Treasury Chambers.—Thanks him for his help with the Finance Bill.
Valour House, Southwest Harbor, Maine.—Refers to her hurried departure from England and her delay at Lisbon. Asks how she might best assist the cause of persuading America to join the war.
Proposes various measures in connection with the War Savings Bill.
—————
Transcript
21st. August. 1940.
Dear Clem,
I had a talk with Kingsley yesterday about the War Savings Bill, and as you probably know we are proposing at the Party Meeting to-day to appoint a small committee to go into this.
As you will remember, this question arose out of the talks that we had with the Policy Committee of the T.U.C. regarding the Keynes plan and the T.U.C. rightly maintained that before they could possibly associate themselves with the recommendation to the workers to save during the war, they must be assured that such savings would not be used when the war was over either by the employers or by the State to reduce the position of the workers.
It is therefore essential in my mind, that it should be new savings and not transferred capital that should form the basis of the Government promise, and any proposal to transform the Bill into a general disregard of all savings, including pre-war, would entirely fail to meet the case though possibly some arrangement might be come to with regard to holdings converted up till last week’s debate.
On the other hand, I am quite sure that the real gravamen of the heat developed in the Labour ranks, is due to our old enemy the Household Means Test, which so long as it remains, will be a constant irritant.
I therefore suggested to Kingsley, that he should seriously consider some gesture with regard to this vital matter and I would like you and he and Arthur to put your heads together to see whether something of this kind could not be done. I am turning over the matter in my own mind. I do not believe that it necessarily need cost a very great deal if it were done on reasonable lines.
I know of course, that the Labour Party have maintained that there ought to be no Means Test of any kind at any rate for Unemployment Assistance, but I do not think that this can be defended either for Unemployment Assistance or for Old Age Pensions. On the other hand, it is humiliating that a member of the household of the applicant should have to undergo a detailed examination of all his resources including savings before the grant to the old person or unemployed living with him, is considered. After the holiday is over, this matter must be faced and dealt with.
I hope you will get something of a change while Parliament is not sitting.
Yours sincerely,
[blank]
Rt. Hon. C. R. Attlee, M.P.,
House of Commons,
S.W.1.
P.S. In turning out my papers & clearing my desk I came across the enclosed which came a few days back. I cannot help feeling it is a most valuable suggestion
—————
The postscript is handwritten.
Refers to Wood’s letter (3/304), and emphasises the need ‘to smooth over difficulties during these present anxious days’. Hopes their talk yesterday will lead to a lessening of tension. Sends a copy of his book A Levy on Capital.
Treasury Chambers.—Will forward Pethick-Lawrence’s letter (see 3/318) and his book A Levy on Capital to the Chancellor (Wood), who is out of London for a few days.
Broomhill Bank, Tunbridge Wells.—Acknowledges the receipt of his letter (see 3/318). Will read his book (A Levy on Capital).
War Office.—Thanks him for his kind message (probably congratulating him on his appointment as Secretary of State for War).
179 City Road, E.C.1.—Sends a copy of the cable received in response to the open letter (cf. 3/196), and asks for comments on it.
West Hackhurst, Abinger Hammer, Dorking.—Invites him to tea, to meet Mrs Barger.
—————
Transcript
West Hackhurst, Abinger Hammer, Dorking
17-2-41
Dear Mr Pethick-Lawrence,
Mrs Barger is here again, and I remember you saying that you might be able to come and see her one afternoon. If you are free next Sunday (the 23rd) I should be so pleased if you could walk over and stay to tea—I shall be here myself that day.
With kind remembrance to Mrs Pethick-Lawrence and yourself:
Yours sincerely
E M Forster
Dominions Office.—Returns, and comments upon, a memorandum (apparently about health administration), which he received just before leaving the Ministry of Health. Suggests showing it to Ernest Brown.
Thanks him for his letter (2/307). Wishes him well in Canada (as High Commissioner).
Office of the Lord Privy Seal.—His cousin Gordon England wishes to communicate his views on Excess Profits Tax to the Labour Party. Suggests that Pethick-Lawrence and others interested in finance should meet him.
London Air Park, Feltham.—Wishes to discuss with him a matter he has raised with Clement Attlee (see 1/62).
Dominions Office.—Thanks him for his good wishes (see 2/310).
Asks for the return of Pethick-Lawrence’s book A Levy on Capital, which was lent to Sir Kingsley Wood last year.
Treasury Chambers.—The Chancellor (Wood) has read A Levy on Capital (see 3/319), and will return it at the first opportunity.
56 Russell Square, W.C.1.—Sends a paper by her brother on post-war policy.
Sends a brochure by Sir Alan Anderson and a copy of his own comments on it (see 1/53). Has been working on his autobiography. Is going to Scotland for a few days.
Ministry of War Transport.—Is glad he is interested in the document (his pamphlet War of Ideas), which he hopes will be sent to various national committees of the International Chamber of Commerce.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—Suggests holding another meeting of the informal all-party group that sent an open letter to India last December. Is concerned at the state of negotiations between the British Government and Indians.
—————
Transcript
179 City Road, E.C.1.
9th October, 1941.
Dear Pethwick-Lawrence†,
I believe that the time has come when it might be valuable to have another discussion among the small informal All Party Group that joined together to write an open letter to India last December.
I must confess that I am not happy about the Indian situation. It is quite possible to find logical grounds for comforting oneself and saying that the British Government has done everything possible and that it is for Indians to make the next move. Nevertheless all the time it seems to me that things are going in India in such a way that there is being built up beneath the surface a situation which will ultimately confront us with another Ireland on a much larger and more dangerous scale. By that I mean a situation which has deteriorated beyond repair. I think it is dangerous to be comforted by the mere outward signs of the declining Congress membership and the steady flow of recruits to the Colours. After the war public interest will swing back to internal political problems and it will be political extremists, embittered beyond repair, who will control the situation. On the British side there has clearly been a hardening recently. I need only refer to two such matters as the further extension of Linlithgow’s term of office by a year and the Prime Minister’s deliberate, pointed reminder that, so far as India was concerned, it was for the British Government to interpret the Atlantic Charter. I am not saying that either of these things is right or wrong; but I do feel that they represent—as I have said—a hardening on the British side and have been interpreted with a good deal of misgiving, even among our friends in India. Sir Sikander Hyat Khan’s comment on the Prime Minister’s interpretation of the Atlantic Charter was significant.
Hopeless as the situation seems I feel that it is still up to all those who have the time to be interested in India to consider without resting whether there are any constructive steps that can be taken which might result in breaking the deadlock.
Can you let me know whether it would be possible for you to attend a meeting? It seems to me most likely that we should be able to get everybody together if the time could be fixed at 5 p.m. on some day when Parliament is sitting. Can you suggest a day to me when such a time would suit you?
Yours sincerely,
George Schuster
The Rt. Hon.
F. W. Pethwick-Lawrence†, M.P.,
House of Commons, S.W.1.
—————
† Sic.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—Has arranged a meeting of the all-party group, to discuss the Indian problem. Asks whether he should invite some members of the Labour Party if Lees-Smith cannot come.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—A committee room in the House of Commons has been reserved for Tuesday’s meeting (of the all-party group on India).
(Signed as Secretary.)
Outlines the points agreed on by an all-party group in the Commons in connection with constitutional reform in India. Asks him to consider the matter and obtain the opinion of the Viceroy (Linlithgow).
(Carbon copy of a typed original.)
—————
Transcript
Draft letter to Mr. Amery.
27.10.41.
As you know there is widespread feeling among Members of all Parties in the House of Commons that, although the enlargement of the Viceroy’s Council and the setting up of the National Defence Council are to be regarded as most important and satisfactory steps, these do not in themselves afford a solution for the fundamental constitutional problem, and that it is necessary to continue making efforts to this end.
A small group met to discuss this matter in the House of Commons last week. There were present Wardlaw Milne, Edward Cadogan, Pethick Lawrence, Graham White and myself. There was general agreement on the following points.
1. The Indian problem is a matter on which Members of the House of Commons feel that they have a direct responsibility as Members.
2. The step most urgently needed at present is that a small body of Indians of experience, intellectual ability, and constructive ideas, should get together in India to consider what form of constitution can be devised which would be acceptable to the main Parties as a substitute for the 1935 Act.
The meeting fully appreciated the difficulties of the present situation, the essence of which is that, not only the leaders of Congress, but even the Liberal Party, seem to be asking the British Government to undertake a substantial immediate transfer of constitutional power to Indian Ministers without any prior agreement or even discussion as to the ultimate form of the new constitution. The problem is how to get representative statesmen away from this negative position and working together on the constructive planning work which is necessary. After full discussion those present agreed that the following line of action is worthy of consideration.
A representative group of all Parties in the House of Commons (which might very well be the group of Members who sent an Open Letter to India at the end of 1940) should send a communication to the leaders of the various Parties in India, making the following points:
(a) The feeling in the House of Commons is one of grave distress that progress is not being made towards a constitutional settlement, that such a settlement is deeply desired on the British side but that these Members do not see how it can be attained without agreement between the Parties on the form of a new constitution.
(b) It is important on the one hand that Parliament should understand what motives are holding the Indian leaders back from discussion on this matter and, on the other hand, that the leaders themselves should understand what are the feelings in the House of Commons.
(c) It is possible that personal discussion between British M.P.s and Indian leaders might help to a better understanding in both these directions, and, further, that a joint discussion of the constitutional problem itself might be helpful. Although difficulties of travel and the great preoccupation of all those engaged in public life with urgent issues at home are serious obstacles, the feeling in the House of Commons on the matter is so strong that it could probably be arranged that a small representative group, say not more than three or four, representing all Parties in the House of Commons, should pay a visit to India. This visit would be entirely unofficial in the sense that it would be in no way connected with the Government. Its object would be:
1st. to assure the Indian leaders of the great interest of the House of Commons in finding a constructive solution and of the general feeling in the House as to the way in which such a solution could be found;
2nd. to give the M.P.s concerned a chance of appreciating the Indian position and of giving a true account of this to the House;
3rd. To† afford such help as these Members could to the Indian Parties in dealing with the problem itself.
Having explained these points the communication would end with a definite request to be informed by the leaders of each of the main Parties whether, in the event of this small mission visiting India, they would be prepared to enter into discussion with the British M.P.s either alone or jointly with the representatives of the other Indian Parties.
The Members present at the meeting were under no illusions as to the difficulties of finding any sort of accommodation with the extreme Party leaders, and they recognised the probability that both Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Jinnah would refuse to enter into joint discussions. They saw also a number of other possible difficulties. On the other hand they felt that action on the lines suggested could not do any harm and might do a considerable amount of good in convincing Indians of British interest in the problem and of Parliament’s desire to find a constructive solution. The general view also was that, even if a solution cannot be found, anything that can be done now to keep the situation fluid and to prevent permanent estrangement growing up would be of value. They have in mind the situation which will arise after the war when, after the period of war prosperity and excietment† is over, political leaders will almost certainly resume their sway over the masses.
Some of the Members present were more hopeful as to the possibilities than others but all were agreed in desiring me to ask you to consider this matter and, if you thought fit, to send a copy of this letter by Air Mail to the Viceroy, asking him to inform you by telegram of his own views on the proposal. Although the essence of the idea is that the visit is a completely spontaneous gesture by the House of Commons and in no sense a move which has been suggested or encouraged by Government, it is of course rully {1} recognised that it would be most undesirable that it should be undertaken if it were actively disapproved of by yourself or the Viceroy.
There will doubtless be considerable difficulties in finding Members of the right qualifications to go, and the provision of money for the expenses of some of the Members will also have to be considered. It was, however, generally felt that these difficulties could be overcome and were certainly worth overcoming if there were even a small hope that some good might be achieved.
An important point is that there should be some sounding of the position and possibly some private approaches to individuals before the proposal is made public. This is a matter for careful consideration.
In the course of the discussion it was suggested that such a visit might perhaps be arranged through the Empire Parliamentary Association and be represented as a gesture made by that Association. While it was recognised that there might be certain advantages in this, the general feeling was that it would tend to blunt the sharpness of the impression which it is desired to convey, viz: an impression of the great interest felt on the subject in the House of Commons and of the earnest desire of the House of Commons, as such, to help in finding a solution.
—————
{1} A slip for 'fully'.
† Sic.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—Encloses a draft letter to Amery (3/200), prepared as a result of last Tuesday’s meeting.
Commends Schuster’s draft letter to Amery (see 3/200) and suggests a slight amendment.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—He appreciates Pethick-Lawrence's point (see 3/218) and will try to provide for it.
179 City Road, E.C.1.—Encloses an explanatory note (3/203). Has exchanged correspondence on the subject with Amery, which he will be glad to show to Pethick-Lawrence.