the births in the country had declined from 948,000 in 1903 to 758,000 in 1923, so that the number of children at school was constantly decreasing. If he had been content to maintain the same services as in the previous year, he said the Estimates might have undergone considerable reduction, but he was leaving room for expansion and improvement, and including a sum of between 500,000l. and 750,000l. for new and productive expenditure. In doing this he was merely interpreting the prevailing discontent at the financial parsimony which had in the past stopped progress and threatened the standard of education already attained. After paying a tribute to one of his predecessors, Mr. Fisher, for having created the instrument which now rendered progress possible, the Minister said that the new educational policy had the approval of nearly the whole of the Press, and the local authorities had also shown their willingness to support it. He had asked for a determined effort to reduce the size of classes throughout the country, for a higher standard of staffing in the elementary schools, a steady increase in the use of trained teachers, and the replacement of the worst class of school building. He was at that moment having a complete survey of the country made, and he intended to make clear in the autumn what school buildings could only be allowed a limited period of continued existence. There had been during his term of office a bound forward in educational activity. In the whole of last year the approved expenditure for the building of elementary schools had amounted to 1,097,000.; for the first six months of this year it was 838,000l. In the whole of the financial year 1923-24, only 30 new secondary schools had been approved, whereas in the last six months 40 new schools had been added to the number. He was prepared to encourage local authorities to adopt the continuation school system, and announced that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was willing to hand over to him for the purposes of juvenile education nearly half a million which might otherwise have gone on the insurance of young people, if the original proposals of the Unemployment Insurance Act had been carried.

On July 23 the Postmaster-General announced that the Government had decided to adopt the main recommendations of the Donald Committee-as embodied in its Report of February 28-in regard to an Empire wireless service, viz., that the State through the Post Office should own all wireless stations for communication with Overseas Dominions, Protectorates, Colonies, and territories, and that the Post Office should operate, directly under an improved business organisation, an Empire Wireless Station in Great Britain. He also stated that the Government was prepared to co-operate with the Marconi Company in the trial of a new system of short-wave directive stations-known as "beam" stations-for which Canada, South Africa, and Australia were also willing to allow facilities.

The Government at this time published a letter which it

་

had sent to the Secretariat of the League of Nations containing its formal refusal to entertain the proposal for a Treaty of mutual assistance which had been drawn up under the auspices of the League. This step was adversely criticised by Earl Grey and Viscount Cecil in a debate in the House of Lords (July 24). Lord Grey charged the Government with having dismissed one more attempt to promote security in Europe, Lord Parmoor stated the reasons by which the Government had been guided. It was, he said, impossible for any Government in this country to carry out a successful policy of disarmament without the united loyalty of all the Dominions. With the exception of Ireland, all the Dominions had expressed opposition to the proposed Treaty, and they therefore could not think of adopting the scheme. There were also other reasons, equally strong. Every objection which the United States had taken to entering the League would be emphasised and strengthened if this Treaty were adopted. Criticism of the proposed Treaty had come from every official body in the country. England having reduced her armaments to a minimum, was it seriously proposed that they should give power to an outside authority to determine the force they should place at the disposal of the Council of the League to carry out the provisions of the mutual treaty? The Treaty was based on the theory that one must use force before one could have friendliness or security, but this he denied wholly. Lord Cecil characterised as astonishing the allegation of the Government that the proposed Treaty would increase armaments, and also demurred to the doctrine that because the Dominions dissented from a proposal it ought necessarily to be dropped. Lord Balfour, on the other hand, thought the Government had acted rightly, though he described as illusory the proposal contained in the Prime Minister's letter, for an assembly of all the nations to devise a scheme by which armaments might be diminished, unless it were dealt with in a spirit of which at present he saw no sign. The suggested Pact was again decisively repudiated by the Premier and Lord Parmoor at the meeting of the League of Nations at Geneva in September.

On July 29 the vexed question of the representation of the Dominions at International Conferences was discussed in the House of Commons in connection with the Colonial Office Vote, but without bringing a solution appreciably nearer. The difficulties of reconciling Imperial unity with the according to the Dominions of equality of status were forcibly expressed by Mr. Lloyd George, who said that the matter was of vital moment to the unity, the strength, and the continued existence of the Empire. He said that the proceedings in 1917, 1918, and 1919, when the Dominions were called practically into the Cabinet, into the Council of the Empire, involved a greater constitutional change than was generally apprehended, so much so that it had been difficrlt to get the Departments quite to accept the full

meaning of the change. Mr. Thomas in reply quoted a telegram. which he had sent to the Dominions on behalf of the Government on June 23, and which, he thought, expressed the views of the House of Commons as a whole. The Government, it said, felt as a result of its experience since taking office that the system in practice had two main deficiencies-first, that it made. immediate action extremely difficult, particularly in the sphere of foreign policy; secondly, that conclusions reached at and between Imperial Conferences were likely to be reversed through changes of Government. They therefore asked for suggestions from the Dominions, being themselves of quite an open mind on the subject. It was unfortunate that in the interval they had been confronted with the problem of the Dawes Report Conference, and for this they had to make a provisional arrangement which he admitted was not satisfactory, and which, as had already been announced, was not to be taken as a precedent. They had therefore invited the Dominions to a Conference which they hoped would take place in October. Outsiders, he said, were inclined to gloat over these domestic differences in the Empire, but he wanted to make it clear that they would. not be allowed to weaken it and that a remedy for them would be found. Mr. Thomas shortly afterwards paid a visit to South Africa, and succeeded in persuading the new South African Premier, General Herzog, to agree to South Africa being represented at such a Conference; but difficulties were still raised by other Colonies, and nothing further was heard of the proposed Conference for the rest of the year.

On July 30 a vote of 2,919,000l. for sundry Middle Eastern services came up, and a reduction was moved by Lieut.Commander Kenworthy, a Liberal who usually voted with the Government, as a protest against the Treaty with Iraq which was awaiting ratification. The speaker's view, that England should clear out of Mesopotamia unconditionally as soon as possible, was supported from the Labour benches, but Unionists encouraged the Government to maintain continuity of policy in the Middle East. The Colonial Secretary said this was the only opportunity which the House would have during this Session of discussing the Treaty before ratification, in accordance with the promise of the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs. In view of the support accorded to the Treaty, he asserted that the Government would without hesitation treat the discussion as sufficient to warrant them in ratifying it. The Government, however, would not be bound by the rider added by the Constituent Assembly of Iraq to its ratification of the Treaty, that such ratification was conditional on Mosul being incorporated in the boundaries of Iraq-a question on which negotiations with Turkey were still going on. Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy did not press the matter to a division in view of what he termed the "unholy alliance between the Government bench and the Conservative Party."

On the same day (July 30) the Liberals availed themselves of the right on which they had reserved to themselves some weeks before, of discussing the Vote for the Ministry of Labour in order to review the Government's unemployment policy. Mr. Snowden, on behalf of the Government, made an elaborate statement of their plans. Five million pounds, he said, was to be spent on the reconstruction of main trunk roads, while a further road programme had been approved amounting to 13,500,000l., of which the Government contribution would be 10,400,000l. Legislation was to be introduced in the autumn to give the Electricity Commissioners compulsory powers as proposed in 1919, and 10,000,000l. was to be spent by the State to standardise frequency of current; the Severn barrage scheme was to be revived, and the sugar beet industry encouraged by excise duties and subsidies; while 3,000,000l. was to be laid out on municipal works schemes in the ensuing winter. Dr. Macnamara severely criticised the Government for failing to do anything which would relieve the needs of the unemployed in the immediate present; and Mr. Lloyd George evoked loud Opposition cheers by sarcastically remarking that when the Labour Party before the General Election said that they had schemes thought out, planned, and considered in every detail as a remedy for unemployment, they meant the schemes prepared by other parties, Unionist and Liberal. Nevertheless the bulk of the Liberals did not judge that the time was yet ripe to force an appeal to the country, and they helped the Government to defeat by 46 votes a motion for reducing the Minister of Labour's salary.

On

On July 30 it had been announced that the House of Commons would rise for the Autumn recess a week later, on August 7, but at the last moment the Government's plans were thrown into uncertainty by the turn of events in Ireland. July 31 the Judicial Commission which had been appointed a few weeks earlier reported that according to the Irish Treaty the Boundary Commission could not be constituted if one of the parties concerned-as in this case Northern Ireland-refused to appoint a Commissioner. Mr. Thomas, in informing the House of Commons the next day of this report, stated that the Government had no doubt that it had been the intention of Parliament when it ratified the Treaty that the Boundary Commission should be appointed, and they felt bound in honour to secure, as far as lay within their power, that that intention should be carried into effect. They were still not without hopes, even at that late stage, that the Government of Northern Ireland might see their way to appoint a representative on the Commission, but if not then the Government proposed forthwith to introduce legislation to give effect to what was the undoubted intention of the Treaty, "regardless," as he said, with a veiled reference to the Conservative Die-Hards, "of any consequences to themselves." Mr. Lloyd George immediately

assured him of the support of the Liberals. Mr. Baldwin remained silent; but the challenge to the Die-Hards was taken up by Mr. R. McNeill, who said that the assumption of the Government that this was a mere drafting oversight in the Treaty, and that the honour of the country was involved in rectifying that oversight, was an idea by no means universal, and one that would be hotly contested.

Before resorting to legislation, the Government made a last effort to induce Ulster to change its mind. On August 2 President Cosgrave and Lord Londonderry, who acted as Prime Minister of Northern Ireland during the illness of Sir J. Craig, were at Downing Street, and had long interviews with the Premier and Mr. Thomas. When they left, the path to an agreement still seemed to be open, but on their return home they found their supporters averse to any concessions, and President Cosgrave wired to London insisting that legislation to appoint the Commission should be carried through forthwith. Many members of the Cabinet, including the Premier, were strongly opposed to rushing so important and contentious a measure through the House of Commons at the fag-end of the Session, when all members were anxious to get away. On the other hand, to flout the Irish President's request might have given a dangerous impulse to the Republican movement in Southern Ireland. In this emergency Mr. Thomas and Mr. Henderson crossed over to Dublin on August 4 to induce the Free State Ministry to consent at least to the postponement of the final stages of the proposed Bill till the House of Commons should re-assemble for the Autumn Session in October.

Mr. Cosgrave gave no definite undertaking, but as a result of his conversations with the English Ministers the Government felt that it could safely adjourn Parliament on the date originally fixed, August 7. In order to convince Southern Ireland of England's good faith in the matter of the Treaty, it decided to lay before the House immediately a Bill for appointing a Boundary Commission in Ireland, and to give an undertaking to convene Parliament on September 30 instead of October 28, if it should seem necessary, thus shortening the recess by four weeks for the express purpose of hastening the passage of the Bill. Mr. Thomas, who with his colleague had returned from Ireland on August 5, in introducing the Bill on the next day said he could not pretend that the Free State Government had in any way desisted from its view that the Bill ought to be passed into law forthwith; nevertheless he hoped to satisfy their people that England meant to keep faith with them. Meanwhile he appealed to the Press and people of England to refrain during the interval until the House met again from any action that might awaken old suspicions or inflame old prejudices. Not many minutes passed before the need for this caution was demonstrated. Sir J. Simon, in assuring Mr. Thomas of Liberal support, asked him whether he had pointed out to the