week. 40,000,000l. had been spent in providing unemployment pay for ex-service men. 23,000,000l. had been allocated for the purpose of settling men upon the land; 10,500,000l. had been provided for new arterial roads to give employment, and 3,000,0001. had been allocated to local authorities for the same purpose. The amendment was then negatived by a majority of 178.

On February 18 an amendment was moved by Mr. Bottomley regretting that, as a long period had elapsed since the Armistice, during which the country had not had an opportunity of expressing its opinion on the provisions of the various peace treaties, no mention had been made of dissolving the present Parliament at an early date. Mr. Lloyd George then replied that the Allies had taken expert advice before fixing the amount of the indemnity, a part of which had already been paid in war materials, ships, property, and coal. Much had been done since the Treaty was signed. The German Fleet and the German. Army had disappeared. The gigantic war material of Germany had been surrendered; the German Colonies had been given up. It would be our duty to see that the rest of the Treaty was enforced to the utmost capacity of Germany to discharge. The amendment was negatived by a majority of 141. Mr. Remer then moved an amendment regretting the absence from the speech of any announcement that the Telephone Service would be placed under private enterprise in view of the necessity for a cheaper and more efficient service. Mr. Illingworth gave figures to prove that the financial results from the Telephone Service under the Post Office management compared favourably with those of the service when under the management of the National Telephone Company. Colonel W. Guinness regretted the absence of any announcement that an inquiry would be instituted into the possibilities of effecting economies in other ways than by heavy increases in charges. The AttorneyGeneral stated that the Government were willing to appoint a Select Committee to inquire into the organisation and administration of the Telephone Service, and the amendment was then withdrawn. The Select Committee was appointed shortly afterwards, under the chairmanship of Mr. Evelyn Cecil.

The question of Ireland was raised on February 21 by Captain W. Benn, who moved to add words to the address declaring that the policy pursued by the Executive in Ireland had failed to secure the repression of organised outrage and had frustrated the prospects of an agreed settlement of the problem of Irish self-government. Sir H. Greenwood, in reply referred to the Sinn Feiners' contemplated outrages in England, and pointed out that the responsibility for all the outrages in Ireland lay on the Sinn Fein conspirators who, since the rebellion of 1916, had never ceased to murder. Speaking with regard to the administration of justice in Ireland, he stated that the ordinary Civil Courts were again functioning nearly everywhere. The police were no longer prisoners in their own

barracks, and the railway boycott and the reign of terror had been broken in nearly two-thirds of the country. Lord Robert Cecil urged the appointment of an independent committee of inquiry. Mr. Devlin and Mr. Barnes were of opinion that anarchy should be ended by negotiation instead of reprisals. Mr. Asquith supported the suggestion of an independent inquiry. Mr. Bonar Law thought that the Irish question should be considered not from the point of view of what the extremists wanted but of what was best for the whole of the kingdom. The amendment was negatived by a majority of 169 and the address was then agreed to.

An Irish debate also took place in the House of Lords on February 22 when the Archbishop of Canterbury called attention to the absence of detailed official information about important incidents in Ireland, and moved for papers. Lord Denbigh declared that the methods of the auxiliaries were manufacturing more rebels. The Lord Chancellor stated that the mischief existing in Ireland could only be cured by the assertion of force in its most vigorous form. Ultimately the motion was withdrawn.

After the House of Commons had concluded its debate on the address, Mr. Bonar Law moved that until the end of the financial year Government business should have precedence at every sitting. After a short discussion the closure was carried, and the motion agreed to by a majority of 165.

During the first half of February a number of minor industrial disputes occurred in Scotland owing to the efforts of employers to lower wages. Unemployment was also much in evidence. Early in the month a ballot was taken of the Unions comprised in the Federation of Building Trade operatives on a scheme proposed by the Government to dilute the industry with 50,000 ex-service men. The scheme was emphatically rejected, the vote being 310,000 against dilution and only 2,500 in favour of it. By taking this line the Unions virtually refused a gift of 250,000l., for a grant of 51. had been offered in respect of each man accepted for training.

Unemployment continued to increase as the winter went on, though the rate of increase became less at the beginning of February. On that date the total number of unemployed was 1,108,000. In view of the figures the Government refused to regard as final the decision of the men in the building trade to resist dilution. They took the employers into conference, and although the latter were unwilling to provoke a conflict with the operatives, their Executive Council unanimously decided, on February 22, to accede to the request of the Government that employers should take into the industry 50,000 ex-service men. They agreed to issue forthwith a manifesto to the members upon which a vote would be taken to confer authority upon the Executive to carry out the request.

On February 21 the Government introduced in the House

of Commons an Unemployment Insurance Act Amendment Bill providing for an increase of the rates payable under the Unemployment Insurance Act of 1920. Dr. Macnamara moved the second reading. on February 22, and explained that the object of the Bill was to continue the donation of 20s. a week to ex-service men and to bring them under the Insurance Act; and to amend the old Bill with regard to general unemployment insurance by providing that men and women who had been employed twenty weeks since December 31, 1919, should be eligible for sixteen weeks' benefit between the passing of this Bill and the end of next October, and another sixteen weeks' benefit from October to the beginning of July, 1922. Thereafter insured persons would be entitled to draw in each year up to twenty-six weeks' benefit. Ex-service men would have to show only ten weeks of employment. Increased contributions were proposed in the Bill. It was also proposed to make the benefit 18s. for men, 15s. for women, and half of those amounts for boys and girls. The addition of 5s. for men and 4s. for women from Trade Unions and Friendly Societies stood as under the existing Act.

In the course of the debate Mr. Hogge and Sir Edward Carson expressed a desire for a more complete and permanent solution of the unemployment problem. Sir M. Barlow pointed out that the net amount to be borne by the State under this Bill was 780,000l.; there was also 4,000,000l. payable under the Act of the previous year. Mr. Clynes declared that the measure contained no remedy for unemployment, and was only an extension of a process of almsgiving. Mr. Marriott supported the Bill as an emergency measure, and Mr. T. Shaw looked upon it as a makeshift. Ultimately the closure was carried by a majority of 98, and the second reading was agreed to.

On the same day Mr. Clynes had introduced into the House another Bill for the prevention of unemployment. It provided that all the powers for dealing with the problem of unemployment should be given to the Ministry of Labour, and that permanent Committees should be appointed to report on the subject of unemployment and the local causes for it. These permanent Committees were to be established under the Local Authorities, who would be empowered to start relief works and to withdraw unemployment benefit from those refusing to take employment found for them. This Bill got no farther than the first reading.

The Government Bill, on the other hand, made rapid. progress. In Committee Mr. Clynes moved that the benefit for the head of a family should be 40s. per week; for others 25s., and for each person wholly dependent upon a person entitled to benefit under the principal Act or the present Act, 5s. The amendment was opposed by Dr. Macnamara, and Mr. T. Thomson suggested the substitution of 20s. for the 18s. in the Bill, a suggestion which was supported by a

number of members, and was finally agreed to. An amendment moved by Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy, and modified by Dr. Macnamara was also agreed to, raising a woman's benefit from 15s. to 16s. An amendment that 2s. 6d. should be given to each child under the age of sixteen was, however, rejected by a majority of forty-five. A further amendment was then carried, on the motion of Mr. Thomas, exempting railwaymen from the provisions of the original Act requiring insurance against unemployment. After some further discussion the Bill was read a third time and passed on February 24. Several amendments were added in the House of Lords on March 2. Lord Midleton moved one which provided that the provision of the principal Act should cease to have effect under which it was possible for a man to take unemployment benefit rather than accept employment at a lower rate of wages than he had previously earned in his usual employment in the district. This was carried by a majority of twenty-four. He also moved to insert words excluding from the unemployment benefit an unemployed person whose wife or husband living in the same house was in receipt of wages, annuity, or other income amounting to more than double the unemployment benefit at the full rate of 40s. a week. This amendment was also agreed to by a majority of six. Both amendments, however, were rejected when they came to the House of Commons, and ultimately the royal assent was given to the Bill very much in the form in which the third reading had been passed by the House of Commons.

For a long time past the coal industry had been in a very unsettled condition, and towards the end of February events gradually began to move towards a crisis. The immediate occasion of trouble was the decision of the Cabinet to decontrol the industry at the earliest possible moment. Embargo on exports had already disappeared and the control of inland distribution and pit-head prices was due to be discontinued on March 1. The last step was to be the removal of financial control. On February 23 Conferences were held between Sir Robert Horne and the Mining Association of Great Britain, and also between Sir Robert Horne and the Miners' Federation, for the purpose of considering the effects of early financial decontrol on the industry. Both the employers and the men expressed objections to this proposal, which the Government desired to bring into operation at the end of March. From the very beginning of the negotiations the leaders on both sides took a pessimistic view of their probable outcome; and their pessimism was unfortunately only too well justified.

The Government policy of decontrol affected many other industries besides that of coal. Wheat prices, for instance, were the cause of considerable agitation, and on February 17 a Conference was held at the Ministry of Agriculture

B

of Commons an Unemployment Insurance Act Amendment Bill providing for an increase of the rates payable under the Unemployment Insurance Act of 1920. Dr. Macnamara moved the second reading. on February 22, and explained that the object of the Bill was to continue the donation of 20s. a week to ex-service men and to bring them under the Insurance Act; and to amend the old Bill with regard to general unemployment insurance by providing that men and women who had been employed twenty weeks since December 31, 1919, should be eligible for sixteen weeks' benefit between the passing of this Bill and the end of next October, and another sixteen weeks' benefit from October to the beginning of July, 1922. Thereafter insured persons would be entitled to draw in each year up to twenty-six weeks' benefit. Ex-service men would have to show only ten weeks of employment. Increased contributions were proposed in the Bill. It was also proposed to make the benefit 18s. for men, 15s. for women, and half of those amounts for boys and girls. The addition of 5s. for men and 4s. for women from Trade Unions and Friendly Societies stood as under the existing Act.

In the course of the debate Mr. Hogge and Sir Edward Carson expressed a desire for a more complete and permanent solution of the unemployment problem. Sir M. Barlow pointed out that the net amount to be borne by the State under this Bill was 780,000l.; there was also 4,000,000l. payable under the Act of the previous year. Mr. Clynes declared that the measure contained no remedy for unemployment, and was only an extension of a process of almsgiving. Mr. Marriott supported the Bill as an emergency measure, and Mr. T. Shaw looked upon it as a makeshift. Ultimately the closure was carried by a majority of 98, and the second reading was agreed to.

On the same day Mr. Clynes had introduced into the House another Bill for the prevention of unemployment. It provided that all the powers for dealing with the problem of unemployment should be given to the Ministry of Labour, and that permanent Committees should be appointed to report on the subject of unemployment and the local causes for it. These permanent Committees were to be established under the Local Authorities, who would be empowered to start relief works and to withdraw unemployment benefit from those refusing to take employment found for them. This Bill got no farther than the first reading.

The Government Bill, on the other hand, made rapid progress. In Committee Mr. Clynes moved that the benefit for the head of a family should be 40s. per week; for others 25s., and for each person wholly dependent upon a person entitled to benefit under the principal Act or the present Act, 5s. The amendment was opposed by Dr. Macnamara, and Mr. T. Thomson suggested the substitution of 20s. for the 18s. in the Bill, a suggestion which was supported by a