Ministers were concerned with foreign affairs. They were kept extremely private, but it was believed that the Prime Ministers were taken into the fullest confidence of the British Government, and that all which concerned the relations of Great Britain with other nations was frankly exposed to them. The significance of these meetings was clearly indicated when the Prime Ministers of the Dominions took part in the Cabinet Council which had to consider the French attitude towards the question of Upper Silesia, and to frame a reply to the French note.

A subject of the highest importance dealt with by the Prime Ministers was that of Empire communications. They decided to extend wireless facilities, and also to maintain communication by airship. The many other questions discussed by the Prime Ministers included the German reparations and their apportionment amongst the various parts of the Empire; the status of Indians in the Dominions; inter-imperial migration, in regard to which the Dominions confirmed the principle of mutual co-operation in helping the movement and settlement of British subjects within the Empire; and lastly, the question of a Constitutional Conference to be held at some future time and place. At the conclusion of the Conference the Dominion Prime Ministers and other representatives of the Empire, addressed a message to the King, in reply to which the King expressed his gratification with the conviction which they had expressed that the Crown was the important link uniting together in cohesion and strength the component parts of the Empire.

Mr. Lloyd George made a statement on the work of the Imperial Conference in the House of Commons on August 18. In reply to a question he admitted that there had been no discussion of the Irish problem. On the question of naval defence, he said that the Conference was agreed that we must have a naval force equal to that of any other country in the world, and there had been a general feeling that it was unfair that the whole of the cost should be borne by the mother-country. The extent to which the Dominions should contribute must be left to the Dominions themselves. Referring to the Japanese Alliance, Mr. Lloyd George said that it was still in existence, and that twelve months' notice had to be given to terminate it. After paying a tribute to the part played by Japan during the war, he asked if this was the time in which we ought to abandon our Allies. He saw no reason why it should be impossible to remember our obligations to Japan and keep our friendship for that country, while at the same time we preserved the spirit of fraternity with the United States of America. He expressed the hope that the Alliance with Japan might merge in a greater understanding with Japan and the United States in all the problems of the Pacific. The four Powers primarily concerned in the Pacific were the United States, Japan, China,

and the British Empire. If the question of disarmament was to be made easier there must be an understanding first on that problem. The Imperial Conference desired that the British Empire should have complete friendship with the United States, and that every conceivable prospective obstacle to such friendship should be removed. What was chiefly to be hoped for was a settlement by which the British Empire and the United States could work side by side in a common partnership for guaranteeing the peace of the world, for this would be the best guarantee that it would be possible to have.

The consideration of the Railways Bill was concluded during August. A debate on amendments introduced on the Report stage on August 8 was interrupted by the sudden death of Mr. T. Wintringham, the Independent Liberal member for the Louth Division, who collapsed in the newsroom of the House of Commons and died immediately. The Leader of the House immediately intervened in the debate and moved the adjournment, his expressions of sympathy being supported by Sir Donald Maclean and Mr. Thomas.

No further amendments of any importance were made in the Railways Bill, and the third reading was passed on August 9. Several amendments were introduced in the House of Lords and agreed to by the Commons, and the Bill received the royal assent on August 19.

The Corn Production Acts (Repeal) Bill passed through all its stages in the House of Lords during August. The Bill was read a second time on August 3. In Committee an amendment was inserted providing that the Committees should be local and not central. Another amendment was agreed to providing that a workman should not be allowed to recover more than six weeks' arrears of wages, and the Bill later on received the royal assent.

The Licensing Bill was also carried during August. A new clause was agreed to providing that certain liquor should not be treated as an intoxicating liquor if Excise License was not required for its sale. An amendment was carried by a majority of thirty-five providing that the hours of opening of licensed premises outside the metropolis should be a uniform eight hours. The Bill received the royal assent on August 17.

Revised Navy estimates were submitted to the House of Commons on August 3. The vote was for 11,845,600l., this sum being required for building the four new capital ships, for guns and expenses in connexion with them, for the partial reorganisation of the torpedo factory at Greenock and other items. Mr. Amery, Financial Secretary to the Admiralty, insisted that the expenditure was the least that was consonant with maintaining the Navy at the standard which the defence of the Empire demanded. He said that our policy was not one of competition or of challenge, but simply one of replacing obsolete ships already relegated to the Disposals Board. Mr. Amery

said that all reliable evidence showed that the capital ship was the basis of naval warfare.

Mr. Asquith questioned the immediate necessity or wisdom of embarking upon the construction of four new capital ships, and other members urged that the construction should be delayed until after the Washington Conference. Mr. Churchill then defended the policy of the Admiralty, saying that unless we built capital ships we should sink to the level of a third-rate Power, and although we might continue on the best possible terms with other naval Powers, we should exist only on sufferance.

It will be remembered that some few weeks back 170 Unionist members had signed a declaration condemning the practice of the Government in spending public money before the sanction of the House of Commons had been obtained. The restiveness prevailing in the House on the subject of expenditure led the Prime Minister to appoint, early in August, a Committee of business men to advise him on matters of finance. The Committee was authorised to consider not only the estimates of departments but the policy underlying the estimates. The object of this committee, which was sometimes referred to as the Super-axe Committee, was to supervise the spending departments of the State, and to advise the Prime Minister as to any directions in which economy might be made. The matter was discussed in the House of Commons on August 8, criticism. being mainly levelled against the principle of establishing a new department to undertake functions which had hitherto always been carried out by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Chamberlain, however, insisted that the Government were entitled to seek the assistance of anybody whom they thought could be useful in any question whether of finance or of administration. The question was again raised in the House of Commons on August 16, and it was then announced that Sir Eric Geddes was to be chairman, the other members being Lord Inchcape, Lord Faringdon, Sir Joseph Maclay, and Sir Guy Granet. The Committee was to make recommendations to the Chancellor of the Exchequer for effecting forthwith all possible reductions in national expenditure in the Civil Services, having regard especially to the present position of revenue. So far as questions of policy were concerned, these would remain for the consideration of the Cabinet, but it was explained that it would be open to the Committee to indicate economies which might be effected by a particular policy. The Treasury organisation would be employed in the ordinary course for the purposes of the Committee, and the Committee would be provided with all the necessary information.

It did not appear that the establishment of this Committee was popular in the House of Commons. Sir Donald Maclean criticised not only the functions of the Committee but the personality of the chairman, who, he said, had always been

concerned with spending rather than with saving public money. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Robert Horne, in defending the Committee, reviewed the financial situation and pointed out that next year it would be necessary to reduce expenditure by 130,000,000. The Treasury had already arranged for a reduction of 50,000,000l. which it was hoped might ultimately be increased to 70,000,000l. A saving of a further 60,000,000l. was therefore necessary, and Sir Robert Horne denied that the Committee constituted any derogation from the authority of the House.

The Safeguarding of Industries Bill went through its concluding stages in both Houses during August. In the House of Commons a clause was moved to exempt goods to be used in shipbuilding, but was negatived by a majority of 117. A clause for exempting goods imported for educational or scientific purposes was also negatived. An attempt was made to secure the omission of the clause which authorised the Board of Trade to make orders applying to certain goods other than food or drink, but this attempt was defeated. On the motion for the third reading Mr. Asquith moved the rejection, but the Bill was carried by a majority of 122.

Several amendments were added in the House of Lords, but when they came up for agreement by the Commons the question was immediately raised as to whether the Bill was a money Bill, and therefore not capable of being amended by the Lords. The Speaker ruled that this was the case and that the amendments were privileged amendments. Mr. Chamberlain thereupon moved that the House disagree with the amendments of the Lords, saying that they not merely infringed the oldestablished principle of the constitution, but directly contravened the Parliament Act. It was open to the House of Commons, he said, to pass the Bill into law in the form in which they had left it, whether the House of Lords made amendments to it or not. The opinion expressed by Mr. Chamberlain was endorsed in an equal degree by Mr. Asquith, who protested against any infringements of the rights of the House of Commons. Whatever view might be held of the Lords' amendments, the House could not agree to waive its undoubted traditional privileges. The House thereupon formally disagreed with the Lords' amendments, the House of Lords made no further protest, and the Bill passed into law in the form in which it had left the House of Commons.

The offer made by the Government to Sinn Fein was not published until the middle of August. In the meanwhile steps were taken to facilitate the growth of a friendly feeling on both sides. On August 5 it was announced that the Government had decided to release forthwith, and without conditions, all members of Dail Eireann who were at present interned or who were undergoing sentence of penal servitude or imprisonment, in order to enable them to attend a meeting of the Republican

Parliament which had been summoned for August 16. This concession applied to thirty-three members of Dail Eireann, but the Government at first declined to release one other member who had been convicted of the murder of a district inspector of the Royal Irish Constabulary. The refusal to release this member caused considerable heart-burning among Sinn Feiners, and it was officially stated on behalf of Ďail Eireann that that body would not meet until the member in question had been released. Thereupon the Government at once gave way and this prisoner was released in common with the rest.

It was not until August 15 that the course of the Irish negotiations was published. It then transpired that the offer made by the Government to Sinn Fein involved the setting up of full Dominion status in Ireland forthwith, and complete autonomy in taxation and finance. Ireland was to maintain her own military forces for home defence and her own police. Irishmen were to be left to determine themselves whether the proposed new powers should be taken over by Ireland as a whole. Six conditions, however, were declared to be vital: the Royal Navy was to control the seas around Ireland; the Irish Territorial Force was to be limited; Great Britain was to have facilities for air defence and communications; voluntary recruiting was to be permitted for the Empire Forces; no protective duties were to be imposed between parts of the British Islands; and finally, Ireland was to assume responsibility for a share of the debt of the United Kingdom. Failing agreement the share was to be determined by a British arbitrator.

Mr. de Valera, in his reply to these proposals, stated that the conditions involved a control which Ireland could not admit, and described Dominion status as illusory. As to the share of the debt, he suggested the appointment of three arbitrators, one to be chosen by agreement or by the President of the United States.

Mr. Lloyd George, in a further reply, said that there could be no compromise on the question of allegiance to the King, and that no foreign arbitration could be accepted. He affirmed that the Government could not go further than the proposals which they had already made, but intimated his readiness to discuss them in detail whenever Mr. de Valera accepted them in principle.

The proposals of the Government were submitted to Sir James Craig at the same time as to Mr. de Valera. Sir James Craig replied that when the Prime Minister and Mr. de Valera had arrived at a settlement, Ulster would be ready to co-operate with Southern Ireland on equal terms for the welfare of the country.

Parliament adjourned on August 19, and the motions for the adjournment gave rise in both Houses to debates on the Government proposals with reference to Ireland. In the House of Commons Mr. Lloyd George made a full statement in which