Unfortunately, the "responsible and sober-minded persons" referred to were taken by the Westminster Gazette (and many readers) to be the Ulstermen and their aiders and abetters; and the Manchester Guardian feared that the King had been "unduly alarmed by the reports of certain of his unofficial counsellors," with consequences that might be serious (for the Constitution) unless he henceforth listened to his official advisers only. Unionist papers pointed out that a host of prominent people, independent of party politics, had talked of civil war, and the Prime Minister, in reply to questions, expressly took the responsibility for the speech, and interpreted His Majesty's words as meaning merely that apprehension of civil strife had been widely entertained and expressed by responsible and sober-minded persons, "among whom I may, perhaps, include myself." The House laughed, but the Liberal objectors were not wholly satisfied. There was some resentment felt, too, at the selection of Buckingham Palace for the Conference. But this, at least, protected the members from journalistic enterprise.

While the Conference was sitting the House of Commons took, among other business, the Report stage of the Finance Bill; but the minds of members were mainly elsewhere. Among the unsuccessful attempts made to obtain alleviations of the income-tax law we may mention proposals (a) to exempt lands and property occupied by any charity, which was asked for especially in the interest of residential hostels at the newer Universities; (b) treating income arising from capital earned by the recipient as unearned income; (c) providing that income from British Colonial investments should be assessed to income-tax and supertax after deduction of any Colonial income-tax; (d) providing for deduction from the taxed income of sums spent in the education of children; making provision for the case of insurance against death duties; (e) exempting income neither taxed nor received in the United Kingdom. Some slight concessions, however, were made by the Government; but a fresh attempt to avert the abolition of the settled estate duty was also unsuccessful. On the first day, complaints were made of the absence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but, on his arrival, he explained that he was detained by a duty not of his own seeking, but which he had no option but to accept.

The debates were cut short by the guillotine, and the third reading followed on July 23. Mr. Austen Chamberlain remarked on the change in the character of the Bill, and regretted the increase of the death duties, the treatment of settled estates, and the raiding of the Sinking Fund. As to the effect, welcomed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in breaking up landed estates, he desired to see many more small estates, especially occupying ownerships, but he thought the effect would be felt rather by those of moderate size than by the great ones; estates would be starved, and the taxpayers would feel themselves unjustly treated, and attempt evasion. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was eminently fair when doing business, but, when convinced that he could not afford to give way, he mis-stated his opponent's case, and showed himself a master in irrelevancy. The new arrangements affecting the Finance Bill deprived the House of its control of finance, and took away its opportunity of reviewing the whole field of taxation. He laid stress on the growth of expenditure, and predicted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would himself convert the country to fiscal reform. The President of the Local Government Board replied that the Bill had set up a better graduation of the income-tax system, including supertax; out of 1,215,000 income-tax payers 214,000 still paid virtually less than 1d. in the pound, and 750,000 less than 6d. As to the provision for reduction of debt, he doubted whether the taxpayer was not being asked for too much. The Liberal Budgets marked a new departure in finance—a march against preventable poverty. After other speeches, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that the new proposals had been fully discussed, and the Opposition had had difficulty in finding speakers. The changes in the Bill were a proof that the Commons still controlled finance. He defended the death duties, and thought that the financial interests of the world were feeling alarm at the total expenditure of 350,000,000l. a year on armaments; he saw signs of reaction, but the movement must be cosmopolitan. It was a duty to raise money for social reform. After further debate, the Bill was passed without a division.

The Conference meanwhile had failed. It met on four successive days (July 21-24), beginning at 11.30 A.M., and closing at 12.30 or 1 P.M.; and there were latterly frequent consultations between various political leaders. A large and attentive crowd, mainly, however, of idlers, and kept by the police at a convenient distance from the Palace, watched the arrival and departure of its members, and cheered them all impartially; and Mr. Redmond and Mr. Dillon, who walked back on the second day through Birdcage Walk, were enthusiastically cheered at the Barracks by the Irish Guards, whose honorary Colonel, it was noticed, was Earl Roberts, a decided Unionist. Two suffragists, Lady Barclay and the Hon. Edith Fitzgerald, attempted in vain to enter the Palace during the Conference, in order to submit the claims of women to the King. As was expected from the first, no solution was reached. After the final meeting on July 24 there was a Cabinet Council, and the Prime Minister announced the failure at the close of the sitting of the House of Commons. He read the official report, signed by the Speaker, stating that the possibility was considered of finding an area to be excluded from the operation of the Home Rule Bill, and that the Conference, "being unable to agree, either in principle or in detail, on such an area, brought its sittings to a conclusion." Mr. Asquith added that the Amending Bill would be taken on July 28.

It was stated that the deadlock arose over the exclusion of Fermanagh and Tyrone, and especially as to whether Tyrone, in which the Nationalist voters were slightly the more numerous, should be allowed to vote itself out by "a bare majority." The personal relations of all the members it was stated, had been excellent, and each set had genuinely attempted to appreciate the difficulties of the others. It was thought that the Ministerialists, and even the Cabinet, might split. The First Lord of the Admiralty and four other Ministers were said to favour further concessions to Ulster, and the situation was described as almost desperate.

It was made even worse, however, two days later by a daring act of gun-running, leading to an affray in Dublin between the populace and British troops. On Sunday morning, July 26, about a thousand National Volunteers, some unarmed, others armed with long staves, assembled at Fairview, two miles from Dublin on the Howth road, and started, apparently on a route march, to Howth. Arriving there at midday, they marched to the pier, where a white yacht, steered (it was said) by a lady, had just arrived. Those with staves guarded the entrance to the pier; the rest, assisted by Boy Scouts, unloaded 2,500 Lee-Enfield rifles and 125,000 rounds of ammunition. Each Volunteer shouldered a rifle; the balance was loaded into motor cars and distributed to hiding-places throughout the county. A policeman and some coastguardmen were prevented from interfering, and the latter telephoned to Dublin. Mr. Harrel, the Assistant Commissioner of the Dublin Metropolitan Police, after sending out a large force of constables, telephoned the facts to the Under-Secretary at 2 P.M., and was directed to meet him at the Castle at 2.45; but he did not do so, having gone to the barracks, where he requisitioned, on his own responsibility, two companies of the King's Own Scottish Borderers, who were sent to Fairview by tram. The Volunteers on their return were met at Clontarf by a body of police and 160 soldiers; the police were ordered to disarm the Volunteers; some refused, and were arrested by the soldiers; others succeeded in disarming the Volunteers in front, after a scuffle in which two soldiers were wounded by pistol-shots, as well as three Volunteers and a policeman; hereupon the Volunteer leaders ordered a parley, during which the rear ranks of their own body dispersed, taking their rifles with them. Meanwhile the Under-Secretary, not finding Mr. Harrel, had left a Minute directing him that forcible disarmament of the Volunteers should not be attempted, but that their names should be taken and the destination of the arms traced. Later the troops, on their way back to Dublin, were stoned in Bachelors' Walk by a mob; their commanding officer expostulated, and some of the rear-rank men, losing patience, fired without orders; three of the crowd were killed (including one woman) and thirty-two wounded, and a number of the soldiers were severely injured with stones. At 10.30 P.M. a crowd attacked the gate of the barracks, but were driven off by the police.

Statements on these events were made in both Houses on Monday, July 27. In the Commons the Chief Secretary, replying to a question from Mr. Redmond, read the Minute left by the Under-Secretary for Mr. Harrel, and stated that the latter had been suspended, and that an inquiry into the conduct of the military would be held at once; and, in answer to Mr. Devlin, he stated that on the previous Saturday 5,000 men, with five machine guns, had marched through Belfast, that General Macready, the military magistrate, was then in the city, and that the police had not been ordered to interfere. The subject was debated as a matter of urgent public importance that night, after a statement by the Foreign Secretary on the European situation (post, p. 167) which was rapidly becoming graver, and an announcement by the Prime Minister of the further postponement of the Amending Bill, since the Nationalist party, which had arranged a conference for that day to consider it, had had its attention taken up by the events in Dublin. A brief and non-party discussion on minor naval votes also preceded the debate.

In moving the adjournment, Mr. John Redmond condemned the Arms Proclamation, and stated that on June 30 he had written to the Chief Secretary, declaring it a failure and likely to lead to collision between the Nationalists and police. He went on to refer to the march of the previous Saturday through Belfast, and asked who was responsible for this monstrous attempt to discriminate in the administration of the law. Where was Mr. Harrell's chief, Sir John Ross of Bladensburg, who had proved himself thoroughly incompetent during the strikes of 1913? After referring, in impartial terms, to the shooting, he demanded from the Government—the suspension and trial of Sir John Ross, an immediate inquiry into all the facts, a judicial and military inquiry into the action of the troops, with (if they were found guilty) proper punishment; removal of the regiment from Ireland; revocation of the Arms Proclamation; and finally, and very emphatically, an impartial administration of the law.

The Chief Secretary agreed that no distinction could be made in the treatment of the Ulster and Nationalist Volunteers, and spoke of Mr. Harrel's "act of extraordinary indiscretion." Mr. Harrel had taken the whole responsibility, but if Sir John Ross were associated with the act, he ought to be suspended also. He dissociated the Volunteers wholly from the shooting and from the attack by the mob, and referred the question of the removal of the regiment to the Prime Minister as Secretary for War.

Mr. Bonar Law declared that the question put to Sir John Ross was most improper; he could not now say it was wrong to suspend Mr. Harrel, but why did not the Under-Secretary send after him? The Government in Ireland had hunted out a scapegoat to save their own skin. The incident was only possible because the Government had abrogated authority in Ireland and had ceased to govern. He did not blame the Nationalist Volunteers, but the Government, for the first time in history, refused to carry out the law and yet continued to hold office. They did not vindicate the law because Mr. Redmond would not let them. The Government had never been able to make up their minds as to their proper policy and risk their fate on the consequences.

The Prime Minister replied. He was not going to follow the example of the Opposition leader, who was "a past master of vituperation," but, as Secretary for War, he put in a plea for the troops. They were exposed to great provocation, and what happened, much as it was to be lamented, was not a fitting subject for condemnation. After promising a full inquiry, he refused to see that it was unfair to ask Sir John Ross whether he associated himself with his subordinate. "It is a question put to me once a week." When Mr. Harrel acted, the proclamation against the importation of arms had already exhausted itself. He denounced the attacks on the Under-Secretary, and said that the importation of arms was relatively of minor importance. If the proclamation was maintained, it should be impartially applied. The real crux of the question was in the attitude of the Government and the Opposition to the maintenance of the authority of the law. The Opposition had greatly increased the inherent difficulty of governing Ireland by proclaiming that violation of the law was a cardinal virtue. Till an agreement was reached as to respect for law, the Unionists, when they came in, would find the government of Ireland an impossible task.

Mr. Balfour shared Mr. Bonar Law's suspicions as to the Minute, and thought the whole story had not been told. The Government had been persistently blind to the feelings of Ulster, and now were up against facts. They had taken and kept power, and had allowed the whole system of law, order, and government to crumble. Every one knew that Ireland had been brought into a condition from which it seemed almost impossible for any courage, statesmanship, or heroism to extricate it.

After other speeches, Lord R. Cecil (U.) moved the closure, which was defeated by 249 to 217. The motion was thus talked out, and a division averted on the main question. It might have imperilled the Government.

It was elicited next day that, as Mr. Balfour apparently had divined, Sir James Dougherty's Minute had in fact been written at 5 P.M., after the affray was over, but that it contained the instructions which Mr. Harrel, had he waited, would have received three hours before. But the occurrence was already obscured by events of greater moment. The Commission, appointed a week later, consisted of Lord Shaw, Mr. Justice Molony, and the Rt. Hon. W. D. Andrews, a retired Irish judge; and the story may be ended here by stating that its Report (published Oct. 1) declared that the employment of the police and military was illegal, that General Cuthbert, who allowed the military to be used, was wrong in doing so, that they were not justified in firing, and that the twenty-one soldiers who fired did so without orders, but believing that they had them.

At the time, however, it seemed possible that this affray, coupled with the dispute over the Amending Bill, might bring about complications delaying the establishment of Home Rule; and an enthusiastic demonstration of Liberals, Labour men, and Nationalists, held at the London Opera House on July 29, demanded that the Government should complete their legislative programme and thus secure the effective operation of the Parliament Act. Sir James H. Dalziel (Kirkcaldy) presided; Mr. Neil Primrose (Cambs, Wisbech), Mr. Rowlands (Dartford), and Mr. Devlin (Belfast, W.) were among the speakers, and there were 50,000 applications for admission. Incidentally the Chairman mentioned—what soon became obvious—the very grave effect produced on the international situation by the reports that civil war was impending in Ireland.

In the interval before the resumption of the debate on the Amending Bill, the House dealt, more briefly than usual, with the Colonial Office Vote and the Education Vote (July 28) as well as with other non-contentious subjects needing no special notice here. On the Colonial Office Vote the points raised were dealt with by the Colonial Secretary in his reply as follows: He must decline to give information as to future policy in Somaliland which would be useful to the Mullah; but they were getting 450 camel constabulary and 400 of the Indian contingent, of whom 150 would be mounted and would strengthen the camel corps. Burao would be occupied by the new commandant early in September, and they would then enable the friendlies to reoccupy their grazing at the mouth of the Ain Valley. He would not decrease the existing native reserve lands in East Africa. As to Tasmania, he had only laid down the rules generally regarded as binding on a Governor, and Sir W. Ellison-Macartney's appointment was based on his work as a Civil Servant and irrespective of politics. The incident, he thought, was closed. The South African Native Lands Act was the outcome of a commission appointed by Viscount Milner, and was temporary; Parliament ought not to intervene except on proof of gross injustice to natives, and there had been none. The Malaya Dreadnought was not a tribute, but a voluntary gift from allies; the taxation of the Malay people was practically nil. He gave encouraging figures as to the decreasing consumption of opium in the British possessions in the Far East, but it was ominous that large quantities of cocaine and morphia had been seized. As to the Ceylon excise, the Government proposed to put up an experimental distillery in each district to get rid of the existing distilleries, but they might be directed by private enterprise, though not at the cost of creating vested interests. The supposed increase in the consumption of arrack was due to the gradual cessation of illicit drinking. He suspended his decision as to the Chartered Company's Charter pending consultation with Lord Gladstone.—The Vote was agreed to.

On the Education Vote, after criticisms and comments had been passed on various points in the Board's policy by several members, the President of the Board of Education paid a tribute to the memory of Sir William Anson, and bore testimony to the efficiency of the staff of the Department. Among other matters of interest, he touched on school hygiene, mentioning that 317 education authorities had established medical inspection, in which 1097 medical men, eighty-four women, and 300 specialists were engaged. Half the children needed dental treatment, and the expenditure on the medical service had increased from 47,000l. in 1912-13 to 175,000l. in 1914-15. For mental and physical defectives there were 365 schools, and the grants were increased. They had 945 places in open-air schools for ailing children, but 500,000 children needed them. Provision was made for feeding 358,000 children, but they hoped to be able to contribute half the cost to local authorities by a supplementary grant of 77,000l. Physical training was invariably part of the course, and England was behind no nation in providing for it. He mentioned also schools for mothers, play-grounds, and a projected grant in 1915-16 of 50,000l. to aid local authorities to deal with epidemics. There was no evidence that the teaching of the three R's had generally deteriorated; the children were more alert and responsive, and happier at school than ever. The wastage of teachers could only be met by making the career more attractive. Lodgings for women teachers were a difficulty, and hostels for teachers were the only solution. The State would find two-fifths of the cost. Children left school just when a good teacher could do most for them, but he thought the prosperity of the country from the point of view of education was assured.

Amid all the prevalent excitement, little attention could be paid to the Report of the Welsh Land Inquiry Committee (July 27). This body, of which Sir A. Mond (L., Swansea) was chairman, had been appointed at the request of the Chancellor of the Exchequer to inquire into and report on the special circumstances of Wales in respect to land tenure and agricultural conditions, and the Report, which claimed, fairly enough, to be judicial and dispassionate, contained some 350 pages of documents and comment, leading up to the following main conclusions. Legislation was urgently needed in the interests of agriculture; the crops, except in roots, were much poorer than in England, partly from the inferior productiveness of the soil, but largely through insecurity of tenure, and also because of high rents, fear that rent would be charged on tenants' improvements, inadequate compensation, and onerous conditions of tenants' agreements. The Committee recommended absolute fixity of tenure, and the establishment of a Land Court with power to fix fair rents and settle reasonable conditions of tenancy. The rural housing conditions were deplorable; there were often not enough cottages, and in no district was there an ample supply of suitable cottages large enough for an average family. The effect was bad for health and morals. The administration of the Small Holdings and Allotments Acts was unsatisfactory and varied greatly in different counties, and the machinery was too cumbersome. At the end of 1912, 1,100 approved applicants were still waiting for land.

The Amending Bill was to be taken on July 30; and its prospects had been perhaps improved by the remarkable pamphlet published a week earlier by Sir Horace Plunkett, announcing his conversion to Home Rule (post, Chap. VI.). But all domestic difficulties were rapidly being obscured and effaced by the rapid gathering of war-clouds in Central Europe. The news of the Dublin shooting was published the same day as that of the rejection by Austria-Hungary of the Serbian reply to her ultimatum; and between question time in the House of Commons and the excited debate on the affray later on that day (July 27) party strife was visibly suspended in both Houses, while substantially identical statements on the European situation were made respectively by Sir Edward Grey and the Marquess of Crewe. The former, replying to a question by the leader of the Opposition, stated that, after hearing of the Austro-Serbian rupture, he had asked the French, German and Italian Governments, through the respective British Ambassadors in their capitals, if their Ambassadors might meet in Conference in London; he had also asked the Austro-Hungarian and Serbian Governments to suspend operations meanwhile. It appeared next day that Italy and France accepted at once; but Germany refused the British invitation, alleging that negotiations between the several Governments would be preferable; Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia and seized Serb vessels at Orsova; and Russia prepared (July 28) to mobilise fourteen Army Corps. Under these circumstances The Times (July 29) urged British parties to "close ranks" and suspend their strife, that the Government might devote all its energies to limiting the area of the war. Sir Edward Grey, it declared, was indispensable as Foreign Minister; and the Ulster question might be provisionally settled by the exclusion of Fermanagh and Tyrone from the Home Rule area. That day, however, the situation became graver; seven Stock Exchange firms failed; and the Prime Minister could only tell the Commons that the Government were doing their best to "circumscribe the area of possible conflict." But on the day following (July 31) he announced that the Amending Bill must be postponed. In an impressive speech to a profoundly attentive House, he stated that the issues of peace and war were hanging in the balance, and with them the risk of a catastrophe of which it was impossible to measure either the dimensions or the effects. It was, therefore, of vital importance in the interest of the whole world, that Great Britain, who had no interests directly at stake, should present a united front and be able to speak and act with the authority of an undivided nation. Hence they would deal with necessary non-controversial business. Mr. Bonar Law agreed, saying that it should be made clear that British domestic differences did not prevent members from presenting a united front in the councils of the world; and that he spoke not only for the Unionists, but for the Ulstermen.

Next day, however (Aug. 1), the situation became worse. German troops were preparing to invade France; Russia had proclaimed a general mobilisation; martial law was consequently proclaimed in Germany; in Great Britain steps were taken to guard magazines, railway bridges and tunnels, and dockyards; the booms defending British naval ports were placed in position; and telegrams from the Dominions exhibited their eagerness to aid the mother country by sending troops. In London, the Stock Exchange, an hour after its opening, was closed sine die; business was active at Lloyd's in insurances against war risks; the Cabinet met in the morning, and the Prime Minister in the afternoon was received by the King. Ministers cancelled their week-end engagements, and, just before the House rose, the Prime Minister stated that the news from Germany indicated that she would follow Russia in mobilisation. Next day the bank rate was advanced to 10 per cent.—its highest point since the Overend-Gurney crisis in May, 1866; the Cabinet met twice, and a conference was held between some of its members, including the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the financial situation; and the King, as a last effort to preserve peace, sent a direct personal telegram to the Tsar, offering mediation, which arrived, however, after Germany had declared war on Russia.

Unwonted and varied excitement characterised Sunday, August 2. Throughout the country prayers for the preservation of peace were offered in the churches, in accordance with a suggestion made some days earlier by the Archbishops, and also in Nonconformist places of worship. In Trafalgar Square a "war protest meeting" organised by Mr. Hyndman, Mr. Ben Tillett, Mr. Keir Hardie, Mr. Barnes, M.P., and other prominent representatives of Socialism or Labour, passed a resolution calling on the Government to take every step to secure peace, and on the workers of the world to use their industrial and political power to avert war; but it was interrupted by a large dissentient element, which, however, ultimately seceded peacefully and held a "patriotic" meeting at the Admiralty Arch. During the day the Cabinet met twice, and frequent informal conferences were held between Ministers; and it was stated that the divisions of opinion previously existing among them disappeared in the course of the day almost entirely. The King held a Council at 4.30 P.M., and it was announced, first, that the Government had taken control of all wireless telegraphy, next that a "moratorium" of a month was established for certain bills of exchange; and the Admiralty called out the Naval Reserves, including naval and marine pensioners under the age of fifty-five, and the Royal Volunteer Reserve. On the announcement of this last step, through the medium of special late Sunday editions of various newspapers, a crowd of some 6,000 people marched up the Mall to Buckingham Palace, where it sang the national anthems of Great Britain and France. The King and Queen were called for, and came out to acknowledge the greetings of their enthusiastic subjects.

Next morning London awoke to a new kind of Bank Holiday. The morning papers announced the Germans' violation of the neutrality of Luxemburg and their invasion of France and their ultimatum to Belgium; many of the railway excursion arrangements had perforce been cancelled; and the streets were thronged by disappointed excursionists, reinforced by others who had come in from the country for further news. Miniature British and French flags found a ready sale in the streets; special editions were issued of the evening papers; crowds gathered outside Buckingham Palace and Whitehall, impartially cheering Ministers and Unionist leaders. In the City a conference of bankers and merchants invited the Government to extend the Bank Holiday for three days by proclamation; the House of Lords had been hastily summoned; but interest centred in the Commons.

Here, indeed, as in the country, the attitude of a large section of the Liberals was still uncertain. Many of them condemned all wars, or almost all, as criminal; many more held that the Foreign Office was prejudiced against Germany, and abhorred the notion of fighting to preserve the balance of power in Europe, or to strengthen Russia, reputed a far less civilised Power than Germany, and the historic foe of the British Empire in India. Protests against any departure by Great Britain from neutrality were specially noticeable in the Manchester Guardian and the Daily News; and manifestoes in a similar sense were issued by various groups of important personages; the Bishops of Lincoln and Hereford, the British Neutrality Committee, and others. A group of learned men, chiefly belonging to Cambridge University, declared that war against Germany in the interest of Russia and Servia would be "a sin against civilisation"; and the Labour Leader appealed to "the organised workers" to demonstrate everywhere that the war must be stopped. But these views were greatly modified, not only by the news of German action in Luxemburg and Belgium, but by a statement published on the Monday afternoon with the authority of the German Embassy, intimating that, if Great Britain remained neutral, Germany would undertake not to attack France in the north by sea, nor to make warlike use of the Dutch or Belgian coasts. Thus, it was contended, Great Britain, as a neutral, could aid France as well as by going to war. This offer was felt to be ridiculous; and the conversion of the vast majority of those Liberals who were still adverse to war was completed by the speech delivered in the House of Commons by Sir Edward Grey. It was described by Lord Lansdowne as "of rare courage," and The Times declared that it would remain memorable in the history of the world.

The centre of interest lay in the Commons, and Sir Edward Grey's speech practically served for both Houses. All questions to Ministers were postponed, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced, without notice, a Postponement of Payments Bill, supplementing the Moratorium proclamation (p. 169) by empowering the Government to declare a general moratorium on occasion. By agreement, it was passed through all its stages at once; indeed, but for a protest from Mr. McCallum Scott (L., Glasgow, Bridgeton) it would not even have been read. The Bank holiday was prolonged for three days; but the stoppage was not to involve a general suspension of work and wages.

Then Sir Edward Grey spoke. He said that Ministers, then as always, had worked for peace, but in vain. As to British obligations he had told the Russian Foreign Minister in 1908 that he could promise no more than diplomatic support, and in the existing crisis, till the day before, he had promised nothing more. During the general election of 1906, at the crisis which led to the Algeciras Conference, he had been asked if, should a Franco-German war break out, Great Britain would give armed support; he had replied that he could promise nothing which would not be fully supported by public opinion, but, if war were forced on France through the Anglo-French entente regarding Morocco, British public opinion would rally to her support. The French Government had then suggested conversations on this support between military and naval experts; and he had agreed, after consulting Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, Lord Haldane, and Mr. Asquith—since he could not, owing to the general election, consult the Cabinet—on the understanding that such conversations should in no way bind the Government. In the Agadir crisis he took the same line, and on November 22, 1912, he exchanged letters with the French Ambassador to this effect, but agreeing that if either Great Britain or France had grave reason to expect an attack by a third Power or a menace to the general peace, both Governments should consult whether they should co-operate and what measures they should take in common. But the British Government remained perfectly free to decide whether it should intervene. In the Morocco question, however, it was pledged to diplomatic support; in the existing crisis France was involved because of its obligation of honour to Russia, which did not apply to Great Britain, a Power which did not even know the terms of the Franco-Russian alliance. But in view of the Anglo-French friendship, let every man look into his own heart and construe the extent of the British obligation for himself. In view of that friendship, the French Fleet was concentrated in the Mediterranean, and if, in a war which France had not sought, her unprotected coasts were bombarded, he felt that Great Britain could not stand aside. And, from the point of view of British interests, suppose the French Fleet withdrawn from the Mediterranean and Italy involved in the war, Great Britain, if she now stood aside, might be exposed to appalling risks. He had, therefore, on the previous afternoon given the French Ambassador an authorised assurance that, if a hostile German Fleet came into the Channel or North Sea the British Government would give France all the assistance in its power. He had just heard that the German Government would be prepared, were Great Britain pledged to neutrality, to agree that the German Fleet should not attack the northern coast of France (p. 170); but that was far too narrow an engagement. There was also the question, hourly becoming more serious, of the neutrality of Belgium. In 1870 Prince Bismarck had acknowledged the sanctity of the Treaty of 1839, and the Government could not take a narrower view of its obligations than Mr. Gladstone's Government took in 1870. He had asked in the previous week the French and German Governments whether they were prepared to respect that neutrality; and he quoted the replies: France had promised to do so, Germany had delayed replying. Belgium had promised neutrality. But Germany had sent Belgium an ultimatum; and the British Government had been asked in the past week whether an assurance would satisfy it that Belgian integrity would be preserved after the war. It had replied refusing to barter away its interests or obligations in Belgian neutrality. The King of the Belgians had that day telegraphed to King George, appealing to the British Government to safeguard the integrity of Belgium. Great Britain had great and vital interests in the independence of Belgium, and integrity was the least part of that independence. Compliance with the ultimatum would be fatal to that independence, and that of Holland would then perish also. If Great Britain stood aside, ran away from her obligations, and merely intervened at the end of the war, her material force would be of little value, in view of the respect she would have lost. She would suffer terribly in the war in any case, but if she stood aside, she would be in no position after it to prevent Europe falling under the domination of one Power, and her moral position would be such as to have lost her all respect. The Fleet was mobilised, the Army was mobilising, but no engagement had yet been taken to send abroad an Expeditionary Force. The one bright spot was Ireland. The feeling there made the Irish question a consideration that need not be taken into account. Unconditional neutrality was precluded by the commitment to France and the consideration of Belgium. To stand aside would be to sacrifice the good name of Great Britain without escaping the most serious economic consequences. The forces of the Crown were never more ready or more efficient; the Government had worked for peace to the last moment, and beyond it; when the country realised the situation, they would have its united support.

Mr. Bonar Law promised emphatically the full and unhesitating support of the Opposition, mentioning also, as another bright spot, the certainty of that of the Dominions. Mr. John Redmond, in a speech that made a profound sensation, declared that the events of recent years had completely altered the Nationalist feeling towards Great Britain. He recalled the support given by Catholics to the Irish Volunteers in the eighteenth century, and said that the Government might withdraw all its troops from Ireland: her coasts would be defended by her armed sons, and the Nationalist Volunteers would gladly join in doing so with their brethren of the north. Mr. Ramsay Macdonald (Lab.) contended that the Foreign Minister had not shown that the country was in danger, the Crimean and South African Wars were fought on the plea of British honour; and the conflict could not be confined to the neutrality of Belgium. The Labour party wanted to know what would happen to Russia, and the annihilation of France was impossible. He admitted that the feeling of the House was against his followers, but they held that Great Britain should have remained neutral.

The sitting was suspended till 7 P.M., when the Royal Assent was given to the Postponement of Payments Bill, and the debate was continued discursively, several Liberal and Labour members condemning, and others supporting, the course taken by the Government. Eventually Mr. Balfour pointed out that all this was "the mere dregs and lees of the debate," and would be misunderstood abroad as representing the opinion of the House. He urged that it should be ended, and after a few words of protest from Colonel Seely (L.) the advice was taken.

Next day the proceedings in the Commons commenced with a momentous statement by the Prime Minister, embodying the earlier telegrams in the series, of which the substance is given below; the outstanding Votes in Supply were then passed, and a Message was read from the King announcing the Proclamation calling out the Army Reserve and embodying the Territorial Force; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer outlined the scheme of the Government for insurance against war risks, so as to secure the continuance of overseas trade. It had been devised by an expert sub-committee of the Imperial Defence Committee, and conditions in the shipping trade had changed since such insurance had been discountenanced by an expert Committee in 1908. Details cannot here be given; but, substantially, the State took 80 per cent. of the risks on vessels trading oversea (which were mainly insured through three great mutual societies) and received 80 per cent. of the premiums, charging no premium on vessels on a voyage on the outbreak of war, and allowing the cancellation of a policy if a voyage were delayed by the Admiralty. For cargoes a State Bureau was opened, to insure cargoes despatched after the outbreak of war. A flat rate was to be charged, subject to certain variations from time to time, and a strong Advisory Board established. Mr. Austen Chamberlain (U.) and Mr. A. Henderson (Lab.) approved the scheme, the latter urging the Government to consider the organisation of distribution; but here, as it proved, there was no need for alarm.

Meanwhile the Government prepared actively for war in other ways. It assumed the control of the railways, vesting it in a Committee of General Managers under the Board of Trade; it took over the two Dreadnoughts completed and nearly completed in Great Britain for Turkey, and the two destroyer leaders building for Chile; Field-Marshal Sir John French was appointed Inspector-General of the Forces, and it was understood that he was to command the Expeditionary Force; and Admiral Sir John Jellicoe was appointed to the supreme command of the Home Fleets, with Rear-Admiral C. E. Madden as his Chief of Staff. The King, too, issued a Message to the Overseas Dominions expressing the "appreciation and pride" with which he had received the Messages from their respective Governments. "These spontaneous assurances of their fullest-support," the Message continued, "recall to me the generous, self-sacrificing help given by them in the past to the Mother Country. I shall be strengthened in the discharge of the great responsibility which rests upon me by the confident belief that, in this time of trial, my Empire will stand united, calm, resolute, trusting in God."

In the country generally the action of Germany and Sir Edward Grey's statement had driven the great mass of the Liberal and Labour parties to agree that war was inevitable and just. In the Ministry some members were still unconvinced. On Monday, August 3, four members of the Cabinet, it was said, still advocated peace; by next day there were but two, Lord Morley of Blackburn, Lord President of the Council, and Mr. John Burns, President of the Board of Trade. They, however, resigned office; but it was stated that they had decided to do so independently and at different stages of the controversy, and largely to avoid hampering the freedom of the Cabinet in a great emergency. Their example was followed by Mr. Charles Trevelyan (Yorks, W.R., Elland), the Secretary of the Board of Education. These three were replaced respectively by Earl Beauchamp, Mr. Runciman, and Dr. Addison.

The breach between Germany and Great Britain became definitive on Tuesday, August 4. Following his statement of the previous day in the Commons, Sir E. Grey telegraphed in the morning to the British Ambassador in Berlin, protesting against the violation of Belgian neutrality by Germany, and asking for an immediate reply. Before it came he received official Belgian intimations that the violation had already been announced to Belgium and had taken place. The German Government also telegraphed to the German Ambassador in London, instructing him to repeat most positively the formal assurance that, even in the case of an armed conflict, Germany would under no pretence whatever annex Belgian territory, and that she had disregarded Belgian neutrality to prevent what was to her a question of life or death, the French advance through Belgium. Thereupon the British Government sent an ultimatum to Berlin, asking for an unequivocal assurance that Germany would respect the neutrality of Belgium identical with that given the week before by France both to Belgium and to Great Britain, and for a satisfactory reply by midnight to it, and to Sir E. Grey's telegram of the morning; otherwise, the British Ambassador was instructed to make what was, substantially, a declaration of war. Late that night this request was refused: and on Wednesday morning, August 5, Great Britain found herself called to be once more the saviour of Europe.

CHAPTER V.
GREAT BRITAIN AT WAR.

The war had come suddenly upon Great Britain, but it found a Government well prepared to withstand the enemy and a Parliament and a people whose divisions—on which the Germans had staked their hopes—were rapidly closing, and whose determination to carry on the contest to a victorious issue was being quickly perfected by a growing knowledge of the real position. Promises of help began to pour in from all parts of the Empire; at home steps were at once taken to detain Austrian and German reservists, and to seize or capture enemy ships within reach of British or French cruisers or lying in British ports. Twenty such vessels were taken on the first day of the war; the following days added many others and German oceanic trade was stopped at once. The British Fleets, brought together at Spithead (p. 158) had taken up their stations in the North Sea, and cruisers had been sent to protect the great trade routes from German warships, or from "auxiliary cruisers" in the shape of fast German liners, armed, and partly coaled, at sea. Horses and motor-lorries were hastily requisitioned for war purposes, and even harvesting was impeded by the (illegal) seizure of farm horses by too zealous agents; and preparations, perfectly well known in the ports, were actively made for the despatch to France of the British Expeditionary Force; but it was only by inadvertence that hints of their nature were published in the Press, and most of the papers patriotically suppressed the news. Then began that system of secrecy as to movements and details, loyally observed by all concerned and rigorously enforced by authority, which was kept up throughout the year by all the belligerents. Baffling to the contending commanders, it was still more so to the contemporary historian; and, for the first few days, it obscured the gravity of the contest.

The first day of war was marked in the Commons by the announcements of the resignations of Ministers (p. 173), of the violation of Belgian neutrality, and of an impending Vote of Credit—which was loudly cheered—for 100,000,000l.; and then two war measures were passed almost without debate. The first amended the procedure in Prize Courts in accordance with the findings of a recent Departmental Committee, the second empowered the Crown, in time of war or national emergency, to impose restrictions on aliens, especially with a view to the removal or detention of spies. Next, on the adjournment, the Chancellor of the Exchequer made his statement on the financial position. The emergency, he said, was due to temporary causes, largely to the stoppage of remittances from abroad to enable the discount market to meet its liabilities; there was no failure of credit. After conferences at the Treasury it had been decided not to suspend special payments, but to take steps to suspend the Bank Charter Act, in order to economise the supply of gold. After strongly condemning the hoarding of gold as helpful to the enemy, he stated that on August 7 Government notes for 1l. and 10s. would be issued, convertible into gold at the Bank of England, postal orders would also be legal tender, and similarly convertible, and would be issued free of charge. The Bank rate would be reduced to 6 per cent., and the moratorium extended for a month. Bills and cheques would be dealt with as usual, subject to the discretion of the bankers in preventing an abnormal withdrawal of gold. This satisfactory account of the position was fully endorsed by Mr. A. Chamberlain.

Late that evening a White Paper was officially published (Cd. 1467) containing correspondence respecting the European Crisis. It embodied nearly 160 documents, and could not be rapidly grasped; but it eventually enabled the British people to form their own opinion as to the responsibility for the war. Later it was republished, with additions, in pamphlet form at the price of a penny, and German and French translations were circulated abroad.[2]

The course of events, so far as Great Britain was concerned in them, in the fortnight preceding the war, was as follows: The Austrian Note to Serbia, which was in fact an Ultimatum, was delivered at Belgrade on July 23, and a reply was demanded within forty-eight hours. Sir Edward Grey, while earnestly deprecating any time-limit to this Note, had laid stress, before knowing its contents, on the appalling consequences that would follow should it lead to a European war between four Powers—a complete collapse of European credit and industry which, in great industrial States, would mean "a state of things worse than that of 1848." But he declined to express an opinion on the merits of the Austro-Serbian dispute. Between the presentation of the Note and the expiry of the time-limit, however, Great Britain made three attempts at peace. In conjunction with Russia, whose Foreign Minister described the Note as "provocative and immoral," she urged the extension of the time-limit on Austria, and pleaded with Germany to do the same. Next, she proposed that Germany, France, and Italy should work together at Vienna and St. Petersburg in favour of conciliation. Italy, France, and Russia assented; Germany had no objection, if Austro-Russian relations became threatening. Thirdly, the Russian, French, and British representatives at Belgrade were instructed to advise Serbia to go as far as possible to meet Austria. Serbia, in fact, conceded very nearly all the Austrian demands; but Austria had determined on war, and Germany, when Sir Edward Grey urged her to persuade Austria to accept the reply, merely "passed on" his message to Vienna. The time-limit having expired, Sir Edward Grey proposed (July 26), by telegram to the British representatives at Paris, Berlin, and Rome, a Conference in London between himself and the French, German and Italian Ambassadors, to discuss the best means towards a settlement. France and Italy accepted; Russia agreed, if direct explanations with Vienna should prove impossible; Germany, however, said that the Conference would practically amount to a court of arbitration, but subsequently "accepted in principle" mediation by the four Powers between Austria and Russia. But Austria now declared war against Serbia. On July 28, however, Sir Edward Grey was informed through the German Ambassador that Germany was endeavouring to mediate between Russia and Austria. He then sent word to the German Government asking them, if they did not like the Conference he had proposed, to suggest any other form of mediation.

The German Chancellor's answer was to invite the British

Ambassador, Sir E. Goschen, to call on him, late at night, on July 29. He intimated that, should Austria be attacked by Russia, a European conflict would become inevitable; he thought it clear that Great Britain would not allow France to be crushed, but this was not Germany's aim; if Great Britain's neutrality were certain, Germany would promise, if victorious, to make no territorial acquisitions at the expense of France. But he was unable, on being asked, to give a similar undertaking in regard to the French colonies. Germany would promise to respect the integrity and neutrality of the Netherlands so long as her adversaries did likewise. German operations in Belgium, he said, depended on the action of France, but, after the war, Belgian integrity would be respected if Belgium had not sided against Germany. He hoped that these assurances might lead to an Anglo-German understanding, and ultimately to a neutrality agreement. Sir Edward Grey replied (July 30) with an absolute refusal; France, without further territory being taken from her in Europe, could be so crushed as to become merely subordinate to Germany, and it would be an indelible disgrace to Great Britain to make this bargain at the expense of France; nor could she bargain away any obligation or interest she had regarding Belgian neutrality. The one way of maintaining the good relations between Great Britain and Germany was by the co-operation of the two Powers to preserve the peace of Europe. But, if the peace of Europe could be preserved, he would endeavour to promote some arrangement to which Germany would be a party, by which she and her allies could be assured against any aggressive or hostile policy on the part of France, Russia, or Great Britain. He had desired and worked for this as far as possible during the Balkan crisis, and, Germany having a like object, Anglo-German relations sensibly improved. The idea had hitherto been too Utopian for definite proposals, but he hoped for some more definite rapprochement between the Powers when the existing crisis was over.

On the same day, July 30, M. Cambon reminded Sir Edward Grey of a letter written by the latter on November 22, 1912, agreeing that while consultations between military and naval experts of their two nations did not pledge their Governments to co-operate, yet, should either Government have grave reason to expect an unprovoked attack by a third Power, or something that threatened the general peace, it should immediately discuss with the other whether, and by what measures, they should co-operate in opposition. M. Cambon also showed a letter from the French Foreign Minister, indicating that Germany was preparing to invade France. Sir E. Grey answered next day, after a Cabinet Council, that as yet Great Britain could not definitely pledge herself to intervene. The preservation of the neutrality of Belgium might be an important factor in determining the British attitude. Sir E, Grey also asked the French and German Governments, through their Ambassadors, whether they were prepared to respect Belgian neutrality provided it was not violated; and he asked the Belgian Government whether it would remain neutral. France and Belgium replied affirmatively at once. The German Government temporised, and eventually gave no answer, though Sir Edward Grey had warned the German Ambassador on August 1 of the probable effect of a violation on public feeling in Great Britain.

Meanwhile Russia and Austria were still negotiating (July 30, 31). On the 29th Germany had suggested to Austria that she should content herself with occupying Belgrade. That night Russia offered to stop all military preparations if Austria would recognise that the Austro-Serbian conflict had become a matter of general European interest, and would eliminate from the ultimatum the points involving a violation of the sovereignty of Serbia. Austria now agreed at last to discuss the whole question of her ultimatum, and Russia asked the British Government to assume the direction of these discussions.

But the hope of peace thus held out was wrecked by the German ultimatum requiring Russia to countermand her mobilisation. Germany, meanwhile, had gone further towards mobilisation than Russia; the German Secretary of State refused to discuss a last proposal from Sir Edward Grey for joint action of Great Britain, Germany, France, and Italy, pending a reply from Russia; and on the afternoon of August 1 Germany declared war against France. Next morning the Germans violated the neutrality of Luxemburg. British merchant ships had already been detained at Hamburg—though the detention was temporarily countermanded on representations from the British Ambassador—and the only question now left for the British Government was whether Great Britain should remain neutral. The determining factors proved to be the violation of Belgian neutrality and the danger to France; and the position was fully explained by the Foreign Secretary on August 3 (p. 170) and by the Prime Minister two days later.

The Prime Minister moved the Vote of Credit (Aug. 5) in a speech continuing the noblest traditions of Parliamentary eloquence. After an emphatic tribute to the unremitting efforts of the Foreign Secretary to preserve peace both in the Balkan crisis and to the very last stage of the recent negotiations, he quoted from the German Chancellor's communication to the British Ambassador at Berlin the appeal for British neutrality, the refusal to undertake to respect the integrity of the French colonies, and the treatment of what, to himself personally, had always been a crucial and almost the governing consideration—the position of the small States. The proposal, Mr. Asquith said, amounted to this—as regarded France, free licence to Germany to annex, if successful, the whole of the French possessions outside Europe; as to Belgium, the British reply to the pathetic appeal of the King of the Belgians would have been that "without her knowledge, we should have bartered away to the Power that was threatening her our obligation to keep our plighted word." He characterised the German proposal as infamous; and in return Great Britain was to get a promise—nothing more—from a Power "which was at that very moment announcing its intention to violate its own treaty obligations and inviting us to do the same. Had we even dallied or temporised with such an offer, we, as a Government, should have covered ourselves with dishonour." He quoted at length from Sir E. Grey's reply, which showed that the Foreign Secretary, who had already earned the title of the peacemaker of Europe, persisted to the last in his efforts for peace. "The war has been forced upon us." Every member of the Government had had before him throughout the vision of the almost unequalled suffering entailed by war, not only to the present generation, but to posterity and the whole prospects of European civilisation. Nevertheless, they had thought it to be the duty as well as the interest of Great Britain to go to war. They were fighting, first, to fulfil a solemn international obligation; secondly, to vindicate the principle that small nationalities were not to be crushed, in defiance of international good faith, by the arbitrary will of a strong and overmastering Power. He believed no nation ever entered into a great struggle—and this was one of the greatest in history—with a clearer conscience and stronger conviction that it was fighting, not for aggression or the maintenance of its own interest, but for principles whose maintenance was vital to the civilised world. "With the full conviction not only of the wisdom and justice, but of the obligation to challenge this great issue," and in order to ensure that the whole resources of the Empire should be thrown into the scale, he asked for a Vote of Credit of 100,000,000l. not only for naval and military operations, but to assist the food supplies, promote the continuance of trade, industry, business, and communications, relieve distress, and generally for all expenses arising out of the state of war. This gave the Government a free hand, and the expenditure would be subject to the approval of the House. He asked also, as War Secretary, for a Supplementary Estimate for men for the Army. He had taken that office in order that the unfortunate conditions existing should be ended and complete confidence re-established; and he believed and knew that it had been. There was no more loyal and united body, none in which the spirit and habit of discipline were more deeply ingrained and cherished, than the British Army. It was unfair that his own attention should be divided, and Lord Kitchener, with great public spirit and patriotism, had undertaken the office. He was not a politician, and his acceptance did not identify him with any set of political opinions. On his behalf, the Prime Minister continued, he himself was asking for power to increase the Army by 500,000. India was proposing to send two divisions; every one of the Dominions had already tendered unasked the utmost help, in men and in money, that it could afford to the Empire in time of need. The mother country must set the example, while responding to these filial overtures with gratitude and affection. "We have a great duty to perform, a great trust to fulfil, and confidently we believe Parliament and the country will enable us to do it."

Mr. Bonar Law, speaking for the whole Opposition, gave their whole-hearted support to the Government. He had said in his first speech on foreign policy as Opposition leader (Nov. 27, 1911) that an Anglo-German war would be due to human folly; it was due to human folly and wickedness; but neither were in Great Britain. Though she was under no formal obligations to take part, the Triple Entente was understood to mean that, if any of its members were attacked aggressively, the others would be expected to aid. Berlin might have prevented war, but a miscalculation had been made about Russia and Great Britain. He endorsed entirely the Prime Minister's view of the position. The struggle was Napoleonism once again. "Thank Heaven, so far as we know, there is no Napoleon." There was danger, not of a scarcity of food, but of a fear of scarcity, and he warned the country against panic. With the command of the sea Great Britain would have freedom of trade with the colonies and the whole of the American Continent, without the competition of her enemies or her allies. He offered the Government the full services of any member of the Opposition.

After further debate, which exhibited the progress of the Liberal conversion to the necessity of the war, the motion was agreed to, and also the increase of the Army by 500,000 men and the Navy and Coastguard by 67,000.

Subsequently, on the second reading of the Appropriation Bill, the President of the Local Government Board summarised the measures to be taken to prevent or relieve distress. For the prevention of unemployment, manufacturers were making patriotic efforts to keep their businesses going, and working short time instead of discharging employees; additional employment would be provided by the Road Board, the Development Commission, and various Government Departments, while Distress Committees and Local Authorities were invited to plan relief works. As to relief, the Prince of Wales's Fund would, it was hoped, supersede local funds; local authorities were being asked to see to the feeding of school children, local representative committees were to be formed for the distribution of the Prince of Wales's Fund, and a Central Advisory Committee had been formed with himself as Chairman, and including Mr. Long, Mr. Burns, and Mr. Ramsay Macdonald. He invited suggestions. The Poor Law was kept in reserve, as a last line of defence.

The Prince of Wales issued his appeal, endorsed by the Queen, on August 6, and the response was immediate. In the first two days the subscriptions amounted to 400,000l.; they ultimately passed 4,000,000l. Queen Alexandra also issued an appeal for soldiers' and sailors' families, and hosts of other appeals followed for Red Cross and hospital work and other matters; to these also response was generous.

Meanwhile the British Navy had achieved its first success and suffered its first disaster. On August 5 the third Destroyer Flotilla, shepherded by H.M.S. Amphion, and patrolling the approaches to the Channel, found the small Hamburg-American converted liner Königin Luise laying mines off the estuary of the Thames. She was chased by a destroyer and sunk by a torpedo, some fifty being saved out of a crew of 130. Early next morning, however, the Amphion herself struck a mine and was sunk, and about 130 of the crew and one officer—a paymaster—were lost, besides twenty German prisoners. In officially announcing the disaster to the House of Commons (Aug. 7) the First Lord of the Admiralty said that this indiscriminate scattering of mines, imperilling even neutral merchantmen, was a new fact calling for the attention of the nations. He added, however, that the strict censorship of the Press permitted the rise of many alarming rumours, and a Press Bureau would therefore be appointed under Mr. F. E. Smith, M.P., which would give out "a steady stream of trustworthy information" from both the War Office and the Admiralty, and he emphatically commended the patriotic reticence as to war preparations shown by the Press. (The Press Bureau, however, hardly fulfilled this forecast.)

The first instalment of emergency war legislation was completed before the adjournment (Aug. 10) of both Houses as follows. The Defence of the Realm Act empowered the King in Council to issue regulations authorising the trial by court-martial and the punishment of persons contravening regulations designed to stop certain specified forms of espionage, such as obtaining information to assist the enemy, tapping wires, or blowing up railway bridges or docks. The Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks (Temporary Rules) Act extended the powers of the Board of Trade to make rules under the Patents and Designs Act, 1907, and the Trade Marks Act, 1908. Its object was essentially to enable the Board to allow the rights in patents or trade marks owned by enemies to be ignored in the United Kingdom during the War. An Electoral Disabilities Removal Act prevented members of the Militia, Reserves, Yeomanry, and Territorial Forces from being disqualified by absence on the military or naval service of the Crown, or by the grant of poor-law relief towards their families during such absence. Another Act enabled the Government to requisition food, forage and stores for the Army; another empowered it to requisition foodstuffs withheld "unreasonably," i.e. in order to raise their price. Finally, a Housing Act revived for one year, in order to reduce unemployment, the powers conferred on the Government by the dropped clause of the new Housing Act (post, p. 209). The Board of Agriculture in rural districts, the Local Government Board in towns, were authorised to acquire land and buildings and to arrange for housing with local authorities or authorised societies. It was explained that they would proceed by lending money to such societies, and use the other powers given them only in the last resort. This Bill was amended, at the instance of certain Unionists, so as to require the concurrence of the Development Commission—an amendment to which some Liberals reluctantly agreed in order to avoid imperilling the Bill. This done, the Houses adjourned for a fortnight, and it was announced that the leaders would attempt to avert controversial debates.

The efforts to compose the Home Rule conflict were not entirely successful (post, p. 203); but less menacing differences were settled or suspended at once. The contest in the London building trade, which had been somewhat mitigated in July by sectional submissions on the part of several of the Trade Unions concerned, was settled on August 6 by the abandonment of the project of a general lock-out by the masters, and the withdrawal on the part of the men of their refusal to work with non-unionists; and settlements were also effected of a dockers' strike at Liverpool, of various sectional railway disputes, and of a coal strike in South Wales, which for a day or two had seemed likely to interfere with the supply of coal for the Fleet. Political propaganda, too, was formally suspended, notably by the Women's National Liberal Association and the Land Union; and the appointment of Earl Kitchener as a non-political War Minister was followed by rumours of the impending establishment of a coalition Government. The only approach made to this, however, consisted in the invitations to Mr. Austen Chamberlain, Mr. Long, Mr. F. E. Smith, and other Unionist leaders, to give their counsel and assistance in various departments to the Government; and they accepted cordially. A general amnesty was announced (Aug. 11) both for suffragist prisoners and for persons convicted of offences in connexion with industrial disturbances; and both the non-militant and the militant groups of the suffrage societies provisionally abandoned their agitation (though a few of the militants made a scene at the Home Office on August 27), and organised themselves for the relief, in various ways, of the women and children sufferers by the war. Admirable work was done in these directions by the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies, and by the Women's Emergency Corps; and Miss Christabel Pankhurst, on her return from Paris a little later, repaid the Government by speaking at meetings designed to encourage recruiting for the "new Army."

Earnest appeals had already been issued for recruits; the response was immediate; and on August 9 Earl Kitchener, as War Minister, issued a circular to Lord-Lieutenants of Counties and Chairmen of County Territorial Associations, asking for 100,000 men to form a new Army. Recruits came in for it at the rate, at first, of 3,000 daily; most of the members of the Universities' Officers' Training Corps applied for commissions in the Territorials or Special Reserve; those who asked to be appointed to the latter were offered commissions in this "New Army," and sent (if they accepted) to officers' training camps, whence they were despatched by instalments to join their units elsewhere. Retired officers and non-commissioned officers largely returned to the colours and were used in these units, which formed additional "Service Battalions" of the existing infantry regiments, their numbers following those of the Territorial Battalions. This Army was formed into six (territorial) divisions each of three brigades. By the end of the year there were also a second and a third new Army formed, or in process of formation, on the same lines. The officers' training camps, however, had been given up.

The Navy, meanwhile, was active. Cruisers were guarding the great trade routes and patrolling the North Sea; a German submarine attack on the First Cruiser Squadron was repulsed, and it was announced on August 10 that the German submarine U 15 had been sunk by H.M. cruiser Birmingham. The German cruiser Karlsruhe had been surprised (Aug. 7) by H.M.S. Bristol 200 miles south of Bermuda while coaling from the Hamburg-American liner Kronprinz Wilhelm and had escaped after a 200 miles' chase; the German battle cruiser Goeben and the light cruiser Breslau, after the latter had shelled Tunis, escaped from a pursuing Allied Fleet through the Straits of Messina, and proceeded to Constantinople, where they were bought by the Porte. (Rear-Admiral Berkeley Milne, commanding the Mediterranean squadron and Rear-Admiral Troubridge, commanding the pursuing fleet, were exonerated from responsibility for their escape.)

Further events were reassuring for the British public. The German wireless station at Dar-es-Salaam, the only good harbour in German East Africa, was destroyed (Aug. 9) by a British force; another British force occupied Togoland in West Africa (Aug. 7); and Japan (Aug. 5) and Portugal (Aug. 10) formally announced that they recognised the obligations imposed by their respective alliances with Great Britain.

Help was tendered lavishly from the Dominions and Crown Colonies; at home private houses and other buildings were freely offered for hospital purposes, yachts were converted by their owners into hospital ships, and the great London hospitals allotted beds for the wounded. Great activity—sometimes marked by zeal rather than knowledge—was shown in preparing for Red Cross work, and in making clothes for soldiers and others. The Queen issued an appeal to all needlework guilds throughout the British Isles (Aug. 10) to send in underclothing for soldiers and sailors, and ordinary garments for their wives and children and such of the civil population as might suffer through unemployment; steps were taken locally to consider how distress might be mitigated, and the newspapers were full of suggestions for help. But, after the first shock, the great mass of British citizens kept their heads, responded as far as possible to the call for "business as usual," and prepared to face bravely the prospect of lessened income—already visible in the withholding of many interim dividends—and the huge sacrifices demanded by the contest.

In two respects only there had been at the outset a tendency to panic. Before the Bank Holiday there had been some attempt by private persons to lay in large stores of food, and to draw gold from the banks; when the shops reopened on August 4, there was a rush to buy provisions in many great provincial cities; next day the alarm spread to London; the great stores were besieged; one of them had to close its provision department, another refused to supply customers with more than ordinary quantities; many of the small shops were speedily sold out; in the East End certain wholesale dealers, to encourage a rise in prices, actually provided purchasers with money; and, in the West End and some southern residential towns on that day and for some days afterwards, well-to-do people personally loaded hundredweights of stores into their own motor-cars, and packed their houses to the roof. But there was no real lack of foodstuffs; steps were taken at once by the Government to keep open the foreign sources of supply by a scheme of insurance against war risks; it took over the flour mills; and a Consultative Committee on Food Supplies met the representatives of certain great distributive companies and of the Grocers' Federation, representing some 17,000 shops, and lists of maximum retail prices were issued, as given below. The interruption was mainly in the supply of sugar from the Continent, and in that of butter, bacon, and eggs from Denmark. The following list (given in The Times, Aug. 7) shows the first effect of the war on wholesale prices.