It has been stated in certain newspapers that Mr. Chamberlain has refused the Viceroyalty of India in consequence of the weak state of his health, and that for the same cause he is likely to vacate shortly the Chancellorship of the Exchequer. All I can say is that on the Treasury Bench he betrays no outward sign of this regrettable debility when dealing with critics of the Treasury. It is not easy to puncture the æs triplex of Mr. Bottomley, but two words from Mr. Chamberlain did it this afternoon.
Sir Robert Horne got a second reading for the Dyes Bill, a measure which he commended as being necessary to protect what is a key-industry both in peace and war. Dye-stuffs and poison-gas are, it seems, inextricably intermingled, and unless the Bill is passed we shall be able neither to dye ourselves nor to poison our enemies.
Wednesday, December 8th.—The Agriculture Bill found one thoroughgoing supporter in the Duke of Marlborough, an "owner-occupier" so enamoured of Government control that he desires to see the whole of the ditches and hedges of England administered out of public funds; and a host of critics, friendly and otherwise. Lord Chaplin, though he thought the Bill one of the worst ever introduced, declined to vote against the Second Reading; Lord Harris believed that it would make very little difference one way or the other; Lord Ribblesdale, as an old-fashioned Free Trader, would have nothing to do with it; Lord Lovat was of opinion that as an insurance for our food supply it would not compare with a Channel Tunnel; and Lord Buckmaster feared that it would rather strengthen than allay the demand for land nationalisation. The Government approached the division in some trepidation and were the more rejoiced when, in an unusually big House, the Second Reading was carried by 123 votes to 85.
But for the self-sacrifice of Mr. Speaker the Commons would have made themselves ridiculous this evening. Major Archer-Shee wanted to have up a certain newspaper for breach of privilege in endeavouring to dictate to Members how they should vote. He obtained leave to move the adjournment and would doubtless have provided the peccant journal with a valuable free advertisement had not Mr. Lowther, reckless of his reputation for infallibility, suddenly remembered that motions for the adjournment were intended for criticising the Government and not for rebuking irresponsible outsiders. At his request the gallant Major withdrew his motion, and The Daily —— lost its advertisement.
Invigorated by this episode the House—or what was left of it—resumed the Report stage of the Ministry of Health Bill. The debate was remarkable for the brevity of some of the speeches. Sir Rowland Blades set a good example to new Members by making a "maiden" effort in a minute and a half. But his record was easily beaten by Mr. Sexton, who found ten seconds sufficient for expressing his opinion that the fact that the House was trying to legislate in the small hours was sufficient proof of the necessity of extending the laws of lunacy. "Si argumentum requiris circumspice," he might have said as he gazed upon the recumbent and yawning figures around him.
Thursday, December 9th.—Mr. Bonar Law enumerated a portentous list of measures which the House of Commons must pass if it wants to enjoy its Christmas holidays in peace. Lord Hugh Cecil wanted to know what was the use of passing "all these foolish little Bills." Mr. Pemberton Billing had another solution for the difficulty and asked, "Why not pass them all ad hoc?" meaning, it is supposed, "en bloc."
Well might the Prime Minister remark at Question-time that he welcomed the attacks of a certain section of the Press on the "Wastrels" because then he knew the Government was all right. Mr. George Lambert made a lively speech in support of his proposal to "ration" the Government to a sum of £808,000,000—the amount Mr. Chamberlain had said would suffice for a normal year. But his criticisms were too discursive to be really dangerous, and his condemnation of "sloppy Socialism" put up the backs of the Labour Party.
The Chancellor Of the Exchequer reminded the House that when he talked of a "normal Budget" he had been careful to add, "but not this year, next year or the year after," which sounds suspiciously like the nursery formula, "This year, next year, sometime, never."
Still the great majority of the Members were only too anxious to be convinced, and passed by a huge majority the "blanketing" amendment of Sir Godfrey Collins in favour of economy in the abstract. I don't know how this is to be squared with the Prime Minister's theory that it is the business of the Government "to see that the population is contented." That sounds a little like panem et circenses—a policy which did not work out cheaply.
Friday, December 10th.—With the air of one who has something fresh and strange to impart the Prime Minister informed the House of Commons to-day that in regard to Ireland "the Government are determined on a double policy." The novelty presumably consists in putting those old stagers, conciliation and coercion, hitherto only tried tandem-fashion, into double harness. Martial law is to be introduced in certain of the most disturbed districts, and at the same time such Sinn Fein M.P.'s as are not "on the run" are to be called into conference. On the face of it the prospect looks unpromising, but happily Ireland is essentially the place where nothing happens save the unexpected.