Lords Sitting of 3 August 1916

CRAVEN ESTATES BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
POLICE, FACTORIES, &c. (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.

RETURNS, REPORTS, &c.
Army—Further Regulations for the Army Reserve and Special Reserve:
Trading with the Enemy (Amendment) Act, 1916—Supplementary list of persons, firms, and companies as to whom orders have been made under Section 1 (1) of the Act:
Public Works (Ireland)—Treasury Minute, dated 28th July, 1916, sanctioning the sale of certain Kingstown Harbour property to the Dalkey Urban District Council:
Laid before the House (pursuant to Act) and ordered to lie on the Table.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
Moved, That Standing Order No. XXXIX be considered in order to its being suspended for this day's sitting; agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

PIER AND HARBOUR PROVISIONAL ORDERS BILL.
LAND DRAINAGE (FELTWELL) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
LAND DRAINAGE (LILLESHALL) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.

ISLE OF MAN (CUSTOMS) BILL.
PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BILL.
Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (AMENDMENT) BILL. [H.L.]
Read 3a (according to Order): Amendments (privilege) made: Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

CONSOLIDATED FUND (No. 4) BILL.
EXPIRING LAWS CONTINUANCE BILL.
Read 2a (according to Order): Committees negatived: Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bills read 3a, and passed.

SPECIAL COMMISSIONS (DARDANELLES AND MESOPOTAMIA) BILL.
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE): My Lords, I think that I need not trouble your Lordships at any length in asking you to give a Second Reading to this Bill. We have so recently had full discussions in this House on one of the subjects with which the Bill is designed to deal that I do not propose now to trouble you with any disquisition on the merits of the case or the circumstances which have made the appointment of these two Commissions advisable. Your Lordships will see, in the first place, that the Commission to examine into the origin, inception, and conduct of the operations of war in the Dardanelles and Gallipoli is to be presided over by my noble friend Lord Cromer, who sits opposite. The second Commission, to make a similar inquiry into the operations of war in Mesopotamia, is to be presided over by a gentleman who is well known to all who have been engaged in or looked on at public life for the last forty years, and who is always regarded with the utmost respect by those who have disagreed with him on particular subjects as well as by those who have agreed—I mean Lord George Hamilton.
I do not propose to undertake what I will call the showman's task of going through the names of the respective Commissions and recommending them to your Lordships. The numbers were, in the case of both Commissions, considerably reinforced in another place over and above what was designed when the Bill was introduced. It was thought desirable to add certain elements—as, for instance, the naval and military elements—which had not been provided for in the first instance. I understand that when this Bill goes into Committee it is probable that a further addition to the Commission over which my noble friend opposite is to preside is likely to be suggested, but I will say nothing or that subject now. I propose that the Committee stage, if your Lordships agree, should be taken on Tuesday next, and t will be time enough then to make any observations about the personnel of the Commission.

1077
One other important point in the Bill is the option which is given to the Commissioners in either case to sit either in private or in public. As your Lordships will comprehend, the subjects of inquiry are closely bound up with a good deal of confidential matter, and it will be for the Commissioners themselves to say—for it is quite impossible now to foretell—what degree of secrecy may be necessary in the conduct of the Inquiries. I have no doubt that those who compose the Commissions will desire to take the public into their confidence during the actual conduct of the Inquiries as far as possible, as well as in the Reports which they will ultimately issue, and I feel that this delicate business can be safely left to their discretion. The indemnity clauses are those which ordinarily appear in the case of such Inquiries as these, where a number of Service witnesses often have to be examined. I do not think there is any further point on which I need trouble your Lordships. I ask you to give the Bill a Second Reading.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Marquess of Crewe.)
THE EARL OF CROMER: My Lords, my excuse for rising to address your Lordships on the present occasion is, as your Lordships have heard from the noble Marquess, that His Majesty's Government did me the honour to ask me to be president of the Commission which is about to inquire into recent events in the Dardanelles. In the circumstances I must ask you to excuse me if I indulge in the use of the personal pronoun to a greater extent than I should like, and if the few remarks which I am about to address to your Lordships partake in some degree of a personal statement. I observed that when this measure was under consideration in another place my appointment was objected to on the reasonable ground, in which I am myself very much inclined to agree, that I was too old to undertake the work. I need hardly say that had I consulted my own personal feelings and inclinations I should not have had the smallest hesitation in asking to be allowed to decline the honour which it was proposed to confer on me.
Although I did not expect when I left Egypt some years ago—neither did I wish—to get absolute rest, at the same time I must confess that towards the close of a
1078
rather strenuous life I had hoped that I should no longer be placed in a position where I had to take serious official responsibility. But when I saw before me so many examples, both inside and outside this House, of what I may call brisk young septuagenarians, who not only have put aside all personal considerations but have also done what is very much more difficult—left in abeyance their most cherished political convictions of a lifetime in order to secure national unity and to help in the present crisis—I felt that I should not be doing my duty if I did not at all events endeavour to follow their lead to the best of my ability. I am somewhat encouraged in what I have clone because I observe that one member of the other House, an Irish Member named Dr. Lynch—who I gather from the Parliamentary Guide is a joyous young adolescent of fifty-five summers, and who seems to possess an inexhaustible fund of sparkling Hibernian wit—said that I am not the only member of your Lordships' House who suffers from the irremediable effect of old age; in fact, he said he regarded your Lordships' House as something between an old curiosity shop and a mortuary.
It was not, however, any question of personal convenience or inclination which made me hesitate to accept this work. I must confess that in the first instance I felt very great doubt as to whether I could undertake it in a manner which would do justice to the subject and command the confidence both of Parliament and of my countrymen outside Parliament. Although my doubts on this point are not altogether removed, all I can say is that I will do my best, and I can assure your Lordships and the Government that if I find after a trial that the strain, whether mental or physical, is too much for me and that I cannot do the work in a manner which would satisfy myself, or the Government, or the country, I shall not hesitate to place my resignation in the hands of His Majesty's Government and ask them to appoint some one else. I feel, however, that I shall have to appeal for the utmost indulgence on the part of my colleagues, on whom a great portion of the work will necessarily fall, and on the part of Parliament and of the outside public; and if I do not make any special appeal for your Lordships' indulgence, it is because I know, from experience now of more than a quarter of a century, that that indulgence is always accorded with the

1079
utmost generosity to all those, whether they are members of your Lordships' House or not, who endeavour to do their public duty to the best of their ability.
I turn from these general considerations to say a word or two about the Bill itself. As the noble Marquess has explained, it was originally intended that the Commission—I speak only of the Dardanelles Commission—was to be composed of six members, but that number has now been increased to nine. I confess that I should have preferred, for very obvious reasons, a smaller number; but I fully recognise the strength of the arguments which induced the other House to add three more members. It is both just and natural, considering the splendid behaviour of our overseas kinsmen at Gallipoli and elsewhere, that their interests should be represented. The same may be said of the Irish, whose gallantry has been quite equal to that of any other of His Majesty's subjects. I therefore welcome on the Commission the presence of an Australian, a New Zealand, and an Irish member. The addition of the name of a distinguished military officer, Lord Nicholson, and of a distinguished Admiral, Sir William May, really needs no explanation. Their presence will be of the utmost use in dealing with a number of subjects which must necessarily partake of a somewhat technical character.
After having criticised the numbers of the Commission, it may seem rather strange that I should advocate yet another addition, but I am going to be guilty of that inconsistency. When that matter was first broached to me, I did venture to remark that it would be desirable that another member of your Lordships' House should be added, and I did so for two reasons. One is that I thought it was compatible with the dignity of your Lordships' House that there should be another Peer; the other is that I think the subjects with which the Commission will have to deal will not so much require expert knowledge as a judicial mind and a habit acquired during a lifetime of balancing conflicting evidence. I therefore thought it would be advisable to draw upon that judicial and legal talent in which your Lordships' House is so rich. I hope, therefore, that before the Bill issues from the Committee stage some other member of your Lordships' House will be added who represents those particular qualities to which I allude.
1080
I should like to say a word on another point which is even more important than that of the composition of the Commission—I mean its functions. It cannot be doubted that when the Bill was first introduced there was a general feeling outside Parliament, and I think it was reflected to some extent within Parliament, that the intention of His Majesty's Government was to conduct a partial Inquiry and not to go into the whole matter thoroughly from its origin. I never believed that those suspicions were in any degree well founded, and I convinced myself, by conversation with the Prime Minister and with the noble Marquess who leads this House, that, equally with myself, the Government were desirous that the Inquiry should be thorough and complete. And I may say, my Lords, that I made it clear from the first that I could have no part or lot in any Inquiry which did not come up to that definition. But whatever may have been the intentions of the Government, I think it must be admitted that the clause dealing with this subject in the Bill as it was originally drafted—which perhaps some of your Lordships may not have seen—was ambiguous; and there are very obvious objections to allowing any great divergence to occur between the intentions of the Legislature and the actual text of the law. I am therefore very glad that in another place, when the matter was under discussion, some words were introduced—which your Lordships will find in the early clauses of the Bill—which remove all doubt on this subject, and make it quite clear that not merely the operations, but the genesis of those operations, will come within the scope of the inquiries of the Commission.
I think my hon. and gallant friend Sir Hedworth Meux, when this matter was under discussion in another place, was a little hard both upon His Majesty's Government and upon the Commissioners. My hon. and gallant friend said they knew that the Commissions were meant to whitewash the Government, and he added that he was convinced that the Inquiry was a farce, would be a fiasco, and would always be written down as a failure. I am convinced that those words very inaccurately convey the intention of His Majesty's Government. And as regards myself, had that gallant and distinguished Peer, who is a member of Sir Hedworth Meux's Service, my old friend Lord Beresford, whom I have known for

1081
at least half a century—had be been in his place to-day I am sure he would have been able to give me a very clean certificate, and to say that. I was not likely to associate myself with any proceedings that were likely to be a farce or a fiasco. I feel certain that my colleagues, although I have not yet had an opportunity of consulting them, share these views.
I should now like to touch slightly on a subject to which the noble Marquess alluded—I mean the very important question of publicity. Here I should like to mention that, with one exception, I have not yet had the opportunity of consulting with my colleagues. Therefore I can only represent my personal opinions, and even these I state with a certain amount of reserve. It appears to me that the question of publicity will present itself in three different forms. In the first place, there will be the question of what is to be communicated by the Government to the two Commissions. On that point the Bill is pretty plain. I hope there will not be, and I do not believe there will be, any reticence of any kind, sort, or description. I think everything must be revealed. And let me say that I trust that, as we shall have to call both Ministers and ex-Cabinet Ministers before us, steps will be taken which will enable them to be relieved of the Privy Councillors' oath, and thus allow of their telling us what happened at Cabinet meetings. That is a point pi very great importance. Then there is the question of what evidence is to be taken in public and what in secret session. That is an extremely difficult question, and I should like to reserve my opinion about it until I have had the opportunity of consulting with my colleagues on the subject.
There is a third aspect of this question, namely, what we are eventually to embody in our Report. There, of course, I speak under correction, but I think that two or three general principles may even now be laid down. In the first place, I do not think that anything should be withheld from the public unless very strong reasons can be alleged that publication would be detrimental to the public interests. I approach this question, my Lords—and I think my colleagues will approach, it also—with a strong predisposition in favour of ensuring a maximum amount of publicity and a minimum amount of secrecy. There is another point as to which I think all
1082
will be agreed—namely, that we cannot publish anything which will be at all likely to be of any help to our present enemies. But in connection with this subject, I should like to say that I think, if the naval and military witnesses in dealing with naval and military questions plead for secrecy, they will have in each case, which must be examined on its own merits, to give good grounds for showing that publicity would be of real disadvantage to ourselves and of advantage to our enemies.
Then there is the further question—where I, perhaps, from long diplomatic experience may be of some little use—of what is to be published in connection with diplomatic secrets. I am no very great, believer in diplomatic secrets, and I think there has been a good deal of rather wild and inaccurate talk about secret diplomacy during the last few months. At the same time it has to be remembered that there has been for a long while an unwritten custom, if not law, that communications from foreign Governments—by which, of course, I mean in the present instance friendly foreign Governments—are not to be published without the consent of those Governments. If that unwritten custom were in any degree violated, it would be very naturally considered by foreign Governments a breach of faith, and it would destroy, I am afraid, all confidence in the discretion of the British Government for ever afterwards. Therefore considerable care will have to be taken in dealing with that aspect of the question. More than that I cannot at present say.
In conclusion, I should like to add that I feel convinced that my colleagues, equally with myself, enter upon this extremely arduous and difficult task without any preconceived notions whatsoever, and without any sort of desire either to blame or to exonerate any individual or any set of individuals. When the hon. and gallant Admiral, Sir Hedworth Meux, talks about a desire to whitewash the Government, it may afford him some consolation if I say that the very last thing, for my own part, which I shall consider throughout this Inquiry is whether the Government comes out of it white as driven snow or black as Erebus. That is no part of the business of the Commissioners. What we shall do will be to approach the subject with an earnest desire to arrive at the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth and

1083
to give to the country an accurate account of all that has happened; and I am not altogether without hope that we may possibly be able to indicate some defects in our naval, military, and political systems which will enable us in the future to avoid such mistakes as have been made in the past.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.

STATE PURCHASES OF HAY AND WOOL.
VISCOUNT GALWAY VISCOUNT GALWAY rose to ask the Under-Secretary of State for War for further information with regard to the terms on which His Majesty's Government propose to take over the whole of the hay and straw crop of 1916.
The noble Viscount said: My Lords. I do not propose to repeat the arguments which I used on July 13, when I last called attention to this subject; and if the noble Earl the Under-Secretary of State for War has paid me the compliment of reading in the OFFICIAL REPORT my speech on that occasion, he will probably be able to answer some of the questions which I then asked. I inquired who was going to fix the price to be paid to the farmers. I also called attention to the excessive amount of commission allowed to hay and straw dealers, and asked whether, if a farmer is at the trouble of cutting up and trussing his hay and taking it to the station himself, he will be allowed to take the benefit of the £2 a ton on hay which the dealer is allowed to make.
I should like to mention to the House that I took up this question so strongly because of the peculiar character of the proceedings in this case. The Government are taking over and fixing the price for a great deal of surplus which they do not propose to use themselves. About 14,000,000 tons is the amount of hay supposed to constitute an ordinary hay crop, and this year's crop promises to reach that average. Yet the Government themselves are only proposing to take 1,000,000 tons, so that a very large amount of hay is affected besides that which is required for Government purposes. At the same time the Government propose to fix the maximum price at which farmers must sell their hay. It seems to me that the Government have gone
1084
rather further than was necessary to prevent their being forestalled by dealers buying the hay. I suggest that a scheme might be arrived at which would be fair to all—namely, that a certain time should be fixed during which the War Office representatives would go round and certify how much of the crop they want, and that after December 1 or January 1 the farmer should be allowed to sell the remainder of the hay in the open market.
With regard to payment by the War Office, unfortunately, Government Departments have not the reputation of being rapid payers. Indeed, one has heard that some of the billeting bills for last winter have not yet been paid by the War Office. But I hope, in regard to the hay crop, that as soon as the War Office representatives have been round and earmarked the stacks or portions of the crop which they want, 75 per cent. of the purchase money will be paid to the farmers at once. It is too frequently forgotten by those who deal with these matters that the money realised from the sale of such articles as wool, hay, and straw practically constitutes the farmer's working capital, and that it is out of this money that he is enabled to pay extra wages and to discharge his tillage bills and buy further stock. I hope that we shall have a statement from the noble Earl that prompt payment will be given for at any rate a large portion of the crop taken. I may add that a great many farmers complain that the price at which old hay of last year is being taken is not a fair one, though I do not suppose there is very much of that left for the Government to commandeer. I can assure the noble Earl that the greatest possible interest is taken by the agricultural community all over England with regard to the Government's decision in regard to the hay crop of this year.
THE EARL OF LICHFIELD: My Lords, perhaps the noble Earl the Under-Secretary of State for War will allow me to say a few words before he replies to Lord Galway. The noble Viscount has dealt so fully, both the other day and to-day, with all the points in connection with the hay and straw crop that little remains for me to add on that subject. Still there is no harm in reiterating briefly some of the matters which farmers consider might be put on a better footing. In the first place, they think it was not right to fix a price for hay and straw early in July, at a time when it was

1085
impossible to know what the quantity and quality of the hay might be throughout the kingdom. Again, they think that the producer should have a free hand for the disposal of his hay and straw not required by the Government, and also that the margin of profit allowed to dealers is excessive. They also complain that farmers at a distance from a port or troop centre should not be penalised by the extra carriage for delivery of the hay to ports or troop centres. Those are some of the matters which farmers would like, if possible, to have placed on a better footing. I know that the noble Viscount, Lord Galway, will agree with me that farmers Jo not wish to set up a grievance because these Orders are made on them, if only they are made after careful consideration and consultation with those interested and with the Board of Agriculture, so that this great national industry should be as little disturbed and interfered with as possible.
This brings me to the Notice which I have placed on the Paper to-day—
To urge His Majesty's Government to name an early date for taking over and paying for the home-grown wool clip as farmers are in need of the money, and in many cases the wool is deteriorating owing to the want of proper storage accommodation on the farms; and to ask that prompt and full publicity, with regard to the intentions of His Majesty's Government on the subject, be given to the farmers.
I have obtained the leave of my two noble friends who have Notices before mine to allow me to bring forward this matter now, so that the noble Earl who will reply for His Majesty's Government may be able to deal with the two questions in the same speech.
The first point in the Notice standing on the Paper in my name is in the same terms as that which my noble friend Lord Harris raised the day before yesterday, to which the noble Earl representing the War Office gave, as we thought, a very satisfactory answer. But on looking at the newspapers the next morning we found no mention at all of the discussion in one or two of the principal newspapers, and in others there was very scant notice taken of the answer which the noble Earl gave. It is of the utmost importance to the farmers that they should know where they stand on this question. Therefore I venture to hope that the noble Earl will be able to tell us
1086
that great publicity will be given to his answer, and that it may be published broadcast so that the farmers may hear of it in all parts of the country. They have been kept out of their money now for some time. As a rule they would get paid for the wool clip by the end of June, or by the end of July in Scotland; yet up to the present moment I do not suppose a single farmer has been paid anything for his wool crop commandeered by the Government. Therefore he is at a great disadvantage. He badly wants the money. I know of cases where farmers have had to sell immature stock in order to find the money necessary to carry on their farming. It is a very good augury that we should see the noble Earl the distinguished representative of a long line of English Earls sitting next to the representative of a long line of Scottish Earls, each representing their respective Departments; and I feel sure, with them sitting together and co-operating, we shall not again have the same state of affairs as has existed with regard to the commandeering of wool. The Board of Agriculture in this matter were never properly consulted. It is true that they were told about it, but they were only told when the matter was practically arranged, when the price had been thought out, and when all the terms had been settled. Therefore we may practically say that the Board of Agriculture were not consulted at all on the subject of the commandeering of wool. I should like to ask what is the use of having a Board of Agriculture and a distinguished gentleman at its head if the Board are not to be consulted on such a question of national importance as that of the commandeering of the home-grown wool clip.
In connection with this, we had the great misfortune that Lord Selborne had just resigned office when this question came forward. I desire to call your Lordships' attention to the fact that Lord Selborne protested against the action that had been taken, and said that the Board of Agriculture had not been properly consulted on the question. On one occasion when this subject was debated in your Lordships' House, Lord Selborne said—
"I have repeatedly, on behalf of the Government, urged farmers to produce more during this time of war, and I think that in the face of great difficulties the farmers have made a noble effort to respond to the appeal made to them…. Therefore I am really concerned at the position into which the War Office has got itself over the price, of wool."

1087
Again Lord Selborne said—
"Almost my last Minute at the Board of Agriculture recorded the fact that I could not endorse this price, and that the Hoard was instructed to protest against it and to point out to the War Office that they were, though unintentionally, using the farmer in an unjust and hard manner."
I think many of your Lordships will agree with the words which Lord Selborne used about the way in which the farmers were treated on this question. I have called attention to this because, if there is a grievance, the only course is to mention it in the hope that, by co-operation in the future between the Board of Agriculture and the War Office, such a state of affairs will not occur again. I am sure your Lordships will concur that it is most undesirable in the best interests of the country that a great national industry like agriculture should be treated in the way it has been with regard to this wool purchase.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (THE EARL OF DERBY): My Lords, I will reverse the order of my answers, and reply first to the noble Earl who has just spoken. I am bound to say that I was rather pleased when I saw that there was no mention made in the newspapers of the answer which I gave to the noble Lord the other day with regard to the price of wool, because it showed that there was certainly no agitation on the subject; for the newspapers, which are hard pressed for space, naturally do not put into their reports anything which they think is accepted and requires no further discussion. I would point out to the noble Earl that although the price of wool may have been at first settled in the way he described, there was a meeting afterwards of representatives of the farmers with my hon. friend the Financial Secretary to the War Office, and the whole question was discussed and the price advanced. I would refer him, with regard to the details, to the answer which I gave to my noble friend Lord Harris on the 1st of this month. I have communicated with my noble friend the President of the Board of Agriculture as to the best way of bringing the terms and conditions before the farmers, and I have no doubt whatever that he, who has better organisation for doing so than the War Office can have, will do all in his power to see that the information is brought to their notice.
I come now to the questions which the noble Viscount (Lord Galway) put to me the
1088
other day and those which he has added to-day. One of the questions asked the other day was, Is £5 10 s. the maximum price or is it a flat rate? It is the maximum price. He then asked who is to judge as to whether a lower price should be paid. The buyers are allowed discretion as to the price they give according to the quality of the hay; but if the farmer is not satisfied, he can appeal to the county committee to readjust the price, and we should act by what the county committee in those cases said was a fair price. There was a question also asked the other day with regard to the amount that was made by dealers. I have in front of me particulars of how the £2 a ton is made up, and I shall be happy to show them to the noble Viscount. I think he will see that it is a fair price to add if you accept the view that a middleman is necessary. I admit that there may be differences of opinion on that subject, but I am certain, from the inquiries I have made, that if you kill the middleman now, as you might do, it would be a serious disadvantage not only now but also after the war.
VISCOUNT GALWAY: Would the farmer, if he delivered the hay in trusses, be entitled to the £2?
THE EARL OF DERBY: No, not unless he had acted in the capacity of dealer before. It is the whole question of maintaining the middleman. The farmer would be allowed a certain addition if he carted it to the railway station.
Let me say, in passing, that we do not force the farmer to part with all his hay, as the noble Viscount seemed to suggest. Any that he says he wants to keep for his own stock, we are going to allow him to keep. The noble Viscount said, I think, on the former occasion that last year was a very bad year for hay, and that therefore the amount which the farmer had last year would not be a good criterion as to the amount he ought to be allowed this year. I agree. What he is asked to state is what he wants this year; but I think it is only fair that we should ask him what he had last year and see whether there is any valid reason for his holding back more than would be considered absolutely necessary. But there is no intention whatsoever on the part of the War Office to deprive any man of such an amount of hay as would inconvenience him in regard to the feeding of his own stock.

1089
With regard to the question of price, I find that it is not the custom of the hay trade to advance more than 50 per cent. of the purchase price. We are going to pay the 50 per cent. at once; we are going to pay 5 per cent. interest from October 31 to the day of lifting; and if there is any case brought to our notice where serious hardship would be done to any man by only paying the 50 per cent., we shall be perfectly ready to consider it on its merits and, if necessary, go up to the 75 per cent. The noble Viscount referred to the commandeering at £5 9s. I have asked in the Office if they can explain how that price arose, and this is the answer which they have given me and which I think is the correct one. Presumably it refers to the natural operation of the Defence of the Realm Order dated March 31, the price named being made up of £5, which was the original price arranged as between the local county committee and the forage committee, plus 1s. 6d. a month per ton from January in respect of the dryage incurred. If there are any other details required I shall be glad if the noble Viscount will let me know, but to the question he put to me that is, I believe, the right answer.
Then I come to the more general question as to whether or no it would not be possible for the War Office to take what it wants and say to the farmer, "You may sell all the rest at any price that you can get." I confess that at first sight this appears to be the most reasonable thing to do; but it was pointed out to me, and with such force that one has to accept it, that if you do that you may be putting a great hardship on those men from whom you take hay if you take it in any quantity. You may take away the whole lot of good hay in one locality where hay is in big demand, and that would enable the men there to make a high price for second quality hay; while in the other parts you would be depriving a man of a chance of so doing.
There is another question, one which materially affects not only the farmer but the whole conduct of the war in one way, and that is the question of transport and freight in this country. What we hope to do is to be fair to the farmer and at the same time to minimise as far as we possibly can the carrying of hay from one locality to another. I have to say that because I really do not think noble Lords quite realise how hard put to it we are at the present
1090
moment to find the necessary freight in this country, with troops moving, with the amount of ammunition, I am glad to say, going up by leaps and bounds, and with the increased demands of the Army abroad. A strain is thus put on our railway service almost up to breaking point; and though it may seem a small thing to limit the transport of hay about the country, I assure your Lordships it is only one of the many steps we feel we must take—a step which we hope will not be against the interests of the farmer, but which will be distinctly in the interests of the management of the war as a whole.
VISCOUNT GALWAY: My Lords, I am much obliged to the noble Earl for his answer, and I am sure he will realise that the agricultural interest is as anxious as possible to help him in every way to have 1,000,000 tons of hay, or whatever is necessary, for the benefit of the nation. At the same time I hope he will allow farmers in the neighbourhood of large camps or elsewhere, who are able to cut the hay up and truss it and transport it themselves to the neighbouring railway station, to recover some of the money which would otherwise go to his favourite middleman. I submit that the farmer should be able to recover some of this money if he undertakes this extra work.
THE EARL OF DERBY: The noble Viscount may rest assured that I have the farming interest as much at heart as he has. One is bound to lay down general rules. At the same time the noble Viscount may be, quite certain that if we can find any way by which we can make it easier for the farmer without departing from the general rule we shall be very glad to do so.
THE EARL OF LICHFIELD: Did I understand the noble Earl to say that he would ask the Board of Agriculture to publish without delay the Government's announcement regarding wool?
THE EARL OF DERBY: That is so. I have already conferred with the President of the Board, who has better machinery than I have for letting the farmers know what is the state of affairs.
THE EARL OF LICHFIELD: I am much obliged to the noble Earl for his answer. It is of the utmost importance that farmers should know as soon as possible. I may

1091
say that I inquired at the Central Chamber of Agriculture this afternoon, and they had not heard a word about the answer which the noble Earl gave the other night, which was very important and should have been published, as we had hoped it would have been, in the newspapers.

THE SUPPLY OF PETROL.
LORD STRACHIE LORD STRACHIE rose to ask His Majesty's Government whether they would state the principle upon which petrol has been allowed by the Petrol Control Committee to owners of private cars; and to move for Papers.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I desire to ask my noble friend Lord Stanmore, who represents the Board of Trade, one or two questions, which I have communicated to him so that he may be prepared with answers. I would preface my remarks by saying that I should be the last person to make the slightest objection to any restriction, even total prohibition, of the use of petrol by private cars if it were really necessary. It would be only one more inconvenience added to the many we have to suffer, and do not complain of suffering, owing to the war. But what we complain of is the way in which this question has been approached by the Government, and especially by the Petrol Control Committee. I say at once from personal knowledge that this Committee is most kind and considerate in giving attention to any complaint made to them; but one always feels that one is up against a stone wall, and that they have not the slightest intention of making any alterations or remedying any grievances as far as they are concerned.
Again, one wonders why, if there is this necessity—and no doubt there must be—for restricting the use of petrol, the Government did not move earlier in the matter. It is true that they appointed this Petrol Committee as long ago as April; but nothing has been done, for instance, as to restricting motoring on Sundays. Any noble Lord who moves about the country is aware that motoring by private cars on Sunday is enormous. This "joy-riding" and the excursions all over the country by heavily laden chars-à-bancs, stirring the dust all over the place and making the country hideous, consume an enormous amount of petrol. Why have not the Government put down, as they easily could, this absolute waste of petrol on Sundays
1092
merely for pleasure? And why do they not stop the large number of taxis and other motor vehicles going to race meetings? I noticed that the Acting President of the Board of Trade said that in the future they are going to impose restrictions; but surely it might have been done at not such a late day as this. Then, again, I am told, as regards aeroplanes, that even if they go out for a very short flight when they come down the whole of the petrol is simply emptied on the ground and wasted.
I hope the noble Lord may be not only able to tell us the principle upon which the Petrol Committee has acted, but perhaps he will also be able to say that a short statement on the matter will be circulated to your Lordships' House and the public, because at the present moment nobody has the slightest idea of the principle on which the Petrol Committee acts. It seems to have no principle at all, except that of rule of thumb. Certainly statements have been made from which it appears that the Committee goes on the principle of making no inquiries at all, although we were asked carefully to fill up census cards showing the amount of petrol we used and our estimate for the future, and we were also asked to state how we had employed our cars. It has been said that it is impossible to go into the thousands of cases, and that one man has been treated the same as another, whether he is doing public work or not; and that the man who is doing public work will get the same amount as the man who is doing nothing but simply using his car for amusement. Again I have been told, and I have no doubt it is the truth, that those people who made false declarations are treated in the same way as people who made true declarations. It seems improbable that the declarations can be true in the great majority of cases when we are told that the increase of petrol for use this year is actually 40 per cent. over the amount that was consumed last year. I may be told by my noble friend that there has been a large increase owing to the use of petrol for commercial purposes. But it is very doubtful whether that is the case, because a good many businesses have had to close down. Certainly the use of private cars has been greatly reduced. Frequently where a man used three cars, he uses only one at the present moment; or where he previously used two, he has one now laid up. So the increase of 40 per cent. seems excessive.
I cannot help thinking that the explanation is that people have put down estimates much in advance of what they have used in the past. A friend of mine gave me a case in his own county, where a man doing a good deal of public work—sitting on the Local Tribunal, presiding over the local Bench, and so on—made a true return and is allowed only ten gallons a month; whilst a neighbour of his made a return which enables him to get 60 gallons a month. What was stated in another place the other day by Mr. Harcourt was that any man who applied for over 32 gallons for the month had his figure divided by four. Therefore it is perfectly obvious that if a man applied for 100 gallons, all the Committee would do would be to divide that by four and he would get 100 gallons.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: Oh, no.
LORD STRACHIE: I do not know whether the noble Earl has read the debate in the House of Commons.
THE EARL OF DERBY: I have not said anything.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: It was I who said it.
LORD STRACHIE: No doubt the noble Marquess has read the debate. I was reading it this morning. Mr. Harcourt said that if a man applied for over 32 gallons for a month the figure was divided by four, and in the debate this was taken as the principle of distribution.
Another point on which I have asked my noble friend to give an answer is this, Did the Committee consider the question of the number of cars a man kept? A friend of mine, a member of your Lordships' House, told me that no doubt the large supply of petrol he received was due to the fact that he had a large number of cars. I have also been told that where an application was made by a man for petrol for use from his London house and for country use he received an equal amount in each case. I venture to say that the fair way of treating a man is not to consider the number of cars he has, but what he is doing and the amount of petrol he ought to require. Surely in these days it is sufficient for a man to have enough petrol to run one car. Then I want to ask my noble friend whether it is the case that the Petrol Committee have not
1094
allowed any owner of a car to receive more than 30 gallons a month, because statements have come to me from people who have declared that they have been allowed more than 60 gallons a month. It may be, of course, an accident. And I have heard of cases in which applications have been made in duplicate, and a man has received a double allowance in that way owing to some error—say, for instance, his agent in the country has applied for him, and he has himself in London also applied.
I do not wish to press that more petrol should be allowed than is really necessary under existing conditions, but there is a feeling abroad that in this matter there has not been fair treatment all round. Nobody would complain if it was felt that all cases were considered on their merits; but under present conditions, as was made clear the other day in another place, there is simply this rule of thumb system and every man is treated on the basis of the return he made. I hope that the noble Lord will be willing to give full information upon this question, and perhaps he will be able to say that in the future the Petrol Committee will not simply meet every request by saying, "Oh, we have no time to go into these questions. All are treated alike on their returns."
Moved, That there be laid before the House, Papers relating to the principle upon which petrol has been allowed by the Petrol Control Committee to owners of private cars.—(Lord Strachie).
THE DUKE OF RUTLAND: My Lords, I hope that attention will be paid to this matter by the Petrol Control Committee, because serious discrepancies have undoubtedly occurred. There have been such grave inequalities in the way in which petrol licences have been issued and in the amount allowed to different persons that I think a strict investigation should take place and a reorganisation of the whole scheme should be considered. I know of a case where, the chairman of a county council who is also chairman of practically every other organisation in the county cannot do his work because he has been allowed only about ten gallons of petrol a month. There are no railways by which he can get about to do his work, and he has to travel from twenty to thirty miles every day to perform the duties which the Government have placed upon him. I have been told by a

1095
noble Lord of a case which occurred near his place. A lady who takes no share in hospital work or in any organisation of any sort or kind in that direction applied for a very large amount of petrol for three months, and the amount she is allowed would be sufficient to run one of the Government's ammunition cars for a year. The actual amount was given to me, but it is so great that until I have it authenticated I hesitate to say it. At the same time, within a few miles of where that lady lives the chairman of the county council who is also chairman of the Local Tribunal—this is not the same case as the one to which I alluded earlier—was allotted such an insufficient amount of petrol that he cannot get about to do his work.
Cases such as these are occurring all over the country. The present system is also operating adversely on local doctors in the country districts. There are many cases—I have no doubt the noble Lord is fully aware of them—where doctors have not been able to get to their patients because they had no petrol. They have no power, under existing circumstances, to commandeer petrol even in grave cases. These things require adjustment at the hands of the Petrol Committee, who, I know, are terribly over-worked. Work which should have taken six months has had to be done in about three weeks or a month, and it is impossible for the people working in that office to get through the amount of work they have to do. I do not blame the Petrol Committee officials in the least, because they have been under-manned and probably under-womaned. All I ask for is a promise that the Government will take the matter in hand and try to put upon a more sound business footing the issue of petrol to those who have to do national work, especially in the country districts. If the existing grave anomalies continue much longer they will do a large amount of harm in an enormous number of country districts. There are some classes of the community who have undoubtedly been terribly wasteful with petrol for a long time past, but I think this is coming to an end; and I hope that those who have really to do work allotted to them by the Government will now have a chance to get the necessary petrol to carry out that work.
VISCOUNT MIDLETON: My Lords, I hope the noble Lord will forgive me for intervening before he replies. I do so
1096
because I want to put a particular question to him. I am not going over again the ground covered by my noble friends. I fully realise the Government's difficulty, and I have so much sympathy with their desire to reduce the quantity of petrol used that I wish they had taken the matter in hand a year ago, when they would have been able to give real consideration to the case. There must be grave inequalities. There are people living side by side, some of whom, although not using their cars for public purposes, have asked for double the usual amount and have been given one quarter, whereas a neighbour using his car for public purposes has got the same amount. No doubt something will be done about that.
But I rise particularly to press upon the noble Lord that he should give us, if he can, the figures of the consumption of petrol by the War Office in this country. I believe that if my noble friend opposite (Lord Derby) would take this matter in hand he could effect an enormous economy in the use of petrol by the War Department. Nothing is so difficult as to produce absolute evidence, but I live in the centre of troops and could give instance after instance of the entire misuse of these cars, of surplus journeys made by officers living within a few yards of each other to the same spot on the same day ten or twenty miles away, of cases where drivers while loading up at a station have allowed their engines to run for a whole hour, and so forth. But I will give one instance of many which reached me the other day of the sort of thing happening now, which it is impossible under the present system for the War Office to check. It happened that a gentleman undertook to lend his car to the War Office. His chauffeur was taken the day before, so he decided to drive the car himself. He attended at the War Office, where he was told to go to Wormwood Scrubs to fetch an officer. That officer, being before his time, spent half an hour at his hairdresser's, and after his visit to the War Office he spent an hour at the Savoy Hotel having luncheon. He was subsequently taken back to Wormwood Scrubs, and he ordered the car again for the next morning. Everybody knows that officers in authority would not allow that sort of thing if they could check it.
What I suggest to my noble friend is that the whole system of the use of Government cars by the War Office should be investigated

1097
by a small Committee. An attempt, at any rate, should be made, if possible, to regulate it, and to make it clear that except in very urgent cases cars are only to be used for the Service. It is quite clear that officers must at this moment to the fullest extent, especially in this country, use trains and motor-'buses, like many of your Lordships do under the present difficulty, as I have noticed in leaving this House. This is a subject on which we are all at one. In the early clays of the war, when there was great pressure, when orders had to be transmitted and carried out with great rapidity, and when there was not the organisation which now prevails, a system arose which might now with great advantage be changed; and I am quite sure that private owners would more readily acquiesce in the privations which they undoubtedly must undergo if they felt that in the Government service every effort was being made to economise petrol to the last degree.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, I sympathise to a certain extent with the sufferings of private owners, particularly with some of those who are doing public work; but, like other noble Lords, I am not going to say a word at present in criticism of the Committee who are doing this work.
VISCOUNT MIDLETON: Hear, hear.
VISCOUNT PEEL: They have had in a very short space of time to look into the cases of something like 324,000 motor-cars, 110,000 of which are private cars. The blame for their not having done this more fully must rest with the Government for not having made a little more provision in these cases rather than with the Committee themselves. A great deal is being said about the dishonesty of owners who sent in for larger requirements than were absolutely necessary, and almost every individual I have come across seems to think that he is the only person who has sent in a fair and just return. I am informed that this is not so, that something like 85 per cent. or more of the returns sent in are on the face of them entirely accurate, and that the wicked and dishonest section is confined to something like 15 per cent. of the owners of motor-cars. I think that is a very reassuring statement. But the difficulty, of course, is this, that though the wicked section, the 15 per cent., of owners sent in for more than they ought to have done, such is
1098
the shortage of petrol for the use of private cars that it would not be enough to cut down the wicked portion, but you must also abate the allowance to the virtuous section who sent in proper returns.
My noble friend below me (Lord Strachie) expressed some doubt as to there being more petrol used by commercial cars in this country this year than last year. So far as my information goes, that is true; and it is largely due to the fact mentioned by the noble Karl (Lord Derby) when he was speaking just now, that the railways have been so congested that a very much larger amount of work has been thrown on commercial cars in consequence, so that in all fairness a certain deduction has to be made in that way.
What I want to put to the noble Lord is this. The Committee has proceeded—and I think necessarily, in the time it has had at its disposal—by saying, "You shall have a certain percentage of the amount you sent in for"; and in order to make things a little more fair they have decreased the percentage in the case of the larger amounts, so that if you sent in a large demand the percentage which is knocked off the amount you asked for is higher. That is a noble attempt to deal with the difficulty. But it does not do so, because it does not follow that if a man sends in for a large amount he does not require it. The method adopted hits the innocent with the guilty. I want to point out this to the noble Lord. You do not want a Committee if you are content simply to lay down a percentage. You have only to engage two or three clerks to do the figures and send out the returns. You do not require men of the ability of Mr. Bury, and his colleague Sir John Hewett, an eminent Indian official, to do this work.
I should like to ask whether, when this burst of business is over, it is intended that this Committee should dissolve, or set to work to deal with the most difficult or hard cases—the case of the doctors, which the noble Duke mentioned, and other eases of that kind. Some cases have been brought to my knowledge of philanthropic men and women who let their houses for wounded, and who find themselves very much handicapped in the matter of petrol and unable to take their wounded to and from the station except

1099
by very uncomfortable methods. I have been informed—and I should like to know whether it is true—that an arrangement has been entered into, in cases of this kind, between the Petrol Committee and the Red Cross, and that there is an official of the Red Cross in each county whose business it is to draw up lists of these persons and send them to the Petrol Committee, who will accept the lists and allow these persons as much petrol as is required for their work. Of course, it depends upon the officials in the counties whether proper lists are made out. But many cases of this kind having come to my knowledge, I should be glad if the noble Lord would give a reassuring answer on that point.
LORD STANMORE: My Lords, I am glad that the noble Viscount (Lord Peel) has said a word on behalf of the Petrol Committee, because they have had a very difficult task. Their methods have, perhaps of necessity, been somewhat rough and ready, but considering the time and the petrol at their disposal I think they have met their difficulties in a very fair way. The shortage of tank steamers has been the factor which has decided all their operations. Owing to this shortage the amount of petrol is strictly limited. I think everybody will agree that the Army and Navy have the first claim on the supply, and after the Army and Navy the Ministry of Munitions, and after them the first call for petrol is for the conveyance of the wounded to the hospitals. When all those claims have been taken into account, all that remains is 6,300,000 gallons per month, and this has to be distributed between the owners of commercial cars and those who require petrol for industrial purposes, hackney and taxi-cabs, and 'buses, and doctors, veterinary surgeons, and, lastly, private cars and motor cycles. It is proposed to allow to owners of commercial cars and those who require petrol for industrial purposes 60 per cent. of their requirements. The omnibuses and taxi-cabs are to have 50 per cent. Doctors and veterinary surgeons are to have the whole of their requirements up to a maximum of 50 gallons a month. The noble Duke made a special point about doctors. I may say that only about three per cent. of the doctors have applied for more than the 50 gallons per month; and as soon as circumstances become at all better the doctors' claims will be first of all considered, and this three per cent. will be allowed their further claim. All these
1100
requirements reduce the amount left for private cars to 700,000 gallons a month, which is an average of rather under seven gallons a car per month.
My noble friend Lord Strachie inquired whether no difference would be made between those who had made a false and those who had made a true declaration. At present it is not possible to do so; but I think those who have made exaggerated returns will probably regret it. In the first place, they render themselves liable to a fine of £100; in the second place, when their licence comes to be renewed at the end of the period of three months, their exaggerated return will be remembered against them. In addition, the Board of Trade have made a regulation under which any licence obtained by misrepresentation is liable to be cancelled. Then my noble friend suggested the case of a man who had asked for 400 gallons and, who, he thinks, under the present arrangement, would obtain 100 gallons. That is not the case, as nobody is entitled to more than 30 gallons a month. And I think that the 60 gallons which the noble Lord mentioned must have been the man's allowance for a quarter, and not for a month. Where an owner has more than one car, the allowance is expected to cover all his cars.
LORD STRACHIE: What I asked was, Is a man allowed more if he has five or six cars than a man who has only one?
LORD STANMORE: He cannot get more than 30 gallons a month. I am sorry I cannot give the noble Viscount (Lord Midleton) the figures for which he asked with regard to the War Office consumption. I think my noble friend Lord Derby will deal with those questions. Lord Peel asked why it was necessary for the Committee to remain in existence if the system is merely one of arithmetic. It is hoped that alterations will be made and that a more equitable plan will be arrived at in the course of the next three months. As regards cars used for Red Cross purposes, on the recommendation of the Joint War Committee an additional allowance of petrol used exclusively for the transport of wounded soldiers and sailors will be allowed. So far as circumstances permit, the more pressing requirements of those who use motor spirit for the essential needs of the country will be reconsidered, and later on the amount

1101
licensed to those who are using their cars for purposes directly connected with the war will, if the petrol available allows of this, be increased, whilst in the renewal of all licences the allowance to owners of cars which are not used for war purposes may be still further curtailed.
VISCOUNT GALWAY: Is there any truth in the statement in the newspapers that the Government have been offered 4,000,000 gallons already in this country? And in that case would they be prepared to reconsider a further amount being allowed to the various cars?
LORD STANMORE: I think an offer was made of 4,000,000 gallons, but they are not in this country, and the steamers in which it was proposed to bring this petrol over are not at present even launched.
THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, I did not come to the House prepared to deal with this subject, as I did not know that the Department with which I am concerned was going to be brought into it. Two noble Lords have mentioned the War Office—Lord Strachie and Lord Midleton—and I should like to say a few words on the subject. Lord Strachie made an accusation—one of those accusations that he flung all over the place—and I want to hold him to it. He said that in the Aeroplane Service when the men come back from a flight they empty the whole of their petrol tanks on to the ground. Can he give a single instance where that has occurred?
LORD STRACHIE: I have been so informed.
THE EARL OF DERBY: Can the noble Lord give me the name of his informant and where it happened? I deny it absolutely.
LORD STRACHIE: I accept the noble Earl's denial at once, but he knows very well that I cannot give the name of my informant unless I have that person's permission.
THE EARL OF DERBY: Nobody ought to make an accusation of this kind, which amounts to a charge of deliberate and disgraceful waste of Government material, without being prepared to give the reasons,
1102
the name, and the whole of the facts. If the noble Lord is not prepared to do that he should not have made the accusation. Of course, these petrol tanks have to be emptied; that is well known, and the reasons why are well known. But when the noble Lord goes on to state that when the aeroplanes come down the petrol tanks are invariably emptied on to the ground, I say there is not a word of truth in it, and I think he ought to withdraw such an accusation against the Aeroplane Service.
My noble friend Lord Midleton asked about the War Office consumption. I should like to know the name of the officer who had his hair cut and spent a lengthy time over luncheon, because that is a case which decidedly deserves investigation. I candidly confess to being dissatisfied with what one sees in going about the streets and when one is in the country. If I am to be hung, I want to be hung with somebody else. Not only is this the case with Army but also with Navy cars, and it does seem to me that we ought to take the most stringent measures we can to prevent waste. There have been accusations of great waste at the Front in France. We wrote to Sir Douglas Haig on the subject, and I received last night a copy of new Orders that have been issued on the subject, and I will show then to the noble Viscount. I venture to say that you could not have better regulations to prevent waste. With regard to the waste in this country, I will see what can be done. But it is not really a question that the War Office can deal with. It must be dealt with by the officers commanding in the various areas and by the Generals in command in the various districts. Those are the people who ought to do all they possibly can in this direction. I can assure the noble Viscount that if there are any measures which we can take to stop waste, if it is proved that there is waste, they shall be taken.
LORD STRACHIE: My Lords, in asking leave to withdraw my Motion, I am bound to refer to the unprovoked attack which the noble Earl made upon me. Though I said at once that I accepted his assurance, he accused me with violence of language. I should have thought that the noble Earl would have been the last person to throw stones in that direction.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

THE ARMY—LOCAL SENTIMENT.
LORD HARRIS LORD HARRIS rose to call attention to the present system of posting of recruits, and to the lack of sympathy with local sentiment displayed thereby; and to move to resolve—
That this House deprecates a departure from the system of recruitment, recognised by Lord Cardwell in the case of the Regular Army and confirmed by Lord Haldane in forming the Territorial Army, whereby recruits were encouraged to prefer enlistment in their county regiments.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I make no apology for bringing the subject-matter of my Motion before your Lordships, because I am satisfied that the principle to which I refer in it is one of profound interest not only throughout every county in the United Kingdom but in every area of any part of the Empire from which troops have been drawn. Every locality takes a profound personal interest in the men who have been recruited in its neighbourhood and has shown its desire to follow their fortune in the field, to assist them there to the utmost of its power with comforts, and, when they come home, whether wounded or sound, to welcome them with open arms. I have—and I know that some of my noble friends have—the gravest suspicion that this principle to which I refer is being discarded.
I think I ought, in the first place, to substantiate the reference I make to that very distinguished Minister of War, Lord Cardwell. In the wording of my Motion as first put down I used the word "inaugurated" incorrectly, and after discussion with a distinguished military historian I have substituted the word "recognised," because it was pointed out to me that unquestionably before Lord Cardwell went to the War Office there had been a territorial system in existence—that is to say, there had been regiments closely connected with certain counties. But I submit that it was the introduction of the double battalion system by Lord Cardwell—the setting up of the large and the small depots, and the bringing into each of the counties concerned another regiment not hitherto connected with that particular county—which inaugurated the new territorial idea. Well, it did not make very rapid advance, certainly not as regards officers. It did as
1104
regards the men, because there were the depots, and the county men were more likely to go to their county depots than to others. Even in the latter 'eighties there was no inclination on the part of officers to join their county regiments; at any rate, that was my experience. They were far more inclined to join the regiments to which their college or school friends belonged. I may say, as regards myself, that from the day when I had connection with the War Office and with this territorial system, it has been a matter of the most profound interest with me to encourage as far as I could the recognition of local sentiment and to encourage in the county itself an interest in the county regiments.
The incident which changed all this want of interest was the South African War. Suddenly the cadres of the Yeomanry and the Volunteers were called upon to do some practical work in fitting out bodies of troops, and they had, of course, to call upon the enthusiasm and the patriotism of their neighbours, and the result was an immense extension of local sentiment in local units. The gentry as well as other classes joined those units, and funds were raised in the several counties with which to equip, indeed to more than equip, those units. And when they came back from that war they were welcomed with open arms. From that day local territorial sentiment with the military units of the county was firmly established, so firmly established that when the noble Viscount, Lord Haldane, introduced his Territorial scheme, he found that from the point of view of local sentiment he had an easy task.
It is not only as regards the Army that this feeling has taken hold of comparatively small areas. The other day there was a most touching illustration of what I mean. I was present on the occasion when the storm-and battle-worn flags of H.M.S."Kent" were hoisted to their last place in the bosom of the mother church in Canterbury Cathedral. Those emblems of our naval might were borne through the streets of the ancient city before enormous and sympathetic crowds, and were placed in the Cathedral before a most reverential and sympathetic congregation. That was an extension of this idea of local territorial sentiment. It had extended beyond the human being; it had actually extended to the inanimate object of a ship. H.M.S.

1105
"Kent" was not built in the county. The ship's complement was not found in the county. It was nothing but a name. But that was enough for the county of Kent. The ladies of Kent worked the flags for H.M.S." Kent." They were flown in the battle of the Southern Atlantic, collected in tatters from the rigging of the ship, and, as I say, at last placed in the bosom of the mother church. That is a sentiment which is worth keeping, which cannot be sacrificed with impunity; and that, I hope, is a sufficient excuse for my having brought this subject before your Lordships to-day.
This territorial spirit does more, as I have already said, than act as a recruiting agent. It appeals to those charitable sentiments which are the foundation of comfort and of kindly and neighbourly love. In every county, I suppose in every locality and in every part of the Empire, there are local bodies who are collecting for the comfort of the men recruited in their neighbourhoods, and who have, by their, contributions, largely assisted His Majesty's Government in their conduct of the war. I had hoped that my noble friend Lord Dartmouth would have been here to speak on this subject. It was, however, impossible for him to get away. But he writes me this letter in connection with the supply of comforts to the county units. He had to take up the matter in connection with Sir Edward Ward's pooling scheme, and he says—
"One point seemed to me to be a strong lever in favour of contributions being sent to the comforts pool. For reasons unknown to us, Stafford-shire units now include men from many other counties, while Staffordshire men are being sent all over the kingdom. Thus the only way to reach one's own county men is to contribute to the general pool."
That may have a discouraging as well as an encouraging effect. I will not hazard a guess as to which is the more likely.
Until the present war began, this local sentiment vitalised our whole recruiting system. It did so for some time after the war began. Then by degrees those of us who had official connection with recruiting became aware of—what shall I say? I should not like to say that it was an unfriendly feeling towards the Territorial Army, but I should say that it was a feeling that was not so favourable towards the New Armies; and much to our chagrin and disappointment, and sometimes to our indignation—at least I speak for myself,
1106
and I fancy there must be other cases as well as mine—we found tradition and precedent ignored, and touch with the counties by degrees being lost. And when the compulsory system came into being, we became aware that there was actual discouragement of the idea of the county man going to his county unit. I took the liberty in this House of calling attention to what I felt was becoming prevalent, and I remember being rather flattered by a cheer from my noble friend who represents the War Office in this House (Lord Derby). He I know, has feelings on this subject almost as strong as I have in private life—
THE EARL OF DERBY: And in public.
LORD HARRIS: And Lord Kitchener, on the occasion to which I refer, said that he attached the greatest possible importance to territorial sentiment. I subsequently spoke to him about it, and he asked me to give him instances. With his permission I called for returns from the depots of the two county regiments, and I was able to send him figures which showed that in three months, in the case of one regiment, about 1,000 recruits had been sent out of the county to other regiments, whilst about 800 recruits had been brought from other counties into our county regiments. This seems to me to be an entirely unnecessary and laborious exchange to other counties of recruits who wished to go into our regiments, and vice versa.
I subsequently addressed an official at the War Office on another case, where a recruiting officer asked for a small number of men—quite a small number of men—who wished to join a particular regiment. He sent me the names, and. I knew from personal experience that they were men whose ancestors had been serving in that regiment for over a century They wanted to join the regiment they knew best, but they were refused on the ground that the regiment in question was well up to strength. I wrote to the officer commanding and asked him what was the position of the regiment at the time, and he told me that on the date when the official answer was sent the regiment was 160 short. Subsequently 100 men were sent to that regiment from a depot outside the county. I cannot explain it; it is not my business to explain these things; but it seems to me to be absolutely

1107
inconsistent, and to point unquestionably to what I apprehend is the intention of the War Office—to do away as far as it possibly can with the territorial system. And when I am talking of the territorial system I am not thinking of Territorial regiments only. I am thinking of Regular regiments just as much. We are equally proud of the county regiments, whether Territorial or Regular.
If it be the case—and I can come to no other conclusion from the proofs that have come so vividly before me—that the War Office has come to the conclusion that the whole principle of encouraging local sentiment by encouraging the county recruit to go into his county regiment is to be done away with, then I think we ought to be told so. We ought to be warned, and we ought to have the reasons given to us. I hope that my noble friend has been put into a position to give us the reasons, if it is the case. Whatever the explanation, I personally am disposed to deprecate such a change, and I can only say that I am excessively sorry if it is absolutely unavoidable.
Moved to resolve, That this House deprecates a departure from the system of recruitment, recognised by Lord Cardwell in the case of the Regular Army and confirmed by Lord Haldane in forming the Territorial Army, whereby recruits were encouraged to prefer enlistment in their county regiments.—(Lord Harris.)
VISCOUNT HALDANE: My Lords, the question which my noble friend has raised is one which is less important to-day when the thing has happened and worked out than it would have been a year ago. But I agree with him in the view which he has expressed. One scarcely likes to make even what might seem like a criticism upon the splendid work which Lord Kitchener did with the magic of his name in raising such enormous numbers of men by voluntary appeal. I often think that we underrate the services which Lord Kitchener rendered by overlooking other directions in which he did what I am sure no other man in the country could have done. By his personal influence he persuaded India and Egypt to take Territorial troops instead of Regulars, Infantry and Artillery alike, and thereby was able to bring back Regular divisions and Regular batteries to this country. No other man
1108
would have been able to induce India and Egypt to do that. These are two services so great that I do not like even to seem to criticise the system under which the troops enlisted in such wonderful numbers and with such great success were raised at home. But I am bound to say that I do not think Lord Kitchener troubled himself very much about the procedure. I think he desired to keep up the territorial system, but he was a man who liked to get results. I have often talked with him over this. His desire was to get the results more than to consider the details. As a general question and as one profoundly affecting the future of the Army, I am in entire agreement with the noble Lord in the views he has expressed.
I do not think people realise what the Cardwell system and the subsequent development of the Cardwell system was. The Cardwell system was one by which every battalion abroad should have a battalion at home corresponding to it, and the battalion at home was not to be filled with trained soldiers in time of peace but was only to have a small proportion of trained soldiers and was to be filled up on mobilisation from the Reserve. The recruits came to the depôt, stayed there a short time, and went on to complete their training in the second battalion. That was a localised system, in which every battalion had its local connection. The battalion abroad came from a local source; the battalion at home was local; and the depôt was local. The Militia was essentially a local force if any force ever was local. They used to be raised and looked after by the Lord Lieutenant, who was at the head of them. Then came the time when it was found that the Militia was recruited only for service at home, and the discovery dawned upon the War Office that for the prospect of anything like what has happened rapidity in mobilisation was absolutely essential, and therefore it was necessary to get rid of the Militia system, on which you could not count for your troops coming rapidly, and extending things further; and the Special Reserve was substituted for the Militia to go abroad. That enabled the depôt to become, on mobilisation, a third battalion; it was a large sedentary force used largely for garrison purposes, and was a reservoir from which to feed the first two battalions. Therefore these three battalions were strictly local. Then behind the third battalion, as it became in case of war, there

1109
used to be some Militia battalions, but when those were done away with there might or might not be a Special Reserve battalion behind the depôt battalion as it was in time of peace. And behind these were the Territorial battalions. The Territorial battalions were again strictly local, but they were not intended to be recruited at the depôt; they were intended to be recruited by machinery which was made for the purpose and which was purely local, in accordance with what the noble Lord has suggested was the best plan—I mean the County Associations.
The whole fountain and origin of the trouble we have witnessed has been a certain want, I think, of understanding on the part of some of the officials at the War Office in the early stages of this war of what the County Associations were and what they could do. It was not realised that these were really in the main military bodies, consisting of men who had given their minds to military things; it was not recognised that these were the men who could squeeze out every voluntary recruit in a county, and make appeals to that sentiment and patriotism of which Lord Harris has spoken—an engine more powerful than any other engine. Nothing was comparable to the County Association as an instrument for getting recruits. The County Associations were recognised but had very little given them to do, because at the Adjutant-General's Department the plan was to use the depôt for the purpose of raising the battalions which were behind the third battalions; in other words, raising them through the general machinery of the Army instead of as a local battalion which the county was to yield, such as the Territorials essentially were.
I have always thought that if the county machinery had been taken you could have secured the whole of the forces now raised more smoothly and probably more rapidly than has otherwise been the case. Lord Kitchener's great influence would have been doubled had he only had this instrument to work through. What has been the result? The result has been that instead of the New Armies having been raised as part of the Territorial system—I mean by the Territorial system not technically what was organised under the Act of 1907, but I mean strictly territorially, that is to say locally, based on the appeal to local sentiment—they have been raised
1110
just like the Regular troops at the depots. I have known of East-end men enlisting in Highland regiments. There are plenty of what are called "Cockneys" in certain of the Highland regiments; though not in the Highland regiments that have the most local associations. You will neither find men from the South in the Black Watch nor will you find in that regiment to any large extent officers not connected with that part of the country. There are a series of regiments like the Black Watch and the Gordons, and I could name others, which have this local association so largely that both as regards officers and men they conform to the tradition of which the noble Lord has spoken. That is a most valuable tradition, and I am sorry we have got away from it.
But I do not think much harm has been done. When the war is over you will reconsider all these things, and will get your system straightened out. Therefore I say again that I do not attach the importance to this question that I should have attached at the beginning of the war. But when the war is over I trust that my noble friend (Lord Derby), who is full of understanding and equity in these matters, and who has done more with his local Territorial force than probably any other man in the country, will take up the question of local sentiment, and, more than that, the question of the principle of organisation which underlies all this, and see that the Army is put back on to what I am sure is the only footing that will keep it in a proper condition. The new feature of the Army to-day, the one feature where we have without any doubt or question made a great stride over anything we had in the past, was the rapidity of mobilisation. Where would you have been if you had not had that rapidity of mobilisation in the early stages of the war which enabled you to put 100,000 men at the place where they were wanted in France without delay? That rapidity of mobilisation depends entirely on the kind of organisation which lay at the foundation of the arrangements, such as they were, and such as they ought to have remained. You have delayed rapidity of mobilisation by collecting troops from all quarters and huddling them together in particular battalions without regard from whence they came and how they were raised. It has not mattered, because you had plenty of time to raise them in the latter stages of the war. But

1111
rapidity of mobilisation will be the bedrock and principle of the test of success of the British Army, whatever it may be in the future. I do not know what shape it will take. I trust that my noble friend, who is very keen and sympathetic about these things, will use his influence to give effect to the request of the noble Lord, and secure to us the continuance of those considerations of sentiment which make the utmost difference both to the spirit and to the efficiency of troops.
THE DUKE OF RUTLAND: My Lords, I wish to emphasise what has fallen from Lord Harris with respect to the methods of recruiting and the carrying on of the territorial system. Lord Haldane has expressed much better than I possibly could many of the views which I hold upon this subject. I venture to say, however, that I am confident that in the long run, when this war is over and when things connected with the Army are being carefully investigated, the territorial system will be found to have done as good work as any one that this country has ever had. I have always felt, having had to do with the Territorial Force from the commencement, that we should be very grateful to Lord Haldane for having initiated such a wonderful system, and one which, had it been on a little larger scale in the first instance, would have enabled us to put more men in the field than we did. Lord Haldane was the father of that Army; it is a largish Army now, and it has done and is doing wonderful work.
But it is not the Territorial Force qua Territorial Force that I have in mind, but the Line regiments belonging to the various territorial areas, and no agency has been so effective in getting recruits as the territorial system. The men have come forward in large numbers and been anxious to get into the Line regiments belonging to their particular area; but on occasion, as has happened of late, there has been a considerable number of recruits brought in from other parts of the country. I have known men to be brought from as many as seven or eight different counties to join the Leicestershire regiments. That has been owing to exceptional and peculiar circumstances; and although there have been occasions when local recruits have been sent away, as Lord Harris has described, to join other regiments in other parts of the country while at the same time recruits from outside
1112
have been brought in, those things have occurred only very rarely; and I am confident that the noble Earl opposite (Lord Derby), who, as I know, has very strong local feelings, will do his best to see that in the future the old territorial system is observed as far as the requirements of the War Office and the Army allow.
I believe the territorial system to be one of the most effective weapons we have, and it should not be lightly tampered with. But, as I say, there have been circumstances within the last year which have made it impossible to carry out recruiting solely from local areas into local Territorial and Regular regiments. That has been very unfortunate, and it undoubtedly did a certain amount of harm to recruiting at the time. But so long as we feel confident, as we do, that the War Office recognises to the full the inestimable value of the territorial system, whether applied to Line or to Territorial regiments, we can rest content that we shall never fail of a due flow of recruits to the Army.
VISCOUNT GALWAY: My Lords, before the noble Earl replies I should like to call his attention to one matter which has been overlooked in this debate, and which I think might have some influence on the territorial system. Formerly the casualty lists always stated the regiment of Yeomanry to which the officer or man belonged, but for the last few months—I do not know how long exactly—the casualty lists have stated simply "Yeomanry." Naturally every county is very proud of its Yeomanry regiment, and I think the noble Earl will admit that the county feeling has been well kept up when you consider that all Yeomanry regiments have their third line. I fail to see how it can be of assistance to the enemy if it is stated that the regiment belongs to Kent, Surrey, or whatever the county is; and as the name of the county is given in the casualty lists with regard to other regiments, I would ask the noble Earl to consider the question of allowing it in the case of Yeomanry regiments. I might add that I support every word said by Lord Harris, and I hope that the territorial system will have every encouragement.
THE EARL OF DERBY: My Lords, I hope I may be able to give a sympathetic answer to the noble Lord; and I can

1113
assure him that, although I have been transferred from the opposite side of the House to this side, my sentiments on the subject have in no way altered. If I may, I will deal first with the question which Lord Galway has just mentioned with regard to the casualties in the Territorial Force. The military authorities attach the greatest importance to not giving such information. The fact of a man being in—shall I say?—the Lancashire Hussars does not convey much information, but it may convey this information to the enemy—that this particular Brigade was in action in one particular place; and the military authorities have laid the rule down very definitely because they think publication might give valuable information. I have been into this matter personally in France. They attach the greatest importance to not giving the names of the regiments. I feel sure that when the noble Viscount knows that this is the wish of the military authorities, he will not question the decision.
With regard to the question which Lord Harris has raised, let me say that I am absolutely and entirely in sympathy with him. I strongly believe in the territorial feeling. It has been of enormous value in getting recruits in this war; and this the noble Lord can take from me as an absolute assurance—as far as anybody can give an assurance—that any departure from it is only temporary, and that we shall go back to what I believe is the right spirit, the territorial spirit, after the war. My noble friend Lord Haldane, I think, hit the nail on the head when he said that what Lord Kitchener wanted was to get the men, and that as long as he got them he was satisfied. I think there is no doubt that this was the case. Equally I have no doubt whatever that if the territorial system had been expanded it would have been worked far easier than the system of raising separate battalions. More than that—and of this I speak with practical experience—it was infinitely harder to get men to fill up a Territorial battalion which was half full than it was to get men to form a completely new battalion. Lord Haldane said that the Territorial Associations had not very much to do. They did have a great deal to do. They had to do with all the clothing and equipment of the whole of the first line; they had to make the second line, and to get 50 per cent. more for a third line.
LORD HARRIS: And there were the separation allowances.
THE EARL OF DERBY: They had to do with the separation allowances for the whole of the Force. Take my own Territorial Association. We had to do the separation allowances for two and a half divisions; and there was some work in doing that. But to return to my point. We were short in the Artillery. I tried to get men for our Territorial Artillery. Meanwhile I was asked to raise some Artillery for the New Army. I was able to raise Artillery in Lancashire and to complete two divisions before I was able to fill up the ranks of the Territorials. There was something unaccountable, but it existed, which made men prefer to go into new units than to go into old-established ones. Granted that you had not compulsory service, I have absolutely no hesitation in saying that the territorial system would have been the right one to work on. The territorial system, of which the noble Viscount (Lord Haldane) has every reason to be proud, was based not only on territorial associations, but to a certain extent on percentage of population. Therefore you would have been able to extend those divisions according to the population of the area. But the more patriotic a county was, the worse is its position at the present moment for getting recruits. Lord Harris spoke for Kent, and I speak to a certain extent for Lancashire. We were both very keen about our counties, but there were some others who were not nearly so keen, and I do not know whether he had the same experience as I did, but one of one's chief duties was warning off recruiting parties who came poaching to get recruits for other parts of the kingdom where the territorial feeling was not so strong, perhaps, as it is in Kent and Lancashire.
I quite agree with the noble Lord that, as far as possible, men ought to be kept within their county regiments. It is a great disappointment to those of us who have raised special battalions and special reserves for those battalions to find that those reserves, whom we had taken a great deal of care to bring up to the right establishment, are suddenly taken off to fill up gaps in other regiments. But we have to face this fact, that having begun in, if I may so call it, rather a haphazard way, it is almost impossible to get out of it now at the moment when the one thing we

1115
want is to make every possible use of our man power when and where it is wanted. The other day when I was in France I went into this question, and what they told me—it is sound common sense—was this. If two regiments go into action, say A and B, and A loses half its strength while B has hardly any casualties at all, and you see behind that B has enough men to make good A's casualties while A has not that reserve, you cannot stand on any rule or regulation, but you are bound to take men from B to fill up A. That is a proposition that we have to face, and I do not think anybody in this House would take the responsibility of saying to our military chiefs in the field or to our military advisers at home, "You are not to make the best use you can of your man power, because by doing so you will in some way go against territorial sentiment." To do such a thing as that would be to ask those who are responsible for the fighting in the field to fight with one arm tied behind their backs.
I entirely agree with the noble Lord that after this war we must go back to the territorial system, and I have the assurance of the military authorities that, so far as they possibly can, they will adhere to this system, because they recognise the value of keeping such men together. I ask the noble Lord to believe that I have exactly the same sentiments in this matter as he has. At the same time I ask him to agree with me that we must do nothing that would interfere in any way with the full discretion of the military authorities as to the best use to be made of the man power of this country.
LORD HARRIS: My Lords, after the extremely satisfactory reply of the noble Earl and his assurance that the interest of the War Office remains in the territorial system though they have had temporarily to depart from it, I think I ought to withdraw my Motion.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

LARCENY BILL. [H.L.]
To be read 3a on Tuesday next.
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed.

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

Consolidated Fund (No. 4).

Gas (Standard of Calorific Power).

Output of Beer (Restriction).

Isle of Man (Customs).

Public Works Loans.

Police, Factories, &c. (Miscellaneous Provisions).

Expiring Laws Continuance.

Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (No. 2).

Local Government Provisional Order (No. 3).

Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 5).

Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 7).

Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders.

Land Drainage (Feltwell) Provisional Order.

Land Drainage (Lilleshall) Provisional Order.

Aberdare and Aberaman Gas.

Tynemouth Corporation.

Colchester Gas.

Ferndale Gas.

Great Central and Sheffield District Railways.

House adjourned at five minutes past seven o'clock, to Tuesday next, a quarter past four o'clock.