ii 
 
 m< 
 
 m
 
 '<\«v 
 
 ■'=1 
 
 % 
 
 /O.
 
 SIX YEARS OF POLITICS 
 
 1910-1916
 
 D. M. MASON, 
 
 [Frontispiece
 
 
 SIX YEARS OF POLITICS 
 
 1910-1916 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 SPEECHES ON FINANCE, FOREIGN AFFAIRS 
 HOME RULE, AND WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE 
 
 BY D. M. MASON 
 
 Member of Parliament for the City of Coventry 
 
 WITH A PORTRAIT 
 
 
 LONDON 
 
 JOHN MURRAY, 
 
 ALBEMARLE STREET, W. 
 
 
 1917 
 
 
 
 
 ' ' > , i 1 t . , 
 
 :/.\ 

 
 All Rights Reserved
 
 I 
 
 
 L 
 
 C/5 
 
 PREFACE 
 
 These six years have been selected for the narrative 
 
 of this volume, not because they represent the only 
 
 political experience of the author, but because they 
 ^' embrace his most active political life, and also because 
 ^ of the hope that, as they refer to actions and events 
 ^ the most important in British history and that of the 
 ^ world, they are the more likely to interest the greatest 
 
 number of people, 
 X The speeches are principally taken from ''' Hansard'' s''^ 
 ec Official Report of Parliamentary Debates, and are there- 
 ""■ fore a report of the actual words spoken in the House 
 ^ of Commons, The author is conscious of their many 
 
 shortcomings, but has deemed it better to present the 
 ^ speeches in their original form, rather than to alter 
 A and correct them in accordance with the style and 
 
 literary taste of some of those who may perhaps do 
 
 him the honour to read them. 
 
 D, M. M. 
 
 April 1917. 
 
 412G91
 
 DEDICATED TO 
 
 JM Y WIFE 
 
 WHOSE SYMPATHY AND INTEREST HAVE BEEN MOST 
 HELPFUL IN THIS VENTURE
 
 CONTENTS 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 PiQH 
 
 Election for the City of Coventry . . 1 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 The Massacre in the Oasis of Tripoli . 20 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 The Integrity of Persia .... 37 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 The HoaiE Rule Demonstration in Dublin 45 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 Suspension of the Old Sinking Fund . 54 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 Women's Suffrage 63 
 
 vii
 
 viii CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 PAGB 
 
 A Pkospective Deficit .... 78 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 An Abnormal Supplementary Estimate . 86 
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 Abolition of Plural Voting ... 99 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 Rise in Prices . . . . . .105 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 The Four and a Half Per Cent. War Loan 114 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 Teeasuey Currency Notes . . . .127 
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 Mobilising American Securities . . .139 
 
 CHAPTER XIV 
 Prospects of Peace 147
 
 CONTENTS ix 
 
 CHAPTER XV 
 
 PAQB 
 
 Peace and War . . . . . .158 
 
 CHAPTER XVI 
 Treasury War Finance . . . .169 
 
 CHAPTER XVII 
 Local and National Questions . . .181 
 
 CHAPTER XVIII 
 Battle of the Somme and Prospects of Peace 202 
 
 Index 213
 
 SIX YEARS OF POLITICS 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 ELECTION FOR THE CITY OF COVENTRY 
 
 On December 6th, 1910, 1 was elected Liberal Member 
 of Parliament for the City of Coventry by a majority 
 of 523 over my Unionist opponent, the figures being 
 J. K. Foster, Unionist, 6,828, and D. M. Mason, 
 Liberal, 7,351. Mr. Foster was the former member, 
 so that the election meant the gain of a seat to the 
 Liberal Party. The following is a copy of my Election 
 Address to the Freemen and Electors of the City of 
 Coventry. 
 
 General Election, December 1910 
 
 To the Freemen and Electors of the City of Coventry 
 
 " Gentlemen, 
 
 " I desire to offer my services as your representa- 
 tive in ParUament. I stand on the principles of Liberal- 
 ism, which I believe to be the best guarantee for 
 maintaining the greatness and prosperity of the British 
 Empire and the welfare of the British people. 
 
 " As you are aware, the present General Election is 
 due to the refusal ot the House of Lords to accept the 
 
 1
 
 2 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap, i 
 
 present Government's Parliament Bill, which proposes 
 to limit the Veto of the existing House of Lords. I 
 need hardly inform you that I am in hearty agreement 
 with the Government on this question. 
 
 " I am, and always have been, a staunch supporter 
 of Free Trade. I regard it as the bulwark of our 
 shipping industry and foreign trade, by which we live. 
 A plentiful supply of cheap food and the free inter- 
 change of commodities between this country and our 
 colonies and foreign nations are the basis of our pros- 
 perity, and will help largely to maintain employment 
 for those engaged in shipbuilding, shipping and allied 
 trades, engineering and the manufacture of all kinds of 
 machinery, cycle and motor manufacturing, and general 
 industry. 
 
 " Unemployment, although very much reduced, 
 still prevails in our midst. To reduce it I believe that 
 peace abroad, economy in administration, and wise 
 expenditure on the part of the Government, coupled 
 with Labour Exchanges, insurance, and a thorough 
 system of land reform, will be most effective. 
 
 " Believing as I do in Religious Freedom and a 
 thorough system of national education, I shall cordially 
 support a proper expediture for this purpose, coupled 
 with popular representation and control when the 
 money required for the purpose is drawn from the 
 people in the shape of rates and taxes. 
 
 " I rejoice that the Liberal Government has been 
 successful in establishing Old Age Pensions, and I am 
 glad to see the pauper disqualification is to be removed 
 from the present Act. 
 
 " I am in favour of self-government for Ireland, 
 and should like to see the same principle of self-govern- 
 ment applied to England, Scotland, and Wales, as well 
 as to Ireland. 
 
 " To enable us to protect our rights throughout the
 
 1910] ELECTION ADDRESS 3 
 
 Empire, I should support a strong Navy and an efficient 
 Army. 
 
 " I should support Poor Law Reform ; I should 
 welcome all Elections on one day, and that day a 
 National Holiday ; Payment of Members of ParUa- 
 ment ; and the granting of the Suffrage to Women on 
 the same terms as men. 
 
 " Regarding India, I should support the maintenance 
 of the Civil Authority and a wise extension of Local 
 Government throughout our great dependency. 
 
 " In Foreign Policy I should loyally support our 
 existing alliances and understandings, although I 
 believe our true policy consists in being friendly with 
 all nations, andjbeing chary about entering into en- 
 tangling alliances, which may draw us into wars or 
 compel us to take the offensive in quarrels which do 
 not concern us, and over which we have no control. 
 
 " In the Near East, I should support a firm policy 
 in carrying out our solemn obligations incurred by 
 Treaty, and otherwise, for the protection of the Chris- 
 tians in Armenia and Macedonia. 
 
 " A great opportunity now presents itself for the 
 City of Coventry to recover its former position as a 
 stronghold of progress. Should you do me the honour 
 to place this great trust in my hands, I need hardly 
 state that my best efforts would be at the service of my 
 country, and of this City in particular. But there is 
 a higher and greater issue involved in the present 
 Election. Your vote now is for Freedom and for the 
 right of the people of this country to govern them- 
 selves. 
 
 " I have the honour to be. Gentlemen, 
 " Your obedient Servant, 
 
 " D. M. Mason. 
 
 "Coventry, 
 
 "November 2ith, 1910."
 
 4 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap, i 
 
 The votes in Parliament which I have given and the 
 speeches I made during the period I have had the 
 honour to represent the City of Coventry in Parlia- 
 ment will demonstrate whether I have been faithful 
 to the pledges contained in the foregoing address. 
 
 In the early years of Mr. Asquith's Ministry I found 
 myself repeatedly voting against the Government on 
 questions of expenditure and Women's Suffrage. 
 These votes were mostly given against what I regarded 
 as provocative and inflated Naval Estimates, my 
 reasons being that while I stood for a strong Navy and 
 an adequate defence, I attributed immense importance 
 to the necessity in time of peace of building up large 
 financial reserves through economy and redemption of 
 debt. I pointed out that the naval expenditure of Ger- 
 many — to which Power comparisons were frequently, 
 unwisely, and in a provocative manner drawn atten- 
 tion to by members of the Government — amounted 
 to about twenty-odd millions, whereas our expenditure 
 amounted to nearly fifty millions. This margin appeared 
 to me to be adequate. Another feature to which I drew 
 attention was that German naval expenditure was met 
 by loans, whereas British naval expenditure was 
 entirely met out of revenue. The importance of a 
 strong financial reserve being of supreme importance 
 in the event of war has been emphasised by statesmen 
 like Gladstone and Disraeli in past years. 
 
 Finally came the Marconi debate, when I deemed it 
 right to vote with the Unionist opposition against the 
 Government. These votes, although in strict accord- 
 ance with my pledges to the electors of Coventry, 
 di.spleased the local Liberal Association, and resulted
 
 1914] DISPUTE WITH EXECUTIVE 5 
 
 in a considerable correspondence with that body, which 
 cuhninated in a decision on their part to withdraw 
 their support. The following speech by the President 
 of the Coventry Liberal Association is, on the whole, 
 a fair and accurate statement of what took place. 
 
 On Party Loyalty 
 
 A Speech delivered before the Executive Committee of 
 the Coventry Liberal Association by the President, 
 Mr. C. Vernon Pugh, J. P., January 22nd, 1914 
 
 " I need not disguise from the members of the 
 Executive Committee the dehcacy and difficulty of the 
 situation with which we have to deal. Neither will I 
 disguise the extremely painful position which has been 
 occupied by myself as President of the Association 
 and the chief channel of communication between the 
 Liberals of Coventry and its member and the Advisory 
 Committee during the last few months. It covers a 
 greater period than a few months, but its acuteness 
 developed very greatly during the last few months, 
 and our position has been extremely painful and 
 extremely difficult. We are very grateful for the 
 sympathy and loyalty which those who appointed us 
 to our position have shown to us during all this time 
 of stress and difficulty. The Advisory Committee, 
 as you will all probably recollect, was appointed on the 
 suggestion of Mr. Bettmann, our present Mayor, to be 
 a body always available to counsel and advise the 
 President when in doubt and difficulty, and I may 
 say I have found the existence of the Advisory Com- 
 mittee a very useful help in time of trouble. The 
 Advisory Committee, I tliink I ought to state, consists 
 of Mr. Woimell, the Treasurer of the Association, Mr.
 
 6 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap, i 
 
 J. Grant, Chairman of the Finance Committee, Mr. 
 Dodd, and Mr. Bettmann, but Mr. Bettmann has not 
 acted on the Advisory Committee or in any other poH- 
 tical capacity since he became Mayor of the City. Our 
 procedure to-night will consist, first, of a statement by 
 myself on my own behalf as President and on behalf 
 of my Advisory Committee. Then certain resolutions 
 will be read to the meeting which are recommendations 
 of the Advisory Committee on the situation as it exists. 
 These resolutions will be proposed by Mr. Wormell, 
 seconded by Mr. Dodd, and supported by Mr. J. Grant, 
 the remaining member of the Advisory Committee. 
 They will be in the form of recommending certain reso- 
 lutions to a general meeting of the Coventry Liberal 
 Association to be called hereafter. So far as my state- 
 ment is concerned, I am going to make it as brief as 
 possible. I shall limit it to a recital of facts, and from 
 it I shall exclude all but the most necessary criticisms 
 and comments. 
 
 THIRTY VOTES AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 " Mr. Mason was, you will remember, elected by the 
 votes of Coventry Liberals in December 1910, and it 
 was not very long after Parliament had assembled 
 when he entered upon a series of criticisms of Ministers 
 and ministerial policy in wliich he has ever since 
 industriously persisted. I have taken out from the 
 official records the number of votes that Mr. Mason 
 has registered against his party, against the Govern- 
 ment. It has surprised me, and no doubt it will sur- 
 prise most of us present and the Liberals of Coventry 
 to find that on no less than thirty occasions during 
 the three years of his membership has he voted against 
 the Govemm'^-t. His pubhc attacks on Ministers 
 have been directed against Sir Edward Grey, the
 
 1914] PRESIDENT'S SPEECH 7 
 
 Foreign Secretary, Mr. Lloyd George, the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, Mr. McKenna when he was at the 
 Admiralty, Mr. Churchill since he has been at the 
 Admiralty, and, above all, and most distressing to his 
 supporters inCoventry, against our great PrimeMinister, 
 Mr, Asquith. (Hear, hear.) Two of the most hurtful 
 and painful votes he has recorded to my mind — and I 
 think I speak for the great majority of Liberals in 
 Coventry — are those, when alone among Liberals, he 
 not only voted for, but actually moved a resolution 
 refusing leave to introduce the Francliise Bill. An 
 act more disloyal to one's party I cannot possibly 
 conceive. (Hear, hear.) Happily he was the sole 
 Liberal member who was concerned in this matter. 
 The other vote which I think hurt us extremely, and 
 pained us, was the vote, with one other Liberal, Mr. 
 Munro-Ferguson,a Scottish member, when he deserted 
 the Government in time of very great stress and trial 
 in the division on the Marconi debate. (Hear, hear.) 
 At that time Mr. Mason and Mr. Munro-Ferguson were 
 the only two Liberals who were not able to stand by 
 their party in a time of great crisis and distress. From 
 the time these attacks began to the present time my 
 personal position as President of the Coventry Liberal 
 Association has been exceedingly difficult, but I have 
 felt it my duty, and as far as in me lay I have acted up 
 to my sense of duty, to smooth, on all occasions and by 
 every possible means, friction between Mr. Mason and 
 many of his constituents. I have had many interviews 
 with him personally, and it will be quite impossible for 
 me to state how many interviews I have had with angry 
 constituents whom I have conceived it to be my duty 
 and my loyalty to Mr. Mason, as member for the City, 
 and in the party's interests, to endeavour to pacify. 
 (Hear, hear.) Everything I could do I have done 
 in that direction.
 
 8 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap, i 
 
 THE GARDEN PARTY REPROOF 
 
 ** In spite of all our efforts, the chances of our holding 
 the seat for JVIr. Mason at the next election, in my 
 judgment, and in the judgment of my Advisory Com- 
 mittee appointed for the purpose of counselling and 
 advising me, have become more and more remote as 
 time has gone on. I will remind the members of the 
 Executive Committee that at a meeting that took 
 place in July 1912, at a garden party at my house, 
 when Mr. Mason delivered a long speech, consisting 
 to a very large extent of an attempt to justify his Par- 
 liamentary action, after he had finished, I, speaking 
 from the same platform, in his presence, from the chair, 
 used these words i 
 
 " ' I do not believe that !Mr. Mason has fully 
 appreciated the mission for which Coventry sent 
 him to Parliament. I consider that the main 
 object of that mission, apart from details, is to 
 give loyal and unswerving support to the Govern- 
 ment policy as laid down by Mr. Asquith and our 
 leaders. I hope that before grave decisions have 
 to be taken it may bo possible for us to say that 
 Mr. Mason is acting in accordance with the mission 
 we have entrusted to him.' 
 
 Those who were present will remember that this state- 
 ment was received with marked enthusiasm by a very 
 large audience of Liberals who had gathered together — 
 (hear, hear) — and it was not dissented from by Mr. 
 Mason at that time nor since, and we all hoped that 
 after consideration he would be able to act upon the 
 statement. Unhappily, time proved that such hope 
 was to be frustrated, and events showed that Mr. 
 Mason was determined to maintain the same attitude 
 of hostility to ministers.
 
 1914] PRESIDENT'S SPEECH 9 
 
 THE LAST CONFERENCE WITH THE COMMITTEE 
 
 " The Advisory Committee, with myself, have had 
 long formal conferences with IVIr. IMason on a number 
 of occasions, the last being his visit here m the first week 
 of December 1913. At that conference we went over 
 the usual ground of IVIr. Mason's criticisms of ministers 
 of late, particularly in regard to the forthcommg 
 estimates and his general attitude towards ministers. 
 The position was very faiily and fully stated to Mr. 
 Mason, and very fully discussed from every point of 
 view. We made it quite clear to Mr. Mason that in 
 our judgment the seat had already been seriously en- 
 dangered, and that it would be certainly lost if Mr. 
 Mason felt compelled to continue his Parliamentary 
 action unchecked, with the result that, after a very full 
 discussion, we understood him to say that he did not 
 think there would bo any further occasion for him to 
 attack ministers, and that, with the exception of 
 attending a meeting on the question of armaments, to 
 which he was already pledged, he was not likely to be 
 identified with anything that would have the appearance 
 of hostility to the Government. As a result of this, I 
 felt myself justified in once more taking the chair for 
 him at his meetmg in the Baths Assembly Hall on 
 December 8th, and also justified in expressing from the 
 chair my hope that Coventry Liberals would be able to 
 renew their confidence in Mr. Mason on many future 
 occasions. I might add to that, that Mr. Mason and 
 his wife were guests at my house during their visit 
 to Coventry for nearly a week, and I gathered most 
 certainly — as far as my mental capacity for grasping 
 an impression enabled me — from my intercourse with 
 him, that it was his intention to make a serious endeav- 
 our to regain the confidence of the party locally.
 
 10 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap, i 
 
 THE LETTER TO THE "DAILY NEWS AND LEADER" 
 
 " In these circumstances which I have described — 
 I hope that without any bias I have tried to confine 
 myself to statement of fact without prejudice or unfair 
 comment — you will understand, probably you all felt 
 it, what a tremendous shock was caused to myself and 
 my Advisory Committee, and, I think, to the majority 
 of Liberals in Coventry who saw it, by Mr. Mason's 
 extraordinary letter to the Daily News and Leader of 
 December 26th, less than three weeks after we had felt 
 ourselves so reassured by him in Coventry. You 
 will remember that letter was addressed to the Daily 
 News and Leader, dated December 23rd, and published 
 on December 26th. The remarkable passages in it 
 were, first, the reference to his attendance as a member 
 of the deputation that was received by the Prime 
 ^linister. The one I refer to was this i 
 
 " ' As one of those who attended the deputation 
 and heard I\Ir. Asquith's request to treat what 
 transpired as confidential, I am, of course, pre- 
 cluded from stating what the reply was. I believe 
 I am justified, however, in asserting that by many 
 of us it was regarded as unsatisfactory.' 
 
 Later on in the letter he asks : 
 
 " ' Will history repeat itself, and will it end in a 
 defeat and reconstruction of the present Govern- 
 ment in the House of Commons ? There are many 
 indications that this is not only possible but 
 probable. I may be told that this is impossible, 
 until Home Rule for Ireland, Welsh Disestablish- 
 ment, and the abolition of plural voting have been 
 secured.'
 
 1914] PRESIDENT'S SPEECH U 
 
 Later on lie says : 
 
 " ' Let us assume that the Government meet 
 with defeat either on this issue or on some other 
 issue in the coming session of Parliament. What 
 then ? I assume ]\Ir. Asquith would resign. Mr. 
 Bonar Law might be sent for by the Kmg. He 
 probably would advise a dissolution of Parliament. 
 The King might agree to that or send for IVIr. 
 Asquith again, who might reconstruct his Govern- 
 ment and endeavour to carry on till 1915.' 
 
 " It struck me and my Advisory Committee, and I 
 think it struck the great majority of Liberals, that a 
 man who could write such a letter, which, reading 
 between the lines, displays acquiescence in, if not a 
 desire for the defeat of the Government, cannot be relied 
 upon as a loyal supporter of the Government in time 
 of crisis. (Hear, hear.) 
 
 — AND AFTER 
 
 ",Directly the holidays were over I wrote to him that 
 I considered the situation provoked by this letter to be 
 extremely grave, and that I was callmg a meetmg of the 
 Advisory Committee together without delay to consider 
 it. The Advisory Committee met on January 6th. 
 We gave long and very careful and deliberate considera- 
 tion to the matter, and we came to the unanimous 
 conclusion that it would be impossible, with Mr. Mason 
 as candidate, to retain the seat for the Liberal Party 
 at the next election, and that it was our duty to report 
 accordingly to our Executive. We also decided that, 
 in fairness to Mr. Mason, I should forward this decision 
 to him, and consult him as to how he would wish it to 
 be announced. I wrote requesting Mr. Mason to give 
 me an appointment. That interview took place in
 
 12 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap. I 
 
 London on the 13th inst., and, having informed him of 
 the purpose of the interview and of the decision of the 
 Committee, he very fully and franldy, and I would like 
 to add with the greatest civility and politeness, dis- 
 cussed the whole situation with me, fully admitting the 
 gravity and danger of the position. The method of 
 publication was discussed, namely, whether he would 
 prefer to state that owing to differences with the local 
 party he would not be able to offer himself again as 
 their candidate, or, on the other hand, whether he would 
 prefer that the announcement should come from the 
 local party. After very full consideration, at an inter- 
 view which lasted the iDest part of two hours, he came 
 to the conclusion that he would prefer the statement of 
 the decision of the Advisory Committee to be made 
 public by it at the earliest possible moment, lest gossip 
 and surmise should put garbled versions into circula- 
 tion. After the interview, I returned to Coventry, 
 having wired for the Advisory Committee to meet that 
 evening. I conveyed this wish to the Advisory Com- 
 mittee, and it was decided to fall in with this view. 
 Consequently, on the 14th inst., the briefest and barest 
 possible statement was conveyed to the Press, and was 
 published that evening in Coventry. 
 
 MR. MASON AND THE ASSOCIATION 
 
 " Until this present moment no other information 
 of any kind whatever has been issued by the Advisory 
 Committee. I should also like to say that all reports 
 as to approaching any otlier possible candidate are 
 entirely without foundation. The Advisory Committee 
 have, of course, no power whatever in the matter. 
 It is for the Association to consider the question of 
 candidature, and no person has been approached by 
 the Advisory Committee with regard to a possible
 
 1914] PRESIDENT'S SPEECH 13 
 
 future candidature. No letters of any kind have 
 passed between Mr. Mason and myself or the Advisory 
 Committee, in spite of statements in the Birmingham 
 Press, but, on the 18th inst., the Secretary of the 
 Association received a letter from Mr. Mason termin- 
 ating his connection with and his subscription to the 
 Association. 
 
 NO " LIBERAL MAGNATES " 
 
 " This brings the history of these very unhappy and 
 distressing events down to the present moment. It 
 only remains for me to refer to two highly improper 
 statements that have appeared in the Press in connec- 
 tion with this matter. The first was made by the 
 Daily News and Leader on the 15th inst., in which, in its 
 leading article, the suggestion was made that our 
 position had been prompted by Liberal magnates in 
 the armament industry in Coventry. (Laughter.) 
 Such a suggestion could only have been made in com- 
 plete ignorance of local conditions. We have no Liberal 
 magnates in Coventry. (More laughter.) Certainly 
 no one connected with armament interests, and it is 
 painful and surprising that so good a Liberal journal 
 as the Daily News and Leader should have stooped to 
 circulate so contemptible a suggestion. (Hear, hear.) 
 The other point to which I take strong exception is the 
 statement in several papers — and I have heard it also 
 in conversation — the suggestion that our action has 
 been taken at the dictation of the Central Liberal 
 Office — the Whip's Office. It is utterly untrue. On 
 two occasions only during Mr. Mason's membership 
 has the Whip responsible for the Midland area mentioned 
 to me Ml. Mason's attacks on Ministers or votes in the 
 House, and on those two occasions merely to suggest 
 an endeavour to impress on Mr. Mason the importance
 
 14 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [ohap. i 
 
 of loyal support of our trusted leaders. (Hear, hear.) 
 The decision has been taken without consulting the 
 Liberal Whips in any way, at any stage. (Hear, hear.) 
 As a matter of course, I have informed the Chief Whip 
 myself, personally, of the decision, but he has had no 
 observations to make upon it. We have been abso- 
 lutely and enthely free from any interference or dicta- 
 tion from Liberal headquarters. 
 
 RELATIONS WITH THE MEMBER 
 
 " We wish it to be very clearly understood that 
 neither the Advisory Committee, nor the official Liberal 
 Party in Coventry, have the faintest desire to dictate 
 unduly to its member how ho shall govern his actions or 
 his votes in Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Wo do not 
 object, and never have objected, to his taking an inde- 
 pendent view, even if taking it should involve criti- 
 cisms of the actions and policy of Mmisters ; but we 
 have felt convinced, however, that Mr. Mason is not to 
 be relied upon to support the Government in a crisis, 
 and this feeling has become, in our mmds, a certainty 
 since the publication of the letter in the Daily News 
 and Leader on December 26th, in which he clearly 
 foreshadowed casting his vote against the Government 
 in a division which ho also foreshadowed might 
 overthrow the Liberal Government, and lose the 
 advantages of the Parliament Act, Home Rule, Welsh 
 Disestablishment, and the abolition of plural voting. 
 
 " I am afraid I have trespassed longer than I ought 
 to have done on your time, but I have felt it necessary 
 to state fully and frankly the facts, and why the Ad- 
 visory Committee came to this Executive with the 
 recommendation which will shortly be put before you. 
 The position may be summed very briefly in this way : 
 Mr. Mason has put us in the dilemma of having to decide
 
 1914] PRESIDENT'S SPEECH 16 
 
 whether, by supporting him, wc will say we accept his 
 individual judgment on matters of high policy as having 
 greater weight with us than the united judgment of the 
 Prime Minister and his Cabinet — I say that to ask us 
 to do that is to put a strain upon our confidence, which 
 we cannot possibly put upon it. (Hear, hear.) With 
 great reluctance and with much pain, but with the sure 
 sense that we are taking the right and only course in 
 the interest of the Party in Coventry, we consider it 
 our inevitable duty to recommend to you the course 
 embodied in the followmg resolutions, which, after they 
 have been read to you, will be proposed by Mr. Wormell, 
 seconded by Mr. Dodd, and supported by Mr. J. Grant 5 
 
 " ' Resolved that, havmg heard the President's 
 statement on the negotiations between IVIr. Mason 
 and the Advisory Committee, the followmg 
 resolutions be recommended for adoption at a 
 general meeting of the Association : 
 
 " ' (1) That the sincere thanks of the Association 
 be and are hereby tendered to Mr. Mason for his 
 services during his candidature and membership. 
 
 " ' (2) That the Association hereby records its 
 appreciation of IVIr. Mason's diligent and con- 
 scientious discharge of his duties at Westminster, 
 but expresses, with profound regret, its conviction 
 that the unfortunate differences which have arisen 
 render another successful candidature by ]Mr. 
 Mason impossible. 
 
 " ' (3) That the usual steps be taken forthwith 
 to endeavour to secure a prospective Liberal 
 candidate in readiness for the election.' " 
 
 [The recommendations were carried unanimously.] 
 
 As a result of all these conversations, and inquiries 
 as to what I intended to do, I decided to announce that.
 
 16 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap, i 
 
 God willing, I would stand as an Independent candidate 
 for the City of Coventry at the next election. Feeling 
 ran very high in the division for some time, and a con- 
 stituent was so moved by the prevailing atmosphere 
 that he endeavoured to describe the situation in some 
 rather amusing verses ! 
 
 THE MEMBER FOR COVENTRY 
 
 It was only last December, 
 
 As most of you remember. 
 That Pugh for D. M. Mason took the chair. 
 
 And referred to him with pleasure, 
 
 Which was almost without measure. 
 You remember — most of you, no doubt, were there 1 
 
 He told us — don't you know ? — 
 That that night, three years ago, 
 
 Mr. David Marshall Mason had been sent, 
 By a large majoritee 
 Of the votes of you and me. 
 
 To represent the town in Parliament. 
 
 And he then went on to say. 
 
 In a very pleasing way, 
 How he hoped that David many times might be 
 
 In the happy future years — 
 
 (There were loud, terrific cheers) — 
 Returned again as Coventry's M.P. 
 
 But before a month had passed 
 
 All of us were quite aghast 
 To read our evening paper and to find 
 
 That a feud had broken out — 
 
 No one quite knows what about — 
 But it Bwenri phe Liberal " Boss " had changed his mind !
 
 1914] CONSTITUENT'S VERSES 17 
 
 The Advisory Committee 
 
 Of the Liberals in the City 
 Had resolved to turn our David into Jonah, 
 
 And to cast him overboard, 
 
 Like that prophet so untoward, 
 To be swallowed by the special fish called " Bonar." 
 
 At first there was a row, 
 
 And a very great " pow-wow " ! 
 For Mason had his pals as well as Pugh ; 
 
 But Vernon had his way, 
 
 And Mason — 'lack-a-day ! — 
 Found support from very, very, very few. 
 
 Now, when Mason had been thrown 
 
 From the place that seemed his own, 
 He read Milton's poem " Paradise Regained," 
 
 And he said, "I'm blowed if I 
 
 Won't have another shy 
 To retain the seat to which I have attained." 
 
 Then, like a " canny Scot," 
 
 Who commit himself will not, 
 " Bang went saxpence " on a message to the Press, 
 
 That, " God willing," next Election 
 
 He would combat Pugh's selection 
 And land the local Liberals in a mess. 
 
 Pugh returned the Scotsman's blow 
 
 With a vengeance — don't you know ? — 
 Seven speeches and a letter volleyed forth ; 
 
 Till the public 'gan to smile, 
 
 At his venom pugherile. 
 And laid " evens " on the Champion from the North. 
 
 We shall have to " wait and see " 
 
 What the issue's going to be ; 
 And we shan't have very long to wait, I giiess ! 
 
 " Solvitur ambulando," 
 
 Asquith says — he ought to know ! 
 But the Local Liberal Party's in a mess !
 
 18 ELECTION FOR COVENTRY [chap, i 
 
 From time immemorial the question of the relations 
 which should subsist between a Member of Parliament 
 and his constituents has provided food for discussion. 
 There is the classical and never-to-be forgotten case of 
 Burke and his constituents at Bristol. 
 
 " Do you think, gentlemen," he said on one occasion, 
 " that every public act in the six j^ears smce I stood in 
 this place before you — that all the arduous things 
 which have been done in this eventful period, which has 
 crowded into a few years' space the revolutions of an 
 age, can be opened to you on their fair grounds in half 
 an hour's conversation ? 
 
 " But," he continued, " it is no reason, because there 
 is a bad mode of inquiry, that there should be no ex- 
 amination at all. Most certainly it is our duty to 
 examine ! it is our interest too ! But it must be with 
 discretion ! with an attention to all the circumstances 
 and to all the motives ! like sound judges, and not 
 like cavilling pettifoggers and quibbling pleaders 
 prying into flaws and hunting for exceptions. Look, 
 gentlemen, to the whole tenor oi your member's conduct. 
 Try whether his ambition or his avarice has just led 
 him out of the straight line of duty ; or whether that 
 grand foe of the offices of active life, that master-vice in 
 men of business, a degenerate and inglorious sloth has 
 made him flag and languish in his course ? This is the 
 object of our inquiry. If our member's conduct can bear 
 this touch, mark it for sterling. He may have fallen 
 into errors ! he must have faults ! but our error is 
 greater, and our fault is radically ruinous to ourselves, 
 if we do not bear, if we do not even applaud the whole 
 compound and mixed mass of such a character. Not 
 to act thus is folly ! I had almost said it is impiety. 
 Ho censures God who quarrels with the imperfections 
 of man.'*
 
 1914] BURKE'S STATEMENTS 19 
 
 These are fine words and cannot be improved upon 
 to define and describe the situation and responsibilities 
 of a constituency and its representative. 
 
 In another passage he says :" If we do not permit 
 our members to act upon a very enlarged view of things, 
 we shall at length infallibly degrade our national repre- 
 sentation into a confused and scuffling bustle of local 
 agency." 
 
 This is the heart of the whole matter. The fact is 
 that a constituency chooses a member of Parliament 
 as a man chooses a wife, for better or for worse. 
 There is this difference, however, that if it is dis- 
 satisfied, it has an opportunity at certain intervals 
 to alter its decision. 
 
 ^ 3 0CT.mM 
 
 >r> .,
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 THE MASSACRE IN THE OASIS OF TRIPOLI 
 
 The Turko-Italian War, which resulted from an unpro- 
 voked attack of Italy upon Tripoli, evoked an out- 
 burst of indignation from the friends of freedom and 
 foes of aggression in this country. Meetings were 
 held and several attempts were made, but without 
 success, to draw attention to the matter by debate 
 in the House of Commons. The only method left 
 open to members, and it was fully taken advantage 
 of, was by question and answer and by speaking on 
 the adjournment motion to endeavour to elicit informa- 
 tion from the Prime Minister and Secretary of State 
 for Foreign Affairs. 
 
 I called a number of meetings of members of the 
 House of Commons in Westminster Hall, open to the 
 Press and attended by members of all parties in the 
 House. They were addressed by members like Lord 
 Konaldshay, Sir Mark Sykes, the late Mr. Sylvester 
 Home, Mr. Amery, Mr. MacCallum Scott, and the 
 late IVIr. Keir Hardie, who denounced the Government 
 for not allowing a free expression of opinion to take 
 place in the House of Commons. As a result of these 
 meetings, I was informed that a better state of affairs 
 had been brought about in Tripoli, resulting in the 
 saving of many human lives. 
 
 There wore a number of meetings held both in 
 
 20
 
 1911] MEETINGS IN THE COUNTRY 21 
 
 London and in the country at which I attended and 
 spoke, protesting against the action of Italy and calling 
 upon the Government to move in the matter. I 
 remember one meetmg at the Memorial Hall, arranged 
 by the late Mr. W. T. Stead. There were a number 
 of Italians present, and the proceedings might be 
 described as lively. When I rose to speak, these 
 Italians, evidently devout Roman Catholics, became 
 very excited and kept continually crossing themselves 
 as a protection from the evil or danger due to my 
 presence. On another occasion at Cardiff a meeting 
 was to be held, and owing to the number of Italians 
 in the town riot and disorder were expected to take 
 place. When I arrived in Cardiff, I found an invitation 
 to dine with the Mayor awaiting me. This worthy 
 gentleman had been requested to cancel the meetmg, 
 and was in great distress as to what course he ought 
 to pursue. After a pleasant dinner, however, he 
 thought he would allow the meeting to take place, and 
 it turned out to be a most successful one. 
 
 Deputations were arranged to wait upon the Prime 
 Minister, and as a result of all this pressure a debate 
 was finally arranged in the House of Commons, when 
 Sir Edward Grey moved the following motion — "That 
 the foreign policy of His Majesty's Government be 
 now considered." 
 
 Sir Edward Grey's statement was almost entirely 
 confined to the Morocco question, and was intended 
 to show that we were bound to support France appar- 
 ently because we were committed to France. It was 
 evidently part of the same policy, in view of a possible 
 great European war, to do nothing or say anything 
 to embarrass Italy in her action in Tripoli with a view 
 to detaching Italy from her alliance with Germany. 
 Not a word was said by the Secretary of State on the 
 Turko-Italian War.
 
 22 MASSACRE IN TRIPOLI [chap, ii 
 
 One of the most disgraceful events connected with 
 the war was the massacre which took place in the 
 oasis of Tripoli, and the followmg speech refers to that 
 transaction and to the Moroccan question, which I be- 
 lieve to have been one of the contributing causes of the 
 war now raging in Europe. This speech was delivered 
 in the House of Commons on November 27, 1911. 
 
 I rise with a great sense of responsibihty to move the 
 Resolution standing in my name. [Mr. David Mason, 
 — TripoH (Seizure by Italy],— " That this House 
 protests against the unwarrantable seizure of Tripoli 
 by Italy and desires to express its horror and detesta- 
 tion at the recent massacre of Arabs by Itahans in 
 the oasis of TripoH, and the House further urges His 
 Majesty's Government, in accordance with The Hague 
 Convention, to which both Powers were consenting 
 parties, to protest against this outrage on humanity." 
 I do this quite conscious of the responsibility which I 
 incur, and I should like to say to the House that I 
 do not wish in any way 
 
 Mr. Speaker : The hon. Gentleman did not tell 
 me that he intended to move his Amendment. I 
 understood from the hon. Gentleman that he did not 
 propose to move his Amendment. I would not have 
 called upon the hon. Member if I had understood that 
 ho was going to do so. 
 
 Mr. Mason : When did you understand that ? 
 
 Mr. Speaker : The last conversation I had with 
 the hon. Member. 
 
 Mr. Mason : I am bound to say to you and to the 
 House that I never stated I would not move the 
 Amendment.
 
 1911] THE SPEAKER'S INTERVENTION 23 
 
 Mr. Speaker : I said I understood from the hon. 
 Member that he would not move. I would not have 
 called upon him if he had told me that he intended 
 to move. 
 
 Mr. Mason : I distinctly stated at the beginning — 
 [An Hon. Member : " Speak without moving."] — I 
 believe I have a perfect right to move the Amendment. 
 I believe I am perfectly in order. If the House 
 wishes to resume the general discussion it can do so 
 after the Amendment has been disposed of. I am 
 perfectly within my rights, and I do submit that the 
 House, which is the greatest dehberative Assembly 
 in the world, should have the option of supporting the 
 Amendment or rejecting it. I do not wish to interfere 
 with the opinions of hon. Members who may wish 
 to discuss other subjects. An expression of opinion 
 by this House with regard to this Amendment will 
 carry great weight, and will be very much appreciated 
 in Italy and throughout Europe. [Interruption.] I 
 do hope the House will accord me the courtesy of a 
 hearing. I will be as brief as possible. I do not 
 think I have interrupted any Member. [Hon. Mem- 
 bers "Say what you have to say." "Make your 
 speech."] I hope hon. Members opposite will show 
 towards me that fair, sportsmanlike attitude which I 
 have always shown to them. [Hon. Members : 
 " Address the Chair."] If I move this Amendment 
 
 Mr. Speaker : I think that the hon. Member really 
 ought to remember the conversation which I had 
 with him. I pointed out to him that it was very 
 undesirable that he should move his Amendment, 
 because it prevented a discussion upon other foreign 
 3
 
 24 MASSACRE IN TRIPOLI [chap, ii 
 
 topics which manj'- hon. Members would wish to 
 continue. I pointed out to him that it would be 
 open to him to make any speech which he desired to 
 make, and I impressed upon him as strongly as I 
 could that he should not move his Amendment. I 
 understood that he adopted my view, and with that 
 in view I called upon the hon. Member. I hope that 
 he will not move the Amendment of which he has 
 given notice, which is not down as an Amendment to 
 this Motion, but stands lower down in respect of 
 some other Motion. If the hon. Member would be 
 content to make his speech I am sure the House 
 would listen to him. 
 
 Mr. Mason : May I ask if I may move this Amend- 
 ment at the end of the discussion ? 
 
 Mr. Speaker : The hon. Member has the right to 
 speak only once. 
 
 Mr. Mason : I am very anxious to get a protest 
 even from a limited number if I cannot get it from the 
 whole House, because of the immense value which 
 the opinion of this Assembly would have with regard 
 to the Turko-Italian War, and if he can show me 
 how I can get a vote from this House I should be 
 glad, because of the immense value which I attach 
 to it. 
 
 Mr. Dillon : Is it not a fact, if this Amendment is 
 moved, the House will be unable to continue the 
 original discussion, and cannot get back to it without 
 the Closure ? If an Amendment of this character 
 is moved, the Chair may not see its way to give the 
 Closure, and the entire Debate will be destroyed. 
 Cannot the hon. Member make bis speech on the
 
 1911] MR. DILLON'S INTERVENTION 25 
 
 particular point in which he is interested, and thereby 
 follow the example of every other Member ? We all 
 have Motions on the Paper, and abstained from 
 moving them for the convenience of the Debate. 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : I must say this is a great dis- 
 appointment to me, but, of course, I will be very glad 
 to fall in with this view. I do not propose now to 
 confine myself to the Turko-Italian war, as I under- 
 stand I am at liberty to touch on the whole foreign 
 policy of His Majesty's Government. I will before 
 I come to that question, which seems to me the ques- 
 tion of the hour, refer to the Moroccan negotiations. 
 I do not propose to address myself to the right hon. 
 Gentleman the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. The 
 question before us is the foreign policy of His Majesty's 
 Government, and we must consider that, not as one 
 affecting the Foreign Secretary or his conduct of the 
 Foreign Office, but as one affecting the whole Govern- 
 ment. Every Member of the Government is respon- 
 sible more or less for the foreign policy, and will 
 receive any benefit that may come from its success, 
 if there is any success, and he is also bound to share 
 in the disadvantage of any failure. We suffer in this 
 House very often from questions being referred to a 
 particular Department instead of being taken as the 
 policy of the Government as a whole. We have to 
 consider every Member of the Cabinet as responsible 
 for this policy. If he does not agree he ought to sever 
 his connection with the Government, and if he remains 
 a Member of the Government that means to all intents 
 and purposes that he svipports the poHcy of the 
 Government as a whole. I had on a previous occasion
 
 26 MASSACRE IN TRirOLI [chap, ii 
 
 an opportunity of addressing some questions to the 
 Government \n ith regard to the negotiations in Morocco, 
 and the answers which were received were equivalent 
 to saying — and some hon. Members who have ah'eady 
 spoken have referred to the fact — that the matter 
 was much too grave for question and answer ; and 
 we were, so to speak, prevented from offering any 
 suggestion as to a solution of the Moroccan difficulty. 
 There were certain articles in the Algeciras Treaty 
 which would have enabled a solution of the difficulty 
 to be arrived at. Articles 8 and 9 provided machinery 
 for the solution of any difficulties which might arise. 
 I agree that the German Government acted in a 
 provocative manner in sending a gunboat to Agadir, 
 because they themselves did not take advantage of 
 these articles, which provided that any complaints 
 to be made could be made to the diplomatic body at 
 Tangiers. As Germany did not take that action, 
 we might have shown them we knew better by making 
 this complaint also to the diplomatic body. Had we 
 done so, it would have come before all the repre- 
 sentatives of the Powers. There was machinery 
 provided in that Act for the settlement of any ques- 
 tions that might arise, and the long-drawn negotiations 
 of the last three months might have been prevented 
 had that machinery been used. Instead of that we 
 had this long recital from the Foreign Secretary of the 
 conversations we have had during that period, of 
 the alarms and scares among the markets of the 
 world, the disturbance of trade and commerce, and 
 the depreciation of securities, all arising from this 
 fatuous blundering policy of present-day diplomacy.
 
 1911] THE MOROCCO QUESTION 27 
 
 Although we rejoice that things have somehow 
 blundered through and that we are about to get a 
 solution, I do not think we have any great reason 
 to be proud of our methods and the way in which that 
 solution has been arrived at. 
 
 I pass from that to the question of the Turko- 
 Italian war. I think we are all agreed that the action 
 of Italy is regarded throughout the whole United 
 Kingdom as most unwarrantable and aggressive. In 
 the Treaty of Paris there is full provision for main- 
 taining the integrity of the Ottoman Empire, and 
 when that aggressive act took place, I do submit 
 that for the British Government to have immediately 
 issued a proclamation of neutrality and even to drag 
 in the Eang's name was quite unnecessary. We 
 surely had a right as a great Power to express our 
 views as to the wanton and aggressive action of the 
 Italians. We had Treaty rights, and we had the 
 right as a great Power to protest against that action. 
 Reference has been made by the hon. Member who 
 has just sat down to the outrages in Tripoli, and he 
 said there had been a certain amount of treachery. 
 I am informed that treachery existed to a very limited 
 extent, and that it was in part due to the absolute 
 carelessness of the Italians themselves. There was 
 no systematic taking of surrenders, and there was 
 no system in any shape or form, as far as one can 
 gather, of dealing with the Arabs and making them 
 friendly disposed. Therefore, the accusation of 
 treachery may be dismissed as reaUy amounting to 
 very little indeed. What were the facts on the other 
 side ? Hon. Members doubtless are well aware of
 
 28 MASSACRE IN TRIPOLI [chap, n 
 
 what took place in the oasis. Every one admits the 
 truth of the statements of brave correspondents of 
 great journals. [An Hon. Member : " No."] The 
 hon. Member says "No." He will have an oppor- 
 tunity later on of giving evidence to the contrary. 
 As far as we go, the evidence I think is most conclusive. 
 I have searched in every possible quarter before rising 
 in this House to make these assertions. I have done 
 everything possible to make myself acquainted with 
 the truth of this matter. I have endeavoured to 
 ehcit the truth from His Majesty's Ministers. Ques- 
 tions have been put in the House from this side as 
 well as the other side, and our difficulty has been to 
 get reliable information from His Majesty's Ministers. 
 That is the disappointment we have experienced. I 
 will now read several extracts from the letters of Mr. 
 I\IcCullagh, war correspondent of The Westminster 
 Gazette and The New York World, with reference to 
 the occurrences in Tripoli : 
 
 " I shall now give some more details of the cold- 
 blooded murders committed by Italian soldiers during 
 the last few days. 
 
 Mahomet Masuri, returning from market with 
 some money, searched by the soldiers, robbed, shot. 
 An old marabout (holy man), who sat on the ground 
 begging for alms, was shot dead. The villagers set 
 the dead man on a donkey and led him round about 
 the oasis to show the people how the foreigners treat 
 their saints. 
 
 " ' AH Frefer, a butcher of Sania, a hamlet in the 
 oasis, was killing a sheep, when some ItaUan soldiers 
 arrived upon the scene, took his axe from him, and 
 killed him with it.
 
 1911] WAR CORRESPONDENT'S EVIDENCE 29 
 
 *' ' In Tripoli a blind beggar was killed by soldiers. 
 At Sakh Dehuma, in the oasis, a woman was lamenting 
 over her dead husband, who had been shot, when 
 some Italian soldiers approached and shot her also. 
 
 " ' On Wednesday, October 25th, at 4 p.m., a twelve- 
 year-old boy was drinking from the well in Vierte 
 Hane Shaiia Kubia, when a soldier shot him dead. 
 
 " ' At Bendair two women coming through the oasis 
 seated on camels were both shot. At the same place 
 a soldier endeavoured to pull the veil off a woman's 
 face. On the woman resisting the soldier shot her. 
 
 " ' A friend of mine had an old Arab servant for 
 twenty-eight years a cripple. The soldiers shot him.' 
 
 " Hundreds of similar instances could be given. 
 Almost every correspondent, almost every foreign 
 resident, has his own list of horrors. Every Consul 
 has sent official reports on the subject to his Govern- 
 ment." 
 
 I hope my hon. Friend will observe those acts, 
 and surely I have no doubt they will be conclusive 
 evidence to him, as blind beggars and cripples could 
 not be accused of treachery. Mr. McCullagh states, 
 and this is important : 
 
 " Every Consul has sent official reports on the 
 subject to his Government." 
 
 Hon. Members opposite, as well as hon. Members 
 on this side, have from time to time endeavoured to 
 elicit from the Foreign Secretary what official mforma- 
 tion he could give us. It was a perfectly reasonable 
 request. Many hon. Members are unwillmg, as I 
 was unwilling, to believe that such horrors could be 
 committed. I have a great regard and love for
 
 30 MASSACRE IN TRIPOLI [chap, ii 
 
 Italy. I visited Italy like many hon. Members, and 
 I was horror-stricken to think that European troops 
 of a countrj^ so cultivated and possessing such a 
 noble history, should have been guilty of such outrages 
 as those to which I have alluded, but we were unable 
 to obtain anj^ information from the Foreign Secretary 
 with regard to the Consul's evidence. He refused 
 to communicate it to us, and as it did not refer to 
 British subjects he did not consider it his duty to 
 make known his knowledge to the House. I have 
 yet to learn that humanity is limited only to British 
 subjects. To the honour of hon. Gentlemen opposite 
 and the party which they adorn, when the massacres 
 were taking place in Bulgaria, IMr. Disraeli had the 
 courage, when an emissary was sent out to give 
 official information with regard to those atrocities, 
 when Mr. Gladstone was speaking throughout the 
 country, Mr. Disraeli had the courage to make known 
 that official information to the world, although it 
 meant the destruction of his Government. I say that 
 undoubtedly it does pay a tribute to the straight- 
 forwardness of hon. Gentlemen opposite and the 
 party to which they belong, that, although it meant 
 the destruction of their party and of their leader, 
 yet they had the courage when they knew the facts, 
 to make them known and let mankind judge as to 
 what was right. I say, as a Liberal, I hang my head 
 in shame that the Foreign Secretary and the right 
 hon. and hon. Gentlemen who adorn the Front Bench, 
 and who pose as Liberals throughout the country, 
 should, as it were, try to deceive this House and 
 try to suppress information, and I say that reflects
 
 1911] WAR CORRESPONDENT'S EVIDENCE 31 
 
 the greatest discredit and the greatest dishonour 
 upon the name of Liberal. In confirmation of that 
 statement, because that war correspondent's remarks 
 and statements might be called in question, I believe 
 there is ample evidence both of Italian journalists 
 and German journalists. 
 
 Major Archer-Shee j It has been denied by the 
 Italian Government. 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : The only denial I have seen from 
 them is that furnished by the Premier of the Italian 
 Government. In that very denial to which the hon. 
 Gentleman refers were the words that those found 
 with arms in their hands were shot. So that, accord- 
 ing to the denial itself, there was a refusal of the rights 
 of war to these combatants and non-combatants. I 
 return to the corroboration of the evidence by a German 
 journalist, Herr von Gottberg, the representative of 
 the Lokalanzeiger, who wrote : 
 
 " In this particular case a young woman, holding 
 her child by one hand and a water-pitcher in the 
 other, appeared in a perfectly peaceful street. The 
 soldiers aimed three shots at her, and she fell dead. 
 Together with the same witnesses, Herr von Gottberg 
 saw a girl of seventeen or eighteen being dragged 
 naked through the sand by jeering soldiers. The 
 girl was ill, suffering from swollen feet. When she 
 threw herself down in despair, the soldiers seized her 
 feet and dragged her on. The girl was fuially thrown 
 on the sand, twenty paces from an Italian field hospital. 
 There she lay, crying for water. Herr von Gottberg 
 called the attention of Italian military surgeons, who 
 stood at the hospital laughing at the girl's tortures. 
 They told him to mind his business. Late at night
 
 32 MASSACRE IN TRIPOLI [chap, ii 
 
 when the correspondents returned they found the 
 girl in the same place, and with her two old women 
 who had been similarly treated. Next morning all 
 were dead." 
 
 I submit that this should really appeal to us. I 
 do not for a moment suggest that in British history 
 there are not some things of which we are not altogether 
 proud. But we of the present generation are respon- 
 sible only for the acts we commit and the protests we 
 make. If the Government are able to prove that 
 these things are not true why do they not get up and 
 do so 1 For the simple reason that they cannot. 
 Would we not all rejoice if they did so ? It is not a 
 pleasant duty for me or any other Member to make 
 these statements. I thank hon. Members for their 
 courtesy in allowing me to tell my tale, but it is not 
 at all a pleasant task. I hope the House will give 
 me credit for smcerity and honesty. I do not do it 
 from any sense of vainglory, or from any desire to 
 make a great speech or to create an impression. 
 Surely we, as men, have some chivalry left in us. We 
 wish to make our voices heard, and we have a right 
 to do so. Great Britain is still a great Power. I 
 have had the honour to preside over two meetings 
 attended by not very many but a representative 
 number of Members of all parties, at which various 
 aspects of this question were discussed. I am informed 
 from authoritative quarters that the speeches then 
 made were telegraphed out, and were the means of 
 saving many lives. 1 ask hon. Members who took 
 part in that, is that not a reward for what little effort
 
 1911] MEMBERS' MEETING 33 
 
 they have made ? I say also it is a reward for us in 
 this House to make our protest known. We have 
 had a great discussion to-day, and if we are able to 
 lift up our voices to express sentiments of condemna- 
 tion of wrong-doing, if we know that the voices of 
 hon. Members of this House have the effect of saving 
 many human lives, and of bringing to an end injustice 
 and cruelty to women and children, and helpless 
 people who are not combatants, I appeal to hon. 
 Members that we should all be very proud indeed. 
 I want to say just one word to show how we have 
 the opportunity here of taking action. It was weU 
 said, I thmk, by jMi\ Gladstone : " That agitation was 
 of very little use unless it led to action." We have 
 a very clear case confirmed, as I have shown the 
 House, from many authoritative sources. We have 
 therefore, a mandate, if we require one, on the highest 
 ground, that of humanity. We have a mandate 
 under The Hague Convention, to which both the 
 Powers and ourselves were consenting parties. 
 
 Let me read to the House the particular Articles 
 to which I refer. Article 2 of the regulations respecting 
 the Laws and Customs of War on Land says that : 
 
 " the population of a territory which has not been 
 occupied on the approach of the enemy and who 
 spontaneously take up arms . . . shall be regarded a^ 
 belligerents." 
 
 Article 3 says that : — 
 
 " in case of capture by the armed forces . . . have a 
 right to be treated as prisoners of war."
 
 34 MASSACRE IN TRIPOLI [chap, ii 
 
 Article 4 deals with prisoners of war, and says : — 
 
 " they must be humanely treated, and that all their 
 personal belongings . . . shall remain theu' property." 
 
 I think the House will agree with me that there is 
 ample power, therefore, for Great Britain to act. 
 All that is necessary is for hon. Members here to 
 express the views which I have, I am afraid, very 
 inadequately expressed. Let lion. Members support 
 those views if they think they are honest and sincere 
 views. This House has the power. Eight hon. 
 Gentlemen are helpless before the House — if we only 
 knew it. We have the power if we unite, and if hon. 
 Members co-operate with us in trying to urge this 
 Government to act. If you co-operate with us in 
 urging the Government to act, and they refuse to do 
 so, then we have a common cause. We can turn the 
 present Government out. [Laughter.] Hon. Members 
 laugh. It is perfectly true. We invite you to co- 
 operate with us in this matter. It is no laughing 
 question. If hon. Members believe we are acting 
 honestly and sincerely let them act with us. It will 
 redound to their credit in their constituencies. Is 
 there a single voter in any constituency which will 
 call their action into question ? There cannot possibly 
 be any one who could call it into question. Why, 
 then, fear to take action ? Why not unite with us 
 in urging the Government to take some steps to 
 protect these people under The Hague Convention 
 and in the interests of humanity ? I have some 
 doubt as to the motives which have animated or
 
 1911] GOVERNMENT POLICY 35 
 
 inspired His Majesty's Government in their action in 
 this matter. Why have His Majesty's Government 
 not disclosed their policy in regard to Turkey, Italy, 
 and this country ? I admit that it is a most extra- 
 ordinary thing, and it is very difficult to elicit why 
 the Liberal Government could not take action, which, 
 after all, would be in accordance with Liberal tradi- 
 tions. The only reason I can adduce for the action 
 of His Majesty's Government is that indicated in the 
 speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Foreign 
 Secretary, which hon. Members opposite have referred 
 to. I am very glad to pay a high compliment to the 
 very warm and generous expression of good feeling 
 towards Germany which fell from the right hon. 
 Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Bonar 
 Law). We on this side of the House feel, that although 
 we may differ and continue to differ in many re- 
 spects from the right hon. Gentleman, we still feel 
 admiration for the manly, straightforward way in 
 which he expressed himself in regard to Germany. 
 Without in any way showing any weakness, or in 
 any way discounting the high difficulty of this 
 country, without in any way indicating that we are 
 not prepared, as I hope we are and always will 
 be prepared, to stand up for our own rights, and 
 interests, and for the honour of Great Britain, yet 
 he was prepared, in contrast to the Foreign Secretary, 
 to express himself in warm and generous terms towards 
 Germany. I cannot understand the attitude and the 
 view of the present Government, and their policy 
 towards others. I am convinced the real reason is 
 an obsession on the part of the Foreign Secretary,
 
 36 MASSACRE IN TRIPOLI [chap.h 
 
 more particularly in regard to Glermany, and that he 
 might possibly detach Italy from the Triple Alliance. 
 That is the only deduction that I can draw as tlirowing 
 light upon his attitude. The House will be mterested 
 to hear what the views of His Majesty's Government 
 are. Personally, I prefer to hear the views of the 
 head of the Government. I had occasion once to 
 approach the head of the Government ; he deprecated 
 reference to these occurrences, which, I think, should 
 really bring a blush of shame to the cheek of any 
 chivalrous man. The House would welcome a state- 
 ment as to the policy of the Government on this 
 question. I can only make one final appeal to the 
 House. I would remmd hon. Members opposite of 
 the policy of Great Britain under the great Canning, a 
 great Conservative, and the greatest Foreign Minister 
 this country ever had. The greatness of Cannmg's 
 policy was to be friendly with all nations and to avoid 
 entangling alliances with all. The Foreign Secretary 
 has spoken rather in ridicule of that great tradition. 
 Canning caused this country to be respected in the 
 councils of Europe ; he was prepared to be friendly with 
 any Power without entering into entangling alliances. 
 Canning, Palmerston, and Gladstone took up the 
 question of suffering mankind. Here is an opportunity 
 for Great Britain to revert to those heights of noble 
 traditions, and I appeal to this House to look back 
 on its past. Remember the great men who have 
 adorned our parties, who have shed lustre upon the 
 great Con.servative Party and the great Liberal Party, 
 and, having regard to those great traditions, let us 
 try to excel, if we can, the great glories of the past.
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 THE INTEGRITY OF PERSIA 
 
 In the early part of the year 1912 I had occasion to 
 visit the United States of America. The Persian 
 question was then very much in evidence, and the 
 relations between that country and Russia were 
 being freely discussed. The fact that a distinguished 
 American citizen, Mr, Shuster, had been engaged by 
 the Persian Government to organise the finances of 
 the country made the subject more interesting to the 
 American people. 
 
 I visited Washington and had an opportunity of 
 discussing this question and the Turko-Italian War 
 with many prominent American statesmen. With a 
 view to peace and the termination of the war, I was 
 anxious to get America to offer her good offices to 
 Turkey and Italy, and also to support the contem- 
 plated diplomatic action which was proposed by the 
 Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee with 
 regard to the dispute between Russia and Persia. 
 
 On my return to England the Persian question came 
 up for discussion in Parliament, and on February 21st, 
 1912, I delivered the following speech : — ■ 
 
 The Amendment, which I have great pleasure in 
 
 supporting, states that, " We humbly represent to His 
 
 Majesty that the failure of His Majesty's Government 
 
 to take effective steps to preserve the integrity and 
 
 37 
 
 di 2f ;9i
 
 38 THE INTEGRITY OF PEESIA [chap.iii 
 
 independence of Persia, in accordance with the terms 
 of the Anglo-Russian Agreement of 1907, constitutes 
 a grave menace to your Indian Empire and to the best 
 interests of this countr3^" I think the House will 
 agree that the many able speeches that we have heard 
 have completed the case, and that there is no doubt 
 in the minds of any of us as to the independence and 
 integrity of Persia having disappeared for the moment. 
 The Seconder of the Amendment referred to the 
 interest that is being taken in this question in other 
 countries, and he mentioned France. I have recently 
 returned from a visit to Washington, where there 
 is very great interest indeed being taken in this 
 question by Members of the Government as well as 
 throughout the whole breadth of the United States. 
 I think the feeling there is one of sorrow that Great 
 Britain has not maintained her high tradition of 
 supportmg a nation struggling for freedom and for 
 nationality, and the fact that her distinguished citizen, 
 ]\Ir. Shustcr, was organising the finances has given 
 her a personal interest beyond the broader one of 
 justice and humanity. I had, when in Washington, 
 placed in my hands by the chairman of the Foreign 
 Relations Committee a copy of a resolution which 
 was introduced in the House of Representatives, and 
 referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and 
 ordered to be printed. It was a joint resolution 
 requesting and empowering the President to com- 
 municate with Russia and Persia, and to urge them 
 to refer differences between them to the Permanent 
 Court of Arbitration at The Hague. It went on to 
 state that.
 
 1912] AMERICAN RESOLUTION 39 
 
 " whereas a serious dispute has broken out between 
 
 Russia and Persia which under certain circumstances 
 
 might involve them in war, and the duty is therefore 
 
 incumbent upon the United States as a contracting 
 
 party to remind them that the Permanent Court is 
 
 open, and the performance of such duty may only be 
 
 regarded as a friendly act, therefore it is resolved by 
 
 the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
 
 United States of America in Congress assembled, that, 
 
 pursuant to the aforesaid treaty, to which Russia, 
 
 Persia, and the United States are parties, and in the 
 
 high interests of peace, the President of the United 
 
 States be urged, requested and empowered as speedUy 
 
 as possible to communicate with both Russia and 
 
 Persia, urging them to refer any differences between 
 
 them to the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The 
 
 Hague, in accordance with the Convention to which 
 
 the three nations are parties." 
 
 I am assured by authorities in Washington that 
 that resolution was only awaiting a time to be brought 
 forward seriously m the House of Representatives and 
 the Senate, when they were convinced that sufficient 
 support would be forthcoming, both from Members 
 here and from other responsible bodies. I believe 
 every hon. Member would certamly be prepared to 
 support any action which the House of Representa- 
 tives or the Senate might take to urge thek President 
 to suggest this means of settling any outstanding 
 differences which may exist between Russia and Persia, 
 and thereby arrive at a satisfactory conclusion of this 
 dispute, if any incentive is requked. The first act in 
 this drama was the invasion of Persian territory by 
 Russian troops, and the second is the Anglo-Russian 
 4
 
 40 THE IXTEGRITY OF PERSIA [chap, ni 
 
 Note. It is of vital importance to Great Britain to 
 maintain an independent State as a buffer for our 
 Indian Empire. It is of the very essence of the 
 highest statesmanship for this country to throw the 
 great weight which she can throw, backed up as I 
 beUeve by the moral influence of the United States, 
 into the maintenance of the integrity and indepen- 
 dence of Persia. As Mr. Gladstone well said on a 
 previous occasion, when there was talk of possible 
 aggression, " there is no barrier " for this purpose 
 " like the breast of free men." 
 
 In the Anglo-Russian Note we see really the begin- 
 ning of a new regime, and it is very pertinent to 
 compare conditions now, when they have got rid of 
 Mr. Shuster, with the state of affairs prior to his 
 departure. The most convincing test of the different 
 state of affairs is the difference in the credit of Persia 
 now as compared with the state of affairs which existed 
 under the regime of Mr. Shuster. I believe, before 
 his departure, there was a proposal on the part of 
 Persia to negotiate a loan. I believe it was to have 
 been a 5 per cent, loan, and was to have been issued 
 to the public at about 96J, and the probable cost to 
 Persia of borrowing at that time would have been 
 about G per cent. We all know that under the bene- 
 ficent influence of the two great Powers which have 
 gone into the pawnbroking business, as it has been 
 described, we are prepared to show what an immense 
 advantage it is to Persia that we should take charge 
 of Persian finances by charging this little State 7 per 
 cent. Here was Persia, before prepared to borrow in 
 the market on negotiations on her own account, which
 
 1912] PROPOSED PERSIAN LOAN 41 
 
 would have cost, at the most, 6 per cent., now 
 compelled, almost at the point of the bayonet, to 
 receive a trumpery £200,000 at 7 per cent. 
 
 Reference has been made to the effect on our com- 
 merce. I agree that that should not influence us or 
 enter into our recognition of justice or humanity, but 
 it is only a propos and right that we should touch on 
 the effect which would have resulted from the success 
 of the earlier financial transactions. Had the original 
 loan gone through, all of us who have had any ex- 
 perience in these matters know that it would have 
 led to a very great increase of trade and commerce, 
 and it would have meant a great influx probably of 
 Manchester goods and other products into Persia. It 
 would have stimulated and developed the trade of 
 Persia. It would have given Persia credit had it been 
 successful, as I believe it would have been, being pro- 
 perly handled by a responsible financial house, and 
 would have established Persia in the money markets 
 of the world and stimulated and increased the trade of 
 the rest of the world with Persia, all of which would of 
 course have reflected and been reflected upon British 
 trade and industry, and we should have seen as a 
 result of that a great stimulus given to the trade of 
 the IVIidlands and Manchester, which formerly did a 
 large busmess with Persia. We see there, as we often 
 see, that what is morally right is very seldom poli- 
 tically wrong. If we start out with the object of being 
 true to our treaty obligations, we are also stimulating 
 and helpmg our commercial interests. 
 
 Allusion was also made to the security for the loan. 
 I should like to ask the Secretary for Foreign Afi'aii's
 
 42 THE INTEGRITY OF PERSIA [chap, m 
 
 if he is thoroughlj^ convinced as to the absolute security 
 of the loan which he now proposes to advance to 
 Persia. I should also like to ask by what right and 
 under what conditions, and under what statute he can 
 make a loan on behalf of the British Government. Is 
 it not necessary for him to come before Parliament ? 
 Can he use public money, even only to the extent of 
 £100,000, and lend it out at 7 per cent, to Persia 
 or any other country without coming before the 
 House ? If that is the case it seems to me it is well 
 worth the consideration of this House. We should 
 inquire into the ways and means of the Secretary for 
 Foreign Affairs entering on behalf of the Government 
 into such a transaction. If he can do for hundreds 
 of thousands, why not for hundreds of millions ? If 
 so, it seems to me that is another argument for more 
 democratic control of foreign affairs, and control over 
 the liabilities which may be incurred if the Foreign 
 Minister has power to enter into such transactions. I 
 feel in respect to this question what no doubt others 
 feel. My hon. Friend the Mover of the Amendment 
 referred to the need of greater democratic control 
 over policy, and I should like to congratulate him on 
 the admirable treatise he recently published on this 
 question. It seems to me the necessity for it is made 
 more apparent every day. We find that our diplo- 
 macy is fettered, and that we are crippled and not 
 able to have that control over foreign affau-s which 
 we formerly enjoyed, because apparently of the 
 reading into alliances and understandiiigs of some- 
 thing which, I think, the country never anticipated 
 when they were entered into. We find that we are
 
 1912] MR. CANNING'S STATEMENT 43 
 
 really being dragged at the heels of Russia. It is not 
 in accordance with the spirit of this country to be a 
 partner in such transactions, and I think it is entirely 
 opposed to the spirit of freedom and to the spirit of 
 independence which is, or ought to be, the very life- 
 blood of British foreign policy. I cannot better illus- 
 trate this than by quoting a statement made by the 
 great Mr. Canning, who admkably described the 
 function of Great Britam's foreign policy in words 
 which seem to me to be just as applicable to-day as 
 when they were uttered three-quarters of a century 
 ago. He saidi — 
 
 " The function of England, in fact, in so far as her 
 obligations to Europe were concerned, was to hold the 
 balance between extreme principles, a function for 
 which her constitution pre-emmently fitted her. But 
 for the fulfilment of this function England had been 
 impotent, because she had been entangled in the 
 meshes of a system which hampered her free action. 
 In the atmosphere of the alliance, her initiative had 
 been stifled, because the whole sphit of continental 
 statesmanship was alien to her genius." 
 
 We are unable to make our voice heard because of 
 certam alliances and under&tandmgs, and we cannot, 
 somehow, make our protest of any value, because we 
 are fettered and held down by these alliances, and 
 understandings, which are alien to the spirit of British 
 sentiment and feeling. What is, or what ought to be, 
 the genius of British statesmanship to which Canning 
 referred ? Surely the genius of British policy ought 
 to be and is the love of freedom. That, surely, is
 
 44 THE INTEGRITY OF PERSIA [chap, iii 
 
 the genius which he contended was not expressed 
 in Continental countries. We find that the Russian 
 Government is quite away from the Russian people, 
 and is not a lover of freedom in the same way as 
 is the case in countries which have control over 
 their Governments. Therefore it is impossible for 
 the Russian Government to work in harmony with 
 the British Government, which, after all, still is a 
 freedom-loving Government as representing the British 
 people. It is impossible to have a partnership with- 
 out, sooner or later, in respect of the Agreement, either 
 our having to give way to Russia or Russia having to 
 give way to us. I say the Agreement is antagonistic 
 to the spirit of Britain and her policy. That love 
 of freedom which unquestionably has burned in the 
 breast of every Irishman for centuries, that love of 
 freedom which does not belong to any one party, 
 and which found one of its best examples in Mr. 
 Canning in the Tory Party, and its highest expres- 
 sion in the immortal Gladstone in the Liberal Party 
 — that spirit is not dead to-day in England. I 
 believe it exists in the people of England, and if the 
 lamp of freedom is, perhaps, burning dimly in the 
 hands of those who at present hold it, it does not 
 mean that it does not exist, and that we here are not 
 anxious to see Great Britain resume her former place. 
 It is in the hope that we will even at this late hour 
 revert to our higher traditions, and stand out for 
 justice and humanity to struggling nations, that I 
 make a final appeal to the Government to stop before 
 it is too late, and insist upon a reversal to that higher 
 and nobler position.
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 THE HOME RULE DEMONSTRATION IN DUBLIN 
 
 During the year 1912 I paid a visit to Ireland. My 
 Bon, a boy of thirteen years of age, accompanied me; 
 and during our stay in Dublin, we were entertained 
 by Mr. Patrick Joseph Brady, Member of Parliament 
 for the St. Stephen's Green Division of that city, 
 at whose suggestion I was induced to combine a 
 projected holiday to the Lakes of Killarney, with 
 attendance at the great Home Rule Demonstration 
 which was about to take place. This Demonstration 
 was held on Sunday afternoon March 31st, 1912. 
 After the morning services in the various churches were 
 over the scene became most animated. I don't sup- 
 pose Dublin ever held so large a crowd. O'Connell 
 Street, or Sackville Street, as it is now called, where the 
 Demonstration was held, has a surface area exceeding 
 seven and half acres, and was packed to overflowing. 
 There were delegates present from all parts of Ireland ; 
 nine of the eleven Irish Corporations were represented 
 in state. All the County Councils were represented, 
 the heads of the Municipal Bodies, the Urban District 
 Councils, the Poor Law Committees, and various social 
 bodies. There were special trains run from all parts of 
 
 45
 
 46 HOME RULE DEMONSTRATION [chap, iv 
 
 Ireland, and I can truthfully state that I never addressed 
 a larger gathering in my life. 
 
 There were four platforms placed at intervals along 
 Sackville Street. We met those intending to take part 
 in the day's proceedings first at the Mansion House, 
 and then proceeded through the streets to the various 
 platforms. I was invited to accompany Mr. J. E. 
 Redmond, M.P., the leader of the Irish Party, to No. 1 
 Platform. It was a difficult matter to get from the 
 carriage to the platform owing to the denseness of the 
 crowd. Through the good offices, however, of a burly 
 Irish Member of Parliament, who kept shouting " Make 
 way for the English M.P.," a lane was formed, and I 
 eventually was allowed to reach the platform. 
 
 The speeches were very good, and listened to with 
 rapt attention by the assembled multitude, Mr. 
 John Redmond's being a model of what a moderate 
 and statesmanlike utterance ought to be. There were 
 other speeches equally good by Irish Members of Par- 
 liament, all breathing a fine spkit of kmdly good-will 
 towards the United Kingdom. 
 
 The Lord Mayor of Dublin invited me to address 
 the gathering. I promptly responded, and was almost 
 overwhelmed by the M^armth of the Irish welcome 
 accorded to me. This, I believe, was largely due to the 
 fact that I was the only British Member of Parliament, 
 not being an Irish Member, taking part in the meeting. 
 
 I commenced my speech by addressing the assembly 
 as " fellow citizens of the British Empire." This was 
 received with tumultuous cheering, and at once put 
 me on good terms with the audience. I told them how 
 proud I was to inform them that my father had helped
 
 1912] SPEECH IN DUBLIN 47 
 
 Mr. Gladstone in bringing in his Home Rule Bill, and 
 if God gave me strength, and I was spared, I hoped to 
 help their great leader in his task. Moreover, if any 
 further help was needed, I had a son, pomting to my 
 boy looking down at them from a neighbouring window, 
 who, if it became necessary, would be prepared to give 
 any help he could. 
 
 I recalled to their minds some events which had 
 taken place during the period when a Parliament had 
 formerly existed in Ireland. There was one fact, and 
 a very significant one, i.e. that the bankers of the City of 
 Dublin in the year 1798, passed a resolution declaring 
 that, since the ending of the interference of the power 
 of Great Britain, the commerce and the prosperity of 
 Ireland and the United Kingdom had eminently in- 
 creased. Mr. Lecky, the historian, had also referred to 
 the fact that the exports from the country in ten years 
 under a Home Rule Parliament had more than trebled. 
 I believed that history might repeat itself, and that 
 under Home Rule the development of commerce, trade, 
 and general prosperity of Ireland would astonish not 
 only Ireland, but the civilised world. I concluded by 
 stating that many of us in England felt that during the 
 past century an irreparable wi'ong had been inflicted 
 upon Ireland by the withholding of the grant of Home 
 Rule. We desired to make amends for that state of 
 affairs. It had been a great delight for me to be 
 present, and if I could in any way do something to 
 make amends for that irreparable \vrong, I should feel 
 that my life had not been lived in vain. 
 
 When I sat down the enthusiasm broke forth, and 
 was a most remarkable demonstration. The people
 
 48 HOxME RULE DEMONSTRATION [chap, iv 
 
 surged around the platform desiring to shake hands 
 with me. What a scene presented itself to the gaze ! 
 A perfect day, and a sea of faces as far as the eye 
 could see. The cheering was tremendous. Wherever I 
 turned, hands were outstretched towards me. It was 
 the greeting of a loj-al and warm-hearted people con- 
 scious of their past sufferings, but desirous of forgetting 
 them, filled with hope, and seeing in me for the moment 
 the representative of a country which had for over a 
 hundred years misunderstood this highly gifted race. 
 It was a most moving spectacle, and one never to be 
 forgotten so long as life remained. 
 
 A few days after this stirring event we left the 
 capital, and turned our faces towards that beauty 
 spot, the famous Lakes of Killarney. Here for a while 
 I rested amidst the exquisite and enchanting scener5^ 
 But change of effort is the only holiday I know, and 
 trout-fishing became the order of the day. 
 
 We had had one or two not very successful days on the 
 Lake of Killarney, my own belief being that it was still 
 too cold for fly-fishing, but the hall-porter in the Great 
 Southern Hotel where we were staying, being a sanguine 
 individual, advised us to have a day on Lough Quittane. 
 Nearly all Irishmen, and particularly Irish gillies, 
 boatmen, and hall-porters, are sanguine individuals. 
 Every day is to be the best day you ever had, and 
 every lough is the best lough in the country for fishing. 
 However, off we started on a Saturday morning, on an 
 Irish jaunting-car, my son and I on one side, and our 
 boatman Donohuc on the other, with a genial Irish 
 garvie driving us, and pointing out the beauties of the 
 scenery as we bowled along. We had a drive of about
 
 1912] A DAY'S TROUT FISHING 49 
 
 seven miles to the side of the lough, which was 
 situated right in among the hOls. 
 
 The conditions were on the whole favourable for fly- 
 fishing, although it was still rather cold. The sun was 
 shining brightly, there was a nice breeze blowing, and 
 we were not long before getting to work. But the fish 
 would not be tempted, and refused to rise to the ^y. 
 Donohue suggested trawling with the imitation min- 
 now, and we got three rods out at the stern for this 
 purpose. It was not very long before we had four 
 very nice trout. We pulled up to an island m the 
 middle of the lough and had lunch. 
 
 After lunch we again carefully resumed our trawling. 
 Withm half an hour my boy, who had a light trout ing 
 rod, hooked what was evidently a big fish. He handed 
 the rod to me, and it bent nearly double under the 
 strain. I gave the fish plenty of line, and meanwhile we 
 decided to take in our other rods, so as to give me 
 plenty of room to handle the fish. After about twenty- 
 five minutes' rushing backwards and forwards, I got him 
 near to the side of the boat, when we discovered that our 
 landing-nets were all much too small for the purpose 
 of landing so large a fish. It was too dangerous to 
 attempt getting him into the net head first, in case of 
 not getting him completely into the net, and the hooks 
 catching and the fish breaking away. The boatman 
 tried again and again to coax him into the net tail first, 
 but that was equally useless, and I certainly thought 
 I had lost him once or twice during the manoeuvre. 
 However, after about forty minutes' struggle, when he 
 was pretty well tired out, I again got him up to the side 
 of the boat, and Donohue grabbed him by the tail
 
 50 HOME RITE DEMONSTRATION [chap, iv 
 
 and lifted him aboard. He proved to be a big tront, 
 unfortunately not in very good condition, but he 
 scaled 4 J lbs. We got nothing more, but had no 
 reason to be dissatisfied with the dav's result. After 
 tea in a neighbouring cottage, and a chat with the 
 owner on Land Purchase, Home Rule, and the general 
 prospects of the country, we returned home to the hotel. 
 
 The scenery surrounding this lough is beautiful in 
 the extreme. At one end level fields and a pebbly 
 beach complete the picture. At the other, steep rocks 
 and high mountains frowned down upon the turbulent 
 waters which at this end were lashed into foam by the 
 breeze which blew steadily all day. At this spot, ever 
 and anon, an eagle, or hawk, high above our heads, 
 would fly out from its nest to attack another bird 
 which evidently intended mischief of some sort or 
 another. It was most exciting to watch this contest 
 of these champions of the air. The two birds would 
 circle roxind and round one another, when suddenly 
 one would make a dart and thev would close in deadlv 
 embrace, and as suddenly draw apart again, only to 
 repeat the operation until exhaustion compelled them 
 to desist. This combat in mid-air suggested to my 
 mind an image which I made use of later on at a Home 
 Rule Demonstration in Coventry when describing the 
 passage of the Home Rule BlQ through the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 On my return to Dublin we stayed for a few days 
 with Lord Aberdeen at the Vice-Regal Lodge. 
 
 Needless to state, this visit was a most delightful 
 climax to our sojourn in teland. An amusing 
 incident occurred one evening when Lord Aberdeen's
 
 1912] AN AMUSING INCIDENT 51 
 
 aide-de-camp came up to my room, in evident 
 distress, to say that unless my son joined the 
 dmner-party we would sit down thirteen to dinner. 
 Nothing loth, my boy, who had been having his meals 
 with the children of Su' Anthony Weldon, the State 
 Chamberlain, donned his evening clothes and came 
 down to dinner. He was intensely interested in every- 
 thing he saw, particularl}^ when the ladies retired and 
 Lad}'' Aberdeen made a low curtsey to Lord Aberdeen 
 as representmg the King. When 9.30 p.m., his bed- 
 time, arrived, my boy created infinite amusement by 
 promptly jumping up and marching to Lord Aberdeen 
 before the assembled guests and bidding him good-night. 
 
 Nine months later, on January 25, 1913, ]\Ir. John 
 Redmond was my guest in Coventry, when, accompanied 
 by Mrs. Redmond, he spoke at a mass meeting in that 
 city to celebrate the passing of the Home Rule Bill 
 through the House of Commons. There were also 
 present IVIr. P. G. Brady, M.P., Dr. Esmonde, M.P., 
 Mr. W. M. R. Pringle, M.P., and JVIr. W. Johnson, M.P. 
 Previous to the meeting I gave a dinner to about forty 
 leading supporters to meet ]\Ir. and Mrs. John Redmond. 
 
 Mr. Redmond delivered a great speech, eloquent, 
 historical, and convincing. The occasion was worthy 
 of the man, and he did full justice to it. 
 
 I followed, and read this letter from Mr. Asquith, 
 who was then Prune Minister. 
 
 10, Downing Street, 
 
 Whitehall, S.W. 
 
 Dear Mr. Mason, 
 
 I uiust congratulate you and your constituents 
 on the presence of the leader of the Irish party at your
 
 52 HOME RULE DEMONSTRATION [chap, iv 
 
 meeting. No one can put before you the case of Home 
 Rule with greater eloquence and force. 
 
 We have proposed, and carried through the House of 
 Commons, the Home Rule Bill in response to a demand 
 for a measure of self-government which has been 
 persistently and untu-ingly mamtained for more than a 
 generation by the representatives of the great majority 
 of the Irish nation. We of the Liberal Party believe 
 that this demand is supported by justice and ex- 
 pediency, we believe that it is necessary for the better 
 government of Ireland, and of the whole kingdom, 
 and we believe it will knit together the nations under the 
 Crown by a stronger and more permanent bond of 
 common loyalty and interest. 
 
 Yours sincerely, 
 
 H. H. ASQUITH. 
 
 I gave to the meeting some interesting figures which 
 had been given to me by IVIr, Finnemore of the Midland 
 Liberal Federation, showing the great recovery which 
 had taken place since the relapse after the Home Rule 
 Bill was introduced in 1886, and I was proud to say, as 
 an M.P., that with other cities they had been success- 
 ful here in Coventry in helping towards that recovery. 
 In 1885 before the Home Rule Bill was introduced 
 there were in the Midland area fifty-eight Liberal 
 M.P.'s and eighteen Conservative M.P.'s. After the 
 Home Rule Bill was introduced in 1886 there were 
 twenty-seven Liberals returned and forty-nine Con- 
 servatives and Liberal Unionists, a relapse which was 
 largely to be attributed to the defection of such 
 honoured Liberals as John Bright and Joseph Chamber- 
 Iain. In December 1910 they found thirty-one Liberal 
 and Labour M.P.'s returned in favour of Home Rule and
 
 1912] SPEECH IN COVENTRY 53 
 
 forty-five Conservatives and Liberal Unionists opposed 
 to it, thus a gain of four seats showed that the tide had 
 turned, and I believed we would continue to make 
 further progress in the same direction. 
 
 I described the passage of the Bill through the 
 House of Commons, and spoke of the invaluable 
 services of Mr, Redmond in watching over its pro- 
 gress. From his seat in the back benches, he had sat 
 there perched like an eagle, as I had seen one do high 
 up in a clifif on the Lakes of Killarney, ready, if an 
 enemy attacked, to pounce and destroy. 
 
 At a meeting of the Irish Party of Coventry later 
 in the evening, Mr. Redmond was kind enough to 
 say that I had been one of the best assistants the 
 Irish Party had had in piloting the Home Rule Bill 
 through the House of Commons. 
 
 The unanimity and enthusiasm which prevailed 
 during the whole of Mr, Redmond's visit were an 
 eloquent testimony to the advance which had taken 
 place in the conversion of the " predominant partner " 
 to the cause of Home Rule.
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 SUSPENSION OF THE OLD SINKING FUND 
 
 In the year 1912 the Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
 r\ir. Lloyd George, in his annual statement, announced 
 a reaUsed surplus of £6,500,000. In the usual way, 
 and according to the terms of the Old Sinking Fund, 
 this amount ought to have gone to the redemption 
 of the National Debt. But the Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer thought otherwise, and a notice suddenly 
 appeared on the notice-paper of the House of Commons 
 in his name proposing the suspension of this fund. 
 No reason was given for this extraordinary departure 
 from a sound and well-recognised custom, and a 
 strong feeling of opposition to the proposal was at 
 once made manifest on both sides of the House. I 
 took the first opportunity of giving expression to this 
 feeling, and delivered the following speech on the 
 subject on April 29th, 1912, in the House of Commons. 
 As a result of this protest, after some two or three 
 weeks' delay, the Government gave way to the extent 
 of £5,000,000 which went to the redemption of debt ; 
 £1,000,000 was allocated to the Navy, and £500,000 
 to Uganda, 
 
 I wish to refer to the Resolution of the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, which is in the following terms ; 
 
 " That it is expedient that the obligation to issue 
 
 64
 
 1912] CHANCELLOR'S RESOLUTION 55 
 
 the Old Sinking Fund to the National Debt Com- 
 missioners should not apply to the Old Sinking Fund 
 for the year ending the thirty-first day of March, 
 nineteen hundred and twelve." 
 
 This is surely a very grave matter for us to discuss. 
 Whatever our views may be, we all agree that to 
 suggest a departure from existing law and procedure 
 as laid down or outlined in the Sinking Fund con- 
 ditions is a very grave proposal to put before the 
 House, and we are entitled to a very lucid and frank 
 exposition on the part of the Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer of his reasons for moving such a Resolution. 
 Is it really urgent that he should ask us to alter the 
 law with regard to the Sinking Fund ? What is that 
 law ? It is very specifically laid down in the con- 
 ditions of the Old Sinking Fund that all surpluses 
 should automatically go to the reduction of debt. I 
 submit that unless there is a very urgent case made 
 out we should seriously consider our position before 
 such a very grave alteration of the law is sanctioned. 
 To take a realised surplus of £6,600,000, and carry it 
 to the Exchequer balances, is certainly an operation 
 which has some effect on the money market. In the 
 natural order of things it would have gone to the 
 reduction of debt, and its effect on the short loans 
 market is one that ought to be considered. Further, 
 the carrying forward of this enormous surplus must 
 be a temptation to many of a spendthrift tendency to 
 apply to the Treasury for Grants for various purposes. 
 If this money had automatically gone to the reduc- 
 tion of debt we should have been so much the better 
 off ; we should have strengthened our national credit 
 5
 
 56 SUSPENSION OF OLD SINKING FUND [chap, v 
 
 by that amount. If it proved to be necessary that 
 the money should be used for naval purposes, there 
 would be no absolute necessity for cash payment for 
 those naval exigencies ; and any further money that 
 might be necessary in the current year would, no 
 doubt, be forthcoming in the usual way. Each year 
 ought to stand on its own basis, and the realised 
 surplus ought surely to have gone in the natural order 
 of things to the reduction of debt. 
 
 Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer state definitely 
 what he proposes to do with this £6, 500,000 ? Further, 
 will he state frankly that, if the House agrees to the 
 proposal, and the money is required, he will come to 
 the House for its sanction for the purposes for which 
 the money is required ? The Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer has shown by the way in which he treated 
 the proposal for an Estimates Committee that he is 
 anxious to carry the House with him in regard to its 
 control of the national finances. I am sure that I 
 am not making too great a demand upon the right 
 hon. Gentleman when I ask him to be very frank in 
 taking this Committee into his confidence ; we are 
 always very anxious for a frank and free discussion 
 of our finances, and we ask for his confidence when he 
 asks us to give such wide powers as suggested in this 
 Resolution. I should just like to say a word or two 
 on the supreme importance of economy — a rather dull 
 subject perhaps — the maintenance of our national 
 credit and of the Sinking Fund. I do not say at this 
 stage how I am going to vote in regard to this Resolu- 
 tion. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, if 
 the right hon. Gentleman can make out a good case, is
 
 1912] PRICE OF CONSOLS 57 
 
 frank in taking the House into his confidence, and 
 can convince this House that there is an urgent 
 necessity for us to give him the power he asks, then 
 certainly any fah and broad-minded man will take 
 that into consideration. Without that knowledge and 
 that information in our possession we are all, I think, 
 entitled, at this stage certamly, to protest against the 
 apparent lightness in treating this subject, and of 
 showing, if I may put it so, not a proper appreciation 
 of the supreme importance of maintaining our Sink- 
 ing Fund, of economy, or of the maintenance of the 
 national credit. 
 
 We have had a great deal of discussion over the 
 last two or three years as to the price of Consols. A 
 great many theories have been advanced as to what 
 governs the price of Consols. If I may venture to 
 give a definition, I would say that while, of course, 
 there are a great many causes, as every one knows 
 who has had experience of finance or business, yet 
 what governs the price of Consols is the proportion 
 which the loanable capital of the world bears to the 
 fixed or funded capital of the world. That is to say, 
 if there is a great mass of loanable capital, not only 
 in this country but abroad, the rate of interest tends 
 to fall. Consols then tend to rise. If money can be 
 lent out at a higher rate of interest than you will 
 get in Consols, the tendency is for securities to be 
 liquidated, and for the capital to be used for lending 
 out purposes, for trade, and so on. WHIien the pro- 
 portion of loanable capital accumulates and increases 
 in the money markets of the world, as against the 
 amounts desu'ed for fixed capital or funded debt, then
 
 68 SUSPENSION OF OLD SINKING FUND [chap, v 
 
 the tendency is for these securities to rise. There are 
 a great many contributory causes, but I think the 
 House will agree in the main with my definition. I 
 hope I do not weary hon. Members by going into 
 these details, but it is necessary to bring out my 
 argument, and to draw attention to the very great 
 importance of the step we are now taking as to what 
 in the main governs the price of Consols. We know 
 that no single Government can control the proportion 
 which loanable capital bears either to fixed capital or 
 funded debt, but certainly Governments can have a 
 very considerable influence upon the matter. 
 
 Our British Budget will very soon approach 
 £200,000,000, taking into account the Post Office and 
 the telephones. That is a huge sum for any body of 
 men or any Chancellor of the Exchequer to have to 
 handle. I think distinguished Members who formerly 
 occupied that position, such as Mr. Gladstone, would 
 have held up their hands in horror at having to grapple 
 and arrange a Budget of this enormous size, and we 
 must congratulate the present Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer on the apparent lightness and cheeriness 
 with which he faces his burden, but it is a great burden, 
 and one of very great responsibility, and I submit 
 that any body of men who have the handling of such 
 a huge sum of money can have some effect, some 
 influence, indirect influence it may be, upon the 
 money market and upon national credit. My point 
 is this : Consols have fallen because of the fact that 
 the proportion of loanable capital has been very 
 much reduced compared with the fixed capital and 
 the funded debt. That is owing to trade activity,
 
 1912] PRICE OF CONSOLS 69 
 
 owing to a very great increase in the funded debts of 
 the world through wars and so forth during the last 
 ten years. Governments cannot alter the past. 
 Having regard, however, to the position, and that the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer realises that position 
 
 Mr. Lloyd George : There are the Trustee 
 Securities. 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : The right hon. Gentleman reminds 
 me of the increase in Trustee Securities. That, it is 
 quite true, is one of the contributory causes. I quite 
 agree. But, with all respect to the Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer, I think that that cause is very much 
 exaggerated. The mam governing factor, I think 
 the right hon. Gentleman will agree, is the proportion 
 of your loanable capital. Bankers in this House will 
 confirm me in this. If they find capital accumulating, 
 and have a difficulty in lending it out for trade or 
 other purposes, then they must invest it in interest- 
 bearing securities. It does not matter to them about 
 the Trustee Act or any other Act. After all it is not 
 really the private investor who in the mam invests in 
 Consols. The great buyers are the bankers and the in- 
 surance companies, and the reason that they purchase 
 Consols is because they are not able to get such a 
 high rate of interest for their capital when they are 
 lending it out. When, therefore, they have a diffi- 
 culty in lending money, when capital increases with 
 them, and in the money markets of the world, they 
 must invest in interest-bearmg securities. I am not 
 reflecting upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or 
 upon the Government, or the policy of the Govern- 
 ment. I am only asking this Grovernment, or any
 
 60 SUSPENSION OF OLD SINKING FUND [chap, v 
 
 Groveniment, to face the facts. Surely these are 
 economic facts ! They do not reflect upon the poHcy 
 of the Government, but surely they should be taken 
 into consideration by the Government ! I hope I am 
 as keen a social reformer as any Member of this 
 House, but I think you ought to cut your coat accord- 
 ing to j^our cloth, and regulate your social reform 
 with the conditions prevailing. When we find, as 
 to-day, that capital is not plentiful, that owing to the 
 activities of trade, owing to great schemes of social 
 reform, owing to the great expenditure necessary for 
 armaments — I am not saying whether these latter are 
 necessary or unnecessary, but they cost money — the 
 loanable capital is absorbed, and the supply naturally 
 reduced, we should realise that position. If w'e are 
 going in for schemes of social reform we ought to have 
 regard to the amount necessary for our defence, to 
 the amount to be spent upon the Navy. What I 
 have stated ought to appeal to any Committee of 
 practical men and to any House. 
 
 We have heard a great deal in recent years with 
 regard to labour unrest. Much has been said about 
 the cause of that labour unrest. The Government 
 have been asked to hold an inquiry and to allot a day 
 for the discussion of the matter. Many theories have 
 been advanced in regard to this matter. IMay I be 
 allowed just to state that this very question of national 
 finances has something to do with labour unrest ? 
 Hon, Members may ask me where is the connection 
 between the two ? Labour unrest has assuredly been 
 brought about by an increase in the cost of livmg. 
 While wages, it is true, have increased during the last
 
 1912] COST OF LIVING 61 
 
 ten years from lOfO to 102, the cost of living has in- 
 creased from 100 to 106. That means a decrease in 
 the real wage. Working men to-day, aKhough having 
 fairly regular employment and good wages, find their 
 conditions have not improved in proportion because 
 of the increase in the cost of living. This increased 
 cost of living has been brought about by a great 
 variety of causes, including the abnormal production 
 of gold. But I just wish to show the connection, as 
 I said, between national finance and the increased cost 
 of living. If Governments, pursuing a certain line of 
 policy, do not recognise the necessity for husbanding 
 their resources, for reducing their debt and reducing 
 their taxation in times of prosperity, then I submit 
 that they are accentuating this increased cost. Let 
 me give an illustration. 
 
 If this Government, for example, were to take this 
 6J millions and use it for the redemption of debt, that 
 would at once set free 6J millions available throughout 
 the country. It might be used through the various 
 banks for various purposes, and if by pursuing another 
 policy further we were able to come to an agreement 
 with other countries to reduce the necessity for enor- 
 mous armaments, we might be able perhaps to save 
 a further ten millions. All that capital would become 
 available in the markets of the world. If that capital, 
 becoming available, were to be used to develop new 
 wheatfields in various parts of the world, it would 
 increase the supply of wheat and food, and actually 
 would reduce the cost of living, so that the Govern- 
 ment, as I have said, having a Budget to handle of 
 something like £200,000,000, can undoubtedly have a
 
 62 SUSPENSION OF OLD SINKING FUND [chap, v 
 
 great effect iii either accentuating or lessening this 
 increased cost of living which I believe in the main 
 has produced a great deal of the present unrest. 
 Anyhow, I submit to this House that before we agree 
 to this very important and grave proposal to suspend 
 the Smking Fund, we are entitled to ask the Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer for a full and adequate explana- 
 tion. I have not the slightest doubt that the right 
 hon. Gentleman wUl accede to my request. I know 
 he is always frank and free in giving any explanations 
 or in answermg any questions put to him. We look 
 forward to him making a very clear and urgent case 
 for asking us to agree to so very important a proposal 
 as mentioned in the Resolution.
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 women's suffrage 
 
 The question of Women's Suffrage was very much 
 before the public in the year 1912. Various Bills had 
 been introduced in the House of Commons with the 
 object of settling this much-vexed question, but 
 owing to the division of opinion which existed in all 
 parties, and in the Government itself, agreement 
 appeared to be impossible of attainment. 
 
 At last what was supposed to offer a prospect of a 
 settlement, but which proved to be no settlement, 
 was the introduction by the Government of a Fran- 
 chise Bill on June 17th, 1912, with the promise that, 
 in the event of an amendment in favour of women's 
 suffrage being carried, it would then form a part of 
 the Government measure when it finally left the 
 House of Commons. 
 
 On the introduction of the Bill I determined to oppose 
 the first reading, and communicated this decision to 
 Lord Robert Cecil, who agreed to support me in the 
 Division Lobby. 
 
 In the debate which took place I delivered the 
 following speech. The figures in the division in the 
 evening were: Ayes 274; Noes 50. Before the Bill, 
 however reached the Committee stage the Speaker 
 ruled it to be out of order to introduce an amendment 
 in favour of Women's Suffrage, as by so doing the 
 
 63
 
 64 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE [chap, vi 
 
 original character of the Bill would have been entirely 
 altered, and this decision resulted in the Government 
 dropping the Bill. The action I had taken in oppos- 
 ing the Bill was therefore fully justified, 
 
 I rise to state that I shall oppose this Bill on the 
 Fii'st Reading for the simple reason that women 
 are left out of it. I do not propose to follow the 
 remarks of the right hon. Gentleman on the other 
 side as to the various details of the Bill, because 
 obviously if one is going . to oppose the proposed 
 introduction of the Bill itself, it will be useless to 
 discuss the details of that Bill. I think we are en- 
 titled to ask the Government which has introduced 
 this Bill what are their credentials in introducing such 
 a measure. I think hon. Members will agree with 
 me that the position is odd, in this introduction of a 
 measure of so far-reaching a character, which, al- 
 though many on these benches no doubt will support 
 much of it in detail — the abolition of plural voting 
 and so forth — does not deal with what, after all, is 
 really the question before the country to-day. What 
 is it, if men are really honest and sincere in connection 
 with the franchise question, they consider the great 
 question before the country at the present time ? 
 Surely there can be only one answer : that is the 
 question of wojnen's suffrage. That is really the 
 question that we all have in our mind, and that is the 
 question which we should grapple with and face in any 
 measure brought forward by any Government. We are 
 entitled, therefore, to ask what are the credentials of 
 the Government in bringing this measure forward. 
 
 Let us take first the position of the Prime Minister.
 
 1912] CREDENTIALS OF MINISTERS 65 
 
 The Prime Minister has stated very straightforwardly 
 on many occasions that he is opposed to women's 
 suffrage ; that he regards it, or would regard it, as " a 
 menace to the State," and therefore he believes that 
 it should not be introduced. There are other Members 
 of the Government, I understand, who support the 
 Prime Minister in that attitude of mind. I think that 
 the House will agree with me that if the Prime Minister 
 is sincere, if he honestly does believe that women's 
 suffrage would be that menace to the State, it is per- 
 fectly absurd, and it is an insult really to the Members 
 of this House and to the country, to try, as it were, 
 to have the best of both worlds by holding out this 
 absurd idea — for it is nothing more or less than a 
 delusion of an idea — to suggest that an Amendment 
 may bo moved by this House ; that he will throw the 
 respoi.sibility upon Members of the House of passing 
 an Amendment including woman's suffrage. If he is 
 opposed to woman's suffrage, if he regards it as a 
 menace to the State, he is bound, as an honest man, 
 as a man who really does believe what he states, to 
 use every possible effort, to fight for all he is worth, 
 as it were, to use every legitimate endeavour to pre- 
 vent this Amendment on women's suffrage becoming 
 law. Not only that, but in his Government there are 
 Members who will be accessories to the fact, supporters 
 of his ideas, and to allow a distinguished Member of 
 his own Government or of this House to propose an 
 Amendment on that which he regards as a menace 
 and something which is likely to be harmful to the 
 State, is to ask us to regard him either as a fool or a 
 knave. That is a self-evident proposition.
 
 66 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE [chap, vi 
 
 There are, I believe, Members of the Government 
 who, I suppose, support the Prime Minister in that 
 view of harm to the State. All I can say is that I am 
 sure the right hon. Gentleman deludes himself if he 
 thinks he can either throw dust in the eyes of Members 
 of this House or the people of this country in endea- 
 vourmg to present this sort of double-shuffle of a Bill 
 where we are going to have a great advance made 
 in manhood suffrage, while the supporters of women's 
 suffrage are to be put off by this idea of an Amend- 
 ment which may or may not become the law of the 
 land. I do not propose to describe those various 
 supporters of the Government who take that view. 
 When I attack the right hon. Gentleman the head of 
 the Government I include all the other Members of 
 the Government who support him in his point of view. 
 I come to the other section of the Government, that 
 section which have led us to believe, not only in this 
 House, but in the country, that they are supporters 
 of women's suffrage. Apparently because they are 
 Members of the Government they support the Bill. 
 They ask us to believe that they are whole-hearted 
 supporters of women's suffrage, and that this is our 
 one chance in the women's suffrage moment of leading 
 to some conclusion, of an Amendment becoming part 
 of this Bill, and therefore the law of the land. What 
 an absurd position for them to bo in ! On this Bill 
 we have to consider — as the Bill does not include any 
 provision for women — I am not discussing whether 
 this particular Bill should be extended equally to the 
 women of this country ; that is not the question 
 before us — the question that we have to decide in
 
 1912] CREDENTIALS OF MINISTERS 67 
 
 discussing the introduction of this Bill is surely as to 
 approval or otherwise of the principle of the Bill, If 
 this Bill itself makes no provision for women, then I 
 think I am right logically in opposing its introduction 
 in any shape or form, though right hon. Gentlemen 
 who apparently support this Bill, and who are in 
 favour of women's suffrage, ask us to regard them as 
 assuming and taking up a consistent attitude. In 
 logic that seems to me to be the most dishonest and 
 most illogical. 
 
 If I am in favour of a certain principle, and if I 
 happen to be a Member of the Government ; if I am 
 in favour of women's suffrage and regard it sincerely 
 and believe in it, surely I am entitled to go to the 
 head of my Government and insist that it shall be 
 inserted in any Franchise Bill that is brought in ; 
 particularly when every one throughout the country 
 knows that this question is a burning question. It is 
 absurd to delude ourselves that this question of 
 women's suffrage is not within the sphere of practical 
 politics. We have ail discussed it in our constituencies, 
 and we have had to deal with it in our election 
 addresses. I hope we are all honest men, but it is 
 not consistent with a high sincerity to say one thing 
 in the constituencies for the purpose of gaming votes, 
 and then, by taking part in a double-shuffle, or a 
 backhanded method of proceeding, to get out of our 
 promises in this House, That is self-evident. The 
 attitude of those right hon. Gentlemen who would try 
 to get us to believe that in supporting this measure 
 which provides for the extension of the franchise, but 
 does not include women, they are consistent, is I sub-
 
 68 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE [chap, vi 
 
 mit entire]}'- -wTong, and not in accordance with the 
 position that they would like to maintain throughout 
 the country. If they are to retain the support and 
 trust of the countrj' they must obviously either take 
 their stand with the Government of the day, that if 
 the Franchise Bill is brought before us that that 
 Franchise Bill should include a provision for women ; 
 or, if they are unable to make their views prevail in 
 the Cabinet, then they have a very clear alternative, 
 that is to sever their connection with any Government 
 if a Government measure is persisted in which does 
 not include women's suffrage. Then the head of the 
 Government will consider whether he will be prepared 
 to risk brmging in this measure, or he will agree with 
 his colleagues not to bring in the measure at all. The 
 Government must either surely stand or fall with their 
 particular measure. It is absurd to delude us by 
 statmg that the other side are divided on the subject. 
 That is not the question. There are many questions 
 on which even the other side sometimes join with this 
 side, and on which hon. Members on this side also 
 join with other Members of the House ; but surely 
 a Government bringing forward a measure of this 
 magnitude must either stand or fall by it ? They 
 must either bring in a measure because they believe 
 in it, or state that they do not see their way to bring 
 it forward, or surely leave it alone. But they cannot 
 expect us, those of us who believe in women's suffrage, 
 to support the First Reading with the idea that we 
 are going to amend it in Committee or later. If we 
 admit the principle, and if we support the First Read- 
 ing of this Bill, then we are a party to that which I
 
 1912] WOMEN AND VOTES 69 
 
 regard as a dishonest proceeding. I said I did not 
 propose to go into the details of the measure, because 
 I cannot discuss details. But I trust Members of this 
 House will appreciate the point of view I put forward, 
 that is that if you support a principle, and wish to be 
 consistent, you must oppose any measure which 
 touches upon the franchise and which does not include 
 the extension of the area to the provision of the 
 franchise for women. 
 
 As I believe in that I may perhaps state why I 
 regard that as fundamental to any measure of fran- 
 chise, or the extension of the franchise, that is submitted 
 to this House. I do not claim that women, or the 
 addition of women, will brmg about any great and 
 particular change in this country. I believe that you 
 will have progressive women, anxl that you will have 
 reactionary women ; you will have women in favour of 
 this question, and opposed to the other question. I 
 do not believe that if women come into the realm of 
 politics as voters that they will vote as a body. I 
 believe that they will support certam candidates, and 
 certain Members of Parliament, and vote on certam 
 questions just as men do. Part of them, as we know 
 from our own experience in our own constituencies, 
 will vote one way and part another, for we have 
 Liberal women and we have Conservative women. No 
 doubt we shall have women supportmg Labour candi- 
 dates, and women supporting Irish candidates. It is 
 absurd to suppose, or to imagine, that because you 
 extend the franchise to women, that women are going 
 to vote as a body, and that they are going to alter 
 the whole structure of the State ; that they are
 
 70 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE [chap, vi 
 
 going to interfere with all the institutions of the 
 State. Certain women, no doubt, will wish for 
 changes in one direction or the other ; but I believe 
 that the addition of women to the franchise will be 
 an immense advantage to the State. I believe, in- 
 stead of it being a menace, it will be a supremo advan- 
 tage. It docs not show us up in any particularly 
 manly fashion, we men who believe in this, that some 
 of us are content, possibly in a half-hearted way, to 
 suggest that it will do if the House is in favour of 
 women's suffrage, and so get rid of an awkward ques- 
 tion by saying that, of course, we will support the 
 Amendment. 
 
 Supposing this Amendment is not carried, what is 
 the position ? It is, of course, this, that you have 
 added a very considerable number of male electors to 
 the register. Does any one in this House state, or is 
 he prepared to state, that that will not be committing 
 a gross injustice ? Of course it will. If you add a 
 very large number of male voters to the electors, and 
 if those male electors, when the question again comes 
 forward of women's suffrage, utOise their power, as 
 possibly they may do, to still further vote against the 
 question of women's suffrage, you will still further 
 Bet back this movement. You will be committing a 
 gross injustice. You will be doing something which 
 you must know is opposed to sincerity and honesty. 
 I wish to draw the attention of the House to those 
 who state that they are in favour of women's suffrage 
 — to those Members more particularly who profess or 
 who state that they are in favour of women's suffrage, 
 and wish the country to believe that they are in
 
 1912] ATTITUDE OF MEMBERS 71 
 
 favour of women's suffrage. I am sure that the 
 country would take note of the votes of those hon. 
 Members. I thmk that is a self-evident proposition, 
 that if any hon. Member is in favour of it, it is neces- 
 sarily absurd that any one should support a Bill 
 which does not include or make provision for women. 
 He cannot honestly or sincerely do so, because he 
 runs a great risk of the Bill being carried, and the 
 Amendment being defeated, because it is not a 
 Government Amendment. One could not be held up 
 as disloyal to his party if he opposed the Amend- 
 ment, for he could oppose it for many reasons. He 
 might say he is in favour of women's suffrage, but 
 does not think that such a large number should be 
 admitted, and for various reasons he might oppose 
 this Amendment, and this Bill may become an Act 
 without it, and permit a gross injustice to be done, 
 and set back for many generations the great boon 
 which I and others believed would be of immense 
 service and advantage to the State by the addition of 
 women to the franchise. I hope I have made my 
 position perfectly clear. I believe I am not alone in 
 this attitude, and I hope that many Members, when 
 a vote is taken upon the introduction of this Bill — 
 because certainly a vote will be taken, as far as I 
 believe, on the Fii'st Reading — will vote agamst it. I 
 certamly hope to vote against it. I hope many others 
 will follow in this Debate who possibly will put the 
 case better than I do of the dishonesty of being a 
 party to the production of a Bill which proposes to 
 alter the franchise but does not make provision for 
 women. 
 6
 
 72 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE [chap, vi 
 
 I do not think I should serve the cause I have at 
 heart by speakmg at great length upon this question 
 of women's suffrage. Many of us are surely now 
 agreed and well convinced of its advantage. Surely 
 the basis of the franchise should be the mind. You 
 want the opinion of the people. You want to have 
 representative Governments, and to have the opinion 
 of men, and I hope equally of women, as to hoAv you 
 should carry on the government of the country. This 
 Bill, by ignoring women, treats women as inferior 
 beings. [Hon. Members : " No, no."] Hon. Mem- 
 bers say " No, no " — but there is no getting over the 
 fact that if you bring in a measure for the extension of 
 the franchise and cut women out of it you treat 
 women as inferior creatures. You do not even recog- 
 nise their mental powers, even in limited numbers, 
 because you make no provision in your Bill for any 
 women. You are in favour of extending the franchise 
 to a considerable number of men ; but you do not 
 yet see that the time has arrived to admit an equal 
 number of women. We men are all agreed that to 
 be perfectly consistent and honest that, if you cut 
 women out of the Bill you obviously — and I think it 
 is clear to any one — treat women as inferior creatures, 
 and do not regard it as many Members of the Govern- 
 ment have said, as an advantage to have women 
 enjoy the franchise in this country. I have said the 
 basis of the franchise is mind, and therefore believing 
 that, and as I have no doubt many other hon. Mem- 
 bers believe, that there are many women of great 
 mind and mental capacity and activity, it surely is 
 of great advantage to bring additional strength and
 
 1912] ADVANTAGE OF WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE 73 
 
 intellect into our councils and into our politics by 
 giving women the right to vote. In a State, if you 
 have net an autocrat with all the virtues and the 
 intellect, the only thing is to advance and widen the 
 area of your electoral franchise, and to bring in all 
 classes of the community, men and women, so that 
 you may have real representative Government, repre- 
 sentative of the whole community, and not half of 
 the community or one section. No one could deny 
 that in bringing women into the Bill we would not be 
 assisting and steadying our policy. You are denying 
 yourself the opportunity of getting within the Con- 
 stitution a great reserve of strength and intellect and 
 mind, 'i his is not an Amendment that we should 
 throw like a sop to Cerberus meant to end in nothing 
 in order to keep women quiet and quiescent. 
 
 I believe we should welcome this question of the 
 vote which women are willing to take, and that we 
 should go out into the highways and byways and 
 rejoice that women are willing to come in and help us. 
 We are all interested and fascinated with political 
 affairs, but I have no doubt I express the views of 
 many Members when I say that we get tired and a 
 little bored with the monotony of the proceedings of 
 the House of Commons, and that politics sometimes 
 try us a good deal. Men sometimes get tired of 
 politics. If there were women willing to vote and 
 help to express opinion, and to help in electoral work 
 in the constituencies, surely that is a thing not to be 
 sorry for but to welcome ? Any one willmg to take 
 a hand in politics or in electoral contests ought to be 
 welcomed, and I am sure we certainly always do
 
 74 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE [chap, vi 
 
 welcome women if they are likely to help us in getting 
 into this House, Avhich seems to be the ambition of so 
 many of us. I do not think it necessarily follows 
 that women, if they had the vote, would wish to sit 
 in this House. At any rate, they would have to be 
 elected to this House, and I very much doubt whether 
 women, when they get the vote, and men equally, 
 will elect women to this House as long as there are 
 men prepared to come forward and serve and attend 
 and go through the arduous work and labour entailed 
 by Membership of this House. It is absurd to suppose 
 that, because women have the power of expressing 
 their views through the vote, that they will neces- 
 sarily wish to come into this House. Tha,t is a matter 
 upon which I do not express any opinion for or 
 against. It is a matter to be settled by the electorate. 
 The point I wish to emphasise is we are anxious to 
 get the mind of the electorate, that women have a 
 mind and intellect of a high order, and will be of 
 immense service through the influence of their votes. 
 I am sure I express the opinion of many Members 
 here when I say that, on moral questions and ques- 
 tions of purity, women possess a higher standard than 
 men on these questions. There are questions on the 
 industries, factories, Focial questions and many other 
 questions which affect a great Empke where women 
 exercising the vote must be of immense service to 
 the Empire. It is moral strength that strengthens 
 nations and empires. Deny that moral strength and 
 you cut away the whole superstructure and under- 
 mine the foundations upon which your Empire 
 is built. Wo are foolish to deny ourselves this
 
 1912] ADVANTAGE OF WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE 75 
 
 great addition to our strength and to our political 
 power. 
 
 I have said sufficient to give proof of the faith that 
 is in me with regard to the immense advantage it 
 would bo to add women to our electorate. It is no 
 new theory, this addition of women. Students of 
 history must know that, even in the days of Plato, it 
 was proposed that women should take part in express- 
 ing their opinions and voting for the various officers 
 of the legislatures of that period. I, for my part, 
 regret that this country has taken so long to find out 
 what an immense advantage and good it would be if 
 we could get women to vote and take the interest 
 which I believe we could get women to take in the 
 affairs of the State. It is argued that where it has 
 been brought into being women have not taken that 
 interest when they had the vote, that they declined 
 to exercise the vote or take part in the elections for 
 which they got the vote. I do not think that is 
 borne out by the facts of the case. I think in Aus- 
 tralia and other countries where women have the vote 
 they take a very considerable interest m the elections, 
 and I think we have seen here at home that in 
 municipal elections they vote and take considerable 
 interest. But that does not afiect the justice or the 
 injustice of granting them the franchise. I think it 
 was Mr. Gladstone who said, when the extension of 
 the franchise to the agricultural labourers was pro- 
 posed, it was not a question whether the agricultural 
 labourer demanded it or not, but he ought to have it, 
 and this responsibility ought to be tlirown upon him. 
 And it was thrown upon him. And I say this, that
 
 76 WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE [chap, vi 
 
 women ought to bear a far greater share m the State 
 and take a far greater interest in the government and 
 should be compelled to face those responsibilities 
 which should be laid upon them. They should feel 
 those responsibiliti(3s, and they ought to take part 
 in the responsibilities of government as citizens of 
 this great Empire. 
 
 I submit this is not a question of granting the fran- 
 chise because they demand it or not. It is a question 
 that they ought to recognise the responsibilities thrown 
 upon them, and they should be compelled to take an 
 interest in the government of the realm. They are 
 willing to bear these responsibilities, and we should 
 try to got them in. I hope the hon. Members will 
 support this attitude of oj)posing the introduction of 
 this measure because of this great outstanding fact. 
 There are many other points that might occur to hon. 
 Members as a reason for opposing the introduction ; 
 I venture to suggest that if we allow ourselves to be 
 diverted into the by-ways of lodger votes, questions 
 of residence, and numbers of the male electorate, we 
 will be, I believe, forced from the main issue and 
 from this question which is before the country just 
 now. Many hon. Members, probably with greater 
 experience than I have, know the folly of lack of con- 
 centrating in political life. We should not allow our 
 energies to be diverted, and the Government have been 
 very wily. They have not been in office all these 
 years for nothing ; they are practical politicians, and 
 it is for us again and again to bring back the Debates 
 on this Bill to this point of women suffrage, because, 
 if the Bill is carried, as it possibly may be, without
 
 1912] INCLUSION OF WOMEN 77 
 
 the inclusion of women, it will set back the question 
 of the admission of women to the franchise for genera- 
 tions. 
 
 Those who believe in keeping this question before 
 the House shoukl bring back the House to the main 
 issue, and that is the burning injustice of any 
 Government, and particularly any Liberal Govern- 
 ment, introducing in these days a Reform Bill without 
 dealing with the question of women's enfranchise- 
 ment, a question vitally affecting the future of this 
 country and providing for that addition of women to 
 the electorate which will add to the glory and future 
 progress of this Empire.
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 A PROSPECTIVE DEFICIT 
 
 DuRiNO the years 1912 and 1913 there had been con- 
 siderable stringency in the money market. Trade 
 had been very active, and in every direction there was 
 a demand for loanable capital. Foreign governments, 
 and otlier large borrowers, who had attempted to float 
 their loans found considerable difficulty in doing so. 
 Underwriters of these loans in many instances being 
 compelled to take up the stock because of the failure 
 of the investing public to subscribe. 
 
 The Chancellor of the Exchequer in his Budget 
 statement appeared to ignore this state of affairs, and 
 did not seem to recognise the close connection which 
 subsists between finance and a continued activity 
 of trade. He was faced with a probable deficit of 
 £7,500,000 in the current year. This he anticipated 
 would disappear owing to an increase in revenue due 
 to a further expansion of trade. My belief was that 
 for the time being the top of the boom in trade had 
 been about reached, and that Mr. Lloyd George was 
 not justified in taking so sanguine a view of the situa- 
 tion, and on June 2nd, 1913, I endeavoured to prove 
 this in the following speech. As events transpired 
 the money position did not improve, and although the 
 revenue of the country owing to various causes con- 
 tinued to increase for some time, there were evidences 
 
 78
 
 1913] CONSUMER PAYS THE DUTY 79 
 
 in many directions that the views which I had ven- 
 tured to express were being confirmed by the general 
 situation throughout the world. 
 
 The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hewins) has made a very 
 interesting speech. He told us that such taxes as the 
 Tea Tax absorb a big payment by the workmg classes, 
 from which large sums of money are drawn, and then, 
 in the latter part of hL speech, he told us that he was 
 a supporter of another fiscal system. We on this 
 side are at a loss to understand how, in view of the 
 argument he has advanced with respect to money 
 coming out of the pockets of the worldiig classes, he 
 can reconcile his advocacy of the other system with 
 that, because we believe that those who advocate a 
 change in our fiscal policy contend that the foreigner 
 pays the taxes. 
 
 Mr. Hewins : The Tea Duty. 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : We have always believed that hon. 
 Members opposite advance the argument that fiscal 
 duties are paid by the foreigner. [An. Hon. Member : 
 " Which duties ? "] All fiscal duties. [An Hon. 
 Member : " No."] We have always contended that 
 the consumer pays the duty. The hon. Member is 
 quite right when he states that the duties take very 
 large sums of money from the consumer. If he can 
 show any duty which he would put on and which the 
 foreigner would pay, we would be very glad to know 
 of it. If he adheres to the contention which he stated 
 in the early part of his speech that these duties take 
 large sums of money from the working class, we camiot 
 see how the putting on of fiscal duties would derive
 
 80 A PROSPECTIVE DEFICIT [chap, vii 
 
 revenue from tlie foreigner. Of course, the consumer 
 pays the duty, and the important admission which 
 the hon. Gentleman has made is one which we have 
 made a note of. I would like to refer to the general 
 discussion and to the previous Debate. On that 
 occasion I ventured to ask the Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer if he could show on what grounds, or state 
 what authorities he could give, for his estimate that 
 the prospective deficit of £7,500,000 would be made 
 up by increased revenue in the current year, and the 
 right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Worcester- 
 shire {j\Ir. Austen Chamberlain) agreed with that 
 request on my part. I have seen nothing since to 
 alter the opmion which I then ventured to express. 
 It is true, of course, that since that discussion took 
 place we have peace in the Balkan Peninsula. That 
 point was referred to by the Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer, and he anticipated that when peace took 
 place we might expect a great development in that 
 part of the world. Although we rejoice that peace 
 has been brought about, and although on both sides 
 of the House we congratulate the Government, and 
 especially the Foreign Secretary, for the distinguished 
 part they have played in bringing about peace, still 
 I, for my part, cannot quite see that the establishment 
 of peace there justifies the right hon. Gentleman in 
 his sanguine estimate that we are going to derive 
 immediate benefit from that part of the world. 
 
 The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mi-. Lloyd 
 George) indicated dissent. 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : I think if the right hon. Gentleman 
 refers to the speech he will find that I am correct.
 
 1913] EFFECT OF WAR ON CAPITAL 81 
 
 Mr. Lloyd George : On the contrary, my hon. 
 Friend has misunderstood me. What I said was that 
 undoubtedly the restoration of peace would go a very 
 great length for the continuance of good trade, but I 
 went further than that, and said that we would not 
 derive benefit from those quarters. I meant gener- 
 ally throughout the world. 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : I am glad of that interruption, 
 because it still further confirms my contention that 
 with jhe restoration of peace we might look, with the 
 right hon. Gentleman, to a considerable drain upon 
 the capital resources of the world to make good the 
 tremendous loss and devastation which have taken 
 place in those regions. I said then that if peace 
 should occur we should have to look for added calls 
 upon the capital resources of the world to make good 
 the loss. The right hon. Gentleman has admitted 
 that there has been considerable loss. It will mean 
 a great drain upon the capital resources of the world. 
 Many of those engaged in finance will confbm what I 
 state when I say that we are suffering from gr^at 
 stringency in the money market. I then pointed out 
 that that surely was a matter which should be con- 
 sidered by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in framing 
 his Estimates, and that the probability was that 
 loans would not be so easily subscribed this year as in 
 former years. Many hon. Members will bear me out 
 when I say that some of the recent loan issues have 
 been failures in the sense that they have not been 
 successfully floated on the money market. I think 
 that all goes to show that the estimate that this 
 £7,500,000 deficit will be made up in the current year
 
 82 A PROSPECTIVE DEFICIT [chap, vii 
 
 is too sanguine. I should like the right hon. Gentle- 
 man to be good enough to give us some of the authorities 
 to which he referred, because I have been quite at a 
 loss to find any authority to justify us in expecting 
 such a prosperous time during the period we are now 
 entering upon. Though I should be sorry to be 
 correct in my estunatc — I mean that I have no wish 
 to be a prophet of evil — I must admit that I do 
 not see what justification there is, with the evidence 
 before us, for the estimate that you are going to get 
 £7,500,000 by writing up Excise, Customs, and so 
 forth, and arriving at the balance in that way. 
 
 We are at present, of course, engaged in a great 
 and colossal trade. There is trade prosperity all over 
 the world, and if that is to contmue, and possibly 
 expand, it will have to be financed. We are also 
 aware that there has been an added call upon the 
 resources of the world, not only by the restoration of 
 peace and the making good of the devastation caused 
 in the Balkan regions, but by the vast and increasing 
 demand for loans. Capital in large amounts is now 
 to be called for by Continental nations for the pur- 
 poses of armaments. France proposes a loan of 
 £40,000,000. Germany will follow suit, and Russia 
 probably will come forward with increased demands. 
 I do submit that these are considerations which we 
 should bear in mind, because this is not merely a 
 matter that affects our own national expenditure 
 alone. We are affected, capital being a fluid matter, 
 by the excessive demands on the part of Continental 
 nations, and also by the excessive demands on the 
 part of other countries. I should like to quote here
 
 1913] PREPARATION FOR WAR 83 
 
 what a distinguished financier says in regard to this 
 very matter. M. Neymerck says : — 
 
 " On every side Governments are acting as if war 
 would break out to-morrow among the Great Powers 
 and plunge Europe in blood and fire. . . . The tre- 
 mendous sacrifices which nations are imposmg on 
 themselves to increase their military forces in time of 
 peace will long weigh, it is to be feared, on the money 
 market ; and a slackening up of economic activity 
 may come on us without money rates going down 
 much." 
 
 I think that also confirms what I have stated. In 
 view of those facts, we are not justified in estimating 
 that the vast expansion of trade which has been going 
 on during previous years is likely to continue. It is 
 well known that vast trade depends, like the wheels 
 of industry, on the oil which lubricates it. This 
 extensive trade demands the free flow of capital, and 
 where will you find any one who will state that there 
 is a free flow of capital at present ? On the contrary, 
 there is a great stringency of capital. That is not 
 confined to this country. You find the same thing in 
 France, Germany, and the United States. The other 
 day a leading railroad in America went into the hands 
 of the receiver. So far as I know it was a good rail- 
 way, but it had a large amount of short term notes 
 falling due, and the bankers were unable to renew 
 them. That is only perhaps a straw, but it shows 
 how the wind is blowing. It is an indication that 
 the high rates now ruling for money are havmg their 
 effect. Not long ago a first-class Power had to pay
 
 \ 
 
 84 A PROSPECTIVE DEFICIT [chap, vii 
 
 6i per cent, for temporary accommodation. That is 
 rather an indication which points that we should take 
 warning from what happened. 
 
 Sir F Banbury : What Power ? 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : It was Austria which, when borrow- 
 ing for mobilisation, had to pay an amount equal to 
 6^ per cent. That shows how stringent capital is at 
 the present time, and it surely should weigh with us. 
 Having regard to that fact, we are not justified in 
 assuming that the vast national revenue derived from 
 expanding trade is likely to be carried on durmg this 
 year. I hope, however, that this may be worthy of 
 the consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 and the Government. I would like, if I may, at this 
 stage to offer some remarks with regard to the posi- 
 tion of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Sir 
 Edward Grey). He enjoys a peculiar power at the 
 present time. He has been successful in recreating 
 the Concert of Europe. It is to the Concert of Europe, 
 of course, that we must look for the cessation of what 
 has been called this sterilising expenditure. It is only, 
 I believe, through mutual reductions of armaments that 
 we may hope for some cessation of this expenditure. I 
 think tlie Chancellor of the Exchequer would go so far 
 with me in this respect that, while not agreeing with my 
 action in moving reductions, he would be happy to see 
 reductions if there were no further necessity for the 
 expenditure — if there was some mutual action taken 
 by the great Powers of Europe to bring about some 
 cessation in this really horrible expenditure. I do 
 not suggest for a moment that we should abolish the 
 British Navy or not have adequate defences, but we
 
 1913] SUGGESTION TO SIR EDWARD GREY 85 
 
 have to cut our coat according to our cloth, and we 
 have to remember that this is an international matter. 
 The right hon. Gentleman has a unique opportunity. 
 He has, I believe, the confidence of the Concert of 
 Europe, and he can express in council with the Concert 
 of Europe the wish of this House and other Houses in 
 France, Germany, and throughout the world. We 
 have, I believe, already responded to the proposals 
 of the United States to take certain steps before there 
 could be any possibility of dispute, and this, I believe, 
 would be also responded to by other countries. But 
 we want more. We want some practical step taken 
 by the responsible Government in conjunction with 
 the other Powers. I, for one, believe that the right 
 hon. Gentleman the Foreign Secretary has the ability 
 and the power to take some action along these lines. 
 Apart from that, I would impress on the House and 
 the Chancellor of the Exchequer that it behoves us 
 to have regard to our financial reserve as well as to 
 our national defence. We should not jeopardise our 
 Budget or the possibility of balancing our accounts 
 by assuming a sanguine estimate of the position which 
 I do not think the facts entitle us to take. Therefore 
 I hope that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will give 
 some consideration to these proposals, and perhaps 
 something may be done along the lines which I have 
 ventured to suggest by the Secretary for Foreign 
 Affairs to bring about the happy consummation which 
 we desne.
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 AN ABNORMAL SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE 
 
 On March 2nd, 1914, Mr. Churchill, who was then at 
 the Admiralty, came down to the House of Commons 
 and proposed a Supplementary Estimate of £2,500,000 
 for the purposes of the Navy. The exceptional 
 amount asked for in the form of a Supplementary 
 Estimate, and the waste of public money at such a 
 time, aroused considerable opposition, and a debate 
 took place in which I contributed the following speech. 
 It may be stated that Mr. Churchill in his speech 
 in which he proposed this exceptionally large and 
 most unusual Estimate, offered no explanation or 
 justification for such a proceeding. The effect could 
 only be to increase the suspicion, and provoke still 
 further the estrangement which was growing up 
 between this country and Germany, and which sooner 
 or later was bound to lead to war. 
 
 I beg to move to reduce the Vote by £100. 
 
 I move this reduction as a protest for two reasons. 
 First of all, because of the enormous waste of public 
 money ; and, secondly, for the reason suggested by my 
 hon. Friend the Member for Dumfriesshire (Mr. Molteno) 
 — namely, the unconstitutional character of this Supple- 
 mentary Estimate ; that is to say, in my humble judg- 
 
 86
 
 1914] SANCTION OF PARLIAMENT 87 
 
 ment, it is not in accordance with procedure that so 
 large a sum should be overspent without the sanction 
 of ParHament. It has been ruled from the Chair in 
 answer to a question that, while Supplementary Esti- 
 mates are in order, the amount ought to be decided 
 by the House. Of course, I recognise that some 
 Supplementary Estimates should be introduced, but 
 to introduce one representing such a large amount as 
 2| millions, whatever our opinion as to the amount 
 that should be spent upon the Navy, is not, I think, 
 in accordance with the procedure of this House. I 
 think, therefore, many hon. Members may support 
 me in the Division Lobby while perhaps not agreeing 
 with my views upon expenditure generally, and upon 
 policy which, of course, we have been debarred from 
 enlarging upon to-night, but they may agree with me 
 because of the present course being unconstitutional 
 and not in accordance with the procedure of this 
 House. The hon. Member for Fareham (]\lr. Lee) 
 made a remark which I venture to think will not find 
 an echo in the breast of his colleague the right hon. 
 Gentleman the Member for East Worcestershire (Mr. 
 Austen Chamberlain), and it was this : In relation 
 to our finance, he said that the system of surrendering 
 balances to the Treasury at the end of the year was 
 an absurd system, and that it was the cause of the 
 Supplementary Estimates. If that represents the 
 views of the great Conservative Party, I must say I 
 am at a loss to understand how former speeches made 
 by men such as Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Pitt and Sir 
 Michael Hicks-Beach, and the right hon. Gentleman 
 the Member for East Worcester can be justified. One 
 7
 
 88 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIIilATE [chap, viii 
 
 listened with amazement to the statement made by 
 the hon. Gentleman, who was put up as the spokesman 
 of his party, and who commences his speech with a 
 statement such as that to Mhich I refer. 
 
 I pass from that to the speech of the right hon. 
 Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty (Mr. 
 Churchill). Many of us on this side of the House have 
 listened with great pleasure to the masterly way in 
 which the right hon. Gentleman goes into details in 
 regard to technique and the mechanical arrangements 
 connected with his Department. But we do believe 
 that whilst he may and undoubtedly does delight this 
 House with his knowledge of technique, and flights of 
 fancy — and we are all interested in his real flights also ; 
 but we respectfully suggest to him that it would be 
 more in accordance with the responsibilities of the First 
 Lord if he cut short some of these latter flights, because 
 we have some regard for his personal safety and for 
 his position as First Lord — I say that, while we admii'e 
 and listen with pleasure and delight to his knowledge 
 of the mechanism of his Department, we fail to follow 
 him when he tries to reconcile his Department with 
 finance. He offered three main reasons as an apology 
 for this Supplementary Estimate. I think his speech 
 may be happily described as an apologia. I doubt 
 if he felt very happy in that position, or that he felt 
 certain he was making out a very complete case. He 
 gave three main reasons for this Estimate. The first 
 was the execution of contracts, the second was details 
 with regard to airships, and the third was increase 
 of the wages of the men. It was well pointed out by 
 my hon. Friend the Member for Dumfriesshire, that
 
 1914] OVERSPENDING 89 
 
 the right hon. Gentleman, in his arguments, made no 
 case or justification for this expenditure. The only 
 check we have upon expenditure is that of voting 
 against these Estimates when they come before this 
 House. It is beside the question to say that this is 
 part of some programme the right hon. Gentleman 
 may have adumbrated or enlarged upon in this House, 
 and which got a certain amount of support at a certain 
 particular period in its career. Surely policy governs 
 expenditure, and if this House six months ago, or a 
 year ago or eighteen months, gave some support to 
 some speech outlining some construction with regard 
 to this year and next, that does not commit the House 
 to a course of expenditure that might be involved m 
 the total construction programme ! We only vote ! 
 we cannot in the nature of things be expected to 
 know the prices of materiel, the various prices of 
 destroyers, cruisers, and battle-ships. Most of us 
 look at what is the amount of money we are asked 
 to vote, and if we subscribe to that amount, we 
 recognise, representing the taxpayers, that this 
 House and those who we represent, are liable for 
 that amount and for that amount alone. If there 
 has been overspending, as undoubtedly there has 
 been, and it is admitted by the right hon. Gentleman 
 in this particular Estimate, I submit it might have 
 been foreseen at the end of last Session, and 
 powers might have been asked from Parliament to 
 justify that over-expenditure. But to ask us now, 
 within a few weeks of the end of the financial year, 
 to give the right hon. Gentleman, in a Supplementary 
 Estimate, an indemnity for the money expended, is,
 
 90 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE [chap, vin 
 
 I submit, entirely illegal and unconstitutional. I pro- 
 pose to give one or two quotations in proof of that 
 statement. There are various authorities. There is 
 one who is well known to many hon. Members of 
 this House, Accordmg to Joseph Redlich and Sir 
 Court enay Ilbert : — 
 
 " Britif^h finance may be said to have commenced 
 from the year 1688. The National Debt, the rise of 
 the Bank of England, the annual treatment of finance 
 by the House of Commons, all date from about that 
 epoch." 
 
 Since then the battle has ebbed and flowed, but I 
 think it is admitted that we believe we have supreme 
 control of finance. They held that — 
 
 *' it was necessary to gain for the Commons full and 
 unrestricted control over the destination of the money 
 spent to enable Parliament to check its application, 
 and to see that expenditure corresponds to the grants 
 made." 
 
 Sir Erskine May distmctly lays down that the money 
 voted by this House is under the control of this House, 
 and any amount exceeding that is beyond the juris- 
 diction of the Government of the day to spend. Let 
 me quote the particular passage to which I refer. 
 Sir Erskine May says : — 
 
 " The most important power vested in any branch 
 of the legislation is the right of imposing taxes upon 
 the people and of voting money for the exigencies of 
 the public service. The exercise of this right by the
 
 1914] PARLIAMENTARY CONTROL 91 
 
 Commons is practically a law for the annual meeting 
 of Parliament for redress of grievances ; and it may 
 also be said to give to the Commons the chief authority 
 in the State." 
 
 That lays down very distinctly that the House has 
 supreme control in governing the expenditure of 
 public money, and, should that amount be exceeded 
 by the Government of the day, or should they antici- 
 pate that they are going to exceed it, they have to 
 come before this House agam for authority to engage 
 upon or indulge in this expenditure. If the Goverri- 
 ment were unable to foresee this at the end of the 
 March Session, they were bound, before involvmg us 
 in such an amount as £2,500,000, even to go to the 
 extreme measure of calling Parliament together to 
 authorise them to engage upon this expenditure 
 before engagmg upon it. What is the use of us debat- 
 ing this question now ? Hon. Members may make 
 interesting speeches and enlarge upon this question, 
 but we all know that, to all intents and purposes, the 
 discussion is merely academic and absolutely futile, 
 and we are asked by an autocratic Government to 
 endorse and indemnify them in expenditure to which 
 they never asked us to agree. The Government put 
 us off with such statements that the first Lord of the 
 Admiralty has made to-day, in which he says this 
 expenditure was advised by his expert advisers, who 
 may be right or wrong. Because Lord Fisher thinks 
 that the price of oil is going to rise, this precious 
 Government engages in a speculation in oil, and they 
 think they are Justified in using public money to the
 
 92 SUPPLEarENTARY ESTIMATE [chap, viii 
 
 extent of £500,000 for the purchase of oil. This is 
 entirely unconstitutional, and there is no justification 
 either in precedent or Parliamentary procedure to 
 justify it. 
 
 I have given a few examples, and there are many 
 more which I could quote. The hon. Member for 
 Dumfriesshire quoted Mr. Gladstone, and I have quoted 
 others, including Sir Erskine May. Any hon. Mem- 
 ber may prove for himself that this action of the 
 Government is both unconstitutional and illegal. 
 Hon. Members opposite may differ with us upon ques- 
 tions as to what amount should or should not be 
 spent upon armaments ; but if they would only take 
 the trouble to look into this question they would see 
 that they have a great opportunity, if they are really 
 anxious to supplant this Government. Why do hon. 
 Gentlemen opposite not study these questions for 
 themselves, instead of leaving it to individuals like my- 
 self to call attention to this unconstitutional procedure ? 
 If they want to achieve the object they have in view, 
 here is the opportunity. Instead of that, you hear 
 speeches from hon. Members opposite who attack 
 this question as a matter of policy. The speech made 
 by the hon. Member for Gravesend (Sir G. Parker) 
 was, according to the ruling of the Chair, quite out of 
 order as far as it related to Germany ; but here is an 
 opportunity for the hon. Member for Gravesend to 
 attack the Government on the ground of their action 
 being unconstitutional. I ask hon. Members opposite, 
 if they do not believe my quotations, to take the 
 authorities I have quoted and study for themselves. 
 Here they have an opportunity of maintaining the
 
 1914] PARLIAMENTARY RESOLUTION 93 
 
 constitution of this country, Parliamentary precedents, 
 and traditions, and they have ample evidence to make 
 out a very strong case which would get support from 
 hon. Members on the Ministerial side, and would 
 receive the solid support of the Labour Party. [Hon. 
 Members : " No."] When a Division is taken I do 
 not think it will be found that the Labour Party will 
 support the Government in this matter. I have no 
 authority to speak for them, and they are well able 
 to speak for themselves, but I cannot believe, after the 
 speech of the Leader of the Labour Party, that they 
 will support these Supplementary Naval Estimates. 
 
 Sir a. Markham : When Labour Members repre- 
 sent constituencies where they make armaments they 
 always vote in favour of these Estmiates. 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : I do not think the hon. Baronet 
 who has interrupted is quite qualified to speak for the 
 Labour Party on this matter. I pass from that to one 
 other Resolution which was passed by the House itself. 
 I have submitted to the House quotations from Sir 
 Courtenay Ilbert and Sir Ersldne May, and now I 
 should like to submit a Resolution passed by this 
 House in reference to this very pomt. The House of 
 Commons registered its permanent disapproval of 
 these Departmental excesses on March 30th, 1849, 
 when the following Resolution was passed : — 
 
 " When a certain amount of expenditure for a par- 
 ticular service has been determined upon by Parlia- 
 ment it is the bounden duty of the Department, which 
 has that service under its cha/ge and control, to take 
 care that the expenditure does not exceed the amount 
 placed at its disposal for that purpose."
 
 94 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE [chap, viii 
 
 There you have a Resolution passed by this House 
 which again confirms my argument that the Govern- 
 ment have no right to come here within a few weeks 
 of the end of the financial year, to ask for a Supple- 
 mentary Estunate to indemnify them for money 
 already spent. The Government did not ask for a 
 Supplementary Estimate at the end of last Session. 
 Had they done that and asked this House for £2,500,000, 
 it would have been in order. We might not have 
 voted it for other reasons, but we should not have 
 had such strong grounds for protest as we have now. 
 This Estimate is an affront to Parliament, and the 
 destruction of our powers. Surely our principal 
 power is control over finance ; surely to allow this 
 Estimate to be pitchforked through a few weeks 
 before the end of the financial year, and to indemnify 
 the Government for an expenditure which they have 
 not asked us to authorise, is to reduce Parliamentary 
 control to a farce, no matter what party you may 
 belong to ! We are not even asked for our opinion 
 upon this Estimate, and we are simply asked to give 
 the Government an indemnity. They have spent the 
 money, and we cannot recall it. Under any circum- 
 stances it has to be settled, but if we were to refuse 
 to vote this money it would give the Government a 
 sharp reproof for their financial irregularities, and 
 other ways would be found of paying the debts which 
 have been incurred. I ask hon. Members, before they 
 agree to this Supplementary Estimate, to weigh well 
 the Resolution passed by this House, and to consider 
 the authority of Sir Erskine May on this point, for he 
 is recognised on all sides of the House as a great
 
 1914] SIR ERSKINE MAY'S QUOTATIONS 95 
 
 authority on Parliamentary procedure, before agree- 
 ing to so irregular a proceeding. There is another 
 quotation I should like to place before the Committee, 
 and it is really the crux of this matter ; it is the 
 question whether the Government are entitled to 
 come before us and ask for so large an amount as 
 £2,500,000, which has already been spent. On this 
 point Sir Erskine May held i — 
 
 " The House of Commons appoints at the commence- 
 ment of every Session the Standing Committee on 
 Public Accounts for the examination of the accounts 
 showii:ig the Appropriations of the sums granted by 
 Parliament to meet the public expenditure." 
 
 Sir Erskine May goes on to say •: — 
 
 ' ' The Committee scrutinises the causes which have 
 led to any excesses over Parliamentary Grants, and 
 the application of savings on the Grants made to the 
 Naval and Military Departments. The researches 
 made by the Committee and the publication of their 
 Reports ensure on behalf of the House of Commons 
 an effective examination of the public accounts." 
 
 I should like to ask whether this Estimate has been 
 submitted to the Public Accounts Committee ? 
 
 The Parliamentary Secretary to the Admir- 
 alty (Dr. Macnamara) : It cannot have been sub- 
 mitted to that Committee yet, but it will be submitted 
 in due course. 
 
 Mr, Mason : That is like locking the stable door 
 after the horse has been stolen. I submit that we 
 are entitled to have that Report before we are asked
 
 96 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE [chap, viii 
 
 to indemnify the Government for money which has 
 already been spent. The whole of this procedure 
 reverses the financial practice of this House. The 
 idea of a Supplementary Estimate is something which 
 we anticipate will be spent at some future date, and 
 the very name suggests that. 
 
 Dr. Macnamara : Hear, hear. 
 
 Mr. Mason : I think that shows the absurdity of 
 asking us to pass a Supplementary Estimate, which is 
 not an Estimate at all, because the money has been 
 spent. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Admu-alty 
 does not seem to appreciate that point, and when 
 he approves of that procedure I think he only shows 
 his incapacity for the position which he adorns. To 
 ask for an Estimate for money which the Admiralty 
 has already spent is reducing the financial control of 
 this House to an absurdity. I have already said 
 enough to show that Estimates are to be put forward 
 for sums which it is anticipated will be required, and 
 that we are entitled in this House to have them 
 submitted to us first for our opinion. I shall be told, 
 of course, that while many may possibly agree with 
 me, they will not support me in the Lobby because 
 it may jeopardise Home Rule. One has heard that 
 argument so often that he begins to weary of it. It 
 has been admitted in the many Debates we have had 
 in this House, and the Home Rule question has been 
 debated ad nauseam, that as between the two parties 
 in the State the principle of self-government has been 
 conceded. The Leader of the Opposition has said 
 
 The Chauiman : How does that arise on this Vote ? 
 
 Mr. Mason : I was just trying to show how it was 
 
 \
 
 1914] NAVAL AND MILITARY BALANCES 97 
 
 relevant to the argument I have in view in order to 
 get as many as possible to oppose this Vote ; but, of 
 course, I bow to your ruling. I was going to try to 
 demonstrate that the Home Rule question would not 
 be jeopardised by an adverse vote on this subject. It 
 is most unfortunate that we cannot get a free vote 
 on a question of this sort. We are unquestionably 
 hampered in coming to a right decision with regard 
 to it, because of some other thing which may or may 
 not come to pass. I believe that we could give a 
 free vote, and that these other causes would not be 
 jeopardised. There are certain items for surpluses. 
 The first appears in Vote 8, There is a surplus there 
 of £350,000. In Section III. there is a surplus of 
 £216,000, and on Vote 9 there is a surplus of some 
 £630,000 odd, which, I think I am accurate in stating, 
 has been spent in addition to £2,500,000. This amount 
 of £2,500,000 is unquestionably over and above those 
 other items. We know that the Naval and Military 
 Departments have a right to transfer certain balances 
 from one account to another, and we see from this 
 Supplementary Estimate that there is a total there 
 of something like £630,000 odd which they have used 
 in addition to the £2,500,000. They have spent every 
 shilling they possess, and yet, in spite of that, they 
 have to come to us and confess and to make apologetic 
 speeches and i?ay that they have been forced into 
 an expenditure of £2,500,000 in addition. 
 
 I submit that that is to affront this House. It is 
 to reduce our Debates to a farce. This House, after 
 all, has fought for the prmciple of the control of 
 finance, which has been admitted and is eulogised by
 
 98 SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE [chap, vra 
 
 men on both sides of the House as one of the greatest 
 powers we possess. If, on this occasion, we allow 
 ourselves to be persuaded to part with that great 
 principle because, forsooth, some may think they 
 want to spend more on the Navy and because others 
 perhaps have other questions at the back of their 
 minds which they are afraid will be jeopardised, we 
 shall be doing something which we shall afterwards 
 regret. Once we give away that power, and allow 
 ourselves to be jockeyed, as we have been this year, 
 and as we may be again, out of our just rights, it will 
 not be so easy for us to recover them. This battle 
 has been fought in the past, and it has been one of the 
 most severe battles we have had to fight. If we 
 allow our control of our finances to escape from us, 
 we reduce ourselves to the position of mere automata, 
 not having any opinions of our own, and not able to 
 express them against an irregularity undermining, as 
 I think, British finance, and we shall be sorry for it. 
 I hope that hon. Members will rise above the mere 
 exigencies of the moment and will enter a protest 
 against this great irregularity.
 
 CHAPTER IX 
 
 ABOLITION OF PLURAL VOTING 
 
 Mr. Asquith's Government was pledged to bring in 
 a Bill for the abolition of Plural Voting, and on 
 April 27th, 1914, the Bill came up for a second reading 
 in the House of Commons. There had been some 
 discussion, as to whether the reform of the franchise 
 which was involved m this Bill should be supported, in 
 view of the fact that the Bill did not contain any pro- 
 vision for the extension of the franchise to women. As 
 the Bill did not propose to extend the franchise to men 
 in any way, but rather to contract the franchise by 
 the abolition of Plural Voting, I saw no difficulty or in- 
 consistency in supporting it. I regarded Plural Voting 
 as unjust and unsound in principle, and in the followmg 
 speech endeavoured to give my reasons for holding this 
 view ! 
 
 The hon. Member who has just sat down has made an 
 
 extraordinary speech. He has pomted out the possible 
 
 danger arising from givmg the vote to Civil servants, 
 
 and has drawn the attention of the House to the great 
 
 menace to the liberty of this House if the evil should 
 
 ever come to pass. Apparently he is quite prepared to 
 
 justify the railway interest, or the brewing interest, or 
 
 the dockyard interest coming to this House. That 
 
 was a contradiction in terms of the whole point of 
 
 99
 
 100 ABOLITION OF PLURAL VOTING [chap, ix 
 
 his speech. I propose to pass from that to the speech 
 of the hon. and learned Member Mr. Hume Williams, 
 who moved the rejection of this Bill. He also, at con- 
 siderable length, spoke of this Bill as being an attack 
 upon interests. I ventured to interrujjt and ask him 
 if he meant that Members of Parliament should repre- 
 sent interests, and he said he certainly thought that 
 Members of Parliament came here to represent in- 
 terests. For example, he said that if a man owned a 
 mill in one part of the country, and another mUl in 
 another part of the country, he ought to have two 
 votes in order that those varied mterests might be 
 represented. The hon. Member for Hammersmith (Sir 
 William Bull) was prepared to go further. With un- 
 blushing candour he defended the position of the plural 
 voter, and compared the Parliamentary franchise with 
 a joint stock company, and said that people ought 
 to have votes according to their means. Apparently 
 their qualification was to be the Income Tax assess- 
 ment. That is a most extraordinary doctrine. Let 
 us examine it. Supposing hon. Members came here 
 to represent certain interests ; it naiurally means that 
 they are to vote for those particular interests, and 
 are to express their views in Debate, not on the merits 
 of the question before the House, but from the point 
 of view whether it adversely or favourably affected 
 their particular interest. That, carried to its logical 
 conclusion, is the argument of the hon. and learned 
 Gentleman. Does he really mean that ? Do hon. 
 Members opposite really mean that the franchise should 
 be based upon interest ? Surely the basis of the 
 franchise is the opinion which a person holds. The
 
 1914] FRANCHISE BASED ON OPINION 101 
 
 franchise is intended to represent and give expression 
 to the opinion of the people of this country, and not 
 to the material interests of this country. I cannot 
 believe the hon, and learned Member meant us to 
 believe that we should discuss questions in this House, 
 not from the point of view of what we think upon 
 particular questions as to then- justice or morality, 
 but purely and simply from the point of view of 
 regarding ourselves as representing certain interests 
 and coming here to fight for them. 
 
 The hon. Member for Hammersmith put no limit 
 to the number of votes which a citizen might have. 
 He candidly and straightforwardly believed that the 
 number of votes a man might have should not depend 
 upon his ability to express an opinion, but should 
 depend entu-ely upon his wealth. I do not suppose 
 he actually believes that voting should depend upon 
 wealth and the ability to purchase votes. That 
 argument is reallj^ so absurd that it is hardlj' credible 
 hon. Members should seriously put it forward. I 
 hope the Government will proceed with this Bill. 
 There has been an impression in certam quarters that 
 there was some doubt as to whether the Government 
 really meant to carry this Bill under the Parliament 
 Act. It was some answer which the Prime IVIinister 
 gave to a recent question, when he expressed the 
 hope that the Government would be able to carry it, 
 which gave rise to the doubt. There is no measure, 
 even when you put this Bill alongside other great 
 measures like the Home Rule Bill or the Welsh 
 Church Bill, which would command a greater amount 
 of enthusiasm and support among Liberal Members
 
 102 ABOLITION OF PLURAL VOTING [chap, ix 
 
 than this one. [Hon. Members : " Hear, hear ! "] 
 Hon. Members laugh scornfully. We admit that it 
 will probably be for the benefit of the Liberal Party, 
 but if the measure is a just one, and if it can be 
 shown, as I think it can by argument, to be just, there 
 is no reason why you should not defend it because 
 it benefits the Liberal Party. All reforms in this 
 country, in the nature of things — the emancipation 
 of labour and municipal reform — tend rather to 
 benefit the Liberal and Labour Parties than the Con- 
 servative Party. 
 
 Major D alrymple White : Would you have brought 
 it in, if it did not benefit the Liberal Party ? 
 
 Mr. D. Mason : I said that nearly all reforms in 
 the nature of things which tend to widen the bounds 
 of freedom and get rid of privilege — which in a sense 
 has, as a rule, been defended by the Conservative 
 Party — tend to advantage the Liberal and Labour 
 Parties as against the Conservative Party. As a rule, 
 the Conservative Party stands for the maintenance of 
 the status quo, the defence of property, and for privi- 
 lege. Hon. Members have admitted that this Bill 
 gets rid of an anomaly, but they say, because we are 
 not prepared to go further and bring in a large measure 
 of Redistribution, that we should have nothing to do 
 with this small reform, I think it was Buckle, in his 
 History of Civilisation, who said that some of the 
 greatest triumphs of legislation were the getting rid of 
 bad legislation of the past. Getting rid of anomalies 
 and privileges and breaking down any laws which are 
 unjust in their essence is, perhaps, a triumph of 
 legislation, as I believe this will be, which will re-
 
 1914] MINORITY REPRESENTATION 103 
 
 dound to the credit of the present Government as 
 much as the other great Bills which are now before 
 the House and the country. T rejoice that the Secre- 
 tary for the Colonies has made it perfectly clear that 
 the Government seriously mean to carry through 
 this measure. We, on this side of the House, rejoice. 
 It leaves me quite cold to hear the scornful laughter 
 of hon. Members opposite when we are told it will 
 benefit this particular party. 
 
 I pass now to some other remarks which were made 
 by the hon. Member (Mr. Mackinder). He spoke of 
 minority representation. He himself perhaps is the 
 most eloquent example of minority representation in 
 this House. He stands for one of the Divisions of 
 Glasgow, which but for a split vote would probably 
 not have sent him to adorn our Debates. When he 
 speaks of minority representation, one cannot but feel 
 that he is thinking possibly of his own case. I hope 
 some hon. Member opposite will tell us what is really 
 the policy of the party opposite. Do they wish to 
 combine with the Leaders on this side of the House 
 in a Bill for Redistribution, or do they not ? Do 
 they wish to couple that with this measure or do 
 they not ? Do they oppose this measure because 
 they do not agree with it or because they see that it 
 is a disadvantage to them ? If they are in favour of 
 Redistribution there is plenty of time. This Parlia- 
 ment may yet have from six to twelve months further 
 life, and there is plenty of time if they are willmg 
 to take this question of Redistribution and join with 
 the Government in a Bill. Hon. Members opposite 
 complain of apathy on this side, but I do not see a 
 8
 
 104 ABOLITION OF PLURAL VOTING [chap, ix 
 
 very great representation on their Front Bench, of 
 theu' direct opposition to this anomaly, which many 
 of them have admitted to bo an anomaly. If it is so, 
 why are we not to hear the views of some hon. Gentle- 
 men as to whether they opi)Ose this Bill on its merits 
 alone or because it is not coupled with Redistribution ? 
 I have listened with very great interest and attention 
 to their arguments, but I cannot find that there is 
 any reason, logical or otherwise, why they should 
 oppose this measure. The only real reason which I 
 believe animates their opposition is not because they 
 believe the Bill to be a bad Bill or an unsound Bill, 
 not because they believe it is not an anomaly, but 
 because they see in it one more defence of their privi- 
 leges bemg shattered to the ground.
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 RISE IN PRICES 
 
 The continuous rise in the prices of commodities 
 which had been going on since the outbreak of war 
 on August 4th, 1914 created a considerable amount 
 of unrest, particularly among the poorer classes of 
 the community. This feeling became very prevalent, 
 and eventually culminated, in Mr. Ferens putting 
 down a motion on the order paper of the House 
 of Commons to the following effect. " That this 
 House regrets the rise in the price of the necessaries 
 of life, and calls upon the Government to use every 
 endeavour to prevent a continuance of this unfortun- 
 ate consequence of war which is causing much hardship 
 especially to the poor." The Prime Minister (Mr. 
 Asquith) took part in the debate which took place on 
 February Uth, 1915, and dealt in detail with the 
 various causes which had contributed towards this 
 result ; but, in common with all those who participated, 
 he entirely omitted to recognise one cause which I 
 believe contributed very substantially in bringing about 
 the rise, i.e. the issue of Treasury Currency Notes. 
 
 Mr. Hewins, who preceded me in the debate, was 
 inclined to suggest Tariff Reform as a remedy, but 
 was rather vague in his suggestions, and certainly 
 avoided being too definite in his statements. In the 
 speech which is furnished herewith, I endeavoured 
 
 105
 
 106 RISE IN PRICES [chap, x 
 
 to survey the whole field, and to emphasise the effect, 
 which the large issue of Government paper money by 
 all the belligerents had had upon the prices of com- 
 modities ! 
 
 The hon. Member rather piqued our curiosity as to 
 what action he would suggest the Government ought 
 to take. He evidently was on the brink of suggesting 
 some action, but I am unable to offer any criticism 
 or observation on his proposals, whatever they were. 
 I therefore pass from his remarks to the speeches of 
 the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. 
 The Prime Minister gave us a very interesting survey 
 of most of the causes which have led to this rise in 
 prices. I have listened to most of the speeches which 
 have been delivered, and I think I may state that 
 the underlying problem in all those speeches was, 
 what is the particular cause which has brought about 
 this rather extraordinary rise of prices. Most of the 
 speakers, and the Prime Minister himself, referred to 
 the War, of course, as perhaps the principal cause by 
 withdrawing largo masses of men from tilling the soil 
 and from industry. Then a great deal of attention 
 is being given to freights and to transport. The Prime 
 Minister's conclusion was that the rise in wheat was 
 due to a shortage of supply. I think it has been 
 demonstrated by other speakers that there is not a 
 shortage of supply, and we well know that the United 
 States this year has had a record crop of wheat. It 
 is quite true that we have not got a crop from Aus- 
 tralia, but Australia has never played any very great 
 part in the supply of wheat to this country. It is
 
 1915] CURRENCY AND PRICES 107 
 
 quite true that we have not had Russia, and also, so 
 far, we have not had much from Argentina, but the 
 Leader of the Opposition very aptly pomted out that 
 with regard to the question of freights and the short- 
 age of ships, he had proof to show that actually ships 
 were being laid up, so that although we knew that 
 there has been a great rise in freight, as there has 
 been a rise in most commodities, as far as I have 
 been able to follow, the difficulty has been to arrive 
 at what particular cause it is that has brought this 
 about, and we are, so to speak, still gropmg after this 
 principle or underlying cause. 
 
 Some reference has been made to speculation, and 
 no doubt syndicates and large capitalists affect the 
 price of commodities, but I think they take advantage 
 of conditions ;,they do not create conditions. I have 
 given a considerable amount of study to this subject, 
 and I offer this suggestion to the Government. I 
 think there is one cause which has not so far been 
 referred to, and which has had perhaps more influence 
 than any other contribuiiiig cause in brmging about 
 this abnormal rise in prices. We know, of course, 
 that, all things being equal, there is still some other 
 cause which affects prices outside, as it were, the 
 law of supply and demand, and that is the state of 
 your currency. Since the War commenced, any one 
 who chooses to give any attention to this subject Mill 
 find that there has been an abnormal increase in the 
 supply of currency by belligerents and by other coun- 
 tries. The figures are astounding. We find, for 
 example, that in Great Britain alone, on January 14th, 
 a year ago, the Bank of England notes outstanding
 
 108 RISE IN PRICES [chap, x 
 
 were £28,500,000. On January 14th of this year 
 they had mcreased to £35,000,000, and, m addi- 
 tion, we know there was that abnormal issue of Trea- 
 sury notes amounting also to £35,829,690, giving a 
 total of paper-money outstanding of something like 
 £71,000,000, as against £28,000,000 a year ago. That, 
 I think, is a most extraordinary and a most significant 
 fact. Surely it must be apparent that, if all things 
 are equal, to give to a country an increase of something 
 like £43,000,000 of paper money something must 
 happen. Of course, you will depreciate the currency, 
 and therefore prices must rise. If you depreciate your 
 currency, commodities must command a greater 
 amount of currency, and therefore prices must rise. 
 
 If we turn to Germany we find that, a year ago, her 
 currency was £115,000,000. In January last she had 
 increased her paper money to £239,000,000 — an in- 
 crease of £124,000,000. It staggers one if you take 
 the trouble to look into these figures and see the 
 enormous difference in the amount of paper-money 
 circulating in Germany, in our own country, and in 
 other belligerent States. It is very difficult to get 
 particulars for France, because the Bank of France 
 has now stopped publishing statements. There was 
 a statement published on December 10th last which 
 showed that the Bank of France issued £176,000,000 
 on a metal base, or 4,500,000,000 francs. The note 
 issue, formerly 5,800,000,000, expanded to nearly ten 
 thousand millions. That demonstrates, surely, that 
 something very abnormal has happened since the War 
 commenced, and, if you have this increase in the cur- 
 rency, and the currency as a reeult is depreciated, it
 
 1915] AMERICAN PAPER MONEY 100 
 
 must follow that prices will rise. If you have an 
 abnormal supply of wheat, perhaps more in propor- 
 tion than the excess of your currency, then possibly 
 you might not have the same proportionate rise in 
 that or the same proportionate rise in timber, iron, 
 steel, and other commodities. I hope I have suffi- 
 ciently proved that this is certainly one cause, if not 
 the most important cause, of this abnormal rise in 
 prices. 
 
 This applies not only to belligerent countries. If 
 we turn to the United States of America we find that 
 there, on January 9th this year, the emergency circula- 
 tion outstanding is reported by the controller of 
 currency as amounting to 126,039,000 dollars. Then 
 I think that in recent years there has been a new Act 
 of a very important and far-reaching character passed 
 by the United States Government with reference to 
 their currency. I think it is well worthy of the atten- 
 tion of those interested in prices. It has already had 
 considerable effect on values in America and other 
 parts of the world. This Act provides for groups of 
 banks throughout the country under a federal reserve 
 board. These banks have power under the new Act 
 of obtaining United States notes, which can be issued 
 against commercial bills. These are not bank-notes, 
 but United States notes, and it is very important to 
 bear that in mind, because while bank-notes may ebb and 
 flow according to the demand, as it were — according 
 to their credit expanding or contracting — there ia 
 very little likelihood of Government notes contracting 
 to the same extent, and that is why there is great 
 danger in any Government, our own included, issuing
 
 110 RISE IN PRICES [chap, x 
 
 Government notes. There is not the same law affect- 
 ing them as the notes of a bank, because if there was 
 any feehng of lack of security, and if the note is a 
 bank-note, then people naturally present the note 
 at the bank for repayment. But no one is likely to 
 doubt the credit of the British Government or the 
 United States Government. Hence the danger of 
 Government paper being pumped into the currency 
 of a country. We shall probably have a statement 
 from the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to a financial 
 transaction put through with the Russian Govern- 
 ment. There was a credit established recently and 
 advanced by the American bankers to the Russian 
 Government of something like £25,000,000. This 
 advance was made on short-term drafts, and these 
 may again be discounted by the reserve banks and 
 they may obtain Government currency agamst this 
 obligation, and that goes to increase the paper-money 
 to which I have referred. 
 
 I think I have dwelt sufficiently on that to show, 
 more particularly with regard to ourselves, Germany, 
 and France, what an enormous increase there has been 
 in this paper-money. In fact, in France one instance 
 has been brought to my notice which shows the straits 
 the country districts there are put to for obtaining 
 this accommodation, and that is that Chambers of 
 Commerce may issue notes, and it is interesting to us 
 to know, because, when talking of prices, our own prices 
 are not only governed by conditions here, but by 
 conditions all over the world. Even if you have Ger- 
 many making excessive issues of paper, as she is doing 
 now, wb may rejoice in it from one point of view.
 
 1915] SUGGESTED REMEDIES 111 
 
 because we thiiik that it indicates a state of collapse ; 
 but, as she is dealing with neutrals with whom we have 
 financial relations, anything that affects them affects 
 the value of commodities we buy from them. I 
 believe that these currencies are having their effect, 
 and will contmue to have their effect on prices. While 
 I agree with a great deal the Prime Minister said, I 
 cannot follow him, unless something very extra- 
 ordmary happens before June in the case of an in- 
 creased supply of wheat or other commodities, that 
 there will be a fall in prices. I do not think he is 
 justified in what he said so long as this abnormal 
 inflation continues to affect prices. It may be asked 
 what are the remedies for this state of affairs ? Is 
 there no way in which we can relieve the present 
 situation caused by this abnormal amount of paper ? 
 There are only two so far as I can see. The fii'st is to 
 pursue the war with the utmost vigour, so as to bring 
 it to an honourable conclusion as soon as possible. 
 The other is to practise economy in every department 
 of Government administration and redeem this out- 
 standing paper as quickly as we can. I have already 
 shown that, according to the London Gazette, there are 
 some £30,000,000 odd outstanding at the present time, 
 and I therefore suggest that, if we wish to produce 
 any considerable effect, that is one method by which 
 we might relieve this position which is forcmg up the 
 prices of so many commodities. 
 
 There is another remedy which might be worth the 
 consideration of the Government. It has reference 
 to the recent Treasury Regulations, the object of 
 which was to what is called husband our resources
 
 112 RISE IN PRICES [chap, x 
 
 here iii London. What are our resources ? What 
 are the resources of the London Money Market ? Our 
 resources consist in vast investments of capital in all 
 parts of the world. If we have great investments of 
 capital in India, the Argentine, China, Canada, and 
 so forth, is it wise suddenly to button up our pocket 
 and say, " We will refuse to fuiance any longer those 
 great investments which we have already made in all 
 these various parts of the world " ? While one can 
 understand the disposition to practise economy and 
 not indulge in wild speculation, yet a certain amount 
 of elasticity might be advisable with regard to these 
 regulations. The other day an operation with regard 
 to the Argentine which might have come to this 
 country went to the United States. That is another 
 point worth considering — that the operations going 
 past our market may not always be taken up by other 
 markets, and that we may lose by the depreciation of 
 these very investments which are really our resources. 
 The vast resources of our great insurance companies 
 are not entkely held in this country. They consist of 
 investments in many parts of the world. Therefore 
 it seems to me that a certain amount of elasticity is 
 wise in not carrying out these regulations in the 
 drastic manner which at first was outlined by the 
 Treasury. Even with regard to the rise in the prices 
 of food it might be thought wise to allow certain 
 operations to be carried out with regard to railways 
 in the Argentine. There have already been great 
 investments of capital there, and, if it were thought 
 advisable that certahi of these railways should continue 
 to be financed by the bankers here in London, that
 
 1915] INFLATION OF CURRENCY 113 
 
 would also help to increase the supply of wheat here 
 in London by openmg up an mcreased wheat area 
 and increasing the supply of wheat, to which the 
 Prime Minister has referred as being short. These are 
 the only remedies of which I can think. The Prime 
 Minister has invited suggestions from Members of the 
 House. I submit those suggestions to him, and in 
 conclusion wish to emphasise the belief that the 
 abnormal situation through which we are at present 
 passing, largely as a consequence of the war, with its 
 inflation of prices, is due in a large measure to the 
 cause to which I have referred, namely, the excessive 
 inflation of our currency by those emissions of note 
 issues both here and also by the other belligerents, 
 and in other countries.
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 THE FOUR AND A HALF PER CENT. WAR LOAN 
 
 When the floating debt of this country which 
 consisted of £235,000,000— in Treasury Bills and 
 £45,500,000 — -in Treasury Currency Notes began to 
 assume such large figures, it appeared to many authori- 
 ties that the time had arrived for the issue of a second 
 long term war loan. 
 
 On June 21st, 1915 the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 (Mr. McKenna) introduced his proposals in the form of 
 a War Loan Resolution. He pointed out that our total 
 of short term borrowings amounted to £283,000,000 
 — but he forgot to include the above mentioned 
 £45,500,000 — of Treasury Currency Notes which would 
 make the correct total £328,500,000. The Chancellor 
 very properly pointed out as a justification for issuing 
 the loan at 4| per cent, that the first War loan which 
 bore interest at 3| per cent, was now standing at a 
 price which would return the investor about 4| per 
 cent, on his investment. In view of this fact and also 
 that Consols had equally fallen in capital value, he 
 felt justified in olTering to the holders of these securities, 
 the right to convert their holdings into the new 4f per 
 cent. War Loan. His argument being that " this 
 country will never leave its creditors in the lurch." 
 
 This extraordinary doctrine appeared to me to 
 mean, *' never mind the cost to the tax-payer, but at 
 
 114
 
 1915] CLAIMS OF TAX-PAYER 115 
 
 all costs save the bond-holder from any loss." I quite 
 agree that a Government when raising loans, must 
 have regard to the conditions of the money market 
 at the time, and must of course consider what is right 
 and due to its creditors, but to ignore the cost to the 
 tax-payer for whom the Government of the day is a 
 trustee, seemed to me to be both unjust and unsound. 
 I expressed these views in the speech which is given 
 herewith. 
 
 I listened with great interest to the hon. Member 
 who has just sat down. When I heard his proposal 
 to place our Loans at this high rate of interest free of 
 income tax, I began to wonder whether we were here 
 representing the tax-payers' interest or some other 
 interest. The speech of the right hon. Gentleman the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer, on which I congratulate 
 him because of its lucidity, seemed to lend itself to 
 the same suspicion. I do feel that we are here surely 
 on behalf of the tax-payers, and I would ask, as many 
 speakers have already asked, where is the proposal 
 for taxation as against the proposal to borrow these 
 large amounts ? One listened to the Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer with great interest on the proposal 
 generally, but I share with other speakers the feeling 
 of disappointment that, so far, the proposals of the 
 Government with regard to the increased taxation 
 which is necessary are in the air. Look for a moment 
 at the financial position, which has already been 
 referred to by my right hon. Friend the Member for 
 Islington (Mr. Lough) and others, and by my hon. 
 Friend the Member for Windsor (Mr. James Mason), 
 who was, I think, the fii-st to refer to it, when he
 
 116 THE WAR LOAN [chap, xi 
 
 asked that more attention should be given to this 
 question of the necessity for increased taxation. 
 Examine for a moment the financial position. Assum- 
 ing that this war runs for a year, we should have an 
 expenditure of £1,136,000,000, as estimated by the 
 late Chancellor of the Exchequer. To meet that we are 
 only raising by taxation something like £267,000,000. 
 We are asked now, not to consider any further taxa- 
 tion with regard to taxation, but practically we are 
 asked to give a blank cheque to the Government for 
 an unlimited Loan, or for unlimited powers of borrow- 
 ing. The hon. Baronet the Member for the City of 
 London drew attention to that point, and I thmk that 
 it is due to the House of Commons that the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, in his reph" , should make the matter 
 a little clearer than he has already done. 
 
 When one considers the conversion, the giving of 
 this addition to the existing Consol holders, the exist- 
 ing Crown annuity holders, the holders of the old 
 Loan, and the raising of this fresh money at 4J per 
 cent,, one is appalled at the proposal. Why should 
 it be necessary to give any such rights to the existing 
 Consol holder, or the holder of old Loans, when he 
 came into the contract with his eyes open ? The 
 right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 says that we have a duty to perform to our creditors, 
 but have we not also a duty to perform to the tax- 
 payer ? Does not the tax-payer look to the Govern- 
 ment of the day to finance this Loan to the best of 
 their ability — that is to say, with as small a charge as 
 possible on the tax-payer, having regard to the exi- 
 gencies of the situation, and the state of the money
 
 1915] DEPRECIATION OF SECURITIES 117 
 
 market at the time ? The right hon. Gentleman's 
 proposal, that we are to give them these powers, and 
 that these powers are all to be extended to further 
 Loans that may be raised after this, is the most 
 astounding proposal from a responsible Government 
 that the mind of man can conceive. Talk of Ger- 
 many ! Germany in her most fatuous moments never 
 made such a proposition. We, the House of Commons, 
 are to be asked to give power to this Government to 
 place these Loans, and to give all these rights, to 
 previous holders of securities, and we are also to give 
 powers b}^ which, if they again come before the House 
 for further money, the existing holders of securities 
 will also be benefited in the same way. It seems the 
 most monstrous proposal that was ever put before 
 any assembly of sensible men. 
 
 I hope that I shall not be accused of using exag- 
 gerated language, but let us conceive for a moment, 
 as serious men, the effect which this will have on all 
 securities owned by the great insurance companies 
 and banks of this country. If you play ducks and 
 drakes with British credit, give unlimited power to 
 issue securities on a 4| per cent, basis, and allow every- 
 body to convert existing Consols and the old Loans, 
 does not the right hon. Gentleman think, and does 
 not the Government know, that if you depreciate in 
 this manner the vast mass of securities, by this high 
 rate of interest, you will depreciate all other securities ? 
 The hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London 
 nods his head. He understands finance ; he under- 
 stands what that means, not only for the City of 
 London, but for the whole country. It seems to me
 
 118 THE WAR LOAN [chap, xi 
 
 quite unnecessary. If there is fresh capital available, 
 the capital would be available at a rate of interest. 
 Why, then, disturb the existing contracts which have 
 already been placed, and which you maintain, by con- 
 tinuing to pay the existing rate of interest ? Why, 
 then, bring in these people and enable them to obtain 
 this higher rate of interest, and thereby, as I submit, 
 tend to depreciate undulj^ all the existing resources 
 of our banks and joint stock companies, from which 
 eventually we have to pay for this war ? There seems 
 to me to be no justification for this. The right hon. 
 Gentleman has made out no case for it, and for the 
 life of me I cannot see why we should be asked to 
 agree to any such proposal. 
 
 May I, in confirmation of the argument that a far 
 greater amount of this demand for capital cost should 
 come from taxation, just read a short extract from 
 an illustrious predecessor of the right hon. Gentleman, 
 Mr. Gladstone. He held, I think, and rightly held, 
 that in finance it was better, as he said, to call upon 
 the tax-payer, rather than upon the provider of Loans. 
 Writing of the Crimean War, he said : — 
 
 " The system of raising funds necessary for wars, 
 practises wholesale, systematic, and continual decep- 
 tion upon the people. The people do not really know 
 what they are doing. The consequences are adjourned 
 into a far future." 
 
 On August nth, 1862, he goes a little more deeply 
 into the subject and says : — 
 
 " The general question of loans versus taxes for war 
 purposes is one of the utmost interest, but one that I
 
 1915] LOANS VERSUS TAXP^S 119 
 
 have never seen worked out in print ; but, assuming 
 as data the established principles of our financial 
 system, and by no means denying the necessity of 
 Loans, I have not the least doubt that it is for the 
 interest of labour, as opposed to capital, that as large 
 a share as possible of war expenditure should be 
 defrayed from taxes. When war breaks out, the 
 wages of labour on the whole have a tendency to rise, 
 and the labour of the country is well able to bear some 
 augmentation of taxes. The sums added to public 
 expenditure are likely at the outset, and for some 
 time, to be larger than the sums which are drawn 
 from commerce. When war ends, on the contrary, 
 a great mass of persons are dismissed from public 
 employment, and, flooding the labour market, reduce 
 the rate of wages. But again, when war comes, it is 
 quite certam that a large share of the war taxes will 
 be laid upon property, and that in war property will 
 bear a larger share of our total taxation than in peace. 
 From this it seems to follow at once, that, up to the 
 point at which endurance is practicable, payment by 
 war taxes rather than by taxes in peace, is for the 
 interest of the people at large." 
 
 I think that that is a very interesting statement, 
 coming from such an illustrious quarter, and I do 
 hope that our friends on the Labour Benches will 
 appreciate what the Government are doing in coming 
 forward with a proposal, after having one Loan of 
 £350,000,000, that we should add somethmg like 
 another £1,000,000,000, while at the same time making 
 no proposals for additional taxation. We had some 
 intimation that they are considering taxation pro- 
 posals, but we have not got them before us. We are 
 now committing ourselves to an addition to the public 
 9
 
 120 THE WAR LOAN [chap, xi 
 
 debt of this country of something like £1,000,000,000. 
 We are, also, committing ourselves to an addition to 
 the fixed charges on the revenue of this country, 
 which it is impossible at the present moment to calcu- 
 late, because we do not know how much will be con- 
 verted, yet we know that there are something like 
 £800,000,000 of Consols and £350,000,000 of the old 
 Loan. The Consols bear something less than 2f per 
 cent, interest and the old Loan 3^ per cent. It is 
 very easy for hon. Members to calculate the addition 
 to the fixed charge of the country which weighs upon 
 the taxpayer, and principally upon labour, because if 
 you have this enormous funding operation, as Mr. 
 Gladstone well pointed out, and place that charge upon 
 the country now, the position is not altogether appre- 
 ciated. We do not feel it at the moment. We think 
 that by putting it on posterity we have created for 
 the time being a position of affluence, a position of 
 apparent prosperity ; but, in my opmion, we shall be 
 lajdng up for the future a terrible legacy of misery, 
 particularly for the working classes of this country. 
 
 I would like to refer to one answer which the right 
 hon. Gentleman made to a question which was asked 
 him in reference to Treasury Bills, as to whether it 
 forms part of the scheme to fund the existing Trea- 
 sury Bills. I think that he stated that the existing 
 amount of Treasury Bills was £235,000,000. After 
 the very apt, lucid, and convincing way in which ho 
 told us that to go on increasing the floating debt, 
 which now amounts to £235,000,000, is unsound, while 
 pointing out very properly that the conditions might 
 not be so favourable as they are to-day, and that
 
 1915] FU^\DING OF TREASURY BILLS 121 
 
 therefore it would be unwise to continue borrowing 
 by keeping on the system of issuing Treasury Bills 
 to all who come and ask for them, I was surprised, 
 when some one on the opposite Benches asked the 
 right hon. Gentleman whether he proposed to fund 
 this floating debt, to hear him say that the funding 
 of this £235,000,000 was not part of the scheme. 
 
 Mr. McKenna : Treasury Bills may or may not 
 be funded out of the money which is raised by this 
 Loan. It is not part of this scheme, but it is quite 
 open to the Government to fund them. 
 
 Mr. Mason : I am very glad to have that interrup- 
 tion, because I do hope, after the very convincing 
 way in which the Chancellor showed us how unsound 
 it was to go on increasing this floating debt, that this 
 wUl form part of the scheme. It is not very definite 
 that it will do so, but it does not close the door, and 
 certainly it might form part. To have this operation 
 of leaving the floating debt lying on the market appears 
 to me most unsound. Another point is why the rate 
 of interest should have been increased to 4| per cent. 
 Of course the Chancellor of the Exchequer will say 
 that he did not think that he could obtain the money 
 unless he increased the rate of interest. Reference 
 has been made to the possibility of America taking 
 part in this Loan, and the suggestion is made that 
 the Loan should be offered in America free of income 
 tax. It was suggested on the former occasion by 
 the hon. Member for Greenock that it would be good 
 to issue British Government securities in the United 
 States. The hon. Gentleman forgot that the United 
 States is a neutral country, and that they have already
 
 122 THE WAR LOAN [chap, xi 
 
 definitely stated that tliey will not issue a Loan or 
 allow a Loan to be issued over there ; but they will 
 allow credits to be established in the United States 
 provided you purchase certain things — munitions and 
 so on. I understand that, as a neutral Power, they 
 have refused to offer facilities to any belligerents to 
 place Loans within the United States. One of the 
 main reasons for raising the rate of interest so high 
 as 4^ per cent, is to attract, quite legitimately, American 
 capital over here ; so that, while they will not allow 
 a Loan to be issued in the United States, there is no 
 reason why American capitalists should not come to 
 this country and invest in a British Loan. I doubt 
 whether there will be a great investment, but the 
 reason for putting the rate of interest so high is with 
 a view to getting American capital. 
 
 But there a very grave situation is caused with 
 regard to the position of exchange, particularly in the 
 United States of America. If this particular Loan is 
 taken up to any considerable extent in the United 
 States that, of course, will tend to bring about a more 
 favourable exchange in this country. But there are 
 other reasons why this unfavourable rate of exchange 
 continues to be a cause of very great uneasiness in 
 the City and in commercial circles. The excess of our 
 imports over exports for ten months amounts to some- 
 thing like £267,000,000, and that is one of the problems 
 which the Government have to face, and probably 
 has entered into their mind in making the rate of 
 interest so high as they have for this Loan. But, as 
 I have said, there is another cause which is not touched 
 upon, and which is undoubtedly afiecting our credit.
 
 1915] CURRENCY NOTES AND EXCHANGE 123 
 
 and which I believe, in spite of considerable applica- 
 tions by America, will continue to operate, and that 
 is the action of the Treasury in continuing to issue 
 Treasury Currency Notes, The late Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer has never met this point ; I do hope the 
 present Chancellor of the Exchequer, who I believe 
 deservedly has a reputation for financial ability and 
 courage, will do so. Within the last two weeks there 
 has been some drop, but I believe the previous issues 
 have been half a million a week, and that the issues 
 amount to something like 45 1 millions. I would point 
 out that if you have some agency of the Government 
 which is continually adding to the currency by the 
 amount of half a million a week it must have some 
 effect. On the previous occasion I suggested, but I 
 hope I was able to prove my point, that it had the 
 serious effect of affectmg the price of commodities. 
 It is, of course, well known to any one who has given 
 any study to this question, that if you contmually 
 add to your currency, if you dilute the regular amount 
 of the currency, existing commodities, as has been 
 seen in the last eight or nine months, will continually 
 rise in price. 
 
 It has been often argued that this action of the 
 Treasury in issuing currency notes is not a bad thing, 
 because they are easily convertible. I do not doubt 
 their convertibility, and I know that the Treasury 
 to-day holds something like 28 1 millions in gold and 
 other securities against the issue, but the continuous 
 issue of these notes has an effect upon the position 
 of exchange. While the Government may think that 
 the Loan, if taken up in America, will tend to bring
 
 124 THE WAR LOAN [chap. xi. 
 
 about a more favourable exchange, this action of the 
 Treasury in continually issuing these Treasurj^ Notes, 
 Mill, I submit, more than offset any advantages which 
 they may temporarily receive through applications 
 for the Loan from America. Because the Bank of 
 England are anxious to turn the exchange in our favour 
 they pursue the policy, as they have done in the past, 
 of trj^ng to raise the rate of discount and trying to 
 increase the value of money. But how can you in- 
 crease the value of money by the continuous issue of 
 Treasury Notes ? On a previous occasion, when I 
 raised the question, I quoted the statements of eminent 
 authorities in support of what I say — the statement 
 of a great French economist, and the statement of a 
 distinguished Member of this House, Mr. Goschen — 
 afterwards Lord Goschen — and I would ask the Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, if my humble words or my 
 feeble arguments have no effect upon him, to refer to 
 those well-known authorities 
 
 Sir J. D, Rees : They did not make those state- 
 ments in war time ; they did not speak in time of 
 hostilities. 
 
 Mr. Mason : On the contrary. Lord Goschen, in 
 his book on Foreign Exchanges, alluded to the ques- 
 tion of war. War does not change economic principles 
 which prevail in war time as in peace, and if you 
 defy economic laws in war time you double the danger 
 and double the disadvantage. You cannot make 
 millions grow on trees simply because it is war time, 
 yet that is what we are endeavouring to do. We are 
 endeavouring to carry on external trade, we are en- 
 deavouring to mauitain London as the centre of Money
 
 1915] CURRENCY AND CREDIT 126 
 
 Markets of the world, and we have to pay for our 
 imports in gold. I submit that in war time, as in 
 any other times, we should be most careful of the 
 delicate mechanism of foreign exchange. I speak in 
 no spirit of hostility to the Government proposals ; 
 I am anxious to maintain British credit, but I believe 
 this action of the Treasury is undermining it. I 
 believe that this policy of the continuous issue of 
 paper-money, if persisted in, will, in spite of American 
 subscriptions to the Loan, affect our credit, and the 
 last condition will be worse than the fu'st. I trust 
 that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will give this 
 point, to which I have alluded, his consideration. I 
 hope that the Government will reconsider some of 
 those powers with regard to conversion. At this 
 time I do not think criticism will be of much avail, 
 as the right lion. Gentleman says the prospectus will 
 be out this evening. All we can suggest, therefore, if 
 it is not too late, is that those powers with regard to 
 conversion, whereb}^ a subscriber to this Loan would 
 be again able as time went on to reconvert at 5 or 6 
 per cent., should be carefully considered. That seems 
 to me quite unnecessary. 
 
 It does not nppear that the subscriber demands it. 
 The subscriber would subscribe partly from patriotic 
 motives and partly because it was really good busi- 
 ness. He would be content with his 3^ or 4| per cent., 
 and to give guarantees to subscribers of a high rate 
 of interest at the expense of the taxpayer is really 
 most unsound. We are here to do what we can for 
 the taxpayers of the country rather than for great 
 financiers and the banking interest. I do not believe
 
 126 THE WAR LOAN [ohap. xi 
 
 the banking interest itself or other great financial 
 interests have brought pressure to bear upon the 
 Government, but, if they have, surely the Government 
 arc here to represent the financial interests of the 
 taxpayers, and do the best they can. I suggest to 
 the right hon. Gentleman that he should, at the risk 
 of perhaps being unpopular in the City, take a strong 
 line with the City bankers and financiers. Let him 
 take his courage in both hands, and let him found his 
 proposals on the broad ground of patriotism and a 
 proper and regular rate of interest, having regard to 
 the state of the Money Market as it is to-day, rather 
 than — as it would be impossible for him to do — to 
 accommodate those financial interests in the City. I 
 believe that the Loan will as a monetary transaction 
 be a success, but I do hope that the right hon. Gentle- 
 man will be clearer as to the amount. No one likes 
 to go into any proj^osal withovit knowing definitely 
 the limit of what the Loan is going to be. I welcome 
 the proposal which has been made to make the Loan 
 possible for the small investor. I believe you will 
 get far more interest taken in the proposal and a great 
 deal more money from the people rather than from 
 financial interests which frequently take it up with 
 the object of again unloading it and reselling it at a 
 profit to the people. If the right hon. Gentleman 
 devotes an amount of attention to makmg the Loan 
 popular and bringing it home to small investors the 
 more likely he is to make it an assured success.
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 TREASURY CURRENCY NOTES 
 
 After the declaration of war between this country 
 and Germany, a panic prevailed on the stock exchanges 
 throughout the world, and credit almost disappeared. 
 To meet this extraordinary situation, the British 
 Treasury was empowered by Act of Parliament to 
 issue, through the banks of this country, currency 
 notes and certificates. This prompt action, in con- 
 junction with other measures, for which Mr. Lloyd 
 George and his advisers deserve the highest praise, 
 had an immediate effect in allaying panic, and pro- 
 viding the banks with a credit instrument which was 
 popular and acceptable to the public. 
 
 When Mr. Lloyd George, who was then Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, introduced the bill for this purpose, 
 I asked him if steps would be taken to control the 
 issue, and to provide for the eventual redemption of 
 the notes. I pointed out that the measure should be 
 regarded as a temporary one, and that its effect, as 
 time went on, would be to drive gold out of circula- 
 tion and to stimulate the hoarding of the metal. 
 These arguments were never met, either by the Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer or by the Financial Secretary 
 to the Treasury, Mr. F. D. Acland, and my protests 
 against the continuous issue by the Treasury of these 
 notes were completely ignored. 
 
 127
 
 128 TREASURY CURRENCY NOTES [chap, xii 
 
 When Mr. McKenna became Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer and Mr. E. S. Montagu Financial Secretary 
 I had some hopes of a reversal of policy, and when 
 the Finance (No. 2) Bill was being considered in 
 committee on June 29th, 1915, I proposed a clause 
 limiting the further issuing of these notes, and pro- 
 viding for their gradual redemption. Needless to 
 state, this action met with the same response as my 
 former elTorts, although there was some disposition 
 to consider the arguments submitted by Mr. Hogge, 
 the Member for East Edinburgh, and mj^sclf in sup- 
 port of the clause. In the following speech I endea- 
 voured to explain my reasons for taking this course. 
 
 I beg to move, " That the Clause be read a second 
 tune." 
 
 I hope I shall not weary the House with speaking 
 on a somewhat complicated and dry subject. I will 
 endeavour to be as clear and, at the same time, as 
 brief as possible. When these currency notes were 
 first issued — in August last — the then Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer, the present Minister of Munitions, 
 indicated to the House that it was an emergency matter, 
 and when he was asked whether provision was made 
 for the retirement of these notes he answered that 
 when the occasion for them had passed the notes 
 would be retired. The outstanding amount of notes 
 is now £44,897,000. In the last few weeks there has 
 been some reduction, but last week there was an 
 addition of a quarter of a million, so that the total 
 outstanding to-day may be put at £45,800,000, I 
 asked the late Chancellor of the Exchequer some few 
 weeks ago, having regard to his statement in August,
 
 1915] TREASURY NOTES A MENACE 1-29 
 
 whether he proposed to redeem them now that the 
 occasion had passed for their being issued. He replied 
 that it was public policy not to retire these notes. I 
 endeavoured to get the right hon. Gentleman to meet 
 me in Debate upon that point. I was unable to do 
 so. I raised the matter on the Adjournment, and 
 the Secretary to the Treasury replied ; but I venture 
 to think that he did not meet the points submitted 
 by another Member and myself. I am glad now to 
 have this opportunity of putting my arguments before 
 the present Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the hope 
 that he, with his great financial ability, will endeavour 
 to meet them. 
 
 I am moving this Clause because I believe that the 
 remaining outstanding of these notes is a menace to 
 the financial position in the City of London to-day. 
 There are two evils resulting from their remaining 
 outstandnig. I should like to say, before I develop my 
 argument, that, personally, I am not opposed to the 
 issue of bank-notes. When we discussed this question 
 on the previous occasion the late Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer and the Member for West Birmingham (Mr. 
 Chamberlain) seemed to be under the impression that 
 I was personally opposed to bank-notes. I am in no 
 sense opposed to the issue of bank-notes, but the diffi- 
 culty here is that this is an issue by the Treasury. It 
 is Government paper-money, and there is all the differ- 
 ence in the world between that and notes issued by 
 bankers who are responsible for them and take pre- 
 cautions not to extend the issue indefinitely and to 
 hold the proper reserves against them. There are 
 many things that tend to give bank-notes a character
 
 130 TREASURY CURRENCY NOTES [ohap. xii 
 
 which does not appertain to the issue of paper-money 
 by the Government. I propose to refer to two evils 
 which result from the excessive issue, as I believe 
 this is, of paper-money by the Government. There 
 is, first, the rise in the price of commodities, and, 
 secondly, the effect on foreign exchange. 
 
 On a former occasion we discussed at considerable 
 length in this House the rise in the price of commodities, 
 and when that Debate took place I laid an argument 
 before the House that this was one of the contributing 
 causes, though not, of course, the sole one. There are 
 many causes which have brought about the present 
 rise in the price of commodities and the cost of living. 
 I submit that this is one of the most important of the 
 contributing causes. I propose to submit arguments 
 in proof of that, and I hope I may be allowed to quote 
 one authority in proof of that assertion. It is that 
 of a great French authority, M. Frederic Bastiat, 
 who, I think, very consistently points out how this 
 effect is brought about. He is referring to the issue 
 of paper-money by the Government, and he says : — 
 
 " Clever persons will take care not to part with their 
 goods unless for a larger number of notes — in other 
 words, they will ask 40 francs for what they would 
 formerly have sold for 20 ; but simple persons will be 
 taken in. Many years must pass before all the values 
 will find their proper level. Under the influence of 
 ignorance and custom the day's pay of a country 
 labourer will remain for a long time at a franc, while 
 the saleable price of all the articles of consumption 
 around him will bo rising. He will sink into destitu- 
 tion without being able to discover the cause. In
 
 1916] QUOTATION FROM BASTIAT 131 
 
 short, once you wish me to finish, I must beg you, 
 before we separate, to fix your whole attention on this 
 essential point — when once false money (under what- 
 ever form it may take) is put into circulation, deprecia- 
 tion will ensue and manifest itself by the universal 
 rise of everything which is capable of bemg sold. But 
 this rise in prices is not instantaneous and equal for 
 all things. Sharp men, brokers, and men of business 
 will not suffer by it ; for it is their trade to watch 
 fluctuation of prices, to observe the cause, and even to 
 speculate upon it. But little tradesmen, countrymen, 
 and workmen will bear the whole weight of it. The 
 rich man is not any the richer for it, but the poor man 
 becomes poorer by it. Therefore expedients of this 
 kuid have the effect of increasmg the distance which 
 separates wealth from poverty and paralysing the 
 social tendencies which are incessantly bringing men 
 to the same level, and it will require centuries for the 
 suffering classes to regain the ground which they have 
 lost in their advance towards equality of condition." 
 
 I must ask the indulgence of the Committee for mak- 
 ing so long a quotation, but this subject is so compli- 
 cated that one has to refer to authorities in the hope 
 that such an authority as Bastiat may carry weight 
 with the Committee when, perhaps, my arguments 
 would not bring about that effect. We know that 
 great economists have told us this over and over again. 
 When we realise that if you take the amount of paper- 
 money in circulation to-day as compared with a year 
 ago, when I thmk I am right in saying that approxi- 
 mately the Bank of England issues represented 
 £35,000,000, that to-day there is an mcrease in the 
 Bank of England circulation, and that with this issue
 
 132 TREASURY CURRENCY NOTES [chap, xn 
 
 of £45,000,000 of Treasury Notes we have an increase 
 in paper-money of something like £80,000,000, we 
 must feel that that is bound to have an effect on the 
 prices of commodities. While that is not the only 
 contributing cause, wo do see evidence of it every 
 day. It may, perhaps, be argued that the authority 
 of a Frenchman is not sufficient to convince this 
 Committee. I therefore call in another authority, 
 that of a former illustrious Member of this House, 
 the late Lord Goschen. He showed, in his book on 
 Foreign Exchanges, how the same effect is brought 
 about, and, if Members are anxious to confirm my 
 argument, they wUl find ample evidence in Lord 
 Goschen's book confiiming what I have said. There 
 is just one passage which briefly puts the pomt, which 
 is so apt to the present day, with regard to the issue 
 of paper-money by the Government that, perhaps, 
 the Committee will allow me to read it. He says « — 
 
 " Sometimes Governments, simply for their own 
 purposes, issue a quantity of paper-money ! the 
 natural consequence will be over-importation." 
 
 That is what we are seeing to-day. The excess of im- 
 ports over exports to-day is something like £264,000,000. 
 That is, possibly, largely made up of purchases 
 on munitions of war, but it is not entirely due to 
 that. I would ask the Committee to rer^mber that 
 they may possibly be misled by the belief that it 
 is entirely due to that. I thhik I shall be able to 
 show that the over-issue of paper-money accentuates 
 this adverse foreign exchange, which is creating great 
 uneasiness in the City, which is leading to a steady
 
 1915] QUOTATION FROM LORD GOSCHEN 133 
 
 outflow of gold from this country, and which, if it 
 goes on, may produce panic and disaster. On the 
 question of over-importation Lord Goschen goes on 
 to say : — 
 
 " Prices will rise in consequence of the increase in 
 circulation " — 
 
 That is exactly what is takhig place to-day — 
 
 " and accordmgly attract commodities from other 
 markets." 
 
 It follows, if you have a rise in prices, it will naturally 
 attract an excessive amount of imports to this country. 
 The quotation goes on : — 
 
 " Or, over-importation takes place in the fii'st in- 
 stance, and Governments, in order to remedy artificially 
 and apparently what can only actually be remedied 
 by the cessation of the real primary cause, commit 
 the fatal error of increasing the circulation by an 
 issue of paper-money." 
 
 I think I have read sufficient. I am very sorry to 
 have to quote at length these authorities, but I hope 
 the Committee will understand that, in order to deal 
 properly with a subject of this character, one has to 
 go to the fountain-head for the arguments which 
 underlie the Clause I am asking the Committee to 
 accept. It may rightly be asked, why does this ex- 
 cessive issue of paper-money lead to an increase in 
 the prices of commodities ? My answer to that is, 
 that, as a result of the war, there has been an immense
 
 134 lEKASURY CURRENCY NOTES [chap, xii 
 
 shrinkage in the general trade of this country. I 
 happened to come across this quotation the other 
 day in a newspaper : — 
 
 " For the week endhig 14th June, we find the re- 
 turns of the Bankers' Clearmg House for last week 
 gives a total of £225,000,000, showing a decrease of 
 £104,000,000." 
 
 If 3^ou have a decrease of £104,000,000 in the com- 
 mercial transactions of this country in one week, with 
 an increasing amount of paper circulation, one of two 
 things must happen. You have, of course, redundant 
 currency, very largely increased, as it is, week by 
 week. The result is that it forces prices to rise still 
 further week by week. You have at the Treasury 
 practically a printing press turning out these notes at 
 the rate of £500,000 a week. They do not represent 
 the work which the ordinary sovereign does when it 
 passes from hand to hand. They are manufactured 
 at the Treasury. No doubt the Treasury uses them 
 in part payment of its liabilities at the Admiralty and 
 elsewhere. It is a very easy way of paying your 
 debts. All of us would probably be very pleased, 
 indeed, if we had printing presses in our libraries, and, 
 when we wanted to pay our debts, we had simply to 
 turn a handle and issue these promises to pay. The 
 same thing applies to the conmiunity as applies to an 
 individual. When you find a State engaged in this 
 most insidious of diseases as the use of printing 
 presses, with an idea, if one may judge from the 
 official announcements, of that gomg on permanently, 
 I am justified in saying a warning word in regard to
 
 1915] A WARNING VOICE 135 
 
 it. I do not argue for a moment that we are in the 
 same position, for example, as Germany, which, of 
 course, has pursued this policy to an extraordinary 
 extent. We also know that the rouble is inconver- 
 tible, and that our Ally, France, has pursued the same 
 policy. 
 
 In view of the awful extent to which the nations of 
 Europe have indulged in this most insidious and 
 unsound policy in a time of war, one is appalled by the 
 enormous liquidations which must ensue when they 
 come to redeem this enormous mass of paper. I do 
 not suggest, for a moment, that Great Britain is on 
 a par with these other nations, but there is no doubt 
 it is having an effect upon our foreign exchange. I 
 come now to that point, which is the second pomt in 
 my argument, of the evil which accrues from this 
 issue of paper-money. It is better to raise one's voice 
 before that evil becomes too excessive. It is better 
 we should utter a warning note now than when, per- 
 haps, panic and great disaster has come upon the 
 country, which may come if this is not stopped in 
 time. Let me give a few figures with regard to 
 the position of foreign exchange. I will concentrate 
 on the foreign exchange with the United States of 
 America, that great neutral country with which we 
 are still carrying on a vast trade, and I am sure those 
 hon. Members acquainted with the position there will 
 confirm what I say. I observe opposite an hon. 
 Member, bearing an honoured name, who must know 
 something of finance, and who will confirm me when 
 I say that the rate of exchange between New York 
 and London has lately been at a figure which has 
 10
 
 136 TREASURY CURRENCY NOTES [chap, xii 
 
 hitherto been unknowii in the history of this country, 
 of course leading to a steady outflow of gold. It 
 might be asked what effect has this issue of Treasury 
 currency notes upon the rate of exchange. It is very 
 easy to follow what effect it lias. We all know what 
 action is taken by the Bank of England when you 
 find an excessive outflow of gold from this country. 
 It endeavours, either by raising the rate of discount 
 or contractmg the currency, to turn the exchange in 
 our favour. But it will be readily seen that it is prac- 
 tically impossible for the Bank of England to have 
 any effect upon the rate of exchange or to contract 
 the currency if you have a competitor in the Treasury 
 turning out these notes at the rate of half a million a 
 week. 
 
 That is precisely what is taking jjlace to-day. The 
 Bank of England has made efforts over and over again, 
 but its efforts are futile. Money is more or less un- 
 lendable, though certainly lately it has risen to a 
 certain extent owing to the Loan operation. It is 
 hoped that the Loan operation, by offering a high 
 rate of interest, will tempt the British investor to get 
 rid of his American securities, and hon. Members have 
 probably followed that within the last week or so the 
 exchange has come a little in our favour as the result 
 of sales of American securities back to America, I 
 believe, rather than purchases by Americans of our 
 Loan. But that is more or less temporary. If this 
 course persists the fact of this continuous issue of 
 paper-money, and the effect it has in depreciating 
 credit and in creating artificially cheap money, un- 
 doubtedly tends to make it impossible for the Bank
 
 1915] EFFECT ON GOLD EXPORTS 137 
 
 of England to have any effect upon the rate of ex- 
 change, with the result, I believe, that if gold con- 
 tinues to leave this countrj'^ at the present rate it may 
 perhaps lead to some very serious disaster. When 
 I am asked what benefit this Clause confers, I submit 
 that while it is not the only remedy — perhaps economy 
 is the most important ; the reduction of our imports 
 from America as much as we possibly can, and a 
 sense of economy here in the purchase of certain com- 
 modities which we get from America — I believe it will 
 unquestionably help very m.aterially to alleviate this 
 acute situation by giving the Bank of England the 
 power to raise the rates for money and to turn the 
 exchange in our favour by attracting American capital 
 to this centre. If the rate of money is higher here 
 than in New York capital will tend to flow from New 
 York to this side, and when capital comes in on this 
 side it has the same effect as if we were exporting 
 commodities to America and creating a more favour- 
 able exchange, I believe that may be brought about 
 by such action as I propose in this Clause. 
 
 It might be argued by some that banks and others 
 who have grown accustomed to these notes might 
 say, " We want to be provided against the recurrence 
 of panic. We want, if credit should dry up and there 
 should be another possible crisis in the City of London, 
 to have something available in the way of a credit 
 instrument." I submit that that already exists in 
 the power which we have to suspend the Bank Charter 
 Act, and that, I believe, is ample power, should it be 
 necessary, which Heaven forbid — I do not anticipate 
 that it should be ; we have got over the most serious
 
 138 TREASURY CURRENCY NOTES [chap, xii 
 
 part, I hope, of the crisis which obtained last August 
 — to provide for any possibility of a recurrence of 
 panic or of trouble in the Money Market ; but this 
 insidious power in the hands of the Treasury to con- 
 tinually issue these currency notes and to debase 
 and dilute our currency, if persisted in, will, I believe, 
 lead to and build up an amount of disaster and misery 
 and it is already creating great suffering, particularly 
 to the working classes. The Labour Members are 
 continually asking the Government to pass measures 
 for fixing the prices of commodities, an almost im- 
 possible thing, because you cannot control all the 
 forces of nature or trade which go to create those 
 commodities, but you can do something here because 
 this is something for which we are responsible. Their 
 support might be appealed for, as I am appealing for 
 it now, and here I believe is one cause which has 
 undoubtedly led to the enormous increase in the 
 prices of commodities. Therefore I think if by their 
 agitation and the agitation of others legitimate pres- 
 sure is brought to bear upon the Government, they 
 may see their way to accept this Clause. This is a dry 
 and complicated subject, but I hope I have put the 
 case clearly and that it will receive, as I have no 
 doubt it will, fair consideration from the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer.
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 
 MOBILISING AMERICAN SECURITIES 
 
 During the yeat 1915 our indebtedness to the United 
 States of America, as a result of large purchases of 
 munitions and other articles by the British Govern- 
 ment, coupled with sales in this country of almost 
 every article manufactured by American manufac- 
 turers, amounted to a large sum. This state of affairs 
 adversely affected the rate of exchange between the 
 two countries. 
 
 The over-importation of commodities from America 
 had been enormously stimulated by the continuous 
 issue in this country of Treasury currency notes. 
 This action by the Treasury, as I pointed out in pre- 
 vious speeches, had helped to raise prices in this country 
 and thus stimulated imports of all kinds. 
 
 Mr. McKenna, who was Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
 apparently beheving that this adverse exchange was 
 due to the exceptional payments which the British 
 Government had to make in America for munitions 
 and other articles, submitted a scheme for the purpose 
 of stabilising the exchange — the idea being that 
 holders of American securities in this country should 
 either sell or lend their securities to the British Govern- 
 ment, which in its turn would either seU or lend them 
 in America, and thus for the time being favourably 
 affect the exchange. He entirely ignored the other 
 contributing causes to which I have referred, and also 
 
 139
 
 140 MOBILISING AMERICAN SECURITIES [chap, xiii 
 
 did not apparently apprehend the fact that by arti- 
 ficially supporting the rate of exchange by this scheme 
 he would very probably accentuate the evil he desired 
 to remove. 
 
 A fall in the rate of exchange makes it more diffi- 
 cult and less profitable for the American manufacturer 
 to sell his draft on London, and therefore tends to 
 check the export trade of America. By supporting 
 the rate of exchange the contrary effect is produced 
 and a stimulus is given to the American export trade. 
 This is exactly what has taken place, as the Board of 
 Trade figures show for the year 1916, when the ex- 
 cess of imports over exports amounted to at least 
 £500,000,000, including munitions and other articles 
 purchased by the British Government. 
 
 It may be asked then. What is to be done to remedy 
 the position ? This can only be effected by removing 
 or reducing the original cause, i.e. our indebtedness to 
 America. Many A\ill at once say that is impossible, 
 particularly in war-time, as we must have the muni- 
 tions, food, and other articles which the Government 
 are compelled to purchase from the United States to 
 enable us to carry on the war. I do not deny that 
 certain purchases are probably necessary, but I beheve 
 the aggregate amount could be very much reduced by 
 aUowng the natural corrective of the exchange rate 
 to operate ; secondly, by imposing much heavier taxa- 
 tion on all incomes, \s'hich would lead to greater 
 economy and thus reduce consumption ; and, thirdly, 
 by a gradual contraction of the currency by stopping 
 the further issue of the Treasury currency notes. I 
 admit that the financial position is now most grave, 
 and the paramount necessity of the day is to bring 
 about a speedy and honourable close to the war. To 
 this end our whole energies should be bent. People 
 talk lightly and ignorantly of the financial aid which
 
 1915] CORRECTING THE EXCHANGE 141 
 
 America may give us now that she has entered the 
 war by lending us £1,000,000,000: what we want is 
 not more debt but some one to show us how to pro- 
 duce £1,000,000,000. I do not mean, by that, that 
 I do not appreciate the financial and other aid which 
 the United States may bring to bear on the position ; 
 but the facts remain, and no amount of talk or en- 
 deavovir to cloud the issue will be successful with 
 those who take the trouble to acquaint themselves 
 with them. 
 
 The scheme was embodied in a bill called the 
 "Government War Obhgations (No. 2) Bill," which 
 came before the House of Commons for a second 
 reading on December 13th, 1915. Although fully 
 aware of the temporary favourable effect which the 
 Government's scheme might have on the rate of ex- 
 change, I did not beheve the plan would prove per- 
 manently successful, and endeavoured to explain my 
 reasons in the following speech. 
 
 I find myself unable to welcome the scheme proposed 
 by the Government for the simple reason that I do 
 not believe it will attain the object which it sets out 
 to achieve, namely, the correcting of the American 
 exchange. The Government have already proposed 
 three remedies for correcting the exchange. The first 
 was the imposition of new Import Duties. Then we 
 had the Anglo-French Loan which cost the country 
 something like 6 per cent, interest. On that occasion 
 I noted that the exchange was 4" 72 when the loan 
 syndicate was closed, and it afterwards fell, and is 
 now round about 4" 70 at the present "moment. There 
 we had a very extravagant form of correcting the 
 American exchange which failed signally in achieving
 
 142 MOBILISING AMERICAN SECURITIES [chap, xra 
 
 that object, although it was undertaken at very con- 
 siderable expense to the British taxpayer. Now we 
 have this extraordinary, fantastic scheme of mobilising 
 American securities which I do not propose to go into 
 at length, but I will concentrate my efforts to show 
 that it will also fail in achieving its main object, which 
 is to get all the American securities into one hand 
 with the object of correcting the American exchange. 
 I admit that the sale of American securities for the 
 time being does tend to prevent the exchange going 
 lower, and whether it is done by private investors, 
 finance houses or the Government, it will to that 
 extent affect the exchange^; but to suggest that we 
 should sanction such extreme powers and such added 
 liabilities to the taxpayer when the Government has 
 made out no case to show the method by which the 
 correction is to be brought about, is asking for far too 
 great powers. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in 
 reply to a question of mine, furnished the House with 
 some very interesting figures which touch upon 
 this question of exchange and gold coinage. I asked 
 the right hon. Grentleman on that occasion if he would 
 state what the circulation of gold was in this country 
 prior to the outbreak of war, and what it was at the 
 present time. And he gave in reply some figures 
 which were very interesting, and which showed that 
 the gold in the hands of the bankers on June 30th, 
 1914, was £82,800,000, and on June 30th, 1916, was 
 £110,200,000. He said :— 
 
 " No precise statistics are available of the amount 
 of gold coin in the hands of the general public, but
 
 1915] GOLD COIN IN CIRCULATION 143 
 
 the best estimate which the Mint is able to make is 
 on the 30th June, 1914, £78,000,000, and on the 
 30th June, 1915, £75,000,000." 
 
 One hon. Member interrupted to ask if it was the 
 case that this estimate of the gold coin in circulation 
 meant only a decrease of £3,000,000 in the circulation, 
 and the right hon. Gentleman was unable to state this 
 point specifically, but I think that a great many be- 
 sides the hon. Member who asked that question will 
 doubt whether the gold coin now in circulation in this 
 country amounts to £75,000,000. I venture to state 
 that if every hon. Member was asked to produce the 
 gold coin in his pocket he would be able to produce 
 very little, because gold coin, as far as circulation ia 
 concerned, has almost disappeared. My argument is 
 that these figures complete my case. I want to bring 
 before the House the real cause of the adverse ex- 
 change. If we take this £78,000,000 on June 30th, 
 1914, and the £75,000,000 which the right hon. Gentle- 
 man states was the amount in circulation this year, 
 and compare it with the trade which we are engaged 
 in, we shall get a very interesting conclusion. Of 
 course, I do not entirely subscribe to what is called 
 the quantitative theory with regard to goods and 
 currency, but it is a very good indication, if you com- 
 pare your trade and circulation as to the state of 
 your currency, and I think you may be able to draw 
 a sound conclusion from that. As the Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer has given us these figures, I take the 
 trade of this country in 1915. For the past six 
 months ending June the imports were £429,000,000
 
 144 MOBILISING AJVIERICAN SECURITIES [chap.xiii 
 
 and the exports £234,000,000, with a total aggregate 
 trade movement of £663,000,000. For the six months 
 ending June, 1914, the imports were £375,000,000 and 
 the exports £314,000,000, or an aggregate trade move- 
 ment of £689,000,000, the difference between the two 
 only amounting to something like £26,000,000, Hon. 
 Members will see that the aggregate trade movement 
 of exports and imports together on June 30th, 1914, 
 and 1915, were approximately very nearly the same. 
 I will now give the circulation to the House. If 
 we take gold coin on June 30th, 1915, it amounted to 
 £75,000,000 ; Bank of England notes increased by 
 £5,000,000, so that the total on June 30th was ap- 
 proximately £35,000,000, and to that you have to 
 add £70,000,000 of Treasury notes, making a total 
 currency for 1915 of £180,000,000 for the trade move- 
 ment, whereas on June 30th, 1914, the circulation of 
 gold coin was £78,000,000, and Bank of England notes 
 £30,000,000, or a total of £108,000,000. So that we 
 find with very nearly the same aggregate trade an 
 increase from £108,000,000 to £180,000,000, or an 
 increase of £72,000,000 sterling in the currency. There 
 is the real root and main contributing cause of this 
 adverse effect on the exchange for which we are asked 
 to place an additional charge on the taxpayer. The 
 chaos of our finance caused by schemes of this sort 
 makes one despair that sanity will ever return to the 
 British Treasury. These figures show an inflation of 
 £72,000,000, and surely that fact ought to carry weight 
 even with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. When 
 I advanced this argument on a former occasion the 
 Secretary to the Treasury, in his reply, only made an
 
 1915] ECONOMIC LAW 145 
 
 elephantine joke about coming under the Defence of 
 the Realm Act, and further informed me that we were 
 at war. On another occasion the Member for Hex- 
 ham (Mr. Holt) replied to this statement that war 
 had not altered the multiplication table, and, I would 
 add, nor has it altered economic law. Economic law 
 still prevails, and it is because of that fact that the 
 Government are now asking us to consider this scheme 
 for correcting the American exchange. I would just 
 like to say, in addition, that when a scheme of this sort 
 is about to be submitted it surely ought to be sub- 
 mitted first to this House. We have been told that 
 there have been various consultations and conferences, 
 and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has ex- 
 plained this measure at length to various insurance 
 companies and trust companies. I think, when the 
 right hon. Gentleman has a scheme of this character, 
 he might at least submit it &'st to the House and get 
 the opinion of many hon. Members who are capable 
 of giving some sound opinion and criticism upon it 
 before it goes to the outside world. We are only 
 asked to come in at the eleventh hour, and we are 
 practically told that it does not matter whether we 
 approve of it or not, because it is a fait accompli. 
 
 In the second Clause there is reference made to a 
 securities' deposit scheme. We shall not be able to 
 amend that scheme, and we are supposed to swallow 
 it wholesale simply because the Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer and the Financial Secretary thmk they 
 have fully considered it, and that it is a sufficient and 
 absolute remedy for the falling exchange. Because 
 of the vagueness of these words they will probably
 
 146 MOBILISING AMERICAN SECURITIES [chap.xiii 
 
 later on be able to bring in a fourth plan, and saddle 
 us with a further debt. I protest against our being 
 treated in thie way, and against the House of Com- 
 mons being treated in this way, without any arguments 
 being given to show how this scheme is going to 
 correct the exchange. First we are to give the Govern- 
 ment power to get the American securities, and to pay 
 i per cent, beyond the yield of these securities. If 
 they borrow them for two years and do not intend to 
 sell, it practically means that the British Government 
 are going to invest millions in American securities. 
 Are they going to guarantee the taxpayer against any 
 loss ? Have hon. Members considered what we are 
 doing in this matter ? Here we are giving power to 
 the Government to purchase without disturbing the 
 market, and practically creating a false market, and 
 making the market for these sellers to unload, and the 
 British taxpayer will be left after this precious Govern- 
 ment has disappeared with a load of some £500,000,000 
 which they will not be able to sell. It is a monstrous 
 scheme that no sane man who has had experience in 
 finance should be asked to tolerate and support, 
 because it is unworkable and unsound in principle.
 
 CHAPTER XIV 
 
 PROSPECTS OF PEACE 
 
 A NUMBER of members of the House of Commons were 
 anxious to raise the question of the prospects of 
 Peace. They were appalled at the terrible loss of 
 precious lives and treasure, and while not giving way 
 as to the objects for which this country had entered 
 upon the war, they desired to elicit from the Govern- 
 ment whether it was riot possible by a statement of 
 terms or in some other form to find an honourable 
 way out of the present war and to bring about a 
 satisfactory peace. 
 
 An opportunity presented itself on the second 
 reading of the Consolidated Fund Bill, which came 
 before the House of Commons on February 23rd, 1916. 
 
 The Prime Minister (Mr. Asquith) replied to a 
 number of speeches, but took uj) a very uncompromis- 
 ing attitude and again repeated his well-known state- 
 ment ! " We shall never sheathe the sword, which we 
 have not lightly drawn, until Belgium " — and he added 
 Serbia — " recovers in full measure all, and more than 
 all, which she has sacrificed, until France is adequately 
 secured against the menace of aggression, until the 
 rights of the smaller nationalities of Europe are placed 
 upon an unassailable foundation, and until the mili- 
 tary dommation of Prussia is wholly and finally 
 destroyed." 
 
 147
 
 148 PROSPECTS OF PEACE [chap, xiv 
 
 In the following speech I agreed with the Prime 
 IMinister as to the deskability of getting rid of the 
 military domination of Prussia, but I believed that 
 this was a matter which principally concerned Ger- 
 many and nmst eventually depend upon the people 
 of that country for its solution. 
 
 If the German people desire peace as I believe they 
 do, if the}'^ wish the rest of the world to believe this 
 and to give them their desire, then I suggest to Ger- 
 many that a large and comprehensive scheme of 
 constitutional reform put through by Germany now 
 would help enormously to bring that about. The 
 people of this country believe that the war, with all 
 its horrors, is principally due to the action of the 
 military party in Germany, and the sooner the 
 authorities in Germany understand that and act 
 accordingly the sooner will the war be over. We 
 have to deal with things as they are ; and while a study 
 of the past may helj) us to understand the future and 
 to guide our future action, I quite appreciate the 
 position that we must have regard to this outstanding 
 fact, which has been emphasised by the entry of 
 Amciica into the war, that the democracies of the 
 world demand that the reign of a military autocracy 
 must cea&e. Russia has led the way; the British 
 Government has announced to the House of Commons 
 its intention to bring in a Reform Bill. The eyes of 
 the civilised world look towards Germany to follow 
 suit. 
 
 The hon. Member who has just sat down, in what I 
 think was very temperate language, referred to the 
 position as it now exists, but I do not propose to go 
 over that ground, which was so ably gone over by 
 the hon. Member for Blackburn and the hon. Member 
 for Elland. My hon. Friend the Member for Stirling
 
 1916] PRUSSIAN MILITARISM 149 
 
 Burghs drew attention to the phrase of the Prime 
 Minister, a phrase which the right hon. Gentleman em- 
 phasised to-day, in what, in- my judgment, was a most 
 unfortunate utterance, in reference to the removal of 
 the domination of Prussian militarism. We all, no doubt, 
 would like to see the removal of Prussian militarism 
 from Germany, but if the German people are prepared 
 to submit to Prussian domination, how can we pre- 
 vent it ? We must face the facts. We are level- 
 headed men, and surely we are able to take a view 
 of the position as it exists to-day. We know that we 
 are dealing with a population in these Central Empkes 
 of something like 100,000,000 ; yet the Prime Minister 
 comes down to the House and talks about the removal 
 of the domination of Prussian militarism. Nothing 
 can be more ludicrous, unless you are prepared to 
 occupy and govern Germany from the time of the 
 war. It is an insult to our intelligence to entertain 
 us with an airy and nebulous phrase about the de- 
 struction of the dommance of Prussian militarism. If 
 the Prime Mmister can show us how this domination 
 is to be removed, I, and I am sure my hon. Friends, 
 would welcome it, as would also the right hon. Gentle- 
 man the Member for the City of London and other 
 hon. Members ; we would be delighted if the Prime 
 Minister could show us how to remove the domina- 
 tion of Prussian militarism in Germany. 
 
 The very able speeches of the hon. Member for 
 Blackburn and of my hon. Friend the Member for 
 EUand unquestionably gave us food for thought. 
 They showed us that the achievement of a great 
 victory by either of the belligerents would not remove
 
 150 PROSPECTS OF PEACE [chap, xrv 
 
 Prussian militarism. Let us face that criticism. 
 Suppose, for example, we achieve through a 17-iiich 
 gun a great victory over Germany or Prussia, would 
 not the Germans or Prussians naturally say, " Of 
 course the reason of our defeat was that the other 
 belligerents had a better gun than ours, and what we 
 have got to do is to get to work again " ? We cannot 
 remove the Central Powers with their hundred millions 
 of people off the face of the earth, and they will bide 
 their time until they get a military instrument which 
 they think will successfully compete with ours. It is 
 a delusion, the greatest delusion, I submit, which is 
 embodied in the unfortunate phrase used by the Prime 
 Minister. To take the most charitable view of the 
 case, I cannot see how he is to adhere to it. If he can 
 show us how it is to be carried out, then I for one 
 and many others would be very glad to hear it. The 
 hon. Member for Blackpool (Mr. Ashley) made a very 
 temperate speech, thougli, of course, in opposition to 
 my hon. Friends below me. He said that what we 
 had set out for was to " keep what we have." I 
 think that is a proposition which we would all sup- 
 port. The hon. Member also went on to say that 
 Germany had been making preparations for this war 
 for a hundred years, and he gave us some facts and 
 references to other wars of Germany, seeking to show 
 that this menace had been preparmg for us, and had 
 been growing up, over a long period of years. I 
 happened to be looking up some foreign correspondence, 
 White Books and Yellow Books published with regard 
 to this war, more or less in preparation for this Debate, 
 and I came upon some remarkable French evidence
 
 1916] CAUSES OF THE WAR 151 
 
 in a communication from the French military attache 
 (Lieut .-Colonel Serrctt) at the French Embassy in 
 Berlin to his confrere (M. Etienne), Minister of War 
 in Paris, in regard to the state of Europe just previous 
 to this war. It is dated March 15th, 1913. It is a 
 most remarkable communication, and I will read one 
 extract which I think the House will agree is im- 
 portant and interesting, coming as it does from a 
 Frenchman who could not be regarded as prejudiced 
 in favour of Germany. He was writing to his Chief 
 in Paris, and of course it was his duty to state to him 
 what was the condition of things in Germany at the 
 period when he wrote. 
 
 Before reading the extract, I should just like to 
 briefly refer to some of the diplomatic facts to which 
 my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling Burghs re- 
 ferred, and the hon. Gentleman who is well versed in 
 these diplomatic facts will correct me if I do not 
 give an exact resume of what took place. The House 
 will recollect what led up to this great tragedy. It is 
 necessary to go back a little, and I think that if we 
 refer to two or three of the international factors of the 
 situation they might possibly lead us to a better 
 understanding of the German mind. After all, if we 
 are to have an honourable settlement and a durable 
 peace we must try to put ourselves in the other's place, 
 and thus try to find out what is exactly the mind of 
 Germany. Reference has been made to a desire of 
 domination on the part of Germany. I quite agree 
 that very probably Germany, like ourselves, is com- 
 posed of a great number of parties. There is a party 
 in Germany which undoubtedly desires that Germany 
 11
 
 152 PROSPECTS OF PEACE [chap, xiv 
 
 should have world-power ; there is, also, no doubt a 
 part}" which has been coerced mto war from the 
 fear that there was an intention on the part of other 
 Powers to crush Germany ; and there is, also, a strong 
 military party whose members, of course, like all 
 soldiers, are desirous of going on active service, with 
 the chance of achieving distinction. When you get 
 a population of that character, when j^ou have cir- 
 cumstances of this nature, and when you bring all 
 those factors into one channel, as a rule you are very 
 apt to have war. The particular factors to which I 
 desire to draw the attention of the House, and which 
 I think had an effect upon the German mind, are these : 
 I go no further back than the South African War, 
 Avhen the famous Kruger telegram was sent, and there 
 was possibly an attempt to play upon German feeling 
 when Great Britain was getting those South African 
 colonies. Then there was the case of Tripoli, in which 
 Italy was engaged. England took no part against 
 her action. The House will recollect that we called 
 attention again and again to The Hague Convention, 
 and protested against the wanton act. No notice 
 was taken of our protest in any shape or form. There 
 was a great Foreign Office Debate in this House, in 
 which a good many Members took part. I asked the 
 Foreign Secretary if the reason for his action in not 
 protesting against what was admitted, I think, by a 
 great many newspapers and many Members of this 
 House, to be a wanton act on the part of Italy, was 
 the detaching of Italy from the Triple Alliance, pos- 
 sibly having in view that a European War might 
 take place. He did not answer me. To proceed to
 
 1916] TREATY OF ALGECIRAS 153 
 
 Morocco. What was the action taken there ? It is 
 with reference to that I shall make the quotation to 
 which I referred. The House will recollect what took 
 place. There was a treaty between all the Powers 
 and the parties — Germany, Russia, France, and our- 
 selves among the others. What took place ? We are 
 very proud of our devotion to conventions and treaties. 
 We resent and condemn, and rightly condemn, the 
 violation of the sanctity of Belgium, and the " scrap 
 of paper " which was torn up ; but we ourselves were 
 parties with France to tearing up the Treaty of 
 Algeciras, which provided for the good government 
 and treatment of Morocco. There was actually a 
 provision in the Treaty of Algeciras, that where any 
 dispute arose with regard to Morocco it should be re- 
 ferred to the Tribunal of the Powers. That was 
 entirely ignored. Then afterwards the war broke 
 out. This was the communication from the French 
 Attache in Berlin to his Chief in Paris, and the dis- 
 patch is in the French Yellow Book, No. 1 : — 
 
 " May I recall, in order the better to show the 
 genesis of this military programme, what was written 
 by my predecessor, Colonel Pelle, a year ago, when 
 the law of 1912 made its appearance : ' We discover 
 every day how deep and how lasting are the senti- 
 ments of wounded pride and rancour against us, 
 provoked by the events of last year.' " 
 
 He was referring to the humiliations inflicted on 
 Germany in speeches made by Ministers in this country, 
 which led practically to the Ultimatum delivered to
 
 154 PROSPECTS OF PEACE [chap, xiv 
 
 Germany that she must withdraw her gunboat from 
 Agadu'. The report continued : — 
 
 "The treaty of 4th November, 1911, is a profound 
 disappointment. The resentment felt in every part 
 of Germany is the same. All Germans, even the 
 Socialists, resent our having taken their share in 
 Morocco. It appeared one or two years ago as if 
 the Germans had set out to conquer the world. They 
 deemed themselves so strong that no one would dare 
 enter the lists against them. Boundless possibilities 
 were opened up for German industry, German trade, 
 German expansion. Naturally those ideas and those 
 ambitions have not disappeared to-day. Germans 
 still require outlets for their commerce ; and they still 
 d'-'sire economic and Colonial expansion. This they 
 consider as their right, as they are growing every day, 
 and the future belongs to them. They look upon us, 
 with our 40,000,000 inhabitants, as a second-rate 
 nation. In the course of 1911 this second-rate nation 
 held its own against them." 
 
 They held their own, because we supported them in 
 the violation of the treaty, in the tearing up of a 
 scrap of paper. The letter concluded : 
 
 " The Emperor and the Government yielded, public 
 opinion has neither forgiven them nor us. Public 
 opinion does not intend that such a thing shall occur 
 again." 
 
 From that moment Germany prepared for war. We 
 are being continually told that there was evidence 
 that Grermany was preparing for war. That is quite 
 true. I do not deny it. All the facts go to show that
 
 1916] BRITISH RESPONSIBILITY 166 
 
 Grermany was preparing for war. I do not suggest 
 for a moment that Germany was justified in the 
 aggressive action she took in the violation of Belgium 
 and many of the other acts which were committed. 
 I do not stand up here to defend Germany in any sense 
 of the word. 
 
 Captain Pirie : What is the purpose of your speech ? 
 
 Mr. Mason : I am sorry if I have not made myself 
 clear. Possibly I cannot do perhaps the same justice 
 as the hon. Member, but I am endeavouring to show, 
 while I do not for a moment palliate or excuse the 
 action of Germany, I ask the House as a fair Assembly, 
 and even the hon. Member as a fair-minded man, 
 after the statement of these facts, and they are facts 
 — [Hon. Members : " No, no ! "] — I ask him if he 
 can state, knowing these facts, that we did not incur 
 responsibility in perhaps helping to provoke this great 
 tragedy. [An Hon. Member : " We were accessories 
 before the fact ! "] I am not going to call ourselves 
 names. [An Hon. Member : " You are ! "] The 
 hon. Member can form his own conclusion. I am 
 endeavouring, to the best of my humble ability, to put 
 these facts as they are before the House. 
 
 Major Newman : Are you speaking for your con- 
 stituents ? 
 
 Mr. Mason : I am glad the hon. Member makes 
 that interruption, because it was so ably answered 
 by the hon. Member who spoke before me. He said 
 a very straightforward thing : that we are not here 
 as it were altogether to speak the views of our con- 
 stituents. Surely we are here as Members of Parlia- 
 ment. I quite agree we have a responsibility to our
 
 156 PROSPECTS OF PEACE [chap, xiv 
 
 constituents, and when the tmie comes I hope I will 
 be able to face that responsibility. I am sure that 
 this House would resent, and very properly, if we did 
 not give our views such as they are. They cannot 
 necessarily be in accordance with the views of every 
 Member. We are Members of this great deliberative 
 Assembly, and, as the hon. Member pointed out, 
 surely it ought to be our primary duty, and I am 
 endeavouring to try to carry that out, to express our 
 views. Whether I represent the views of my con- 
 stituents I am unable to say, but I can assure my 
 hon. Friend that I long for the period when we may 
 meet our constituents. I, for one, was quite against 
 extension of the life of Parliament. I thought it was 
 a most unjustifiable act, and I supported the extension 
 of eight months rather than twelve. As far as I am 
 concerned, I am quite prepared to give them any 
 satisfaction, and to try to put these views before my 
 constituents, and to ask for a renewal of their con- 
 fidence. I am quite unable to say whether they will 
 do so or not. I do hope some further consideration 
 will be given to this very proper suggestion of my 
 hon. Friend. I, for one, have never wavered in my 
 support of this cause. I regard it as a just cause. 
 
 Mr. R. McNeill : What cause — our cause, or Ger- 
 many's ? 
 
 Mr. Mason : The cause we are engaged in, our 
 cause. I clearly said that over and over again in this 
 House, and I have never wavered in the belief that 
 we are engaged in a just cause. I do suggest that for 
 motives of reason, from higher motives, that after all 
 we have a higher responsibility. I am sure that we
 
 1916] RESPONSIBILITY TO GOD 157 
 
 do recognise our responsibility, and that our words 
 do carry weight in the country, and that the country 
 looks to this House for statesmanship and for guid- 
 ance, and that every single Member of this House 
 owes a responsibility to the House for every single 
 word he utters, and owes a responsibility to a higher 
 power than this House, to himself as a man and to 
 God. I say that we are bound as men to offer our 
 opinions — what we sincerely believe to be our just 
 and true opinions. We are supposed to offer them 
 to the Government. It is not our responsibility if 
 the Government refuse to listen to them. We owe 
 that responsibility to this great Assembly, to ourselves, 
 and to God. On those lines I ventured to address 
 this Assembly.
 
 CHAPTER XV 
 
 PEACE AND WAR 
 
 Speech delr^ered on May 24th, 1916, in the 
 House of Commons 
 
 I should like, first, to say that I regret to see that the 
 Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Sir Edward Grey) 
 has seen fit to absent himself from this Debate so early 
 after his own speech. I think I express the feelings of 
 manj^ here present when I say that it was a gross act 
 of discourtesy to the hon. Gentleman who followed him 
 in the Debate. For a Minister who so seldom comes 
 to this House to walk out of the Chamber immediately 
 after making a speech is certamly an act of the grossest 
 discourtesy. The Foreign Secretary, referring to the 
 recent interview of the Imperial German Chancellor, 
 said that he demanded a victorious peace. I happen 
 to have here a copy of the recent dispatch of the Ger- 
 man Government to the United States Government, 
 and I will quote it to the House, so that we can see 
 for ourselves what is in the mind of the German 
 Government at the present moment. The German 
 Government said that twice within the past few 
 months she has announced before the world her 
 readiness to make peace on a basis safeguarding Ger- 
 
 158
 
 1916] GERMAN CHANCELLOR'S STATEMENT 159 
 
 many's vital interests, thus indicating that it is not 
 Germany's fault if peace is still withheld from the 
 nations of Europe. The Foreign Secretary read into 
 the statement of the Imperial Chancellor, when he 
 referred the British Government to the war map of 
 Europe, a declaration for a victorious peace, but I 
 do not think that is consistent with the actual state- 
 ment which I have just quoted. They are the actual 
 words of Germany herself. Twice she has been pre- 
 pared within the past few months to make peace — 
 providing her vital interests are preserved. My hon. 
 Friend (Mr. Ponsonby) did a good service in his very 
 able speech when he initiated this Debate, and I think 
 he was justified in pointing to the elements which at 
 present exist, as he said, for advancing negotiations. 
 He considered the time was ripe for these negotiations, 
 and this dispatch from the German Government cer- 
 tamly gives us very considerable ground for that 
 assertion. If we pass on to the latest interview of the 
 Imperial Chancellor, we find that he again refers to 
 this statement to which I have just alluded, and 
 says : — 
 
 " I have twice publicly stated that Germany has 
 been and is prepared to discuss the termination of the 
 war on a basis that offers her a guarantee against a 
 future attack from a coalition of her enemies, and 
 ensures peace to Europe." 
 
 There agam we have a very distinct and specific utter- 
 ance from the Imperial German Chancellor, in which 
 he very defuiitely states that Germany is prepared to 
 enter into peace negotiations providing her interests
 
 160 PEACE AND WAR [chap, xv 
 
 are preserved. I do not know what words mean if 
 that does not mean that she is in that position, and 
 therefore I contend that the speech of the right hon. 
 Gentleman was certamly not borne out by the state- 
 ment of the German Government itself. I very much 
 regret and deprecate the tone of the right hon. Gentle- 
 man's speech, and I think that will be endorsed by 
 others who heard it. I am not here to defend the 
 German Government or the attitude they took up 
 with regard to Bosnia, but a Minister who describes 
 the statement of the Imperial Chancellor with regard 
 to Bosnia as " a first-class lie " is certainly not likely 
 to be the instrument that is going to advance that 
 honourable and satisfactory conclusion to this War 
 which is so very desirable. He was perfectly justified 
 in pomting out the inaccuracy of the statement made 
 by the German Imperial Chancellor, but such an ex- 
 pression as he made of course will be publicly quoted 
 and sent far and wide throughout the length and 
 breadth of the world, and is not the way to advance 
 the cause of peace which he himself would have us 
 believe he desires. What did the Secretary of State 
 for Foreign Affairs himself say ? He said, in that 
 famous interview in the Chicago Daily News : — 
 
 " Nobody wants peace more than we want it, but 
 we want peace that does justice, and a peace that 
 re-establishes respect for the public law of the world. 
 . . . Presumably Germany would like neutrals to think 
 we are putting pressure to keep France, Russia and 
 Italy in the war. We are not." 
 
 That is a sentiment which I think will meet with
 
 1916] OBJECTS OF THE WAR 161 
 
 support from every Member of this House. But when 
 one reads a statement of that character in an inter- 
 view purposely provided for the nourishment and 
 consumption of the American public rather than of 
 the British public, how can we reconcile it with the 
 bellicose language and very extraordinary method of 
 expressing himself which the right hon. Gentleman 
 has used this afternoon ? It is impossible to believe 
 in the assertions or attitude of His Majesty's Govern- 
 ment, or to reconcile it with a statement of this 
 character, which every one will agree was temperate 
 and moderate ; which led me to believe, when I came 
 down to the House, animated by the most conciliatory 
 attitude towards the Government and looking for- 
 ward to a great advance, as I believed, the Government 
 and right hon. Gentleman were prepared to make. 
 To fiiid the right hon. Gentleman using language and 
 tones such as he used just now, I am bound to confess, 
 was a very great disappointment to me. 
 
 What, after all, are the primary objects for which 
 we entered into this war ? It may seem unnecessary 
 to agam go over the whole ground and to reiterate 
 them, but I would like briefly to state them, as they 
 may help once again to direct our minds to the object 
 for which we are strugglmg. The hon. Member for 
 StirUng Burghs (Mr. Ponsonby), in his able speech, 
 and the hon. Member for Leicester (Mi*. Kamsay 
 Macdonald) both referred to these objects and showed 
 that, as far as we believe, Germany is prepared to 
 concede them. The Secretary of State for Foreign 
 Affairs perhaps does not agree with that ; indeed he 
 denied that there was any evidence to show it. But
 
 162 PEACE AND WAR [ohap. xv 
 
 I have endeavoured to show that there is abundant 
 evidence. What are these objects ? They are, first 
 and foremost, to carry out our solemn treaty obliga- 
 tions with regard to Belgium, and to bring about an 
 honourable settlement with reference to France. It is 
 often forgotten that we are not alone in this treaty. 
 The obligation for the preservation of the sovereignty 
 of Belgium is equally shared by Russia, France, Austria 
 and German^^ They, severally and jointly, are re- 
 sponsible for the obligation. No one has suggested 
 that we are anxious to make peace independently of 
 Russia or France, because we recognise that they are, 
 equally with ourselves, responsible for the carrying 
 out of this obligation towards Belgium. Therefore, 
 we feel, unless they have some other motive, some 
 other axe to grind, they must be equally as anxious 
 as ourselves to carry out the primary object for which 
 we entered on the war. 
 
 It has been suggested by other critics to those who, 
 like ourselves, contend that the time is approaching, 
 or even ripe, for trying to bring this war to an honour- 
 able close, that to state this is a sign of weakness. I 
 cannot see how that can be justified. How is it a 
 sign of weakness ? We may point to our strong mili- 
 tary position, our strong naval position, and our 
 strong financial position. But, because we are equally 
 as patriotic as others, because we are alive to the 
 enormous liabilities which we are incurring, because 
 we had taken a particular view on the whole situation, 
 because we are alive to the immense cost both in life 
 and treasure, because we are anxious to bring this 
 war to a close, and because we eeem to take more
 
 1916] EVACUATION OF BELGIUM 163 
 
 persuasive measures for bringing that about than 
 those who cry " Peace " and then indulge in the 
 purest invective, how can it be a sign of weakness on 
 our part when we add that, whilst stating our 
 minimum terms, we ought still to pursue the war with 
 our utmost vigour ? If Germany is prepared to con- 
 cede — as I think she is — these very legitimate demands, 
 I thmk we should be prepared to meet her either by 
 arbitration or in the way suggested by the hon. Gentle- 
 man who preceded me (Sir W. Byles), by suggesting 
 another conference at which the nations can come to 
 terms. If, on the other hand, she refuses to have 
 anything to say with regard to the complete evacua- 
 tion of Belgium, then I do not believe there is a single 
 man in this House or in the country who would 
 support any giving away or weakness with regard to 
 that fundamental principle which lies at the bedrock 
 of our position. Knowing that fact, knowing full well 
 that we will adhere to the primary object with which 
 we entered and are carrying on the war, it cannot be 
 suggested that it implies an element of weakness or 
 is likely to discourage our Allies. If we can get those 
 terms granted, we are prepared to give an honourable 
 peace, and to imply that that means weakness is not 
 in accordance with common sense. 
 
 Reference was made by one of the preceding speakers 
 to the immense risks and liabilities that we are incur- 
 ring, and I would like to allude to that once again, 
 as it may perhaps press upon some who look at this 
 question, not only from the point of view of human 
 life, but from the pomt of view of the financial re- 
 sponsibilities and untold suffering which are bound to
 
 164 PEACE AND WAR [chap, xv 
 
 come to this country, and to all countries, whatever 
 the settlement may be, as the result of this awful 
 tragedy. I saw a statement the other day by a 
 London financial expert estimating what would be the 
 position of the belligerents if this war should continue 
 until August 1st next. He estimated that the total 
 debt of the German Emphe would be £3,200,000,000, 
 with interest charges amounting to £152,000,000 ; of 
 the Russian Empire at £3,000,000,000, with interest 
 charges of £145,000,000 ; of France of £2,920,000,000, 
 with a fixed charge of £125,000,000 ; and of Great 
 Britain at £2,610,000,000 with interest charges of 
 £110,000,000. That, perhaps, is a rather modest 
 estimate, because our own Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 has told us we shall have interest charges of some- 
 thing lilce £145,000,000. Still, that latter figure may 
 possibly include the loans we have made to our 
 Dominions and our Allies, and I think was based upon 
 the war continuing till the end of the year. But if 
 you take that as a summary of the position, which 
 we shall have to face sooner or later, and which is 
 bound to entail an immense amount of suffering on 
 people who are struggling to live, you will find the 
 total debt charge will be £11,730,000,000, and the 
 annual interest charge between £500,000,000 and 
 £600,000,000. That fact is worth the consideration 
 of all of us, and it is worth bringing to the notice of 
 many hon. Members who perhaps, in the present state 
 of artificial prosperity and the great boom in trade, 
 are not alive to what is going on. They see immense 
 prosperity, a great circulation of money and high 
 wages, and, for the moment, they keep this fact in
 
 1916] CRUSHING OF GERMANY 165 
 
 the background. It is not a very welcome fact to 
 realise the enormous debt that you are incurring and 
 the enormous bill you will have to meet some day 
 very soon. Therefore it may serve a useful purpose 
 if I draw the attention of the House to that factor in 
 the situation. 
 
 Many other critics say, again, that even if Germany 
 was prepared to meet this country in grantmg, for 
 example, those primary objects to which I have 
 alluded, it is not sufficient. They say that they do 
 not want this to occur again, that they do not 
 want their children to suffer another such tragedy, 
 and that there is only one solution, namely, to crush 
 Germany to her knees. All I can say to those critics 
 is that if they will honestly face the situation from a 
 military point of view and consult military authorities, 
 they will find many of them who will say that that is im- 
 possible. If they could consult the war map of Europe, 
 to which the Imperial Chancellor referred, they will 
 admit that the task is a superhuman one. It is no 
 use deluding ourselves that it is within our powers, 
 that it is an easy task, and that it is not going to cost 
 us also an enormous sacrifice of blood and the pro- 
 bable bankruptcy of this country if we persist in the 
 steps which this particular end involves. We cannot 
 dismiss Germany b}'' simply saying that we are going 
 on until we have crushed her to her knees and, in the 
 end, make her sue for peace. In the first place, I 
 doubt our ability to do it, and, in the second place, 
 if we were to persist in it, after having attained the 
 primary objects with which we entered the war, it 
 would not only be an impolitic but an immoral act.
 
 166 PEACE AND WAR [chap, xv 
 
 The Duke of Wellington once said that after a great 
 army had obtained the primary object for which it 
 entered the campaign, it was unquestionably an 
 immoral act if it persisted in the campaign for mili- 
 tary glory, or with a deske to trample upon and crush 
 the enemy. Even if you imagine it would remove the 
 menace from our children and our children's children, 
 it would leave you with a crushed and beaten Germany 
 with a rankling spkit of revenge. If mc study his- 
 tory, we find that Napoleon tried that with Prussia, 
 and failed. He tried to limit her standing army to 
 40,000. He succeeded for the moment, but she again 
 i ose up, and eventually took her revenge on France 
 in 1870. What policy did Prussia pursue then ? 
 Very foolishly she took from France Alsace and Lor- 
 raine, but she did not prevent a spirit of revenge 
 arising in France, because we now see France, very 
 rightly, trying to get back what she lost by that most 
 unjust treatment of her by Germany in 1870. There- 
 fore, if we sti dy history, we see there is no evidence 
 to show that si ch a policy — apart from its difficulty 
 — is likely to achieve the result which those who 
 support it would have us believe it is likely to bring 
 about. 
 
 I do not propose to go into all the details of a poL - 
 eible settlement. This is not the time for us to survey 
 the whole field, or for stating what we are prepared 
 to do in regard to Serbia, Poland, and the other parts 
 of this enormous field of operations. We have speci- 
 fically stated the objects for which we entered the 
 war, and Grermany has agreed, as I believe, to concede 
 these primary objects. We have to remember that
 
 1916] ARBITRATION 167 
 
 in the earlier stages of the war many German pubKcists 
 were in favour of the annexation of Belgium. All 
 that has disappeared. I contend that while we were 
 a united country — ^I'ightly united — and are still united 
 with regard to those particular objects, there will be, 
 and necessarilj'' must be, growing disunion in this 
 country because of the suspicion, which may rapidly 
 grow into a conviction, that we are not now pursuing 
 the war for the objects for which we entered it, but 
 for some ulterior objects not disclosed to the House 
 or the country. If the belief centres in the minds of 
 men and in Members of this House that the Govern- 
 ment is not anxious to bring to a close this horrible 
 tragedy, but that they have ulterior motives in view, 
 we are justified in pointing out to them that they are 
 guilty of the worst of all crimes — the crime of blood- 
 guiltiness. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, 
 in the interview to which I have referred, spoke of the 
 advantages of arbitration. He used one phrase in 
 which he said that he was not in favour of war as a 
 means of settling disputes, and that he regarded it 
 as a most undesirable method of settling disputes. 
 That interview may possibly have been drawn up for 
 American consumption only, but I believe that is his 
 honest conviction. I have heard the right hon. 
 Grentleman speak in the most eloquent terms of the 
 advantages of arbitration and conference, and in 
 condemnation of war. Perhaps if he had not been 
 irritated a little by the criticisms made upon his 
 diplomacy this afternoon he might have spoken in 
 that higher and nobler vein. On some occasions he 
 has spoken in very eloquent terms of the terrible 
 12
 
 168 PEACE AND WAR [chap, xv 
 
 disadvantages of war. In conclusion, I would remind 
 the House of an episode that occurred in South 
 America, High up on the mountain side of the Andes 
 is a statue of bronze. It is made of the cannon belong- 
 ing to the two States of Chile and the Argentine. It 
 is a statue of our Blessed Lord, and it is set up there 
 to commemorate the fact that these two countries, 
 rather than go to war, preferred to refer their differ- 
 ences to arbitration and to a conference such as we 
 desire.
 
 CHAPTER XVI 
 
 TREASURY WAR FINANCE 
 
 A NUMBER of members of the House of Commons, like 
 Sir Frederick Banbury the member for the City of 
 London, Sir Charles Henry, and myself, became very 
 much concerned at the growth and amount of the 
 floating debt. We had one or two private conferences 
 on the subject, and decided to raise the question at 
 the earliest opportunity, and on August 10th, 1916, 
 we were afforded such an opportunity, when the Civil 
 Services and Revenue Departments Estimates 1916-17 
 (and other estimates) came up for discussion. I asked 
 Sir Charles Henry if he would open the discussion and 
 he agreed to do so, and with that object in view moved 
 to reduce Item A by £100. 
 
 Both Sir C^iarles Henry and Sir Frederick Banbury 
 made admirable speeches pointing out the gravity of 
 the position, and the advisabihty of considering the 
 question of the issuing of a long term loan. 
 
 The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. McKenna), 
 while not ruling out the possibility of his issuing a 
 long term loan, was evidently of two minds on the 
 subject. He tried to justify his policy of piling up 
 the amount of short-dated securities, and at the same 
 time claimed credit for reducing the amount of three 
 months' Treasury Bills. 
 
 In the folio-wing speech I endeavoured to meet his 
 
 169
 
 170 TREASURY WAR FINANCE [chap, xvi 
 
 various points, and to press home the arguments of 
 those who had preceded me in the debate ! 
 
 I join in the appreciation which has been expressed at 
 the hicid statement of the right hon. Gentleman, the 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer. Before I make any 
 obser\''ations upon what he said, I would like to express 
 agreement with 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 canron. 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 mth 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
 
 1916] BANK OF ENGLAND 171 
 
 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. 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 one motive which animated the directors of 
 the Bank of England was that they were faced with 
 a considerable gold drain to America, The Cliancellor 
 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. Al- 
 ready very considerable sums have, 1 believe, been
 
 172 TREASURY WAR FINANCE [chap, xvi 
 
 attracted to London, and the fact that money was 
 quoted cheap again in New York is, I think, one of 
 tlie reasons for the Baid^: 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 odd. 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 
 £2,000,000 ; 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 
 cognizant with finance and have a knowledge of the 
 Money Market must know that when the Bank of 
 England raised the rate of discount, with the object 
 of attracting capital here, the Trcasuiy was a com- 
 petitor of the Bank as it were, by adding to the aggre- 
 gate amount of currency at the rate of something like 
 a million or two milhons in a week. The Bank of 
 England's 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
 
 1916] DILUTION OF CURRENCY 173 
 
 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 
 dikition of Courts of Inquiry by the addition of lay 
 members. We have had the dilution of tlie Arm}'' 
 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 eflect 
 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 ap- 
 pointed 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 
 Bhort-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
 
 174 TREASURY WAR FINANCE [chap, xvi 
 
 issue of £10,000,000 of French bills and £10,000,000 
 of Russian bills which have matured, and which, I 
 beheve, 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 not a liability of the 
 British Treasury, but to arrive at the menace — as 
 many of us think it to be — of having 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 Chan- 
 cellor 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. For 
 the purposes of my argument I will take the sum of 
 £500,000,000, plus the French bills £10,000,000, the 
 Russian bills £10,000,000, and our own Treasury Bills 
 of £850,000,000, plus notes of £127,000,000. That will 
 give us an aggregate of short-dated paper existing on 
 the Money Market of something like £1,497,000,000. 
 It was hardly worthy of the right hon. Gentleman 
 that he should enlarge upon paying ofi' 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. Gentle- 
 man should not be in a position to finance the war
 
 1916] FUNDING FLOATING DEBT 176 
 
 in the future or to finance his purchases in America 
 or elsewhere by means of Treasury Bills. If I appre- 
 hend 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 tcp- 
 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 his 
 reply. He did not meet the arguments of the hon. 
 Baronet the Member for the Wellington Livisicn. 
 He said that the reasons for or against a long loan 
 depended upon whether the market disclosed in flation 
 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. All Chan- 
 cellors 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 over- 
 whelming 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
 
 176 TBEASURY WAR FINANCE fcHAP. xvi 
 
 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. W^hile 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 dilTerences of opinion as 
 to the methods adopted with regard to it, but there 
 is only one feeUng in this country as to the object for 
 which we all stand. Peace may come more or less 
 suddenl}'. 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 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 fairly attractive loan, not necessarily 
 at a high rate of interest. We have seen that New 
 South Wales is borrowing to-day at 5J per cent. 
 More than one speaker has referred to the exorbitant 
 terms — 6 J or 6^ per cent, now oliered. Those terms 
 are too exorbitant for the British Treasury to pay
 
 1916] GERMAN FLOATING DEBT 177 
 
 when New South Wales can borrow at 5 J 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 in- 
 vestors. 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 issuing a 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
 
 178 
 
 TREASURY WAR FINANCE [chap, xvi 
 
 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 Ger- 
 many is now reduced. According to this article, 
 Germany's floating debt at the time of the issue of 
 the fourth German War Loan 
 
 " Exceeded 
 follows : 
 
 1,400 millions sterling, made up as 
 
 Drawn credits, Treasury bonds and bills 
 and notes of private banks 
 
 Reichsbank notes 
 
 Treasury notes 
 
 Loan Bank bonds 
 
 ^Municipality of Berhn notes . 
 
 Old Prussian bonds, replacing Loan Bank 
 bonds 
 
 New Prussian bonds 
 
 Former fiduciary circulation 
 
 £719,000,000 
 
 224,500,000 
 
 18,000,000 
 
 88,000,000 
 
 7,500,000 
 
 75,000,000 
 150,000,000 
 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 verv 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 :
 
 1916] BORROWING IN AMERICA 179 
 
 " 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 obhgations — i.e. 719 
 millions sterhng. Well, the amount actually an- 
 nounced 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 it 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 mil 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 concen- 
 tration of mind upon it. Opportunities for invest- 
 ment 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 be- 
 cause, 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 shall stand better and
 
 180 TREASURY WAR FINANCE [chaf. xvi 
 
 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 considera- 
 tion.
 
 CHAPTER XVII 
 
 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS 
 
 A Speech at Coventry, December 8th, 1916 
 
 I SHOULD lilce, first of all, to express my appreciation 
 of the able address of our Chairman this evening. I 
 think the eminently straightforward expression of his 
 views must have been apparent to the bulk of the 
 audience in this hall. Secondly, I should like to 
 thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for being here to- 
 night, one of the many kindnesses I have experienced 
 in Coventry. I much appreciate the fact that you 
 have turned out after a busy day to attend a political 
 meeting on such a dark and foggy night. 
 
 Before I proceed to speak on the general situation, 
 either the local political situation or the national 
 situation, I should like just to say one or two words 
 with reference to some personal matters connected 
 with the city of Coventry. Since I last had the 
 honour of addressing you you have elected a new Mayor, 
 and I wish to offer my hearty congratulations to you 
 upon the selection of our good friend, Mr. Councillor 
 Hill. Mr. Hill, if I may say so, is an old friend of 
 mine, and he is a man, who, with his forebears, has 
 been honourably associated with the city of Coventry ; 
 
 181
 
 182 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvii 
 
 and I do think you aro very fortunate in having 
 Councillor Hill as your Mayor ; and also in having a 
 Mayoress in the person of JMrs. Hill. I wish them a 
 most successful Mayoralty. 
 
 Next, I should like to say — and this has perhaps a 
 more direct reference to the war in which we are 
 engaged — that on behalf of Mrs. Mason and myself 
 we offer our heartfelt sympathy to the many who, 
 like myself, may have lost friends and relatives in the 
 war. I know that many Coventry and Warwickshire 
 men have died, and to those who have been bereaved 
 of husbands and sons I wish to offer heartfelt sj^m- 
 pathy. 
 
 Before I proceed with my address generally, I would 
 like to say something about the great political crisis 
 in which we find ourselves, though I do not propose 
 to speak at anj'- great length on that. Well, I support 
 what has been said by your Chairman. I think, and 
 I believe all patriotic men will think, that in this grave 
 period of our national history it is our bounden duty, 
 whatever our political feelings may be, whatever our 
 political labels may be, to recognise that the King's 
 Government has to be carried on. Secondly, it seems 
 to me that we ought to sink our own personal prede- 
 lictions and forget our personal labels ; that every 
 patriotic man and woman ought to be ready to offer 
 his best services to the support of the Government in 
 the work in which they are engaged. Let us offer the 
 Government of Mr. Lloyd George our unfeigned sup- 
 port. That does not bind any man or interfere with 
 his liberty, and until Mr. Lloyd George has outlined 
 his policy wo ought to be generous and magnanimous
 
 1916] LOCKHURST LANE CROSSING 183 
 
 towards the Government and give them the benefit 
 of whatever support we can ; and I hope myself that 
 the Government will, as soon as possible, be able to 
 bring the war to an honourable and satisfactory close. 
 I now turn to a local question, which I believe is a 
 burnmg one, and that is the question of Lockhurst 
 Lane and Holbrooks Lane Crossing. I have taken a 
 humble part in that. It appeals to me on two grounds, 
 national and local — (1) the provision of a new means 
 of crossing the railway line will facilitate the work 
 in which you are engaged — the manufacture of muni- 
 tions. (2) It seemed to me to be necessary that the 
 fresh facilities should be offered as speedily as possible 
 for the convenience of the people of Coventry by the 
 erection of a footbridge or in some way which would 
 help the crossing of people at that particular place. 
 So I endeavoured to help the movement. First I 
 communicated with Mi-. Lloyd George when he was 
 Mmister of Munitions, and secondly, with Mr. Montagu 
 when he succeeded to that position ; and I found, 
 particularly with Mi-. Montagu, every desire to meet 
 the wishes of the citizens of Coventry that something 
 should be done and done speedily. Mr. Montagu 
 told me he was sendmg down a representative to 
 Coventry to investigate the question on the spot, 
 and that I believe has been done. I hope, therefore, 
 the IMinistry of Munitions will, in harmony with the 
 local authorities, provide something of a satisfactory 
 and efficient character and that it will soon be carried 
 out. Certamly anything I can do to advance the 
 matter will be done ; it will have my best considera- 
 tion and most hearty support. 
 13
 
 184 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvii 
 
 I have now gone over most matters of local interest, 
 and I would like to add that I am always glad to 
 come face to face with my constituents and to keep 
 in touch with you, and anything I can do in Parlia- 
 ment in regard to local matters I am always ready 
 to do. 
 
 Well, now, I should like to say a few words on a 
 question of very great interest, not only to you in 
 Coventry, but to the country. It is, indeed, a most 
 important question just now. It is the increased cost 
 of living — the question of the price of commodities — 
 and I will say what I think should be the action of the 
 Government with regard to that. We had a debate 
 in the House of Commons a few weeks ago, on this 
 question, and certain proposals were made by the then 
 President of the Board of Trade (Mr. Runciman). He 
 made a very able and lucid speech. He made pro- 
 posals and laid down certain principles which I did 
 not altogether agree with ; at the same time he made 
 a very interesting and certainly gave a lucid exposi- 
 tion of the question as it presented itself to him. He 
 made proposals with the object of meeting the demands 
 of people who are suffering from the increased cost 
 of livhig. 
 
 One proposal was for limiting the price of milk. 
 That seemed, on the face of it, a very wise provision. 
 Let us just examine it. Before this speech was made 
 by the President of the Board of Trade we had had 
 a representative Committee of the House cf Commons 
 elected for the purpose of inquiring into this question, 
 and in their very full report they gave some of the 
 causes which had led to the increased prices of food
 
 1916] INCREASE OF PRICES 185 
 
 and other commodities. Now, first, we must have in 
 our minds this fact : that of course when you have 
 war, such as this war, when 26,000,000 of men are 
 withdrawn from the production of commodities and 
 are endeavouring to destroy one another — when we 
 have increased consumption and decreased production 
 — there must be, from that very cause alone, a great 
 increase in the prices of all commodities. That is so 
 very simple that it requires no argument to explain 
 it further. If you increase the one and decrease the 
 other and have 26,000,000 engaged in warfare, you 
 must have increased prices of all commodities. Well, 
 the Government has endeavoured to fix the prices of 
 commodities, and milk is one of the articles, in order 
 to bring about a remedy for this state of things. Now 
 I must be frank with you. I don't wish you to thmk 
 the Government can by that method cure this evil. 
 The Government can do a great deal by organisation, 
 by curtailmg or controlling exploitation of the con- 
 ditions prevailing by combinations and syndicates. I 
 do not say the Government cannot do a great deal 
 to alleviate the state of distress and to remedy the 
 position, but I don't think they can remedy the posi- 
 tion by just imagining that the fixing of prices will 
 provide the remedy. 
 
 Take the proposal to fix the price of milk at five- 
 pence per quart. In this report of the Committee of 
 the House of Commons it was stated that during the 
 past year one of the prmcipal milk distributors 
 (Welfords) had had to pass theii- dividend. Why ? The 
 reason was on account of the deficiency of labour. 
 They could not get labour on the farms, and although
 
 186 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvii 
 
 milk prices had risen, the company were not making 
 huge profits, as people imagined, and they could not 
 pay the usual 10 per cent, dividend. That shows 
 how they were affected by the state of affairs. Imagine 
 how the position will be affected by fixing of prices. 
 If the company were not able to make a profit before, 
 I don't think any fixing of prices can be a remedy, 
 with the continued deficiency of labour. The prob- 
 ability is that the company will go out of business 
 altogether. People do not go mto business from 
 philanthropic motives and for the benefit of their 
 health ; and so, if you arbitrarily try to fix prices and 
 do away with profit, one tendency will be for people 
 to go out of dairy-farmmg into something else and 
 the supply of milk to the general community will be 
 less. 
 
 Therefore the question is not so simple as it looks, 
 and I wish you to bear in mind that you cannot fix 
 the prices of commodities just by a stroke of the pen 
 and still maintain the supply. You must have regard 
 to the conditions in which we are, and if you fix 
 prices too low, you will find that, instead of removing 
 the evil, you will accentuate the evil of which you 
 complain. The Government may say the price of 
 an article shall be so-and-so ; but you cannot, after 
 all, make water run up hill ; you must know all the 
 contributing causes, and control alone will not make 
 the remedy effective. You cannot cure the evil by 
 fixing prices. But there is one thing I do think the 
 Ck)vernment can control, and which I do think has 
 been one of the main contributory causes why the 
 prices of provisions have increased. It is one to
 
 1916] CURRENCY AND PRICES 187 
 
 which I have referred in the House of Commons. 
 It is perhaps rather a technical subject, but I will 
 endeavour to explain it to you as I tried to explain 
 it to the House of Commons. One of the causes, for 
 which the Government is responsible, is the action of 
 the Treasury in largely diluting the currency of the 
 country. The question is the cash you have to ex- 
 pend in the purchase of particular commodities, and 
 price, as of course you know, is also governed by a 
 great many contributing causes. If there is a great 
 supply of wheat crops, the tendency is for the price 
 of wheat to fall ; if you have a great supply of boots 
 and shoes ; if you have a great supply of bacon or 
 other things, the tendency is for prices to fall. If, 
 on the other hand, you have short supplies, the 
 tendency is for prices to rise — governed by the cash 
 you have to expend on any particular article. Well, 
 I won't go into the details of the question, but I 
 will try to explain how the amount of cash in the 
 country has its influence on prices. 
 
 It is rather difficult to follow, but just try and 
 follow me. A certain amount of currency, or cash, 
 is necessary to carry on the operations of the country, 
 and as the Government is engaged in large operations, 
 they have set up a printing press at the Treasury and 
 issued currency notes. As the Treasury thus adds 
 to this currency and the notes are circulated through- 
 out the country, one tendency is that more cash is 
 required to purchase a particular article than was 
 necessary to purchase it formerly. More cash being 
 required, prices rise — boots, shoes, etc., go up. It is, 
 as I said, a difficult matter to explain at a public
 
 188 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvii 
 
 meeting ; but any one who has studied the question 
 knows that if you issue an unlimited amount of paper 
 monev, the effect is what I have said it is. In this 
 country the issue of notes by the Bank of England 
 was about £30,000,000 prior to the war, and it is 
 now about the same, but Ave have issued nearly 
 £150,000,000 of currency notes. Add £150,000,000 to 
 the £30,000,000 and you have £180,000,000, and here 
 is one of the causes of high prices, and a cause over 
 which the Government have some control. The Trea- 
 sury has never been able to meet that argument in the 
 House of Commons. All our great economists — Lord 
 Goschen, the distinguished French economist, M. 
 Bastiat and others — agree that thus a great injustice 
 is done, by the policy, to the people of this country. 
 You have no time to study these questions, but you 
 do understand how your sovereign is now worth only 
 125. 6c?. Well, I have explained. The war itself 
 is a large contributing factor, but another cause are 
 these Treasury notes. The unsound principle of the 
 printing press, the issue of an unlimited amount of 
 paper (which particularly penalises the working man) 
 is most reprehensible and deserves censure in the 
 most severe terms. 
 
 I have endeavoured to show the Government that. 
 I attacked the late Chancellor of the Exchequer and 
 the measures he has carried out. Of course as a 
 result of this policy you have asked for a war bonus, 
 and I don't blame you. Tliat has been given in many 
 industries throughout the country, but it is only a 
 mere makeshift. It does not go to the root of the 
 matter, because though various industries get the
 
 1916] CONTRACTING THE CURRENCY 189 
 
 war bonus the cost of production of the particular 
 articles they are manufacturing means an increase in 
 the cost of living for those who use the articles ; so 
 the last state is no better than the first. You have 
 to go back to first principles, and the first thing 
 is to increase the purchasing power of your wages. 
 That is the first thing to do and you have to pro- 
 test. You can protest against the debasement of 
 the currency in the way, it is suggested, it is being 
 debased. 
 
 What are the remedies for this increased cost of 
 living that is going on all over the country ? Some- 
 thing may be done, as was suggested by the late 
 Grovernment, by taking control of mines and shipping ; 
 but I think that what should be done is to stop this 
 further dilution of the currency, and I am glad to 
 see that a week ago, before the late Government went 
 out of ofiEice, they for the first time manifested a desire 
 for this to be done. There was some slight reduction 
 in the output of paper-money from the Treasury. 
 You can read it in the weekly currency report. It 
 has been increased by £1,500,000 a week for the last 
 week or two, and then they called a halt. 
 
 Then I think one of the best ways to improve the 
 present position is to increase the amount of du'ect 
 taxation. Now the Government, by the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, made certain proposals m the last 
 Budget. He proposed to tax railway tickets, which 
 would have affected Coventry very much. He pro- 
 posed also taxes on cinema shows and taxes on food. 
 I, for one, believe that far the best method of meeting 
 the enormous charges which this terrible war has put
 
 190 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [ohap. xvn 
 
 upon us would have been to carry out the proposal 
 which, I thmk, Mi\ Henderson, then leader of the 
 Labour party, made at the begmnmg of the war. It 
 was, instead of taxing the people's food, to have 
 taxed incomes. It is on the people of small wages 
 and a number of old-age pensioners that the increased 
 cost of living falls the hardest, and those are the 
 people least able to bear it. That seems to be unsound 
 and unjust, and I would have supported the proposal 
 of ]VIr. Henderson to have a production tax, a tax 
 on wages. We have taxed incomes on the higher 
 grades. We have put the very heavy tax of 55. in 
 the £ on them, and some have to pay a super-tax. 
 What I would suggest, and I think it is a sound 
 method of meeting this position, is that you should 
 tax incomes right down the scale. You would thus 
 tax fairly those who receive the highest wages, but 
 now everybody has to pay the increased cost of living. 
 Instead of these haphazard taxes on tea and sugar, 
 which all go to increase the cost of living, I would 
 tax the people best able to bear the burden laid upon 
 them, and not those in receipt of very small wages 
 and old-age pensioners. 
 
 One of the reasons why I have attacked the Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer is because of his profligate 
 (as I think, and many more of us think) borrowing 
 of money for the war. That presses very hardly upon 
 the labouring classes. I know you cannot pay all 
 the expenses of the war by direct taxation ; still I 
 think the proportion which we have raised by borrow- 
 ing, as compared with the total taxation, is much 
 too great and that we ought to have raised much
 
 1916] LIVING ON CAPITAL 191 
 
 more of our cost of war by direct taxation. In the 
 Crimean War, which cost £70,000,000, we raised half 
 by taxation and half by borrowing. The present 
 system of borrowing deceives the people as to what 
 is actually going on. Why after two years of war 
 you are having lectures by Mr. McKenna and others 
 in favour of economy and saving, yet we don't see 
 official economy anywhere. In this and every town 
 in the Midlands people are receiving higher wages 
 than they ever received before, and the cause of the 
 artificial position which exists is the borrowing of 
 money and the spending of it which has gone on. 
 Payment we postpone till a later date. The prosperity 
 is artificial. It is impossible to get people to econo- 
 mise by giving them lectures about the country. 
 The only way to get them to do so is to let them 
 know what is going on. Look at the cost of what is 
 going on. Why, our interest charges before the war 
 were £22,500,000 per annum, and now they are at 
 least £150,000,000— interest on debt ! That gives 
 you some illustration of what we are doing. We 
 are living on our capital. Just think if every one did 
 that for a week. There would be a boom in trade, 
 but at the end of the week where would the shop- 
 keepers be ? Well, we are doing that as a nation : 
 we are borrowing instead of payiiag by direct taxation, 
 and we are bringing on ourselves immense poverty and 
 suffer mg. 
 
 I say this is unsound. We are not afraid ; I don't 
 think the working classes are afraid of being told the 
 truth. They think they are engaged in a just cause. 
 They are not afraid of being told what they have to
 
 192 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvii 
 
 do. But I say we are entitled to be told, and I hope 
 the new Chancellor of the Exchequer will tell us in a 
 straightforward manner, what is our position and not 
 delude us by continually deceiving us and saying 
 everything is sound when we know we are becoming 
 embarrassed because of these unsound methods. I 
 think I carry you with me in the protest I make on 
 the subject of finance, which is not on a sound basis. 
 I recognise that the cause in which we are engaged is 
 a just one, and I am desirous of bringing the war to 
 an honourable close as soon as possible ; at the same 
 time, as we have to fuiance this cause, we ought to 
 have sound methods of financing it. Occasionally I 
 incur unpopularity for what I have done, but I have 
 given, positively, chapter and verse in support of the 
 course I have taken. I have attacked the Govern- 
 ment for extravagant methods. I object to the 
 mobilisation of our securities. You may say *' Don't 
 bother us about these things," but I want to bother 
 you. These are not my ideas alone, but what I say 
 is the result of research and study of authorities far 
 greater than I am, and I say that unless we adopt the 
 principles I have put forward wc shall become embar- 
 rassed and we shall feel it. 
 
 I know people said they did not know what I was 
 driving at, when I protested against an excessive 
 expenditure on the Navy. In my address to the 
 electors of Coventry six years ago — I was elected on 
 December 6th, 1910, and this is December 8th — I 
 said I was in favour of a strong Navy, but that I 
 believed that if we were drawn into a Continental war, 
 finance would be a deciding factor, and therefore I
 
 1916] FINANCIAL RESERVES 193 
 
 advocated sound finance. Lord Beresford appreciated 
 my point of view by saying that aeroplanes and sub- 
 marines have revolutionised naval warfare. Is not 
 that the case ? If we had had fewer dreadnoughts 
 and more submarmes and destroyers we would have 
 had more cash in reserve. Therefore my position was 
 that a strong Navy must have strong financial re- 
 serves. That was what I wanted. I don't know 
 how long this war is going to continue. God forbid 
 it should continue much longer. At the same time, 
 as a practical man — and I hope I am, not a dreamer — 
 whatever Government is in, I say, if their financial 
 processes are wrong the whole country suffers. It 
 is therefore for that reason that I stand up for sound 
 methods of finance. 
 
 You may say " What about the method of support- 
 ing the exchange and the mobilisation of securities 
 adopted by Mr. McKenna ? " I shall endeavour to 
 explain that to you. You see the object of support- 
 ing our exchange in the United States was to prevent 
 the gold export going on from this country to America. 
 The rate of exchange is governed by a number of 
 causes, one of which is the indebtedness which one 
 country has to another. We have been piling up 
 enormous indebtedness to America by the purchase 
 of munitions from her. Well, I venture to doubt 
 what the Chancellor has done in this matter. The 
 policy of supporting the rate of exchange may enable 
 the country to purchase munitions of war a little 
 cheaper, but there are other American commodities. 
 America manufactures boots and shoes, sends bacon, 
 paper — I see the paper unports have quadrupled —
 
 194 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvn 
 
 into this country. Paper does not enter into the 
 manufacture of munitions. The manufacturer of 
 paper in America who wants to sell his paper in Eng- 
 land has to consider at what rate he can sell his drafts 
 upon London. When he sells his paper he tries to 
 sell his draft upon his London correspondent, and 
 the rate at which he can sell in New York is one of 
 the factors as to what profit he has upon the transac- 
 tion. If it is cotton or paper or bacon he tries to sell 
 his draft on Liverpool or London. He sells the draft 
 according to a higher or lower rate of exchange. If 
 there is an excessive export of commodities to this 
 country the rate of exchange drops, and the reason 
 why it drops is because there are so many people with 
 drafts to sell. It is a question of supply and demand. 
 It is supply and demand that create this position. 
 If gold cannot be easily got the effect is to check 
 American imports. That is what I want to do. I 
 want to reduce this indebtedness, which is embarras- 
 sing us. But what did the Treasury say ? They say 
 it would not do to let gold go out of the country to 
 meet our obligations. As a result of the fall in ex- 
 change a certain amount of gold has gone, and what 
 are gold reserves for but to be used in times of emer- 
 gency ? You know what they do — use paper in time 
 of distress to alleviate distress. You are thus creating 
 an artificial, a false position. But the Treasury think 
 differently and sent securities across the Atlantic to 
 help to keep up the rate of exchange, but the effect it 
 had was just to stimulate the export of American 
 commodities. If you take the Board of Trade figures 
 which are just published you will see proof of my
 
 1916] EXCESS OF IMPORTS 196 
 
 statement. The figures show that there has been an 
 increase of £17,500,000 in imports, while British ex- 
 ports are up only £7,000,000, In the first eleven 
 months of this year our imports were £873,000,000 
 and our exports £466,000,000 — figures which I ven- 
 ture to say prove what I have just been explaining — 
 that this artificial method has increased our indebted- 
 ness to America and is embarrassing us to meet the 
 position. That is a summary of the position of this 
 country. 
 
 The other day the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 tried to place some of our short-dated securities in 
 America, after being warned by the House of Com- 
 mons not to increase the floating debt, and the Federal 
 Reserve Board recommended people not to purchase 
 our Treasury bills. Just think of that ! A Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer allowing our credit to get to that 
 and our securities practically refused by America ! I 
 believe one of the causes is that we are not pursumg 
 sound methods of finance, I hope the new Govern- 
 ment will tell us if we are living in a fool's paradise. 
 The proper system is to cut down our consumption, 
 and the only way is to live on half our incomes, and 
 not continue to live in a fool's paradise as we have 
 for the last two years. 
 
 I have said enough on that subject and I shall now 
 say something on the question of the war itself. Your 
 Chairman has said that he is anxious, as we all are, 
 to bring the war to a speedy and honourable close 
 as soon as possible. We all agree that we are engaged 
 m a just cause. I don't thuik there is a dissentient 
 voice in regard to our position as to Belgium, but
 
 196 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvii 
 
 when we go beyond that we should have to consider 
 what undertaking we may have given to Russia or 
 perhaps to others of our Allies. I certainly think 
 that as honourable men we should abide by our com- 
 pacts with the Allies ; still I think we shall do well 
 to get back to the prmiary cause why we entered on 
 this war. 
 
 Now that cause was the case of Belgium. By 
 treaty in 1839, England, France, Russia and Germany 
 agreed to create and to recognise the sovereignty of 
 Belgium. When we have agreed about an honourable 
 settlement of that question, and with regard to 
 France, surely we should then be on the look-out for 
 any evidences on the part of the enemy to bring this 
 terrible thing to an end. That would not be a sign 
 of weakness but of strength. If a man knows definitely 
 the objects for which he engaged in a quarrel, and 
 knows that he has a just cause — a cause that he is 
 determined to concentrate upon and carry it through 
 to the end — surely it is not a cause of weakness, but 
 rather a sign of common sense and strength, if he, 
 appreciating the appalling slaughter and the sacrifice 
 of brave men, did not watch for an opportunity of 
 bringing the war to an end. I think we must all see 
 that, and every sane man, worthy of the name of 
 man, must strain every nerve to brmg that about. 
 I yield to no man in my admiration of the deeds of 
 valour of our men. One example is sufficient. At 
 the beginning of the war I remember reading of an 
 incident which exemplified the courage and spirit of 
 our men. There was a charge led by a Captain 
 McMillan. He fell mortally wounded. His men
 
 1916] BRAVERY OF OUR SOLDIERS 197 
 
 stopped to pick him up. He pointed to the enemy 
 and said : " Forward ! a McMillan knows how to die." 
 These men do not ask any reasons when they go 
 forward. They believe it to be their duty and they 
 go into the firing line without a question. Such a 
 spectacle as that makes us proud of our men, but it 
 throws a responsibility not only upon you but upon 
 me. My particular work is to offer what little I can 
 to try not to waste this noble sacrifice. Every one is 
 touched by the spectacle of men laying clown their 
 lives and making the greatest sacrifice of all on behalf 
 of their country and of ours, and we are stimulated 
 and spurred to use what brains and intellect we have 
 to see if there is not a better way to avoid this 
 terrible sacrifice. 
 
 Therefore I look out to see what the enemy has to 
 say, and having observed a striking speech by the 
 German Chancellor I tried to bring it to the attention 
 of the House of Commons. Now Herr Bethmann- 
 Hollweg, whose position is like that of our Prime 
 Minister, and who has been in office since the begin- 
 ning of the war, made a remarkable speech three or 
 four weeks ago, and I endeavoured to call the atten- 
 tion of the House of Commons to it, but owing to the 
 unfortunate time when I rose — the only time I could, 
 at the end of the sitting — I could not get the requisite 
 forty members and the sitting of the House was 
 brought to an end. 
 
 Now I want to draw your attention to that speech, 
 because it touches on the conditions laid down by 
 our own late Prime Minister as to the objects for 
 which we are fighting. He was speaking of a speech
 
 198 LOCi\L AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvn 
 
 made by the late Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs 
 (Viscount Grey), and he said : 
 
 " With regard to the statement that in order to 
 keep England out of the war we made a discreditable 
 proposal to the British Government, to shut its eyes 
 to the violation of Belgian neutrality and allow us 
 a free hand to take the French colonies, I challenge 
 Lord Grey to investigate the real facts m his Blue 
 Book and in Ms documents. In an earnest endeavour 
 to localise the war I assured the British Ambassador 
 in Berlin on July 29th that on the condition of Eng- 
 land's neutrality we would guarantee France's in- 
 tegrity." 
 
 I believe that suggestion was made at the beginning 
 of the war, and therefore the Imperial Chancellor is 
 telling the truth. Give the hon. Gentleman his due. 
 I am not a pro-German, but I am here standing for 
 the truth. What further did he say ? 
 
 " While I, in discussions of our war aims, never 
 indicated the annexation of Belgium as our intention." 
 
 He then refers to Lord Grey's suggestion of a con- 
 cert of all the Powers by creating, after the war, an 
 organisation to oppose any Power going against the 
 will of all the others, and the German Chancellor 
 went on : 
 
 " Lord Grey finally dealt exhaustively with the 
 period after peace and with the establishment of an 
 international union to preserve peace. On that sub- 
 ject, too, I will say a few words. We never concealed 
 our doubts whether peace could be lastingly ensured
 
 1916] LEAGUE OF NATIONS 199 
 
 by international organisations such as arbitration 
 courts. I will not discuss here the theoretical side of 
 the problem, but in practice now and in peace we shall 
 have to define our attitude towards the question. 
 When, as after the termination of the war, the world 
 will fully recognise its horrible devastation of blood 
 and treasure, then through all mankind will go the 
 cry for peaceful agreements and understandmgs which 
 will prevent, so far as is humanly possible, the return 
 of such an immense catastrophe. This cry will be so 
 strong and so justified that it must lead to a revolt. 
 Germany will honourably co-operate in investigating 
 every attempt to find a practical solution and col- 
 laborate towards its possible realisation, and that all 
 the more if the war, as we confidently expect, produces 
 political conditions which will do justice to the free 
 development of the nations, small as well as great." 
 
 Now there he agrees to enter into a concert of the 
 Powers. That, to my mind, is a most excellent pro- 
 nouncement on the part of Germany — which prac- 
 tically and definitely gives up the annexation of 
 Belgium. I don't think there is a single German 
 publicist who now advocates the annexation of Bel- 
 gium, and that is one of the primary causes for which 
 we are at war. The German Chancellor is prepared 
 to jom a concert, and that is more significant still 
 because a great many people are afraid that unless 
 Grermany is crushed — and I don't thmk it is possible to 
 crush her, or see what good it would do us. Politically, 
 so far as the matter appeals to me, I don't think it 
 would be a good thing, apart from what I think of the 
 impossibility. But this fact of Germany being will- 
 ing to enter a concert of the Powers is, I think, the 
 14
 
 200 LOCAL AND NATIONAL QUESTIONS [chap, xvii 
 
 best answer to that proposal. It destroys or limits 
 the power of militarism, either British or any other 
 militarism, in the future, because when all the Powers 
 are in the concert they will be more or less agreed. I 
 suggested that myself in the speech I addressed to 
 you in Coventry this year. There may be many 
 people who would wish to prevent Germany going 
 into war again, but if Germany goes into the concert 
 what Power would be able again to commit aggression 
 which had all the other Great Powers against her ? 
 If they agreed, every one of them, to commit no act 
 of aggression, but put their cases before a tribunal, 
 would not that curb the militarism of Germanv, 
 Russia, or any other Power ? 
 
 So now we see that Germany is against the annexa- 
 tion of Belgium. That is shown in the speech of her 
 responsible Minister, and he has twice stated his 
 willingness to discuss with us the termination of the 
 war. If Germany is prepared to meet us, still I would 
 not give way one single iota of our just demands. I 
 would not make any concession of what we consider 
 just, but still if Germany is prepared to do that — and 
 she says she is by her responsible Minister — then I 
 do think we ought to seek some way of communicating 
 with her, either by a speech by the new Prime Minister 
 when he comes before the House of Commons or by 
 some other means. I believe we stand behind him 
 as a united nation, because there is no weakening in 
 the fundamental principles for which we went to 
 war, but I believe he will be carrying out in the highest 
 form what is just and right if he responded to this 
 invitation on the part of Germany to meet the position.
 
 1916] GOD'S GUIDANCE 201 
 
 I have now gone over the principal points of public 
 questions which I wanted to bring before you. I 
 think we are all agreed that there is an acute financial 
 position which ought to be attended to at once. In 
 this time we know no party labels, and are prepared 
 to support the new Government, and while we must 
 maintain a critical attitude in regard to finance or 
 diplomacy, yet we need not engage in captious criti- 
 cism. We ought to be prepared to recognise their 
 responsibilities and the complexity of those responsi- 
 bilities and desist from all criticism, but be mag- 
 nanimous and be willing to support the Government. 
 Here in Coventry you are concentrated on work. 
 
 I have endeavoured to put the case before you in 
 an unvarnished way. While you must concentrate 
 upon your work, I would say while you do that work, 
 turn your eyes occasionally to those beautiful spires 
 of St. JVIichael's, Holy Trinity, and Grey Friars 
 which point to something higher, and while your 
 feet are on the ground, and you know it is neces- 
 sary for you to daily work and that you can have 
 little to say in the direction of policy, still you can 
 look to a higher and greater Power. May we remem- 
 ber, as we look at those spires, that there is one 
 Almighty God whom we trust and believe will guide 
 us to a safe and secure end.
 
 CHAPTER XVIII 
 
 BATTLE OF THE SOMME AND PROSPECTS OF PEACE 
 
 Within a few days after Mr. Lloyd George had formed 
 his Government, Herr von Bethmann-Holhveg an- 
 nounced in the Reichstag that he had dispatched a 
 peace offer to the AlUes through the American Am- 
 bassador. Some time elapsed before the German 
 Note arrived in this country and there was considerable 
 speculation as to its contents. 
 
 Those of us who hailed with delight this first move 
 on the part of Germany as the dawn of a better day, 
 and the beginning of the end of the terrible state of 
 affairs which had prevailed throughout Europe for 
 more than two years, were much exercised in mind 
 as to whether anything should be said in Parhament 
 before the actual Note had arrived. The prevailing 
 view was to say nothing until the new Prime Minister 
 had made a declaration regarding the German pro- 
 posals. 
 
 Owing to indisposition on the part of the late Prime 
 Minister (Mr. Asquith) and the new Prime Minister 
 (Mr. Lloyd George) the declaration was delayed, and 
 also because the proposals had not yet reached His 
 Majesty's Government. 
 
 It was necessary for Mr. Bonar Law, the new Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, on behalf of the Government, 
 at once to ask for a Supplementary Vote of Credit, and 
 this he did on December 14th, 1916, for a sum not 
 
 202
 
 1916] APPEAL TO PRIME MINISTER 203 
 
 exceeding £400,000,000. There had been a disposition 
 on the part of the Government to endeavour to rush 
 this through \\'ithout a discussion ; but this was re- 
 sented in many quarters of the House, and Mr. Bonar 
 Law was therefore compelled to give a general financial 
 survey when introducing the vote. 
 
 He made only a short reference to the statement of 
 the Imperial German Chancellor, contenting himself 
 with a quotation from the Ex-Prime Minister that 
 " they (the Allies) require that there shall be adequate 
 reparation for the past and adequate security for the 
 future." 
 
 Mr. McKenna followed with some graceful words of 
 congratulation, and then proceeded to state that there 
 would be no change in the policy of the Government 
 in their financial relations with America. 
 
 Knowing that Mr. Lloyd George would probably 
 speak in the following week, I was anxious, if I got 
 an opportunity^, to make an appeal to him, when the 
 Government came to consider the German proposals, 
 not to close the door to all future negotiations. I 
 therefore endeavoured to do this in the following 
 speech. 
 
 As events turned out the Prime Minister did not 
 quite close the door, but did not accept the German 
 invitation of a Conference, presumably because the 
 German Note did not furnish particulars of the " pro- 
 positions " which they intended to submit to such a 
 Conference. 
 
 The British Government, in response to an invita- 
 tion of the President of the United States of America 
 a few days later, outHned their war aims in a dispatch ; 
 but the German Government adhered to their pro- 
 posal of a Conference, their argument being that a 
 statement beforehand of war aims would tend to 
 prolong the war.
 
 204 BATTLE OF THE SOMME AND PEACE [chap, xviii 
 
 It is useless to discuss which method is the more 
 likely to achieve the result desired of a speedy and 
 honourable peace; but, meanwhile, the war goes on, 
 and even with the entrj^ of America it is not at all 
 certain that we are now in sight of the end. 
 
 If Germany could be induced to make some fresh 
 proposals or state more specifically what her " pro- 
 positions " meant, and if this country could ofTer a 
 more definite interpretation of the terms outhned in 
 her Note to the American President, a basis might be 
 found again to open up the subject. It is to be hoped 
 that statesmanship is not bankrupt, and that an 
 honourable way out may yet be found from the pre- 
 sent position. 
 
 I should like to support the congratulations which 
 have been ofEered by the late Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer to the present Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 upon his very business-like, clear, and lucid statement. 
 I should like, if I may, to refer to the last passage of 
 the speech of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 when he spoke of the hope that there would be — he 
 understood there would be — no change of policy on 
 the part of the present Ministry. I suppose he re- 
 ferred to their policy in regard to converting sterling 
 wealth into dollar wealth. I do hope that there will 
 be a change of policy. I, for one, think that the 
 profligate and extravagant methods of the late Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, if they had been pursued, 
 would have got us into very considerable embarrass- 
 ment. If there is any compensation in the change 
 of Ministry, it is now that we have a different occu- 
 pant of the office of Chancellor. The right hon. 
 Grentleman referred to the question of the great
 
 1916] BOARD OF TRADE RETURNS 205 
 
 difficulty which, he said, the present occupant of his 
 late office would have m converting sterling wealth 
 into dollar wealth. I thmk he is perfectly right in 
 that statement. I think also he himself is bound 
 to confess that his policy — or the results of it — 
 have certainly not made the task lighter for the 
 present Chancellor of the Exchequer. His method of 
 artificially supporting exchange and piling up our 
 indebtedness to America has accentuated that posi- 
 tion, has increased enormously, as the Board of Trade 
 returns show, the excess of imports over exports, which 
 question I hope the present Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer will face very shortly, and which he will have 
 to face. As I say, the artificial method pursued by 
 the late Chancellor of the Exchequer in issuing credits 
 in America, artificially bolstering up exchange, and 
 stimulating exports from America to this country has 
 undoubtedly increased our indebtedness, as I think 
 the Board of Trade returns bear out. 
 
 Let us briefly examine these Board of Trade returns. 
 I think Members will agree that when they find, ex- 
 clusive of munitions, our excess of imports over ex- 
 ports will be something like £500,000,000, and that 
 if we have to add to that possibly £200,000,000 for 
 munitions, our excess of imports over exports at the 
 end of the year will be something like £700,000,000. 
 I hope that is a problem which the present Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer wUl face, and if he will, cither by a 
 drastic method of cutting down imports, or by a 
 direct system of taxation, reduce the consumption 
 and the purchasing power of the people of this 
 country, he will be doing something to meet that
 
 206 BATTLE OF THE SOMME AND PEACE [chap, xviii 
 
 position. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 always met it by asking for further drafts on securities 
 and increasing debt, and by staving that off which he 
 was bound to meet sooner or later by extravagant 
 borrowing on the part of the exchange. I do hope 
 the right hon. Gentleman will meet that problem, 
 which is a very grave one. It is perhaps the key to 
 the whole position, because, after all, finance is the 
 key to the position. If this war is prolonged, which 
 God forbid, but if it is prolonged — if the terms of 
 peace are not satisfactory, then I assume the war 
 may be prolonged — it is as well that we should face 
 the position. The right hon. Gentleman himself has 
 stated he does not think it can go on indefinitely, 
 and he is sanguine enough to believe we can bring the 
 war to an honourable and a satisfactory close under 
 the financial capacities and reserves which we at pre- 
 sent possess. But we are here surely for the purpose 
 of examining the financial position. It is no use 
 deludmg ourselves that we have an unlimited supply 
 of reserves, and when we have regard to the past two 
 and a half years, when wo know that throughout the 
 country there has been little or no economy, that 
 wages have been paid in excess of any known records 
 in this country, and that theatres, restaurants, and 
 expenditure generally, instead of showing any decrease, 
 has mounted up during those two and a half years, 
 that does bring home to us the necessity of facing 
 the position, and the supreme gravity of the task in 
 which we are engaged. 
 
 I do hope, therefore, that, with a change of Govern- 
 ment and a change of control in the Treasury, we
 
 1916] SOUND FINANCE 207 
 
 will face the position, because it is evident that, if 
 you pursue a system of creating credits in America 
 and raise an excessive amount of money by borrow- 
 ing rather than by dii'ect taxation, you are bound to 
 land yourself in an awkward position and to embarrass 
 your finances, as we feel we are embarrassing them. 
 Take the action of the late Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer the other day in instructing Messrs. Morgan 
 and Co. — after two Debates in this House protesting 
 against the increase of floating debt — to try to place 
 Treasury BUls on the New York money market. He 
 naturally incurred a rebuff. The state of the floating 
 debt, something like £1,000,000,000 to £1,500,000,000, 
 has been brought forward by Members on all sides — 
 by Members of the Conservative party as well as the 
 Liberal party. It is not a question of politics, but of 
 sound finance, which has no regard for politics. If 
 finance is unsound it is not made sound because it is 
 the finance of a Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
 nor is it made unsound because it is the fbiance of a 
 Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer. The laws 
 of finance take no account of party, and if a policy 
 is pursued of profligate borrowing and extravagant 
 waste we are bound to suffer from it, and we are 
 suffering from it to-day. That, I think, is a subject we 
 in this House ought to consider. That action of the 
 late Chancellor of the Exchequer unquestionably did 
 hurt British credit, because the action of the Federal 
 Reserve Board in recommendmg institutions over 
 there not to invest in our securities was undoubtedly 
 to hurt British credit. Any banker will bear me out 
 that the effect of that was at once reflected in the
 
 208 BATTLE OF THE iSOMME AND PEACE [chap, xviii 
 
 prices of our securities on the London money market. 
 The reply given to our protest as to the excessive rate 
 paid upon Exchequer Bonds was another action which 
 affected our credit, and which unquestionably made 
 it harder for the Treasury to finance this war. There- 
 fore, I sjnnpathise with the right hon. Gentleman 
 ^^•ho has now succeeded to the office of Chancellor of 
 the Exchequer. If he is able to brmg order out of 
 the existing chaos he will deserve the gratitude and 
 the appreciation of this whole House. He has a 
 colossal task, as he himself described it, before him, 
 and I hope he will face it with success. I should like 
 to say one further word. I presume I would not be 
 in order in going into the details of the method of 
 raising the money for this Vote of Credit, but perhaps 
 I may make a passing reference by saying I hope some 
 action will soon be taken to fund this large floating 
 debt, and to issue some form of long term loan so as 
 to get us out of our present embarrassment more or 
 less. 
 
 Li conclusion, I should like to refer to what the 
 right hon. Gentleman himself touched upon, and that 
 is the offer that has been made by Germany to this 
 country. Of course, we are quite unable to discuss 
 that, because, as he has very properly said, there are 
 no terms before us. All that we know is what has 
 appeared in the Press, that the German Imperial 
 Chancellor has issued a Note, which, I presume, m 
 due course will arrive, to His Majesty's Government 
 through some neutral Powers. But I would just, if 
 I may, appeal to the right hon. Gentleman as a mem- 
 ber of the Government, while I for one do not abate
 
 1916] DUKE OF WELLINGTON 209 
 
 one jot or tittle of our just demands in what we regard 
 as a just war in its inception, I adhere to that atti- 
 tude to which I have always adhered, although I have 
 suffered perhaps through some misunderstanding in 
 the desire for the speedy ending of this war in an 
 honourable fashion, and I do not believe there is a 
 dissentient voice throughout the country with regard 
 to the primary objects for which we entered this war, 
 and I think that if there are any dissentients at all 
 it is with regard to the future, when you have some 
 section of the community not content with achieving 
 that which I hope we may achieve, the primary 
 objects for which we entered into this contest, but 
 who have some ideas of extending our domam or 
 inflicting a crushing defeat upon the enemy. I do 
 not believe that that is possible for one thing, and, 
 in the second place, I think even if it were, it would 
 be most unwise and impolitic. On a former occasion, 
 I think, I quoted the Duke of Wellhigton that, after 
 an army had achieved the primary object for which it 
 entered a campaign, to pursue that for the sake of 
 some temporary advantage, or to add a lustre to its 
 name, was impolitic, and also, I think, an immoral 
 proceeding. 
 
 We all recognise throughout this House and through- 
 out the country the unquestionable valour and heroism 
 of our men. If we feel that we have achieved, and I 
 believe we are now within reasonable distance of 
 securing, the primary object for which w^e entered 
 this war, then we do feel that the heroic sacrifices of 
 the men on the Somme, in Flanders, and in France, 
 have enabled us to achieve that object. What was
 
 210 BATTLE OF THE SOMME AND PEACE [chap, xviii 
 
 the primary object for which we entered this war ? 
 Surely it was to carry out our solemn treaty obliga- 
 tions, and to secure the complete evacuation of Bel- 
 gium. Hon. Members forget, and perhaps the country 
 forgets, that at the beginning of this war there was 
 a very large and considerable section in Germany 
 in favour of the annexation of Belgium — that there 
 was a party in Germany who had the dream of getting 
 down to the sea and carrying out an annexation policy 
 with regard to Belgium. We forget that. We forget 
 it was the heroic work of the British Army in the 
 beginning of the war that checked the German legions 
 in the onslaught on Paris. We forget it has been the 
 heroic resistance of our m.en in France and Belgium 
 that has prevented, and has now completely de- 
 stroyed, the annexationist party throughout Germany. 
 I do not think there is a serious politician now in 
 Germany who talks of annexation, and if we refer 
 to the German Chancellor's last speech we shall find 
 that he himself — and let us give him credit for it — 
 has never supported the annexation policy. 
 
 Then, I say, when we are apt to think to-day that 
 we have not succeeded as we might have succeeded, 
 when we look to the more or less sterile or barren 
 victories of Germany in the Balkan Peninsula, we 
 forget the great battle of the Somme, one of the greatest 
 battles of history — we forget what, through British 
 resistance, we have achieved, because this very offer 
 on the part of Germany is an acknowledgment of 
 defeat, an acknowledgment that we have achieved 
 the objects for which we entered the war. There- 
 fore, I hope the Prime Minister, when he comes to
 
 1916] BORN NEGOTIATOR 211 
 
 make his statement, will bear that in mind. The 
 Prime Minister has justly achieved in former days 
 a great distinction and a great reputation for 
 negotiation. He has shown himself to be a born 
 negotiator, and, while he possesses at the present 
 time, I believe, more or less the whole-hearted support 
 of this country, I pray him, and I beg of him, not to 
 be carried away by a desire to add some great and 
 spectacular victory to our laurels, but that he should 
 have regard, as no doubt he will first and foremost, 
 to the fact that we have achieved the object for which 
 we entered the war ; and, secondly, when he has 
 regard to the financial position and the economical 
 position of this country, he will not, in a desire per- 
 haps to achieve some spectacular victory, pile up 
 suffering for those who come after.
 
 INDEX 
 
 Aberdeen, Lady, 51 
 
 Aberdeen, Lord, entertains D.M. 
 Mason at Dublin, 50 
 
 Acland, Rt. Hon, F. D., Finan- 
 cial Secretary to the Trea- 
 sury, 127 
 
 Agadir incident, 26, 154 
 
 Agricultural labourers, exten- 
 sion of the franchise, 75 
 
 Algeciras Treaty, 26, 153 
 
 Ali Frefer, murdered, 28 
 
 Alsace and Lorraine, taken by 
 Germany, 166 
 
 Amery, L., at Westminster Hall, 
 20 
 
 Andes, the, 168 
 
 Arbitration, advantages of, 167 
 
 Archer- Shee, Major, 31 
 
 Argentine, the, investments of 
 capital in, 112; result of 
 arbitration with Chile, 168 
 
 Ashley, W. W., M.P. for Black- 
 pool, 150 
 
 Asquith, Rt. Hon. H. H., letter 
 to D. M. Mason, 51 ; opposi- 
 tion to Women's Suffrage, 65 
 on the rise of prices, 106 
 attitude on the war, 147 
 removal of the domination of 
 Prussian militarism, 147-50 
 
 Australia, supply of wheat from, 
 106 
 
 Austria, high rates for borrow- 
 ing, 84 
 
 Balkan Peninsula, restoration of 
 peace, 80 
 
 Banbury, Sir Frederick, 84 ; on 
 the amount of the floating 
 debt, 169 
 
 Bank Charter Act, power to sus- 
 pend, 137 
 
 Bank of England, rate of dis- 
 count raised, 171 
 
 Banlc-notes, issue of, 129, 144, 
 188 
 
 Bankers' Clearing House, re- 
 turns, 134 
 
 Bastiat, Frederic, on the issue 
 of paper-money, 130, 188 
 
 Belgium, treaty obligation for 
 the preservation of the sove- 
 reignty, 162, 196; annexa- 
 tion policy, 210 
 
 Bendair, 29 
 
 Beresford. Lord, on naval war- 
 fare, 193 
 
 Bethmann-HoUweg, Herr von, 
 on negotiations for peace, 
 158, 199, 202 ; violation of 
 Belgian neutrality, 1 98 ; a 
 concert of the Powers, 199 
 
 Bettmann, Mr., Mayor of Co- 
 ventry, 5 
 
 Brady, Patrick Joseph, 45, 51 
 
 Bright, Rt. Hon. John, defec- 
 tion from Home Rule, 52 
 
 Buckle, H. T., History of Civi- 
 lisation, 102 
 
 Bulgaria, atrocities in, 30 
 
 Bull, Sir William, on plural vot- 
 ing, 100 
 
 Burke, Edmund, statement on 
 the relations between a Mem- 
 
 213
 
 214 
 
 INDEX 
 
 ber of Parliament and his 
 constituents, 18 
 Byles, Sir \V., 1G3 
 
 Canning, Rt. Hon. George, 
 character of his foreign policy, 
 36 ; on the spirit of British 
 polic}', 43 
 
 Cardiff, meeting at, 21 
 
 Cecil, Lord Robert, 63 
 
 Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. A., M.P. 
 for East Worcestershire, 80, 
 87 
 
 Chamberlain, Rt. Hon, J., de- 
 fection from Home Riale, 52 
 
 Chicago Daily News, 160 
 
 Chile, result of arbitration with 
 Argentine, 168 
 
 Churchill, Rt. Hon. W., First 
 Lord of the Admiralty, amount 
 of his proposed Supplementary 
 Estimate, 86, 88 
 
 Civil Services and Revenue De- 
 partments Estimates, 169 
 
 Commons, House of, control of 
 finance, 90, 95, 97 
 
 Consolidated Fund Bill, 147 
 
 Consols, price of, 57, 114 
 
 Coventrj', addresses at, 1, 181 ; 
 Advisory Committee, 5 ; meet- 
 ing. 11 ; Liberal Association, 
 speech of the President, 5-15 
 
 Credit, Supplementary Vote of, 
 202 
 
 Crimean War, cost of the, 191 
 
 Daily News and Leader, 10, 13, 
 
 14 
 Debt, floating, amount of, 120, 
 
 172, 207 ; in Germany, 178 
 Dillon, J., intervention against 
 
 D. M. Mason's amendment, 
 
 24 
 " Dilution Government," 173 
 Disraeli, Rt. Hon. B., on the 
 
 atrocities in Bulgaria, 30 
 Dodd, Mr., member of the 
 
 Coventry Advisory Commit- 
 tee, 6, 15 
 
 Donohue, the boatman, 48 
 Dviblin Home Rule Demonstra- 
 tion, 45 
 
 Emerson, R. W., on the posi- 
 tion of Great Britain, 170 
 Esmonde, Dr., 51 
 Etiemie, M., Minister of War, 151 
 Exports, amount of, 144, 195 
 
 Ferens, T. R., on the increase in 
 the cost of living, 105 
 
 Finance (No. 2) BiU, 128 
 
 Finnemore, Mr., 52 
 
 Fi.sher, Lord, 91 
 
 Foster, G. K., candidate for 
 Coventry, 1 
 
 France, proposed loan, 82 ; 
 increase in the note issue, 
 108, 110; total debt and in- 
 terest charges, 164 ; result 
 of the war of 1870, 166 
 
 Franchise Bill of 1912, 63 
 
 George, Rt, Hon. D. Lloyd, 
 Chancellor of the Exchequer, 
 proposed suspension of the 
 Sinking Fund, 54, 62 ; deficit, 
 78; on the restoration of peace 
 in the Balkans, 81 ; issue of 
 Currency Notes, 127 ; Prime 
 Minister, 182, 202; reputa- 
 tion for negotiation, 211 
 
 Germany, naval expenditure, 4 ; 
 the Agadir incident, 26, 154; 
 increase in the paper-money, 
 108, 1 10 ; proposed scheme of 
 constitutional reform, 148 ; 
 preparations for war, 150, 
 154 ; desire of domination, 
 151 ; views of the various 
 parties, 151 ; international 
 factors leading to war, 152 ; 
 negotiations for a victorious 
 peace, 158-63; total debt 
 and interest charges, 164; 
 policy to crush, 105 ; amount 
 of the floating debt, 178; 
 Peace Note, 202, 208; an- 
 nexation of Belgium, 21U
 
 INDEX 
 
 215 
 
 Gladstone, W. E., sayings of, 
 33, 40 ; on the extension of 
 the franchise to agriciiltural 
 labourers, 75 ; system of 
 raising loans for war, 118 
 
 Goschen, Lord, 188; Foreign 
 Exchanges, 124, 132 
 
 Gottberg, Herr von, on the out- 
 rages in Tripoli, 31 
 
 Government War Obligations 
 (No. 2) Bill, 141 
 
 Grant, J., Chairman of the 
 Coventry Finance Committee, 
 6, 15 
 
 Great Britain, naval expendi- 
 ture, 4 ; amount of paper- 
 money, 107 ; indebtedness 
 to America, 139-141, 193; 
 scheme for stabilising the ex- 
 change, 139 ; total debt and 
 interest charges, 164, 191 ; 
 position, 170 ; dispatch on war 
 aims, 203 
 
 Grey, Sir Edward, foreign policy, 
 21 ; criticism on, 35 ; re- 
 creates the Concert of Europe, 
 84; on Germany's demand 
 for a victorious peace, 158- 
 161 ; advantages of arbitra- 
 tion, 167 ; proposed Concert 
 of all the Powers, 198 
 
 Hague Convention, articles in, 
 
 33 
 Hardie, Keir, at Westminster 
 
 Hall, 20 
 Healy, T. M., M.P. for North- 
 
 EastCork, 173 
 Henderson, A., proposed method 
 
 of taxation, 190 
 Henry, Sir Charles, on the issu- 
 ing of a long term loan, 169 
 Hewins, W. A. S., on the Tea 
 
 Duty, 79 ; on Tariff Reform, 
 
 105 
 HiU, Mr., elected Mayor of 
 
 Coventry, 181 
 Hill, Mrs., 182 
 Hogge, J. M., M.P, for East 
 
 Edinburgh, 128 
 
 15 
 
 Holbrooks Lane Crossing, case 
 of, 183 
 
 Holt, R. D., M.P. for Hexham, 
 145 
 
 Home Rule Bill, 51-3 ; demon- 
 stration in Dublin, 45 
 
 Home, Sylvester, at Westmin- 
 ster Hall, 20 
 
 Ilbert, Sir Courtenay, on the 
 control of finance by the 
 House of Commons, 90 
 
 Imports, amount of, 143, 195; 
 excess over exports, 122, 132, 
 140, 195, 205 
 
 Insurance companies, invest- 
 ments of, 112 
 
 Ireland, 45 
 
 Italy, attack on Tripoli, 20, 
 152 ; outrages in, 27-32 
 
 Johnson, W., 51 
 
 Killarney, Lake of, 48 
 
 Labour unrest, causes for, 60 
 
 Lausanne, Gazette de, extract 
 from, 178 
 
 Law, Rt. Hon. Bonar, attitude 
 to Germany, 35 ; Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer, 202 ; Sup- 
 plementary Vote of Credit, 
 202 
 
 Lee, Lieut. -Col. A. H., M.P, 
 for Fareham, 87 
 
 Living, increase in the cost of, 
 60, 105, 130, 173. 184; pro- 
 posed remedies, 189 
 
 Loan, issue of a long term, 160 
 
 Locldiurst Lane, case of, 183 
 
 London Gazette, 111 
 
 London Money Market, re- 
 sources of the, 112 
 
 Lough, T., M.P. for Islington, 
 115 
 
 Macdonald, Ramsay, jNI.P, for 
 Leicester, 161
 
 216 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Mackinder, H. J., on minority 
 representation, 103 
 
 Macnamara, Dr., Parliamentary 
 Secretary to the Admiralty, 
 95 
 
 Marconi debate, 4, 7 
 
 Markham, Sir A., 93 
 
 Mason, D. M., M.P. for Coven- 
 try, 1 ; addresses, 1-3, 181- 
 2ul ; criticism of his policy, 
 6-9 ; conferences with the 
 Advisory Committee, 9 ; letter 
 to The Daily News and Leader, 
 10 ; interview with C. V. 
 Pugh, 1 2 ; verses on, 1 6 ; 
 protest against the seizure of 
 Tripoli, 22 ; intervention of 
 the Speaker, 22-4 ; criticism 
 on foreign policy, 25, 34-6, 
 43 ; the Morocco question, 26 ; 
 the Turko-Italian War, 27- 
 34 ; at Washington, 37 ; on 
 the dispute between Russia 
 and Persia, 37-40 ; proposed 
 loan to Persia, 40-42 ; in Ire- 
 land, 45 ; speech at the Home 
 Rule Demonstration, 46-8 ; 
 at the Lake of Killarney, 48 ; 
 trout- fishing, 49 ; entertains 
 J. Redmond, 51 ; letter from 
 Mr. Asquith, 51 ; on the pro- 
 posed suspension of the Sink- 
 ing Fund, 54-62 ; the price 
 of Consols, 57 ; increase in 
 Trustee Securities, 59 ; Labour 
 unrest, 60 ; opposes the Fran- 
 chise Bill of 1912, 63, 67 ; on 
 Women's Suffrage, 64-77 ; 
 fiscal duties, 79 ; the deficit, 
 80 ; reductions of armaments, 
 84 ; Naval Supplementary 
 Estimate, 86-98 ; bill for the 
 Abolition of Plural Voting, 
 99-104 ; increased price of 
 commodities, 105, 130, 184-0; 
 issue of paper-money, 107- 
 111, 123-25, 130; suggested 
 remedies, 111-13 ; the 4J per 
 cent. War Loan, 115-26; 
 result of excessive issue of 
 
 currency notes, 128-38, 172, 
 187 ; scheme for mobilising 
 American securities, 141-6 ; 
 removal of the domination of 
 Prussian militarism, 149 ; in- 
 ternational factors leading to 
 war, 151-5; negotiations of 
 peace with Germany, 158-68 ; 
 reasons for our entry into the 
 war, 101, 196, 210; desire 
 for a speedy ending of the 
 war, 162, 192, 195, 209; on 
 the result of raising the I3ank 
 of England rate of discount, 
 171 ; amount of the floating 
 debt, 172, 207 ; disadvan- 
 tages of short-dated paper, 
 174-7 ; proposed method 
 of taxation, 189; protest 
 against naval expenditure, 192; 
 on Herr von Bethmami-Holl- 
 weg's speech, 197-9; finan- 
 cial policy of Mr, McKenna, 
 204-8 
 
 Mason, James, M.P. for Wind- 
 sor, 115 
 
 Mason, Mrs., 182 
 
 Masuri, Mahomet, shot, 28 
 
 May, Sir Erskine, on the control 
 of finance by the House of 
 Commons, 90, 95 
 
 McCuUagh, Mr.,! War Corre- 
 spondent of The Westminster 
 Gazette, on the outrages in 
 Tripoli, 28 
 
 McKenna, Pvt. Hon. R., Chan- 
 cellor of the Exchequer, 114, 
 128 ; 4.} per cent. War Loan, 
 114; funding of Treasury 
 Bills, 121 ; mobilisation of 
 American securities, 139, 193; 
 short-dated securities, 1G9, 
 1 74 ; lectures on economy, 
 191 ; on financial relations 
 with America, 203 ; result of 
 his policy, 205 
 
 McMillan, Captain, case of, 196 
 
 McNeill, R., 156 
 
 Milk, proposal for limiting the 
 price, 184
 
 INDEX 
 
 217 
 
 Molteno, P. A., M.P. for Diim- 
 friesshire, 86, 88, 92 
 
 Montagu, Rt. Hon. E, S., Fi- 
 nancial Secretary to the 
 Treasury, 128 ; Minister of 
 Munitions, 183 
 
 Morocco question, 21, 26, 153 
 
 Napoleon, Emperor, policy to 
 
 Prussia, 166 
 Naval expenditure, British, 4, 
 
 192 ; German, 4 
 Navy, Supplementary Estimate, 
 
 86-98 
 New South Wales, terms for 
 
 loan, 176 
 Newman, Major, 155 
 Neymerck, M., on preparation 
 
 for war, 83 
 
 Oil, rise in the price, 91 
 
 Paper-money, increase in the 
 issue, 105, 108, 123, 127-38, 
 172, 173, 187-9 
 
 Parker, Sir G., M.P. for Graves- 
 end, 92 
 
 PeUe, Colonel, 153 
 
 Persia, relations with Russia, 
 37 ; proposed loan, 40-42 
 
 Pirie, Captain, 155 
 
 Plural Voting, Bill for the aboli- 
 tion, 99-104 
 
 Ponsonby, A., M.P. for StirUng 
 Burghs, 159, 161 
 
 Pringle, W. M. R., 51 
 
 Prussia, military domination, 
 147-50 ; result of the talcing 
 of Alsace and Lorraine, 166 
 
 Pugh, C. Vernon, President of 
 the Coventry Liberal Associa- 
 tion, speech on Party Loyalty, 
 5-15 ; interviews with D. M. 
 Mason, 9, 12 
 
 Quittane, Lough, 48 
 
 Redlich, Joseph, 90 
 
 Redmond, J. E., at the Home 
 
 Rule Demonstration, Dublin, 
 46 ; at Coventry, 51 
 
 Redmond, Mrs., at Coventry, 51 
 
 Rees, Sir J. D., 124 
 
 Robertson, Rt. Hon. J. M., 
 Chairman of the Committee, 
 on the rise in the cost of Uv- 
 ing, 173 
 
 Ronaldshay, Earl of, at West- 
 minster Hall, 20 
 
 Runciman, Rt. Hon. W., Presi- 
 dent of the Board of Trade, 
 on the price of commodities, 
 184 
 
 Russia, relations with Persia, 
 37 ; total debt and interest 
 charges, 164 
 
 Sakh Dehuma, 29 
 
 Schuster, Mr., organises the 
 finances of Persia, 37 
 
 Scott, MacCallum, at West- 
 minster Hall, 20 
 
 Securities, short-dated, 169, 173 
 
 Serrett, Lieut.-Colonel, French 
 Attache in Berlin, dispatch, 
 151, 153 
 
 Sinking Fund, proposed suspen- 
 sion, 54-62 
 
 Somme, battle of the, 210 
 
 Sovereign, worth of the, 188 
 
 Speaker, the, intervention 
 against D. M. Mason's amend- 
 ment, 22-4 
 
 Stead, W. T., at the Memorial 
 Hall, 21 
 
 Sykes, Sir Mark, at Westminster 
 Hall, 20 
 
 Taxation, proposed method of, 
 
 189 
 Trade, Board of, returns, 140, 
 
 205 
 Treasm-y Bills, amount of. 173 ; 
 
 fimding of, 120 ; Currency 
 
 Notes, issue, 105, 108, 123, 
 
 127-38, 172, 173, 187-9 
 TripoU, attack on, 20, 152; 
 
 massacre, 22 ; outrages, 28, 
 
 31
 
 218 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Trout-fishing, 49 
 
 Trustee Securities, increase in, 
 
 59 
 Turko-Italian War, 20, 27 
 
 United States, stringency of 
 capital, 83 ; record crop of 
 wheat, lOG ; increase in the 
 paper- money, 109 ; Cui-rency 
 Act, 109 ; decision on loans, 
 122 ; rate of foreign exchange, 
 135, 139, 193 ; result of the 
 over-importation of commo- 
 dities from, 139, 193 ; scheme 
 for mobilising securities, 142- 
 G ; refusal to purchase Trea- 
 sury Bills, 195 
 
 Vierte Hane Shaiia Kubia, 29 
 
 War expenditure, 116; posi- 
 tion of the belligerents, 104 
 
 War fmids, system of raising, 
 
 118 
 War Loan, 4 J per cent., 114- 
 
 26 
 War on Land, laws and cus- 
 toms of, 33 
 Washington, 37 
 Weldon, Sir Anthony, 51 
 Wellington, Duke of, on the re- 
 sult of victory, 166, 209 
 Westminster Gazette, extract from, 
 
 28 
 Westminster Hall, meetings, 20 
 Wheat, rise in the price, 106 
 White, Major Dalrymple, 102 
 WilUams, Hume, on the bill for 
 the Abolition of Plural Vot- 
 ing, 100 
 Women's Suffrage, 63-77 
 Wormell, Mr., Treasurer of the 
 Coventry Liberal Association, 
 5. 15 
 
 Primed by Hazcll, Watson 6c Vine;/, Ld., London and Aylesbury, England.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below 
 
 :. 8 1961 
 
 *^,5|^i""9 1986 
 MAR 1 5 198$- 
 
 JUL fi 1988 
 
 Form L-» 
 £'m-la.'14<2in) 
 
 UMVEKrflTY OP (;\Ui''UtiNlA 
 
 AT 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 i-'ii i.'.ason - 
 576 Six years of 
 irt38s politics, 
 
 SEP^ 8 1951 
 
 DA 
 576 
 
 I158s 
 
 3 1158 01096 2099 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 AA 000 403 629 9
 
 &'J^:yCi.i^.J--''--:':j-- '--r'':-