NEWS OF THE WEEK.

Inever rains but it pours, according to the methods of the 1 Government. The Government are now showering upon the country a plentiful supply of homilies about wicked extravagance and of schemes for cutting down expenditure. The whole proceeding bears some resemblance to the overwhelming operations of a Northcliffe Press stunt. We must not, however, be misunderstood. Though the ways of the Government are lacking in coolness, sobriety, and dignity— these qualities have greater worth than mere manners have, for they are political virtues which inspire confidence—the attempt to insist at all costs upon economy is entirely to the good. Nobody could welcome it more heartily than we do.

Let us take some events of the week in their turn. The papers of Tuesday announced that the Prime Minister had addressed a letter in strong terms to all the spending Departments. He pointed out the need for effecting all possible economies and for restoring the normal numbers of the staffs. He desired that a Report should be prepared by each Department before the reassembling of Parliament on October 22nd, showing what has been done to this end. Almost at the same time—on Monday evening—Sir Auckland Geddes, speaking at Basingstoke, expressed his wonder whether any problem had ever been more intently studied than this question of Departmental economy. He stated that, at the suggestion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, a Financial Committee, of which the Prime Minister is Chairman, had been formed. " The Prime Minister is throwing himself with all his wonderful energy into the work of cutting down expenditure. As a consequence enormous results are being achieved. We have great commitments which nothing can immediately reduce." That last sentence was rather a chilling breath, but Sir Auckland Geddes blew a warmer one before he finished. " Believe me," he said, " the Government is fully alive to the need for economy, and we shall get it. We have installed processes which will lead to enormous reductions in outgoings."

On Wednesday the Daily Mail published a letter which Mr. Lloyd George had written on the subject of economy to some

lorrespondent whose name is not given, but who is evidently me of his colleagues in the government :—

" I wish," he says, " to call the attention of my colleagues to the feeling which exists in the Rouse of .0011311101113 in the Press, and among all classes' of the community as to the necessity for an immediate cutting down of Government expenditure. A general feeling undoubtedly exists that expensive and needless establishments are being maintained because of the reluctance of those at the head of the various branches of Administration in the GovernmentDepartments to dismiss any of their employees. I do not think that the strength of this feeling is realized by subordinates, and this is probably due to the fact that the need for immediately taking steps to curtail expenditure has not been sufficiently insisted upon. . . . The time has come when each Minister ought to make it clear to those under his control that if they cannot reduce expenditure they must make room for somebody who can. That is the public temper, and it is right... , Everything in excess must be ruthlessly cut down."

The advice is admirable, and we only wish we could praise as heartily the motives which the Prime Minister candidly acknowledges as his inspiration. Surely it is the part of a Prime Minister of this great country to insist upon economy for its own sake, and because we shall certainly go bankrupt unless we quickly practise it. Surely, again, it is the part of a Prime Minister to speak with authority just because he is Prime Minister and for no other reason. It may be said that Mr. Lloyd George was writing, as it were, in his shirt-sleeves to a colleague, and not attempting to deliver a message to the nation. Nevertheless, we cannot describe how much the reasons given for insisting upon economy grate upon our senses, and we think must grate upon the senses of all who are conscious and proud of our traditions and of the history of our institutions. After reading this letter we feel rather as though we had overheard a woman saying that she wished to be good not because she esteemed virtue but because the neighbours were talking.

The papers of Wednesday announced that the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the newly formed Finance Committee of the Cabinet had carried out a reorganization of the Treasury. Three new Treasury Departments have been set up to deal with the size of Government establishments, the supply services, and general financing administration, respectively. Sir Malcolm Ramsay, formerly Assistant-Secretary to the Treasury, will control the first Department ; Mr. G. L. Barstow, the second ; and Mr. B. P. Blackett, a former Financial Secretary to the Treasury, the third. Sir John Bradbury, Joint Permanent Secretary to the Treasury, has resigned in order to become Principal British Representative on the Reparation Commission set up by the Peace Treaty ; and the other Joint Secretary, Sir Thomas Heath, has also resigned in order to become Controller-General of the National Debt. Sir Warren Fisher, formerly Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue, becomes Permanent Secretary to the Treasury.

Another step the Government have taken is to stop the building of ships of war. The puzzle is to find any change in the outlook in foreign affairs which justifies this extraordinarily rapid decision. The announcement came out of the blue, and there is alarm in the dockyards lest there should be unemployment, though of course the intention is to turn all hands on at the first possible moment to the construction of mercantile vessels. For our part, we can quite well believe that the construction of ships of war was going on of its own momentum and that the ships were not really needed. Very likely we could have safely stopped all such construction on the princir13 which the Duke of Wellington asserted after the Napoleonic Wars, that the danger of industrial collapse was at the moment very much greater than the danger of another war, and that the arts of peace must for the time being entirely take precedence over the arts of war. But if this he true, surely the truth was apparent many months ago.

Meanwhile the efforts of the Government in the direction of economy are being excellently backed up by several leaders of Labour. Perhaps the best example of good advice nobly expressed was contained in a letter from Mr. Brownlie, Chairman of the Executive Council of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers. The letter was written to Mr. C. W. Bowerman, Secretary to the Parliamentary Committee of the Trade Union Congress, and from what we know of Mr. Bowerman we are certain that it will meet with a very friendly and active response. Mr. Brownlie, in urging that all leaders of Labour should cooperate in bringing about increase of production, says that a considerable misapprehension exists in the minds of Trade Unionists. He agrees with Mr. Hoover that unless production can be rapidly increased, nothing but political, moral, and economic chaos, finally interpreting itself in a loss of life on a scale hitherto undreamt of, can be expected.

" The Trade Union movement," continues Mr. Brownlie, " is more powerful to-day than at any period of its history. With power come, responsibilities. . . . We cannot evade our responsibilities to the community." Finally Mr. Brownie urges the Parliamentary Committee of the Trade Union Congress to tell all workers the truth. " The mere raising of nominal wages without an increased production in the necessaries of life is no solution of the difficulty." We may add here that some leaders of Labour in America are not at all blind to the truths which are just being widely preached here. The head of a deputation to President Wilson the other day declared that Labour men were not in favour of demanding a mere rise. of wages as a settlement of their troubles, as many of them recognized that an all-round rise of wages was always accompanied by an all-round rise in prices. That is perfectly true. There is only one certain way to improve the standard of comfort, and that is to increase the buying-power of money, When there are more things to buy, and these can only be manufactured by the muscles and sweat of the nation, prices will fall, and wages at their present level will become such a boon as the working deem* in this country have never yet experienced.

There is no need to be dispirited when success or failure lies, as it undoubtedly does, in our own hands, A dose of optimism is good for everybody at times, and for a dose worth drinking commend us to an interview published in the Morning• Post of Tuesday with Mr. E. M. Edgar,. head of the firm of Messrs. Sperling and Co. Mr. Edgar was speaking of American competition, which is the chief bogy of most of our pessimists.. He would not admit that even the low value of sterling in America was wholly a bad. thing. " It is very much worse," he said, " for the Americans. It means that we cannot afford to purchase in the United States—that we will buy anywhere except there."

America, he went on, was loaded with goods to produce which she had paid uneconomic wages. She would therefore either have to sell at a loss or cut down production. People grumbled here about the high cost of living and the high wages, but these things were as nothing compared with the conditions in America. There was bound to be a drop in America from these sky-high levels, and the drop would be a crash. London was in no danger of ceasing to be the financial centre of the world. Nor does Mr. Edgar fear American competition in shipping. America, he said, had not yet the means to turn out vessels for special trades, and the cost of construction was still far ahead of ours. Moreover, the cost of running an American ship was at least 30 per cent. heavier than the cost of running a British ship.

Speaking at his first public meeting in the Widnes Division last Saturday, Mr. Arthur Henderson made some remarkable statements. He said that when he was sent to Russia by Mr. Lloyd George, he went in possession of power to send the Ambassador, Sir George Buchanan, home, and to " take on the job " himself at £8,000 a year. He found when he arrived in Russia that the supplanting of the Ambassador would be a mistake, and he telegraphed that he would return to London and that the Ambassador ought to remain, He also explained that he was orginally opposed to the Stockholm Conference, and that Mr. Lloyd George was in favour of it. His visit converted him, and he came home in favour of the Conference. By that time, however, Mr. Lloyd George had changed his mind and opposed the Conference in spite of Mr. Henderson's advocacy of it.

We imagine that Mr. Henderson could not possibly have made these statements without warrant, and that though there is plenty of room for dispute over phrases, as there always is in such episodes, Mr. Lloyd George did actually contemplate recalling Sir George Buchanan and letting Mr. Henderson take his place. If Mr. Lloyd George did so, one can easily understand his point of view. He probably said to himself • " There is now a revolution in Russia. Sir George Buchanan, who has served our interests faithfully and well, was persona grata at the Russian Court. Necessarily so—he could not have done his work as well as he did otherwise. But a persona grata at the Russian Court will not be acceptable to revolutionaries like M. Kereneky. Therefore it would be advisable to send them somebody who will not be suspect and whose political views will more nearly approach their own." No man need be ashamed of arguing like that.

But what are we to say of the manner in which it was proposed, to recall Sir George Buchanan ? We hope that in this respect Mr. Henderson may have done Mr. Lloyd George less than justice. If he has not done so, one will have to add the name of Sir George Buchanan to the list of distinguished public servants (like Sir William Robertson and others) who have been got rid of in a cloud of innuendo and intrigue. It is lamentable that the Government—if Mr. Henderson is right—cannot do what ought to be a perfectly straightforward thing in a perfectly straightforward manner. Some explanation of Mr. Henderson's statement is certainly owed to Sir George Buchanan and to the Foreign Office.

According to the latest news when we go to press on Thursday, the Red Army in Russia, having driven back Admiral Koltchak far enough, has turned upon the army of North Russians, Finns, and Esthonians which proposed to advance on Petrograd, and also against General Denikin. The Bolsheviks assert that they have recaptured Pskoff, between. Riga and Petrograd, from which they were expelled in May. According to an announcement by Trotsky, the Bolshevik War Minister, the movement against General Denikin is taking place along the whole front, and the grain port of Kamyshin on the Volga has been seized. We have yet to hear statements from the other side. Meanwhile a correspondent of the Times who has lately escaped from Petrograd described in the issue of Thursday the decline of Bolshevism in that city. He said that the food ration did not admit of more than one meal a day. This ration, however, did not apply to the Hotel Astoria, where the chief Commissaries live in plenty. At a recent meeting at the Battle Works Trotsky was so much heckled by his disillusioned audience that he left in a hurry, accompanied by hoots.

The attempt of the Archduke Joseph to regain power for the Hapsburgs has failed, at all events temporarily, owing to the action taken by the Allied Governments. The Note sent by the Supreme Council at Versailles to Budapest pointed out that the Hungarian Government under Archduke Joseph had not been established by the will of the people, " but by a coup d'etat carried out by a small group of police under the protection of a foreign army " ; that a Peace negotiated with a Government of that kind could not be durable ; and that while it lasted the Allied Governments could not give Hungary her muchneeded economic aid,. In reply to the Archduke Joseph's protestation that he was ready to submit his position to the popular vote, the Allies stated in effect that they could not trust elections carried out under the control of a Hapsburg. The Note concluded by demanding the resignation of the " present pretender to supreme power in the Hungarian State," and stating the willingness of the Supreme Council to make peace with an Assembly elected by free vote. According to the latest news when we go to press on Thursday, Herr Friedrich refuses to resign, and professes to represent the people.

The news from Upper Silesia is still somewhat eonfuaedIt seems fairly clear, however, that though a certain degree of order has been restored, it is of the surface only, and is the result not of the reconciliation of the inhabitants, but of ruthless suppression by the German authorities. Reports of German barbarities have been constant during the week, and it is said that the methods adopted in Belgium—summary executions, maltreatment of prisoners, brutalities to women and old people, and the wholesale deportation of men and boys—have been repeated. It is inevitable that in the turbulent condition of the country stories should have been exaggerated, but there unhappily seems to be evidence that there is truth in many of them. The Times of Tuesday published a long statement from its special correspondent in Silesia describing the investigations he had made, conjointly "with the correspondent of the Morning Post, into the charges, and quoting characteristic cases for which both writers vouch. It is generally agreed that the strike among the Polish miners was only a subsidiary cause of the • disturbances which have led to the present grave situation. The racial antipathy between the Germans and the Poles needed only this match to set it alight. The Poles state that German oppression, particularly since January and during the state of siege, has been intolerable. Added to this is the suspicion very strongly held that, in view of the plebiscite which under the Peace Treaty is to be held in Silesia to determine her government, -the Germans wish to discredit the Poles as a people, and to reduce the power of the Polish inhabitants so that the plebiscite may result in favour of German domination. To this end, it is declared, Germany first instigated the revolt, and • then deported the insurgents to France and Belgium to take part in reconstruction work demanded by the Allies.

An Allied Military Mission has been sent to Upper Silesia to inquire into the situation. The Gelman Government; though protesting against any suggestion of an Allied occupation to restore order, welcome the appointment of the Mission, and the Silesian authorities offer every facility for investigation, Which they feel sure, according to an official report from Copenhagen, will " lead to the Entente being convinced of the groundlessness of the Polish charges against the German Government and the German troops," and will reveal " the real influences behind the regrettable events in Upper Silesia." If there are grounds for Polish suspicions of German intrigue, the whole situation affords a grim lesson in the preliminaries of self-determination.

Following on the stories of German brutalities in Upper Silesia comes an exposure of Germany's cynical acquiescence in the Turkish atrocities in Armenia during the war. The Times of Wednesday publishes some facts -contained in a collection of German official documents under the title " Germany and Armenia : 1914-1918," edited by Dr. Johannes Lepsius, founder of the German Orient Mission and President of the German Armenian Society. Dr. Lepelus was given full access to the reports of German Diplomatic and Consular agents In Turkey. All the evidence shows " that, from the Imperial Chancellor in Berlin down to the lowest-grade official in Anatolia the whole of the German Foreign Service knew day by day what was happening in Armenia." But nothing effective was done, although it is obvious that the Central Powers could have imposed their will upon their ally had they wished to do so.

The German Ambassador at Constantinople, it is true; made representations to the Turkish authorities, but theGerman Government were apparently < satisfied with Enver Bey's plea that nothing should be done to' interfere with the " unification " of Turkey. Yet the German authorities knew well enough the real meaning of " unification," which was, as the German Ambassador wrote home in 1915, " to expel or kill everything that is not Turkish." In the Turkish principle of forcible conversion to Islam, with all its attendant horrors, Germany tiequieseed because " in the East creed and nationality are synonymous." Count Wolff-Metternich and Prince Hohenlohe, it Is stated, did indeed go so far in repudiation of the crimes as to suggest to Herr von Bethmann Hollweg that Germany should dissociate herself from her ally's enormities by articles in the Press ; " but the course was not deemed expedient." But perhaps Germany knew she was disqualified as an advocate 'of mercy. As the writer in the Times says, when Talaat Bey justified' the massacre of 20,000 women and children in four• days and 55,000 corpses were buried at Meskene alone on the plea of " military necessity," "what could the apostles of Kultur 'reply ? They had Belgium, French Flanders, and. Poland on their backs."

A great surprise was sprung upon American Labour on Tuesday by President Wilson. According to the Washington cone-sporide-nt of the' Times, 'the President, in refusing the demands made by railway shopmen for a further inereaae in wages, stated that they could expect no increase, " at least till the process of reconstruction is finished and it is possible to adjust 'the relations between prices and wages on something like a permanent basis." The railwaymen had asked for an increase if the cost of living were not lowered, but the President pointed out that such increase at this juncture could only further Increase costs and hamper production. It would be impossible to increase freight rates or to call upon the Treasury to meet the

expense. He added that the cost of living " had reached the peak," and might be lowered by Government effort. It would certainly be lowered by the ratification of Peace. The President's arguments, however, seem to have failed with the railwaymen, for on Wednesday It was announced that they could not accept a settlement on the basis suggested and that a strike vote was to be taken immediately.

The Committee of Inquiry appointed to investigate the Caporetto disaster in 1917 has now issued its Report. The Committee places the chief responsibility upon the Supreme Command. General Cadorna is severely criticized for his general conduct of the Army, which weakened the moral of the troops, and for his defective organization and strategic policy. Various members of his Staff are also heavily censured, and in particular the Commander of the Second Army, "for his cruel disciplinary methods."

The Morning Post tells us that the decision to conduct the affairs of the Royal Commission on Agriculture in secrecy was due to the vcrtab ta favour of secrecy by the Labour representatives. There must be some reason for this extraordinary volte-face, and we should very much like to know what it is. Day in and day out the Daily Herald exhausted its powers of invective against those who wished the meetings of the Royal Commission to be secret. When the matter was put to the vote the disciples of the Daily Herald voted for secrecy. Can it be that Lord Selborne's advocacy of publicity was enough to drive the Labour representatives in the other direction ? Did their heated imaginations see in the arguments of a landlord Peer some dark design against the position of Labour ? If so, the Labour representatives seem to have been acting quite irrationally because in a panic. Whatever happens, we trust that the Royal Commission on this most important subject will do something to redeem the great reputation which British Royal Commissions have always enjoyed. The Coal Commission was a stunt, not a judicial taking of evidence. Practical affairs are not helped forward by such means. We suppose that all men in their calmer moments would admit this, whatever their political points of view may be.

We are glad to see that Lord Lee is to receive a deputation of allotment-holders, who will state the case for safeguarding the allotment movement. Allotment-holders, naturally alarmed by the-large number of evictions, demand a two years' tenancy from the end -of the war. Sir Kingsley Wood, in his letter to Lord Lee on behalf of the allotment-holders, recognizes the State's need of land for its house-building programme, and also the importance of open spaces for the public. He urges, however, that there is an equal need of allotments for increasing the food supply, and asks that where land is retaken for other purposes,' suitable plots should be substituted. In addition to the deputation to Lord Lee, the campaign opened by allotmentholders includes a petition to the L.C.C., candidates at municipal elections, and protest meetings.

With the deepest regret we record the death Of General Botha, Which occurred on Wednesday night. We' cannot attempt to do justice in a few lines to the career of this remarkable and great-hearted man. He was a brave and generous enemy and a loyal friend. He was one of those liberal-minded 'Boers who tried to divert Krliger'sobstinate policy and thusprevent the war in 1899. Raving failed, he took the field, as he was bound to do, and no soldier on either side gathered `more renown from the campaign. He succeeded Joubert as Commandant•-General of the Boer forces when Joubert 'died. When the Treaty of Vereeniging was accepted by the Boers, no one 'respected it more scrupulously and honourably than General Botha. , He 'felt that it was possible for the Boers to be free under the British flag, and he carried his conviction into pectic*. What the British Empire owes to him as' Prime 'Milliliter of the South African Union for his wise leadership of those who worked for the co-operation, and indeed the identification, of the two white races in South Africa, can perhaps never be' fully measured. But for him General Hertzog with his subtle and poisonous " two-stream " policy would have gained even more adherents than he has gained. General Botha's campaign in German South-West Airia during the Great War was a brilliant feat of arms. With his moderating influence removed, the future in South Africa will certainly be more difficult.