Lords Sitting of 3 March 1943

Preamble
The House met, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Kenneth Escott, Lord Bishop of Oxford—Was (in the usual manner) introduced.
CONSOLIDATION BILLS.
Message from the Commons to acquaint this House that they have appointed a Committee of six members to join with the Committee appointed by this House, as mentioned in their Lordships' Message of Wednesday last, to consider all Consolidation Bills in the present Session, and that they have ordered that the Committee have power to send for persons, papers and records, and that three be the quorum.

GRAND UNION CANAL BILL. [H.L.]
Report from the Committee of Selection that the following Lords be proposed to the House to form a Select Committee for the consideration of the said Bill, namely:

L. Ellenborough,

L. Monkswell,

L. Faringdon,

L. Milner,

L. Kenilworth (Chairman):

Agreed to: and the said Lords appointed accordingly. All petitions to be referred to the Committee, with leave to the petitioners praying to be heard by Counsel against the Bill to be heard as desired, as also Counsel for the Bill.

JOURNAL COMMITTEE.
Report from: that the one hundred and seventy-fourth Volume of the Journals (5 & 6 Geo. VI, 1941–42) with an index was ready for delivery: Read, and ordered to lie on the Table; and the said Volume ordered to be delivered in the same manner as the preceding Volumes of the Journal have been delivered.
ECCLESIASTICAL COMMITTEE.
The LORD CHANCELLOR The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that by virtue of the powers vested in him by Section 2 of the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, he had nominated the Lord Stanmore, the Lord Daryngton and the Lord Noel-Buxton to be members of the Ecclesiastical Committee established under that Act and to serve for the duration of the present Parliament in the room of the Lord Darcy (de Knayth), the Lord Clinton and the Lord Kinnaird.

COURTS (EMERGENCY POWERS) BILL [H.L.]
THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT SIMON): My Lords, I beg leave to introduce a Bill to consolidate the Courts (Emergency Powers) Acts, 1939 to 1942, and certain enactments relating to the possession of mortgaged land; and to move that it be read a first time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 1a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 1a, and to be printed.

EVIDENCE AND POWERS OF ATTORNEY BILL [H.L.]
THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, I beg leave to introduce a Bill to amend the Evidence and Powers of Attorney Act, 1940, to provide for the proof of notarial acts of certain foreign diplomatic and consular representatives, and for purposes connected therewith; and to move that it be read a first time.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 1a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
On Question, Bill read 1a, and to be printed.

AID FOR CHINA.
LORD STRABOLGI LORD STRABOLGI rose to ask His Majesty's Government, what steps are being taken to implement the declared policy of the United Nations to afford all possible aid to the National Government of China in the common cause; and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, the Motion that stands in my name is not put on the Paper with any hostile intent, and I do not propose to

413
venture on any criticisms of the Government. It is put forward because my noble friends on these Benches feel that this is a very important matter, and your Lordships will, I am sure, be glad to know that on this question we are all once more united. Although my noble friends are not here in the body, they are with me in spirit. For four years China fought the whole power of Japan alone. We take justifiable pride in the fact that, for one year, we defied the military might of the European Axis alone. The Japanese military machine is very formidable, as we have good reason to know. The Chinese started the war, when the Japanese made their aggression upon them, with only two modern and foreign trained divisions and with very light equipment, and they withstood this savage and violent onslaught for four years by their own strength aid fortitude. Our Chinese Allies are now in the sixth year of their resistance to a brutal invasion, and it is estimated that they have inflicted 2,000,000 casualties on the Japanese. Throughout this time the Chinese have been fighting with insufficient aircraft and with only light equipment, and yet they have defeated the Japanese in several pitched battles. The Chinese Armies have usually defeated the Japanese when they have had anything like an equal chance, and foreign observers in China are unanimous in paying tribute to the high quality of the modern Chinese soldier. Man for man, he is a better fighting warrior than the Japanese.
The information which comes to me, and which has been published, is that Japan is supposed to have mobilized 100 divisions. Your Lordships will be aware that a Japanese division is composed of about 20,000 men. Of those 100 divisions they keep twenty-five in the Pacific islands and Burma, thirty-three on the frontiers of outer Mongolia and Asiatic Russia (they are only a holding, watching force), and ten in reserve in Japan, and no fewer than thirty-two divisions are engaged in China. I also understand that one-eighth of the whole Japanese Air Force is engaged in China. The reason why this very large Japanese force is engaged in China, and therefore not available for mischief against our interests, is that the Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek and his colleagues have raised and trained 7,000,000 soldiers. There are 7,000,000 Chinese enrolled as trained soldiers, and
414
they could increase this number, I understand, if more equipment and weapons were available.
During the memorable visit to Washington of that eminent Chinese lady, Madame Chiang Kai-shek, Mr. Waithman, the News Chronicle correspondent in Washington, whom your Lordships will know as an experienced and reliable journalist, made himself responsible for the statement that the Chinese Government believes it could drive the Japanese into the sea with a well-balanced American or British Air Force of 500 combat planes and 5,000 tons of military cargo a month. The only way at present to send this military equipment to China is by cargo aeroplane, and, making what calculations I can, I believe that on a liberal estimate a thousand cargo planes (probably less) diverted to the China-India route would be enough to supply this equipment, so that for 5o0 war aeroplanes—bombers, fighters, reconnaissance machines and so on—and a thousand transport planes, enough equipment could be sent to China to enable the Chinese Armies to drive the Japanese off the mainland of Asia.
I referred just now to the memorable visit of Madame Chiang Kai-shek to Washington. Your Lordships will have observed that on February 18 this eminent lady addressed the American Congress. I understand that His Majesty's Government have issued a very warm invitation, not for the first time, to Madame Chiang Kai-shek to visit this country. I am sure your Lordships agree that it would be a very great occasion if she came. I hope opportunities will be found for her to address your Lordships, who, I am sure, will be just as susceptible to her eloquence and logic as were the American senators. Amongst other things Madame Chiang pointed out that to-day Japan, thanks to her conquests, has at her disposal greater resources than Germany, and the longer she is left alone to exploit and develop these resources the stronger she will become. The conclusion to be drawn from that is that our task is made more difficult the longer we delay, or are forced to delay, in sending out more assistance to our Chinese Allies, or in attacking the Japanese in some other way.
As I said at the beginning of my remarks, I am not criticizing. I realize the geographical and other difficulties of the problem, and it is, of course, a fact that

415
since the conquest of Burma the Japanese control all the routes into China. They control practically all the seaboard and principal navigable rivers. As a result the Chinese Government and soldiers and China itself are becoming weaker. Grave warnings have been given of China's peril through hunger, and, owing to inflation, the economic situation is becoming very serious in China. The Armies are suffering acutely because of lack of transport and petrol which makes it increasingly difficult to feed them. There are dangers in this situation of which I am certain the noble Viscount who leads your Lordships' House is well aware, and nothing is to be gained, I am sure he will agree, by glozing them over. There are Quislings in China, unfortunately. The Japanese have been able to get one or two prominent Chinese to act in their service and there are also ambitious Generals. Patriotism and the spirit of self-sacrifice in the Chinese masses, especially the younger generation, is admirable. Nevertheless, the national unity of China is only of recent growth. The country was divided between contending Generals and political leaders for a long time and really it was the Japanese who forced this unity upon China, although it was slowly growing before the Sino-Japanese war.
The only relief China is at present receiving consists of the Lease-Lend supplies and the supplies through the British Government in India sent by aeroplane across the mountains. In the middle of February, last month, there were signs that the Japanese realized the danger if these supplies were increased and realized also their opportunity resulting from the Casablanca Conference and the decisions there reached. They have begun a series of new offensives and an intensive air activity which is apparently meant to drive China out of the war before her Allies can come to her assistance. May I draw your Lordships' attention to the remarkable fact that in the middle of last month a statement was made to Congress by Mr. Franklin Ray, the Chief of the China Branch of the Lease-Lend Administration, who gave a very full and frank account of the whole situation with regard to supplies, with regard to geographical and other difficulties, and with regard to what the United States is doing and trying to do. He made the remarkable statement that only half of all the Lease-Lend sup-
416
plies which have been shipped to China so far from the United States have reached China. The rest was in India. Obviously the need here is for more cargo planes. There is being made, as all the world knows, a new road with great labour and difficulty, to replace the lost Burma Road, but that will take a long time. It is our declared object—we have had it stated by General Wavell—to reconquer Burma. That also may take a long time, and it would be prudent to consider that it will take a long time. In the meantime the best way to send more supplies is by means of cargo planes.
What supplies have been sent so far? As regards Lend-Lease supplies—I know that in addition His Majesty's Government have sent substantial supplies—the figures are something like these. The figures were published in Washington on February 27, and I give them in round numbers. This country has had Lease-Lend shipments to the value of £990,000,000. Russia has had Lend-Lease material to the value of £383,000,000, largely owing to the energy and drive of my noble friend Lord Beaverbrook. China has received £39,000,000 of Lend-Lease material. The contrast is extraordinary. The Chinese have more men under arms than Britain and the United States combined—and I suppose about the same number as Russia—but they have received only a very small proportion of the Lend-Lease material so far shipped from the United States. I said that it is easy to appreciate the difficulties. It was absolutely necessary, of course, to stop the German drive to the Middle East by way of Egypt and the Caucasus. The worst thing that could have happened for China was a junction of the Japanese and Germans in the Indian Ocean. If we and the Russians had not stopped the Germans in their drive to the Middle East, that would have happened.
On February 12 last, the American President made a very great speech and amongst other things he told the world how Japan would be brought to unconditional surrender, the unconditional surrender of the Casablanca Conference. May I have permission to quote three sentences from the President's statement? He said:
"We do not expect to spend the time it would take to bring Japan to final defeat merely by inching forward from island to island across the vast expanse of the Pacific.

417
Great and decisive actions against the Japanese will be taken to drive the invader from the soil of China. Important actions will be taken in the skies over China and over Japan itself."
It is clear from these sentences that the shapers of our strategy have abandoned the idea of reconquering the great chain of islands formed by the Philippines and the Dutch East Indies as a first step, and hope to be able to strike at Japan herself. I am not surprised at this change in the direction of strategy, because it took the Americans six months to eject the Japanese from Guadalcanal, and it took Australian soldiers, with some help from the Americans, six months to clear Papua of this yellow plague. If all these former American, Dutch and British possessions are to be reconquered, after Japan has had many months to fortify them, it will take a long time; and then Japan's strategical position would be no weaker than at the time before Pearl Harbour when she threw down the gage to the Western democracies. So we are going to attack Japan through China. We should have had to come to this plan anyhow. It is a much more hopeful prospect. From the mainland of Asia Japan can be brought under a sea and air blockade, and if her sea-borne trade is cut off, her teeming millions are brought to ruin and starvation. Japan is in exactly the same position as these islands. She is a sea Power with the strength and weakness of a sea Power. Japan's great industrial cities and naval and military bases can be bombed from the China coast, but there must be a Chinese Ally n the field to co-operate in that action.
I and my noble friends fully appreciate the importance of the visit of Field-Marshal Sir John Dill and Lieutenant-General Arnold, Chief of the Air Force of the United States Army, to Chungking immediately after the Casablanca Conference. We understand that it is part of the general machinery of keeping in touch with our Chinese Ally. We also appreciate that this is not solely an American responsibility. The last person to say that it was an American responsibility alone would be the noble Viscount opposite. We are equally involved with the United States and we have responsibilities too. We are full members of the Pacific Council. We are always being informed, especially when the noble and learned Lord Chancellor replies to debates on these
418
matters, that there is a unified strategy. Nevertheless, there has been welcomed to this imperial city a very great Chinese General and administrator in the person of General Hsiung Shi-Hui. This General has been head of the Chinese Military Mission in Washington since last March, and, judging from his public statements, he does not seem to be satisfied about this unified strategy. At any rate, he is less satisfied than the noble and learned Lord Chancellor, for at his Press conference in London on February 25, according to the report in The Times, the General "urged that the United Nations should formulate a common plan for the attack on Japan." I read these words, I confess, with great surprise, because I had a lively recollection of the debate here, initiated by my noble friend Lord Addison on December 2, in which the Lord Chancellor, in a reply which, as always, was very frank and very interesting, assured us that there was constant and direct communication between the Prime Minister, the President of the United States and the Chinese Generalissimo and Government. And yet here is the head of a Chinese Mission, a man of great military and administrative fame and renown, who can state at a Press conference in London that we should formulate a common plan for the attack on Japan.
On the same day that this Press interview was given by General Hsiung Shi-Hui, the Chinese Foreign Minister, Mr. T. V. Soong, who was in Washington, made this statement publicly. He said that a few hundred aeroplanes would enable the Chinese Armies to begin an offensive aimed at driving the Japanese from Chinese soil. He also said: "Airfields from which aeroplanes could attack Japan proper are still in Chinese hands." The object of this Motion, which I venture to submit, is to inquire of His Majesty's Government what steps are being taken to see that these aerodromes remain in Chinese hands; in other words, what are we doing to implement our undertaking to afford all possible aid to our Chinese Allies? I beg to move for Papers.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, I feel that the noble and gallant Lord has been happily inspired in placing this Motion on the Paper. It is exactly a month ago that two noble Lords who formed part of the Parliamentary delegation to China received a warm wel-

419
come from all sections of opinion in your Lordships' House on their return home, and the noble Viscount, the Leader of the House, gave a definite assurance on behalf of the Government that the interests of China were as near to the heart of the Allied Nations, in achieving victory, as those of any other member of that alliance. The noble Lord, therefore, has, I think, every right to make the inquiries which he has made, and all the more so because during the month that is past many things have happened which, no doubt, have tended to divert public attention from the Chinese part of the war. The attention of the public has been fixed on the astounding resistance and rebound of the Russian Army on their interminable front. It has also been much occupied by the swaying fortunes of the campaign in North Africa, to say nothing of the fighting in the Pacific in which the Australian and American Forces have been so heavily engaged. It is, accordingly, not surprising that the newspapers, and therefore the attention of the public, have been far less occupied with what has been happening between China and Japan than with those other aspects of the war.
And yet the claims of China to our consideration, as the noble Lord has pointed out, are at least equal, and in some respects even superior, to those of all the rest who are taking part in the war. The Chinese had to meet absolutely unprovoked attack for a period of years with no talk of any Second Front to help them anywhere, and, as the noble Lord also pointed out, they were in the same position for a long time as we were when we were fighting our lonely battle. Therefore it is, surely, a fair demand that everything which can be done to ease the terribly hard position in which the Chinese Forces are placed should be done. But bear in mind—as the noble Lord was himself careful to bear in mind, although sometimes, in our past debates it does seem to have been forgotten by some enthusiastic speakers—the more you send to one place the less you have to send to another, and with every possible desire to give all the assistance in the form of munitions and other supplies to China it is impossible to forget or ignore the necessities, for instance, of the Russian Front or of our African Campaign.
420
I feel also that there is a particular moral claim which China can advance, if we look back to the history of the last fifty or a hundred years. The Western Powers, including to some extent ourselves, have much to make up in our past treatment of China. Without troubling your Lordships with any historical references, I am bound to say that we cannot look back with an absolutely clear conscience on our treatment of China during the last century. During the present century I think we may fairly claim to have behaved better than some others. The worst offender—and I think it is rather interesting to note it now—was undoubtedly Germany. After the Boxer rebellion at the beginning of this century, it was Germany who, by the shameless seizure of Kiao-chau, set the example and set the pace to other countries not tied down by scruples. We all know the history of the Sino-Japanese war, and the successes of Japan. Japan was not allowed to reap those successes owing to the action of the Western Powers, not because the Western Powers cared about the integrity of China, but because they wanted to have some gain for themselves. As I say, Germany was the worst culprit of all; in fact, it is hardly too much to say that, but for the action of Germany, the war between Russia and Japan might never have taken place at all.
However, that is all ancient history. What we have to do now is to look forward to the future of China in combination with the well-disposed European Powers, and also, of course, and perhaps most of all, with the United States. As some of your Lordships probably know, the distinguished family of which Madame Chiang Kai-shek is one of the most distinguished members, owes to the United States its upbringing in education and in religion. That, of course, creates a very special tie between the Chinese Government and administration and the United States of America, and therefore we feel that whatever we may be able to do for the assistance and for the future benefit of China will be shared in to the utmost by the United States.
I think, however, that there are other hopes which we may dare to entertain. It seems to me that there could be no more hopeful or fruitful prospect for the great continent of Asia than a lasting co-operation and comprehension between a restored China and a reconstituted India. I

421
am quite sure that the advanced section of Indian reformers will have much to learn from the reconstitution of China under the remarkable man whom we all know by the title of Generalissimo. Further than that, should like to think that both Australia and New Zealand will have special reason and special opportunities to four close and friendly connexions with China in the coming generations. I must not waste your Lordships' time by dwelling longer on the future possibilities; I will merely repeat that I hope that His Majesty's Government will see their way to do all that they possibly can to assist China now in the manner indicated by the noble Lord, and that they will even strain a point and go beyond what may be considered absolutely safe in furnishing all that is possible in the way of supplies and munitions to this particular Ally.

DEATH OF THE SPEAKER.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (VISCOUNT CRANBORNE): My Lords, I have just heard the most distressing news that Mr. Speaker passed away at two o'clock this afternoon. I cannot help thinking that your Lordships would feel it most inappropriate that this House should continue in session in the circumstances. I would therefore most respectfully suggest to the House that we should immediately adjourn, and that on the next sitting day we should pass a formal vote of sympathy with Mr. Speaker's widow and relations.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWE: My Lords, I am sure that this news has come to us all as a shock, and that we all
422
deeply regret the loss which the House of Commons has sustained, a loss which it is altogether impossible to over-state. I know that I can speak for my noble friends in saying that we entirely agree with the course which has been proposed by the noble Viscount, the Leader of the House, for we desire to show every possible respect to our friends in another place in the loss which they have sustained.
THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I should like on behalf of my noble friends who sit on these Benches to associate myself and them with every word that has fallen from the noble Marquess, the Leader of the Liberal Party, and to take this very early opportunity of making it perfectly plain to the members of another place that we share with them their very intense grief and shock at the loss of one who has played, for so long a period, so distinguished a part in their proceedings.
VISCOUNT CRANBORNE: My Lords, perhaps I should say just one word before we adjourn about business, as we are cut short in the very middle of a debate. I think it would be the wish of the House that this present debate should be continued at the earliest date on which arrangements can be made for it. I submit that to the House as probably the most satisfactory procedure; and now it remains for me to move that this House do now adjourn.
Moved, That the House do now adjourn.—(Viscount Cranborne.)
On Question, Motion agreed to.
House adjourned.