable, in the interests of the Bill itself, or in the interests of the Act when it comes into force, that these organisations should come to an end if they cease to be operative. If it is one payment of 10s., as is provided under the Bill, they will remain on the books of the authority, but if they had to pay an annual fee, it might be a small sum, or whatever the sum might be, to the Charity Commissioners, and they failed to pay it, then their society would be considered at an end. It might be an advantage to the responsible authorities administering the Act to know when any of these charities had ceased to operate any longer, so that they would not be further troubled. I understand that my hon. Friend does not wish the Amendment to go into the Bill, but I should like him to consider between now and the final passage of the measure through another place, whether there is not some point in what I have mentioned, that where it does not pay the annual fee, the charity shall cease to bother anybody or to be taken into account at all.
  Mr. BRACE: If I accepted the Amendment it would put the Commissioners under the obligation of finding out whether there had been any charge in regard to these charities. I hope the figure of 10s. will not be taken as the cost; it ought not to cost 10s. in any case. We think that we have drafted the Bill fairly, and that it properly meets the case. As to the payment of an annual fee, I would call attention to the fact that the Bill is for the duration of the War, and if the present War ended at the end of six months the operation of the Act would come to an end, and the charities would cease. There is no necessity to put in an annual fees

  1377
  and under the circumstances I hope my hon. Friend will withdraw the Amendment.
  Sir E. CORNWALL: I will withdraw the Amendment, but I doubt whether the war charities will end with the War. There will be many disabled men who will require attention, and these war charities will continue after the War. However, I do not wish to press my Amendment, and beg leave to withdraw it.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Mr. BRACE: I beg to move, in paragraph (d) to leave out the words "inspecting, and for" ["fees for inspecting, and for making"].
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: That does not quite cover the Amendment which I drafted for the registers to be open to public inspection daily. The hon. Gentle-, man's Amendments makes inspection free, but does not in any way provide that the registers shall be open to inspection daily. I should like to have the Amendment considered between now and the Report stage.
  Mr. BRACE: I hope the hon. Gentleman will not press his proposal that the register should be open to inspection daily, for it would make matters very inconvenient. It is open to anyone, without fee, to go and see the registers, but if people were every day to inspect the register, how could the registration authorities be expected to do their work? I hope that the Amendment will not be pressed.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I am very sorry I am not able to accept the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman. He suggests that the registration authorities could not carry on their work if the register were open to daily inspection. I hardly think that is so. May I point out that a person is liable to three months' imprisonment with hard labour, or a fine of £100, if he collects for an unregistered charity or does certain things for another charity, and it would be very hard on that man to go to the office of the registration authority and find that he was not allowed access to the register. I do not want to press the hon. Member to-night, but I would ask him between now and the Report stage to consider the question.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Further Amendment made: In paragraph (d), after the word "registers" ["extracts from registers"], insert the words "and lists."—[Mr. Brace]
  Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

  CLAUSE 5.—(Removal from the Register.)
  (1) The registration authority, if satisfied that any charity registered under this Act is not being carried on in good faith for charitable purposes, or is not complying with any of the conditions imposed under this Act, or is not being properly administered, may remove the charity from the register:
  Provided that an appeal shall lie to the Charity Commissioners against the decision of the registration authority to remove a charity from the register.
  (2) Where any charity is removed from the register the Charity Commissioners may, notwithstanding that an appeal is pending,—

  (a) order any bank or other person who holds money or securities on behalf of the charity not to part with such money or securities without the authority of the Commissioners;

  (b) order any cash or securities held for any such charity to be paid or transferred to the Official Trustees of Charitable Funds and for that purpose may make any such order as they are authorised under Section two of the Charitable Trusts Act, 1860, to make;

  and if any person fails to comply with any such order he shall, without prejudice to any other liability, be guilty of an offence against this Act.
  (3) The Charity Commissioners may also, where a charity is removed from the register, establish a scheme for the regulation of the charity in accordance with their ordinary jurisdiction under the Charitable Trusts Acts, 1853 to 1914, as if the charity were a charity within the jurisdiction of the Commissioners under those Acts, but without the necessity of any application being made for the purpose.
  Amendment made: In Sub-section (1), after the word "register" ["from the register"], insert the words "and shall notify such removal to the Charity Commissioners."— [Mr. Brace.]
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move after the words last inserted to insert the words "and if they so remove, it shall give public notice of its removal." I think if the registration authority remove a war charity from the register, they ought certainly to make that fact known to the public by giving public notice.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move, in Sub-section (3), after the word "is" "a charity is"], to insert the, words "refused registration or."
  Mr. BRACE: This point is covered by a new Clause which I propose to move subsequently.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to, and ordered to stand part of the Bill.
  CLAUSE 6 (Powers of Charity Commissioners for Purposes of Appeals) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

  CLAUSE 7.—(False Statements, etc.)
  If any person in any application for registration or in any notification of any change requiring alterations in the registered particulars makes any false statement or false representation, or if he fails to send any notification which he is required under this Act to send, he shall be guilty of an offence against this Act.
  Mr. BRACE: I beg to move, after the word "representation," to insert the words "or if any person falsely represents himself to be an officer or agent of a registered charity."
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to propose, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, to leave out the word "an" ["an officer"] and to insert instead thereof the words "a duly authorised." In another Amendment which I moved the hon,. Gentleman agreed that there was some substance in my suggestion that we should have the words "war charity" instead of "registered charity." For that reason it might be advisable to insert the words "a duly authorised."
  Mr. BRACE: I am willing to accept the words "war charity" in place of "registered charity."
  Sir G. TOULMIN: Before the words "duly authorised" are accepted, may I ask why should we make it more difficult to convict any person who commits an offence of this kind? Why should he not be convicted if he represents himself to be an officer, and why should it be necessary to prove that he represented that he was a duly authorised officer?
  Mr. BRACE: I would rather not have the words "duly authorised," but I would prefer to have the words "war charity." That would give us a broader term and enable us to get at charities which were not registered.
  Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Amendment made to the proposed Amendment: Leave out the word "registered," and insert instead thereof the word "war."
  Proposed words, as amended, there inserted.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to, and ordered to stand part of the Bill.

  CLAUSE 8.—(Penalties for Offences.)
  (1) Any person guilty of an offence against this Act shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds, or to imprisonment with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding three months.
  (2) No proceedings for an offence against this Act shall be instituted except by or with the consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
  Amendment made: In Sub-section (2) leave out the words "Director of Public Prosecutions," and insert instead thereof the words "Charity Commissioners."—[Mr. Brace.]
  Clause, as amended, agreed to, and ordered to stand part of die Bill.
  Clause 9 (Interpretation) ordered to stand part of the Bill.

  CLAUSE 10.—(Application to Scotland.)
  This Act shall apply to Scotland, subject to the following modifications:—

  (a) The Local Government Board for Scotland (hereinafter referred to as the Board) shall be substituted for the Secretary of State, and the Charity Commissioners respectively.

  1381

  (b) A royal, parliamentary or police burgh, and the town council thereof, shall be substituted for a county borough, or a borough having a separate police force, and the borough council thereof respectively.

  (c) Paragraph (b) of Sub-section (2) and Sub-section (3) of the Section of this Act relating to removal from the register, and the Section relating to the powers of the Charity Commissioners for the purposes of appeals, shall not apply, and in lieu thereof the following provisions shall be substituted, that is to say:—The Board may order any cash or securities held for any such charity to be paid or transferred to the Board or to such bank or other person as the Board may direct; and may frame a scheme providing for the future management of the charity and for the appointment of trustees to manage the same, or order that the charity be discontinued and that the funds be paid over to some registered charity having similar objects, or be otherwise applied as the order may direct, and if any person fails to comply with any such order he shall without prejudice to any other liability be guilty of an offence against this Act.

  (d) Sub-section (2) of the Section of this Act relating to penalties for offences shall not apply.

  (e) For the purposes of this Act the Board may make such inquiry as they think necessary and shall (except as regards costs) have the like powers in regard to any such inquiry as they have under Section twenty-five of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894, for the purposes of that Section.

  The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Munro): I beg to move in paragraph (b) to leave out the words "a county borough or a borough having a separate police force, and the borough," and to insert instead thereof the words "municipal borough or urban district."
  This Amendment is merely consequential on an Amendment which my hon. Friend moved to Clause 2.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Clause, as amended, agreed to, and ordered to stand part of the Bill.

  CLAUSE 11.—(Short Title, Commencement, and Extent.)
  (1) This Act may be cited as the War Charities Act, 1916, and shall come into operation one month after the passing of this Act.
  (2) This Act shall not extend to Ireland.
  Amendment made; In Sub-section (1) leave out the words "and shall come into operation one month after the passing of this Act."—[Mr. Brace.]
  Clause, as amended, agreed to, and ordered to stand part of the Bill.

  NEW CLAUSE.—(Powers as to Unregistered War Charities.)
  (1) Where the Charity Commissioners are satisfied on the representation of the registration authority that there is reason able ground for believing that any unregistered war charity is not being carried on in good faith for charitable purposes or is not complying with conditions substantially corresponding with the conditions imposed on registered charities under this Act or is not being properly administered the Commissioners may exercise as respects the charity any of the powers which are exercisable by them with respect to a charity which, having been registered under this Act, has been removed from the register, and for the purpose of an inquiry into any charity under this Section the Charity Commissioners shall have such powers in relation to the charity as are conferred by this Act on the Commissioners for the purposes of appeals.
  Provided that the Charity Commissioners shall not exercise the power of establishing a scheme for the regulation of any charity under this Section without giving the charity a full opportunity of being heard.
  (2) This Section shall apply to unregistered war charities whether or not an application for registration has been made, and to war charities registration of which has been refused.
  Clause brought up, and read the first time.
  Mr. BRACE: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a second time."
  During the early proceedings on Clause 1 it became clear that the general body of opinion of the Committee was overwhelmingly in favour of devising machinery whereby it would be possible to deal with cases of unregistered war

  1383
  charities. The hon. Member for Attercliffe (Mr. Anderson) and other hon. Members in the discussion pointed out that some war charities with funds in hand might evade the provisions of this Bill by neglecting to register. The Bill as drafted contained no provision on the subject, for we had not been able to devise procedure which might not have operated also as an embargo on the operations of genuine charities. In the interval since the discussion to which I have referred we have been successful, I hope, in overcoming that difficulty. This proposed new Clause gives power to the Charity Commissioners over unregistered charities under certain conditions, and, following the general scheme of the Bill, places the initiative in the hands of the local registration authority, and I trust that the Clause will receive the approval of the Committee. It is very comprehensive in character, and it is intended to be so. It is hoped that there will be no opportunity for any charity desiring to exploit the public to get outside the four corners of this Clause. I commend the Clause. I think it will make the Bill very much stronger. I am much obliged to my hon. Friends who have taken part in the discussion and to endeavour to correct what was a weakness of the Bill. If the Committee will accept this new Clause I believe that the Bill as a whole will be found to be an effective instrument for dealing with a great deal of the exploitation which this country has experienced in the past.
  Mr. ANDERSON: As I moved the Amendment on the point with which this new Clause deals, I wish to thank the Under-Secretary for bringing in the Amendment in a much better way. I think it will very considerably strengthen the Bill. It not only allows public control over future appeals, but provides some measure of public control over the future expenditure of money already in hand. From that point of view I think it considerably strengthens the Bill, and I am very glad it has been possible to adopt the Amendment in this way.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I agree with the last speaker that this Clause very much strengthens the Bill. I would like it, however, to go a little further on one point, and I would ask the hon. Gentleman whether he could not see his way to insert the words "or has not been," so that the Clause would read, "that any un-
  1384
  registered war charity is not being or has not been carried on …"I think that would strengthen the Clause very much.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Mr. PENNEFATHER: I beg to move, after the word "being" ["war charity is not being carried on"], to insert the words "or has not been."
  Mr. RAFFAN: I understand that some so-called war charities which feel the effect of this Bill have intimated in the newspapers that they are not appealing for further subscriptions. The intention no doubt is to evade the operation of the Act. I am not quite sure whether the phraseology of the new Clause covers such a case as that. The words of the Amendment do not appear to me to be the proper words, and if the case is not covered by the Clause as it stands I would appeal to my hon. Friend to insert words which would prevent the evasion of the Act by the ostensible winding up of a charity before the Act is passed.
  Mr. BRACE: I can assure my hon. Friend that the Clause is intended to do all that he desires. I am not sure that these words are required, but I have no objection to accepting them. I have consulted the Lord Advocate, who advises me that the Amendment will not weaken the Clause, and may strengthen it. I do not want to weaken it; I want to make it as strong as possible. We will, therefore, give the hon. Member the benefit of the doubt and accept the Amendment.
  Amendment agreed to.
  Further Amendments made: After the word "complying" ["is not complying with conditions"], insert the words "or has not complied."
  After the word "being" ["or is not being properly administered"], insert the words "or has not been."—[Mr. A. Williams.]
  Clause, as amended, added to the Bill.
  Bill reported.
  As amended, considered.
  Mr. RAWLINSON: I beg to move, to leave out Clause 1.
  10.0 P.M.
  I believe that this is a most, admirable Bill, and that it is thoroughly watertight. But a Bill which affects a large number of interests as this does ought to be seen in

  1385
  print by the people concerned. I have not the slightest intention of moving any Amendment on the Report stage if it comes on on Monday, but I would suggest that it is extraordinarily risky to put through in this way a Bill which nobody has seen in print.
  Mr. BRACE: The House has treated the Bill and me personally with such great consideration that I will not attempt to do anything against its wishes. If there is a feeling on the part of hon. Members that they would like the Report stage deferred I will not offer any opposition. My only desire was to get the Report stage and the Third Reading so that the Bill could go to the House of Lords and come into operation as soon as possible.
  Mr. J. W. WILSON: I congratulate the Under-Secretary on the way in which he has conducted the Bill and met the various criticisms which have been made. I hope the House will realise that no unnecessary delay will take place. Perhaps arrangements may be made to get the Bill considered on Monday. I agree with the hon. and learned Member opposite that, seeing that the Bill has been altered in so many details to-night, it would be much better to delay the Report stage for a day, so that hon. Members may see the amended Bill in print. I would point out, however, that it is necessary to get it, and especially the new Clause, into operation as speedily as possible.
  Mr. ANDERSON: I am quite sure that if this matter is adjourned till Monday there will be no desire on the part of any Member of the House to put forward any new Amendments or to bring forward any new matter. Therefore, I think that will be the wiser course. I am quite sure the Government will get that Bill on Monday without any trouble.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Mr. BRACE: I beg to move, "That further consideration of the Bill, as amended, be now adjourned."
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill, as amended, to be further considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 89.]

  GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (RETIRING ALLOWANCES AND GRATUITIES).
  Resolved, "That this House will on Monday next resolve itself into a Committee to consider of authorising the payment in certain cases out of the Revenue of India of a retiring allowance to the auditor of the accounts of the Secretary of State for India in Council, and his assistants, and of a gratuity to the legal representatives of the said auditor and his assistants under any Act of the present Session, to amend certain enactments relating to the Government of India, and to remove doubts as to the validity of certain Orders in Council made for India." (King's Recommendation to be signified.)—[Mr. Charles Roberts.]
  Whereupon Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 22nd of February, proposed the Question, "That this House do now adjourn."
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Adjourned accordingly at Seven minutes after Ten o'clock till Monday next, 14th August, pursuant to the Order of the House of 22nd February last.

  PETITIONS PRESENTED.
  The following Petitions were presented and ordered to lie upon the Table:

  TUESDAY.
  Dublin Reconstruction (Emergency Provisions) Bill,—Petition of owners, lessees, and occupiers of property in the city of Dublin, against (praying to be heard by counsel).
  Sale of Intoxicating Liquors during the War,—Petition from Belfast and other places, for prohibition.

WAR.
  GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND.
  GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND.
  SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (TITLE).
  SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (TITLE).
DISTURBANCES IN IRELAND.
  DEATH OF FATHER WATERS.
  DEATH OF FATHER WATERS.
  SHOOTING OF CONSTABLE FRITH.
  SHOOTING OF CONSTABLE FRITH.
  PRISONERS INTERNED.
  PRISONERS INTERNED.
  LORD DECIES.
  LORD DECIES.
  MOTOR PARTS (IMPORT DUTY).
  MOTOR PARTS (IMPORT DUTY).
  HOTEL CLOSED (STROMNESS).
  HOTEL CLOSED (STROMNESS).
  VACCINATION (EOYAL NAVY).
  VACCINATION (EOYAL NAVY).
  HAY PURCHASES.
  HAY PURCHASES.
  ARMY RATIONS (HOME SERVICE).
  ARMY RATIONS (HOME SERVICE).
  ROYAL GARRISON ARTILLERY (PROMOTIONS).
  ROYAL GARRISON ARTILLERY (PROMOTIONS).
  TROOPS AT SALONIKA.
  TROOPS AT SALONIKA.
  WAR OFFICE (REPLIES TO QUESTIONS).
  WAR OFFICE (REPLIES TO QUESTIONS).
  NO-CONSCRIPTION FELLOWSHIP (SEIZURE OF PAMPHLET).
  NO-CONSCRIPTION FELLOWSHIP (SEIZURE OF PAMPHLET).
  EXPEDITIONARY FOECES (PARCELS).
  EXPEDITIONARY FOECES (PARCELS).
  NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.
  NAVAL AND MILITARY PENSIONS AND GRANTS.
  HUTTING (RETURN).
  HUTTING (RETURN).
  OFFICERS ON LEAVE (TRAVELLING ALLOWANCE).
  OFFICERS ON LEAVE (TRAVELLING ALLOWANCE).
  WOOL PURCHASES.
  WOOL PURCHASES.
MILITARY SERVICE.
  SIR FRANCES VANE.
  SIR FRANCES VANE.
  NON-COMBATANT CORPS (DUTIES).
  NON-COMBATANT CORPS (DUTIES).
  IRISH MIGRATORY LABOURERS.
  IRISH MIGRATORY LABOURERS.
  TREATMENT OF SOLDIEES.
  TREATMENT OF SOLDIEES.
  CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.
  CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS.
  LOCAL TRIBUNALS.
  LOCAL TRIBUNALS.
  DARDANELLES COMMISSION.
  DARDANELLES COMMISSION.
  PETROL SUPPLY.
  PETROL SUPPLY.
MUNITIONS.
  SHELL INSPECTORS.
  SHELL INSPECTORS.
  BEER AND SPIRITS (HOME CONSUMTION).
  BEER AND SPIRITS (HOME CONSUMTION).
  LUNACY BOARD OF CONTROL.
  LUNACY BOARD OF CONTROL.
  BERMONDSEY BOARD OF GUARDIANS (OUT-RELIEF).
  BERMONDSEY BOARD OF GUARDIANS (OUT-RELIEF).
  NERVE-SHAKEN SOLDIERS.
  NERVE-SHAKEN SOLDIERS.
  BRITISH SHIPS (LASCARS AND FOREIGNERS EMPLOYED).
  BRITISH SHIPS (LASCARS AND FOREIGNERS EMPLOYED).
  BOARD OF TRADE (TEMPORARY BOY CLERKS).
  BOARD OF TRADE (TEMPORARY BOY CLERKS).
  POST OFFICE HOLIDAYS.
  POST OFFICE HOLIDAYS.
  INTERNMENT CAMPS (USE OF SOAP).
  INTERNMENT CAMPS (USE OF SOAP).
  Estate Duty Office (Second-Class Clerks).
  Estate Duty Office (Second-Class Clerks).
  Weeds Act (Ireland).
  Weeds Act (Ireland).
  Nicaraguan Canal.
  Nicaraguan Canal.