take and exercise control over manufactories capable of being used for the manufacture of munitions, as well as over factories already engaged in that work. In the hope of securing more loyal coöperation from the laborers, Mr. Lloyd George and Mr. Runciman (president of the board of trade) conferred with representatives of the trade unions, March 17th and March 19th. The agreement was reached that (1) during the war there was to be no stoppage of work on the munitions and equipment ordered by the government; (2) disputes were to be settled by conferences between the men and their employers, or in case of deadlock referred either to the Committee on Production, to a single arbitrator appointed by the board of trade, or to a Court of Arbitration representing equally capital and labor; (3) an advisory committee representing the munitions workers was to be appointed by the government; (4) trade-union regulations, especially the restrictions upon the employment of semi-skilled and female labor in union shops, were to be relaxed during the war, on the assurance that no diminution of pay would result from the introduction of cheaper labor. During March also a strong movement was set on foot to restrict or prohibit the use of alcohol, so that the labor of the munitions workers would be more efficient. King George himself set an example to the nation in this respect by announcing, the first week in April, that henceforth the use of alcoholic beverages would be prohibited in the royal household. In May the Parliament authorized the government to regulate the sale of liquor in areas where the munitions of war were being made, and a Central Board of Control was nominated, under the chairmanship of Lord D'Abernon. In spite of the measures taken by the government to increase the output of munitions, the shortage continued to cause complaint and criticism in the press. The London Times' military correspondent asserted May 12th that in attacks at Fromelles and Richebourg, "the want of an unlimited supply of high explosive was a fatal bar to our success." To break through the hard crust of the German line in France and Belgium, he asserted, "we need more high explosives, more heavy howitzers, and more men."

ATTITUDE OF THE INDEPENDENT LABOR PARTY. The difficulty experienced by Great Britain in meeting the demand for more men and more munitions was partly due to the attitude of the laboring classes. The Socialist Independent Labor Party, although representing only a fraction of organized labor, was influential in propagating doubt as to the justice of Great Britain's cause, and in raising the question in the minds of at least a few workingmen, whether after all democracy was to be furthered by waging war in alliance with the Tsar. A conference of the Independent Labor Party met at Norwich, April 5th, reëlected Mr. Jowett as chairman, and by an almost unanimous vote resolved: "That this conference expresses its strong disapproval of the action of the Labor Party [the Labor Party, it should be noted, represented the bulk of the trade unions, whereas the Independent Labor Party represented the Socialist minority] in taking part in a recruiting campaign, and of Independent Labor Party members of Parliament speaking from platforms on which attempts were made to justify the war and the foreign policy of the Liberal government which

led up to the war." While they were at Norwich, many of the Independent Labor Party delegates attended the meeting of the Union of Democratic Control, whose object was to abolish secret and undemocratic diplomacy. Mr. Ramsay McDonald, who presided over the meeting, declared that Russia was fighting for power in the Balkans and France for revenge; that Prussian militarism could not be crushed by war, but must be destroyed from within. This extremely diffident attitude towards the war, let it be repeated, was not shared by the majority of the workingmen. Nevertheless it must be admitted that a very widespread discontent was manifested, chiefly as a result of the increase in the cost of living without a simultaneous commensurate increase of wages. During the period from January to May, 286 labor disputes, strikes, or lockouts were reported, affecting 109,693 men. Two-thirds of the strikes were caused by the demand for higher wages, and at least 12 by the attempt of employers to maintain the "open shop" system. The total time lost amounted to 762,900 days. In the coalmines, and in the munitions industry, the workers complained that they were being forced to work long hours, without an adequate increase of pay, while the cost of living had increased, and the employers were enjoying unprecedented profits. Any attempt on the part of the government to coerce munitions workers, or to introduce compulsory military service, would encounter the most stubborn opposition from organized labor.

THE COALITION CABINET. In May a cabinet crisis was precipitated by the quarrel (see below, Churchill's Resignation) between Winston Spencer Churchill, first lord of the admiralty, and Lord Fisher, first sea lord. The latter resigned May 14th; at the same time Mr. Churchill offered to resign. In view of the demand which had of late become insistent, that the Opposition be allowed some voice and some responsibility in the cabinet during the war, Mr. Asquith decided to take this opportunity for the reconstruction of the cabinet and the formation of a Coalition government. Lord Haldane, Lord Beauchamp, Mr. Hobhouse, Mr. Herbert Samuel, Mr. Pease, Mr. Montagu, Lord Lucas, and Lord Emmot were asked to resign their posts, and in their stead eight Unionists were brought into the cabinet. By creating 2 new places in the cabinet, bringing the total up to 32, room was made for a Labor member and another Liberal; so that the Coalition cabinet included 12 Liberals, 8 Unionists, 1 Labor member, and Lord Kitchener. The apportionment of portfolios, as announced May 25th, was as follows: Prime minister and first lord of the treasury, Mr. Asquith (Liberal); minister without portfolio, Lord Lansdowne (Unionist); lord chancellor, Sir S. Buckmaster (Liberal); lord president of the council, Lord Crewe (Liberal); lord privy seal, Lord Curzon (Unionist); chancellor of the exchequer, Mr. Reginald McKenna (Liberal); secretary of state for home affairs, Sir John Simon (Liberal); secretary of state for foreign affairs, Sir Edward Grey (Liberal); secretary of state for colonies, Mr. Andrew Bonar Law (Unionist); secretary of state for India, Mr. J. Austen Chamberlain (Unionist); secretary of state for war, Lord Kitchener; minister of munitions (a newly created port

folio), Mr. David Lloyd George (Liberal); first lord of the admiralty, Mr. Arthur J. Balfour (Unionist); president of the Board of Trade, Mr. Walter Runciman (Liberal); president of the Local Government Board, Mr. Walter Hume Long (Unionist); chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Mr. Winston Spencer Churchill (Liberal); resigned November, 1915, succeeded by Mr. Herbert Samuel (Liberal); chief secretary for Scotland, Mr. McKinnon Wood (Liberal); president of the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries (not previously a cabinet office), Lord Selborne (Unionist); first commissioner of works, Mr. Lewis Harcourt (Liberal); president of the Board of Education, Mr. Arthur Henderson (Labor); attorney-general, Sir Edward Carson (Unionist), resigned October, 1915, succeeded by Sir Frederick Edwin Smith (Unionist); chiefsecretary to the lord-lieutenant of Ireland, Mr. Augustine Birrell (Liberal). Outside of the cabinet, important ministerial positions were assigned to Mr. H. Samuel (postmaster-general), Mr. F. E. Smith, (solicitor-general), and Mr. Montagu (financial secretary to the treasury). In respect of the new cabinet, it should be noted that Unionists were placed in charge of India, the colonies, the navy, and agriculture; that the Labor member, Mr. Henderson, on the other hand, was not assigned to a post where his partisan convictions were likely to find expression; that Mr. Winston Churchill was removed from the admiralty and given a post without special responsibility; that the Irish Nationalist leader, Mr. Redmond, although offered a place in the Coalition cabinet, refused to accept a government office while Home Rule was still denied to Ireland, and an Ulster Unionist (Sir Edward Carson) sat in the cabinet; and, finally, that after seven historic years as chancellor of the exchequer, Mr. David Lloyd George, the eloquent Welsh land-reformer, resigned the ministry of finance into the hands of Mr. McKenna, and undertook a new and arduous responsibility as minister of munitions. Of interest to students of constitutional history was the bill introduced immediately after the formation of the Coalition government, to render the reëlection of newly appointed cabinet officers unnecessary during war time. The reason which led to this important departure from a venerable precedent was the obvious inexpediency of requiring a newly appointed minister to undertake an electoral campaign, distracting his attention from his ministerial functions, just at the time when his undivided energies were demanded by the nation.

LLOYD GEORGE AND MUNITIONS. The bill to establish and define the powers of the minister of munitions was introduced in the House of Commons the first week in June, by the home secretary, Sir John Simon. The extraordinary character of the powers which the bill conferred upon the new minister evoked violent criticism in the House of Commons, June 7th. Mr. Pringle (Liberal) expressed his abhorrence of the provisions which, he claimed, would give the minister of munitions power to "socialize" labor. A Labor member, Mr. Philip Snowden, vigorously opposed compulsion and "forced labor." An Irish Nationalist believed that the bill would force "slavery" upon the working classes, and demanded to know of what avail it would be to destroy German militarism, if liberty were deliberately abolished in the United

Kingdom; Mr. Hobhouse warned the government against introducing compulsory labor. Mr. Crooks (Labor) expressed the fear that "conscript labor" was contemplated. Sir John Simon quelled the storm of criticism by disclaiming any intention on the part of the government to impose any compulsion upon labor. In course of the debate Sir R. Cooper made the astonishing statement that he had offered, as long ago as April 21st, to supply 5,000,000 shells, and desired to know why his offer was not accepted. Despite hostile criticism, the Ministry of Munitions Bill was passed by both Houses of Parliament and received the royal assent, June 9th. With an energy that promised well for the future, Mr. David Lloyd George now threw himself into the work of his new department. On June 23rd he came forward with a Munitions Bill, which embodied the chief points of his programme: (1) Strikes and lockouts were to be made illegal in the munitions plants, and industrial disputes were to be settled by compulsory arbitration; (2) the short-sighted policy which had permitted skilled workers to be drafted into the army from the munition plants was now to be reversed, and the skilled munitions workers who had enlisted were to be brought home again; (3) seven days were to be allowed for the voluntary enrollment of skilled men in a mobile munition corps, the enrollment being conducted by the trade unions, and the recruits being given a certificate instead of a uniform to show that they were engaged in patriotic service; (4) government control over munitions workshops was to be established, "slackers" were to be fined, and a Munitions Court was to be constituted; (5) trade union regulations, in so far as they hampered the work, were to be suspended; and (6) employers' profits were to be limited. During the debate on the Munitions Bill, an important revelation was made by Mr. Pease, former minister of education. The government at the beginning of the war, he affirmed, had no idea of the large proportion of high explosives or the number of machine-guns or the type of hand grenade which would be used in trench-warfare. Lord Kitchener, he implied, had been more farseeing than the other ministers, and had continually urged the necessity of providing in advance for the materials which might be required in a long and stubbornly contested war. The Munitions Bill was finally passed by Parliament the first week in July, with an amendment somewhat weakening the government's power to enforce the arbitration of industrial disputes. By July 12th 90,000 men had been enrolled as munitions workers under the new plan. By July 28th 16 national munitions factories had been established in England, and 10 more, it was announced, would soon be erected. Early in August a board of 25 scientists and engineering experts was created to examine inventions and improved appliances for the munitions ministry. On August 12th the minister announced that in addition to the "national" munitions plants, 345 "controlled establishments" were engaged on government work. In "controlled establishments" the owner, for his part, consented to turn his excess profits over to the national exchequer, while the workmen consented to suspend restrictive trade-union regulations. In September it became evident that the government was living up to the provision of the Mu

nitions Bill which provided for the establishment of Munitions Courts to fine delinquent workmen. A large number of Cammell, Laird and Company's men were fined for loss of time, the aggregate loss of time in 20 weeks having amounted to about 1,500,000 hours, and the fines varying from 5 to 60 shillings. The result of a little more than two months' work on the part of the able minister of munitions was indicated on September 15th, when the government announced that 715 munitions factories, employing 800,000 workmen, had been constituted as "controlled establishments," and in addition the ministry of munitions had constructed 20 shell factories and was constructing 18 more.

LABOR DIFFICULTIES. In September the failure of the government to enlist the hearty sympathy and support of the laboring classes began to cause grave concern. Strikes in the Welsh coal mines threatened to tie up industry in general and to cripple the munitions trade in particular. (For further information regarding the strike see STRIKES AND LOCKOUTS, Great Britain.) The minister of munitions, moreover, found that his most eloquent appeals were unavailing to secure a sufficient supply of labor for his munitions factories. In order to stir up enthusiastic patriotism, delegations of workers were sent to visit the front. The first of these delegations, upon its return, issued an appeal to labor-"We have brought the needs of your fellow workingmen at the front before you and we expect and believe you will not fail them." Mr. Lloyd George in person attended the Trade Union Congress, September 9th, so that he might answer the complaints of the trade unionists. In reply to the charge that the munitions workers were being forced to work overtime for the profit of the factoryowners, Mr. Lloyd George pointed to the national arsenals which had been established, and the limitation which had been imposed on profits in "controlled establishments." He in his turn complained that by insisting upon the strict observance of their rules, the trade unions were fatally hampering a most vital work. For example, at Woolwich Arsenal the engineers had refused to allow semi-skilled persons to do the work of qualified mechanics. In South Wales, the unions had refused to permit the operation of lathes by semi-skilled workers. In a large tool-making firm the workers had vetoed the employment of women to operate lathes. Such restrictions on the employment of unskilled labor must be abandoned during the war; and the unions must help the government to find the 80,000 skilled workmen and the 200,000 unskilled laborers who were urgently needed for munitions work. Owing to the shortage of labor, Mr. Lloyd George said, at least 15 per cent of the machines for turning out rifles, cannon, and shells were standing idle every night. "If the attitude of the Woolwich engineers is to be adhered to," he declared, "we are making straight for disaster." The same warning was repeated by Mr. Lloyd George in December, when he said that success or failure in the war depended upon his securing permission from organized labor to recruit 200,000 unskilled workers for the munitions plants.

IRISH HOME RULE AND WELSH DISESTABLISHMENT. Since the Irish Home Rule Bill had not yet come into operation, although passed for a

third time by the House of Commons in 1914 (consult the YEAR BOOK for 1914) in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Act, a certain amount of solicitude was expressed in Ireland lest a Unionist ministry, coming into power during the war, might strike the act from the statute book and cheat Ireland of the boon for which the Irish Nationalists had so stubbornly fought. The emotions may well be imag ined with which the Nationalists contemplated the establishment of the Coalition ministry, in which Sir Edward Carson, the leading antagonist of Home Rule, occupied an honorable posi tion. By the Suspensory Act of September, 1914 (consult the YEAR BOOK for 1914, GREAT BRITAIN, History, The War and the Irish Question), the Irish Home Rule Act had been suspended until the expiration of 12 months from the date of passing, i.e. until Sept. 18, 1915, or "until such later date (not being later than the end of the present war) as may be fixed by His Majesty by Order in Council." The anticipation of the Irish Nationalists that the Coalition cabinet, instead of permitting the act to come into effect in September would take advantage of the loophole permitting a further suspension, was realized when on Sept. 14, 1915, the government published an Order in Council as follows: "If at the expiration of 12 months from the date of the passing of the said acts (Irish Home Rule and Welsh Disestablishment) the present war is not ended-(1) No steps shall be taken to put the Government of Ireland Act, 1914, into operation until the expiration of 18 months from the date of the passing of that act unless the present war has previously ended, nor if at the expiration of those 18 months the present war has not ended until such later date, not being later than the end of the present war, as may hereafter be fixed by Order in Council. (2) The date of disestablishment under the Welsh Church Act, 1914, shall be postponed until the end of the present war."

FURTHER WAR CREDITS. When the House of Commons reassembled, September 14th, after its summer recess, it was called upon to consider two principal problems, finance and recruiting. The London Times editorially remarked, “Upon its (Parliament's) decisions during the next few weeks may depend the fortunes of the war and the future of the civilized world." A war credit of £250,000,000 was demanded by Premier Asquith, September 15th, to cover expenses up to November 15th. The total credits to date amounted to £1,262,000,000, since Aug. 6, 1914. The government, it was announced, had repaid £50,000,000 to the Bank of England, and had lent £28,000,000 to the dominions, £250,000,000 to other belligerents, and £30,000,000 to other foreign governments. The average daily cost of the war had shown a steady tendency to rise, from £2,700,000 during the period from April 1st to June 30th, to £3,000,000 from July 1st to July 17th, and £3,500,000 from July 17th to September 11th. During the next month Great Britain's gross daily expenditure would not exceed, on the average, £5,000,000.

RECRUITING. In asking for the new credit, Mr. Asquith made the important but very vague statement that from first to last, including both army and navy, "not far short of 3,000,000 men' had offered themselves for service. The total casualties numbered 380,000, although