§ Mr. WASONasked the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will consider whether it is now possible to demobilise P. G. Smith, first-class petty officer, Royal Naval Reserve, His Majesty's Ship "Bootle," care of General Post Office, London, on the ground that his services are urgently required to assist in the working of his croft, which his wife is no longer able to manage without his help?
§ Dr. MACNAMARAIt is not possible to demobilise this petty officer immediately. A relief for him is required, as he is serving in a commissioned ship. The general policy of the Admiralty is to relieve first those men who are serving on stations abroad.
§ Mr. WASONasked the Secretary of State for War if he has received urgent representations for the release on compassionate grounds of Gunner J. D. Rendall, A Battery, 290th London Brigade, Royal Field Artillery, France; and if he will take into consideration the fact that Gunner Rendall's widowed mother is left without any help on a farm of 70 acres with stock consisting of twenty-two cattle, three horses, one pony, and two sheep, and that, unless her son is released, she will have to abandon the farm and will have great difficulty in providing for herself and four young girls dependent on her?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThere is no trace of any such representations having been received by the War office in this case. If my hon. Friend will furnish me with a statement giving more detailed information, including particulars of what labour there is available on the farm, and also the ages of the girls, or will obtain a similar statement vouched for by a magistrate, doctor, or clergyman, the case will receive consideration. It will also be necessary to 1745W know Gunner Rendall's regimental number, age, and the date on which he joined the Colours for continuous service.
§ Mr. J. M. MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour whether he has received an application for the release as a slip man of Private R. Naylor, No. 78906, 4th Battalion Durham Light Infantry, early in January, 1919;whether he forwarded a recommendation for his release to the War Office before 1st February; and, if no such recommendation was forwarded, what was the reason for it being withheld?
§ Sir R. HORNEIf such an application was received it would have been dealt with locally by the Employment Exchange. Inquiries will be made if the hon. Member will be good enough to say to which Employment Exchange application was made. I may point out, however, that even if Private Naylor had been registerred as a "slip" man before the 1st February he would not for that reason be eligible for demobilisaition, although he would thereby have secured a certain priority of release if he were eligible for demobilisation under one or other of the conditions provided in Army Order 55, dated 29th January.
§ Mr. MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour whether he received an application through the Manchester Labour Exchange in November, 1918, for the release of Private J. Wood, No. 176553, 326 H.S.W.C, Maltings, Thetford; whether he forwarded a recommendation for the release of this man to the War Office before 1st February; and, if no such recommendation was forwarded, what was the reason, for it being withheld?
§ Sir R. HORNENo application from Manchester for the man named can be traced.
§ Mr. MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour whether he received an application for the release as a contract letter man of Private C. Oldroyd, No. 277801, attached to the 594th (Tyne) Fortress Company, Royal Engineers, early in January, 1919; whether he forwarded a recommendation for the release of this man to the War Office before 1st February, 1919; and, if no such recommendation was forwarded, what was the reason for it being withheld?
§ Sir R. HORNEIf such an application was received it would have been dealt1746W with by the local advisory committee. Inquiries will be made if the hon. Member will be good enough to say to which local advisory committee application was made. I may point out, however, that even if Private Oldroyd had been registered as a "contract letter" man before the 1st February, he would not for that reason be eligible for demobilisation, although he would thereby have secured a certain priority of release if he were eligible for demobilisation under one or other of the conditions provided in Army Order 55 of the 29th January.
§ Mr. MACDONALDasked the Minister of Labour whether he received an application through the Bradford Advisory Committee for the release as a pivotal man of Gunner Edward Hall, No. 154696, 504th Siege Battery, Royal Garrison Artillery, in January, 1919; whether he forwarded a recommendation for the release of this man to the War Office before 1st February; and, if no such recommendation was forwarded, what was the reason for it being withheld?
§ Sir R. HORNENo such application can be traced as having been received through the Bradford Local Advisory Committee. An application was received from Gunner Hall's employers, Messrs. Wayman and Company, Halifax, on the 11th February, after the lists of pivotal men had been closed, and no action could be taken under the Regulations then in force.