“AFTER THE WAR."

Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 29, Issue 40, 25 May 1917, Page 8

“AFTER THE WAR."

Captain Wilfred Findlay's articles on the problems that will confront the Mother Country after the war, constitute a very interesting study of the psychology of the people of the Homeland from the point of view of a young Now Zealander, says the Wellington “Times." They contain also much that is at once instructive and suggestive from the political, the sociological and the economic standpoint. Undoubtedly the people of the Homeland are looking forward to, and have won the right to look forward to, a reign not only of peace, but of plenty after the war—to a time when, as John Burns would say, there shall be leisure for all, pleasure for all, treasure for all, not merely for the few. The great brotherhood of the British Army, which Captain Findlay has so clearly sensed, should lead to a great, permanent brotherhood of the British race throughout the British Empire—a brotherhood in which distinctions of class and caste and creed shall be unknown. It will, indeed, be a tragedy if these great “after the war" aspirations remain unrealised. “Yet, with the blessed period of “after the war” apparently approaching," says Captain Findlay, “this country has heard practically nothing of proposed schemes for meeting the difficulties which must arise when our armies come home—armies numbering millions of men, trained to arms, returning with a knowledge that they have earned the right to true citizenship, but alas, apparently returning to the regime of pre-war days, with the additional burden of an enforced poverty the equal of which they have never known." As Captain Findlay points out, after the war “the- burden of taxation is going to be heavy for years to come." Even if the war finishes this year or early next year, it is too probable that the interest and sinking fund charges on the War Debt will amount in round figures to some £300,000,000 a year, and that a national revenue of £500,000,000 a year will be required in place of the £200,000,000 which was considered an excessive amount in pre-war days. If such a huge tax-burden is to be levied on trade and industry in the old, bad way—especially if this vast revenue is raised in large part by indirect taxation, which inevitably carries with it an added burden of at least 50 to 60 per cent, of wholesalers' and retailers’ profits on the taxes — then, indeed, will the people of the Motherland have to endure a poverty, the equal of which they have never yet known. And then—what? Well may Captain Findlay exclaim, “God forbid that, after all the sacrifices and horrors this country has borne in the name of civilisation, evil strife should take its place, that the magic of 'after the war' should be dispelled and leave nought but misery and violence in its place.”

With graphic touch, Captain Findlay shows how great has been the awakening of the men of the British masses, of the British proletariat, who have battled side by side through the great adventure of this war. ‘.‘When war broke out,” he says, “England got together a huge army of men who did not count— uneducated, unthinking men, who from inheritance and environment apparently took their position in the social scheme as natural and irrevocable. She trained them in mind and body, and sent them across the sea to fight her enemies. These men have nobly fulfilled the highest duty their country could impose on them. Surely, it is only right that on their return they should be treated as true citizens, unfettered by any class distinction.’ He declares, and we believe rightly declares, that “No plan •(for solving after-the-wnr problems) can now succeed in England, unless it has as one of its chief aims the undermining of class distinction.” But, as ho points out, “To do this (and to treat the returned soldiers as tfho citizens), the country must first realise that those who return are different beings from those who went away—no longer to be treated as ‘the lower classes,’ and as such ignored when vital issues are being decided. It will not be easy, he adds, to affect such a realisation, but it is surely imperative if England’s name for fair play is to remain and civil strife is to be avoided.” The great difficulty is that “the feeling of class superiority is ingrained in the English upper classes, and amongst those who have not lived amongst the men of the British Army the feeling is still as it was in pre-war d-iys.” TJr also, it is in

these men that the governing power is vested at present, and on them devolves the duty of making wise provision for a new state of affairs. ‘ ‘ The Government of the country," states Captain Findlay, “has been for years in the hands of a political set whose members have been drawn from a class which appears to have neither knowledge of, nor sympathy with, the workers. . . . The unrest, the awful slums, the sweated labour, the low wage standard and the woeful lack of education, are all monuments to the neglect of the underworld by those who govern it." Mr Lloyd George is “the outstanding exception”; and Captain Findlay tells us how Mr Lloyd George, when he saw the unfairness of it all and tried to put it right, was * ‘ insulted and reviled from one end of . the country to the other in language which at times was almost staggering." The common danger to rich and poor alike has, it is true, united all classes for the time being in support of the one man of clear vision and with a faculty for getting things done. But, asks Captain Findlay, and not without reason, “Should the danger be removed, will the upper classes remain loyal; or -will they, when Mr Lloyd George renews his pre-war work, once more repeat their chorus of abuse and show that their pre-war outlook remains unchanged?"

Time alone can show. But the very fact that Mr Lloyd George has not yet dared to call upon the great landowners, as such, to pay one pennypiece towards the huge cost of defending “their" land—the very fact that since the war began not one penny has been added to the almost microscopical British land tax —does not seem to argue that ho has much faith in the loyalty and patriotism of the upper classes. It is good, however, to know that Captain Findlay, necessarily more in touch with Home affairs than we out here can be, looks to Mr Lloyd George to renew the pre-war work. If Mr Lloyd George’s future be but true to the best promise of his past; if, after the war, he follows up the trail blazed by his great pre-war Budget, his Land Tax Budget of 1909-10, the response of the war-enlightened, erstwhile denizens of “the underworld," will be so enthusiastic, so overwhelming, that the attitude of even the most influential of the upper classes will be practically negligible; though, of course, it is greatly to be desired for many reasons, and not least for their own sake, that they should loyally and heartily co-operate in bringing about the good time coming “after the war." Captain Findlay rightly declares that as long as the present overcrowding of the cities exists, it will be w'ell-high impossible for the replacing of class distinction by comradeship and brotherhood to be brought about; he rightly prefers the settlement of the British soldier on British soil to his being exiled, a la Rider Haggard, to the Dominions overseas; he rightly declares that “there are huge areas in England producing practically nothing, because their owners require them for parks or shooting grounds"; and he rightly denounces ‘ ‘ the great class selfishness of these landowners, who, rather than forego their sport or lose their parks, prefer to see their fellow-countrymen set out (in many cases over thousands of miles) to get a little land to settle on." Labour, happily, sees this also. Labour sees in the Lloyd George Budget of 1909-10 the sign-post pointing the way to a land tax that shall make the great land-holders pay something more like their fair share of the cost of defending the land they hold—a laud tax that shall make the great landwithholders let go their grip of the land they are holding idle, both in town and country. They look to such a tax to free the people from the slavery of the slums and to open up _ to colonisation Britain's own countryside, thereby solving the problems of poverty and unemployment, and insanitary and inadequate housing which must be grappled with in downright est after the war. That this is so is shown by the following resolution carried unanimously at the recent conference of the British Labour Party:— This conference, recognising that the huge national expenditure caused by the war has. to be met by increased taxation, declares that those’ who claim the ownership of the land of the country should be required to make a special contribution towards its defence. It therefore calls upon the Government to impose a direct tax on land values in the next Budget; and, to enable this to be done, to use the powers conferred by the Defence of the Realm Act to compel all owners of land to furnish an immediate declaration of the present value, extent, and character of all land in their possession. This conference affirms that such a tax, in addition to’ providing a large amount of revenue, would open up the land to the people, increase the production of home-grown food, and thus materially reduce the prevailing high cost of living, tend to raise wages and lessen the evil of unemployment, which threatens on the close of the war.