Lords Sitting of 26 July 1917

PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday next (The Lord Hylton). (No. 84.)
ASHTON-UNDER-LYNE CORPORATION BILL. [H.L.]
  NORTH CHESHIRE WATER BILL. [H.L.]
  Returned from the Commons, agreed to with Amendments: The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 1), BILL.
  Reported, without amendment, and recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.
  Reported, with Amendments, and recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.
  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 3) BILL.
  Reported, without amendment, and recommitted to a Committee of the Whole House on Tuesday next.
  ROYAL VICTORIA INFIRMARY, NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE BILL. [H.L.]
  Reported, with Amendments.
  SOUTH EASTERN AND LONDON, CHATHAM AND DOVER RAILWAYS BILL.
  Read 3a, with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

  SOLICITORS (EXAMINATION) BILL. [H.L.]
  A Bill to amend, in connection with the present war, the law relating to the qualifying examinations for Solicitors—Was presented by the Lord Chancellor; read 1a, to be printed; and to be read 2a on Tuesday next, (No. 85.)
  Representation of the People Bill: Redistribution of Seats (Boundary Commission, England and Wales)—Letter amending instructions in accordance with Resolution of the House of Commons on 19th June, 1917:
  Cape of Good Hope Observatory—Report of His Majesty's Astronomer at the Cape of Good Hope to the Secretary of the Admiralty, for the year 1916:
  Presented (by command), and ordered to lie on the Table.

  LAND DRAINAGE (WISTOW) PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL.
  Read 3a (according to Order), with the Amendments, and passed, and returned to the Commons.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, I desire to ask the noble Earl who leads the House whether he is able to make any statement to-day on the business to be transacted before we disperse for the recess. As I understand, the principal measure which will come up to your Lordships' House from another place is the Corn Production Bill, to which the House will no doubt desire to pay full attention. I should not suppose, subject to what may be the view of your Lordships, that it would be thought necessary for a very long interval to pass between the arrival of that measure here and its being put down for Second Reading. On the other hand, no doubt it would be desired that substantial time should be allowed between the Second Reading and the Committee stage. If the noble Earl is able to give us information, not only on this point but on the general business for the remainder of the present sittings, I am sure your Lordships will be grateful.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON): My Lords, I am sorry to be obliged to give a rather less definite answer to the question put by the noble Marquess than I had expected. As he pointed out, the determining factor in the case is the Corn Production Bill and the date at which that measure will come up to us from another place. On your Lordships' Paper there is a Motion standing in the name of the noble Earl, Lord Selborne, for August 1, and I should have liked to move that your Lordships' House should adjourn from August 2 until August 14. On the assumption that the Corn Production Bill did not reach us at an earlier date and that no other business of an important character required your Lordships' House to sit in the interval, I

  45
  should still hope to carry out that programme. But just now I was informed from another place that the prospects of the Corn Production Bill are rather more rosy as regards the date of its passage through the House of Commons than I had thought, and it may be that that Bill will leave another place sufficiently early to enable us to take the Second Reading in the manner suggested by the noble Marquess at an earlier date than I had anticipated. If that be so, there would then be, I imagine, a brief adjournment between the period of the Second Reading and the Committee stage in your Lordships' House. These matters are still undecided. But in the event of this sanguine prediction about the date of the Corn Production Bill coming from another place not being realised, I should still hope to ask your Lordships to take a brief holiday from the 2nd to the 14th of August.

  MARTIN'S DIVORCE BILL. [H.L.]
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to.
  House in Committee accordingly.
  [THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
  Clauses 1 to 5 agreed to.
  Clause 6:
  Payment by Thomas Ernest Martin to Nita Martin of£1,000.
  6. That the said Thomas Ernest Martin shall pay to the said Nita Martin the sum of One thousand pounds as provision for her future maintenance.
  LORD ATKINSON: My Lords, the clause which I desire to insert in substitution for the present Clause 6 embodies an agreement arrived at by the parties as regards the payment of alimony. It was mentioned at the Second Reading and approved of by your Lordships who were then present.
  Amendment moved—
  Leave out Clause 6, and insert as a new clause:
  " 6. The said Thomas Ernest Martin shall pay to the said Nita Martin, dum casta et sola, permanent alimony at such a rate as together with any sum payable by him as permanent alimony under any Order of the High Court of Justice in Ireland shall amount to three pounds per week."—(Lord Atkinson.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 7 agreed to.
  Clause 8:
  To bar Thomas Ernest Martin from marriage with Stella Patricia Hastings.
  8. It shall not be lawful for the said Thomas Ernest Martin to intermarry with the said Stella Patricia Hastings.
  LORD ATKINSON: My Lords, in accordance with the usual practice, I move that this clause be deleted.
  Amendment moved—
  Leave out Clause 8.—(Lord Atkinson.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  The Report of Amendments to be received on Tuesday next.

  PARKER'S DIVORCE BILL. [H.L.]
  Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  On Question, Bill read 3a.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I move a verbal Amendment in the Preamble. It is on page 2, line 10, to leave out the words "and the date hereof." The words are quite inappropriate here, and should be deleted.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 2, line 10, leave out (" and the date hereof ").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Bill passed, and sent to the Commons.

  NAVAL AND MILITARY WAR PENSIONS, &c., (TRANSFER OF POWERS) BILL.
  Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee, read.
  Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Earl of Crawford.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to.
  House in Committee accordingly.
  [THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]
  Clause 1 agreed to
  Clause 2:
  2.—(1) The Minister of Pensions shall as soon as may be after the passing of this Act constitute for the purposes of this Act a committee, which shall be known as the special grants committee and shall consist of such number of persons, not being more than ten, as the Minister shall determine.
  THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE EARL OF CRAWFORD): I move an Amendment in subsection (1) of Clause 2, to leave out "ten" and insert "twelve." This enlarges the membership of the Special Grants Committee from ten to twelve.
  Amendment moved—
  Clause 2, page 3, line 9, leave out (" ten ") and insert (" twelve ").—(The Earl of Crawford.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 3:
  (2) Out of the funds belonging to the Statutory Committee derived from or representing money provided by Parliament, there shall be transferred to a special account to be opened for the purpose at the Bank of England to be called "the Ministry of Pensions (Special Grants) Account" (herein-after referred to as "the special grants account") the sum of five hundred thousand pounds, and the balance of such funds shall be paid into the Exchequer.
  THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I move to amend subsection (2) of Clause 3 by leaving out "at the Bank of England" and inserting" in accordance with directions to be given by the Treasury." The marginal note to Clause 3 is "Transfer of staff and funds." This Amendment does affect the question of funds, but not in a money but only in an administrative sense. Instead of stating in the Act of Parliament that money which belongs to the Statutory Committee should be placed at the Bank of England, it is suggested that it should be placed in accordance with directions given by the Treasury. As it is wholly an administrative point, I think the Amendment is one which in this House we are fully entitled to insert.
  Amendment moved—
  Clause 3, page 3, line 10, leave out (" at the Bank of England ") and insert (" in accordance with directions to be given by the Treasury ").—(The Earl of Crawford.)
  THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, I do not rise to make any objection to the Amendment which has just been moved by the noble Earl; indeed, the contrary. The Amendment, as the noble Earl has pointed out, is no doubt administrative in its force rather than financial, but still it is possible that in another place such an Amendment might be regarded by some as contravening the privilege of that House. I only rise to express the hope—founded on the fact that this change in the Bill is
  48
  intrinsically desirable and for the benefit of the public—that if such a view is taken by the authorities or by the House at large in another place, they will repeat the action which they have sometimes taken on former occasions and waive their privilege on the ground of the definite merits attaching to the proposal of the noble Earl.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.
  Clause 4:
  (2) Payments out of and into the special grants account shall be made, and all other matters relating to the account and to the money standing to the credit of the account, shall be regulated in such manner as the Treasury direct.
  THE EARL OF CRAWFORD THE EARL OF CRAWFORD moved to amend subsection (2) of Clause 4, after the word "account" (where it last appears), by inserting "including the investment of any such money." The noble Earl said: This is another Amendment of the character to which the noble Marquess has just alluded. It is to give power to the Pensions Ministry and the Special Committee to invest money at their disposal. It is true that it does touch money, but the money belonging to the State will be increased if this power is granted; and subject to the note of warning which the noble Marquess has just uttered, I submit this Amendment to the favourable consideration of your Lordships. I believe, indeed, that no objection will in point of fact be taken to it in another place. It is probably more convenient that an amendment should be made here than that both Houses of Parliament should have to pass an Amending Bill at a subsequent stage.
  Amendment moved—
  Clause 4, page 3, line 27, after (" account ") insert (" including the investment of any such money ").—(The Earl of Crawford.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.
  Remaining clause agreed to.
  The Report of Amendments to be received on Tuesday next, and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 86.)

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ALLOTMENTS AND LAND CULTIVATION) (IRELAND) BILL.
  Read 3a (according to Order), and passed.

  FOOD CONTROL.
  LORD SYDENHAM LORD SYDENHAM rose to ask His Majesty's Government what measures they hive in view for dealing with the question of the control of food supplies. The noble Lord said: My Lords, it is quite certain that the food production of the world is not nearly being maintained at the present time, and that the longer the war lasts the greater must be the total deficiency. When peace comes there must be a shortage which will create famine conditions in many parts of Europe; and, besides that, the heavy losses which shipping has sustained will aggravate the difficulties and delay post-war reconstruction. The submarine menace has not been brought under control so far, and the continuous destruction of large steamers remains a source of great anxiety. The economic position of Germany and Austria-Hungary is very bad; and the German Chancellor, in his recent speech, thought it necessary to hold out strong hopes that our condition would shortly be worse. It depends mainly upon our handling of the question of food supplies in all its branches to falsify those hopes.
  There is a general wish throughout the country to know the lines of policy which the noble Lord the Food Controller proposes to follow. At the same time, I am sure that his wisdom in taking time to consider and master the whole situation is universally recognised. If the question of the food supply is important from the economic, it is also quite as important—if not more—from the political point of view. The Report of Mr. Barnes's Commission, which your Lordships have seen, shows that, among the several causes which are now contributing to create unrest, high food prices and the resentment felt against profiteering are, perhaps, the most prominent. The Commissioners say that the great majority of manual workers are anxious to do their best to help to win the war. I believe this to be perfectly true. But, on the other hand, there is among us an organisation, uniting several rather diverse elements and apparently well provided with funds, which is working actively and strenuously to bring about an immediate peace by the agency of strikes of a revolutionary character. Of this organisation Mr. Victor Fisher, the able and earnest secretary of the British Workers League, wrote the other day, shortly after the very ominous proceedings which took place at Leeds—
  50
  " I hear it repeated on all sides that these people do not represent the masses of the British workers. That is true; but the revolutionists are organised for the specific purpose of revolution, and the masses of the British workers are not so organised."
  My Lords, that is where the danger lies at the present time. As Mr. Hederson—fresh from Petrograd—has pointed out, quite a small body of extremists has brought Russia to the brink of ruin. These are his significant words—
  " It is true that they do not represent more than a small minority of the population; but such has been the spirit of terror exercised, taken with their destructive influence over certain sections of the military forces, that they succeeded in rendering good and stable government difficult, if not almost impossible."
  I suppose that all that can be done is to take every possible step to remove the legitimate grievances of our working classes; and the noble Lord, in the measures that he is about to take, may play a great part in helping to allay the discontent which unscrupulous agitators so well know how to turn to account.
  I am quite certain that the noble Lord will deal sternly with profiteers wherever they are to be found, but I hope that where he finds that high prices are not due to profiteering he will make that fact perfectly clear to the public. There are pitfalls in his path which I am certain he will avoid. It is above all things necessary that the clearest statements should be made for public guidance, and that abrupt changes of policy, which create perplexity and distrust, should be shunned as far as possible. It is also most necessary that the Ministry of Food Control should work in the closest touch with the Board of Agriculture, and that the statements made by these two Departments should never be allowed to conflict. In the past there has not been nearly enough co-ordination in this sense in the work of Public Departments. It is essential that they should all say the same thing when they deal with the same subject.
  The noble Lord, as we all know, is pre-eminently practical, and I am quite sure that he realises that equitable distribution is perhaps the crux of his great problem. That is where the elaborate organisations of the Germans have hitherto failed. I am sure the noble Lord also realises that the conditions between town and country life differ widely, and that measures suited to the one may be quite impracticable in the other. In Germany it appears that all classes are persistently attempting to evade

  51
  the food regulations in every way they can. It has been stated in the Reichstag that in Greater Berlin alone there are between twenty and thirty establishments engaged in forging bread tickets. Here the appeal to conscience and reason has materially helped to bring about a distinct saving of food consumption, and this, I think, is a hopeful and encouraging sign. I believe that the noble Lord will have the full support and the confidence of every true citizen in the difficult and anxious task which he has so patriotically undertaken.
  THE FOOD CONTROLLER (LORD RHONDDA): My Lords, I am indebted to Lord Sydenham for affording me this opportunity of making a statement on the policy of my Department in regard to the control of food supplies and the fixing of prices. I am also indebted to him for his friendly references to myself. I should further like to take this opportunity of thanking your Lordships' House, the public, and the Press for the patience that has been exercised in waiting a few weeks until I had an opportunity of settling down to the duties of my Department, and I am particularly gratified at the confidence shown by trade unionists in the new Food Controller. My relations with those in my employ have, I think, on the whole been fairly good; but we have crossed swords occasionally, and when that has been the case there has been no mistake about it that we had crossed swords. Your Lordships, I think, recognise that the task I have undertaken—I think I might almost say the task which has been imposed upon me—is no sinecure. The labour involved in endeavouring to meet very natural expectations, in at the same time coming to important decisions, and in, I will not say reorganising the Ministry of Food Control, but largely extending the organisation to meet the increased duties that are being imposed upon it, make the position an exceedingly difficult one. I should like, before I proceed further, to pay my tribute of appreciation to the excellent work done by my predecessor, Lord Devonport. His task was an exceedingly difficult one. It is a fairly easy matter to go into an old Department, well organised, and with its functions clearly defined through the exercise of them over a long period of years; it is a very different matter to take over a new Department, with an entirely new staff previously largely unknown to one another, and with the duties not altogether defined.
  52
  I feel very keenly the responsibility of the statement I am about to make, and the necessity, as the noble Lord has pointed out, for being as accurate as possible. Therefore, with your Lordships' permission, I propose to rely very fully upon the notes which I have prepared for this occasion. Representations have been made to me from several quarters in respect to the difficulty and danger of any attempt to fix food prices, and further that the present high range of prices is due to interference by the Government in the free play of supply and demand. Reference was made to the matter in another place yesterday. No student of economic law would lightly interfere with the operation of supply and demand at any time. I should myself be the last man to do so in times of peace. Indeed, I hold strongly that the less Government intervened in business in ordinary times the better. But we are living under very extraordinary conditions when the nation may later find itself short of some of the necessaries of life, and in these circumstances I think we must be prepared to interrupt for a time the free play of economic laws and fix more or less arbitrarily the prices at which some of the principal articles of food may be sold. We are in the case of a man who is willing to take drugs in order to tide him over a serious but temporary illness, though he knows that under normal conditions of health the continued use of such remedies would prove very harmful.
  I may again remind your Lordships that a deficiency of only a very few per cent. in an article of prime necessity may raise the price of that article in an altogether disproportionate degree—to a price, in fact, beyond the reach of the poorer classes of the country. True, there is no immediate prospect of a serious shortage in any important article of consumption. Nevertheless, a number of commodities have reached extravagant prices, though these prices are not so high as in other countries, and already the increase has produced a feeling of unrest in many quarters. The effect of the rise in price has naturally varied among different sections of the people.
  The Board of Trade estimate that while the cost of food has on an average rather more than doubled, the cost of living to the wage-earner has increased by over 75 per cent. In some cases wages have advanced sufficiently to cover the increased cost of

  53
  living, while in others there has been only a comparatively small advance, and in some cases none at all. The wages of a large number of textile workers in Lancashire have risen only from 15 to 20 per cent. on pre-war rates, and your Lordships will realise the great hardships which these workers endure with the purchasing value of the sovereign reduced to less than one-half. I confess that I should view with some alarm the effect which any further rise in prices might have in fostering a spirit of discontent among the people, and thus hampering the action of those who are charged with bringing the war to a successful issue. Fortunately it is possible, by the exercise of a little self-sacrifice and the avoidance of waste on the part of the community generally, both to maintain adequate supplies of food and to reduce substantially the price of the chief necessaries of life.
  It would, however, be the greatest folly to underestimate the possible dangers that lie ahead, or to argue that because the submarine menace has thus far led to little deprivation on our part, we need be under no alarm for the future. The effect of the loss of tonnage is cumulative, and until the shipbuilding programme of the Allies results in replacing vessels as rapidly as they are sunk, we cannot be said to be out of danger. I would therefore make the most earnest appeal to all classes of the community not to relax their efforts in economy in the smallest degree, but rather to redouble them. In that direction lies the most patriotic service which those at home can render to their country, and the most effective aid which we can give to our brave soldiers at the Front.
  But if the Food Controller is to set aside economic law and arbitrarily to fix prices, it can only be in those articles over the supply of which he can secure complete control and obtain a virtual monopoly, and even under these conditions he must not overlook the effect his action may have in discouraging supply and in increasing consumption. It will further be necessary to have regard to what may be called the parity of prices—that is to say, their relation in food values—so as not to risk too great a change in the relative demand of the respective articles. The heavy increase in the cost of production and in that of purchase, where the article is imported, must also be borne in mind. In commodities over the supply of which I
  54
  cannot secure effective control—commodities, for example, in which a large proportion of our requirements are drawn from neutral countries—it may not be practicable to reduce prices, except, of course, with the help of State subsidies, the risk of cutting off supplies being too great.
  My policy, broadly stated, is to fix the prices of those articles of prime necessity over the supply of which I can obtain effective control at all stages from the producer down to the retailer. Such prices will, as far as possible, be fixed on the principle of allowing a reasonable pre-war profit for those engaged in the production and distribution of the particular commodity. Indeed, the policy will in effect be one of determining profits at every stage, though it will take the form of fixing prices. Every effort will be made to prevent speculation, and unnecessary middlemen will be eliminated. Existing agencies—I make a strong point of this—will be utilised for purposes of distribution under licence and control, and under the supervision of local food controllers to be appointed by the local authorities.
  It is intended to decentralise the work of the Ministry of Food as far as possible and devolve important functions upon the local authorities, and in this way to exercise a close supervision over the distribution of supplies, and in particular to provide a more equitable distribution of sugar, than now obtains. Your Lordships will appreciate the magnitude of the task imposed upon the Ministry of Food. The time and means at our disposal make it impossible to provide anything approaching a perfect organisation, nor can we hope to avoid public inconvenience or the infliction of hardship, and possibly in some cases injustice, on traders. We shall naturally use every endeavour to reduce these to a minimum, and to avoid differential treatment as far as possible; but we are at war, and each and all must be ready to make sacrifices.
  The noble Lord referred to profiteering. I must admit I have not been able to obtain a satisfactory definition of the term, or to determine in what degree it is responsible for the present high range of prices. Where excessive profits have been made within the law, Governments, past and present, must be held largely responsible for permitting them, and must bear their full share of blame. Where profits have been made

  55
  illegally, I hardly think that the infliction of a fine is likely to prove a sufficient deterrent in many instances, and I shall press for imprisonment in all cases that I regard of sufficient gravity, irrespective of the age or position of the delinquent. In my judgment no man is entitled to make any gain out of the necessities of the nation, especially in times such as these; and without attempting further to arrive at a precise definition of the profiteer, I propose to eliminate him by fixing prices at every stage on the basis of pre-war profits.
  To illustrate the general policy I have outlined, I will ask your Lordships' permission to give in more detail the arrangements which my Department propose to make in the case of some of the more important articles. What I have to say on the proposed regulation of bread has been somewhat anticipated in the very admirable and clear statement made by my colleague, Mr. Clynes, on behalf of the Food Ministry yesterday in another place, but perhaps it would be convenient that I should repeat it.
  SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS: Hear, hear.
  LORD RHONDDA: The action proposed in respect of bread is this. All the flour mills of any importance have been, or will be, taken over by the Government and will work on Government account. From the mills, flour will be sold to the bakers at a uniform price. Bakers obtaining flour at this price will be expected to sell the quartern loaf across the counter for a maximum of 9d. cash, and will only be able to charge more if they can prove to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Food, or of a local food authority, that they have specially high and unavoidable working costs. Bakers will, however, in all cases be allowed to make an additional charge for delivery or for giving credit. The retail price of flour will be fixed to correspond with that of bread. British wheat will be bought by the mills at the price determined on by the Government from time to time. It is proposed that the price for British wheat of sound quality shall over the year average 72 s. per quarter of 480 lbs. The actual price will be graduated, probably starting at 70 s. in the early part of the year, and rising to 74 s. later. The procedure governing the purchase of British wheat by millers will prevent profiteering, speculation, or unnecessary inter-trading by middlemen. Millers will be encouraged as far as possible
  56
  to purchase both wheat and barley direct from the farmer; but where to ensure proper distribution the services of a merchant are required, the number of transactions and the profit will be strictly limited and may not exceed 1s. a quarter in all. Imported wheat will be supplied to the mills at a price corresponding with the price determined on for British wheat. Under these proposals the price charged to the millers for both British and imported wheat will be lower than that at which the Government purchases are made. The difference in each case will be met by a subsidy from the Exchequer. I should mention that there will be no restriction as to price in the sale of seed grain purchased for seed, and the recent Order prohibiting dealing in grain of the 1917 crop will not apply to such transactions. I fully expected that the policy of subsidising the loaf would be adversely criticised in some quarters. It is a policy that can be justified only by the conditions under which we are living and the impossibility of otherwise reducing the price of bread, the chief food of the poor. I accept the fullest responsibility for this policy, and indeed I urged it myself upon the Cabinet. Four-fifths of our wheat supplies come oversea; without these supplies we should quickly starve, and we are not ourselves in a position to determine the price to be paid to the producer abroad. I am watching with great interest the action which is being taken by the United States. I hope that they will be able to take measures to control effectively their food supplies. I need hardly say that co-operation between the two countries in matters of food will be of enormous value to the Allies as a whole.
  Many responsible representatives of labour have assured me that they would rather see the higher cost of living met by a reduction in the cost of food than by an advance in wages. It is idle to talk of curtailing our expenditure abroad by reducing the import of food upon which the very life of the nation depends. It appears to me to be a perfectly legitimate action in times such as we are passing through to hand back to the consumer a part of the excess profits to which he contributes. The high prices which lead to excess profits are an indirect form of taxation collected for the State through the employer, and it is little satisfaction to the consumer who pays the high price to be told that the greater portion of the profit derived from it goes back to the

  57
  State. He would naturally prefer to handle it directly himself in a lower price.
  It will not, I hope, be thought irrelevant if I interpose here a few words on the relation of war bread to the health of the community, which has been causing some anxiety if I may judge from the space devoted to the question in the Press and the complaints which have reached the Ministry of Food. These complaints have been investigated, and I am assured by my medical advisers that, with the possible exception of the more serious disturbances of digestion in which almost any form of bread might be harmful, they fail to afford evidence of medical trouble directly due to war bread. Roughly one half of the complaints received refer to diseases the course of which cannot possibly be influenced by the kind of bread consumed. Inquiries addressed to provincial hospitals and sanatoria and to medical officers of health have, in the great majority of cases, elicited unequivocal testimony to the satisfactory quality of the bread so far as its nutritive properties and its effect upon health are concerned. Where small disturbances of health are mentioned they are such as might be ascribed to the dearth which has obtained of potatoes, green vegetables, and fruit, and to the hot weather experienced in June, which undoubtedly predisposed workers to disturbances of digestion.
  The complaints as a whole largely reflect the fact that the nation is now nearing the end of the third year of unprecedented strain, physical and mental. The country must face cheerfully the necessity for using bread of a quality somewhat below that to which it has grown accustomed. The food value of the bread supplied now is as high as heretofore. The hot weather of June caused an outbreak of the change in bread known as "rope." The micro-organisms responsible for this change are common everywhere and are not directly harmful to man. There is not, I may say in parenthesis, the slightest foundation for the absurd impression that "rope" is a disease of man. The best means of combating "rope," should it reappear, are being studied with every prospect of success.
  Both the miller and the baker have had considerable difficulties to contend with, and I gladly take this opportunity of acknowledging the spirit in which they have met them. The miller has had to
  58
  produce from maize and other cereals a grade of flour which would blend satisfactorily with wheat flour containing more of the outer part of the grain than formerly, and the baker has had to bake bread from a composite flour whose properties differ from the flour to which he has been accustomed. In both cases loyal effort has met the greater part of the difficulties, and those which remain will be overcome as experience grows.
  I come next to meat, the supply of which, unlike that of wheat, is derived at the present time mainly from this country. The fixing of the price of meat has presented difficulties owing to the unprecedented rise in the cost of store cattle a few months back. Farmers have bought store cattle admittedly at high prices in the expectation of realising high prices for fat cattle during the autumn. The problem before me has been to secure a general and considerable reduction in the price of meat without involving serious loss to farmers who had bought stores in good faith and in the ordinary course of business. At the same time it is impossible to admit that the hardships to the consumer involved in the high prices of beef now ruling should continue because a proportion, admittedly a very large proportion, of farmers have paid high prices for store. The maximum live weight prices fixed for Array purchases, in agreement, the noble Lord will be glad to hear, with the Board of Agriculture—namely, 74 s. per cwt. for September, 72 s. for October, 67 s. for November and December, and 60 s. for January—will enable the farmer who has paid high prices for his stores to realise during the earlier months without very serious losses, and will at the same time at once lead to a reduction of price to the consumer of, I hope, 3d. per lb. by September; while by the end of the year it is estimated that the reduction will reach the substantial figure of at least 6d. per lb. retail on prime joints.
  But it would not do to fix the prices of cattle and to leave the profits of dealers and butchers uncontrolled in the case of civilian sales and in the circumstances of the present demand for meat. Steps are therefore being taken carefully to analyse figures so as to determine what margin between the price of cattle and the price of beef will, on the average, yield to the dealer or butcher a fair rate of profit comparable to the profit he would have obtained under pre-war conditions. Based on the price of

  59
  cattle for the Army and the margins determined in this manner the wholesale price of beef will be fixed, and butchers and others will base their purchases of cattle on this wholesale price. The wholesale carcase price of beef will be the same for the great industrial centres. All wholesale and retail dealers will be registered, and their rates of profit limited by fixing prices. Their right to remain on the register will depend on the proper observation of the conditions laid down by the Ministry of Food and the local food committee concerned. Serious infraction will involve the withdrawal of this right, in addition to any punishment which the Courts may inflict.
  In fixing actual retail prices of meat the circumstances of each locality will have to be considered. The methods of cutting up meat vary in different parts of the kingdom. It is proposed, after the limits of profit which the retail butcher may be allowed to make have been fixed, that the fixing of detailed price lists for the different joints should, subject to guidance from the Ministry and within certain limits, be left to the local food committee. The responsibility for enforcing these schedules of prices will also fall on the local committee. It is hoped that the decentralisation of the control of retail prices may not only secure that the retail prices are properly applicable to the circumstances of the particular locality, but that it may induce a measure of generous rivalry between neighbouring localities to keep down prices. It is certain that it will render much more rapid and effective the bringing into operation of the scheme of control.
  The fixation of maximum prices without further control of the supplies involves considerable risk of the arrangements for distribution breaking down. In normal circumstances shortage of supplies in any locality results in a rise of prices which immediately brings in supplies. If maximum prices are fixed this automatic method of distribution may to some extent cease to operate. It is therefore essential that there should be ready a carefully organised scheme of control for the purpose of securing that supplies come forward regularly at the rate at which consumption can be allowed, and that the supplies are distributed equitably among consumers. It is intended to use the ordinary channels of trade and existing agencies for distribution to the fullest possible extent, subject to the elimination of all unnecessary middlemen
  60
  and to the control of profits at each stage. So long as the ordinary trade arrangements secure an equitable distribution of meat throughout the country there will be no need to intervene, but arrangements will be ready by which local shortages will be dealt with expeditiously, and, if the necessity arises, limited supplies can be equitably distributed. It should be borne in mind that these meat prices are maximum prices. Mutton and pork prices will be fixed relatively to those fixed for beef.
  I ought to say, in justice to farmers, that one of the main causes for the increase of prices of meat has been the enormous increase in the cost of feeding stuffs. I know to my own cost that they are something like three times the pre-war level. It is anticipated that, with the wider powers of control now possessed by the Ministry of Food, considerable reductions in the cost of feeding stuffs to the farmer may be possible. It must be borne in mind, however, that whilst every effort will be made not only to get cheaper supplies of feeding stuffs but also adequate supplies, the situation as to supplies of feeding stuffs is controlled by the general shortage of shipping and the need of shipping for other purposes. Therefore I cannot give any guarantee. It will be noted that the proposed reduction in price in the case of both bread and meat amounts, roughly, to 25 per cent. on current prices.
  I now propose to say a word with regard to milk. In regard to the price of winter milk, which has received much public attention and to which your Lordships may wish me to refer, a pledge was given on the authority of the President of the Board of Agriculture last April that—
  " unless the prices of feeding-stuffs are in the meantime substantially reduced, the winter contract prices of milk will not be less than 1s. 8d. a gallon."
  By that pledge the Government are bound, and I am obliged to frame Orders to carry out the promise made before I took office. The price to the consumer must, of course, include the expenses of wholesale and retail distribution. Into those expenses an investigation is being made by the accountants of the Ministry of Food, and the public can be assured that no unnecessary profits on distribution will be included in the price of winter milk. It has been suggested that the price should be raised for the remainder of the summer, but I see no sufficient reason at present for such an increase in price

  61
  to the public. Should there be any serious shortages in the winter, provision will have to be made, of course, that the needs of children come first.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Did the noble. Lord mention the figure by which he thought he might be able to reduce the cost of feeding stuffs?
  LORD RHONDDA: No; I am not able to do so. I hope that it will be a substantial one, but I can give no guarantee at this stage. I pass to the functions of the local food control committees that we propose to set up. I am about to ask local authorities in Great Britain to undertake certain important duties on behalf of the Ministry of Food. I hope in the course of next week to address to them, through my colleague Mr. Hayes Fisher, the President of the Local Government Board, a letter with full details of these duties. I am obliged, however, to ask them to take early action; and since many of them are about to go into recess, it may be convenient if I take this opportunity of stating with some precision what they will be asked to do. The local authorities to be approached for this purpose in England and Wales will be the municipal corporations and the urban and rural district councils. We have not finally determined what the local authorities in Scotland will be. Each local authority will be asked to appoint a food control committee consisting of not more than twelve members. The committee should probably consist partly, but need not wholly consist, of members of the local authority. It will be a committee of the local authority and will report to it from time to time, but not for confirmation of its proceedings. It will be provided that the committee must include, where practicable, at least one representative of labour and one woman.
  In view of the work which the committee will have to undertake, I wish to emphasise the importance of securing that the committee takes full advantage of the experience in regard to food distribution possessed by co-operative societies and other traders. In deciding the membership of these committees local authorities should also have regard to the importance of utilising in the food economy work which they will be asked to undertake the experience gained by many of the war savings committees. I expect that the food control
  62
  committee will find it convenient to act in many cases through sub-committees, which may include other persons than members of the main committee. I propose gradually to extend the functions of these committees. Their first duties, however, will be—

  (a) to exercise certain powers in regard to the enforcement of the Food Controller's Orders;

  (b) to register the retailers of various foodstuffs, and to recommend necessary variations in the scale of retail prices as fixed by the Food Controller;

  (c) to continue and develop the campaign for food economy;

  (d) to administer a new scheme of sugar distribution.

  Among the first of the duties of the committees may very likely be that of considering cases in which bakers and others claim to be unable, owing to the special circumstances of their business, to sell at the prices fixed by the Food Controller. This function will, I trust, be used with the utmost care and very sparingly. Arrangements will be made to allow food control committees to grant provisional licence for these prices to be increased in exceptional cases, subject to a review of each case on subsequent examination. Committees may be asked to exercise a somewhat similar power in regard to the prices of meat.
  The war savings committees are compelled, owing to their other responsibilities, to relinquish the admirable work which they have been doing in securing food economy in the country. It is proposed that the new food control committees should take over from them the important duty of maintaining and developing national economy in food consumption. It may be found convenient to entrust this branch of the work to a special sub-committee. Advice will be given from time to time by a special department of the Ministry, so that committees may know, for example, at any moment in what article it is especially desired to secure economy. An important feature in this branch of the work will be the establishment, where local circumstances suggest that they are required, of central or communal kitchens. Experiments already made in this direction lead me to hope that there is a considerable future for the central kitchen run on commercial lines for the provision of well-cooked

  63
  meals at a reasonable price. The idea of these communal kitchens will be that they shall be run with a view to economising food and not in any sense as charitable institutions. Economies both in food and in coal can, I believe, be effected by this means.
  The present distribution of sugar based on 1915 requirements is not satisfactory and requires considerable alteration. The arrangement which the food control committees will be asked to administer is designed to remedy the present inequalities in distribution, and, incidentally, to secure information which will be of much value for the purpose of adjusting the regulation of other foodstuffs. Arrangements will be made to ration hotels, restaurants, and manufacturers, and every householder will be invited to apply to the local food control committee for a sugar card. The householder will be asked to take his card to the retailer from whom he would like, in due course, to obtain his sugar, and to register with him. This will enable the retailer to apply for sugar to meet his customers' requirements. It will, however, be some little time before these sugar cards can be issued to the public, and the new scale of distribution cannot, I much regret to say, come into complete working order for several months, though I hope that some improvement may be effected in distribution in the meantime.
  Not only will the alterations required in present distribution, which it will be seen are very considerable, take some time before they can take complete effect, but losses at sea and delays in transport may at any time cause a dislocation of supplies. It is the object of the scheme to secure that whatever supplies are available are divided equally among all classes. I have deliberately decided against the introduction of any system of rationing by sugar tickets. The success of the scheme will therefore largely depend on the willing and intelligent co-operation of the public. I am also giving consideration to the question of the prices and supplies of tea and margarine, and hope to announce the policy of my Department on those matters shortly. I do not know that I can usefully occupy your Lordships' attention further this evening. I have to thank you for the indulgence you have shown in listening to what I am afraid has been a somewhat dull and dreary statement.
  THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWN: The noble Lord told us about the prices of fat cattle, but I think he omitted to mention the prices of store cattle. The main cause of the large rise in the price of meat has been the inordinate price of store cattle. What arrangement does the noble Lord propose with regard to store cattle in the way of maximum prices?
  LORD RHONDDA: Perhaps it would be convenient if I defer my answer to the noble Earl until other questions have been put, and then reply to them all together.
  VISCOUNT HARCOURT: I am not proposing to make any observations on the very able statement we have heard from the noble Lord, but there are one or two questions I should like to put to him. First what is the sugar card for householders if it is not a ration ticket? We did not understand what it was to effect. Secondly, has the noble Lord made, or is he going to make, any provision for special machinery for turning potatoes into potato flour during this summer?
  LORD RHONDDA: There is a Question later on the Paper about that.
  VISCOUNT HARCOURT: Then I will only put the question about the sugar rations.
  THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY: My Lords, I come from Norfolk, where we fatten a number of bullocks, and I should like to ask my noble friend the Food Controller how he proposes that these bullocks shall be weighed. I fatten a number of beasts myself. It would be of service to know whether these are to be weighed outside my yards, or whether they are to wait until they go elsewhere before being weighed. As the noble Lord is aware, bullocks lose a great deal of weight on a journey. They may be sent a long distance, and weight is lost particularly in cold weather. In my county farmers grow a good deal of corn, and at the same time, as I have said, they fatten a large number of bullocks. The whole secret of farming high—I am not talking as a landowner now, but as a farmer, for I farm my own farm—is to have plenty of what we call "muck" in Norfolk—in other words farmyard manure. You are giving a large incentive, and rightly, to farmers to grow corn; but you must beware. If you hold out this incentive to grow corn it may not

  65
  be worth the while of farmers to fatten bullocks, which is a difficult thing, because our bullocks do not go out until after January I in the main. There is great danger of land deteriorating unless you allow an adequate margin in regard to bullocks to enable the farmers to ensure sufficient "muck" in order to keep the land fertile. If you give us feeding stuffs cheaper than they are at present, we can turn out all you like to ask for. In 1911, when we had the worst root crop in Norfolk that I remember, I myself had one of my best years for bullocks. Why? Because feeding stuffs were cheap. I could buy meal and cake cheaply, and by using very much less roots and giving the cattle sufficient clear water to drink I was able to turn out more bullocks than ever before. This year we shall have a very short root crop on account of the hot and dry weather. A short root crop means that bullocks will have to be fed on meal and cake. The problem is where is the reduction in the price of feeding stuffs to be made. Perhaps the noble Lord can enlighten us upon this.
  THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, while congratulating the noble Lord on the general terms of his statement and its extreme lucidity, I would ask two questions which I think will help to clear up the situation. One is a special matter affecting London. The noble Lord, in stating how these committees were to be formed, did not make it clear to me who the authorities in London will be to whom these powers are to be entrusted. He spoke generally of urban and rural district councils. I was not certain whether he intended that the powers should be given to the London County Council, or otherwise. No doubt he will be able to reply to this question.
  The other point arises out of what was said by my noble friend Lord Kimberley. When Lord Rhondda was speaking he mentioned as an accepted fact that for the time being supplies of meat have to come from this country—that is to say, that a far smaller proportion than usual of imported meat will be consumed during the next few months. That is a point which concerns the whole series of subjects raised by my noble friend. My desire is merely to ask His Majesty's Government whether it is proposed that on this occasion the whole question should be opened up—because it has never been discussed in this House so far—of the reasons for trusting
  66
  for the time being for beef to the existing supply of cattle in this country, rather than, as we usually do, to a large proportion of imported meat, including thereby, of course, the feeding of the Armies at the Front; or whether, in the opinion of His Majesty's Government, it would be better to take that subject separately—I know that a number of my noble friends around me are anxious to discuss it separately—rather than to mix it up with the special matter of food control which has been so clearly explained by the noble Lord. I dare say the noble Lord will tell us which course the Government prefer to take.
  LORD RIBBLESDALE: My Lords, as this debate apparently is to proceed by a system of interpellation, and as I understand from Lord Crewe that the larger subjects raised by Lord Kimberley and others will come up in some other way in your Lordships' House, I will ask only one particular question—namely, in regard to milk. The noble Lord admitted that he had heard that winter milk—that is, milk between October 1 and April 30—has hardly paid its own owing to the great expense of feeding stuffs. Then, if I understand him aright, he said that a disagreeable situation might arise leading to a good deal of that trade being abandoned. I can tell the noble Lord that in my part of the country, where we send a great deal of milk into Lancashire, milk producers, in view of the arrangements made under various Milk Orders, are already considering the advisability of giving up dairying altogether and of reverting to cattle breeding. In dealing with this question the noble Lord said that, if anything of that sort happens, something will have to be done. Can he give us any indication of what the "something" will be? Will it be by an Order increasing the price of milk as so to make it worth while for people to go on producing milk?
  LORD STRACHIE: My Lords, the noble Lord told us that the price of wheat was fixed at 72 s. a quarter. In fixing that price, did the noble Lord have regard to the statement made in another place by the Under-Secretary to the Board of Agriculture to the effect that the cost of production to the farmer now of a quarter of wheat was 67 s. 6d. as against the pre-war price of 33 s.? My noble friend proposes to put wheat, at 72 s., thereby leaving to the farmer a profit of about 4s. 6d. per quarter. Does

  67
  he think that this will stimulate an increased production of wheat? Has he based his figures on the statement to which I have referred, and is it his intention to have a sliding scale for the price of wheat according to the cost of production?
  Then the noble Lord referred to the prices of mutton and pork. I venture to impress upon him the importance of speedily fixing the prices of both those commodities, especially mutton. As he is no doubt aware, a large number of sales have already taken place, and the same difficulties that have been experienced in connection with store cattle will occur here if the prices are not immediately fixed so that those who propose to buy sheep for fattening may know exactly where they stand. The question of pork is also of importance. If the price for this is fixed too late, difficulties will occur. People conversant with the pig trade know that there is no trade which fluctuates so much with regard to prices. For one or two years there may be a great scarcity of pigs, and in the next year there may be an over-abundance. In my opinion there will be a pig famine if too low a price is fixed for pork.
  THE EARL OF ANCASTER: My Lords, as the noble Lord stated that he had looked upon this matter from a practical point of view, I should like some assurance on a point I am going to mention. He stated that the live weight price for beef would be 74 s. a cwt. in September and 60 s. in January. Has the noble Lord satisfied himself that it will pay a farmer, unless the price of feeding stuffs is fixed, to keep a bullock from September through the winter? The Food Controller stated that he required a constant stream of meat to come into the market; but unless he is certain on the point I have raised, I am afraid that the price of 74 s. in September will induce a large number of farmers then to kill off a lot of half-fat beasts because they will stand to lose money if they feed them for months on cake and get only 60 s. in January. That is a most important matter.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNE: My Lords, I should like to congratulate the noble Lord on the lucidity of his statement, and, if I may say so, I think the general principle which he laid down in his exordium is such as would command the complete approval of your Lordships' House. The matter of his statement, however, is so
  68
  important and so full of detail that it clearly would not be respectful to the noble Lord to attempt to deal with it on this occasion. We must study his very important utterance and return to the subject at a later date. I join with my noble friend the Leader of the Opposition in expressing the hope that the question of the treatment of our flocks and herds and our relative dependence on them and on imported meat during the next few months should be the subject of a special debate. I think we can deal with it much better if it stands by itself rather than be mixed up with the whole question of food control. I hope, therefore, that one of my noble friends who is a great authority on this subject—like Lord Kimberley—will introduce it by way of a separate Question or Motion.
  But I should like to make two or three general observations, and one criticism in detail. The noble Lord is to be congratulated on his determination to decentralise his administration. I am sure that he will never regret his decision to establish local committees to assist him in the complicated work of food control. He has told us that he is going to use the urban and rural district councils, and not the county councils. There is no doubt a sufficient reason for that selection. But I would suggest that although the county council may not be the most convenient body for local administration, it may yet be in a position to help as a local advisory body, because in the county council there is focussed a knowledge of all aspects of country life that is not to be found elsewhere. Then I wish to express my personal adhesion to the doctrine which the noble Lord laid down and defended—namely, that it is legitimate, in circumstances such as we now find ourselves in, to throw on the general taxpayers a part of the burden of the food of the people in respect of bread. In my opinion it is a right policy, although I know the objection that will be raised to it. Perhaps I would go much further than the noble Lord and the Government have felt themselves able to go. I believe a great deal can be said for a policy of letting prices find their own level, and making good to the community at large—not to any selected class—the prices of the prime necessities of life, and throwing the burden on general taxation. Therefore I shall not be found among the body of critics of the noble Lord for that part of his programme.
  I join with my noble friends behind me

  69
  in asking the noble Lord the Food Controller to be very cautious in connection with the fixing of the price of the live weight of cattle at 60 s. per cwt. in the winter months. I appreciate, of course, the reason for the drop. The price begins at 74 s. to enable those farmers who, as the noble Lord admitted, have bought store cattle at a dear price in the perfectly legitimate and natural course of business, to have time to send their cattle to the market; and the calculation of the noble Lord is that by Christmas time those fanners ought to have had an opportunity of doing that, and then he can fix the price at 60 s. But if he makes a mistake in fixing that price too low he will certainly reduce the production of meat, which is the last thing he wishes to do, and he will reduce also the production of corn. In this connection I want to endorse what Lord Kimberley said. The production of corn in 1918 will depend to a great extent on the number of beasts reared in the winter of 1917–18, and if there is a large reduction in the number of beasts not only will the output of beef be decreased but the output of corn in the subsequent harvest. Consequently the matter is one of double importance. I have no hesitation in saying that it would be far better for the noble Lord to err a little from his point of view in allowing too high a price for winter beef than that he should run the risk of finding himself a few months hence shorn in his calculation of the amount of food available in this country, and with the subsequent result of a shortage in the following year's harvest.
  LORD BERESFORD: My Lords, the argument of the noble Lord opposite depends really upon the question of shipping. I should not give the figures which I am about to place before your Lordships had they not been published in America. The shortage of shipping is far more serious than the public knows, and the figures given out to the public in connection with our losses do not enable the true position to be realised.
  From August, 1914, to January, 1917, the amount of shipping sunk—British, Allied and neutral—was 4,000,000 tons. From January, 1917, until now very nearly another 4,000,000 tons have been sunk. Taking the losses from January to the present time as the average rate, we stand to lose 8,000,000 tons in the year. We commenced the war with about 49,000,000 tons of shipping in the world, of which
  70
  British, Allies, and neutrals had 30,000,000. That 30,000,000 tons has been reduced already by 8,000,000, leaving about 22,000,000 to 23,000,000 tons. To that we have to add what the Americans can put into the water, including ships taken from the Germans, which would run into about 2,000,000 tons. But a very large number of those ships are not suitable for cargo carrying. Further, the majority of the ships which the Linked States propose to build are to be wooden ships. You cannot drive a wooden ship over a speed of ten knots, and you cannot make her into a big cargo boat because you cannot build her big enough. We cannot count very much, therefore, on those ships in making up what I may call our debt.
  In 1913 the output of tonnage by our Allies and ourselves was about 2,500,000 tons. During the first two years of the war shipbuilding went down enormously, so that we have nothing like begun to make up the deficit. I do not think we can make up more than 4,000,000 tons a year altogether, which is about half the amount we have already lost. The great difficulty is not only the shortage of steel, but the shortage of engines. It is this latter difficulty which accounts for our not being able to get aircraft, destroyers, trawlers, and so on. I consider, for the reasons I have given, that the position is very dangerous.
  I ask the, Government once more whether they can see their way to alter the Returns of shipping losses made to the public. They are most misleading. Arrivals and departures of all ships are given, but the losses stated are those of British ships only. The tonnage is not given, and that is the really material factor. You may have, say, nine ships which can carry a larger volume of cargo than twelve or fourteen others. I do not believe it is possible to starve us. Therefore the U boats have been entirely defeated in their original object. But I believe that in about March or April of next year we shall have to face the difficulty of a great shortage of tonnage.
  LORD HINDLIP: I wish to ask the noble Lord the Food Controller a question on the subject of milk. When the Milk Order for the winter supply comes out, will it be the usual Order extending over the period from October to March? The noble Lord will appreciate the two points I have in my mind—namely, the price of feeding

  71
  stuffs already bought for the winter, and the price that will have to be paid in connection with calving cows in the next few months.
  LORD RHONDDA: My Lords, the first question put to me was by Lord Camperdown, in respect to fixing the price of store cattle. No attempt has been made to fix the price of store cattle, though I am hopeful that when the knowledge comes to the farmer that the price of fat cattle is going down he will be very careful when the next occasion comes for him to purchase cattle to buy them at a lower price than the recent prices, because he will know that if he pays a high price the State will not come forward to help him out. I have strong hopes that the effect of fixing a lower price for fat cattle will lead to very much lower prices for store cattle. Then the noble Viscount (Lord Harcourt) asked me whether the sugar card was a ration. I have deliberately rejected the idea of rationing by ticket. It is a very elaborate and costly system, and one which would involve the services of a large number of persons to carry it out. Furthermore, wherever it has been tried, it has had at most a very partial success. I thought I had stated clearly what was intended, and if the noble Viscount will look at the report of my remarks I think he will find that I have fully explained the matter. The idea is that the householder should apply to the local authority for a sugar card, and should name the grocer to whom he wishes to go. Then the amount of sugar will be provided on the application of the grocer, who will be supplied, of course, by the central authority.
  VISCOUNT HARCOURT: The householder will state his own requirements?
  LORD RHONDDA: No; he will state only the number of people for whom he requires it. The ration will depend on the amount of sugar available.
  VISCOUNT HARCOURT: Then there is a ration?
  LORD RHONDDA: If there is enough to give each consumer ½ lb., he will get it; but there is no guarantee of that amount. I think he will be hardly disposed to rely upon it in the way he would if he were actually giving out a sugar ticket. Lord Kimberley then asked me whether the
  72
  cattle would be weighed, and where. It is only cattle required for Army purposes which will necessarily be weighed. In the case of civilian requirements dead weight prices, corresponding as far as possible to the live weight prices, will be fixed; and in the case of the Army purchases extending over the next few months the cattle will be weighed in the nearest market town. The noble Marquess (Lord Crewe) asked as to who would be the authorities in London. Apparently, the authorities will be the borough councils, and not the London County Council.
  With regard to the question of imported meat and home-grown supplies, I think it would be for the convenience of the House to postpone a discussion on that bigger question until a later date. There is not very much time left before the recess, but perhaps a Motion could be put down for August 1. The noble Earl, I understand, has a Motion down for that day, and the discussion on this question might come after that.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNE: The Motion standing in my name will take some time.
  LORD RHONDDA: That is the only suggestion I can make on that point. The next question was by Lord Ribblesdale. The noble Lord has left the House, and I do not quite recollect the point he raised. Lord Strachie mentioned that it had been stated in another place that the cost of growing corn at the present time was 67 s. 6d. per quarter, and he wanted to know whether I had had regard to that figure in fixing the price at 72 s. Frankly, I did not pay any very great regard to the particular figure mentioned in another place. The noble Lord must know how exceedingly difficult it is to ascertain even the average cost of growing corn. When I hear that in a particular case the cost of growing a quarter of corn is 67 s. 6d., my answer is that that can hardly be a typical case. It is not customary on the part of farmers to keep careful accounts, so that very few of them can tell the cost exactly. What I did have some regard to was the fact that for many years the pre-war prices were well below 40 s., and this price of 72 s. is, of course, an enormous advance on that. The cost of production has no doubt gone up, and I naturally had regard to that. But the increase of rent has been very small, and some of the other factors which go into the cost have not increased in any

  73
  way. I appreciate what Lord Strachie said as to the urgency of fixing the prices of mutton and pork, and I think I can give him my assurance that this will be done as speedily as possible. The noble Earl, Lord Ancaster, referred to the price of 74 s. per cwt. in September and 60 s. per cwt. in January, indicating that beef might not be produced in the winter at the low figure of 60 s. I would ask him to bear in mind what was the average price of meat before the war. He will find that 60 s. is a very substantial increase on that price—it is over 50 per cent.
  THE EARL OF SELBORNE: The matter depends very largely on the price of feeding stuffs.
  LORD RHONDDA: Yes; but I do not think I need go again into that question. I have told your Lordships that I have every hope of reducing the price of feeding stuffs to farmers, both to dairy farmers and those who fatten cattle. But I can give no guarantee in this respect. The noble and gallant Admiral, Lord Beresford, raised the question of tonnage. I am not going into that now, because I have not the figures by me. But I thought I had indicated two or three times in the course of my rather lengthy statement that I was fully aware of the grave possibilities in the future with regard to a shortage of tonnage.
  As to fixing the winter price of milk, I should not like to commit myself too definitely; but I think the period will be, as Lord Hindlip suggested, from October to March. I say that, however, with reservation, as it may have to be open to correction on my part later.

  POSSIBLE POTATO SURPLUS.
  THE EARL OF ANCASTER: My Lords, I rise to ask His Majesty's Government whether any arrangements are being made to utilise the possible surplus supply of potatoes during the year 1918 in the event of a shortage of cereals. As I infer in my Question, I believe there is a probability that this year's potato crop will be the one crop which will exceed the average, and it would be a great pity if His Majesty's Government did not take every means in their power to preserve this surplus for the people. The noble and gallant Admiral (Lord Beresford) has referred to our losses
  74
  through enemy submarines. We never know what straits we may be in twelve months from now. Excellent meal for use in the making of bread can, I understand, be obtained from potatoes, and I think the Government should consider whether it would not be advisable to erect mills in different parts of the country capable of grinding potatoes. The ordinary flour mills cannot do this, so I am told. A large number of potatoes were ruined in the late spring by frost. Although many farmers imagine their potatoes to be safe when placed in pits, such is not always the case. If the surplus potatoes are ground to meal they will, I am credibly informed, keep much better, and will form an extra source of food supply in the case of need next spring and summer.
  LORD RHONDDA: My Lords, inquiries and experiments have been made in a number of directions by the Ministry of Food and the Food Production Department as to the way in which any surplus of potatoes might be utilised if it were not consumed in the ordinary course. These methods include, first, drying potatoes. Very considerable progress has been made in this direction, and a certain amount of plant has already been arranged for to deal with potatoes in this manner, if necessary. Another process is the utilisation of potatoes by bakers in making bread. This has often been done in the past; and, if necessary, formal authorisation can be given to bakers to put potatoes into bread, up to a certain limit, directly and without previously converting potatoes into flour. This makes a very palatable loaf—as I know from my own experience—though there may be difficulties in a great extension of the practice, since bakers may not have sufficient facilities for boiling potatoes. With respect to the suggestion as to manufacture of potato flour, this has been investigated to some extent, but it is probably not a very hopeful way of utilising potatoes, owing to the large amount of potatoes required to produce any given quantity of flour. It is, however, being further investigated as an ultimate resource. It will thus be seen that the Ministry have been giving careful consideration to the methods of utilising any surplus of potatoes, and if, happily, there is a surplus, full advantage will be taken. I am not at present in a position to say whether there is likely to be a surplus, though present conditions point to a heavy crop.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: My Lords, it has been suggested that the discussion on the meat aspect of the food question should be resumed at a later date. The noble Earl (Lord Selborne) has a Motion on the Paper for Wednesday next to call attention to the alleged sale of honours. It is possible that your Lordships will adjourn on that day until August 14. Therefore if we wish a special debate on the meat question, I suggest that we should take it on Tuesday or Wednesday of next week; otherwise it will have to be postponed for a further ten days, and perhaps longer. Might I suggest to the noble Earl that he should put down a Question framed in general terms for Tuesday or Wednesday next?
  THE EARL OF SELBORNE: One of my noble friends is going to put down a Notice. However, I do not think it would be any use putting it down for Wednesday next, as that day will be fully occupied, I take it, with the Motion of which I have given notice. I am not entitled to speak for Lord Crewe, but as he left the House he told me that he thought Thursday next would be a convenient day for this other Motion.
  THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: We had better leave it open until Tuesday next and then see what can be arranged.
  House adjourned at ten minutes past sis o'clock, to Tuesday next, a quarter past four o'clock.