BRITISH INFORMATION SERVICES
AN AGENCY OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT
OF THE DAY
LORD HALIFAX, British Ambassador to the United States, January 24, 1.44.
Fortifying the Partnership of the Commonwealth.
C. R. ATTLEE, Deputy Prime Minister, December 31, 1943.
The New Year's Hopes. ( tjL rr
LORD BEAVERBROOK, Lord Privy Seal, January 19, 1944. -
Plans for Development of Civil Aviation. ,.
LORD WOOLTON, Minister of Reconstruction, January 14, 1944.
Problems of the Future.
LORD HALIFAX, British Ambassador to the United States, January 28, 1944.
British Relations with India.
CHUTER EDE, Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education,
January 20, 1944. r *
The Teacher and the Child. I '
Vol. II, No. 2 February 1944
NEW YORK . . . 30 ROCKEFELLER PLAZA . .. Circle 6-5100
WASHINGTON, D. C.. . 1336 NEW YORK AVENUE, N.W. Executive 8525
rflGO . 360 NORTH MICHIGAN AVENUE Andover 1733
? 260 CALIFORNIA STREET . . Sutter 6634
British Ambassador to the United States
Toronto, January 24, 1944
A hundred years is a long time in the life of any organization; and for this
reason, among others, I feel it a real privilege to be here tonight in one of the
greatest cities in the North American continent to celebrate the hundredth birthday
of the Toronto Board of Trade.
For this is more than, the birthday of an organization. The Board of Trade
has played a notable part in the development of this city. The history of the
one is inseparable from the history of the other as that of two persons who have
grown up together.
It is by the vigor and enterprise of her sons that Toronto today occupies so
proud a place among the cities of our Commonwealth; and surely no single
organization represents and expresses those qualities more faithfully than does
the Board of Trade.
To say that is to say a good deal more. I need not remind you of what Toronto
stands for in the life of this Dominion. Nor need I remind you of its place in
the remarkable progress of the last half-century, which before the war had con-
verted Canada into one of the leading industrial countries of the world, and during
the war has made her a veritable supply base for the Armed Forces of the United
Nations. We may be sure that this progress will not only continue, but will
assume a new importance when the war is over. For Canada, as for the United
Kingdom, a primary need in any postwar economic arrangements that may be
made is to secure full employment of both people and resources; and this can
only be satisfied by an expanding world economy, in accordance with the principles
to which you and we have subscribed.
For the fulfillment of this purpose we are pledged to great and difficult tasks,
which will demand the fullest measure of co-operation, especially between the
members of the Commonwealth and your great neighbor, the United States; and
in all this Canada, from her geographical position, her rapidly developing indus-
try, and her vast natural resources, is obviously and intimately concerned.
These matters are much in the minds of all of us today, and especially in the
minds of members of a body like the Board of Trade, with its long record of
public service. But you would, I am sure, be the first to recognize that these
problems which lie before us are political as well as economic; and so tonight,
when you have every right to look back with pride on the past hundred years, and
forward with confidence to the next hundred, it will not perhaps. be out of place
if, for a few minutes, I attempt a rather similar task in a rather wider field.
A hundred years is indeed a long time in the history of an organization; but
it is not very long in the history of a country; and some may find it strange to
recall tonight that only a little more than a hundred years have passed since Lord
Durham wrote his famous T.eport, which was to be so large a landmark in the
history of Canada, as in th c of all the Dominions.
The Anomaly of the Commonwealth
Less than a century separates the Durham Report from the Statute of West-
minster, and, as we look back upon the history of the Commonwealth, that period
stands out as a distinct, clear-cut stage in its development. In 1838, the Dominions
British Speeches of the Day
were still Colonies; in 1931, the process of peaceful development by which they
had reached complete equality of status with Great Britain was formally recorded
in Imperial Statute. That particular stage was over eight years before the whole
Commonwealth and Empire were subjected to the strains and stresses of a second
world war, which must have tested to the uttermost the strength and flexibility
of any political society.
I often think that to the outsider the British Commonwealth must surely appear
an almost inexplicable freak of nature. We can imagine the bewilderment of an
intelligent visitor from another planet on being confronted with its manifest con-
tradictions. He would see something of which the component parts were united
under a single Head, but constitutionally so ordered that while that Head, in his
capacity as King in Great Britain, might be at war with a foreign power, as King
in a Dominion he might continue to enjoy normal friendly relations with the enemy.
The visitor, baffled by this extraordinary confusion of functions, would suffer
a further shock if he went on to study what actually happened in September, 1939.
He would find that on September 3, Great Britain declared war on Germany;
that Australia and New Zealand declared war on the same day, and that South
Africa and Canada followed a few days later.
He might well wonder why. He would naturally be puzzled to determine
what possible interest the Polish Corridor could have for a Canadian, or Danzig
for an Australian, or the western frontier of Poland for a South African.
The Dominions had not been parties to the Treaty of Guarantee to Poland
which was the immediate cause of Great Britain's action. They were themselves
in no danger of direct attack. They had influenced, but had not been responsible
for, the foreign policy of Great Britain.
They had, it is true, been kept regularly informed of events, and been in con-
stant consultation. But the day-to-day control of policy had been in the hands of
a Minister whom they had not appointed, and who was responsible to a Parliament
in which they were not represented. In fact as well as in theory, they were
entirely uncommitted. The best proof of this reality is that Eire pursued, and still
pursues today, a policy of abstention and neutrality.
Yet, not only did the great Dominions enter the war without hesitation; they
showed at once that theirs was no formal acquiescence in a situation which, though
disagreeable in the extreme, could by no means be avoided. They realized that
Great Britain was the first line of their own defense. They immediately threw
all that they had in men, money, and material, into the struggle. They held nothing
back; and in the summer of 1940, when Britain faced the probability of invasion
and the possibility of conquest, they were unflinching in their support.
Comradeship in the War
Even now I find it hard to put into words all that this has meant to us. I am
not thinking only of the actual physical assistance, great as that is, which has
come and is coming to us from overseas. I am not even thinking only of your
valiant airmen, who fought beside ours in the battle of Britain; or of the Aus-
tralians, New Zealanders and South Africans, who helped to turn defeat into
victory in the Middle East and to conquer a great empire in Africa; or of those
stout-hearted troops you had sent over months before, and continually reinforced,
to strengthen a perilously weak defense; or of the Royal Canadian Navy on its
sleepless vigil in the North Atlantic.
I am thinking also of the sense of comradeship you gave us.
Fortifying the Partnership of the Commonwealth
In the grief and tragedy of the war, many mothers have drawn new strength
and courage from the example of their sons; and so the Old Country, in that
which was at once her darkest and her greatest hour, drew strength and courage
from the younger members of our family of nations.
When the history of those fateful days is written, I do not doubt that the
unshaken staunchness of the Commonwealth will be recognized as a decisive factor.
If once again Britain was "a bulwark for the cause of men," it was because when
the storm broke she was so stoutly buttressed. And had Britain not been able
to stand firm then, where would today be the United Nations, or where tomorrow
the certainty of victory, or in the future, hope of security and peace?
So much is surely incontestable, but because it is incontestable, there is a real
danger that, with this experience before our eyes, we may be tempted to conclude
that all is for the best in our affairs. Why, it may be said, should we tamper
with what has so stoutly met the stern challenge of these times? I think we should
pause before we accept that argument as final.
Equality of Status and Equality of Function
During the period of which I have spoken, between the burham Report and
the Statute of Westminster, the whole trend of development in the Dominions
was towards equality of status. But there was hardly an equivalent effort towards'
securing what I would call equality of function. By that I mean that while the
Statute of Westminster assured to each and every Dominion complete self-govern-
ment, it perforce left unsolved the more obstinate problems arising in the fields
of foreign policy and defense.
The essential unity of the Commonwealth, of course, owes much to the exist-
ence of a common Head, at once the living representative of the whole society
before the world, and the embodiment of history and tradition in which all parts
of the Commonwealth may feel themselves to have equal share and pride.
In a sense not the less real because few might be able to translate the instinctive
emotions into language, the Crown stands for an ideal of ordered life and service,
and is thus the interpreter to all its subjects of standards and purposes, which at
their best they would make their own. As a great Governor General of Canada,
the late Lord Tweedsmuir, once wrote:
"In any deep stirring of heart, the people turn from the mechanism of govern-
ment, which is their own handiwork and their servant, to that ancient, abiding
thing behind governments, which they feel to be the symbol of their past achieve-
ment and their future hope."
There was thus the unifying influence of a common Head. We were also at
one in seeing how directly the Nazi philosophy cut at the roots of our whole way
of life and how irreconcilable therefore was the difference between the Nazis and
ourselves. We do not always reflect that our belief in freedom is the direct out-
come of the value we have learned to attach to human personality; or remember
that the principal source of this reverence for personality has been the age-long
emphasis of Christian teaching upon the eternal worth of each human soul. We
have not always given these things much thought, and too often have been content
to live upon the accumulated capital of the past. But on the day that we realized
how near we were to losing this inheritance, we awoke to a new sense of what
That was true of Britain. It was equally true of the Great Dominions. But
when this has been said, it remains a fact that, much as the unity of the Common-
British Speeches of the Day
wealth owed to a common Head and a common thought upon the things that
matter most, it found little expression in outward form.
Responsibility in External Affairs
The right of each member to determine its own external affairs may mean a
gain or it may mean a loss. It is plainly a loss if, with our essential unity of ideal,
the responsibility for action which represents that unity is not visibly shared by
all. It is an immeasurable gain if on vital issues we can achieve a common
foreign policy expressed not by a single voice but by the unison of many.
So, too, in the field of defense, while there must be individual responsibility
there must also be a unity of policy. I suggest that in the years of peace it was
a weakness, which we should try to cure, that the weight of decision on many
problems of defense was not more widely shared.
That in fact all the Dominions save one entered the war with us is not sufficient
answer. Nor is the fact that they have made a total war effort which matches
that of the United Kingdom. For we must rightly concern ourselves not so much
with what happens when war has come, but with what in future we can do to
prevent it coming. The magnificent response of the Dominions in 1939 was not,
thank God, too late to save the cause for which the Commonwealth and Empire
stood and stands; but there is a real sense in which it was too late to save the peace.
I speak frankly, as I know you would have me speak. On September 3, 1939,
the Dominions were faced with a dilemma of which the whole world was aware.
Either they must confirm a policy which they had had only partial share in framing,
or they must stand aside and see the unity of the Commonwealth broken, perhaps
fatally and forever. It did not take them long to choose, and with one exception
they chose war.
But the dilemma was there, and having occurred twice in twenty-five years,
it may occur again. That is the point at which equality of function lags behind
equality of status. The Dominions are free-absolutely free-to choose their
path; but every time there is a crisis in international affairs, they are faced with
the same inexorable dilemma from which there is no escape.
What then is the solution? Well, there are, broadly speaking, two roads
which the Dominions may take. There is the road of national isolation. They
can choose in peace, and after full deliberation, the course that they rejected in
1939. They can say-and who should attempt to gainsay them?-that their
foreign policy will be unconcerned with any but their own immediate national
interests; that it will not reflect an underlying unity of ideal or strive towards
unity in action; that they will neither defend others, nor expect others to defend
I am not going to argue against such an attitude, least of all in days like these,
or in a city such as yours; beyond observing that isolationism is an old policy and
that, in the shrinking world where we all have to live today, it is not an easy
policy to pursue, and is unlikely to get easier.
Once upon a time, a great many people in Great Britain were isolationists in
the sense that they wished to avoid entanglement in the affairs of Europe; just
as in the United States there was an overwhelming opinion against becoming
involved in disputes outside the Western Hemisphere. Indeed it might be said
that in 1939 almost every country-certainly almost every small country-was
isolationist; and today the map of the world is strewn with the wreckage of small
states. With such a record of failure before us, they would be optimists in any
Fortifying the Partnership of the Commonwealth
country who supposed that such a policy would be more successful in the future
than it has been in the past.
"Fortify Our Partnership"
But for most of us there is a stronger and more compelling argument towards
choosing the second road. We believe that the British Empire has proved, not
once nor twice, but many times, a powerful and beneficient world-force. We
believe that without it the cause we uphold today would have been lost long ago;
and therefore that the remedy for the difficulties which I have tried to describe
is not that we and you should draw apart, but that we should try to fortify our
By that I do not mean that we should attempt to retrace our steps along the
path that led from the Durham Report to the Statute of Westminster. To do so
would be to run counter to the whole course of development in the Common-
wealth. But what is, I believe, both desirable and necessary is that in all the field
of interests, common to every part of the Commonwealth-in Foreign Policy, in
Defense, in Economic Affairs, in Colonial Questions and in Communications-
we should leave nothing undone to bring our people into closer unity of thought
It may be that we shall find it desirable to maintain and extend our present
wartime procedure of planning and consultation, which itself adapted and extended
the methods we practised in time of peace. The question admits of no easy answer.
It should be constantly in our minds, and I have no doubt that it will be among
the first problems to be considered, whenever the responsible ministers of the
Crown from every part of the Commonwealth are able once more to meet together.
But there is one thought which I could like to leave with you now. The
Statute of Westminster was in a sense a Declaration of Independence. But it was
more than that. It was also a Declaration of Interdependence, a recognition that
in the world of the twentieth century no country can live by itself and for itself
alone. It did not attempt to make a stereotyped pattern or mould to which the
Commonwealth must conform; but it did leave the greatest latitude for develop-
ment, in the conviction that, in working out our fate together, we should discover
that independence and interdependence, so far from being incompatible concep-
tions, were not only complementary but necessary to each other.
For surely that is true. Today we begin to look beyond the war to the reorder-
ing of the world which must follow. We see three great powers, the United States,
Russia and China, great in numbers, areas and natural resources. Side by side
with them is the United Kingdom, with a population of less than 50,000,000,
with a territory which could easily be contained in one of the larger States of the
American Union, and with natural resources which, though great in proportion
to her size, are by themselves scarcely comparable with those of her companions.
Not Britain Only, But the British Commonwealth and Empire
In the company of these Titans, Britain, apart from the rest of the Common-
wealth and Empire, could hardly claim equal partnership. It is none the less
likely that, when the war is ended, Western Europe, as never before, will look
to her for leadership and guidance. She has been the one inviolate fortress of
freedom in the West. Once again her people have shown their ancient virtue.
They have disclosed unsuspected reserves of strength. Much will be asked
British Speeches of the Day
Yet, while they will assuredly emerge from this war with a new self-confidence
and feel rightly proud of their achievement, they will certainly be poorer. They
will have drawn heavily upon their manpower and resources. They will have
spent their accumulated capital without stint. If, in the future, Britain is to play
her part without assuming burdens greater than she can support, she must have
with her in peace the same strength that has sustained her in this war. Not Great
Britain only, but the British Commonwealth and Empire must be the fourth power
in that group upon which, under Providence, the peace of the world will hence-
forth depend. There, summed up in a sentence, is the need as I see it.
To say this is to make no selfish claim. The unity of the Commonwealth is
no mere British interest. So far from being an obstacle, it is a condition necessary
to that working partnership with the United States, Russia and China to which
we look. If we are to play our rightful part in the preservation of peace, we can
only play it as a Commonwealth united, vital, and coherent. By so doing, and
only by so doing, can we hope to achieve the high purposes to which we are dedi-
cated by the suffering and sacrifice of war.
RT. HON. C. R. ATTLEE
Deputy Prime Minister
Broadcast, December 31, 1943
I suppose that most of us on New Year's Eve look back on the old year and
count our blessings and look forward to the New Year with hope. If we are
wise we also note our failings and resolve to correct them. It is a salutory custom.
Every one of us has had his or her own particular losses and gains in 1943, but
as a nation we can say thanks to the old year as it departs.
Let me just in retrospect recall some of its features. The expulsion of the
enemy from Africa, the invasion of Europe and the surrender of Italy. The
growing strength of our Air Offensive. The brilliant victories of the Russian
Armies. This year for the first time, instead of Russian winter successes being
followed by a German advance in the summer, the Russian attack has moved on
successfully throughout the whole year. In the Far East the Japanese advance
has been halted and month by month her outer ring of defenses in the islands
of the Pacific has been penetrated.
In the battle of the Atlantic after the difficult months at the beginning of the
year the anti-U-boat war has gone in our favor and Allied shipping resources
have been steadily growing. On the Continent of Europe the activities of the
resistance groups increasingly embarrass the enemy and tie down forces which he
urgently needs elsewhere. The year has seen many Allied conferences, culminating
in that at Cairo where Mr. Churchill and President Roosevelt conferred with
Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek and at Tehran where they held counsel with
Marshal Stalin. The full discussions of the leading statesmen and their staffs
resulted in complete agreement on the major strategy of the war. As the year
drew to a close we were relieved of our anxiety for the Prime Minister's health.
We were able to celebrate Christmas with the knowledge that he was convalescent,
while the Navy gave us a Christmas box last Monday in the sinking of the Scharn-
horst in the cold and dark of the northern sea.
Cold and dark is the outlook of Hitler and the Nazis for the New Year.
The passing year has been for their forces one of continual retreat and of failure
The New Year's Hopes
by land, sea and air. The Germans have felt the weight of the bombing weapon
which they used so ruthlessly and so lightheartedly against defenseless victims in
the day of their strength. The hour of reckoning has come and they know that 1944
will mean for them only heavier attacks. They still fight hard and skillfully but
the hope of victory is dead in them though some trust that a secret weapon may
enable them to postpone the inevitable. We can therefore close this year in a
spirit of thankfulness for the past and of hope and confidence for the future, but
we must not translate hope into relaxation or confidence into complacency. We
cannot tell what unexpected trials may lie ahead of us, for war is full of surprises.
We do know that in 1944 the war will blaze up into greater intensity than ever
before, and that we must be prepared to face heavier casualties.
You have just seen the announcement of the names of the British and Ameri-
can Commanders who will be responsible for the conduct of the great operations
of the coming year. They can be certain that the men in the Fighting Forces will
give them their fullest support. Let every one of us, each in his particular sphere,
resolve to do the same.
"We Must Keep Our Eyes On the Ball"
1944 may be the victory year, but it will only be so if we continue to put forth
our utmost efforts and if we allow nothing to divert us from our main purpose.
There is always a danger of slackening when things go well. How often have we
seen football teams with two or three goals in hand let up for a fatal few minutes
and lose the advantage they had gained. We must keep our eyes on the ball.
Let me give you one or two examples of how they may stray. For the testing
time ahead we need the most careful allocation of our limited manpower. There
is no surplus anywhere. I know there is a housing shortage, and I sympathize
with the sufferers. What can be done to alleviate their lot will be done, but
adequate labor is not available. War needs must come first. Again I know
that it will be hard on boys who have been training and looking forward to join-
ing the Fighting Services to have to go to the coal mines, but we must have
coal. It is as much a munition of war as guns or shells. The man who helps to
get it is taking part in the attack on the enemy just as much as a man who brings
up ammunition to the front line. Both of them serve the fighting men at grips
with the enemy. Neither of them would like to let him down.
But the need for devoting our utmost efforts to the attainment of victory does
not mean that we consider only the immediate future. It is the task of a Govern-
ment to look ahead and make plans. Thus even while the Battle of Britain was
raging and invasion threatened, the Government took the measures which made
possible Wavell's victories in Libya. Even while we were preparing for the defeat
of Rommel at El Alamein, everything was being keyed up for the entry of British
and American Forces into French North Africa. Plans have to be made for con-
ditions yet uncertain and have to be flexible enough to fit in with the shifting
We Cannot Wait to Make Plans
In the same way, despite our absorption in the war, we are preparing for the
problems which will confront us in the difficult period which will follow victory.
We cannot wait till time and circumstances are known. In the interim period
between the cessation of hostilities and the establishment of settled conditions-
and this may last some time-whatever Government may be in power in this
country will have to work on plans made well ahead. It is not possible to impro-
vise at short notice the change-over from war to peace, any more than it was easy
to transform a peace into a war organization.
British Speeches of the Day
If houses are to be built, as they must be built as soon as conditions allow,
the provision of plans, sites, materials and labor must be arranged for now.
If industry is to be restarted for peace production, plans for factory space,
raw materials, machinery and labor must be made now.
If we desire to have a system of education fully worthy of the nation we must
plan now, even though the provision of schools and teachers may delay the full
operation of the scheme.
The same thing applies to a national health service and a system of social
security and the provision of full employment.
If we desire the resumption of international trade on the basis of the utilization
of abundance we must have discussions now, within the British Commonwealth
and Empire and with other nations.
Work on all these things is going on, and on many other problems, for never
in any previous war has the peace organization of the country been so dislocated
by war. Not even in the last war was the fabric of European civilization so torn
as it has been in this.
In planning for peace as in planning for war the watchword of the Govern-
ment is first things first. Plans are being worked out, preparations are being
made by this Government, an all-Party administration, so that whatever Govern-
ment may have to deal with this interim period will be able to get work on
reconstruction without delay.
The Greatest Measure of Agreement
But necessarily the Government in framing these plans has to seek the greatest
measure of agreement. It has to work within the stern limitation of fact and
within the region of the possible. It must also take into account the effects that
policies for thq interim period are bound to have on the permanent structure of
society. Much of this preparatory work can be done by administrative action,
but legislation will also be required and Bills are now coming forward to Parlia-
ment. I hope that the present session is going to be a very fruitful one. This
business of preparing for peace is not going to be very easy. While there is, I
believe, a large measure of agreement on reconstruction problems, issues are bound
to arise on which strongly conflicting views are held. This is right and proper
in a free democracy such as ours. Our political parties are divided from each
other on points of principle honestly held. There are also sectional interests,
quite legitimate interests, the claim of which will be put forward. It is not the
least notable of the triumphs of democracy that during the war the points of view
of political parties and sectional interests have been subordinated to the supreme
need of winning the war. Can this also be done in order to make the vitally
necessary preparations for the change-over from war to peace? It is obvious that
if everyone stands out for his absolute demands and determines to fight to the
last ditch for them little progress will be made, but this is not in the tradition
of our British democracy. It is our way when a fair opportunity has been given
for debate and discussion, when everyone has put forward what he thinks to be
the best, for the greatest common measure of agreement to be accepted as the best
that can be done in the circumstances-those who agree to this resolving that on
a future occasion they will hope to get more of their own way.
I believe that the country will expect the Government to see that there is
available to all the citizens of this country work, food and shelter, and as many
other needs as can be satisfied. I am certain that men of all parties will do their
utmost to assist in this, and will not allow political differences or sectional interests
Plans for Development of Civil Aviation
to prevent essential work being done. There are two things of which, as a member
of the Government, I am very conscious. The first is the hopes and fears for the
future in the hearts and minds of these millions of men and women who are
serving the country so well, especially of the younger ones. I do not want to see
them the prey of bitterness and disillusion after the war is won. The second is
this. As I read in the lists of awards of the deeds of quiet heroism performed by
so many men and women in various walks of life, whether members of Fighting
Services, the Mercantile Marine, the A.R.P. Services, in industry or as ordinary
citizens, knowing that these are only a few of those who deserve recognition, I
think what a great people it is that I am privileged to serve, I think what nobility
resides in the ordinary man and woman. From this springs a great hope for the
If we face the difficulties of the world after the war with the spirit which has
inspired our people throughout these hard years, if we bring to the task of build-
ing the peace the unselfishness and idealism and courage displayed so widely, we
can establish peace on firm foundations reassert the moral law and banish from the
lives of our children the fear of want and the fear of war.
May I wish to you all health and happiness and victory in the New Year.
Lord Privy Seal
House of Lords, January 19, 1944
My Lords, I wish to deal first of all with two or three issues raised . before
attempting to discuss the policy of the Government in relation to civil aviation
. .The chosen instrument, the British Overseas Airways Corporation, is not a
monopoly; there is no monopoly at all. It has a monopoly of subsidies for over-
seas air traffic, but nothing else. So far as overseas air traffic by private companies,
shipping companies or other concerns may be carried on without any subsidy,
then there can be no objection on account of the statutory rights of the British
Overseas Airways Corporation. The same applies to aircraft transportation within
Great Britain. Air transportation within Great Britain is already the charge of
the railway companies; they have combined, and they have what is called Railway
Air Services. There is another line called Allied Airways to Orkney. These receive
no subsidies; they are independent lines, and they are not interfered with by any
statutory rights of the British Overseas Airways Corporation. That question of
the chosen instrument was raised only, I think, by my noble friend Lord London-
Another question which has run all through the debate is that of the status of
civil aviation in relation to the Air Ministry. I think the whole House has agreed
that there should not be any plan or proposal for removing civil aviation from
the care of the Air Ministry during the war. If that is so, it seems to me quite
foolish and futile to discuss the future of civil aviation in relation to the Air
Ministry at this time, for the Air Ministry has many issues to dispose of which
concern the future of civil aviation which cannot await transfer to another Ministry,
and it would be a pity to make the decision now to remove civil aviation from
British Speeches of the Day
the Air Ministry to another Ministry without placing responsibility on such other
Ministry for dealing with the policy relation to civil aviation so far as it concerns
the future. My noble friend Lord Rothermere indicated that he at any rate would
prefer that I should state the case of the Government in relation to civil aviation
before the debate was launched. I should be quite willing to do so at any time
if it were the pleasure of the House. A number of other questions raised by noble
Lords I propose to deal with in the course of my remarks on policy.
Types of Aircraft for Civil Aviation
First of all, I am asked what we are doing, what are our plans for civil aviation
and what is our immediate province. Since I spoke last, on October 20, we have
done a very great deal. In the first place, we have been making progress in pro-
viding types of aircraft for civil aviation. These are, of course, types suitable
for civil aviation, types which can be used and may be used, for military transport
during the war, but types which are essential for the purpose of providing civil
aviation with the necessary aircraft when the war is over. First of all, there is an
airplane which is known as the Brabazon. This is a very big project. The all-up
weight is designed to be more than 100 tons, with a speed of 250 miles an hour
and a capacity for fifty passengers and 2 tons of mail. The airplane will be
scheduled to cross the Atlantic in fifteen hours. The design of the Brabazon has
been begun, and the prototypes are actually on order, but do not on that account
expect a swift conclusion, because, of course, years must pass before a type so
completely new can be brought from the drawing board to the traffic route. We
owe a debt of gratitude to Lord Brabazon and to his colleagues for having laid
down the most ambitious aircraft program so far set in hand in this country.
The Secretary of State for Air and the Ministry of Aircraft Production have
taken into account the long time that must elapse before the Brabazon makes its
maiden journey, and it is for that reason that a project for another type has been
launched. The all-up weight is about 32 tons. You will say that is not much to
boast about compared with the Brabazon. But, just the same, it is a very fine
plane indeed. This new aircraft will have a cruising speed of 220 miles per hour,
will be fitted with de-icing means, and will be constructed in a form suitable for
pressurization. The journey over the North Atlantic in winter as well as summer,
with twelve passengers and luggage, will be an easy flight. This aeroplane is
named the Tudor. Its design is already in hand. The prototypes will be brought
out as soon as possible. Preparations for production will be undertaken. If it
is ready before the end of the war-and we expect it will be-it will be most
suitable for a military transport.
Aviation Must Be a Guarantee of International Solidarity
We are ready at any moment to enter into an international conference. I
cannot tell you when it will take place. But in our view when the time comes
our first concern will be to gain general acceptance of certain broad principles
whereby civil aviation can be made into a benign influence for welding the nations
of the world together into a closer co-operation. These principles must assure
to all countries a free and fair share in this new means of transportation. No
nation, great or small, except of course the guilty aggressor nations, must be
debarred from taking a full and equitable part in the upsurging development of
civil aviation that will follow the end of the war. It will be our aim to make
civil aviation a guarantee of international solidarity, a mainstay of the world's
peace. Of course, there are vital issues on which it will be necessary for the great
Powers to reach preliminary agreement. We are ready for such discussions at any
time. At present we are waiting on the Americans to complete their surveys.
Plans for Development of Civil Aviation
*In particular the question of bases has been widely canvassed. We have many
bases at our disposal. They are scattered all over the Empire, and in other lands
too the needs of war have caused us to contstruct airfields suitable for peace as
well as for war. I do not of course deal today with the bases in the Dominions.
These are necessarily separately dealt with, but they must and will be a subject
for discussion between Great Britain and the Dominions. But as for the bases
under our control, let me say at once that the Government have no desire to
exclude aircraft of other nations. We demand no prescriptive right to the use
of airfields for ourselves. Rather do we mean to use them for the purpose of
steadily developing civil aviation throughout the world. Here it must be said
that the bases are few in number at which any great volume of traffic can be
collected. Just the same, it will be necessary to have international agreement on
traffic regulations and arrangements. This is an essential condition of future devel-
opments. For my part I find myself on this subject in agreement with Mr. William
Burden, of the Department of Commerce in Washington. Mr. Burden, speaking
in Washington on the 5th of January, said:
"Complete freedom of the air in the present state of the world
might result in commercial anarchy."
I share Mr. Burden's view. For our part we are prepared and ready at any
time to enter into negotiations with a view to disposing of all traffic problems
and arrangements that will arise.
Now the President has recently made certain proposals for the future of inter-
national civil aviation. He has declared for the right of innocent passage for all
nations throughout the world, and for the right to land anywhere for refuelling
and other non-traffic purposes. And I am now authorized by the Prime Minister
to say that we join with the President to the fullest extent in subscribing to those
principles. I repeat the principles: the right of innocent passage for all nations
throughout the world, and the right to land anywhere for refuelling and other
Responsibility for Development of Civil Aviation
I am asked . to state what is the future policy of the Government, and I
will state it here. It is our intention that the Government shall take a full meas-
ure of responsibility for the development of civil aviation when the war comes
to an end. That will be our right and our duty, and to the performance of the
task we shall bring the vast knowledge of the air and of the aeroplane which
Great Britain has acquired. For the aeroplane, of course, is the weapon above
all in this war for which we have shown the swiftest aptitude. We have exhibited
the most- remarkable capacity for design and development of new types of aircraft.
We have manifested the highest degree of engineering skill in bringing production
to a state of efficiency. All that is not saying too much. I was asked ... to make
a statement about the operations of the B.O.A.C. I cannot do so; I am not
entirely familiar with the operations of the B.O.A.C.; but this I can say, that it is
under able and competent direction. I have had the opportunity of talking to
Lord Knollys, and I am convinced that as much as can be extracted from the
wise and able direction of the B.O.A.C. will be got from it under his care. But
I can tell your Lordships something of the aircraft industry in Great Britain and
what the aircraft industry is capable of doing when it comes to dealing with the
necessities of civil aviation.
I will give you one example to make good my claim that we have brought
production and development to a high state of efficiency; that is the engine manu-
facture that we have launched in the United States of America. In the very
12 British Speeches of the Day
darkest days of the war, our engine manufacturers launched in the United States
of America, for the use of the Royal Air Force, the most famous engine in all
the world, the Rolls-Royce Merlin. In July, 1940, we launched that project for
building the Merlin engine in the United States. (Here let me say that both the
Merlin engine and the Spitfire aircraft were got into design and development
during the Ministry of my noble friend Lord Londonderry-it affords me particular
pleasure to may so-and my noble friend Lord Dowding was responsible for
design and development at that time under Lord Londonderry.) That engine
was put into production in the United States. New York funds were provided
by the Government for the purpose, and these New York funds were taken from
the securities of our rich investors abroad. The securities which were so willingly
given up at the beginning of the war provided necessary money for the production
of the Rolls-Royce Merlin. In fact, we provided something in the neighborhood
of 12,000,000 to 15,000,000. Within twelve months of having signed the
contract for the production of these engines, we had brought them into existence.
The Americans have since adopted that type-the Rolls-Royce type-for some of
their fighter aircraft. We read a great deal in the newspapers today about fighter
aircraft, built in America and engine by engines built in America, but these
engines are Rolls-Royce engines, the production which we launched in July, 1940.
"We Gave the Germans a Long Start"
I need not tell your Lordships, when giving an account of the capacity of the
aircraft industry in Great Britain, that we did not always hold the mastery of the
air. In fact, at the outbreak of war, the Germans' strength in aeroplanes-first-
line strength-was as four to one. The Germans had at that time 4,320 operational
aircraft in their first-line strength and in addition reserves. Their strength was,
as I say, four to one. Shortly after the war broke out we found that the German
enemy was our master in the air. For many years the Germans had been planning
and experimenting while we had rested content with prevarications and delays.
We had indeed. We gave the Germans a long start. But then came the Churchill
Government. At once the whole country was roused, a measure of drive and
energy was infused into production everywhere, and there was an immense improve-
ment in the output of planes. I submit to you a chart of aircraft made available
for the Royal Air Force in those days. It shows a most dramatic spurt in new
production. An immense supply of repaired aircraft was made available also,
and aircraft assembled from spare parts as well as aircraft brought into use by the
practice that has since come to be known as "cannibalism"-that is, making two
or three aeroplanes into one.
What then was the result of the labors of the aircraft industry? In the first
four months of 1940, before the National Coalition Government was forrrnd, just
over 2,700 operational aircraft were provided for the Royal Air Force. You will
say that is a good many, but I have told you that the first-line strength of the
Germans was 4,320 aircraft. In the next four months-the critical period in
British history-when Churchill was Prime Minister, the number was just
over 6,400. That is what the aircraft industry performed in that crisis of our
history. All this improvement was brought to pass under the dominating influ-
ence of the Prime Minister. He is entitled to the credit. Churchill's inspiration
made possible, as nothing else could have done, the conditions under which these
results were achieved. He dealt personally with all the issues of aircraft produc-
tion, not occasionally, not now and then, not ever so often, but day by day and
.every day with the most exhaustive, and sometimes exhausting, examinations.
Could we hold the battle front? That was the question that was ringing
through the aircraft factories in Great Britain. Could we hold the battle front,
Plans for Development of Civil Aviation
could we recover the chances we had lost? Could we meet the enemy, not on
equal terms, but in sufficient strength to save our skin? Only by providing air-
craft for every available pilot. We set out on the contest under disastrous condi-
tions-conditions which should be retold. The enemy dominated the English
Channel in the air. Their aircraft had driven our seaborne commerce from our
southern ports. For the first time in history the Port of London was almost closed,
and all the while the enemy's air power gave complete protection to the ports of
Northern France from Boulogne to Brest while preparations went forward for
the invasion of this island. Our need was for fighting aircraft. We had the
pilots but not the planes. We must build or die. We built and lived, and we
are still building. The production of aircraft for military use was, and still is,
our main purpose. I must say that that task has been pursued with the most
spectacular success. Speed and performance in our aeroplanes has been developed
to a most remarkable degree. No Ministry has done better or accomplished more
than the Ministry of Aircraft Production, and there need be no complaint about
my making this statement because it is nearly three years since I had a place in
what has become a triumphant organization-the Ministry of Aircraft Production.
Now what conclusion do I ask you to draw from all this? Just this. That
the aircraft industry in Great Britain, which served us so well in the hour of our
greatest peril, is capable of performing, when peace comes, a program of design,
development, and production of civil aircraft which will not disappoint the highest
hopes of those of us who believe in the dazzling future of civil aviation throughout
the Empire. It will not disappoint us, we may trust it. What will be required
of us in this peacetime future? We shall need machines, not only for the great
trunk routes that will link the Empire, but aircraft of smaller sizes for internal and
feeder lines. We shall want to operate from the snows of the North to the heat of
the Equator. That is our purpose, that is our intention.
Number of Aircraft Required in Peace
How many aircraft shall we need? The question was raised today by my
noble friend the Duke of Sutherland. He spoke of my having mentioned a
figure of 2,000 aircraft. I cannot suggest any figure. I set down that figure of
2,000 aircraft as a tentative proposal, but I cannot really suggest any figure. But
I bring to your notice this fact. The Pan-American Airways in 1943 carried
twice as many passengers as in 1941, and four times as much mail. That gives
us some idea of the rapid growth and development of transportation by air. I
give you also the opinion of the Civil Aeronautics Administration in Washington.
That American organization, a Government institution, has made a calculation that
American internal airways-that is, lines within the United States of America-will
need in 1950, 5,000 aircraft. That is more than ten times the number that
operated in 1940; in other words, ten times more in ten years. Traffic over the
North Atlantic is already a common practice. I have seen it stated from New
York that at the present time 1,000 aircraft are crossing the North Atlantic in
each week-1,000 crossings every week! What will be the volume of Atlantic
traffic after the war is over? I would not estimate it, but certainly it must be
.many aeroplanes every day as you will easily imagine when you consider that
now, during the war, 1,000 aircraft are crossing the Atlantic every week.
Assuredly then there are immense possibilities for civil aviation after the
war. Assuredly, too, we are equipped with all the necessary genius for design
and development. We possess manufacturing plants and personnel unexampled
in efficiency, workmanship and experience. But we have something more as well.
We have an Empire in every respect suited to the use of this new means of trans-
port. It is most admirably situated to make use of it. It is widely scattered, separated
British Speeches of the Day
in its parts by vast distances, by mountains, seas and deserts. All our Empire
problems can be made to yield to the new science, the science,of transportation by
air over sea and over land. In truth, where aviation is concerned, the Third British
Empire gives high hope and great promise. We failed to make use of our oppor-
tunities before the war. We did not develop our Imperial resources or our vast
agricultural wealth in the Colonies. Now there is another chance. Now a new
age opens, an age of raw materials, an age when the riches of the Empire require
development for the benefit of the whole world, an age when the Empire has a new
instrument in the shape of the airplane which can help us to link up, to gather,
and above all develop to the fullest extent the essential resources in raw mate-
rials for the populations here and abroad, for the men and women everywhere'
who will be awaiting as soon as peace comes the flow that must take the place
of the drought of the past five years.
We have an Empire that has mastered the art of war and is determined now
to master the art of peace, an Empire of solidarity and single purpose with a
strength that may not be challenged, holding a justifiable pride in the deeds of
its youth, respected by all the nations that will have been freed from bondage,
trusted by the United States and by Russia. Our Third Empire will end the war
stronger than ever before, firmly established and confidently determined to expand
and develop her latent resources and her hidden treasures. And in all our plans
and schemes the youths who fought our battles must be our mainstay. The devel-
opment of the airways of the Empire must be their instrument. The future of
civil aviation will be in their hands, and we may safely leave it there.
[House of Lords Debates)
Minister of Reconstruction
Liverpool University, January 14, 1944
The problems that face us are immense. Reconstruction is a convenient word
covering in many minds a host of reforms, but look at the problems it contains.
This peaceful trading nation has become completely mobilized for war. Immense
numbers of our young people have joined the Forces-been far afield and become
accustomed to the ways of war instead of receiving a training in trade or commerce.
Our entire industrial capacity has grown accustomed to working under Govern-
ment control, and with assured markets for whatever they produce either for the
purposes of war or for the needs of the civilian population. That spirit of striving
that was induced by the forces of competition has been dormant. Production has
been surrounded by many difficulties, but never by the essential need to produce
with a strict regard to economy.
We ourselves have become a people controlled in our private lives; we pull
down the blinds each night at the appointed time; we regulate our consumption
according to a ration card-we can't even get an extra half-pint of milk unless
a doctor says we may. We accept all this, and the directions of those whom
we have elected to govern us.
That is War. We have indeed shown much fortitude. But a reconstructed
England isn't going to be like this, and one of the major problems of Government
Problems of the Future
will be to carry public approval for their actions in unwinding this administrative
machine. I think it will demand much patient understanding of economic neces-
sities by the people-and a fine sense of public psychology from the Government
-if this process is to work smoothly.
Controls: Demobilization: Building: Industry
There is much talk about controls; much loose talk. Clearly as soon as the
danger is over the controls imposed for security reasons can go; but those controls
that have been imposed because supply was not equal to demand must stay until
these two economic factors approach the balance. If we abandon too soon control
of the distribution of food and clothing the inadequate supplies would inevitably
go to the people who can pay the most for them: we should have great misery,
and maybe starvation, stalking the land; our whole price and wages structure
would be destroyed and we should have both social unrest and inflation.
We have to plan the demobilization of our Fighting Services-and to do it
in such a manner that, whilst national needs are met, the process is one that com-
mends itself to the sense of fairness of the men who are left in the Forces when
others come home: we have to demobilize the vast army of munition workers,
many of whom have been directed to labor away from their homes.
We have to rebuild our damaged towns, but more particularly we have to
provide housing accommodation-and I think we owe it that priority in this shall
be given to the places that have suffered from enemy action. Without giving any
pledge on behalf of the Government, I am bound to say that I think it right that
some priority should be given to the returning soldier, particularly to the newly-
married, so that they may begin their married life in a home of their own.
And finally in my catalogue, we have the problem of industry: we have to
change over the vast mass of our engineering production from war to peace, and
in all our industries we have to plan once more to obtain an international trade
in a world that will be vastly disturbed.
You will understand with what hesitation I assumed this new office. Difficul-
ties there will be in plenty, but they will be difficulties that will be shared. I have
no desire to evade responsibility either for myself or for the Government of which
I am a member. But I venture on the reminder that we are a democracy. I hear
and I read many inquiries as to what the Government is going to do about these
problems: some of them undoubtedly fall wholly within the province of govern-
ment; but others, and particularly those concerned with the re-establishment of
our industrial life, will depend upon the vigor and the vision of those men of
commerce and of industry who, in the past, have made this country one of the
greatest mercantile centers of the world.
Those who are entrusted with the responsibility for government must show
qualities of leadership; but we mustn't get into the habit--encouraged, nay indeed,
enforced by war-of waiting on the edicts of government to determine our
commercial life. That is the principle of authoritarianism, necessary-indeed
essential-in war, but not a principle which this country, with its free traditions,
would wish to pursue as an end in itself into the years of peace.
I look forward, when the time is opportune, to the revival of that spirit of
vigorous enterprise in our commercial life, which, surveying the needs and the
well-being of the country, will once again come forward and advise the Govern-
ment how it can further the commercial life of the nation, and what controlling
British Speeches of the Day
forces of law are necessary to give proper protection to the workers in our indus-
tries at home.
The provision of work is a natural part of the economic life of the country.
It is the normal result of the operations of the industrialists and the traders when
they are no longer required to concentrate all their capacity on work of national
defense. I hope and believe that they are conscious of the extent to which the
country depends upon them now preparing their plans for the future, thinking
of trade abroad as well as trade at home, and, within the limits imposed by the
stringency of labor, I trust that they will feel encouraged to make their plans now,
and to call for such help as they may need from government.
Many years spent in the world of business make me chary of prophecy, and
slow to make promises. It's a maxim of all respectable business that to promise
is to perform. I noticed that The Times leader a few days ago expressed the hope
that I would fix my sights high. That's a very different story from making
promises. We have a right to have very high hopes for the future. By fortitude
and sacrifice, by skill and by heroism, both in the home and in martial realms,
we have once again established and confirmed our place in history. We have
once again become conscious of our power and our responsibility as a nation.
After some unhappy years during which we allowed ourselves to fall into
domestic and international incompetence we have emerged chastened by the suffer-
ing of war, but I think with a clearer idea of our place in the world anq a deeper
sense of our capacity to order our affairs at home in a manner that will make
Britain a better place to live in.
Destined for Greatness
In the days before the war there were, in our national life, some things that
we regretted and deplored: among them were unemployment, and some very bad
conditions of housing. We were also slow to appreciate the national importance
of health, and we disregarded the part that nutrition played in determining the
manpower of the nation-which was strange, in view of the knowledge regarding
it that existed in informed and scientific circles. But we do ourselves less than
justice if we imply that all our conditions of life were bad. Large sections of
the population were happy and well circumstanced, and there had been an immense
improvement in the general standard of social welfare, a rapid development of
scientific knowledge, and its application to industry. But, best of all-and I think
to our great surprise-the sense of national purpose and personal obligation to
the country was deep in the heart of the nation, however much, in our peculiar
British way, we disguised this truth from ourselves and from the rest of the world.
The war-or perhaps more truly the imminence of military defeat-tore away,
almost in a week, this mask and affectation, and showed us to ourselves for what
we are-a nation destined for greatness. I believe that among the many services
that Mr. Churchill has rendered to this country none stands higher than that he
was able to sense the unflinching and courageous spirit of the people: he used
language that explained and encouraged that spirit: he immortalized it. He
interpreted Britain to itself. But the quality was that of the people. It was the
quality that forgot self; that was prepared to fight in the streets; to fight on the
beaches; to endure anything for Britain's sake; and the Battle of Britain will
glorify the pages of history.
In danger we have experienced the resurrection of the spirit of a great people.
The danger will pass, but the people will remain and their spirit with them.
Before us lies the task of building again in peace the common life of this land
in a manner worthy of our sons who fought, and of us who kept our national pride.
Problems of the Future
And what sort of country is it going to be? We ourselves will make it, and
when peace comes we shall need that same spirit that we discovered in 1940. I go
to much trouble to inform myself of what the men-and the women-in the
Forces are thinking about reconstruction.
Let us welcome them home with bands and flag-waving, and all the heroic
panoply that passes with the day; but also let us see that they have a house to
live in, a way of life that will give to them and to their children a chance of work
and happiness and healthy life-and a chance of benefiting themselves by their own
efforts. They have behind their minds the fear of unemployment that wrecked
not only the lives of their parents, but also the social stability of this country in
the decade before the war.
The assurance of security against these things is the debt that we owe; and
it transcends in importance any question of money, or of rights, or of pre-war
interests. The obligation of Government to meet these demands is beyond
question, but central government alone cannot do it. The will of the people in
these matters must find expression not only in Parliament, but in the councils of
the local authorities.
We have already produced the first of our plans-and we have begun with the
education of the child-and the country generally has welcomed them.
I trust too that somehow, and soon, we shall be able to secure forever that
we retain in our social life those provisions which we have made during the war
for the protection and strengthening of physical powers of nursing mothers and
young children, which it was my privilege to institute in the Ministry of Food.
We shall presently place before Parliament a constructive set of proposals,
which, if they meet with public approval and the co-operation of the public
authorities and the medical profession, will enable this country to embark on a
policy of positive health for all the people that will, I believe, meet the high hopes
for social service of the medical profession.
In the urgent matter of housing we are well advanced in our exploration of
all the various ways in which, through the development of modern practices and
the use of new materials, we can hasten the production of houses to prescribed
standard, with fittings that will bring the uses of science to the aid of the house-
wife. The Minister of Health and the Minister of Works will, in a few weeks,
invite local authorities to look at the result of their researches in practical form.
The demand for housing is much greater than the supply of labor and materials
can possibly meet until some time after the war with Japan, as well as Germany,
is over. Meanwhile we depend upon local authorities not only to prepare plans
for this future time, but to use now, and without delay, such resources as are
available to repair damaged houses and to prepare building sites for the future.
Nothing is of greater urgency than this; and I think few things call for more
tolerance and understanding between the officials, both central and local, on whom
You will observe that I have limited my remarks on the subject of physical
planning to the building of houses, and in the main to the responsibility of local
and central government in this matter. In this University you must take pride in
the fact that you are the home of academic town planning-Adshead, Abercrombie,
Reilly, Budden and Holford have greatly influenced thought and prospective action
in these matters. I know that many cities have praiseworthy and ambitious schemes
designed to take this opportunity of planning their cities in more orderly shape,
18 British Speeches of the Day
and in such manner as to add not only to the convenience of the outlay, but to
In association with my several colleagues who are concerned, I am heavily
engaged in preparing the legislative basis that will enable them to take long views;
we want to encourage them to do so. But I take the occasion to remind
them that, in the first years after the war, the people of this country will be more
concerned to be assured that they have homes than beautiful public buildings and
shopping streets; in that period, so far as I can estimate the position after most
searching inquiry, we shall require to put the whole weight of the effort of which
we are capable into domestic building.
My Lord Chancellor, I have used your platform today to make my first speech
outside Parliament on reconstruction. I wanted to tell our people at home that we
are not only planning on paper, we are creating the legislative machinery to make
reconstruction work. I want to tell the men who are now fighting very arduous
battles overseas that we are getting on with the job.
We are not at the end of the war. There are many men in this country now,
very fully-trained and equipped, who are waiting impatiently for the signal to
embark on an enterprise of great danger. They will win much glory for Britain:
they will be crusaders, freeing other lands from the foul domination under which
they have been living. They, and all who have preceded them, have left us with
an indebtedness that we can pay in only one way-they went into battle so that
Britain's promises might be fulfilled and that our land remain free from the danger
of foreign domination-we shall repay them only if we remember why they
fought; if we match our spirit with theirs and, forgetting all else, work together
with them when they return-to build a life for future generations that is worthy
of the high tradition of their noble ancestors. It is within our means and our
capacity. Let us resolve to pay the debt in full.
British Ambassador to the United States
National Geographic Society, Washington, D. C,
January 28, 1944
I feel it a great privilege to be here tonight, on the invitation of the National
Geographic Society, with its large and distinguished membership and an interest
that ranges over all the lands and peoples of the world. And for many reasons
I am glad that the subject on which you have asked me to address you is India.
For all who have had the honor of serving India hold in their hearts forever the
love of that historic land, which-is the cradle of so large a part of the entire human
race, and where the hand of nature has worked A pattern of such infinite variety.
I am glad, too, for another reason. During the past two years, public opinion
in the United States has followed events in India with a new attention.
And this is natural, because India, like Britain or any of the Dominions of the
British Commonwealth, is your partner in a great and exacting enterprise, and
when people are in a big job together, they rightly want to know all they can
about their partners.
British Relations with India
As regards the war effort, I scarcely think that what India has put into the
pool has always been fully apprehended. Yet it is quite remarkable. The Indian
Services-Army, Navy, and Air Force-have grown to more than ten times their
peacetime size; all by voluntary recruitment; and wherever they have met the
enemy in Africa or Asia, have taught him to respect the quality of Indian fighting
men. Equally impressive is the achievement of India's industry, which is now
producing at a rate and on a scale undreamed of in India's history. Ships, tanks,
armored vehicles, guns, rifles, uniforms, boots-the list amounts to a total of some
20,000 different products needed in a modem war.
When the formidable problems of supply and communications have been
overcome, as they will be, and India marches, as she will, to the reconquest of
captive Burma, and the Japanese are thrown out, as they surely will be from the
lands they have invaded, none will decry the worth and dimensions of India's
Of this record India, then, has no cause to be ashamed. It certainly is not the
record of a people disinterested in the war, or fermenting with rebellious dis-
content. And that brings me to a third reason why I am glad to have the oppor-
tunity tonight of speaking about India.
Misunderstanding of the Indian Situation
As I have travelled through this great country, I have found, side by side with
a genuine interest in India and her problems, a not less genuine misunderstanding
of the situation. It would indeed be surprising were it otherwise; for when we
reflect how easily we misjudge our nearest neighbors, it is scarcely to be expected
that all your people should judge fairly of Indian problems from which they are
removed by vast spaces of land and sea.
The farther away you are from India, the easier her problems seem; and I
shall certainly feel that I have not wholly wasted your time, if I may to any extent
succeed in giving you a picture of India as she is, and conveying to you some
impression of her complexities.
I suppose that if you were to ask the average American who had not given
particular study to Indian affairs what was the rock-bottom of the trouble, he
would reply that Britain had deprived India of freedom and was reluctant to restore
it. It is always attractive to find a short, simple view which appears to dispense
us from the necessity of further mental effort. And in different ways we are all
prone to yield to this temptation. But such a view of the Indian riddle leaves
too much out to stand up against the facts. The whole course of Indo-British
relations since 1600 is against it-and if you will bear with me for a few moments
I will remind you of what these were.
The Beginnings of Indo-British Relations
Traders from Britain first went to India about 1600. The Mogul Empire,
which ruled over the North and Center and stretched its tentacles out West, East
and South, was then at the zenith of its power. We have many accounts of the
splendor of that Empire; and we can recapture something of its glory from its
buildings, which display more vividly than words the wonders of that by-gone age.
Most famous among these buildings is the Taj Mahal, the supreme example
of its kind, whose architecture, it has been said, reflects the touch of sadness
inseparable from all perfect beauty. Its builder was Shah Jehan, who erected it
in memory of his wife, and you may recall the tradition that, when it was com-
pleted, he put out the eyes of the architect so that nothing like it should ever be
built again. Years later, so the tradition goes, when he had lost his throne and
British Speeches of the Day
was imprisoned in the Fort of Agra, he was allowed to look through a small
window at the exquisite memorial created at his command.
Perhaps that story was a parable of the Mogul Empire, which was to fade so
completely from the human scene, but which in its day of spendor held such sway
But, even then, vast areas of the country survived as independent States. In
the course of the seventeenth century and in the first part of the eighteenth
century, Mogul Emperors, in an endeavor to extend their frontiers, embarked on
an exhausting series of wars, which in turn provoked a military renaissance among
their Hindu subjects. The rise of the Mahratta Confederacy was not only a
leading factor in the disintegration of the Mogul Empire, but led to the appear-
ance of numerous sovereign princes and to the pattern of the Indian States, which
in many respects survives unchanged to this day.
The important point to note is that no thought of conquest was in the minds
of the Englishmen who began to trade in India in the seventeenth century. They
formed themselves into the East India Company and sought from the Mogul
Emperor permission to carry on their business. They asked merely for the pro-
tection of Mogul law and order for their caravans and factories, and only applied
for leave to fortify their trading stations when they found that, in fact, the
Emperor was unable to protect them.
From 1600 to about the middle of the eighteenth century, the policy of the
British in India was inspired by the famous despatch of Sir Thomas Roe, the
Ambassador of King James I, who arrived at the Court of the Emperor Jehangir
in 1615. "Do not waste money," he urged, "on military adventures, on acquiring
territories and maintaining garrisons, as do the Portuguese and the Dutch, who
seek plantation by the sword. Let this be received as a rule, that if you will profit,
seek it at sea and in a quiet trade." So for some 150 years, Britain's relations
with India were confined to trade, and were similar to those of the United States
today with South America or Australia.
In the middle of the eighteenth century, however, the warring States of India
began to realize the superiority of European weapons and to compete for the help
of European gunners and trained soldiers.
In consequence, the French and British, as the two principal trade rivals, were
drawn into conflict with each other as allies of one or other of these warring
States. Through several wars between 1746 and 1761 this rivalry was settled in
favor of the British, but with the result that we found ourselves inextricably
involved in politics where hitherto our only interest and occupation had been trade.
Disintegration of the Mogul Empire
The principal date that the schoolbooks mark in this period is 1757. In that
year, the English Company's clerk, Clive, with 3,000 troops defeated at the Battle
of Plassey an army of 50,000 men under Siraj-ud-Daula, the man who nominally
ruled Bengal for the Mogul Empire. With his defeat, the whole administration
of Bengal collapsed-a result, incidentally, received with complete indifference by
the entire population. The proof that even as late as this British had no formu-
lated plan of conquest is the fact that, instead of openly seizing the Province for
the Crown, they were content to secure for the East India Company the rights
of a landholder from the Emperor.
Throughout the eighteenth century, the Company's directors in London were
reiterating plaintive instructions to their representatives in India to stick to trade
and avoid entanglement in Indian politics. This was easy enough to say in London,
British Relations with India
but in India it was a counsel of perfection. You might as well give permission
to some one to bathe provided he did not get wet. What neither the directors
nor the representatives on the spot realized was that the steady distintegration
of the Mogul Empire was bound to make it quite impossible for the instructions
to be carried out. With political control and the stable conditions it ensured,
trade would flourish; without such control, and therefore without any security or
order, no trade could be maintained.
Thus British traders found themselves more and more deeply committed to
the tasks of the Government.
Warren Hastings, one of the greatest Governor-Generals Britain has ever sent
to India, came and went.
Growing Sense of Responsibility in Britain
It is significant of the growing interest which people in Britain had begun
to take in India, and the sense of responsibility felt by Parliament to see fair-
dealing between Briton and Indian, that Hastings, on his return, for all the
greatness of his achievements, was not greeted with public acclamation. On the
contrary, as we all know, he was put on trial, and among his prosecutors were
Burke, Fox and Sheridan, names famous in our political history, and not perhaps
unknown to yours. The trial lasted for seven years; and, though in the end
Hastings was acquitted, the moral was there for all to see. India was not to be
a mere field for exploitation.
The arrival of Lord Wellesley as Govenor-General of Bengal in 1798, accom-
panied by his more famous younger brother, who later became Duke of Wellington
and wrote history at Waterloo, introduced a period of more conscious and deliberate
expansion. Wellington's letters show that he was fired, not only by a vision of
Empire, but just as much by an almost missionary zeal to spread the benefits of
law, order and justice in a continent given over to destructive anarchy. It is also
to be remembered that when the Wellesley brothers went to India, Napoleon was
making plans to bring it under the flag of France.
Wellesley's policy of India alliances and annexations, directed to the immediate
purpose of making the British the supreme power in India, did not therefore
spring solely or mainly from the local situation; it was part of the larger struggle
against the last attempt before present days to establish a world supremacy. As
a result of this forward movement, by 1823 the East India Company's influence,
either by direct control or through treaties with the Indian States, extended over
most of India.
Meanwhile, the Company's original Charter had been repeatedly revised, the
Company itself being gradually transformed from an unofficial group of traders
to an agent of Parliament responsible for the good government of India. At
the same time, the ferment of the Liberal movement in Europe was affecting the
outlook of the Company's servants and creating a new sense of responsibility. As
early as 1824, Sir Thomas Munro, the Governor of Madras, foresaw the possibility
of a united and self-governing India. "Whenever," he added, "such a time shall
arrive, it will probably be best for both countries that the British control over
India should be gradually withdrawn."
Profit-Making Declared Incompatible with Government
When, therefore, the Company's Charter came up for renewal by Parliament
in 1833, the report of a Parliamentary Committee laid down the principle that
"the interests of the native population are to be consulted in preference to those
of Europeans, whenever the two come into competition." So great was the change
British Speeches of the Day
of mind from the early years that profit-making was declared incompatible with
the function of government, and the East India Company that had been established
for the sole purpose of trade, was now forbidden to engage in trade at all. At
the same time, the Charter Act provided that no native of India or other subject
of the British Sovereign should be debarred by race, color, or religion from
holding any office whatsoever under the British rule. Speaking in defense of
the measure in the House of Commons, Macaulay recurred to the suggestion of
a future self-governing India.
"It may be," he said, "that the public mind of India may extend under our
system till it has outgrown that system; that by good government we may educate
our subjects into a capacity for better government; that, having become instructed
in European knowledge, they may, in some future age, demand European institu-
tions. Whether such a day will ever come I know not. But never will I attempt
to avert or retard it. Whenever it comes, it will be the proudest day in English
Meanwhile, two important steps were taken in- the field of administration.
In 1813, a start was made with the spending of public money on education by an
annual grant of $30,000-no large endowment of a great service, it is true; but
it happened some fifty years before the British had spent a penny of public money
to educate themselves.
English Language Unifies India
In 1834, English was adopted as the official language of government and
business. Ambitious young Indians anxious to get on in commerce or government
service, were now learning English and reading in their schools the works of
Locke, Burke and John Stuart Mill. For the first time in Indian history, the
Tamil-speaking men of the south, the Gujarati-speaking men of the west, the
Bengali-speaking men of the east, and the Pushtu-speaking men of the north,
could travel and trade in safety along the thousands of miles of new roads and
railways that were being built, and, in so doing, could understand one another.
And something else soon began to happen. Steadily growing numbers of
Punjabis and Rajputs, Biharis, Oriyas, and Sindhis, began to think of themselves
less as Punjabis, Rajputs, and the rest, and more as Indians.
By the early years of the present century, a nationalist movement had begun
to stir in a continent speaking some ninety languages, and previously only conscious
of its different States. If the British had done nothing else in India, they had
done this. Without their unifying rule, India might well have continued, as
in her past, to see the rise and fall of empires, the tragic and wasteful round
of war and conquest. Her experience, in fact, could hardly have been different
from that of Europe in the 1,500 years that followed the fall of Rome.
How did the British meet the slowly emerging nationalist demands? If it be
suggested that they have given India too little, too slowly and too late, I would
ask you to look at the actual record of the facts.
Reforms to Meet Demands of New Nationalism
It is in the nature of democratic government that an agitation should resolve
itself into a demand, which must then be discussed and threshed out in the legis-
lature. Thus statutory shape was given to the Morley-Minto Reforms in 1910,
and the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms of 1921. At the time they were passed,
they went a long way towards meeting the demands formulated prior to their
British Relations with India
The next large landmark, before the offer carried by Sir Stafford Cripps, was
the Government of India Act of 1935. That Act gave self-government to the
eleven provinces of British India, with a population close on 300,000,000. It
established popular Indian ministries responsible to Indian-elected legislatures and
enjoying much the same powers, as a State in this country.
In all those matters in which one of your States governs itself-law and order,
finance, education, public health, and so on,-300,000,000 Indians now came under
the rule of popularly elected ministries. Only the federal subjects of foreign
relations, defense, income tax, customs and, broadly speaking, those matters covered
by your inter-State commerce laws, were reserved to the Central Government. The
Governors of the Provinces appointed by the British Crown are enjoined to sign
all bills passed by the Legislature with three exceptions. A Governor can refuse
to sign bill if, in his opinion, it victimizes minority communities, or threatens the
financial credit of the province, or impinges on the Federal sphere of legislation.
In order to preserve the unity of India, the second part of the 1935 Act pro-
vided for the federation of the eleven British provinces that compose British India,
with the Indian States, whose people are not British subjects.
Problems of Representation with a Permanent Majority
At this point, we meet the higher mathematics of the Indian problem. The
leading groups in India include some 206,000,000 caste Hindus; 49,000,000 De-
pressed Classes, often called Untouchables; 92,000,000 Moslems; and nearly
The framers of the Act, among whom were many representative Indians,
thought that the best way of safeguarding the interests of these several groups
Should be by coalition in the Federal Government, and accordingly a proportionate
number of seats was reserved for each group in the Central Legislature.
This plan quickly ran into stormy weather. The Hindus, as the biggest single
group, would have secured the largest single group of seats, and therefore the
largest share in any coalition government. But their leaders objected to this
arrangement on the ground that in parliamentary democracy of the British type
the party which wins' the most seats forms the Government. The Moslems for
their part maintained that they were inadequately protected; and the Indian States
for many different reasons were apprehensive of the new and unknown order
involved in Federation.
While debate on this part of the Act was still proceeding, the war came and
it was impossible to deal with a great controversial measure when more pressing
needs claimed all our thought and energy.
Offer of Constitution Drafted by Indians Rejected
Accordingly, on August 8, 1940, the Viceroy reaffirmed the purpose of the
British Government that India should exercise the same rights of control of her
own affairs as Canada or any other of the Great Dominions. With the authority
of His Majesty's Government, he announced that after the war the Act of 1935
could be replaced by a new Constitution drafted by Indians, provided that the
result was not rejected by large elements in India's national life.
This was at once denounced by the Congress Party, whose leaders said in
effect that the Moslem League could always be relied upon to object; that the British
could always be relied upon to point out that the Moslem League represented a
"large and powerful element in India's national life"; and that therefore the
British Speeches of the Day
offer was intended to enable the British for all time to stay in India. They there-
fore demanded a constituent assembly to frame a postwar constitution.
This was the background of the offer carried by Sir Stafford Cripps to India
in April, 1942.
While repeating the Viceroy's undertaking, Sir Stafford Cripps met the objec-
tion that the Moslem minority would be in a position permanently to impede
India's independence. For his proposals provided that rejection of the Constitution
by any province need not impede self-government, because the objecting Province
might have separate autonomy. And, secondly, the Cripps offer conceded the
demand for a constituent assembly.
It was, however, a condition that the business of Constitution-making should
be postponed until victory was won, and that India should meanwhile join in
organizing that victory, without which self-government for India, or anyone else,
must remain a dream. In the actual conditions of the time, with the Japanese
hammering at the gates of India, no other course was possible; but hope of agree-
ment was destroyed mainly by the Congress Party's insistence on immediate
"responsible" government by the Party leaders in India and the control of the
War Department by an Indian Minister.
This demand raised just those thorny constitutional questions which Cripps
had rightly urged should be shelved for the duration of the war. If, under well-
intentioned but uninformed pressure, Britain were to support a political settlement
which was denounced as a betrayal by Moslems, or by Sikhs, or by Hindus, this
could only too easily be followed by serious bloodshed, and create grave conflict
of loyalty in the minds of the Indian Army.
Certainly I cannot doubt that for the British to have allowed issues to be
raised which, if unsolved, must disrupt India and totally paralyze her war efforts-
would have been folly, for which we should have been rightly condemned by all
the United Nations. And when I see criticism in the Press of Britain's attitude
on this matter, I wonder what would have been felt or said, had she weakly
allowed to be neutralized one of the great bases for the war against Japan.
So the Cripps offer failed; but as Mr. Churchill said on September LO, 1942,
"The broad principles of the Declaration . must be taken as representing the
settled policy of the British Crown and Parliament. These principles stand in
their full scope and integrity."
No Stability Through Compulsion of Minorities
We hope that India, in what we believe to be heirown highest interests, will
wish to remain within the British Commonwealth; but if, after the war, her people
can establish an agreed constitution and then desire to sever their partnership with
us, we have undertaken not to overrule such decision. The constitution must be
agreed, for even after peace has come we are not going to hand India over to
anarchy and civil war. At the same time, if a constitution should be found
acceptable to the great part of India, but unacceptable to certain provinces where
for example the Moslems are preponderant, this need not of itself present an
If India cannot yet agree to move forward as a single whole, we are prepared
to see her large component elements move forward separately. We recognize all
the objections to a rupture of Indian unity, but we also believe that stability cannot
be found through compulsion of the great minorities.
As Mr. Amery, the Secretary of State for India, has pointed out, this attitude
is in complete conformity with the principles of the Atlantic Charter. I have
British Relations with India
never been able to understand why it should ever have been suggested that it
wasn't. For we were in fact applying the Atlantic Charter to India-and indeed
to the whole of our Commonwealth-long before the President and Mr. Churchill
had their historic meeting; and no more faithful interpretation of it could be
conceived than the declaration expounded by Sir Stafford Cripps.
Perhaps I have said enough to correct the idea, so far as it may exist, that
Britain has deprived India of her freedom and is unwilling to restore stolen goods.
Nor is it true, which is to state the same thing in other words, that Britain
is in possession of India and finds her position there too pleasant or too profitable
Indians in the Majority on the Viceroy's Council
It might be supposed that all the highest offices are held by Britons, and that
the Viceroy, Provincial Governors, and Civil Servants govern despotically without
reference to India's wishes. What are the facts? The Viceroy has an Executive
Council, only four of whose fourteen members are not Indian. The Indian
Members are fully representative of powerful elements in India. They govern the
country. They took the decision on August 9, 1942, to fight the civil disobedience
movement; and it so happened that on that day only one British Member was
present at the Council Meeting.
Sir Firoz Khan Noon, Defense Member of the Counfil said on August 4, 1942:
"It is sometimes suggested that . the present members of the Executive
Council are mere puppets in the hands of the Viceroy . in other words, that
the whole administrative machinery is run by the Viceroy, and we have no voice
"Let me tell you straight away that there is not one of us who would be
willing to serve in these circumstances. I have been in office since October 3, 1941,
and I can say this without fear of contradiction that on not a single occasion has
the Viceroy ever overruled me or rejected my advice. . The experience of every-
one of us is exactly the same."
What is true of the Viceroy applies with equal force to the British Provincial
Governors, who, like any other Constitutional rulers, must take the advice of their
popularly elected ministries; and to the British Civil Servants, numbering less
than half of a total of approximately 1200 in the Indian Civil Service. In this
Service, rank depends not upon race, but upon efficiency, British and Indians being
inextricably mixed at every level.
No Conflict Between British and Indian Commercial Interests
Then there is that question of the profit Britain is supposed to draw from
India. It is true that we have carried out there large material developments. We
have capital invested in India which is recently estimated at $960,000,000, a
substantial sum, but less than half our investments in Argentina.
In time of war, India is a source of manpower and supply. Her geographical
position makes her an important link between the different parts of the British
But none of these British interests conflicts with the interests of India. On the
contrary, she has derived marked advantage from this association. She has been
able to borrow in London at an average rate of about 41/2%, which is certainly
far lower than what she would have had to pay had she not formed part of the
British Speeches of the Day
Her railroads, roads and millions of acres, brought to fertility by artificial
irrigation, have certainly in the past earned profit for British investors, but they
have even more directly benefited India.
SMoreover, since the war India has been able to repay virtually the whole of
her foreign debt. She has become the owner of these vast utilities, and India,
not Great Britain, is now the creditor. Not only does India pay no taxes or sub-
sidy of any kind to Britain, but the British taxpayer is today finding some four-
fifths of India's military expenditure.
When it is recalled that the total pre-war budget of the Government of India
averaged about $360,000,000, it may well be doubted whether India would have
been able to support a modern army, navy and air force to defend herself alone
in a dictator-ridden world.
In trade, as in finance, she has moved rapidly towards autonomy. In 1922,
a Fiscal Convention gave the Government of India, in conjunction with the Indian
Legislature, full power to frame its own tariff policy.
This fiscal autonomy has been freely exercised, sometimes greatly to the detri-
ment of British interests, and particularly to those of the cotton industry of Lan-
No Fear of the Verdict on Britain
I have therefore no fear of the verdict when in future years the whole story
of Britain's association with India is weighed and judged. I think we may fairly
claim to have given her peace in place of war; unity in place of division; order in
place of anarchy; law in place of the irresponsible working of despotic wills. We
have sown in her people the seeds of self-government and, so far from trying to
uproot the plant, have tended it carefully through the years. By great public
works we have laid the foundation of a prosperous economic future. Those
achievements stand and we are not ashamed of them.
One of the greatest of modern Viceroys, Lord Curzon, on taking leave of India
forty years ago, spoke his faith in words which we may still remember:
"A hundred times in India have I said to myself, Oh that to every
Englishman in this country, as he ends his work, might be truthfully
applied the phrase 'Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity.'
No man has, I believe, ever served India faithfully of whom that could
not be said. All other triumphs are tinsel and sham. Perhaps there are
few of us who make anything but a poor approximation to that ideal.
But let it be our ideal all the same-to fight for the right, to abhor the
imperfect, the unjust or the mean, to swerve neither to the right hand nor
to the left, to care nothing for flattery or applause, or odium or abuse-
it is so easy to have any of them in India-never to let your 'enthusiasm
be soured or your courage grow dim, but to remember that the Almighty
has placed your hand on the greatest of his ploughs, in whose furrow the
nations of the future are germinating and taking shape, to drive the blade
a little forward in your time, and to feel that somewhere among these
millions you have left a little justice or happiness or prosperity, a sense
of manliness or moral dignity, a spring of patriotism, a dawn of intel-
lectual enlightenment or a stirring of duty where it did not exist before
-that is enough,-that is the Englishman's justification in India. It is
good enough for his watchword while he is here, for his epitaph when
he is gone."
fOfficial Release] .
The Teacher and the Child
MR. CHUTER EDE
Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Education
House of Commons, January 20, 1944
The teacher's problem will be: Here is this child; you have to discover its
abilities and its aptitudes and you have to develop both. You have to round off
in every child his character and his attainments by encouraging him to develop
aptitudes which he is reluctant to develop. If we can get this Measure through
with this new definition of what the education service ought to be, we shall
give to our teachers a real opportunity of applying their training to the task
that they ought to consider-not the subject but the child. I agree with all that
has been said today about the teaching profession and I almost blush to think
that there was a time when I was a practising teacher, but I notice that these
tributes have been paid to it since I left it. The success or failure of this or any
other scheme of education in the long-run depends upon the way in which the
wishes of Parliament can be implemented in the classroom. That is the point
of application of these powers we are hoping to generate today.
Misgivings have been expressed regarding the rate of recruitment of teachers.
May I say that the indications are that the response from the Forces is as good
as could be expected with the little amount of stimulus that has so far been
given. The proportion of people who are applying for postwar education and
have announced that they will identify themselves with the teaching service is
high. I think I ought to say that there are four groups of teachers we shall
require-teachers for the nursery schools, of whom there are very few at the
moment; teachers in order to reduce the size of the classes in the primary
schools-and my right hon. Friend [the President of the Board of Education]
and I are only too well aware of the urgent need for that; teachers for the
secondary schools to reduce the forties of the senior schools to thirties and to
prepare for the raising of the school-leaving age; and last and by no means least
in importance, teachers and instructors for the young people's colleges. I believe
that none of these-grades is born exclusively in one year. In every year there will
be a proportion of people who are suitable for each group. On the borderline
there may be some interchangeable people, but I do not think that a young lady
who is eminently suitable for a nursery school will, in many cases, be very helpful
in the young people's colleges. I think, therefore, we shall have to endeavor to
recruit each of these four groups of teachers simultaneously.
We intend, as I hope that the speech of my right hon. Friend convinced
everybody in the House, that this Measure shall be implemented. It is the
first comprehensive Education Measure that has ever been presented to the House
of Commons. With all its merits Mr. Fisher's Bill failed because it declined to
tackle the two outstanding problems-the dual system and the local authority
problem. We have in this Measure, for good or ill, attempted to survey the whole
field, educational, administrative and religious, and we believe that our Measure
is such that we shall be able, when it gets to the Statute Book, to proceed with
diligence in our endeavor to make this Act of Parliament a living reality. My
right hon. Friend in opening this Debate quoted a phrase of a hymn. I hope I
may be allowed to close with a statement which represented in the days of my
youth a confession and a prayer by those with whom I- worshipped. I do not
hear it sung in the churches now. I think that in this conflict between faith and
British Speeches of the Day
knowledge, and also between knowledge and wisdom we have yet grave respon-
sibilities to bear. If I may I would say that this is the spirit which has inspired us:
"We have but faith: we cannot know;
For knowledge is of things we see.
And yet we trust it comes from Thee,
A beam in darkness. Let it grow.
Let knowledge grow from more to more,
But more of reverence in us dwell,
That mind and soul according well,
May make one music as before."
[House of Commons Debates]
When the aggressor nations have been crushed and freedom from fear
established for all peoples, we must turn to another battle, the battle
against poverty. I hope that in this fight, too, British, Americans and
Russians will be brothers in arms. The terrible events of these years of
war have, I think, proved that those of us who between the wars said that
peace was indivisible, and that though aggression started far away in
China it concerned us, were absolutely right.
It is the same with poverty. We must not think of ourselves alone but
of the whole world. The greater the prosperity of other nations, the
higher we can raise the standard of life throughout the world, the better
for ourselves as a nation that lives so largely by our overseas trade.
I can assure you that the Government is very conscious of these great
issues, and that its members are working hard on the solution of the
problems that will face us at the end of the war; but remember you have
your responsibilities also.
The privileges that spring from democracy bring with them their
obligations. The decisions on the future of this country rest with the
people of this country. We in the Government are there to carry out your
will. I want that will to be backed by thought and knowledge so that
Great Britain, which under God's will, has saved the world from disaster
in these grim years, may play its full part in establishing a prosperous,
just and free world when peace comes again.
C. R. ATTLEE, Deputy Prime Minister.
Sunderland, January 30, 1944.
Other Material Available from the
British Information Services Includes:
Britain. A monthly magazine. 10 cents a copy or $1 a year.
Information Division Circular. A fortnightly bulletin of
current background news on Britain. Free on appli-
Labor and Industry in 'Britain. Monthly. Free on appli-
Information papers on wartime Britain covering Taxation,
Education, Rationing, Women's Work, Industry, etc., may
be obtained free on application.
Britain Looks Ahead (Official Statements).
50, Facts about India.
50 Facts about Social Services in Britain.
The British Cdnstitution.
Winning the Peace.
(All available free on application.)
For catalogue of Films available, terms of hire, etc., apply
to any office of the British Information Services.