Sitting of 17 November 1914

Preamble
The House met at a Quarter before Three of the clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.
DIVORCE BILLS.
The Lord Advocate, Sir David Brynmor Jones, Mr. Percy Harris, Mr. King, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Russell, Mr. Sanderson, Mr. Theodore Taylor, and Mr. John Wood, nominated members of the Select Committee on Divorce Bills.—[Mr. Gulland.]
NAVAL AND MARINE PAY AND PENSIONS ACT, 1865.
Copy presented of Order in Council, dated 10th November, 1914, made under the Act [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
COURT OF SESSION ACT, 1868.
Copy presented of Act of Sederunt appointing Judges and Clerk for Additional Division of the Inner House [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.

SHOPS ACT, 1912.
Copies presented of Orders made under the Act by the undermentioned local authorities and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department:—
The Council of the borough of Chorley;
The Councils of the urban districts of Brierfield, Brierley Hill, and Pontypridd;
[by The Council of the rural district of Cheadle Act]; to lie upon the Table.

BRIDLINGTON PIERS AND HARBOUR.
Paper laid upon the Table by the Clerk of the House:—Copy of Abstract of the General Annual Account for the year ending 26th July, 1914 [by Act].

FINANCIAL STATEMENT (1914–15).
Copy ordered "of Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure for the year 1914–15, as revised in view of the War, with an Explanatory Memorandum."—[Mr. Montagu.]
Copy presented accordingly; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 2.]

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.
  WAR IN EUROPE.

    LICHTENSTEIN.
    Sir JOHN JARDINEasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the Sovereign of the Principality of Lichtenstein is, by reason of alliance with Austria or any other cause, in a state, of war with this country; and whether any prohibition of commercial or other dealings with the subjects of the Prince has been published?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Edward Grey): I am informed by the United States Ambassador that the Sovereign Principality of Lichtenstein considers itself neutral in the present hostilities. No prohibition of commercial or other dealings with the subjects of the Prince has been published.
    Sir J. JARDINE: Can publicity be given to this statement, seeing that one of the evening papers has published statements distinctly saying that this peaceable and friendly Prince is at war?
    Mr. SPEAKER: We do not pay any attention to evening papers here.

    IMPERIAL OTTOMAN DOCKS, ARSENALS, AND NAVAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY.
    Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has taken notice of the operations of the Imperial Ottoman Docks, Arsenals, and Naval Construction Company; whether he is aware that this British company has

    311
    been formed to supply Turkey with munitions of war; and whether this company continued to carry on its operations up to the outbreak of hostilities with Turkey?
    Sir E. GREY: The company in question is Ottoman, not British. I presume that up to the outbreak of War the company carried out operations in accordance with its contract, but I have no reason to suppose that these operations, of which the provision of munitions of war was to form a subsequent and subsidiary part, were in any way detrimental to the interests of His Majesty's Government.

    RUSSIA.
    Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whether the capital of Russia, formerly known as St. Petersburg or Petersburg, is now officially called Petrograd; and whether a similar change of name has occurred in the case of Kronstadt and other places in Russia with German names?
    Sir E. GREY: The hon. Member must surely be aware that the answer to the first part of his question is "Yes." I have no information as regards other places in Russia.
    Mr. KINGasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has any information concerning a Russian subject named Bourtzeff, who was in England at the beginning of August, but who subsequently returned to Russia to offer his services to the Russian Government?
    Sir E. GREY: I have no official information on the subject.

    AMERICAN CIVIL WAR (FEDERAL FORCES).
    Mr. JAMESHOPE asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will obtain authentic information through the British Embassy in Washington as to the steps taken by President Lincoln to maintain and augment the strength of the Federal forces in the
    312
    American Civil War; and will he publish such information in the form of a White Paper?
    Sir E. GREY: The information which the hon. Member desires can be obtained in many works of a historical and biographical character, and I therefore venture to deprecate throwing more work on the officers of His Majesty's Embassy at Washington, who are extremely hard pressed at this time.

    NEW GOVERNMENT OFFICES, EDINBURGH.
    Mr. HOGGEasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in accordance with his speech of 7th October, he is proposing to take power in his Estimates to build new Government offices in Edinburgh?
    Mr. GULLAND (Lord of the Treasury): Having regard to the fact that the buildings on the site at Calton Hill cannot be vacated for some time, no provision for building new Government offices can usefully be made in next year's Estimates.
    Mr. HOGGE: Are you taking any money for building?
    Mr. GULLAND: On that site?
    Mr. HOGGE: Yes.
    Mr. GULLAND: I do not think so.

    SUPPLY OF FARM PRODUCE.
    Mr. LEACHasked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Agriculture whether the replies received from farmers of the quantity of produce they can sell to His Majesty's Forces at fair prices are satisfactory; and, if not, what arrangements are being made to secure adequate supplies?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir Harry Verney): It is too early to express a definite opinion on the arrangements made by the Board through county committees for the purchase of agricultural produce for the Army direct from farmers,

    313
    but there is every reason to believe that adequate supplies will be secured at satisfactory prices.

    ADMIRALTY CONTRACTS.
    Mr. BRACEasked the Secretary to the Admiralty if he will place upon the Table a complete list of the Admiralty contracts given out during the months of July, August, September, and October, indicating the firms to which contracts have been allocated and, where possible, the firms to which contracts have been sub contracted?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Dr. Macnamara): To prepare a Return such as is asked for by my hon. Friend would involve an amount of labour which I should deprecate adding to the burden already borne by the Admiralty. Further, such a Return would necessarily be incomplete, as there are a number of confidential contracts, particulars of which it would not be in the public interest to quote.
    Mr. BRACE: In what way has the House of Commons an opportunity of going into the contracts made by the Government, or can it keep some check upon what is being done during the War?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: We are following our usual practice. I do not think the House and the country would wish that certain classes of contracts should be stated.
    Mr. KING: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the late Mr. Gladstone described the present practice as wasteful and extravagant?
    Dr. MACNAMARA: That surely could not have been the present practice.

    UNMARRIED MEN (UNITED KINGDOM).
    Mr. FELLasked the President of the Local Government Board how many men there are in the United Kingdom who are between twenty and thirty years of age and who are unmarried at the present
    314
    time; and, if the exact number cannot be given, if he can state the approximate number of such men?
    The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Herbert Samuel): No exact figures are available, but as far as can be estimated, the numbers are about 2,600,000.

    LANARKSHIRE HOUSING SCHEMES.
    Mr. DUNCANMILLAR asked the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been directed to the fact that the scheduled prices of materials required in connection with the Middle Ward housing schemes in Lanarkshire have been greatly increased owing to the War, and thru the extra cost hereby incurred will make it impossible to fix the rents of such houses on an economic basis; and whether, having regard to the employment which such schemes are giving during the present crisis and to the need for providing adequate housing accommodation at an economic rent in these districts in Lanarkshire where the existing buildings have been already condemned, he will consider as to meeting the increased cost by a special Grant to the local authority in charge of the schemes in question in order that they may at once be proceeded with?
    The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. McKinnon Wood): Representations have been made to me in regard to an increase in the cost of building, but no fund is available from which I could make a grant in the form proposed.

    BELLIGERENT RESERVISTS, CONTRABAND, AND NORTH SEA MINES.
    Sir GILBERT PARKERasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the anxiety of public opinion in the United States with regard to the search for belligerent reservists in American vessels, the declaration of oil and copper as contraband, and the mining of the North Sea, he will make a general explanatory statement of the policy of His Majesty's Government on these subjects?
    The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): I will deal in turn with each of the matters referred to in the question:—
    (1) Enemy Reservists.
    In view of the action taken by the German forces in Belgium and France, where they have arrested and removed as prisoners of war all male inhabitants of military age, His Majesty's Government have found it necessary to give instructions that all enemy subjects liable to military service who may be found on board neutral vessels shall be made prisoners of war. This instruction applies to neutral vessels under whatever flag. As a matter of fact, no case has, so far as I am aware, occurred where enemy reservists have been found in United States ships.
    (2) Oil and Copper.
    As regards oil and copper, His Majesty's Government have reliable information that in the present circumstances any oil, copper, and certain other substances that may be imported into Germany or Austria will certainly be used exclusively for warlike purposes, and His Majesty's Government have for this reason felt justified in adding those items to the list of absolute contraband. Every possible care is being taken to ensure that oil and copper bonâ fide intended for neutral countries should not be interfered with.
    (3) Mines.
    From the commencement of the War the German naval authorities resorted to the indiscriminate laying of mines in large numbers in the North Sea outside territorial limits. The mines were laid upon the trade routes without regard for the safety of peaceful shipping, and in furtherance of no definite military operation, their purpose being clearly to endanger trade with Great Britain. There is good reason to suppose that in many cases they were laid by fishing vessels disguised as neutral, and ostensibly following their ordinary pursuits.
    These proceedings, besides violating the principle of the freedom of the seas for peaceful trading, constituted a breach of the 8th Hague Convention of 1907,
    316
    which was duly signed and ratified by Germany, in the following respects:—1. The mines were not so constructed as to become harmless on breaking adrift from their moorings. 2. No precautions whatever were taken for the security of peaceful shipping. The mines were not kept under observation, and no steps were taken to notify the danger zones by a notice to mariners.
    As a result of these proceedings, a number of British and neutral merchant and fishing vessels have been lost, as well as many lives of neutral and non-combatant persons.
    His Majesty's Government deliberately abstained, and abstained entirety, from the use of mines during the first two months of the War outside British territorial waters, but eventually found it necessary to adopt counter measures in order to cope with the German policy of mine-laying combined with their submarine activities. A mine field was, therefore, laid across the southern portion of the North Sea in such a way as to guard the approaches to the English Channel, and due public warning was given in accordance with The Hague Convention.
    In the last week of October the Germans succeeded in laying a mine field off the north coast of Ireland on the main trade route from America to Liverpool via the North of Ireland. More peaceful merchant ships were blown up and lives lost. But for the warnings given by British cruisers, other British and neutral merchant and passenger steamers would have been destroyed. These mines could not have been laid by any German ship of war, nor any vessel under the German flag. They could only have been laid by some merchant vessel flying a neutral flag, which must have come along the trade route as if for the purpose of peaceful commerce and, while profiting to the full by the immunity enjoyed by neutral merchant ships, wantonly and recklessly endangered the lives of all who travel on the sea, regardless of whether they were friend or foe, civilian or military in character.
    The menace to peaceful shipping presented by these wholly illegal

    317
    methods of waging war is so great that His Majesty's Government have been compelled to adopt the only possible means of protection, namely, to declare the whole North Sea to be a military area, and to restrict all shipping crossing it to a narrow passage along which the strictest supervision can be exercised. Access to the coasts of Great Britain and neutral countries has thus been made as safe as is in the power of the British Navy to make it, and although this has been done at the price of certain inconvenience and delay to shipping through its inability to follow its accustomed routes, the price cannot in the circumstances of the case be considered a high one.
    His Majesty's Government are fully aware of the anxiety prevailing in the United States and other neutral countries on these subjects, and they trust that their policy will be fully understood. They are confident that public opinion in neutral countries will appreciate their earnest desire that there should be no interference with neutral trade, provided the vital interests of Great Britain, which are at stake in the present conflict, are adequately maintained.
    Any interference by the British Navy is directed not to increase British trade, or to diminish the trade of any neutral foreign country, but solely to prevent goods from reaching the enemy which would increase his power in the War against the British and allied forces.

    INDIAN TROOPS.
    Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary for India whether he can state, without injury to the required secrecy of pending military movements, the different portions of the Empire and places in the field of warfare in which troops of His Majesty's Indian Army are now stationed?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. C. Roberts): It is not to the public interest to give this information in any detail, but there are Indian troops in France, in Egypt, in British East Africa, and in the Persian Gulf. One regiment
    318
    was recently engaged at Tsingtau, and a brigade co-operated with the Navy in the reduction of the Turkish defences at Sheikh Saiad, opposite Perim.

    MILITARY OFFICERS (CIVIL EMPLOYMENT IN INDIA).
    Sir J. D. REESasked whether military officers in civil employment in India have been released for military duty in the Royal Engineers, the State Railways, the Survey of India, and other such departments?
    Mr. C. ROBERTS: A considerable number of military officers in civil employ in India, especially officers of Royal Engineers, have been released for military duty.
    Sir J. D. REES: Is this a general movement, or are there still a considerable number of capable military officers engaged in civil employment in India?
    Mr. C. ROBERTS: A considerable number of officers have been released, but I do not think we can press the Government of India to go beyond what it thinks right in its discretion.
    Sir J. D. REES: Is it not a case of suggesting to the Government of India that however necessary these capable officers may be, they are more required elsewhere at the present time?
    Mr. C. ROBERTS: I think the Government of India has the whole matter before them, and I think hon. Members must trust the discretion of the Government.

    VACCINATION.
    Mr. BRACEasked the Under-Secretary of State for War if a general order is in operation that all recruits for the Army at present being recruited must undergo compulsory vaccination or compulcory inoculation; if he is aware that a number of would-be recruits are hesitating to enlist because of their objection to this; and is he prepared to take some action, and, if so, what, to remove this difficulty to recruiting for the Army the nation is now calling for?
    The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. Tennant): I would refer the hon. Member to the written reply I gave yesterday to the hon. Member for Shoreditch. I would add that inoculation against enteric fever is not compulsory.
    Mr. BRACE: Do I understand that soldiers may go to France or Belgium and fight in the ranks although they may have conscientious objections to being vaccinated or inoculated?
    Mr. TENNANT: Yes, Sir.

    OUTFIT (TERRITORIAL OFFICERS ABROAD).
    Sir JOHN JARDINEasked what scale of outfit has been sanctioned for officers of the Territorial Forces ordered to the front or to India, Egypt, or any Colony; and on what date did the orders about outfit in such cases take effect?
    The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. H. Baker): A special outfit grant of £20 was approved in the case of Territorial Force officers proceeding to India. This was communicated to the officers by telegram some days before they left. The amount of the grant to be made to officers proceeding to Egypt or the Mediterranean has not yet been fixed.

    MILITARY SUPPLIES.
    Mr. CHIOZZAMONEY asked the Under-Secretary for War whether he has any official information showing that there has been speculation in military supplies, and that middlemen have been at work to make profit out of the national emergency; that this has held up some supplies and has increased the cost of others; that one middleman bought 5,000 jerseys at 3s. 11d., offered them to the War Office at 4s. 5d., was refused, and then sold them to a Territorial association at 6s. 11d.; and, if so, will he make example of the offenders or exercise the powers conferred by Parliament to seize, goods held up for unjust prices?
    Mr. BAKER: There is reason to believe that middlemen have made profit out of
    320
    the national emergency. A case resembling in some respects that quoted in the hon. Member's question has been brought to my notice. Means are being devised to avoid competition and to ensure greater co-operation between the War Office and Territorial Force Associations.

    ALDERSHOT CANTEENS.
    Mr. CHIOZZAMONEY asked the Under-Secretary for War whether he is aware that on 10th October Major-General A. H. Gordon, General Officer Commanding at Aldershot, issued a notice headed "Instructions to canteen tenants," in which he stated that it had been brought to notice that the price charged in canteens in that command for groceries, etc., were in many cases exorbitant, and out of all proportion to the current market rates in London, and that among the most noteworthy were the following: Bloaters over 500 per cent. above market rates, kippers over 150 per cent., onions over 100 per cent., potatoes over 30 per cent., salt over 150 per cent., vinegar over 100 per cent., margarine over 35 per cent., and milk over 25 per cent.; and if he will state the names of the canteen tenants who have been guilty of these overcharges, and if their contracts have been cancelled?
    Mr. BAKER: I am informed that this notice was issued under a misapprehension and was subsequently withdrawn, as the information given to the General Officer Commanding at Aldershot was found to be incorrect.

    EXCHANGE OF MONEY.
    Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary for War whether he is aware that soldiers at the front, and also on returning from the front, find difficulty in obtaining proper value or fair exchange for British or French cash; and whether arrangements have been or will be made to facilitate fair exchange of money in the hands of soldiers passing to or from these shores?
    Mr. BAKER: I am informed that as a rule the usual exchange facilities are found to meet the case. Special arrangements have been made at one port of disembarkation, as they appeared to be necessary.
    Mr. KING: Can the matter be considered with the view of making arrangements at all ports?
    Mr. BAKER: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will confer with me about that, and tell me the ports to which he refers.

    FRUIT ORDERS.
    Mr. WHELERasked whether any orders for fruit for the Army have been placed outside the United Kingdom; and, if so, with which countries?
    Mr. BAKER: No such orders have been placed by the War Office, but it is understood that a certain quantity of dried fruit for the use of the Indian troops has been purchased in the South of France.
    Mr. WHELER: Am I to understand that no order was given to California?
    Mr. BAKER: I understand that no order has been given by the War Office.

    SOLDIERS' HUTS (CARPENTERS' WAGES).
    Mr. TYSONWILSON asked the Under-Secretary for War whether he has received a complaint that Mr. Randolph Meech, of Hamworthy, Poole, contractor for the supply of doors and frames for soldiers' huts, is not paying the proper rate of wages to the carpenters in his employ, paying only 6d. an hour instead of 8½d.; and whether he is having full and prompt inquiries made into the matter?
    Mr. BAKER: The firm in question holds no direct contract with the War Office, but certain materials have been bought from them by two contractors who have undertaken to supervise the erection of huts on behalf of the War Office at Weymouth and Wareham. Their attention has been drawn to the complaint referred to by the hon. Member.
    Mr. TYSON WILSON: Does the contract contain the Fair-Wages Clause?
    Mr. BAKER: I must ask notice of that question.

    CANADIAN CONTINGENT (SUPER-NUMERARY OFFICERS).
    Mr. RENDALLasked whether some 300 supernumerary officers accompanied the Canadian contingent and have since their arrival in the Home country had no regular duties to perform and in many cases no duties at all; whether those officers have all trained in their Territorial regiments; and, if so, why no use whatever has been made of them since their arrival?
    Mr. TENNANT: There are a certain number of supernumerary officers in the Canadian contingent who will be utilised to replace casualties. I am not aware that no use has been made of their services since their arrival.

    ARMY HOSPITAL NURSING.
    Mr. RENDALLasked the Under-Secretary for War what is the number of patients assigned to each nurse in an Army hospital under peace conditions; whether the same number is still being assigned to each nurse, notwithstanding the altered conditions and the constant and unwearied attention required by many of the wounded patients, particularly the tetanus cases; and whether, as all the best orderlies have been sent to the Front and far greater burdens have thereby been placed on the nurses, he will take advantage of the services of the many nurses anxious to serve their country and thereby give to the wounded patients the perfect attention which they deserve?
    Mr. TENNANT: The nursing staff of all the military hospitals have been largely increased since the beginning of the War according to need and without any regard to peace establishment, and are still being increased daily as need arises. Any patient requiring individual attention has a special nurse allotted. The committee of the Nursing Board meets every week at the War Office to

    323
    consider applications of trained nurses, and these are taken on as their services are required. The patients are now receiving all the nursing attention which the rature of their cases demands.
    Mr. RENDALL: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the same number of patients are assigned to a nurse during war as during peace?
    Mr. TENNANT: I cannot say, but I will make inquiry.

    DRILL INSTRUCTORS.
    Mr. TICKLERasked how many Army pensioners are there at present in Government employ who have been requested to rejoin the Colours as drill instructors and have not responded to the call although medically fit; and whether any steps will be taken to relieve them of their situations after the War and fill the same by those who have gone to help to train men to defend our country?
    Mr. TENNANT: I cannot say how many pensioners there are who are medically fit and who have not offered for service. I do not think it would be practicable to order a compulsory medical examination of all Army pensioners in Government employ.

    WAR OFFICE CONTRACTS (WAGES).
    Mr. TYSONWILSON asked the Under-Secretary for War if he is aware that His Master's Voice Gramophone Company, of Hayes, who are making ammunition boxes, rifle cases, packing cases, and other articles for the War Office, have reduced both the piece and day rate of wage paid to their employés, on the ground that the War Office is paying such a low price for the work done that they cannot afford to pay the standard rate of wage; and whether he will make an inquiry into the matter with the object of compelling this company to pay the proper rate of wage?
    Mr. BAKER: I am not aware of any such allegation, but if the hon. Member will furnish particulars of the class of
    324
    labour and of the reductions of rates referred to, the matter shall be investigated.

    PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES.
    Sir RICHARD COOPERasked the Under-Secretary for War whether any posters in relation to separation allowances for the wives and children of soldiers have been exhibited in which there was not an explicit statement that the increased allowances payable from the 1st October included the amounts allotted by the soldier; and if he will have a copy of each poster used exhibited in the Library?
    Mr. BAKER: Only one such poster has been issued by the War Office and it contained an explicit statement to the effect mentioned. A copy will be exhibited in the Library. Various posters have, I believe, been issued in various places, but I cannot say whether any of them have been incorrectly worded.
    Mr. HOGGEasked why many branches of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Families Association were allowed to mismanage the distribution of allowances when other efficient help was refused?
    Mr. BAKER: I assume that by allowances the hon. Member means allowances payable from Army Votes, but I do not understand to what he refers.
    Mr. HUNTasked the Under-Secretary for War whether any increase has been made to the dependants of officers who serve abroad and die during the War; and if he could say what pensions would be received by wives and dependants of subalterns, captains, majors, and colonels of the Regular Army, Special Reserve, and Territorial Forces?
    Mr. BAKER: No such provision has been made, but the existing regulations will come under review in the inquiry which has been promised. I will furnish the hon. Member with a statement showing the pensions referred to.
    Mr. HUNT: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether anything is proposed to be done for officers' wives and dependants?
    Mr. BAKER: I may inform the hon. Member that the existing regulations will come under review in the course of the inquiry that has been promised.
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Under-Secretary for War whether any record is kept of the circumstances of dependants of men in the Army or joining it; whether he is aware that Widow Anne Power, of Delvin, Westmeath, whose two sons, William and James Power, belonging to the Reserve forces, were without notice called to the front on the outbreak of the War, leaving her without means, almost blind, unable to go about without an attendant, and now in a state of distraction, since her son William, her sole support, died in action, has received no allowance or help of any kind from the War Department or any public source, and has been kept out of the workhouse only by the charity of her neighbours; whether he is aware that a statement of these facts sent to the Secretary of State for War has failed to elicit attention or acknowledgment; whether this is the usual treatment of dependants in such circumstances; and, if not, will he say what is the regulation treatment, why it has not been extended to Mrs. Power, and when it will be extended to her?
    Mr. BAKER: It is not practicable to keep records of the circumstances of the dependants of men in the Army, and no public provision was made for them until the recent concessions, made specially for the War. No application by or on behalf of Mrs. Power is traced in the War Office, but if application is now made, as directed in the recent Army poster, it will be duly considered.

    WINTER CLOTHING FOR TROOPS.
    Mr. HOGGEasked what arrangements have been made for the winter clothing of our troops at the front; and when these will take effect?
    Mr. TENNANT: Cardigan jackets and warm underclothing have already been supplied and mufflers and body belts are being sent out as required. Large quantities of fur-lined coats and fur under-jackets
    326
    are being sent overseas weekly. Warm gloves and warm turned-down hats are also being prepared.
    Sir R. COOPER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that great demands are being made on charity to provide men fighting, both in the Army and the Navy, and does he consider, in regard to these necessary articles, that demands on charity should be made?
    Mr. TENNANT: All the articles which exist in the War Office vocabulary are supplied by money voted by Parliament. Other comforts, such as gloves, are sometimes given by private individuals who seek an outlet for their charity.

    SOLDIERS' SOCKS.
    Mr. HOGGEasked why the knitting of socks, etc., by private enterprise was stopped and an appeal subsequently made for hundreds of thousands?
    Mr. TENNANT: The War Office maintains a sufficient supply of socks for the troops at the front and the knitting of them was not therefore the most useful form the activities of the public could take. It was found, however, that there was so strong a wish on the part of private persons desirous of helping the troops to make and send socks that it became necessary to co-ordinate the efforts, so as to ensure uniformity of supply and proper distribution. The socks sent are extra to and not in diminution of the supply considered necessary by the War Office.
    Mr. HOGGE: May we rest assured that no soldier at the front will be charged anything for any deficiency in his kit?
    Mr. TENNANT: Yes, Sir, so far as that kit is part of the vocabulary of the War Office.

    WAR BULLETINS.
    Mr. HOGGEasked the Postmaster-General whether he will improve the bulletins posted at post offices on Sunday mornings by including information of a later and up-to-date kind, especially where no Sunday newspapers are issued?
    The ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Captain Norton): The bulletin, which is prepared by the Press Bureau for distribution by the Post Office on Sunday mornings, does already contain the latest information up to the latest hour at which it is practicable to issue it for dispatch.

    WIRELESS TELEGRAPHIC APPARATUS.
    Sir J. D. REESasked the Postmaster-General what was the result of the trial of Focktenberger, or Falconer, for being in possession of wireless telegraphic apparatus, he being an employé of Messrs. Siemens and an unregistered alien?
    Captain NORTON: I understand that a trial by court-martial is being held.
    Sir J. D. REES: May I ask the hon. Gentleman whether he is not aware of that fact for a certainty, and whether this prosecution is being instituted and carried on by the Government?
    Captain NORTON: I have stated that a trial by court-martial is being held.
    Sir J. D. REES: May I ask if the hon. Gentleman did not say "I understand"?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Gentleman is really taking a pedantic objection to the form of the answer. Unless the hon. Gentleman was on the court-martial himself, he would have to rely on the information supplied to him.

    AVIATION SCHOOL, EASTCHURCH.
    Sir J. D. REESasked the Postmaster-General what was the result of the trial of Mr. Tomlin, late sub-postmaster at Sittingbourne, for being in possession of plans of the aviation school at Eastchurch; and was any prosecution instituted or any action taken in regard to Mr. Budd, an employé of Messrs. Siemens, who had been employed at the aviation ground and admitted that he had left the papers at Tomlin's house?
    Captain NORTON: Mr. Tomlin, the sub-postmaster of Eastchurch, was arrested
    328
    by the military authorities on 31st August, and was charged with an offence against the Official Secrets Act. The case came before the Sittingbourne Petty Sessions on the 14th September, with the result that Mr. Tomlin was discharged. I have no information about the case of Mr. Budd, who is not a Post Office servant.
    Sir J. D. REES: Can the hon. Gentleman say whether Mr. Tomlin is not a Post Office servant, and seeing the nature of this offence is it not the duty of somebody in the Government to prosecute him and see that he is brought to justice?
    Captain NORTON: My duty is to attend to the Post Office service.
    Sir J. D. REES: Does the hon. Gentleman not think it his duty to be interested in a case like this which came to light in the Post Office service?
    Captain NORTON: I am very much interested.
    Sir J. D. REES: Will the hon. Gentleman make his interest effectual and try to bring this person to justice?

    FAST MOTOR DRIVING (LONDON).
    Mr. CHIOZZAMONEY asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is aware that the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis has issued a special warning and appeal relating to fast motor-driving in London, in which it is stated that certain motorists are taking advantage of the national emergency to drive to the danger of the public, with the result that there has been a grave increase in accidents; if he is aware of the proportion of motorists thus offending; and if he will lake special measures to suppress these offences?
    The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. McKenna): The answer to the first paragraph of the question is in the affirmative. I am unable to say what is the proportion of motorists thus offending, but it is larger than in normal times. Special measures will be taken, if necessary, but I trust the warning referred to may suffice.

    SALE OF INTOXICATING DRINKS TO SOLDIERS.
    Sir JOHN JARDINEasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has received a copy of a resolution passed by the members of a meeting of the Baptist church at Kelso, in the county of Roxburgh, deploring the evils resulting from the present system of sale of intoxicating drinks to the soldiers now being trained in the New Armies and to their families and dependants; and whether he can see his way to suggest more restriction or regulation of such sales?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I have not received the particular resolution referred to, but I have received other representations. I am not at present in a position to make any statement in reply to the latter part of the question.

    Wormshill School (Kent).
    Mr. KINGasked the President of the Board of Education whether a new Order amending final Order, No. 120, under Section 11 (8) of the Education Act, 1902, has been made for the Wormshill school, in the county of Kent; and, if so, whether he will make Orders in the same terms for any non-provided schools in the case of which requests to that effect are made by the local education authority or the minor local authority?
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of EDUCATION (Dr. Addison): The answer to the first part of the hon. Member's question is in the affirmative. The original Order under Section 11 (1) of the Education Act, 1902, for the school in question was made on incorrect information, and a clear case for its amendment was made out. I cannot undertake to make amending Orders unless a sufficient case is made out.

    Workmen's Cottages.
    Mr. LEACHasked the President of the Local Government Board how many building schemes for workmen's cottages
    330
    in rural areas the Board has sanctioned since 1st August last?
    Mr. HERBERT SAMUEL: Since the 1st August last the Board have sanctioned loans under Part III. of the Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890, for the erection of 678 houses by thirty-seven Rural District Councils in fifty-eight parishes. The Board have also sanctioned loans for the purchase of land for the same purpose by five other Rural District Councils in seven parishes.

  NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.

    UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT.
    Sir RICHARD COOPERasked the President of the Board of Trade how many associations have been registered as eligible to receive Grants under Sections 105 and 106 of the National Insurance Act, 1911; and how many workpeople in those associations are now entitled to benefit by the Government Grants under those Sections, distinguishing between men and women and between insured and uninsured trades?
    The PRESIDENT Of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. Runciman): One hundred and three associations have made arrangements with the Board of Trade under Section 105 of the National Insurance Act. The total membership of these associations is returned as 1,230,330. Of this number 881,744 are entitled to receive, when unemployed, unemployment benefit. Of the latter figure 650,709 are compulsorily insured under Part II. of the Act. The Board of Trade have admitted as being qualified for a repayment under Section 106 of the Act, 386 associations with a membership of 1,455,481 entitled to receive unemployment benefit when unemployed. Included in the 386 associations are 102 of the associations which have made an arrangement under Section 105. The Board have no other information enabling them further to distinguish between members in insured and uninsured trades, or the proportion of women in the total membership.
    Mr. JOHN WARD: Is there any idea of applying the procedure of this Act to other trades?
    Mr. RUNCIMAN: Yes, Sir. Under Section 106 a large number of trades that are not called insured trades are receiving State aid.

    MALINGERING.
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why cases of alleged malingering under the National Insurance Act are not dealt with in accordance with the statutory provisions for that purpose; whether the general inquiry into alleged malingering was conducted in secret in Great Britain as in Ireland; whether there was any substantial difference in the findings in the two countries; on what law or findings the difference of treatment is based instead of making the system of medical referees and the amount of remuneration for certification uniform; and will he state the scale of remuneration for certification in Great Britain and in Ireland, respectively?
    Dr. ADDISON: The Report of the Departmental Committee on Sickness Benefit Claims in England has been laid before the House. No similar inquiry has been held in Ireland, and in the absence of medical benefit in Ireland renders it impossible to compare the systems of certification in Great Britain and in Ireland. I may point out, however, that the agreements entered into by doctors on the panel in Great Britain do not provide for specific payments for certification as distinct from other duties required by the agreements.
    Mr. GINNELL: Will the hon. Gentleman say whether any inquiry has been held in Ireland into malingering?
    Dr. ADDISON: I said that a similar kind of inquiry has been held.
    Mr. GINNELL: What kind of inquiry has been held?
    Dr. ADDISON: An inquiry has been held in Ireland for the information of the Department.

    Dublin Disturbances.
    Mr. GINNELLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland why the soldiers who killed innocent
    332
    people in Dublin last July, and the officers who are reported by the Commission of Inquiry to have illegally consented to the use of the soldiers on that occasion, and the person who illegally requisitioned the soldiers, have not yet been tried for their respective parts in that occurrence; when and where they, or any of them, are to be tried; if none of them are to be tried, will he say by whose direction and under what law this course is taken; and what action the Government propose to take with reference to the loss of human life on the occasion mentioned?
    Mr. T. W. RUSSELL (Vice-President of the Department of Agriculture, Ireland): In view of the open verdict returned by the Coroner's jury and of all the circumstances set forth in the Report of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into them, it is not proposed to take any further action in the matter.
    Mr. GINNELL: Even with regard to the deceased persons and their next-of-kin?
    Mr. RUSSELL: If the hon. Gentleman refers to compensation, that question is now before the Treasury.

    Housing Conditions (Scotland) (Royal Commission's Report).
    Mr. HOGGEasked the Secretary for Scotland when the Commission appointed to investigate housing conditions in Scotland is likely to report?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I have made inquiry and am informed that the hearing of the evidence is nearly complete, but that in consequence of the demands connected with the War on the time of most of the Commissioners, it is not possible at present to say when the Commission is likely to report.
    Mr. HOGGE: Seeing that the Grants made by the Local Government Board depend upon the conditions of housing, will the right hon. Gentleman expedite the findings of the Commission?
    Mr. McKINNON WOOD: I have no control over the procedure of a Royal Commission.

    Conviction, of Shopkeeper (Gorey Petty Sessions)
    Mr. GINNELL asked the Chief Secretary whether, at a recent petty sessions at Gorey, a shopkeeper named Kenny was sent to prison for three months for having wrapped parcels of goods for his customers in papers on which certain matter was printed; if so, what was the printed matter; whether the customers objected to it; the names of the magistrates; the law under which that sentence was imposed; and what action the Government propose to take with reference to the sentence?
    Mr. RUSSELL: The facts are as stated in the first part of the question, with the exception that Kenny was bound over to be of good behaviour for twelve months, or in default sentenced to three months' imprisonment. He gave bail, and accordingly did not go to gaol. The printed matter consisted of handbills of a seditious nature, entitled "Ireland and the War," and the attention of the police was called to their distribution by a customer of Kenny's. The magistrates on the Bench were Viscount Stopford (in the chair), Captain the Honourable H. de Vere Pery (resident magistrate), Messrs. A. Kinsella, P. J. Fanning, E. F. L. Ellis, N. Whitty, H. H. Moore, and Dr. Dwyer, the charge being brought under the Act 34, Edward III., Cap. 1. The Government consider the proceedings in this case entirely proper, and do not propose to take any action in connection with them.

    Old Age Pensions.
    Mr. GINNELLasked under what statutory provision or rule voluntary gifts which cannot be enforced, and which are liable to cease at any time from the death of the giver or inability or unwillingness to continue the gift, are reckoned as means in Ireland, and not in England, against claimants of old age pensions; and what is approximately the number of claims that have been disallowed in Ire land because the claimants have hitherto received relief from relatives in America?
    Mr. RUSSELL: The statutory authority for reckoning voluntary gifts as means
    334
    for old age pension purposes is Section 2 (1) (d) of the Old Age Pensions Act, 1911, which applies, and is enforced, not only in Ireland, but throughout the United Kingdom. It is not possible to give the information asked for at the end of the question.

    Government of India Bill.
    Mr. KINGasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the Government of India Bill, introduced into this House on the 6th August last, will be reintroduced this Session with the intention of passing it into law?
    Mr. C. ROBERTS: It is hoped to reintroduce the Government of India (Consolidation) Bill as early as possible next year.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  Lord EDMUND TALBOT: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what business it is proposed to take to-morrow?
  The PRIME MINISTER: To-morrow we propose to take the Motion for the appointment of the Committee on Pensions.

  BILLS PRESENTED.
    HOUSE OF COMMONS (COMMISSIONS IN HIS MAJESTY'S FORCES) BILL.
    "To prevent the acceptance of a commission in His Majesty's Forces vacating the seat of a Member of Parliament, or rendering a person holding such a commission incapable of being elected to, or sitting or voting in, the Commons House of Parliament." Presented by the ATTORNEY-GENERAL; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 4.]
    ANGLO-PORTUGUESE COMMERCIAL TREATY BILL.
    "To make such provisions as are necessary to enable the Anglo-Portuguese Commercial Treaty to come into force." Presented by Mr. RUNCTMAN; supported by Mr. Robertson; to be read a second time To-morrow, and to be printed. [Bill 5.]

    MEMORIAL TO FIELD-MARSHAL EARL ROBERTS.
    The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Asquith): I beg to move:
    "That this House will, upon Monday next, resolve itself into a Committee to consider an humble Address to His Majesty, praying that His Majesty will give directions that a monument be erected at the public charge to the memory of the late Field-Marshal Earl Roberts, with an inscription expressing the admiration of this House for his illustrious military career and its gratitude for his devoted services to the State."
    The British Empire experienced a sense of personal loss for which it was wholly
    342
    unprepared when it realised that death had suddenly taken from us the oldest and most illustrious of our soldiers. Lord Roberts, Irishman by race and blood, born in India of a distinguished military stock, educated here in England, entered the Indian Army when he was still little more than a boy, won the Victoria Cross in the Mutiny, and fought his way step by step, unaided by any influence except his own gallantry and skill, to the highest place in the famous force to which he gave the best years of his life. During the forty years which he spent in the service of the country and of the Crown in our great Dependency there was from the first no hazard which he did not encounter, and no daring adventure in which he was not in the front; and in his maturer days there was no campaign in which he did not stand out from among his contemporaries by his consummate strategy, his great powers of leadership, his unique faculty of attracting the devotion of his men, his mastery over the science and practice of the art of war.
    Crowned with honours and distinctions, he came home with every title to enjoy during the remainder of his life a well earned and glorious repose. But he never allowed the sword, which had won victories for his country and fame for himself, to rust in its scabbard. He was past the age of sixty when he was called, in a moment of national emergency, to recover ground which had been lost, and to reestablish the prowess of our arms in South Africa. I will not presume to pass judgment upon his military qualities and achievements, but I am confident that I am not going to step in advance of the ultimate verdict of history when I say that he takes a high and an undisputed place among our greatest British captains. As our poet says:—
    "On Fame's eternall beadroll worthie to be fyled."
    Nor did he, when he retired from the active service of the State, resign himself to an old age of lethargy and ease. His vivid and ardent spirit and his devoted and untiring patriotism were still alert and alight with fervent energy which age could not dim or daunt. I recall the last talk which I had with him only two or three weeks

    343
    ago, when he pressed upon me his desire to be of use in whatever capacity in this the latest and the greatest of our wars. To the end he was not only wishing but working for the success of our arms. Death came to him at last where, we may well believe, had the choice been his, he would have elected to die. Fresh from reviewing the Indian regiments, to whom his name and fame are a watchword and an inheritance, saluted, as he passed away, with the distant roar of the Artillery, which falls, we may believe, like noble music upon the ears of a dying warrior, and almost within sight of the trenches held by his old comrades in arms, with the same dauntless heroism which he himself had so often inspired and led to victory. Nunc dimittis servum tuum.
    Mr. BONAR LAW: I regard it as a great honour to second the Resolution that has been proposed in words which command the sympathy of the whole House, and which will command the sympathy of the whole nation. For a generation Lord Roberts has stood in the public mind as the outward and visible expression of the soul of the British Army. In his courage, in his personal disinterestedness, in his devotion to duty, which never shone so brightly as on the occasion to which the Prime Minister has referred, when he obeyed the call of his Queen and country at a time when he was bowed down with sorrow through the death of a gallant and dearly beloved son; in his simplicity, in his modesty, in his high-minded uprightness, and in his stern detestation of everything mean and base, Lord Roberts was, in real life, all, and more than all, that Colonel Newcome was in fiction. He understood, better than any man, British soldiers of all ranks and of all nationalities. He understood them, he loved them, and they loved him. He was, and he deserved to be, the ideal of the British Army. But his influence extended far beyond the Army. The words used of another are true of him—
    "He was loved as well as admired by all his countrymen, and most by those who had known him most intimately."
    344
    He was a great soldier, great in the courage, in the originality, and in the breadth of his strategy, but great most of all, perhaps, in the quality which has always distinguished famous commanders—in the blind confidence which he inspired in every man who followed him. How great he was it is impossible to say, for the relative greatness of a soldier must depend upon the greatness of his opportunity. This, however, we can say, that from the day, more than half a century ago, when he won the Victoria Cross, to the day when he led the British troops in triumph into Pretoria, every task which had been entrusted to him was accomplished with unerring sagacity and with complete success. It was my privilege to visit Lord Roberts twice in his own home. On each occasion he was surrounded by soldiers, most of whom were young enough, almost, to be his grandchildren, but in spirit he was the youngest of them all. I was surprised, and I was moved, to see the reverence and the love which the soldiers of the new generation showed to the old hero. No observer could fail to see the spirit of the relationship between them, and no observer in the presence of the man who inspired that feeling could fail to understand it. Our hearts go out to-day in deepest sympathy to Lady Roberts and her daughters. If anything could bring them any comfort in the hour of their affliction, it would be the evidence of the universal feeling of respect, of admiration, and of affection which the death of Lord Roberts has evoked; it would be the knowledge that he died as he had lived, in the path of duty. Since fate or Providence has decreed that his long day's work should now be over, it was indeed fitting, as was expressed in the touching message from our troops at the front, that the great soldier should die in the midst of soldiers. He did not actually fall on the field of battle; still, his was the ideal death of which the poet speaks in words so familiar to all of us:—
    "In some good cause, not in mine own,
    To perish, wept for, honoured, known,
    And like a warrior overthrown."
    Mr. JOHN REDMOND: I beg to ask the permission of the House to utter a

    345
    few brief, simple, but sincere words in support of this Motion. I am not, I need not say to the House, going to attempt to give expression to any appreciation of the great military career of Lord Roberts or to utter any panegyric on his life. Indeed, were that my desire, I could add nothing to the speeches that have been delivered. Lord Roberts was an Irishman, and it is fitting that, at any rate, one Irish voice should be heard in support of this Motion. In addition to that, Lord Roberts was closely and intimately connected with the city which I have had the honour to represent for so many years in this House. Lord Roberts was a Waterford man. His family, of good old Irish stock, were associated with the city of Waterford for very many generations, and those whom I have the honour to represent in this House have always felt proud of being able to claim him as a Waterford man. It is pleasant to recollect that quite recently, within the last few years, the corporation of the city of Waterford, consisting of men of all political views, and all classes and all creeds, unanimously paid him the highest honour which it was in their power to bestow by making him an honorary freeman of that ancient city. I am glad to be able myself to recall that recently—since this War broke out—I had some personal relations with Lord Roberts of a pleasant and most friendly character. He was most anxious to aid in every way he could in rousing his country, Ireland, to an adequate sense of the gravity of the crisis which had arisen. May I be allowed to recall the fact that he expressed a few weeks ago to me a desire, if it were at all possible, to attend the meeting in Dublin which the Prime Minister addressed, and to speak from the same platform as the Prime Minister and myself. As things turned out he was unable to do so, but he was passionately anxious to do everything in his power for the Irish troops, those troops whom he trusted, those troops to whom he was so devotedly attached, and those troops who in turn so highly honoured him throughout his career. He was anxious to do everything in his power,
    346
    passionately anxious to elicit and to gratify their national sentiment and in this way to encourage them to play a part in this War worthy of their past in the military history of this country. A great soldier is dead, dead with his harness on him, fallen at the front in my belief as truly as if he died from a German bullet in the trenches, and I am glad that the House has been good enough to give me as an Irishman the opportunity of saying these few simple words in honour of a man who, whatever may have been his political opinions from time to time, and on an occasion such as this I utterly decline to think of his political opinions, has certainly added to the long roll of great soldiers whom Ireland has given to the Empire in the past one of the greatest of their names.
    General Sir IVOR HERBERT: I venture with great hesitation to rise as one—I fear the only one now present in this House, who has had the honour to serve on the staff of Lord Roberts—to say in a few words, few and plain words, that which I feel to be some of the thoughts of the men in the Army. At this moment I cannot expect to emulate, much less add to the eloquence of the tributes already paid to my lamented chief, but I do feel that perhaps without any eloquence at all I may be able to put forward one or two things which might be expressed by the men in the ranks. Lord Roberts was not only a great commander, but he was looked upon by every man in the Army as a comrade, and as a valued personal friend. The men in the Army spoke of him and thought of him as the Grenadiers of France may have thought of that great Emperor when they spoke of him as Le Petit Caporal. It was the personal element that was so strong. One of the secrets of his great influence lay in a certain simplicity of nature, in an innate sweetness of disposition. Officers and men alike would do their utmost for him. Having once come under the influence of his personal charm they would do their utmost for him and feel themselves sufficiently rewarded, though their efforts might never be recognised and

    347
    might be lost in the general operations. The rank and file knew that they had in him a personal friend, one who ever watched after their interests and whose constant thought was solicitude for their interests, and not only for their material benefit but one who did more perhaps than any commander in the British Army to safeguard those under his command from the moral dangers which unavoidably surrounded them. It was that influence and that example of his which had the effect of building up in the men of the Army that great quality of character which we see so strongly marked, and of which we are daily seeing the proof on the battle fields of France, and which have raised the deeds of our Army to greater heights of heroism than ever before.
    It would be improper for me to touch on the question of what the Memorial to our deceased Leader should be. I know that in these days there is often a feeling that memorials should have some material form for the benefit of some object. I think it would not be improper for me to express that which I feel would be the wish of the large number of those who have served under him, allowing, of course, for wishes that he may have expressed or for wishes of his own family. We would like to see somewhere in this great City of London a living presentment of the man whom we knew, and to see him as we saw him at Kandahar, at Paardeberg, or at Aldershot, in the performance of his duties. We would like to see him, that figure which we knew so well with his admirable seat on a horse, which was one of the things that so endeared him to many of us, and with that youthful appearance to which the Leader of the Opposition referred just now, and which endeared him so much to the younger generation as to those who served under him. I should like that image and memory of him to exist as it exists and will for long in our hearts, and I should like that image and memory to go down to untold generations as a precious heritage and as an example to the race in succeeding generations.
    Colonel YATE: May I, as an officer of the Indian Army who was on the Staff of Lord Roberts on the march from Cabul to Kandahar, and with him throughout the battle of Kandahar, say one word to express the feelings of grief and sorrow which I am sure reverberated throughout the whole of India on the news of the death of Lord Roberts. I trust I may be permitted to say this word in support of the Resolution, that I am sure that all the officers and men of the Indian regiments now at the front will feel it to be one of the proudest things of their life that the last act of Lord Roberts should have been to inspect them on the field of active service.
    Question put, and agreed to, nemine contradicente.

    WAR IN EUROPE.
      WAYS AND MEANS.

        SECOND VOTE OF CBEDIT.
        Considered in Committee.
        [MR. WHITIEY in the Chair.]
        1. Resolved, "That towards making good the Supply granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1915, a sum of £225,000,000 be granted out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]
        Resolution to be reported to-morrow (Wednesday).

    WAR BUDGET.
      CHANCELLOR OF EXCHEQUER'S STATEMENT.

        INCREASED TAXES.
        The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Lloyd George): Before the announcement of the Second Vote of Credit I read a good many forecasts in the papers as to the expenditure on the War, and I was very much struck by the fact that they were all underestimates, and that the public until this figure appeared had no idea as to the costliness of

        349
        the undertaking. But the Prime Minister yesterday gave such figures as could consistently with the public safety be given of the details of that expenditure; therefore it will be quite unnecessary for me to dwell upon the Vote of Credit or the sum of money which it is necessary for me to ask in submitting proposals to the House by way of raising the necessary money. The expenditure is higher in proportion to the forces in the field than the expenditure in any other country. There are two or three reasons for that. However, I am not sure that it is generally realised how many men we have under arms at the present moment. We have at least 2,000,000 men serving the country under arms at the present moment, and, if the next million is enlisted, as I confidently anticipate it will be, in the course of the next few months, there will be 3,000,000 men under arms. It is forgotten too often that, in addition to a very considerable Army, we are maintaining a huge Navy as well. The separation allowances to our troops and to those serving in the Navy are on a more liberal scale than those of any other country in the world. I hesitate for a moment to give the actual figure, but the estimate, roughly, is that, when the million men are added to our Army, the separation allowances will cost something like £65,000,000. In addition to that, the pay of the Army is considerably higher. There are two or three other items of expenditure which make the cost of our forces, both on sea and land, higher in proportion to the number of men incorporated in them than probably in any of the other belligerent countries.
        I submit to the Committee to-day proposals not merely covering that huge expenditure up to the end of the financial year, but also for the shortage in the revenue directly attributable to the circumstances and conditions of the War. The Budget Estimate of the revenue was £207,146,000. Up to the time when war was declared there was every prospect that that Estimate would be fully realised. Since then there has been a drop in the revenue not nearly as considerable as one would have feared, but by the end of the year I anticipate that the Treasury will
        350
        be short of £11,350,000. I therefore estimate that the revenue on the present basis will produce £195,796,000. The estimated expenditure on the basis of the estimates actually presented before the outbreak of War was £206,924,000. To this must now be added the abnormal expenditure due to the War of £328,443,000. That means that we have to find before the end of the financial year a total sum of £535,367,000. If the revenue which we anticipate will be collected by the 31st March is deducted from that amount, that will show a deficiency of £339,571,000. The question is how that is to be met. Of course, it is far and away the largest sum that Great Britain has ever had to meet in the course of a single year. No war has been as costly. The cost of no war has even approximated to the cost of the present War. The largest amount spent by Great Britain on war in a single year before the present War was £71,000,000. The Bevolutionary and Napoleonic Wars cost in the aggregate £831,000,000; that war was spread over twenty years. The Crimean War cost £67,500,000; that was spread over three financial years. The Boer War cost £211,000,000; that was spread over four financial years. The first full year of this War will cost at least £450,000,000. We are continually increasing the number of men, and therefore the rate of expenditure increases.
        4.0 P.M.
        It is obviously out of the question to raise the whole of this sum of money by taxation. The first question I should like to ask the Committee to consider is this: Is it worth while raising any, and, if so, what proportion by means of taxes? If we do not tax and tax heavily, it will be a serious departure for the first time from the honoured traditions set and hitherto maintained by this country in every single war in which it has ever been engaged. Let us examine one or two of the precedents. The first great precedent to which I shall call the attention of the House is the precedent of the French wars at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries. The total cost of those wars, as I have already stated to the Committee, was £831,000,000. The

        351
        amount raised by loans came to £440,000,000. The amount raised by Pitt and his successors out of taxes came to £391,000,000. The next precedent is the precedent of the Crimean War. The total cost of that war was £67,500,000. Of that, £32,000,000 was found by means of loans, and £35,500,000 was raised by means of special taxes during the war. I should also like to call the attention of the Committee to another very important consideration—the comparative wealth of the country during the French wars of the eighteenth century and its wealth at the present moment. Mr. Pitt, in introducing his Income Tax, I think it was in 1798—just about the end of the eighteenth century—estimated the income of the country at £102,000,000. I think that was the income of Great Britain alone. As a matter of fact, Income Tax was paid upon a sum of £57,000,000, so that either he overestimated the amount of income which was available, or perhaps there may have been some evasion.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The collection was bad at first.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Yes, the collection was bad at first. Let us assume that Mr. Pitt's figures were correct. Allowing for evasion, and bearing in mind that industrial wages were very low, even in comparison, the total income of the country at that time could hardly have been £250,000,000 a year. At the present time it is estimated to be £2,300,000,000. Everything was taxed — income, alcohol, food, light, auctions—everything that the ingenuity of Chancellors of the Exchequer could think of. The revenue raised for war and ordinary purposes ranged from £50,000,000 to £70,000,000 a year. That means that at one stage, one-fifth of the national income; at another, one-fourth; at another, between one-fourth and one-third, of the total income of the country was taken for public purposes. If we rose to the heroic level of our ancestors we should be raising to-day a revenue of between £450,000,000 and £700,000,000, and no borrowings would be necessary. May
        352
        I also point this out, that had Mr. Pitt not set that noble and heroic example, and had it not been followed by his successors, we should to-day have been devoting the proceeds of a fourpenny Income Tax to pay interest in respect of money which he found out of taxation, which otherwise would have been borrowed and have been added to the National Debt; and since that day, between £1,500,000,000 and £2,000,000,000 would have been paid upon that amount, because it would have crippled and depressed his borrowing powers. Mr. Gladstone, in considering the same problem on a much smaller scale than the one, I am sorry to say, with which I am confronted—it was during the Crimean War—made use of these words. After referring to the example set by Mr. Pitt and the principles laid down by him, he went on to say:—
        "These, then, were the convictions which Mr. Pitt and the successors of Mr. Pitt entertained of their duty to their country. This was the idea that they had of their obligations to posterity. Do you suppose that in those days, when the Duke of Wellington was crowning the British arms with fresh laurels from year to year, your fathers did not think they were fighting for the advantage of posterity? Did they not think they were fighting for our advantage—for we were posterity to them—when they made such efforts to meet those tremendous charges by sacrifices of their own? Why cannot you do that in 1854 which your fathers did in 1798? What were their means as compared with ours?"
        It is equally true to-day. I could adapt that last phrase, and say, "When Sir John French and his armies are adding fresh laurels to the military story of this country, why cannot you do that in 1914 which your fathers did in 1798 and in 1854? What were their means as compared with ours?" The arguments then used by Mr. Pitt, afterwards by Mr. Gladstone, afterwards by Lord St. Aldwyn when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, are just as applicable to-day. It must be remembered that heavy increased taxation may be inevitable as the result of the War. There will be the interest on Sinking Fund, there will be the increase of the pension list, there will be the inevitable increase in separation allowances, and the less raised during the War by taxation the heavier the taxes after the War is over. It may be asked, Why should we begin now?

        353
        By the indulgence of the Committee I should like to address a few observations to hon. Members upon that point. I am not going to presume to express an opinion about the duration of the War. There is no man, however equipped and however competent, who can express an absolutely reliable opinion upon that subject. There may be accidents which will shorten the War. There may be accidents that will lengthen the War. It depends upon questions military. It depends upon questions political. It depends upon subtle human considerations that are outside the purview of both. I am therefore not going to express an opinion. We are fighting a tough enemy. We are fighting an enemy that cannot submit to any terms we can accept—to any terms we can prudently accept—without a smashing defeat. Let us bear that in mind when we are making our calculations. Therefore if there is any doubt about the length of the War, I am bound, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, to assume a longer period rather than a shorter period in making my plans. It would be unwise to do otherwise; it would be imprudent and show a deplorable lack of foresight.
        That is the basis upon which I am proceeding, and if I assume in the course of my arguments that the War is going to take a long period, it is not because I have formed any estimate upon the subject, but because I think it is wiser to do so when you are laying your financial plans for the future. We should be all the stronger to get through, long or short; and whether long or short we have to settle once and for all the great questions that for generations have been the cause of irritation in Europe. I should like first of all to give one figure to the Committee in justification of the proposals which I shall submit for taxation. The first is this: If you take the loss of revenue and interest together upon the money we have borrowed for the War, I shall in my proposals have to find this year about £16,000,000, while next year £50,000,000 will have to be found for interest and loss of revenue. I am taking all assumptions into account, and the fact that you will probably have next year a million or two
        354
        millions of men who will have left this country. To that extent the revenue will be deprived of some of its support. No one suggests borrowing for any of these purposes. That would be profligate finance. It would be cowardly finance in the extreme.
        The next consideration I want to put to the Committee is this: By far the greater part of the money raised, whether by loan or otherwise, for the purpose of this War, will be expended in this country. I should not like to express an opinion as to how much, but I should say at least four-fifths will be spent in this country. Immediately after the War there must be a period of reconstruction, not merely here, but in Europe, when enormous demands will be made on the manufacturing resources of this country. During the War, and during the period of reconstruction, there will be practically no competition in the neutral markets of the world except from America. We shall, therefore, practically command those markets, because America certainly cannot supply the demand. Therefore, when I am taking those two periods into account, I think we can look forward" to something like four or five years when the industries of this country will have the artificial stimulus which comes from these abnormal conditions. When that period is over, we shall be face to face with one of the most serious industrial situations with which we have ever been confronted. We shall have exhausted an enormous amount of the capital of the world which would otherwise have been available for industry. Our purchasers both here and abroad will be crippled. Their purchasing power will have been depressed, and—let us make no mistake—Great Britain will be confronted with some of the gravest problems with which it has ever been faced. Why do I say that? For this reason: Because I want to impress upon the Committee with all the earnestness at my command that it is desirable that the nation, during this period of inflation, should raise as much money out of taxation as it can be induced to contribute. Every twenty millions raised annually by taxation during this period

        355
        means four or five millions taken off the permanent burdens thereafter imposed on the country. We shall certainly need all that relief to face the period which we have got in front of us. With wisdom, sagacity, and foresight, we shall come through it, but let us think about it in time, and lay down our plans accordingly. If the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham is Chancellor of the Exchequer in those days, if he will allow me to say so, he will thank me for listening to his first wise appeal, and for turning a deaf ear to his second suggestion, which was not quite as wise. I think his first instinct was the sound one, I think it was the courageous one. It is the one to which I am going to listen.
        Taxes will have to be imposed to meet permanent charges as a result of the War. I hope there will be a great reduction in the cost of armaments as the result of the War. I should regard the War as having failed in one of its chief purposes unless it led to an all-round reduction in the inflated cost of armaments, but even then, for the first few years after the War, we must anticipate heavy increased charges for interest for Sinking Fund, for separation allowances, and for pensions. I wonder whether the right hon. and hon. Gentlemen realise that if the War proceeds for any long period the pension list will be increased probably by £10,000,000 a year. It is easier to raise taxes in a period of War and to lower them in a period of peace than it would be to raise even lower taxes in a period of peace. War is the time for sacrifice in nations. They are in the spirit of sacrifice, and that makes a difference. It is a time when men know that they are expected to give up comforts, possessions, health, limb, life—all that the State requires in order to carry it through the hour of its trial. It is a time of danger, when men part willingly with anything in order to avert evils impending on the country they love, and I am perfectly certain that when there are millions of our countrymen volunteering to risk their lives, men who cannot volunteer are not going to grudge a fair
        356
        share of their possessions. It is not merely a time of sacrifice, it is a time for the temper of self-denial, it is a time to ask the nation to make sacrifices. People who cannot go and give their lives are anxious to do something else to assist, and I am perfectly certain I should be committing an unpardonable blunder against the highest interests of this country if as Chancellor of the Exchequer, however disagreeable the task may be, I did not take this, the earliest possible opportunity, for submitting proposals that would enable people to contribute something towards carrying on the War in which the honour and life of their country is so deeply involved.
        It is not easy to refer to what other countries are doing. Russia is taxing and taxing heavily in that wonderful spirit of heroism and self-abnegation which Russia is showing all round, and which is the marvel of the whole world. It is not merely that she is taxing and taxing heavily, but she is doing that at a moment when she is prohibiting the sale of a commodity which is bringing in tens of millions to her pockets. It is one of the greatest acts of national heroism which I think any country has ever displayed in the face of great danger. Other countries are not in the same condition as we are. The oversea trade of Germany and Austria is completely cut off by our Fleet; nine-tenths of their overland trade is gone; they are deprived of their raw material; they are deprived of a good deal of their food supplies; their exports are practically gone; not an unimportant part of French territory is still, unfortunately, in possession of the enemy. This country is absolutely free from the invader. Not only that, but our oversea trade is carried on practically without any interruption. We have lost a certain amount of lucrative business on the Continent, but the markets of the world are open, not merely for the trade we used to carry on, but for the trade the enemy used to carry on before the War. I am quite alive to the danger which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham pointed out of the possible effect upon the loan. But after anxious consultation with those who have

        357
        been advising me—and I do not think that anyone has ever been privileged to have had a better or more sagacious set of advisers than those who assisted me throughout the whole of this great crisis—the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the Member for West Birmingham, if I may say so, is one of them, and one of the most sagacious—but in this respect I should point out that, at any rate, the vast majority of them are of opinion that the readiness to tax ourselves for the purpose of paying some part of the burden of war, in their judgment will strengthen our credit and give increased confidence that we are not going on by the easiest method of borrowing, but that we are going to carry on the very best traditions of the finance of this country by taxing ourselves for the time being.
        And as to the effect on trade, the Government propose to levy no taxes that will interfere with any productive industry. You can always find excuses and reasons against either levying or paying taxes. "This is not the time, this is not the way, this is not the method, this is not the amount, and these are not the persons or classes who ought to pay." It is always disagreeable. The function of the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon these occasions is the least picturesque and the most perilous of all the combatants. He is simply a coal-heaver; he is filling the bunkers of the battleships and cursed by everybody as a nuisance; but still it is a very essential function, and my appeal to the Committee—it is not necessary, I am sure—is that we should show courage. It does not require very much courage to tax ourselves, to give part of our income to fight the enemy, but let us show that we civilians of all classes are perfectly prepared to take our share of the burdens of this War. It is for these reasons that the Government propose to submit to the House of Commons proposals for raising a substantial sum by means of taxes. On the ground of policy, as well as of justice, it is inexpedient that a great war, involving national honour and existence, should be financed by contributions levied upon any section—upon a minority of the population. It is peculiarly a case for every
        358
        class, every condition, every grade, to bear their share of the burdens. I shall therefore submit proposals which will bring in, so far as we are able, all classes of the community.
        I now come to the first of them. Naturally, the first resort of every Chancellor of the Exchequer in these conditions is the Income Tax. As far as the ordinary Income Tax is concerned, I propose, that although the rate of the tax shall be the same, this year as next year, so far as the proposals of the Government are concerned I propose that this year the new rate shall be charged from the 1st of December, and therefore only in respect of one-third of the year's income. I propose that in respect of unearned income, that a man shall make an additional contribution of one-forty-eighth of his income towards his country's needs this year—I will give the actual figures later on—and next year that he should pay one-sixteenth. In respect of earned income, the income which is charged at 9d., I propose this year that a man should contribute an additional one-eightieth of his income towards the cost of the War, and next year three-eightieths. After what I have said about Mr. Pitt and the contribution he levied in his generation that does not sound very heroic. I shall point out later on that as far as the small incomes are concerned it does not amount to that. Putting it in another way, it looks more formidable. I propose that the Income Tax should be doubled.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Does the right hon. Gentleman propose 2s. 6d. in the pound on unearned income?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: If the right hon. Gentleman will allow me I will come to that.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot follow the one-forty-eighth.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I did not mean the right hon. Gentleman should follow it just yet. I want to bring the Committee gradually up to it. I therefore propose that as a basis the Income Tax should be doubled, but that this year that should only be collected in respect of one-third of the

        359
        income. That would mean that this year the Income Tax would be levied at the rate of 1s. 8d., 1s. in respect of earned income on the 9d. class, and 1s. 8d. for the rest; next year at the rate of 1s. 6d. and 2s. 6d., and the same thing will apply to the Super-tax. Let me show exactly what that means. With regard to small incomes it looks much more serious than it really is. For instance, take an income of £200, that means that the earned income will be contributing one-four-hundredth part of that income and the unearned income will be contributing one-three-hundredth part. It is 3d. in one case and 4d. in the other on the basis of the deduction of a considerable abatement. It is upon £40, and not upon £200. In addition to that it must be borne in mind that where you double the Income Tax you double the abatement in respect to children always, because that abatement is not on the basis of the rate of the Income Tax but upon the basis of £10 deducted from the assessment.
        Therefore the abatement in respect of children will be double when you are doubling the Income Tax rate. The reason why the scale is different, why we do not impose the whole benefit of this new scale, and practically postpone it until the beginning of the next financial year is that, first of all, we recognise that when war was declared a third of the year had already passed. Men had already made their arrangements for their scale of expenditure, and it was very difficult for them to adapt themselves immediately to the new conditions. The second is this, that during the first year there will be a greater hardship in respect of those whose incomes have been swept away altogether by the War. We hope to be able to make certain arrangements to meet some of the very worst cases, and when we come to the Income Tax Resolutions—I shall not propose any Income Tax Resolutions to-night—we hope to be able to set forth in greater detail the proposals which we intend making for meeting the very worst cases where, owing to the War, practically the whole of a man's income has been swept away. The amount which the
        360
        Inland Revenue expect to collect this year will be from Income Tax £11,000,000 additional, from Super-tax £1,500,000, a total of £12,500,000; next year from Income Tax £38,750,000, from Super-tax £6,000,000, a total of £44,750,000 increase. So much for Income Tax.
        Now I come to the taxation upon the classes which are not included in the Income Tax scale. Indirect taxation always presents great difficulties. It is borne unequally; it is often not according to-the means but according to the habits of the taxpayer. A man may be out of employment at the time, still he has to pay, and that comes hard upon particular industries. That is inevitable with any indirect taxation you can possibly think of. The Government have tried to seek some means by which they could raise money from the non-Income Tax paying classes, without imposing anything in the nature of a direct tax upon commodities. We naturally thought of the proposal which has been made from time to time, a tax upon wages. That would undoubtedly mean that a man would be paying upon what he actually received, and according to what he received. Well, now I am sorry to say that after very lengthy consideration we felt ourselves bound to dismiss it—for the time being—and for these reasons: there would be difficulties of dealing with changing rates of wages, with casual labour, with outworkers, with piece-workers, with half-timers, of whom at present you have a very large number; there is the difficulty to employers of working any system of card collection, except on a flat rate. There was the question of variation for married people and people with children. It would have been obviously unfair to charge the same rate upon a man with a large family as upon a bachelor. Then came the difficulty of how the employer was to collect the amount and so discriminate between one and the other.
        Mr. JOHN WARD: You should tax the bachelors alone.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Well, there would be the same difficulty with an employer in that case. Then there is the

        361
        case of the non-insured person not in the employed class—the small shopkeeper, the man who is occasionally employed, but at other times is his own master. To attempt to collect a small Income Tax upon the hundreds and thousands, and possibly millions, of that class was a prodigious task, which we could not contemplate doing within the course of the next four or five months, and we feared that the cost of collection would be quite out of proportion to the revenue derived. We therefore very reluctantly came to the conclusion that we must resort to the old method of raising taxation by means of indirect taxes upon commodities. We had all sorts of suggestions, the usual suggestions for fancy taxes, most of them irritating and all of them unproductive. We dismissed these. Therefore we had to resort to the very limited list which the experience of successive Chancellors of the Exchequer indicated as the only sources out of which you could raise any considerable revenue in time of national need and emergency.
        The first of these is beer. Considered as a tax on alcohol, beer is charged at the present moment at an absurdly low figure as compared with any other alcoholic beverages. I will give one figure to the Committee in order to prove this. Beer brewed at the standard gravity—I shall have a word to say about standard gravity in a minute—of 55 degrees, will, after fermentation, contain from 9 to 10 per cent. of proof spirit, say 9 per cent., or something like three and a quarter gallons of proof spirit to the barrel. Charged as spirit, this would pay £2 7s. 10d., but charged as beer it pays 7s. 9d. [HON. MEMBERS: "Put it up!" and "Put it down!"] No one would, of course, dream of taxing beer on the spirit basis at this rate, but it does indicate that beer, as alcoholic liquor, is at present taxed very low. I am sure the Committee will not run away with the idea that all beer contains from 9 to 10 per cent. of spirit, as much of the beer consumed is brewed at gravities much lower than the standard. People who drink beer and who do not consider they are drinking intoxicating liquor will be glad to know that light beers
        362
        contain only from 5 to 7 per cent. of proof spirit—just a little above ginger ale. Slight additions have been made from time to time to the Beer Duty, but there is one vice common to all these additions — they hit the trade hard, but they have been very difficult to pass on to the consumer because they have been too small. The trade has at last, by a good many devices and expedients, all of them honest and some distinctly beneficial to the public, saved themselves from ruin. The gravity of the beer has been lightened, and the public has become accustomed gradually to drinking lighter and leas alcoholic and much more salubrious beverages, and the health of the community has undoubtedly improved in consequence. But it is quite clear that the trade are at the end of all their expedients in that respect, and that no amount of scientific resource would enable them to absorb a very considerable tax without passing it on to the consumer. Therefore we must make up our minds that if a duty is to be imposed upon beer it must be one that the publican and the brewer can, and, I may say, ought to, pass on to the consumer, because it is right that the duty should be a duty imposed upon the consuming public, and not upon the trade.
        I have had considerable inquiries made as to the form in which the public take their beer. I left my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary (Mr. McKenna) to prosecute these inquiries, and he assures me that they generally drink in half-pints. The greater part of the demand is one for glasses and half-pints. They are not the same thing, although probably some of the public may think they are. A glass is not a measure at all. It is just what the publican makes it in order to save himself from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and it varies according to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the time being, but it is somewhere about one-third of a pint. It is a valuable commodity for the money, but it is not a half-pint. My right hon. Friend has had 120 public-houses visited in a single evening, and there at the public bar there were 4,386 glasses, 10,443 half-pints, and 1,500 pints

        363
        called for. It is perfectly clear from that the bulk of the drinking is in half-pints. [An HON. MEMBER made an observation which was inaudible.] Oh, no! I am quite prepared to believe that of a thin beverage like beer, they would want more than a half-pint in these trying times. That means that if we are going to impose a tax which the publican and brewer can pass on to the consumer, it must be in some current coin of the Realm that can be put on the half-pint. That measure cannot be varied. The glass might be varied. If we had put something, say, in the form of a halfpenny, on the pint you may depend upon it that the halfpenny would get on to the half-pint and that the revenue would get no share of it. The brewer and publican, in fact, would be driven to put it on in that form to save themselves. Therefore we take that basis, and that is the basis upon which we propose to proceed—a halfpenny the half-pint. Every half-pint that a man drinks he will be contributing to the carrying on of the War. I commend that to my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton. I therefore propose that the Beer Duty should be increased by 17s. 3d. per barrel. This will allow the retailer to charge an extra halfpenny for half-pints, but it will leave the brewer and the publican a fair margin for waste, for bad debts, for interest, and for a fair profit on turnover. May I also point out that the lighter the beer the larger the margin, and that has been the policy of the House of Commons in order to encourage the drinking of lighter beer.
        There are one or two concessions which are proposed to be made to the retailer and to the brewer. I now come to the concession which we propose to make to the retailer. There has been a curtailment of hours under the Scottish Temperance Act, which is a permanent Act, and under the Intoxicating Liquor (Temporary Restricting) Act of this year. The Scottish publicans have petitioned the Exchequer to take that into account in the levy of the Licence Duties. They petitioned, I think, that there should be a reduction of one-seventh in respect of the two hours
        364
        knocked off. In this country there has been a considerable curtailment in the drinking hours in London, and some of the more important and more populous centres, and I think the demand of the retailer is a perfectly fair one. If you are going to restrict by law the facilities for drinking, I think there ought to be a reduction in the Licence Duty charged by the State in respect of that restriction, and we propose practically to take the standard which the Scottish publican has laid down. We propose that the publican should be allowed one-fifteenth of the Licence Duty payable by him for every hour of curtailment sanctioned by the Home Office up to a maximum of one-fourth. Of course, you take into account the number of months in the year for which the curtailment operates, and if it is only five or six months we do not make the same allowance as if it were a curtailment in respect of the whole year.
        There may be an exception made in the case of great camping centres, because, although in these camping centres there has been a great curtailment of hours, the amount of custom has necessarily increased, and increased very considerably. It would be unfair to give a reduction to them which is extended to publicans who are losing custom in consequence of the War, when their custom has increased considerably in consequence of the War. That has been put to me very strongly by the War Office, and we are considering the form of the exception we may propose in the case of these camping centres. I think that will commend itself to the Committee as being a very fair proposition. That concession this year to the revenue will cost £450,000, and next year £550,000. I will just explain to the House why there is so little difference between the two. It is because the licensing year is not coterminous with the financial year. The licensing year commences in England, Wales and Ireland on the 1st October, and by far the larger part of the duty is payable in two moieties in October and February. Hence, on 1st February next, the publican will receive an allowance up to the 30th September next. In this way the

        365
        cost of the concession is nearly as great this year as next. The Scottish licensing year, I think, begins on 29th May.
        I now come to the concession we propose making to the brewer. It is with regard to the payment of duty. We realise that the brewer will have to advance a very much more considerable sum of money for the purpose of paying this duty than he had in order to pay the old duty, and, therefore, that a larger sum of money will be lying dormant and unproductive than under the old system. At present the charge for duty on beer is made up at the close of each month, and the duty is payable not later than the fifteenth day in the month following. A considerable quantity of beer is actually consumed before the duty is paid. In view of the much larger sum to be found to meet the duty charges, it is proposed to give a month's credit in future, and duty will be payable not later than the middle of the second month following the month of charge. So far as the revenue is concerned, this will mean that in the first year no duty whatever will reach the Exchequer during the first month following the imposition of the duty. This will be an important concession, and will give substantial assistance to the brewer at the time of the change.
        Sir G. YOUNGER: Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to give the brewer any assistance to finance the transaction? It will be hundreds of thousands in some cases.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The hon. Gentleman will see that there is a considerable margin between the halfpenny proposed to be charged, and which will undoubtedly be charged, on every half-pint, and the amount which will be collected by that halfpenny in respect of the balance, and we are of opinion, particularly having regard to these concessions, that margin will be ample to repay the brewer for financing the transaction, especially when we extend the credit. We also propose to make a concession in respect of export beer, and this will give very considerable relief to the trade in exporting beer, which, I believe, is an increasing trade. The export of beer requires some consideration under a system of high Beer
        366
        Duty. No beer is brewed in bond, so that the drawback of duty can be claimed only when beer is exported. With a low duty, the question of advancing the duty on export beer is not of much consequence, but it must be admitted that it is a different matter when there is a very high duty on beer. It is proposed to allow brewers and exporters, if they so desire, to bond beer intended for export, so it will be unnecessary for them to advance the necessary capital under those conditions for the payment of the duty. In such cases the drawback will be paid on the deposit of the beer in bond, and the brewer will benefit to the extent of the interest on the capital which would otherwise be locked up in the duty while the beer was maturing. I understand that these beers are kept for some time in order to mature. The brewer will also get more drawback, in that no duty will be paid in respect of the natural waste which occurs during the maturing of the beer. This concession will place the exporter in a distinctly better position than he is at present, and this at the expense of the revenue. The export trade for beer has for some time been showing a very considerable advance.
        5.0 P.M.
        I have announced the two concessions, and come to the amount of the probable receipts. This year I anticipate receiving from this increase in duty £2,500,000, less a reduction of Licence Duty of £450,000. That would mean a net amount of £2,050,000. In 1915–16 I anticipate an increase in duty of £17,600,000. This is on the basis of a substantial decrease in consumption, due not merely to the effect of the increased duty, but also to the curtailment of the hours under the Scottish Act and under the Act of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, and to the fact that there will be 2,000,000 men abroad who were in England last year, some of them helping the revenue; and, also, as I have pointed out, to the anticipated decrease of consumption owing to the increase in price. If you deduct from that the reduction of Licence Duty, £550,000, that will make a net receipt next year of £17,050,000.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Can we have the estimated decrease in consumption owing to the different causes?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: You mean the aggregate. I cannot give it in respect of particular items. It is 35 per cent. Taking all these into account, we anticipate a reduction of consumption of 35 per cent. I should like to review one or two other commodities which naturally press themselves upon cur consideration. One of them is spirits. I have already pointed out that on 3¼ gallons of proof spirit whisky would pay about £2 7s. 10d., whereas beer, with the new duty, will only pay 25s., so that whisky will still be much more highly taxed than beer. In 1909 we imposed a very heavy duty upon spirits without any corresponding duty on beer, and the trade reeled for some years under the blow; so much so that, for the first year at least, so far from receiving anything from that increased duty, we lost money by it. Inasmuch as we are raising taxes for the immediate necessities of the time—for the conduct of the War, I am advised that to attempt to raise money by means of putting on a considerable additional duty on spirits would be futile, and that you would not get your revenue, but, on the contrary, might lose by it. Therefore, I cannot afford at the present moment to press the House of Commons to repeat the experiment of 1909. Another tax which has been pressed upon us is one upon wine. Let mc say this about wines: at the present moment they are producing something like a diminishing revenue. At present we are collecting no duty on German wines. Even in a full year German wines only contribute £84,000 out of a total of £1,127,000. Any duty upon wines at the present moment would be a heavy duty upon commodities which come to us either from the Colonies or from countries in close alliance with us. For instance, out of £1,127,000 received from wine, £405,000 comes from Portuguese wines, £315,000 from France, and the only other considerable item is one of £214,000 from Spain. Then there is £47,000 from Australia, and £21,000 from other British
        368
        possessions. It therefore comes to this, that, at the present moment, it would be undesirable for diplomatic reasons, and it would not be very productive, to increase the duties upon wine, especially as we are increasing very substantially the levy upon the wine-drinking classes of the population by increasing the Income Tax.
        We are taxing those who drink beer and, naturally, I have been devoting my attention to the elusive teetotaler. I can assure you he is as difficult to catch as was the "Emden," but I think I have got him. It is a great mistake to imagine that you get him by taxing mineral waters. It is a perfect delusion. He is the last man to drink mineral waters. The teetotaler never drinks soda water, although he is proverbially supposed to do so, and to tax it would only be another way of taxing those who drink whisky. Three-fourths of the mineral waters in this country are drunk by consumers of alcohol, and half the rest are drunk by children. One's only chance of getting at the teetotaler is by taxing tea. [An HON. MEMBER: "Cocoa!"] You would not get very much out of that. Let me say one word about tea. Since 1836 all tea has been charged at the same rate. All sorts of suggestions were made for a graduated scale, according to quality, but that was given up because it was found to be utterly impracticable. The uniform rate began at 2s. 1d. per 1b., with 5 per cent. added from 1840 to 1853. It was reduced to 1s. 10d. in 1853, and to 1s. 6d. in 1854. It was raised to 1s. 9d. at the Crimean war. It was reduced to 1s. 5d. in 1857, to 1s. in 1863, and to 6d. in 1865, where it remained until 1889, when it was reduced to 4d. In the first Budget after the outbreak of the Boer war it was raised to 6d.; in 1904 it was further raised to 8d., and since then it has been reduced gradually, until it is now 5d. The consumption has increased enormously in recent years until I think we drink more tea per head of population than any other country in the world except Australia and New Zealand. It seems to have an excellent effect on the fighting qualities of the population. There has recently been an increase in the price owing to the great increase

        369
        of consumption in foreign countries, and also owing to the fact that a good many tea plantations have been converted into rubber plantations. But quite recently prices have been going down, according as the market has adapted itself to the new conditions. I regret having to propose an increase of this duty. If I could find any other way of levying a contribution upon every class of the community I would certainly adopt it as opposed to this particular duty. Sugar it is impossible to tax because the supply is limited, and the only way in which to secure the supply is practically by the Government stepping in; therefore sugar, for the moment, is outside the range of really taxable commodities, and I am driven to propose an additional duty of 3d. upon tea; in fact I propose to put it at the same level as in 1904. During this year—there have already been some forestalments—I hope I shall get £950,000, and next year £3,200,000, because I anticipate a decreased consumption of 5 per cent. due to the increase of the duty.
        The Committee will be very glad to hear that I am at the end of my tax proposals. I now come to the Sinking Fund. The charge for the debt was fixed by the Finance Act, 1914, at £23,500,000. Of this sum under ordinary conditions £16,741,000 would represent interest and management, and £6,759,000 would have been allocated to the repayment of capital. Owing to the very considerable sums of money which have already been borrowed for War purposes on the credit of Ways and Means, interest and management will amount to £17,580,000, and that leaves only £5,920,000 for capital. Under the National Debt and Local Loans Act, 1887, none of the interest on the New Debt created under the provisions of the War Loan Act of 1914 can be paid out of this charge, and the natural step would be to suspend the payment of the whole £5,920,000. But unfortunately I am not in a position to do that. Out of the New Sinking Fund £1,000,000 is specially ear-marked for the redemption of the instalment of Allotment Bonds which fall due in April. It is the last part of a loan of £10,000,000 in part repayment
        370
        of the South African war borrowing, under the Act of 1905, redeemable by ten annual drawings. To interfere with this last instalment would be very undesirable and might be regarded, perhaps, as a breach of faith towards the holders. I am sure the Committee will feel that it is very much better that that £1,000,000 should go to its original destination. As to the remainder of the New Sinking Fund, I propose to suspend it. This will set free £2,750,000, which can be applied towards covering the interest on the New Debt which will fall outside the first charge. Now comes the question of what we are to do with the Terminable Annuities. These might also be suspended, and there is a good deal to be said for it, but there are two good reasons for not suspending them this year. The first is, that already over three-fourths of the money has already been issued, and, if we suspend the remaining portion, we should cut off one of the sources by which the National Debt Commissioners obtain the cash which they can relend to the Exchequer for financing land purchase, local loans and telephone extension. In a year like this they will want every penny of this money. The same reason appears to preclude absolutely the suspension of the capital portions of annuities under Naval Loans, military works, Post Office and other buildings. If, then, the course suggested is adopted, the amount issued in respect of fixed debt charge will be reduced from £23,500,000 by £2,750,000 to £20,750,000.
        The account so far will stand thus:—New taxation, £15,500,000; suspension of Sinking Fund, £2,750,000; total, £18,250,000. That leaves me still with a deficiency to be made up of £321,321,000. There is only one way, I regret to say, of meeting that, that is by means of a War Loan. We have already borrowed £91,000,000 by means of Treasury Bills—£1,000,000 issued before the War and £90,000,000 after the outbreak of War. Of this total amount, £38,500,000 falls due before the end of the financial year, 31st March. A further £45,000,000 falls due in April and May, the balance of £7,500,000 falling due in September. Assuming that the Treasury Bills are renewed at their maturity—and that may

        371
        be determined upon according to the conditions at the end of a financial year it would be a mistake for the Treasury to make up its mind upon that point so many months in advance—the net amount of further borrowings to meet our requirements to the end of the financial year would be £230,321,000. It is necessary to borrow that in order to carry us on to the end of the financial year. Now comes the question, a very important question and a very anxious question, whether we should borrow to the end of the financial year or attempt to raise an amount which will carry us on beyond the end of the financial year. There is, of course, one obvious argument, and only one obvious argument, in favour of borrowing to the end of the financial year, that is, the smaller the amount the easier we can raise it at the present moment.
        But there are strong and overpowering reasons in favour of raising a sum of money which will carry us beyond that. One of those reasons is that the instalments must be spread over four or five months, and it is undesirable to have recourse to borrowing on Treasury Bills while the instalments upon the great loans are in process of being paid. The other is, that it is desirable to raise an amount that will carry the War forward, finance all the Services which are necessary to carry the War forward, not merely to the end of the financial year, but for some weeks beyond that, because at that time we shall certainly, I think, be in a better position to form an estimate as to the prospects of the War, assuming that it has not come to an end. We shall be well into the summer; the winter will have been well over, and there will have been great decisions taken. Therefore we have decided—and I think we have taken the right course—to raise a sum of money which will enable us to carry the War through without a further appeal to the public up to the month of July next year.
        The precise form of the loan has also given us a good deal of anxiety. Whatever form it finally assumes, you may depend upon it that there will be some
        372
        people to whom the other form would have appealed more, and, perhaps, with reason, because there are good sound reasons in favour of both these forms. In one thing there is perfect unanimity. After consulting practically every financial interest and those competent to give me advice, I found they were all agreed that it was hopeless to try and float a loan under present conditions—at any rate of interest less than 4 per cent. There are two ways in which this can be done: one is by issuing stock at par at 4 per cent. interest. That, I agree, is a simple and direct method, intelligible to everybody. Probably that is the reason why it did not commend itself to the financiers. I know there is some division of opinion, but I am sorry to say the overwhelming body of opinion which I have gathered has taken a different view. The disadvantages of that course are that there is no guarantee to the investor that, in the event of the prolongation of the War, his capital will not depreciate seriously. That is the view which is taken, and banks and other institutions will be very reluctant to part with a considerable portion of the capital, deposits, and the accumulated funds left with them and place it in an investment, the value of which might depreciate considerably if the War lasted a long time. That is why, financially, the majority of those who advise me have come to the conclusion that in spite of the simplicity and directness of its appeal that was not the best form in which to issue the loan to the public.
        The second form is an issue below par at 3½ per cent. and redeemable at par at a comparatively early date, the discount on the issue and the guarantee of repayment at par at a certain date being equivalent to a guarantee of interest at 4 per cent. The advantage of that would be quite obvious to the Committee. The guarantee of repayment at par at a given date and at an early date is security against depreciation. It means, on the contrary, that so far from its depreciating as you approach that date, however long the War may last, when it is redeemable at par your security will appreciate. That is infinitely

        373
        better from the point of view of the banks and the great institutions, and it has also this advantage, that a stock gradually appreciating in capital value to the date of redemption lends itself more readily to the purposes of credit facilities, which are likely to be increasingly important, not only during the duration of the War, but during the period of reconstruction which follows the War. We have therefore come to the conclusion that the issue of stock of that character would be, on the whole, more advantageous to the investor and to the State. The loan will therefore take the form of a 3½ per cent. security, to be redeemed by the Government at par on the 1st March, 1928, or, subject to three months' notice, at any time between 1st March, 1925, and 1st March, 1928. The issue price will be fixed at 95 per cent. The point of our securing an option to redeem three years before the termination of the full period is that there may be—no one can tell—a period of cheap money. It is not at all an impossible thing, and by no means impossible at the end of ten years. It is at the end of ten years that I propose the option should be exercisable. It is quite within possibility that there may be a short period of cheap money, and the State ought then to be in a position immediately to take advantage of it and redeem at par, so as to reduce the percentage of the security. That is why we propose that option. The prospectus will be issued this afternoon and will be immediately distributed through the Bank of England to all banks and money order offices in the United Kingdom. Applications will be received from the public through the same channels, or through any stockbroker, or through the banks in England, Scotland and Ireland. We have already had £100,000,000 offered firm. I think we owe a debt of gratitude to those whose patriotism has already responded so very liberally to the appeal which has already been made.
        An Hon. MEMBER: What is the total amount?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The total amount of the loan will be £350,000,000 at
        374
        95 per cent., and the applications will be received in the way I have mentioned. A deposit of 2 per cent. will be required on application, and 3 per cent. on allotment, and the balance by instalments of 10 per cent. at intervals of fourteen to seventeen days, the last instalment being payable on 26th April. The instalments may be paid in full on or after 7th December under discount at a rate of 3 per cent. The issue will take the form of inscribed stock or bearer bonds at the option of subscribers. Inscribed stock will be convertible into bonds at any time without charge, while bearer bonds will be exchangeable for inscribed stock at any time on payment of a fee of 1s. per bond. On these terms the yield to the investor, allowing for redemption at par on 1st March, 1928, will be exactly 4 per cent. We considered very carefully the question whether investors could apply for smaller amounts than £100, but the advice we received on that point was against the experiment. It has been tried repeatedly, not merely in this country, but abroad. The result has not been satisfactory as far as the aggregate is concerned. The effect is very largely to deplete the Savings Bank. That does not help the Government at the present moment.
        It is far better for us that we should induce the support of the banks in placing the Loan than that we should appeal to the small investor who has invested either in the banks or in the Savings Bank, by giving a security of something which is less than £100. It is something which rather appeals to the public, but does not mean very much in the cash that comes to the till of the State. I have, further, a very important announcement to make which will give a special value to this investment. I am in a position to state that the Bank of England has patriotically agreed to give me important credit facilities in connection with the new Loan which will have the effect, not only of bringing enormous relief to the pressure of the money market which the raising of so large a sum would otherwise create, but of making the security itself a most valuable investment to the whole financial and mercantile community. For a

        375
        period of rather more than three years, that is from the date of the issue of the Loan until let March, 1918, the Bank of England will be prepared to make advances against the deposit of War Stock or Bonds, without collateral security, of amounts equal to the issue price of the stock or bonds deposited without margin at a rate of interest 1 per cent. below the current Bank Rate.
        Sir A. MARKHAM: Will every other bank have that right besides the Bank of England?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I think my hon. Friend is mistaken. It is not a right but a very great concession which is made by the Bank of England.
        Sir A. MARKHAM: I ought to have said duty, because all the banks have received facilities from the Government.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I can only make the announcement on behalf of the Bank of England, and they are prepared to give these facilities to the public, and my hon. Friend realises how very important they are.
        Mr. SAMUEL ROBERTS: Will the right hon. Gentleman state how many days the option will remain open after today of taking part in the Loan?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The list of applications will be closed on or before Tuesday. 24th November. They will be open until Tuesday.
        Sir EDWARD COATES: "On or before" means that if you have a very large number of applications you will close your list, otherwise if you leave them open for a week you might have several thousand millions applied for, or you might have withdrawals.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I can see the point of putting in the words "on or before," but the idea was to leave it open for a week. The words were inserted to prevent the possibility which the hon. Baronet has pointed out.
        Mr. THEODORE C. TAYLOR: Do we understand that the Bank of England will for the next three years advance £95 on
        376
        one of these bonds in spite of the fact that the market price for the time being might be 92? In other words, does the Bank of England guarantee that the price for the next three years shall be 95?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: This is the notice the Bank of England will issue. "The Bank of England will be prepared for a period of three years, say until 1st March, 1918, to lend on War Loan, 1925–1928, taken at the issue price, without margin, at 1 per cent. under current Bank Rate." I do not know that it is even necessary to appeal for the patriotic support of those who are in a position to invest in this War Loan. It is of enormous importance to this country that the money should be subscribed, not merely in order to enable us to get cash to carry on the War, but for the, moral effect of it. The enemy knows that perfectly well. After taking the most elaborate precautions to see that the whole of the loan was either nominally or really subscribed—the great loan they have issued—they took also the most elaborate precautions to advertise the fact throughout the whole of the civilised world. They knew thoroughly the effect that that would have. I do not think it is necessary to point out to my fellow countrymen that the same considerations will apply to this country. It is a loan to help the country to fight the battle for its existence—to fight a battle which lends value to every other security which we have got. Victory means value, defeat means depreciation. It is an excellent investment, because the credit of Great Britain is still the best in the market, and after this War it will be a better investment than ever. There will be no more loose and malevolent talk about the decay and downfall of the British Empire. Never have her sons displayed as great valour and skill in her defence; never have they displayed as great an eargerness to rally to her standard in the hour of her danger. The vast majority of her citizens cannot, owing to age, or infirmity, or physical disability, share the toils and dangers of those who are risking their lives—those valiant fellow countrymen

        377
        of ours—in the field, but they can display the same readiness to render all the help in their power to their country in her need. Then, not only will the Empire win a great triumph in this trouble, but, what is more, the spirit now shown by her people of all ranks and races will be a guarantee that the victories won by her in the future will surpass even the great achievements recorded among the glories of her past.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not think I ought to let the statement of the right hon. Gentleman pass without a word of comment. It is a statement on an occasions for us to offer to say as little as have listened to it have felt that he has spoken in the spirit which we should desire a British Minister to feel at such a crisis, and we all of us are anxious to make his difficult path as smooth as we can, and in any observations which it may be necessary in the course of these discussions for us to offer, to say as little as possible that is embarrassing to him and nothing that is harmful to our country. On this occasion, and I hope on later occasions, I shall say very little, but there are one or two observations I should like to make at once. First, as regards the question of how the expenses of this gigantic conflict are to be met. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has, I think, been under the impression that there was a much greater difference of opinion between himself and me than actually exists. Never for one moment did I, or any of my Friends, suggest that we should go scot-free of taxation during the currency of the War, and still less that, on the plea that we were fighting a war for posterity, we should discharge on to posterity the whole financial burden of it. I agree that such a policy would have been unworthy of us as citizens. It would be unpatriotic, and it would be improvident. It would be to fail in the discharge of our duty to those who follow us just as distinctly as if we failed to hold our own and play our part in the field. The whole difference between the Chancellor and myself, if difference there were, is a difference of a few months. I thought
        378
        that it would have been wise for him to make his proposals a few months ago. I do not make that a charge against him, for I can quite understand that he might reply to me that at that moment the Government and himself, and every public office, were so overwhelmed with work that he could not get all the attention that he required for such large proposals.
        But my idea was that if you had made these large proposals at that moment, they would have come upon the country in the midst of the first shock of the War as a part, and but a small part, of all that was involved in the opening of this great struggle, and I thought that by this time the effect of them would have passed away, so far as such things can pass away, with the first shock of the outbreak of war—that trade would have steadied itself to the new conditions, and that everyone would now be pursuing his business, be that business what it may, of a warlike or a peaceful character, in the light of—if I may use such a phrase—it can only be used with great qualifications—in the light, so to speak, of settled conditions. I thought it was desirable for him to make his proposals three months ago for that reason. I doubted whether it was desirable to make them at this moment, but I never thought of suggesting that he should postpone them for more than another three months or so until we came to something more like the normal Budget time. I will not argue the question with the Chancellor now. On the advice which he has received he has decided otherwise. I think there would be no advantage in my laying before the Committee considerations which might have been alleged in favour of a different consideration, and which could not now alter the Chancellor's course, and might only suggest doubts as to whether it was the best course that could have been followed. I am content, therefore, to say that the whole difference between the Chancellor and myself was a difference of a few months. I never suggested—it would have been impossible for me to suggest—that the whole weight and burden of the financial sacrifices of the War should have been borne by posterity.

        379
        If, subject to that small qualification, I agree with what the Chancellor considers to be his duty under the present circumstances, I do not take exception to the spirit in which he discussed the taxes which he might impose, or to the principles which he laid down for his own guidance and that of the Committee. The Budget which the right hon. Gentleman proposes could not be, and we could not expect it to be, exactly the same Budget that perhaps any other Bench of Ministers would have proposed, and certainly not exactly the same as might have seemed most suitable in the circumstances to my colleagues and myself. But I do not want here, any more than at other stages, of what I say to raise even the faintest echoes of controversies which divided our parties, and to which we shall come again, though we leave them sleeping for the time.
        As regards the taxes which the Chancellor himself has announced, I am bound to say that I think, even within the limits of economic doctrine by which he and his colleagues are bound, it is a misfortune that we should be confined for the purpose of raising our revenue to so few fruitful channels, and that we should have to extract so large a sum from each of them. I do not take exception to the general proposals the right hon. Gentleman has laid before us in regard to Income Tax. Every Income Tax payer has expected to be called upon for a large sacrifice, and every Income Tax payer, I believe, who has means will be glad to make his contribution to the common expenditure in this great emergency. But I think we ought to state quite fairly and fully what the Income Tax payer's contribution is. I was puzzled by the proportions of income which the Chancellor of the Exchequer gave, and I think that feeling certainly was shared in other parts of the House. I believe I now understand them, though of that I am not confident. But, if I do, let me say at once that they are not figures to be quoted as the contribution made to our taxation by the Income Tax payer as such. They are an additional contribution imposed upon him by the War. I hope the Chancellor of the Exchequer will see that that
        380
        is put in the report of his speech. I think he omitted to use the word "additional."
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: If that is so, I should have done it, but I certainly was under the impression that I said the contribution which I propose to be levied for the purposes of this War was so much.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: There is no controversy between us.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I certainly have it on my notes
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Neither I nor my colleagues so understood it, and it was only by working out the sum backwards that we arrived at that explanation of the right hon. Gentleman's observations. It will be seen therefore that the contribution of the Income Tax payer in a normal year, when these new taxes are in full bearing, will be in the case of unearned income one-eighth per cent. of the total, and in the case of earned income three-fortieths per cent. of the total, Then the Chancellor of the Exchequer turned to beer. I agree that if you turn again to the trade in alcohol, you must do so on the understanding and with the intention that the sum which you take as revenue shall be collected from the consumer as he consumes the article. The imposts on the trade have been raised to such a point that they could not by any other means than by a direct charge on the consumer support further burdens. That being so, I think the Chancellor of the Exchequer is right when he said that there is no use making the basis of his tax anything less than a halfpenny on the half-pint. When we come to discuss these matters in detail, and when we have had an opportunity of getting perhaps some more information than we have at present, I think it will be found that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has overestimated the amount of revenue per barrel which the halfpenny on the half-pint to the consumer can properly be made to yield. I was glad to hear the Chancellor say that he felt it was nothing more than fair to the publicans to take into consideration the reduction of hours in the Licence Duty they have to pay, and to hear him mention at least one other concession to a portion of the

        381
        trade, but I beg Members and the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself to keep an open mind upon this question, as I wish to have, the matter discussed at the proper time without any heat, and always having in our minds what is going on at a very short distance away from us. I want hon. Members to keep an open mind as to what the effect on the trade is going to be of so tremendous an increase of taxation as the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes. Let me put it in this way: The Chancellor estimates that the result of his proposals, together with other circumstances adverse to that trade, will involve a decrease in consumption of 35 per cent. next year.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Not the halfpenny on the half-pint.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The halfpenny on the half-pint, plus the other circumstances adverse to that particular trade—the absence of drinking at home and the curtailment of the hours—will produce the 35 per cent. reduction of consumption. I ask any manufacturer or trader to say what would be the effect on his profits of a reduction of 35 per cent. in his turnover. That is the way in which you have to examine the fairness of your proposals for the compensation of the publican and the brewer, and if it be judged in the light of evidence that could be brought from that point of view, I think the Chancellor of the Exchequer might perhaps be convinced that he is not leaving a sufficient margin to meet the extra strain thrown upon the trade. The Chancellor, as he said, had to raise something by indirect taxation from those who do not consume alcohol. Indirect taxes are never, taken singly, very perfect instruments for adjusting the burden to the capacity of the shoulders to bear it. You may make your system of indirect taxation more equable by increasing the number of your duties, but, of course, it does not at all represent the facts, as we know them, to say that having taken a contribution from those who drink alcohol and beer, you will now turn to the teetotaler and take his contribution in the form of a duty on tea, because most of those who drink beer drink tea, and therefore whilst nominally taxing the teetotaler,
        382
        as the Chancellor said, you are, in fact, retaxing the drinker of alcohol to the same extent, or almost to the same extent, as the drinker of tea. In the bulk of these cases you tax the family consumption, and the family consumption of tea will not be very different, I think, in the two cases, in those cases where tea taxes are the important part of the contribution of the individual or the family to the revenue. I am sorry that the Tea Duty has to be put up to this point. I am especially sorry that it should be necessary to do it at the present time for a reason akin to one of those which the Chancellor of the Exchequer adduced for not meddling with the wines. The great bulk of our tea comes to us from India and Ceylon, and in the circumstances of the case this burden must necessarily in the main be borne by the consumer, and any reduction in consumption of this article affects the position of the Indian producer. I am sorry that it should be necessary to do this at a time when we are rejoicing that the Indian troops are side by side with other soldiers of the Empire in the trenches in France. But unless the Chancellor of the Exchequer was able to take a much wider sweep, not perhaps so immediately profitable but more permanent, enduring, and endurable, I do not know that he could have done very much better than turn to tea as one of the sources of his revenue.
        6.0 P.M.
        I say no more on any of these subjects at the present time. I have pleaded for a fair consideration of the various difficulties and hardships that must arise both in regard to the proportion of the Income Tax, and I think especially the Super-tax, in relation to which the Chancellor has indicated that he will make some proposals of amelioration, though he has not yet told us what they are. I ask for fair and generous consideration for the hard cases that must arise, and I say no more about them at the present time. As regards the Chancellor's treatment of the Sinking Fund, as far as I follow it I think that it was perfectly correct and wise. My only regret is that the Sinking Fund which he has available is not larger than that

        383
        which our peace operations have left us. I could not, even if I felt inclined to do so, set my opinion against the advice of those much more experienced than myself whom the Chancellor has already consulted. I should have had an inclination towards a slightly different proposal from that which he has decided. But the proposals which he has announced to us to-day, he tells us, have been taken after consultation with all those who are most competent to advise him, to whom he at all times has access on such occasions as these; and of this I am quite certain, that he can look to the patriotism of the people of this country to make this issue a great success. I have not the smallest doubt that it will be a most popular issue, not only because of the terms upon which it is offered, but even more so because of the purpose for which it is raised. I am sure that throughout the country everybody who is able to do so will desire to take some portion of this loan, as the discharge of a public duty and for the satisfaction of his own conscience, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer need have no doubt as to its great and overwhelming success.
        Mr. CHIOZZA MONEY: On the last occasion a White Paper was issued showing what the Income Tax proposals meant, and indicating the contribution of each class of taxpayer, and I would suggest to the Chancellor that a similar Paper should be issued in reference to the taxes which are now proposed.
        Sir ERNEST LAMB: There is a point of paramount importance in reference to the New Loan which I think should be cleared up, and that is as regards the advance from the Bank of England. I would suggest for consideration whether some addenda should not be made to the undertaking by the Bank as regards a minimum rate of interest, because, if the Bank Rate, at present 5 per cent., were, during the coming three years, to sink, say, for the purpose of argument, to 4 per cent., borrowers would be able to get an advance from the bank at a lower rate than they would be receiving from the Government as interest on the loan itself,
        384
        and thus make a profit on the deal. It either means, it seems to me, that we have to face a permanent Bank Rate for the next three years of 5 per cent., or else, if the Bank Rate is going to be reduced below 5 per cent., that borrowers are going to get advances at a lower rate from the Bank than the Government will be paying on the War Loan. I do not want to enlarge on that point, but I think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will see that, unless some minimum is arranged in advance, we shall have that difficulty, as subscriptions will be given on the strength of what the Chancellor said in the House to-night, and what the Chancellor said to-night is not on the prospectus. That is the difficulty. He read out the form of the Bank of England, and unless this point is covered subscriptions will be coming in to-morrow on the strength of that form read in the House of Commons tonight, and something should be done to safeguard the position before the people subscribe on the faith of that statement.
        Mr. T. C. TAYLOR: I would like to know whether Members of Parliament will be allowed to apply for this stock without vacating their seats? It seems that they were not allowed to do so during the Crimean War, but I suppose that we have now got a House of Commons that is able to apply for stock. I would also ask what allowance the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made in his estimate of Income Tax for the fact that a certain rate of Income Tax will produce a smaller amount, and, if so, what will be the percentage? In the case of beer he gave us an estimate of something like 35 per cent. reduction. The larger rate of Income Tax charged will have a tendency to cause assessments to be reduced, and I should like to know whether he has made any allowance for that. In reference to the question of my hon. Friend (Sir E. Lamb) I cannot see that there is any hardship to anybody in being charged 1 per cent. less by the bank than if they borrow on these bonds. There are all the other banks in the world with the bonds to borrow from. I have never seen myself a more patriotic and more splendid offer by the biggest

        385
        bank in the world, behind the Government of the richest and strongest country in the world. I had hoped that the bank, or somebody, was going to do the brokers' work perhaps for nothing. It is almost equal to that. The Bank of England is practically guaranteeing the market price of this stock to be 95 for the next three years, because there is no stipulation made apparently that the borrower shall have any other security at all, so that anybody with this stock can take it and borrow from the bank up to the full amount and skedaddle. It appears to me that a man without means can go to the Bank of England and practically sell his stock for this price and disappear from the country. So that it is actually guaranteeing the market price of the stock for the next three years. I think that that is a point which is well worth rubbing in.
        Sir GEORGE YOUNGER: I should like to know what the procedure to-night is going to be. Naturally I shall have a good deal to say when I get the opportunity about one of the proposals made tonight, and I hope that I shall say it in the same moderate and kindly way as the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham. I presume that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is going to take the Resolution to-night?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Certainly.
        Sir G. YOUNGER: I do not propose to discuss it now, nor do I propose to divide against it; but I desire to tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer that I assent to the passing of that Resolution to-night under protest, and I disagree with the whole of the fabric on which he has built up the statement which he has made to the House to-night in reference to the Beer Duty. I am willing to recognise that he approached this subject with a perfectly fair desire to safeguard the trade, but from a knowledge of the actual facts I can say that the result is not going to be so, but that it is going to impose a very serious burden on them and a burden which I am afraid they will not be able to bear and continue to carry on their trade. I simply say now that I submit under protest, and with great respect I
        386
        ask the House to keep an open mind on the subject until the facts of the case are put before them, so that they may know whether or not the Chancellor is not taking too much of this extra halfpenny from the Exchequer, leaving far too little to finance the operation.
        Sir A. MARKHAM: I would like to know if my right hon. Friend can say whether, in the Estimates which he has made for Super-tax, he has taken into account the fact that the income will be based on that of the preceding year? My right hon. Friend knows that the operation of the War has in some cases, as he very truly said, swept men's income entirely away. I happen to know a case of a man who had a very large income which has entirely disappeared. Nevertheless, as I understand, under the proposal which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made to the House to-night, that man would be assessed on an income of nearly £100,000, although he has now got no income at all.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGEindicated dissent.
        Sir A. MARKHAM: My right hon. Friend made no statement on that point.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I made a most distinct statement as to the case of men whose incomes have been swept away. I said that I have proposals to make in respect of cases of that kind, and when the Resolution has been moved I shall explain them.
        Sir A. MARKHAM: My right hon. Friend has referred to the case in which the income has been entirely wiped out, but having regard to the fact that incomes as a whole have been diminished in many industries the proposal would not mean a Super-tax of 5s. but in many cases it would mean a Super-tax of 10s. in the £. If it is the object of the Chancellor to impose a tax to that degree it ought to be made perfectly clear that that is the amount of the tax. I can give many cases where the tax of the preceding year will amount to double that which he is taking. With regard to the statement which he has made in reference to the Bank of England making advances, in the first place I do not think that it is quite fair to the other banks

        387
        that the statement should be made. As I understood, my right hon. Friend has said that the Bank of England were prepared to guarantee to everybody who bought stock that they would advance the full face value of the stock, the issue price of which was £95, without any collateral security whether the stock depreciates or not. Has there been any arrangement made with the Bank of England, in consideration of their giving this guarantee of the face value, and 1 per cent. below the Bank Rate, that they are to be relieved of paying for the notes which the Chancellor of the Exchequer is allowed to issue in respect of the deposits. All the banks are allowed to take up notes equal to 20 per cent. of their total deposits, the total amount of which, I believe, is £1,200,000,000. Has there been any arrangement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to those notes in respect of those banks, because if so they are paying 5 per cent. at the present time. As a bargain the banks have done very well out of the matter. I am not complaining of the arrangement made with the banks as one that is not favourable, taking everything into account. I want to make it quite clear to the House that every effort possible should be made to take up the loan, and I am sure we will all do our best to get it taken up. But we, Is business men, want to know, and to make it clear to business houses, that we can obtain from the Bank of England during the next three years advances on this War Stock at 1 per cent. below the Bank Rate.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I am very much obliged to the House for the tone and spirit of the discussion of the proposals now before it, and I will now confine myself to answering the few questions put to me by the various speakers. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham (Mr. Chamberlain), in the exceedingly temperate and fair speech with which he followed my statement, pressed the Government to keep an open mind upon one or two points, in particular the question of whether 17s. 3d. duty levied upon beer leaves a fair margin
        388
        to the trader. I shall certainly apply my mind to that subject, but I can assure him and the hon. Member for Ayr Burghs (Sir G. Younger) that it is not our desire, by means of this duty, to hit the trader. It is simply a means as far as we are concerned of levying a contribution upon the consumer, and if the hon. Baronet is able to prove to us that we have done anything by that method which would bring ruin or injury upon the trader—
        Sir G. YOUNGER: Something very like it.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Certainly, so far as I am concerned, and so far as the Government is concerned, though that is not our view, I shall keep an open mind upon the subject.
        Sir G. YOUNGER: No doubt that is your spirit; it is only want of knowledge.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I am quite prepared to take as much upon mo as is compatible with safety, or rather with sobriety, if the hon. Gentleman will convey to me such items of information on the subject as are necessary to enable me to arrive at a just conclusion on the matter. I can assure him that I shall apply my best mind to the consideration of the problem with a view to seeing that absolute fairness is done to the industry in which he is interested. I am quite aware of the difficulty, which is this: The man who deals in light beers will have a very considerable margin. That is not true of the man who is dealing in beers of a heavier grade, and I believe the difficulty arises in that particular case. I think the hon. Baronet will admit that, on the whole, we have not been unfair to those who are dealing in the lighter beers, for there is a very considerable margin there. The question put to me is whether we are quite fair to the more substantial beers, and I shall keep an open mind on that question. The right hon. Gentleman has also pressed upon me the consideration of the Super-tax payer, and my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Sir A. Markham) has reinforced his plea. It is true that in terms I referred to the fact of a man's income having been swept

        389
        away, but what I mean is the case of a man whose income is threatened to be destroyed by the War, and what percentage of his income should be ground for special consideration. That is a question to which, I admit, we are not in a position to give an answer at present. It is one of the questions we are considering. It is quite clear that you cannot sweep away the whole of the three years' average. If you were to do that you would destroy the whole basis of the Income Tax.
        Sir A. MARKHAM: The Super-tax is based on the preceding year.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: It is based, again, on the three years' average; it may, or may not be, but, at any rate, we will consider that point, and we shall probably give an appeal in cases where a man is able to prove that his income has been swept away owing to the conditions of the War. My hon. Friend the Member for Northamptonshire (Mr. Chiozza Money) asked a question with regard to the White Paper. I have a very long list of figures, which I might have read to the House, but it is very difficult for hon. Members to grasp figures which are read out, especially complicated figures. Therefore, instead of reading them out, I thought, on the whole, that it would be the better plan to put them in the form of a White Paper, which will give my hon. Friend exactly the information for which he asks. It shows, so far as the smaller incomes are concerned, that the additional burden, taking everything into account, is not so severe as it may appear.
        Mr. CHIOZZA MONEY: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the necessity of an allowance with regard to the three years' average?
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That is one of the things which will probably be considered. Another question which my hon. Friend put to me is whether Members of Parliament would be in a position to apply for this Loan without vacating their seats. I think they ought to be allowed to apply in the case of this great national and patriotic Loan, and to contribute in proportion to their means.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: They always have been.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I think it is better, however, to put the matter beyond any doubt at all. The hon. Member for Ayr Burghs asked a question with regard to our procedure. To-night it is absolutely necessary to take the Resolutions in regard to beer and tea. On Thursday I hope we shall be able to take the Income Tax Resolution, and so get a general Debate.
        Sir G. YOUNGER: It is not really necessary to take these Resolutions; there is no anticipation about it.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That is not so, really.
        Sir G. YOUNGER: I ought to know something about it.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: And so ought I to know. I have suffered a great deal as Chancellor of the Exchequer from forestalments of one kind and another. I think, on the whole, we had better be on the safe side. I am advised that we stand a chance of losing very considerably every day by the postponement of this Resolution. The figures which have been given to me are quite considerable. I now come to the anouncement of the Bank of England. That is an announcement which they are making on their own responsibility, and they are in a better position to explain it than I am. I have simply read to the House of Commons the announcement which they have made. They are perfectly convinced that no risk attends it, and it is certainly a great advantage to the State—an enormous advantage to the State. My right hon. Friend is very sanguine if he expects a lower Bank Rate than 5 per cent. during the currency of the War, or even immediately after the War, because there will be enormous capital absorbed in all sorts of enterprises, and I shall be very much surprised myself if we are in a position to get such a low Bank Rate as my hon. Friend anticipates. But at any rate the Governors of the Bank of England have considered this matter, and I have given simply his announcement to the House of Commons; they are favourable terms to all those who make application

        391
        for this loan. I am exceedingly grateful to the Committee for the way in which they have met these proposals. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman and the House that our only desire in the proposals we are putting forward is to do our best for the country in this very trying position. I know perfectly well that nothing will do more harm at the present moment than any appearance of one taxpayer trying to shift the burden on to another, and each and all trying to get out of their responsibility. The readiness and the alacrity shown by every class of the community during the whole of this time, not merely to shoulder the burdens imposed upon them, but to seize the opportunity of doing something, is, I think, one of the most hopeful signs of the times, and it is a sign of the times which I hope will be seen not derely during the War, but equally during the time to come after the War. I am perfectly certain that, however obnoxious heavy taxes of this kind must be to any section on which this House chooses to impose them, the burdens will be manfully and cheerfully borne.
        Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: May I ask, with the assent of the Chair, under the arrangement which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has suggested, that if we pass the other Resolutions to-night and resume the discussion on the Income Tax Resolution on Thursday, we shall then, on that Resolution, be able to travel as widely as we like within the ordinary limits of a Budget Debate?
        The CHAIRMAN: Yes, that will be so.
        Sir F. BANBURY: May I ask that when the Income Tax Resolution is submitted that it will be drawn in such a way that it will be possible to move an Amendment to bring back the Clause which was in the Income Tax Acts up to five or six years ago since 1842, and which provided that if a man's income in the year had not come up to that which he had returned, that then he might claim exemption for that part of it? A provision of that kind would meet the desire of the Chancellor to meet those cases where people's incomes had been swept away owing to the War.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I hope the hon. Baronet will not try to limit the Debate by way of moving Amendments.
        Sir F. BANBURY: No, not at all
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: There will be an opportunity later on of moving an Amendment of that kind. I would rather that we should have our general discussion on Thursday or Friday.
        Sir F. BANBURY: I had no intention of any kind of moving an Amendment in order to limit Debate. I would be perfectly willing to move it whenever the Chancellor desires. All I am anxious is that there should be the opportunity to move it on some day.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Certainly.
        Mr. J. M. HENDERSON: I would like the Chancellor of the Exchequer to make this point clear. By the 1907 Finance Act you were bound to the three years' average unless you could show "special cause." Thus the trader or merchant, or anyone concerned, who had a bad year could claim exemption if he could show special cause. It has been very difficult to establish what "special cause" is to the satisfaction of the Commissioners, and I should like the Government to make it quite clear that this War would be taken as a special cause. If I get that assurance, that will meet the whole of the case.
        Mr. T. M. HEALY: The Chancellor of the Exchequer has displayed a certain amount of nervousness and anxiety at the possibility of criticism with regard to this Budget. I can assure him that so far as those who take the views I do are concerned, that there will he none. We did attack his Budget in former years, because his Budget was politics. This is not politics, it is dire necessity, and accordingly he will find that instead of any obstruction being put in his way, there will be a most helpful spirit. I am very glad to congratulate him on the admirable speech which he has made to-night. I desire to make one small point. The Dublin publican pays 10s. per year which no other publican in the United Kingdom pays. I have made several efforts to get it abolished. I was

        393
        told I was out of order on the Budget of 1909. Now that the hours are so much reduced in Dublin, and while this beer tax will undoubtedly lessen the consumption to a very large extent, and will have a very serious effect upon the general body of the population, though I believe it will be cheerfully paid, I do think the right hon. Gentleman might look into this very small tax which distinguishes Dublin publicans from others, namely, this 10s. tax, and make this the occasion of doing away with that impost.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I will look into it,
        Mr. DAVID MASON: I referred in a previous speech to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham (Mr. Chamberlain) and as to his attitude in regard to the question of taxation versus loans. I would like to say that subsequently I had the privilege of having a conversation with that right hon. Gentleman and he assured me that he was always in favour of the principle of taxation as bearing part of the costs of this War. I congratulate the Chancellor of the Exchequer on his courage and on the very clear and lucid speech to which we have just listened. He has appealed for a patriotic response for this loan. I think I may assure him that he need have no fear on the subject, and apart altogether from the patriotic aspect, I believe the new loan will be regarded by all those who have any slight knowledge of finance, as a most excellent investment.
        Sir RICHARD COOPER: I feel I must take this occasion of submitting to the Chancellor of the Exchequer a very simple point with regard to the Income Tax, and which I do not think I would get any consideration for when we get to the Resolution. It would be a particular advantage to a number of people, particularly at the present time, and in my belief it is a matter of equity when Income Tax is levied that the people on whom it is levied should have the opportunity of paying it, as they do the local rates, namely, in two instalments. With the tightness of money and with a heavier Income Tax it is a serious difficulty to ask people to pay in one sum, and it would be, I think, a very
        394
        small concession on the part of the Government if they could arrange to have the Income Tax payable in two half-yearly instalments. I venture to ask the Chancellor to give his consideration to that matter for the public good. I understand we are in order in debating the proposals of the Chancellor. I do feel myself that there is a great deal of danger if it is permitted to go forth to the public, and they are allowed to get the idea that the additional contribution out of Income Tax is represented by the remarkable fractions given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Am I not right in saying that the Chancellor would be perfectly correct if he limited those fractions to the proportion of Income Tax paid by a person with £200 or £300 a year? Is it not equally true for me to say that the additional tax on account of the War that will be paid by people with higher incomes will not be one-fortieth or one-eightieth, but one-eighth? I am speaking of the ordinary Income Tax plus Super-tax, which now comes to 2s. 9d., and if doubled 5s. 6d., so that a person with a large income will really be paying 5s.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: You mean those with over £100,000 per year?
        Sir R. COOPER: Or with £50,000 or £60,000 a year. My mathematics may be very bad, but it seems to me if a man is going to pay in Income Tax and Super-tax 5s. in the £, that is one-fourth of his income.
        The CHAIRMAN: I observe an hon. Member reading a newspaper, which is a disorderly practice not allowed in the House.
        Sir R. COOPER: My only desire was that there should not be any misapprehension as to what proportion people with large incomes are contributing and for this reason: I would support the Chancellor of the Exchequer in demanding a great deal more than one-fortieth or one-eightieth of a man's income as a contribution to this War. I entirely agree with the sentiments he expressed so well, that when so many of the young men are going out to the front and giving their service

        395
        to the country, and probably sacrificing their lives, the least we can do, who stay at home for one reason or another and cannot give our services in that way to the country, is to make whatever sacrifices are in our power. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer's figures as to the proportion were correct, then all I can say is that I do not think his proposals with regard to Income Tax go far enough. I quite recognise the wisdom of the principles which he enunciated, that we should not be heaping up burdens for posterity. If the Chancellor's proportions are right, then the man with a £100,000 should have more taken from him and can well afford to make the sacrifice, just as the younger men give their services and their lives for the country.
        There is one other point I feel it my duty to mention, because there is probably no man in this House who in the past, quite conscientiously, found more fault with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and especially with certain portions of his social legislation. Speaking now as a business man, and whilst we are discussing the general situation of our national finances, I want to say what I believe, and what I heard most people in the country say, and it is this: In the early days of this War those of us who were receiving large sums of money and paying out large sums of money were full of the gravest anxiety as to where we were all going to be. The steps taken by the Chancellor of the Exchequer at that time gave the very greatest satisfaction to a large number of people, and in my humble opinion he rendered very valuable service to the country, and not only to the people who are receiving very large sums of money but to the large staffs of people of all kinds, including the workmen that we are responsible for employing. I have said very unpleasant things on the platform, and I expect to say a good many more, but I do think one ought to take the opportunity, when the right hon. Gentleman has rendered that service, of acknowledging it. There is a lesson though, I think, to be learned. Whilst I readily give the Chancellor of the Exchequer full credit for the
        396
        manner in which he has protected the national finances of this country, may I say he has taken a very wise step by consulting people who knew what they were talking about. That is generally foreign to him. It has been foreign to him in smaller matters in the past and in social legislation. It is true that in the case of the Insurance Act he went to Germany after he had enunciated the basis of the Act.
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I am sorry the hon. Gentleman introduced that subject, but as he has, I may state I went to Germany, but I took two years before I introduced the insurance scheme in this country.
        Sir R. COOPER: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if I am incorrect in stating that he, and the heads of Departments of the present Government, have gone more out of their way during these last three months than ever they did in their history before. I know they have. I do know a little of what goes on. I do approve of the principle, and I hope it is going to be followed more and more, not only in matters of national importance, but as well in matters of domestic-legislation.
        Mr. RAWLINSON(indistinctly heard): I desire to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer a question, because some hon. Members seemed to be in doubt on the point. It is in reference to the paper from the Bank of England which he read. I understood its meaning to be that at any time during the next three years, roughly speaking, anybody could take one of these War Loan securities, Bearer Bonds, or whatever they may be, for £95 to the Bank of England, and receive £95 in return. Will he then borrow that sum from the Bank, and will he be under a personal liability to repay it? Some hon. Members seemed to think that it was practically a purchase. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] As long as I understand that all that it means is that a person shall be able to borrow the money on his own responsibility—
        Mr. LLOYD GEORGEindicated assent.

        INCREASED TAXES.
          LOAN.
          2. Resolved, "That any amount may be raised by the Treasury under the War Loan Act, 1914, which is in their opinion required for the purpose of defraying the Expenses of the present War, notwithstanding that the amount raised may exceed the supply for the time being granted to His Majesty for the service of the year ending the thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and fifteen."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]

          TEA.
          3. Resolved, "That in lieu of the duty of Customs payable on tea there shall be charged, levied and paid on and after the eighteenth day of November, nineteen hundred and fourteen, and until the first day of July, nineteen hundred and fifteen, the following duty, that is to say:—
          Tea, the pound … eightpence,
          and it is declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]

          BEER (CUSTOMS).
          4. Resolved, "That in addition to the duties of Customs now payable on beer imported into Great Britain or Ireland, there shall, on and after the eighteenth day of November, nineteen hundred and fourteen, be charged, levied and paid the following duties, that is to say:—In the case of beer called or similar to mum, spruce, black beer, or Berlin white beer or other preparations, whether fermented or not fermented, of a similar character:—

          £

          s.

          d.

          For every thirty-six gallons where the worts thereof are or were before fermentation of a specific gravity not exceeding one thousand two hundred and fifteen degrees, a duty of

          3

          9

          0

          Exceeding one thousand two hundred and fifteen degrees, a duty of

          4

          0

          10

          In the case of every description of beer other than that above specified—

          £

          s.

          d.

          For every thirty-six gallons where the worts thereof were before fomentation of a specific gravity of one thousand and fifty-five de grees, a duty of

          0

          17

          3

          and so on in proportion for any difference in gravity; and it is declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]

          BEER (EXCISE).
          5. Resolved, "That in addition to the duty of Excise in respect of beer brewed in the United Kingdom there shall, on and after the eighteenth day of November, nineteen hundred and fourteen, be charged, levied and paid the following duties; that is to say—

          £

          s.

          d.

          For every thirty-six gallons of worts of a specific gravity of one thousand and fifty-five degrees, a duty of

          0

          17

          3

          and so on in proportion for any difference in quantity or gravity; and it is declared that it is expedient in the public interest that this Resolution shall have statutory effect under the provisions of the Provisional Collection of Taxes Act, 1913."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]

          BEER (SPECIFIC GRAVITY) TABLES.
          6. Resolved, "That amended tables for determining the specific gravity of worts of beer shall be substituted for the tables now in use for that purpose."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]
          Resolutions to be reported to-morrow (Wednesday); Committee to sit again tomorrow.

    LAND DRAINAGE BILL (EXPENSES).
    Committee to consider of authorising the payment, out of the moneys to

    399
    be provided by Parliament, of any Expenses that may be incurred in pursuance of any Act of the present Session to make better provision for the execution and maintenance of Land Drainage Works (King's Recommendation signified)."—[Sir Harry Verney.]
    Mr. T. M. HEALY: I have read the Bill, and as far as I can see it does not apply to Ireland. The hon. Baronet knows a great deal about Ireland, having been for so long Private Secretary to the Chief Sectary for Ireland. Is there any reason why the Irish Department of Agriculture should not apply this Bill in some way to Ireland? If there is any advantage in the Bill for England, I think it might be extended to Ireland.
    The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of AGRICULTURE (Sir H. Verney): That would require a separate Bill, as Ireland is not under the jurisdiction of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. It would require a Bill introduced by my right hon. Friend (Mr. Russell).
    Mr. T. M. HEALY: Will there be an Irish Bill?
    Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member had better raise the point on the Bill itself. This Resolution is only to set up the Committee.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    The remaining Orders were read and postponed.
    Whereupon Mr. SPEAKER, pursuant to the Order of the House of the 12th November, proposed the Question, "That this. House do now adjourn."
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Adjourned accordingly at Six minutes before Seven o'clock.
    Mr. SPEAKER has, in pursuance of Standing Order No. 1, nominated
    The Rt. Hon. Charles Beilby Stuart-Wortley,
    The Rt. Hon. Charles Fenwick,
    The Rt. Hon. John William Wilson,
    Mr. Charles Henry Lyell, and
    Mr. Thomas Power O'Connor
    to act this Session as temporary Chairmen of Committees when requested by the Chairman of Ways and Means.

WAR IN EUROPE.
  INTOXICATING LIQUOR (TEMPORARY RESTRICTION) ACT.
  INTOXICATING LIQUOR (TEMPORARY RESTRICTION) ACT.
  PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES.
  PENSIONS AND ALLOWANCES.
  INDIAN CIVIL SERVICE (AGE CONCESSION).
  INDIAN CIVIL SERVICE (AGE CONCESSION).
  RECRUITS (ENTERTAINMENT AND INSTRUCTION).
  RECRUITS (ENTERTAINMENT AND INSTRUCTION).
  RUM RATIONS.
  RUM RATIONS.
NATIONAL INSURANCE ACT.
  NATIONAL AMALGAMATED APPROVED SOCIETY.
  NATIONAL AMALGAMATED APPROVED SOCIETY.
  Industrial Development (Ireland).
  Industrial Development (Ireland).
  Telephone Service, Bradford.
  Telephone Service, Bradford.
  Factory and Workshops Act (Sheffield).
  Factory and Workshops Act (Sheffield).
  Street Accidents, Metropolis.
  Street Accidents, Metropolis.
  Crown Foreshore Eights, Sea View, Isle of Wight.
  Crown Foreshore Eights, Sea View, Isle of Wight.
ROLL OF THE LORDS.
The LORD CHANCELLOR acquainted the House that the Clerk of the Parliaments had prepared and laid the Roll of the Lords on the Table: The same was ordered to be printed. (No. 1.)
WELSH CHURCH ACT, 1914, AMENDMENT BILL. [H.L.]
A Bill to amend the Welsh Church Act, 1914— Was presented by The Lord Bishop of Hereford; read la, and to be printed. (No. 2.)

THE LATE EARL ROBERTS.
The SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (EARL KITCHENER): My Lords, by the death of Lord Roberts the British Army has lost its senior Field-Marshal, and your Lordships will, I doubt not think it right that we should pay our tribute of admiration and affection towards one whose achievements as a soldier and character as a man will be an abiding memory not only in this House but for the whole nation. Lord Roberts served for 63 years in the Army, 41 of which were passed in India. He joined the Bengal Artillery in the year 1851, and, after 34 years of soldiering in many campaigns, he reached the highest post of Commander-in-Chief in India. During that period there is no page of the history of the military forces in that great Dependency which does not bear his name, and there has hardly been a battle within its confines to which he did not contribute by his valour and his skill. His fame will ever be associated with the memorable march to Kandahar, and the affection I and confidence he inspired in all ranks of the Native Army are a signal proof of his exceptional personality. His name and that of Nicholson—under whom he served in the glorious siege of Delhi—are a proverb in every bazaar in India. To the very end Lord Roberts took the keenest interest in India and Indian troops, and it was to greet our Indian forces in the field that he made the journey which was to be his last.
After a term of command in Ireland, Lord Roberts was selected in a moment of emergency to lead the forces fighting in
58
South Africa. He took with him the confidence of the whole nation, and, notwithstanding his heavy sorrow at the loss of his only son, justified it by the masterly and soldier like manner in which he carried out the difficult problems of that campaign. On his return from South Africa he became Commander-in-Chief of the British Army, and in that capacity was able to inculcate those lessons of the South African War which we may see bearing fruit on the hard-fought fields in France and Belgium. On vacating that office at an age when other men might have looked forward to spending in well-earned leisure the evening of a glorious day, he was not content to abandon his lifelong work for the Army. Anything that would seem to benefit the military forces of the Crown or to promote the welfare of officers and men claimed his energetic support and his untiring advocacy.
When the present war broke out all his thoughts, as I know well, were for the troops in the field, which, but for his age, he would have undoubtedly either directed or commanded. His indomitable spirit led him, in spite of his weight of years, to face the discomforts of a journey to the Army in France, and, although he died on this mission of encouragement to those of whom no small number had served under him before, lie would himself, I feel sure, have wished for no happier end than to pass away, the greatest soldier of our day, in the midst of the greatest Army the Empire has ever put into the field, with the sound of the shells and the cheers of his comrades still ringing in his ears. Lord Roberts's reputation as a soldier stands secure, and no words of mine are needed to praise hint. He was one of the most tried and proven leaders of men the British race has ever produced, and the country at the present crisis can ill afford to lose the services of so eminent a military adviser. It has fallen to my lot as Secretary of State for War to attempt to give expression to the sense of affectionate veneration and high esteem with which the Army regarded the late Field-Marshal, for whom, as my old chief, I entertain feelings upon which I cannot expatiate here. I, more than most men, had occasion to learn and admire his qualities of head and heart; his ripe experience and sage counsel were fully and freely offered to me to the end. To us soldiers, the record of his life will ever be a cherished possession. We mourn his loss, but hope to profit by his illustrious example.
*EARL CURZON OF KEDLESTON: My Lords, the noble Marquess who leads the Opposition greatly regrets his continued absence from this House, and never more so, as he has asked me to say, than this afternoon. He would have liked to be present here to bear his part in the tribute that is being paid from all quarters of this House to the illustrious Field-Marshal who has just passed away in the golden sunset of a glorious life. They were colleagues as Viceroy and as Commander-in-Chief for four momentous years in India. Again at a later date they were associated as Secretary of State for War in this country and as Commander-in-Chief in the field in the dire perils and the ultimate triumphs of the South African campaign; and still more were they linked to each other by the strongest ties of personal attachment and affection. If I stand for the moment, by accident, in the place of the noble Marquess, I am only encouraged in the performance of this duty by the consciousness of the privilege that I also enjoyed the close friendship of Lord Roberts in the concluding years of his life, and that I had the honour of being associated with him in some of his undertakings.
Nothing, if I may say so, could be more appropriate than that the tribute to which your Lordships have just listened should have come from the lips of the noble Earl the present Secretary of State for War, who was the colleague of Lord Roberts in some of his greatest achievements, and who can speak with a higher authority than any man living in this country upon his qualities and attributes as a military commander. The House has listened, venture to say, with deep respect and emotion to the clear and moving words which we have just heard from the Secretary of State for War. He lots portrayed to us some, at any rate, of those qualities which ensured the remarkable success of Lord Roberts both as a commander of troops and as a leader of men. It would be, I feel, impertinent on my part to dilate at. any length upon this aspect of Lord Roberts's character and career; but this perhaps I may be permitted to say—that a General who never knew defeat, who more than once retrieved the trembling fortunes of Armies and who conducted great operations on large fields of warfare with an amazing rapidity and with astonishing, success must have possessed rare gifts of foresight, insight, patience, resolution, and
60
courage. Those who remember the historic march from Kabul to Kandahar, which was rightly mentioned by the noble Earl, and the victorious sweep of our Armies, which for obvious reasons he did not mention, from Capetown to Pretoria, in the South African War, will be best able to appreciate the qualities of quick initiative and boldness in execution that were responsible for-those results.
But, my Lords, there is another respect, I think, in which Lord Roberts excelled as a leader of men. I speak of his extraordinary understanding of the soldier. He seemed by a sort of instinct to know what were his wants and desires. He was not merely the commander of the troops but their comrade, and hence believe it to be true to say that Lord Roberts was more loved by the troops' whom he led, both in this country and in India, than any commander in modern, and I dare say also in ancient, times. Especially was this true with regard to Indian soldiers. Born in India eighty-two years ago, spending, as the noble Earl reminded us and as the title of Lord Roberts's book tells us, one-half of that period in service in India, his greatest military achievements were won either-inside India or just beyond its frontiers. He was really the embodiment of the finest traditions of Indian service, and might almost himself be called the incarnate spirit of the Indian Army. How fitting it is, we cannot but recognise, that after going out to visit and to encourage those Indian troops whom he had so often led to victory, and who are now fighting under such novel and terrible conditions, but with a bravery equal to anything' which we might have expected from theirhistory—how fitting it is that he should have laid down his life almost in contact with those troops and almost within sight of the battlefield. Felix opportunitate mortis is the hackneyed but inevitable quotation that leaps to the lips of everyman, and we feel sure that Lord Roberts, himself would not have wished it to be otherwise.
Perhaps I may be allowed to add one or two words upon another aspect of Lord Roberts's life and character, which may well come more fittingly from the lips of a civilian. Lord Roberts was first and foremost a great patriot. Like the Duke of Wellington, he invariably thought of

61
the welfare of his country. To the Duke of Wellington the first thing was always how the government of the King could be carried on. To Lord Roberts it was how the safety of this Kingdom and the integrity of the Empire could be maintained secure. Throughout his whole life he gave to the country all of character, of purpose, of energy, and of strength and devotion that a man had to give. He gave to the country his only and dearly loved son. Finally, he gave to the country his own life. It was truly a patriotic enterprise that took him last week to France, and which brought about his end. Those who saw him or conversed with him in the last few weeks of his life will appreciate what I mean when I say that for any other or more onerous call that might have been made upon him he was ready. At the age of eighty-two he was prepared to take up any burden in connection with the war that the voice of his country might lay upon his shoulders.
Secondly, Lord Roberts was emphatically a statesman, if by a statesman we mean a man of wide outlook on affairs, who foresees and attempts to provide for the future, and who is never switched aside from his main object by minor considerations or by petty abuse. Is not the present position of affairs in this country, and in Europe, the best testimony to the statesmanlike prevision of Lord Robert? During the last ten years of his life he held the view, with intense and passionate conviction, that a war with the adversary with whom we are now contending was only a question of time, that the call of faith to our Allies and of duty to ourselves, would impel us to place a large force upon the Continent, and that the military preparations of this country were not adequate either to that task or to the defence of our own shores. I am speaking within the recollection of every one of you when I say that he preached the remedy for that state of affairs with all the fervour and intense conviction of a prophet, only to meet. I fear, with the proverbial prophet's fate. But, toy Lords, who now will say hint nay? Who will call him a false prophet new that he is dead? I venture for my own part to express the opinion that this last campaign which Lord Roberts waged in this House and outside of it in defence of the principles which he held most dear was not the least noble episode, perhaps the most noble episode, in his long and crowded career.
62
It will be remembered when other and more martial exploits are forgotten, and not the least characteristic and admirable of its features was the dignified self-effacement., the honourable silence with which he declined to take the credit to himself for his foresight and refused to reproach those who had turned a deaf ear to his warnings.
Lastly, we shall remember Lord Roberts as a man. We recall, every one of us, his genial presence in our midst in this House. We see his alert figure seated at the corner of that Bench [indicating the Front Cross Bench], kindly in manner, exquisite in courtesy, modest in bearing. In the later years of his life he seemed to combine the ripe wisdom of years with the eternal fresh-heartedness of youth, and that was perhaps the explanation why he found himself so easily in touch with men of every age and period of life, and became the friend, and even the confidant, of those who very likely had only entered the world when Lord Roberts's name had already been made. No Englishman, at any rate of our time, has set so rich and rare an example of simplicity and purity of life, and none has been more religious-minded or devout in the beliefs as well as in the external observances of religion.
Only a little more than a fortnight ago I received a letter from Lord Roberts, the last that he ever wrote to me, in which, amidst the trials of this war, while he was busily occupied in providing for the comfort of our troops in the field, and whilst all his larger thoughts were turned with anxiety to the issues of the campaign, he nevertheless found time to write to me a strong plea in defence of family prayers. These were his words—
"We have had family prayers for fifty-five years Our chief reason is that they bring the household together in a way that nothing else can. Then it ensures the servants and others who may he in the house joining in prayers which for one reason or another they may have omitted saying by themselves. Since the war began we usually read a prayer like the enclosed, and when anything important has occurred I tell those present about it. In this way I have found that the servants are taking a great interest in what is going on in prance. We have never given any order about prayers; attendance is quite optional, but as a rule all the servants, men and women, come regularly on hearing the bell ring."
My Lords, the man who penned those words was not only a great soldier, a patriot, and a statesman, but he was also

63
a humble-minded and devout Christian man, whose name deserves to live, and will live, for ever in the memory of the nation whom he served with such surpassing fidelity to the last hour of a long and glorious life. May I, in conclusion, say on behalf of those who sit with me; on these Benches that we would desire to associate with our tribute of deep and sorrowing respect the gracious lady who has for more than half a century been the partner of his joys and sorrows, has shared the ordeals and the triumphs of his life, and whose tender devotion was the main cause of the great happiness that he enjoyed.
*THE LORD PRIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE): My Lords, I asked my noble and gallant friend behind me [Earl Kitchener] to pay the first tribute to the memory of the great man who has gone, for his title to do so is beyond all dispute; and now, although we might well leave this tribute where it stands after the beautiful and touching allusions to Lord Roberts by the noble Earl opposite, I feel that I ought to say a few words on behalf of my political friends in this House. It is a great pleasure to me personally to do so from the unvarying kindness which I always myself received at Lord Roberts's hands.
The fullest justice to Lord Roberts's fame as a soldier has been done in this House, and also outside by the unanimous voice of the country which owes so much to him. It is impossible for me to add anything of value to those eulogies. But as it happens I have witnessed as a civilian assessor a number of those discussions, to which the noble Earl opposite made some reference, connected with the defence of the country, in which Lord Roberts played so conspicuous a part, and I like to recall the distinguished courtesy with which Lord Roberts always advanced his arguments, his freedom from any tinge of bitterness in reply, and his refusal to attribute any ill motives to any opponent whom he might meet in debate.
It is something of a happy accident that the three speakers this afternoon have all been in different capacities officially connected with India, because India will mourn Lord Roberts as she would mourn no man who is now alive. The Indian
64
Army Neill always, I am sure, cherish the thought that his last visit was paid to them in their day of stress. When the news came we all felt, as the noble Earl opposite has said, that Lord Roberts was fortunate in the occasion of his death. The imagination is kindled by the picture of a great commander dying in the arms of victory, like a Gustavus Adolphus or a Nelson; but emotions not less real are stirred by the spectacle of an honoured leader full of years passing away in the midst of the soldiers to whom for long his example has been a guiding star, and to whom the thought of his presence in his last days will remain an enduring inspiration. Like the noble Earl, I desire on behalf of this House to convey our most respectful tribute of sympathy to the lady who for five-and-fifty years has been the partner and the stay of Lord Roberts's life, and to the family who are left behind to mourn his loss.

THE ROYAL MARINES.
LORD LATYMER LORD LATYMER had given notice to ask His Majesty's Government whether they would appoint a Committee to inquire into the status of the Royal Marines in His Majesty's Forces and to make such recommendations as might appear necessary. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have been asked by the noble Lord opposite, Lord Wimborne, to postpone the Question, and I gladly accede to the request. I will put the Question down again for Tuesday next.

THE SPY PERIL.
THE EARL OF HALSBURY THE EARL OF HALSBURY had the following Notice on the Paper—namely, To call attention to the various acts of high treason alleged to have been committed in this country, and to ask whether His Majesty's Government have investigated the facts alleged, and, if they have been accurately alleged, why no indictment for high treason has been preferred. The noble Earl said: My Lords, I also ask leave to postpone my Notice, as I am unwilling to interfere with the present tone of mind of the House.
House adjourned at Five o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.