radical reconsideration, and, where necessary, revision of existing arrangements. The time had come for the convocation of a great Conference of the Powers who were mainly interested in the Reparation question. The situation was too difficult and threatening to be dealt with by any subordinate authority—even the League of Nations. With the assistance of America-which he was convinced would be forthcoming-he believed that such a Conference could even now devise means for setting Germany on her feet and enabling her to pay in reparations a sum which would be both reasonable in itself and beneficial to the recipients. But it was an indispensable condition of Germany's recoveryand he gave this not as his own opinion but as that of all the experts whom he had consulted-that the French occupation of the Ruhr should cease, or at least be rendered "invisible." He pointed out that if the Ruhr should be considered-as the French official view inclined to consider it-as a "productive pledge," to be worked by the occupying authorities in default of official reparation payments by the German Government, then its occupation would be a direct exploitation of German territory entirely unprovided for in the Versailles Treaty. By the negotiations which General Degoutte was carrying on with German industrialists over the head of the German Government, the French had already commenced a "revision" of the Treaty, much as they hated the word. Besides, the British Government had solemnly declared the whole Ruhr occupation to be illegal. They were therefore once more back in 1914 when they had gone to war to prevent a treaty being regarded as a "scrap of paper." He cautioned the British people against accepting any invitation to join in the spoils of the Ruhr. Such a step could only bring shame and humiliation on England, and besides he did not believe there would in any case be any great spoils. He pressed England to do all in its power to prevent Germany from going to pieces, an event which would throw the Continent of Europe into chaos, and profoundly affect her own industrial position and political relationships. He then called attention pointedly to the menace of French militarism, and deprecated a policy of excessive generosity on the part of England or America which would have the effect of enabling France still more effectively to foster and subsidise militarism on the Continent. mitted that France had been left in the lurch by Great Britain and America through not obtaining the Treaty of Guarantee which had been promised her, and had naturally adopted a policy of force as an alternative. But France knew from her own history and traditions that there was a nobler way, and he appealed to France in the day of her victory and greatness not to forget her noble historic mission as the great bearer of the liberal tradition in Europe.

As General Smuts's speech was broadcasted, it was actually heard by vast numbers of people in all parts of the country, many of whom would otherwise have taken no heed of it. There

could be no question that it echoed the sentiments of the majority of the people. It found particular favour with the Bishops, who took active steps to disseminate it. The general opinion was that General Smuts had acted as the mouthpiece of the Government and the Conference, and his speech consequently raised hopes that new developments were at hand.

These hopes were strengthened by a speech delivered on the same evening (October 23) by Mr. Harvey, the retiring American Ambassador, at a farewell dinner given to him by the Pilgrims. He boldly asserted that if America abstained from coming to the assistance of Europe, it was simply because she was not asked. Eleven months ago, he said, Secretary Hughes had gone as far as diplomatic usage permitted, and, without even requiring a formal request from any Power, had offered to provide American adjudication. America came to the door of Europe, but found the door closed. The United States did the only thing it could do in the circumstances-it went home. To-day the need of a financial plan to save Europe from economic disaster was obviously not less imperative, and while Secretary Hughes could hardly renew his proffer without seeming to be intrusive, there could be no question of the American Government's entire willingness to take part in such an Economic Conference as originally suggested, if asked to do so by all the Allies chiefly concerned in German reparations. Under President Coolidge, as under President Harding, the United States stood quite ready to help in any practicable way to promote recuperation and re-establishment of economic stability throughout the world. As he graphically expressed it, they were willing to come in as soon as they were asked, but they could not be expected to smash in the door; the Monroe Doctrine forbade.

Concurrently with the Imperial Conference, and conformably to Mr. Bonar Law's announcement of April 9, an Economic Conference of Empire representatives was held to discuss economic matters affecting the Empire as a whole. The meetings of the two Conferences took place as a rule on alternate days, so that the Premiers who had come for the Imperial Conference might if they chose be present at the Economic Conference, the delegates to which were mostly Ministers of Finance. The first meeting of this Conference was held on October 2. It was presided over by the President of the Board of Trade, Sir Philip Lloyd-Greame, who in his opening address explained the purpose of the Conference and outlined the work before it.

Dealing in the course of his remarks with the particular needs of England, the Minister said that her export trade, on which of course she mainly depended, was to-day still far below its prewar volume. The deficiency was reflected in unemployment of a duration and on a scale without precedent. Steady employment could only be restored and maintained if they could wipe out the deficit in their export trade, and indeed, do something

1923.]

Imperial Economic Conference.

[113 more, since owing to the growth of population and the increased efficiency of methods of production a larger volume of trade was necessary than before the war to maintain employment. The vital problem for them, therefore, was the problem of markets, and they naturally looked to the Dominions and Colonies as the most likely field. The Empire would of course in the fulness of time develop of its own accord; but in this time of their greatest need they were forced to ask whether they could not anticipate the development. If they could follow a bold and businesslike policy of accelerating the development of the Empire and its resources, then they would find immediate relief in their present difficulties and bring about a greater and quicker increase in the wealth and strength of all parts of the Empire. The agenda of the Conference set forth the factors in this problem. Its subjects fell into three broad classes. The first was Empire Settlement. The Empire Settlement Act had been a real contribution to the solution of the problem, and had established a sound base on which to build. It would be their duty to consider how to utilise the resources of the Act to the best advantage. Closely allied with the problem of settlement was that of financial co-operation between the Mother Country and the Dominions. He hoped it would be possible to devise for the purposes of Imperial development an instrument similar to the Trade Facilities Act in England. The rate of development in any State was normally limited by its own immediate financial capacity. But if the normal rate of development could be accelerated, that was good policy and good business. The growth of cotton within the Empire was a case in point; the more England could derive from the Dominions and Colonies, the better it would be for both parties. Thirdly, there was the analogous question of Imperial Preference. England was appreciative of the preferences she had received under Colonial tariffs, and had definitely established the principle of Imperial Preference in her own more limited fiscal system. They would wish to apply that principle to develop still further the development of Imperial products and Imperial resources.

Speeches were made in reply by the representatives of Canada (Mr. Mackenzie King), New Zealand (Mr. Massey), South Africa (General Smuts), the Irish Free State (Mr. McGrath), Newfoundland (Mr. Warren), India (Mr. Innes), and the Colonies and Protectorates (Mr. Ormsby-Gore). The reception accorded to Sir Philip Lloyd-Greame's speech was throughout sympathetic, but a few friendly criticisms were offered. Mr. Mackenzie King put in a caution against expecting too much from Government action. He pointed out that it was individual initiative on the part of labour, merchants, manufacturers, and investors of capital which had made British trade and industry the world over what it was, and it was to individual initiative that countries must look in the future even more than in the past. His own view was that one of the greatest services

H

that Government could render to-day was to clear the channels of trade and communication of obstructions, and to make as free as possible the movement of men and money throughout different parts of the Empire. General Smuts insisted that the Colonies should retain their full freedom of fiscal action, pointing out that it was in the fiscal field that the Dominions first obtained their independence. At the same time he denied that there was any conspiracy, as some people seemed to think, to make a concerted attack on the fiscal policy of England. In regard to preference he said he did not want to bargain. South Africa had many years ago given a preference to British products and claimed nothing in return. But England could not fairly claim that the Dominions should in very large numbers take immigrants from the British Isles and at the same time refuse to help the Dominions by taking the produce of the work of their hands. He noted with pleasure that the British Government had of its own accord embarked on a policy of improved communications. He regarded communications as of the essence of the Empire, and was afraid that unless they succeeded in solving some of the more urgent problems of communications it would be almost impossible to hold the Empire together.

The speech of the President of the Board of Trade made it clear that the principal subject which would come before the Conference was that of Imperial Preference. The Conference, · however, was unwilling to come to grips with this matter in the absence of Mr. Bruce, the Australian Premier, who was expected in a week's time, and who was known to have important suggestions to make. In the meanwhile, on October 5, it listened to an interesting account from the Chairman of the Oversea Settlement Committee, Lieut.-Colonel Buckley, on Empire settlement. He said that the Empire Settlement Act which became law on May 31, 1922, empowered the Secretary of State for the Colonies, acting on the advice of the Oversea Settlement Committee, to co-operate with the Dominion Governments or with public authorities in carrying out schemes for the assistance of people in England who wished to settle overseas. The number of persons who had hitherto proceeded abroad with assistance accorded under the Act was relatively small-23,479 to Australia, 4,502 to New Zealand, and 3,857 to Canada, making a total of 31,832. Their actual cash commitments amounted to a total of 382,000l. as against authorisations of 1,500,000l. up to March 31 and 3,000,000l. for the current financial year. These results, he admitted, were disappointing, the numbers who had gone overseas being infinitesimal in comparison with the needs of the movement, and falling far short of the total number contemplated for absorption, which was 95,000 a year. The meagreness of this result could not be put down to any lack of attention on the part either of the Home or the Dominion Governments. He thought the primary difficulty in the way

of the rapid expansion of settlement was economic. The causes which brought about unemployment hindered migration; it was good times and good trade which encouraged would-be settlers to launch forth, and these conditions had not existed during the past two years. Further, in England the policy of Empire settlement had met with opposition from certain extreme elements, which widely advertised every case of failure; and in the case of Australia and New Zealand distance also acted as a deterrent. Whatever might be the best way of overcoming these difficulties, he was convinced that the policy underlying the movement was a great and noble one, and vital to the future of the Empire.

On October 6 four Dominion Prime Ministers-Mr. King, Mr. Massey, General Smuts, and Mr. Warren-and the Maharajah of Alwar went out to Wembley, on the north-west of London, to inspect the progress of the British Empire Exhibition which was in course of erection there with a view to being opened in 1924. After first being mooted the idea of the Exhibition had for some time hung fire, and fears were entertained that it would not materialise, but owing to the energetic efforts of Sir W. Joynson-Hicks a start had been made early in the year, and there was now every prospect that the Exhibition would be an unqualified success. General Smuts laid the foundation of the South African pavilion before a gathering of South Africans in London and others. The Premiers were entertained to luncheon by the Duke of Devonshire, who in the name of the gathering sent a telegram to the Prince of Wales, President of the Exhibition, who was then in Ottawa in Canada. Proposing" Success to our great Imperial Project," he said that it was intended to make the Exhibition an Empire Exhibition in the truest sense of the word, and it was expected that every part and product of the Empire would find a place in it. By the time it was opened a sum of 10,000,000l. would have been spent on it. Mr. Mackenzie King said that "Our great Commonwealth Project" would be perhaps more applicable than "Imperial Project" as a description of the purpose of the Exhibition, which was to demonstrate the common weal of all the members of one great family. The word Empire had no terrors for him, or, he thought, for anyone in the British Empire, but it was advisable that words which they themselves fully understood should not be allowed to create a false impression in the minds of others. He thought the outstanding memory of visitors to the Exhibition would be that the British Empire delighted not in uniformity but in diversity. The different parts of the Empire retained their individual identities and national aspirations, but shared in a unity and common interest which were good for all concerned. The Exhibition would also, in the present state of the world, offer an object lesson in the work of peace. Militarist and industrial activities were found constantly wrestling with each other in the history of mankind. The world had seen the