Lords Sitting of 13 September 1939

Preamble
The House met at three of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.

THE WAR: SUPREME WAR COUNCIL.
3.7 p.m.
LORD SNELL: My Lords, I beg to ask His Majesty's Government whether they have any statement to make on the situation.
THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL STANHOPE): My Lords, the following statement, which I make on behalf of His Majesty's Government, has also been made by the Prime Minister in another place. Your Lordships will have learnt from the communiqué issued last night that the Supreme War Council met for the first time during the present war yesterday on French soil. It is only fitting that the progress report this week should begin with an account of that meeting. It was attended, as your Lordships already know, by the Prime Minister and the Minister for the Co-ordination of Defence for Great Britain, and by M. Daladier and General Gamelin for France. The representatives of both countries were accompanied by a number of officials, but as His Majesty's Government were already in close touch with the French authorities on technical strategic questions it was not intended to discuss such questions at the meeting and the Chiefs of Staff were not, therefore, on this occasion summoned to attend. The object of the meeting was to make possible at the earliest practicable stage in the war a direct and personal exchange of views. The present situation was fully examined and the measures to be taken in the immediate future were discussed. Further meetings will be arranged as and when necessary in order to ensure that the closest possible contact is maintained between our two countries on all major aspects of the conduct of the war.
The meeting began in the morning and was supplemented by further conversations in the afternoon. The House will
1040
not expect a detailed account of the many subjects discussed; nor would that be in the public interest. There is, however, one important matter to which it is proper and useful to refer. As was natural, there was an exchange of views at an early stage in the conference on the present state of public opinion in the two countries. I am glad to be able, to assure the House that it is evident that public opinion on the two sides of the Channel is completely in accord. The people of France and the people of Great Britain are alike determined not only to honour to the full their obligations to Poland, but also to put an end once for all to the intolerable strain of living under the perpetual threat of Nazi aggression. Our French allies are, like ourselves, a peace-loving people, but they are no less convinced than are we that there can be no peace until the menace of Hitlerism has been finally removed. "Il faut en finir."
For the rest I am authorised to assure the House that the Prime Minister came away from this meeting fortified and encouraged by the complete identity of views which was revealed between the French Government and our representatives on every point of policy and strategy which was discussed. I need hardly stress the immense value of these personal contacts which enable that mutual confidence to be established without which there can be no real harmony of action.
I will now give your Lordships a short account of the present situation in the Empire, in Europe and the several theatres of war. Day by day fresh evidence reaches us of the determination of the peoples of the British Commonwealth overseas. Noble Lords will have read during the last day or two speeches by Dominion Prime Ministers and other leaders making this determination manifest. But it is not only by words that this resolve is shown; it is by deeds also. I cannot, of course, give the House details of all the measures of defence which have been adopted in the oversea parts of the Empire, but on behalf of His Majesty's Government I can say that, both in the military and in the civil sphere, steps which in some cases are of a far-reaching character have been taken. These steps are all directed to one end—the pursuit of a common purpose, the fulfilment of a common task. An increasing number of foreign States have

1041
declared their neutrality, but in no case has this led to any relaxation of the armed vigilance which now characterises Europe and is the direct result of the Nazi menace to our common civilisation.
For the moment the Eastern theatre of war is still the main centre of operations. The Germans appear to be endeavouring to force a decision in this theatre before they are compelled to transfer formations to the West to meet the threat of allied intervention. With this object in view they have continued their relentless pressure on the Polish Army, hoping thereby to break resistance and to turn a hardly contested withdrawal into a retreat. That these hopes have been so far frustrated is due to the indomitable spirit of the Poles, who refuse to be intimidated by the weight of material brought against them or by the overwhelming superiority of the German Air Force.
In the West the French Armies have begun a methodical advance. Hitherto, these operations have been local with the object of straightening out the line and gaining contact with the main enemy positions. This is an essential and important preliminary phase, about which the French are naturally reticent, and it is sufficient to say that it has been completely successful. Certain statements have been made to the effect that the British Expeditionary Force has already been engaged in France. These statements are not strictly accurate and are principally the result of the highly imaginative reports of foreign correspondents, over whose activities we, unfortunately, have no control. Nevertheless it is true that British troops are already in France, though they have not been in action. When this happens, as full information as the exigencies of the military situation permit will at once be issued.
In the air the normal work of reconnaissance and patrol has been continuous, and a number of Royal Air Force squadrons are now operating from French soil. Further successful reconnaissance flights over Germany have been carried out by the Bomber Command in this country and much useful information has been gained in the course of these flights of activities behind the German frontier. Defensive patrols proceed continuously, and the Fighter Command remains in a state of instant readiness. The Coastal
1042
Command has continued to carry out extended reconnaissance and anti-submarine patrols and a number of attacks have been carried out against enemy submarines.
On the seas, the outbreak of the war found the active Fleet fully prepared and the Reserve Fleet mobilised, but that did not include the whole of the very numerous auxiliaries which when war begins have to be brought forward to complete our sea power. These forces are now passing rapidly into service. The Fleet has been joined by three destroyers of the Polish Navy which have proved to be very efficient and are taking part in the strenuous life of our light forces. The main object of the British Navy must be, as in the last war, to ensure the freedom and safety of the seas. During the war of 1914–18, and particularly in 1917, the German policy of unrestricted submarine warfare created, as is well known, a situation which was at one time very serious. In the present war, the German attack upon our merchant shipping, begun by an act of ruthlessness against a passenger ship contrary to all the rules of maritime warfare and the Convention that Germany herself had signed, is being continued. A certain number of British merchant ships has been sunk, and our losses have undoubtedly been somewhat severe. This is only what had to be expected for the reason that the war came at a moment when large numbers of our merchant vessels were scattered over the seven seas moving under peace conditions. On the other hand, the Germans had placed their U-boats and their supply ships previous to the outbreak of war in the best strategic positions and it is not surprising that some of our vessels have been caught and surprised by submarines before they were able to reach port.
It is impossible to apply the convoy system while many of the ships to be convoyed are still on the high seas. We are, however, pressing on with putting that system into force and it is daily operating with ever increasing efficiency. In the last war out of some 16,500 vessels which were convoyed to and from this country on the Atlantic, only 102 or 6 per cent. were sunk by submarine action while on convoy. But the convoy system was only applied in the summer of 1917 after we had been at war for nearly three years. That is not the case

1043
to-day. The convoy system is being applied immediately and as soon as it is in full working order there is no reason to suppose that it will prove to be less decisive than it was twenty years ago. Meanwhile, I am able to assure the House that submarines are being constantly attacked and that successes have been achieved. At the outbreak of war the total German tonnage of ships at sea or in neutral or allied ports, Baltic Ports excepted, was in the neighbourhood of 1,105,000 tons. Practically all that shipping has now been cleared off the high seas, some has been captured and much of it has interned itself in neutral ports. Moreover, the supply to Germany of vital war materials carried under neutral flags has been, and will increasingly be, limited by the contraband control imposed by the power of our Fleet.
In the statement which was made in both Houses of Parliament on September 7, I said that the organisation of the Civil Defence Services was being rapidly completed. This process has continued, and steps are being taken to deal with the various problems inseparable from the rapid mobilisation of personnel in an entirely novel form of national defence. It was of course essential at the outset of the emergency to call up everyone available for whole-time service to man the home defence front. It has been suggested that as a result, in the absence of any call as yet to meet actual attack from the air, we have unnecessarily immobilised a considerable mass of man-power, I would, however, remind the House that if our Civil Defence organisation is to be effective, it is inevitable that a sufficient nucleus of men and women should be kept at "Action Stations"—standing by cannot be avoided. We are, however, endeavouring to ease the position in various ways and are considering how best we can minimise dislocation while still maintaining Civil Defence on an adequate war-time footing.
There are one or two specific matters on which I think it may be desirable that I should give your Lordships some further information. Take first lighting restrictions. It is said, and said with truth, that the lighting restrictions at present in force cause personal inconvenience, that they are dangerous to traffic, and that they slow up important elements in the
1044
productive processes of the country. But they are, in fact, required on strategic grounds, and they form part of the strategic defence of the important industrial areas of the country, and all their details are the result of long experiments carried out by the Royal Air Force. The Air Staff are equally interested in reducing to the minimum any slowing down or interference with production, and if the existing restrictions appear irksome, it must be accepted that they are, for the moment, inevitable.
The whole preparations of civil defence, whether lighting restrictions, warnings, or mobilisation of personnel, are conditioned by the speed with which hostile air attack can develop. There is, for example, general agreement that buildings should be "blacked out" in advance. Preparations for "blacking out" at the last moment would be too late. The blackout restrictions apply for the present to the more remote areas as well as to the big cities. It is not that those remote areas are themselves likely to be attacked, but the lighting they give would be a signpost to built-up areas which might be of greater military importance. Somewhat different considerations apply to the restrictions on moving vehicles and on the use of pocket torches and small lamps by pedestrians as aids to movement. I think the House will be glad to hear that some relaxation in these respects is considered practicable and the necessary instructions are in preparation. Many of the complaints about the lighting restrictions and also the warning system are influenced by the fact that up to the present we have not had air raids. It would be very dangerous to make any drastic modification of these strategic preparations until actual air raid experience has indicated the lines upon which modifications might safely be made.
The movement of evacuation which was started on Friday, September 1, was completed with the evacuation of Jarrow, Hebburn and Sunderland on September 10 and 11. Experience so far shows that the billeting of unaccompanied school children has given rise to much less difficulty than the billeting of mothers and young children. A very heavy demand has been made on the energy and initiative of the receiving local authorities and on the good will of the householders in the receiving areas. There has been a remarkable response to the demands thus

1045
made and there every indication that the process of settling in is now taking place satisfactorily in a great majority of cases. Needless to say a movement on this scale raises a large number of social problems. Active steps are being taken by the local authorities in this matter, and the Minister of Health and the President of the Board of Education and the Secretary of State for Scotland will continue to co-operate in a solution of these problems. In order to afford to the parents of school children who had not taken part in the movement a further opportunity, arrangements were made to enable these parents to register their children at schools on Monday and Tuesday of this week. No immediate further evacuation move is, however, in contemplation, as the receiving areas must be given time to assimilate the present large influx of population, and all concerned must have time to digest the experience already gained.
As was stated last week some 200,000 hospital beds were made available by various means for the reception of civilian air-raid casualties. These beds, of course, are also available for Service sick and casualties and a certain proportion of them are now in use for this purpose. It is also part of our scheme that these hospitals should continue to admit ordinary acute surgical or medical cases amongst the general population. This "reflux" is now taking place and will continue. There are therefore facilities available to ensure that any patient whose medical condition requires inpatient treatment shall be able to obtain it. These cases will naturally encroach upon the number of beds immediately available for the reception of casualties, but this is being met by increasing the numbers of extra beds, by pressing forward with the building of hutted wards, and by providing further temporary accommodation in large tents. The net result is that in spite of fresh admissions the number of beds immediately available on 12th September has been maintained at the figure of 200,000. Furthermore, we have asked that out-patient facilities for the ordinary civilian sick should be maintained and this is being done.
The first-aid posts, both fixed and mobile, have been in general duly established and equipped and the emergency ambulances have been assembled and fitted up. Motor coaches in the provinces
1046
as well as in London have been converted for use as inter-hospital ambulances. The full complement of casualty evacuation trains for civilian cases has been assembled and staffed and provided with medical equipment. Some shortage of extra beds, bedding, dressings and surgical equipment has been reported from a number of places, but this is being met as rapidly as possible by accelerating the delivery of goods on order, by the diversion of supplies from places more favourably situated and by placing fresh orders. In particular surgical instruments are now being delivered in considerable numbers and others have been obtained on loan from hospitals and surgeons having a surplus available.
Finally, I propose to say a few words about the creation and work of the Ministry of Information, over which a distinguished member of your Lordships' House, my noble friend Lord Macmillan, has been called to preside. The work of the Ministry of Information is the most difficult type of work that can be assigned to a Government Department. Such a Ministry must continually seek to steer between giving information which might help the enemy to defeat and destroy our own troops and withholding information with the risk of creating an impression that terrible things may be happening of which the public have no knowledge. In the second place, a Ministry of Information is necessarily a department which cannot begin its work in any real sense until the outbreak of war, and then, at a moment's notice, it has to spring into the fullest activity. It is scarcely to be expected that in the face of such formidable difficulties as these errors will not be made and some of them will be serious enough to cause trouble and exasperation to the whole Press. His Majesty's Government greatly regret such incidents and we should like to express our appreciation of the patriotic way in which the Press generally in this country has co-operated with the Government and sought to play its part in the common struggle.
It is definitely the desire and intention of the Government to give the fullest possible information to the public and to do all that we can to prevent any feeling in the minds of the public that they are being kept in the dark. That is the principle to which, through the Ministry of Information, His Majesty's Government

1047
will seek to give effect. Improvements in the machinery can, I have no doubt, be made, but in these early days my noble friend is entitled to ask not only your Lordships but the country as a whole for patience and toleration while he is endeavouring to correct what has gone wrong and to build up a satisfactory and efficient service.
3.31 p.m.
LORD SNELL: My Lords, first of all I beg to thank the noble Earl for the very interesting statement that he has made. The statement has covered so wide a field and is so very important that for my part I do not propose to ask your Lordships to discuss it to-day. I shall therefore put on the Order Paper for tomorrow a Motion that will enable some comment upon it to be made.
3.32 p.m.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: I think that the noble Lord who leads the Opposition has taken the wise course in postponing from to-day any comments which he may desire to make, or others of your Lordships may desire to make, upon the very important statement to which we have just listened from the noble Earl. I think that on the whole your Lordships would welcome the statement as being a satisfactory one, but there may be points on which the noble Lord, Lord Snell, and other noble Lords may wish to make observations.

WAR AND CIVILIANS.
3.33 p.m.
LORD MOTTISTONE: My Lords, I gave notice yesterday to the Foreign Secretary that I thought it would be wise to raise a point to which everyone in this country is directing his attention so that the intention of His Majesy's Government and of the French Government could be made perfectly clear. I know many of your Lordships appreciate my reason for doing this. It is that the public is puzzled to know whether as a nation, and the French nation likewise, we do in fact stand by the declaration made before the outbreak of war by our two Governments, and without doubt approved by both peoples, as to the conduct of war if war should come. The question is whether the declaration of war on Germany has altered the statement
1048
therein made. With your Lordships' permission I will read the document which will take about two and a half minutes to read but which may save two hundred years of misery if we are fortunate enough to be able to carry it out. It is the most remarkable document to which any countries have ever set their names.
At the time it was published nobody noticed it, and if the question is asked "Why do not our aeroplanes drop bombs instead of pamphlets?" here is the answer in this document. It is because we promised that we would not. The most reverend Primate in his moving speech said that amongst the many things we were fighting for was the pledged word. Here is our pledged word. It is the joint Anglo-French Declaration sent to President Roosevelt through our Ambassador at Washington, before the declaration of war:
"The Governments of the United Kingdom and France solemnly and publicly affirm their intention should a war be forced upon them to conduct hostilities with a firm desire to spare the civilian population and to preserve in every way possible those monuments of human achievement which are treasured in all civilised countries. In this spirit they have welcomed with deep satisfaction President Roosevelt's appeal on the subject of bombing from the air. Fully sympathising with the humanitarian sentiments by which that appeal was inspired they have replied to it in similar terms.
"They had indeed some time ago sent explicit instructions to the commanders of their armed forces prohibiting the bombardment whether from the air, or the sea, or by artillery on land of any except strictly military objectives in the narrowest sense of the word. Bombardment by artillery on land will exclude objectives which have no strictly defined military importance, in particular large urban areas situated outside the battle zone. They will furthermore make every effort to avoid the destruction of localities or buildings which are of value to civilisation.
"As regards the use of naval forces, including submarines, the two Governments will abide strictly by the rules laid down in the Submarine Protocol of 1936 which have been accepted by nearly all civilised nations. Further they will only employ their aircraft against merchant shipping at sea in conformity with the recognised rules applicable to the exercise of maritime belligerent rights by warships.
"Finally, the two Allied Governments reaffirm their intention to abide by the terms of the Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibiting the use in war of asphyxiating or poisonous or other gases and of bacteriological methods of warfare. An inquiry will be addressed to the German Government as to whether they are prepared to give an assurance to the same effect. It will of course be understood that

1049
in the event of the enemy not observing any of the restrictions which the Governments of the United Kingdom and France have thus imposed on the operations of their armed forces these Governments reserve the right to take all such action as they may consider appropriate."
Now everyone will have observed that our Air Force, with its wide power of movement, has again and again flown over the enemy's territory, and instead of dropping bombs has dropped leaflets. The reason they have done so is that, through the President of the United States, the Government promised the whole civilised world that they would not begin atrocities.
May I say that, of course, we do not do this from fear of the ultimate consequences, because it must be apparent to anyone that if atrocity war is to be carried on by bombing from the air, in the long run the advantage must be on the side of this country and its Empire? Not only because of its manufacturing power but because of its geographical position it can continue to manufacture aircraft in places which no enemy aircraft can reach within a very long period of time. Therefore not in the least is it from fear, but it is, I am sure, a wise decision. The matter was put to me by a very eminent man, a member of your Lordships' House, in this way: "Once you begin this you are on a slippery slope." Once you begin deserting this document—which I know His Majesty's Government have no intention of deserting—and say: "Ah well, there is a little factory in that little town, we will bomb that town and destroy it," you go on from that to bombing a larger town, and from that to bombing a city, and ultimately to the mutual destruction of the Capitals of the countries. And all, please observe, for no possible advantage. Warfare can only be of value to the aggressor if he is enabled to enter the territory of the enemy and impose his will. This mutual destruction can have no effect on the result of the war.
Therefore I ask the Government whether they can give us two answers. The first is, whether the German Government did in fact reply to this, and if so, did they give the same promise to the President of the United States as we ourselves gave just before the declaration of war? The next question is, do they adhere absolutely to this document
1050
which I have ventured to read to your Lordships' House? To me it seems the Soldier's Bible. This is his charter, by which he knows that he is fighting with clean hands in a good cause. Who began the atrocities? history may ask. The answer is "Not we, nor will we ever begin, not even if we thought that by breaking our word here we would win certain victory. What would it profit us if we gained the whole world and lost our own souls? We stand pat on this, that under no circumstances will we break this pledged word." If that be said, we can go forward, I think, in confidence, knowing full well that right is on our side, and while we condemn the German Government and their system, we can look forward without undue bitterness to the day when we may live at peace with the German people. I beg to ask the Foreign Secretary the questions of which I have given him notice.
3.42 p.m.
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT HALIFAX): My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for having given me information that he intended to ask this question this afternoon in your Lordships' House, and I think it is in my power to give him a short, but I hope reasonably comprehensive, reply on the matters that he has raised. All war must of necessity be a brutal and bloody business, and, in the full sense of the word, quite obviously what is sometimes called the humanising of war is impossible. At the same time, we all know that from the earliest times efforts have been made, and on the whole perhaps not unsuccessfully, to try to mitigate some at least of the worst horrors of war, and the nations have come together trying to do that by the institution of codes referring to this and that in a great variety of ways. It is also quite obvious that with the advance of science, and the extension of the range of old weapons and the invention of new weapons, and also the fusion of all the activities of a nation, military, civil and industrial, into one gigantic war effort, the distinction to be drawn between combatant and non-combatant becomes vastly more difficult to draw in these days, and to maintain. None the less, I agree with what was implicit in the noble Lord's speech, that certain broad distinctions can, and might, to be drawn, and we, in that document which the noble Lord

1051
quoted to your Lordships, did our best publicly to lay down the lines on which such a distinction might be made, in response to the appeal made to us and to other Governments by the President of the United States.
That was an attitude that in common with the French Government we adopted, for the general reason to which I have referred—namely, the desire, so far as was possible, to protect the civilian population. That declaration, published on September 3, represents the considered policy of His Majesty's Government and of the French Government, who made it in the hope that it would be observed by all parties in the present war; but your Lordships will have noticed that the last paragraph which the noble Lord read provides that if the enemy does not observe any of the restrictions which the Governments of the United Kingdom and of France have imposed on the operations of their armed forces, these Governments reserve the right to take all such action as they may consider necessary. That is still our position.
Your Lordships may have seen reports of an announcement made by the German High Command in the course of this morning, of their intention to bomb and shell open towns, villages and hamlets in Poland, in order to crush resistance by the civilian population. Of that announcement, of which I in common with your Lordships have seen the published report, we have as yet no official confirmation, but I would say this. First of all, if it is true, it would seem to be in direct contradiction of the statement of purpose expressed by the German Chancellor in his Reichstag speech, when he disclaimed any desire to make war on women and children; and in the second place, whatever may be the rights of a belligerent army as against franc-tireurs, there can, I imagine, be no sort of justification for what must be indiscriminate bombardment, whether from the land or from the air, of the civilian population. As I have said, the restrictions that His Majesty's Government have imposed upon the operations of their own forces were based upon the condition of similar restraint being observed by their opponents, and His Majesty's Government must hold themselves completely free, if such restraint is not in fact observed, to
1052
take such action as they may deem appropriate.
LORD MOTTISTONE: I am most grateful to the noble Viscount for having given us the information that he has, that the Government stand by their declaration. But the noble Viscount omitted to give one piece of information for which I asked—namely, did Germany in fact agree to this request of President Roosevelt, which was addressed also to our Government and to the French Government? I do not know whether he can give us that information.
VISCOUNT HALIFAX: So far as my information goes, which may not be complete, I think I am right in saying that the reply of the German Government to President Roosevelt merely covered the question of gas, and that what I stated as to the professed intention of the German Government with regard to air bombardment was, if I remember rightly, based, and I think only based, upon Herr Hitler's statement to the Reichstag.
3.50 p.m.
LORD STRABOLGI: My Lords, we have just had a very important statement from the Foreign Secretary in reply to the noble Lord. I only had notice that this question was to be asked a little time ago, and have not had an opportunity of consulting my noble friends and my friends in another place, as to what attitude we should take towards this particular subject. But the matter is important because we are only in the early days of this war. Passions have not, on the whole, been aroused, and those of us who remember what happened in the last war will be well aware that, before very much longer, natural but bitter feelings will arise in people's minds and there will be demands for reprisals and demands for giving what is called "a taste of their own medicine" to our enemies and so on. Therefore this might be an opportunity for me, if I might be permitted, to make just one comment; and I believe here I am speaking the minds of my friends here and in another place on what has fallen from the Foreign Secretary.
In the first place, we have understood from the newspapers that already there have been deliberate attacks on the civil population in Poland, principally by means of aircraft, and what is known as

1053
"organised frightfulness" has been put into force. That has been stated in the newspapers, and I saw the answer made in another place on tins subject by the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, but the facts seem to speak for themselves. Already the campaign in Poland has led to a breach of undertakings of the kind, whether we refer to the original Hague Conventions or the other Conventions. Secondly, quite apart from the disgraceful case of the "Athenia," the submarine war at sea is not being conducted in accordance with signed treaties and conventions by the German Government. In certain cases, apparently, from the newspaper reports, our seamen have been permitted to take to the boats, and in one case, at least, a humane submarine Captain has helped them to find their way to land or to a rescuing neutral ship. But it has been laid down that open boats, far from land, are not a place of safety and do not comply with the terms of the Conventions. Certain of these sinkings have taken place a long way from shore. It is only because the weather has been abnormally fine for this time of year in the Atlantic that there has not been greater loss of life; and it should be put on record on every possible occasion that there have already been a number of these disgraceful breaches of the old-established law of the sea and of signed Conventions.
The second point I venture to make is this: with regard to reprisals, to us it is unthinkable that we should exercise reprisals of that kind at sea. Under no circumstances would we lower ourselves to break the old-established brotherhood and chivalry of the sea. But with regard to air attack, I notice that the Foreign Secretary reiterated the saving clause in the reply to the American President; and if our civil population is to be bombed, well, there are obviously a great many objects of military importance in Germany, fit targets for attack, but, because of their situation and the modern method of high-flying attack, it would be inevitable that there would be loss of civil life if they were attacked from the air. If we are going to be attacked in contravention of the pledges already given, and indeed of the laws of war, surely we are not going to tie our hands to attacking only those objects of military importance which lie so far from any civil habitation that
1054
there is no danger of hurting anyone. For example, the only one I can think of in Germany where that can be done is the Isle of Heligoland itself; perhaps the upper part of Heligoland, which is itself a fortress, could be attacked without hurting any civilians, who have been evacuated in any case. But there are few other objects of military importance where, in the event of an attack from the air, a good many of the civilian population are not bound to be injured or killed in the process.
Furthermore, if we do so tie our hands that we are not under any circumstances to make these attacks, we free our enemies from the immense efforts involved in what We call in this country Air Raid Precautions, with the consequent tying up of man power and material; and that would be, to them, a tremendous advantage. I believe I am interpreting the minds of my Party and also I believe of the great majority of the public when I say that, if illegal air warfare is going to be waged against us, we must have a free hand to wage it back without deliberately attacking the civil population but in such a way as to damage the economic and military strength of our opponents. I believe that there I am speaking for the Labour Party. We do not want to descend to the level of barbarism already reached in Germany, but at the same time we would not wish to tie the hands of our military commanders in the legitimate use of the air weapon, even if, in so doing, great loss and suffering were caused to the civil population of Germany.
Lastly, we hope that, however long and however hard this war is waged, our quarrel will remain with the present rulers who have seized power in Germany and with the system they represent, and not with the German people as a whole. That is, in a sentence, what at the present moment the Labour Party is discussing, and discussing with great sincerity and fervour.
3.56 p.m.
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: My Lords, may I put to the noble Viscount a supplementary question in order to be clear on a point which is of great importance? In replying to a supplementary of my noble friend beside me, he said that the Germans had replied to the President of

1055
the United States on the question of gas. He did not say whether the German Government has specifically undertaken not to use poison gas or bacteriological warfare if other countries do the same.
VISCOUNT HALIFAX: I rather hesitate to answer precisely without the full terms of their reply before me, but, if the noble Lord will allow me, I would give him a more precise answer if the means might be devised to-morrow.
VISCOUNT SAMUEL: Thank you.

HAMILTON BURGH ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL.
Considered on Report (according to Order).

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
3.57 p.m.
EARL STANHOPE: My Lords, there is at present no business for to-morrow
1056
except a draft statutory order from the Ministry of Supply which will be reported to the House from the Special Orders Committee, but I understand the noble Lord, the Leader of the Opposition, would like to put a Motion down, and in any case there will be, no doubt, a discussion on various matters in the statement which I made to your Lordships to-day. Therefore I propose that your Lordships should meet to-morrow at three o'clock. It may be that we shall get an important Bill from another place, the Control of Employment Bill, in which case I should propose that we read that a first time to-morrow. Then I should ask your Lordships to sit on Friday morning, probably at eleven o'clock, in order to pass it through all its stages forthwith. It is a measure which is being put through all its stages in another place and it is of the greatest possible importance to get it passed into law.
House adjourned at one minute before four o'clock.