Lords Sitting of 8 August 1918

BURGHS GAS SUPPLY (SCOTLAND) AMENDMENT BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a, and to be printed.
CONSOLIDATED FUND (NO. 3) BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read la, and to be printed: Then (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) Bill read 2a; Committee negatived; Bill read 3a, and passed.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (NO. 6) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.

PRIVATE LEGISLATION PROCEDURE (SCOTLAND) ACT, 1899.
Report from the Committee of Selection, That the Lords following be proposed to the House as the Panel of Lords to act as Commissioners under the Act:—

D. Argyll.

L. Wemyss (E. Wemyss).

L. Kintore (E. Kintore).

L. Elphinstone.

L. Southwark.

Agreed to, and the said Lords appointed accordingly.

LONDONDERRY AND LOUGH SWILLY RAILWAY BILL.
Read 2a, and committed: The Committee to be proposed by the Committee of Selection.

MAXIMUM PRICES FOR CEREALS.
THE EARL OF SELIBORNE: My Lords, I beg to ask the Question standing in the name of my noble friend Lord Hindlip

1. Whether it is correct that it has been decided not to raise the maximum price for cereals produced in Great Britain.

2. When was this decision arrived at.

668

3. Whether, in view of the increase in the cost of production, and the necessity of encouraging the production of cereals in this country, His Majesty's Government propose to reconsider their decision.

4. At what date and by whom were the maximum prices for cereals fixed, and have they been reconsidered. If so, when and by whom.

5. Were the prices fixed by a Committee appointed by the Ministry of Food. If so, who were the members of the Committee, and had producers of cereals any representative on the Committee.

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE EARL OF CRAWFORD): My Lords, I very much regret that, having asked my noble friend Lord Hindlip to postpone this Question, I shall be unable to-day to give a definite reply. But I will endeavour to explain the procedure adopted with reference to the points on which information is desired
It is the duty of the Food Controller to fix maximum prices for cereals produced in Great Britain, and in the discharge of this duty he is naturally assisted by the three Departments of Agriculture concerned. There has been set up a Home Cereals Committee for the purpose of advising the Food Controller in this respect. It comprises representatives of the Wheat Commission, of the three Departments of Agriculture, the milling and grain trades, and the Army Forage Department, thus covering producer, dealer, and user. The new Central Agricultural Advisory Council have now asked for direct representation on the committee, and they have been invited to send two representatives.
For the encouragement of corn production, and in order to inspire confidence among the farmers; it was announced early in this year that maximum prices for the 1918 crop would be fixed on substantially the same basis as those of 1917. Recommendations were made to the Food Controller some weeks ago in favour of some slight adjustments in the scale of prices; and, in view of the changed seasonal conditions, some further modifications may be thought desirable. The urgency of the matter is recognised, and a definite announcement will be made as soon as possible.
VISCOUNT CHAPLIN: I wish to say a word in connection with this question

669
because it appears to have been forgotten by the Government why there is all this trouble and difficulty about the increased cost of production, arising from the prices settled or recommended by the various Wages Boards throughout the country. I wish to remind the Government of the reason why all this has arisen, and at the same time to tell them how serious is the position, in my opinion, unless some fitting and proper adjustment of prices is carried out without delay.
Just imagine how farmers in this respect have been treated. On February 23, 1917—and I have stated this before in the House without its receiving any attention whatever, without its having been published in the Press, or attended to in any degree, so far as I can see, by the Governraent—the Prime Minister gave the most unqualified pledge that ever was given by a Minister, that there should be no Wages Board set up till after the war. I will quote his own words, so that there can be no mistake upon the subject. He began by stating that there must be an addition in wages for the agricultural labourers, and he further stated that they had taken as the proper figure the 25s. a week recommended by the National' Service Department, under Mr. Chamberlain at that time. Then he went on to say this, and I hope it may be taken into consideration by the Government—
"We discussed for some time" [that is, I presume, the Cabinet] "the question of whether you should have a Wages Board to fix wages or whether you should have a fixed minimum. That is what influenced us eventually in not settling up a Wages Board during the war. The farmer—I will not say preferred to know the worst, but he preferred to know exactly what he had to face—
And here I may say that if you are to hope for any really permanent increased production, that is something which the farmer must know and it never ought to be forgotten. He must know how he is situated with regard to the cost of production, in order to know how to carry out his business successfully. The Prime Minister proceeded—
"He (the farmer) did not want to be bothered with Wages Boards; he preferred to concentrate the whole of his mind on ploughing the land. After the war Wages Boards can be set up."
Now, is it possible to have given a more positive pledge than is given in those words? Yet when the Corn Production Bill was laid upon the Table, it was seen
670
at once that the second part of that Bill was devoted entirely to the setting up of the Agricultural Wages Boards. I have always said that I cannot blame—and I never have blamed—the Prime Minister for this, for in the multitude of other occupations and serious matters which he had to carry on his back, and with all his immense responsibility, I was perfectly well aware that he never attended one single debate upon the Corn Production Bill during the time it was passing through the House of Commons. He was constantly abroad, as everybody knows, going to Paris at one time, to Italy at another, and somewhere else on a third occasion in connection with vital matters concerning the successful prosecution of the war. I have good reason for believing that he was not aware of it, and yet it has been done. I hope that after what I have said, to-day, for the third time on this point, it will at least receive some attention and consideration.
I will go to another sentence in that speech, which is in these words. The Prime Minister turned round to Mr. Balfour, saying—
"My right hon. friend beside me (Mr. Balfour) reminds me that it is not merely during the war that this guarantee of a minimum wage will be given, but during the period when there will lee a guarantee of prices";
—showing conclusively that these two things (the fixed minimum wage on the one hand, and the fixed price for corn on the other) were each the complement of the other. But there was a third pledge given, and this was with regard to maximum prices. What was said upon t he question of maximum prices was this—
"The only guarantee we have given of the maximum is this, that if the State commandeers either potatoes or cereals the prices will not be fixed without the consent of the Boards of Agriculture of England, Scotland, and Ireland; therefore there will be an opportunity of consultation before the prices are fixed. Obviously, you cannot limit the power of the State to commandeer for national purpo es. I hope and trust that, with this guarantee, the farmers will put their backs into it."
That is exactly what the farmers did, and it is exactly what many Members of Parliament, like the member who has now the honour of addressing your Lordships, also did.
We went all over the country, and pointed to the guarantees thus given. I went to a variety of meetings, and I said

671
"Here is the man for you. He has made you these promises and these great concessions, which I think no other Minister would have ventured to make in these days, and, he having done this, it is your business to support him." And they did; for, late as it was in the season, they grew 350,000 acres of more corn than had been grown in any year before for a very long time. What more could they do? And now they are confronted with the position that unless something is done, and done directly, towards increasing the price of corn, you may say good-bye to all your hopes of a largely increased production of corn, which is the one kind of food which is most essential to the population, and of which you will find it stated in the Royal Commission which was appointed to consider our supplies of food during the war, that this is the one kind of food which is consumed in an immensely larger proportion by the population of the country than any other single kind of food you can name.
Now let me point out what your own Minister of Agriculture said upon this question. He was asked to attend a great meeting of farmers in Norfolk, and I can tell you that another meeting of 3,000 farmers in Norfolk was held not very long ago, an account of which was sent to me. I read it with no great surprise. Yet I never heard of a meeting of 3,000 farmers before during the whole of my political career. Therefore you may imagine how strongly they feel on this subject in Norfolk, which, next to Lincolnshire, is probably the largest corn-growing county in England. In Lincolnshire they feel just as strongly, and they write to me just as strongly as they do from the county of Norfolk. What did Mr. Prothero state? I will read an extract from the report—
"Mr. Prothero proceeded to answer questions that had been handed to him in writing. The first was, 'In the event of any rise in agricultural wages, what increase does the Government intend to make in the maximum prices fixed for farm produce? Mr. Prothero said that the cost of production was the basis upon which prices had been fixed, and any increase would and must be met by corresponding changes in the maximum prices."
That is a positive statement made to a great meeting of farmers, which cannot be contradicted. The Minister would be the first to admit it, and I am quite confident that what he said to them he must have made known to the Cabinet. I say that it is nothing less than my duty, and
672
the duty of all people who know something about this subject, to press what the President of the Board of Agriculture has stated upon the Government with all the force at our command.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: My Lords, my noble friend has made a considered attack upon all Departments of the Government, to which I have no right to reply.
VISCOUNT CHAPLIN: No right?
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Only with the leave of the House.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: The noble Viscount has made a considered attack upon various Departments of the Government, to which, I regret to say, I have no right to reply; but if your Lordships will allow me to say a few words, I shall be glad. We cannot go back upon the establishment of Wages Boards.
VISCOUNT CHAPLIN: Quite true.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: They exist, and they have to be taken into account in fixing prices, but I deprecate the view that a change of policy is the same thing as a breach of faith. Parliament insists—and perhaps rightly insists—on debating all kinds of matters before the policy of the Government is finally adjusted, and the natural result is that announcements are made, or expectations are aroused, which have to be modified later on. Conditions in time of war change so quickly that what may be true to-day, as a statement of fact or as an outline of policy, may in a month's time have to be reversed. I regret, therefore, that it should be considered that because at one stage—in regard to the food problem, for instance—a particular view is announced, that view, in the changing conditions of war, may not be modified later on without subjecting the Government to charges such as we have just heard from the noble Viscount.
VISCOUNT CHAPLIN: May I interrupt my noble friend for one moment? Does the noble Earl mean to say that this doctrine is to hold good when, on the very faith of the statement made, great additional expenses have been incurred and unusual efforts have been made in full reliance upon that statement?
THE EARL OF CRAWFORD: I should like to check the statement of the Prime Minister to which Lord Chaplin has referred, but I do not think that the effort to promote cultivation would have been decreased if the establishment of Wages Boards had been announced at an earlier moment. I think the two went together, and I do not believe that if Wages Boards had been established or announced at an earlier stage the acreage grown would have been materially increased in consequence. The only other point I wish to draw your Lordships' attention to is this. Personally, I should be very glad if circumstances justified the increase of prices, but I hope those who advocate this will not consider our home prices in isolation.
There are other countries where corn prices are fixed and where guarantees are accorded, notably in the United States of America. Lord Chaplin will remember that quite recently an Act was passed by both houses of Parliament in the United states to raise the price from $2.20 to $2.40. That Act was vetoed by President Wilson. If we take a corresponding step here there will be no veto. It would be hollowed, of course, by a rrecrudescence of the demand elsewhere to increase the price, and that demand would, of course, be conceded. That naturally would react on other sources of supply to the Allies, notably in the Argentine and in India, and, possibly, in Australia. Therefore an increase beyond an adjustment of price in this country may involve the taxpayer here in an outlay two or three or four times greater than the increased guarantee to the producer at home. I hope, therefore, that your Lordships will remember that adjustments here will be followed by reaction elsewhere, and that the question should not be treated in isolation.

WITHDRAWAL OF KEYMEN FROM AGRICULTURE.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE THE EARL OF SELBORNE rose to ask the Lord Privy Seal whether His Majesty's Government have had their attention drawn to the following Resolutions passed unanimously by the National Agricultural Council on 6th August last; and whether he can give an undertaking on their behalf that no more keymen will be withdrawn from agriculture, and that those keymen considered indispensable to food production by the county war agricultural execu-
674
tive committees will be released from military service—

1. That the National Agricultural Council, representing landowners, farmers, and labourers, desires to enter the strongest protest in its power against any further withrdawal of keymen from agriculture as certain disastrously to affect food production; and calls upon the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries strenuously to resist any further pressure to make such men available for military service.

2. That in view of the fact that so many key-men have already been called to the Colours as seriously to jeopardise the maintenance of the present standard of food production, and to make its increase impossible, and that those men, while essential to agriculture, represent but a small fraction of the fighting forces of the Crown, county war agricultural executive committees should be empowered to claim the return from the Army to the land of any men who in their opinion are essential to the cultivation of the greatly increased area of arable land during the next ensuing farming year.

3. That these resolutions be communicated to all the mèmbers of the War Cabinet, to the President of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, and to the Director-General of National Service.

The noble Earl said: My Lords, in asking His Majesty's Government this Question I would like to draw your Lordships' attention to the fact that it is the first time that any pronouncement of the National Agricultural Council has been mentioned in this House, or, indeed, in Parliament. I think I may claim that the resolution to which I draw attention is the most authoritative pronouncement on agriculture that has ever yet been made, because never hitherto have agricultural labourers and farmers and landowners united in one organisation for the purpose of formulating their joint demands from time to time. I was desired by the Council, after they had passed this resolution, to ask this Question of His Majesty's Government, and I was urged to endeavour, with the greatest emphasis at my command, to make His Majesty's Government realise the danger of the present situation.
"Danger" was the word that I was asked to use. There is a general belief that, unless stopped by the War Cabinet, Sir Auckland Geddes will resume his recruiting operations among the keymen of agriculture the moment after the harvest. By "keymen" I mean of course carters, ploughmen, engine men, and shepherds; those most skilled men on whose operations agriculture depends. There is no doubt in the minds of the county war agricultural committees that Sir Auckland Geddes will

675
resume his recruiting operations among these men unless stopped, and I have been asked by the National Agricultural Council to warn the Government that if more of these men are taken the industry will be brought to a standstill.
The situation is already more serious than the Government realise. Case after case has been brought to our notice where, apparently, there is really no prospect of the farmer getting in the harvest which is now standing on the ground. The harvest will be much more difficult to get in than was anticipated a month ago. There has been abundant rain. I have no doubt, the rain has done much more rood than harm, but the result is that many acres of valuable corn are, in some eases, almost flat on the ground and cannot be harvested by machine. It will have to be harvested by scythe or hook (by hand) and where that is the case, on a farm that has been absolutely denuded, or almost denuded, of its skilled men, I do not wonder at the farmer sitting (low n in despair and wondering how he is going to get his harvest in. Therefore the situation is a very serious one and demands all the, assistance that His Majesty's Government can give, and nothing would reassure the farmer more than to know that this taking of his key-men is going to stop.
The National Agricultural Council also claim the right, not at their own discretion, but at the discretion of the war agricultural executive committees, to claim back from the Army some of these keymen who have been taken, and who in their opinion are really essential for the farming operations of the coming year. The total number of such men that might be claimed is probably much less than the number of Americans landing in France in any one day, and their corporative value here on the land or in the Army really does not admit of argument. Therefore I have been asked to put this matter in a clear light before the Government, and to express, as I have done, the sense of responsibility of the National Agricultural Council in its demands and also its sense of the extreme seriousness of the position.
THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY OF THE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE (LORD CLINTON): My Lords, I regret very much, and your Lordships will also regret it, that my noble friend the Secretary of State for
676
War is not able to be in his place to-day as he desired to answer some of these questions. I will, however, give your Lordships such information as I am able to do upon the subject.
First of all, the Government are aware of the resolutions passed by the National Agricultural Council, and the matters referred to in them have received for a long time their fullest consideration. When the call was made for the last 30,000 men the position as affecting the whole agricultural industry was the subject of the most earnest consideration by the Government. My right hon. friend the President of the Board of Agriculture on more than one occasion placed the entire facts before the Government, and explained very fully the probable effect of the withdrawal of these men, not only on the coming harvest, but on the general need of agriculture. He went as far as was possible to go to save the country districts from the hardships which the withdrawal of these men would cause, and the Government were fully informed of and thoroughly realised, the effect of their proposals.
My right hon. friend showed quite plainly that the industry was dependent on these men; that they were in the very highest degree indispensable, and that the number of unskilled men who may possibly be called upon to replace them would be of comparatively small value without their guidance. He went further, and made it quite clear that the absence of these keymen would imperil not only the coming harvest but the whole programme of food production which had been laid down as indispensable for the safeguarding of the nation's food supply. With all these facts before them, and in the full knowledge that disaster to agriculture at this moment would have an effect upon the war no less than a disaster to our Army, the Government took the responsibility of deciding—and no one but the Government, with a full knowledge of all the relative demands and necessity for man-power, could decide—that these men should be taken away from the imperative needs of agriculture to supply the still more imperative needs of the Army.
The House is aware that the full number of 30,000 men was not taken, and that on a certain date, owing to further representations which were made and other causes, the call up of these men was stopped, and 9,000 men were left until after the harvest

677
In addition, I am able to inform your Lordships of certain figures which have been given to me by the Ministry of National Service. Ten thousand men are being released from the Army for England and Wales.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Are they skilled men?
LORD CLINTON: Not largely skilled men.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: That is the whole point.
LORD CLINTON: Previously to this, the Ministry of National Service had arranged with the War Office to give one month's agricultural furlough to men in command depots who are not fit for discharge within a month, and also to allow convalescent soldiers to do harvest work. The Ministry of National Service is also arranging for the employment of about 15,000 men from public and elementary schools, scouts divisions, etc. Further, the part-time committees which have been established by the Ministry are providing large numbers of seasonal workers. One committee in Liverpool has provided workers to do 2,500 days' work on the land each week.
Besides the above temporary sources of labour supply, permanent war agricultural volunteers are being enrolled, and up to date 2,068 have been actually placed in permanent situations on the land, and at least a further 2,000 have applied for jobs who have not yet been placed. These volunteers will form a permanent source from which agricultural labour can be reinforced, and approximately 60 per cent. of these men have had previous agricultural experience. The Food Production Department are arranging to have a number of these volunteers trained as ploughmen. The number of men in agricultural companies now number about 60,000, and they are also a permanent reinforcement to agriculture. The War Office has agreed, where low category men in such companies were placed by the county agricultural executive committees with a farmer—provided that the men are not above category B 2—that they will be left with such farmer for a period of twelve months. A number of the men in the agricultural companies have now had sufficient experience of agriculture to make them valuable.
678
There are 17,100 prisoners of war at work on the land in Great Britain, and 488 have been allocated but are not yet at Work. In addition to this, arrangements are being made to make a temporary levy, if necessary, for harvest work on prisoners of war employed on other work in this country. It should also be remembered that men are being constantly discharged from the Army and are going back to agricultural work. Those are the figures which I am able to give about these men. We have no information as to how large a number of them are trained men, with the exception of the 60 per cent. of agricultural volunteers to whom I will refer.
The first of the two specific Questions asked me by the noble Earl was whether an undertaking could be given that no more keymen will be withdrawn. I am authorised to give that undertaking, subject of course, I imagine, to no urgent need arising for the Army which is not at present anticipated.
LORD GAINFORD: The 11,000 men to whom the noble Lord has referred will not be taken?
LORD CLINTON: The noble Lord means, I think, 9,000. I understand it to apply to them.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: The point is not that. All these 9,000 men may not be keymen. There may possible be young men among them.
LORD CLINTON: Quite so. I understood that Lord Gainford was asking whether my authority went so far as to say that those keymen included in the 9,000 would not be taken. I understand that is so, but I regret that I am not able to make any statements as to the release from the Army of the keymen already called up.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Is that matter under consideration?
LORD CLINTON: I have no definite reply upon the subject.

FORESTRY.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE THE EARL OF SELBORNE rose to ask the Lord Privy Seal whether he is now in a position to state the decision of His Majesty's Government on the Report of the Forestry Sub-Committee of the Reconstruction Committee.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, I know that this matter has been receiving the close attention of the whole of the Cabinet, but a decision is very urgently called for, because there is no authority that has the means or the staff wherewith to collect the seed from the coniferous trees which will probably all be cut down in the course of the next winter, and unless this season's seed crop is collected at least, so that we may have plants for replanting after the war, there really is little or no prospect of any such seed being forthcoming when the war is over, as an almost complete clearance will have been made at the end of this next winter. The whole problem of re-afforestation depends on the decision of the Cabinet, and therefore my noble friend who is going to reply will not be surprised when I tell him that all who are interested in this subject in the three kingdoms are looking forward very anxiously for a decision.
VISCOUNT PEEL: My Lords, my noble friend has asked me to reply to the Question put by the noble Earl. This matter was referred by the War Cabinet to a subcommittee of Ministers Who reported generally in favour of the proposals of Mr. Acland's Committee, and their Report has been accepted by His Majesty's Government.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Hear, hear.
VISCOUNT PEEL: It would, of course, be impossible, within the limits of a Question only recently put down, to give the noble Earl full information on the subject, or upon the full details of the Report of the Committee; but I think I can state generally that a central authority for afforestation for the United Kingdom will be set up, and a policy of planting will be pursued with the least possible delay.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: Hear, hear.
VISCOUNT PEEL: With reference to the noble Earl's Question regarding the collecting of seed, I understand that there are at present many millions of trees—certainly a very large number—in the State nurseries which might be made use of, and I am informed that the seed will now be collected.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: But it is a very urgent problem.
VISCOUNT PEEL: I will call the Government's attention to these two points.
THE EARL OF SELBORNE: If my noble friend will ask Mr. Acland. who presided over the Forestry Sub-Committee, he will explain the matter to him. All these seedlings are a very small proportion of what will be wanted, and Mr. Acland will tell my noble friend why the problem is so extremely urgent. Lord Lovat will also tell him the same.
[From Minutes of August 7.]

SOUTH SUBURBAN GAS BILL.
Brought from the Commons; read 1a; and referred to the Examiners.
SHROPSHIRE, WORCE TERSHIRE, AND STAFFORDSHIRE ELECTRIC POWER BILL. [H.L.]
Returned from the Commons, agreed to, with Amendments: The said Amendments considered, and agreed to.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDER (No. 5) BILL.
Returned from the Commons, with the Amendments, agreed to.
House adjourned during pleasure.
House resumed.

ROYAL COMMISSION.
The following twenty-five Bills received the Royal Assent—

Consolidated Fund (No. 3).

Public Works Loans.

Maternity and Child Welfare.

Trading with the Enemy (Amendment).

Government War Obligations.

British Nationality and Status of Aliens.

Education.

Trade Boards.

Asylums Officers Superannuation.

Public Health (Borrowing Powers) (Ireland).

Statutory Undertakings (Temporary Increase of Charges).

Naval Prize.

Corn Production (Amendment).

681

Income Tax.

Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 4).

Local Government Provisional Order (No. 5).

Local Government Provisional Order (No. 6).

Rothesay Tramways (Amendment) Order Confirmation.

Rotherham Corporation.

Maidenhead Gas.

St. Olave's Church, Southwark.

Wandsworth, Wimbledon, and Epsom District Gas.

West Sussex County Council (Bridges).

682

Bristol Corporation.

Shropshire, Worcestershire, and Staffordshire Electric Power.

THE AUTUMN RECESS.
LORD HILTON: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn until Tuesday, October 15.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned at a quarter past one o'clock.