-'/THE SOCIAL CREDITER

The Social Crediter, Saturday, December 9th, 1939.

-'/THE SOCIAL CREDITERFOR POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC REALISM

Vol. 3. No. 13. Registered at G.P.O. as a NewspaperPostage (home and abroad) ~d. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 9th, 1939. 6d. Weekly.

WHOSE SERVICE IS PERFECT FREEDOMBy c. H;'. DOUGLAS

"Let us now praise Famous Men."

It is characteristic of the Jewish- Whig conception of theState, that the State should do anything for the individualother than permit him to become able to do everything forhimself. I think that this is the simple explanation of theobvious fact that Germany, because of her population atonce docile and truculent, has been so invaluable to Jewry.Frankfort was the capital of International Finance until itmoved to New York, and the form of State Capitalism whichbegan in Germany, spread to Russia and is strugglingdesperately to conquer Great Britain and the United States,is coalescing to ensure that it shall become universal eitherthrough conquest or Revolution.

For this reason, if for no other, it appears to be ofthe highest importance to recognise that we are engaged intwo wars at one and the same time, and that, to win theexternal war against the German incarnation of the Willto Power, we must conquer it in our own State and Bankinginstitutions. Anyone who is unable to see that "Socialism"is merely Will-to-Power, and that it becomes State Capital-ism inevitably (because universalised individual Capitalismis the complete and only answer to the Will-to-Power) hasnot, I think anything of consequence to contribute to anunderstanding of the present situation.

It is obvious that anonymity is the antithesis of bothindividualism and responsibility-it is the amorphous, indistinction to the defined responsibility. The first characteristicconferred upon an individual by Christianity is "a Christianname." A child thus becomes an individual, not merely"a human being" or "one of the Smiths". And if at somelater date, John Smith forges a cheque, we are careful toincarcerate not merely one of the Smiths, but John Smith.

It is equally significant that, as far as possible, every

ON OTHER PAGES

A Catholic Marksman"According to your Cloth" by Mrs. Palmer.Painless War Finance by H. R. P.

Alberta: The Wider FrontChatham House

(XI)

attack on individual freedom is, like every attack on localand state sovereignty, an anonymous attack, generally inmisleading phrases, and fathered on an institution whichcannot be made responsible for it. Anonymity is anacknowledgement that an action which is covered by it,would provoke reprisals if the perpetrator were not shieldedby superior force.

When the Civil Service was, in fact, as well as byconstitution, simply the highly-trained executive of auelected Political Minister, this anonymity was quite possibly,although not necessarily, justified.

But, as Lord Hewart, in his book "The New Despot-ism" has pointed out with the technical ability arising fromlifelong 'experience, the modern Civil Service ischaracterised by an administrative lawlessness which issomething quite new in British experience. More and morethe business of the country is being controlled by irresponsibleFonctionnaires sheltering behind some Enabling Act. Eachinterference increases the mass of "Forms" and involves stillgreater armies of Office staff. The sheer inability both ofindividuals and businesses to make any headway againstthis situation is adduced as justifying still further inter-ference. There is no check upon it whatsoever; no one inGovernment Service is ever responsible for anything.Apart from the fact that, in general "The Crown (i.e., theCivil Service) can do no wrong" and cannot be sued, noone with any experience pursues a grievance against aGovernment Department with any hope of redress.

The Policy, as distinct from the Administration, ofGreat Britain both domestic and Foreign, between 1918 and1936, has been so suicidal as to pass all possibility of merestupidity or incompetence. As isolated instances, theshutting down of shipyards so that our building capacity hasbeen reduced by at least 40 per cent., the sale of hundreds ofships to enemies to provide them with steel, the handingover of the Treasury Note to a Bank of "England" controlledfrom the U.S., the return to the Gold Standard in 1925,against even orthodox protest, the refusal to utilise theartifically engineered slump and unemployment of 1929-1933to re-arm, and so to forestall a Continental situation, whichwas even then patent to any informed observer, the transfer ofloans made or guaranteed by the Bank of "England" toGermany, to the debit of the Exchange Equalisation Fund,so that the British Taxpayer provided the money to buildthe German submarines to sink British ships, areunfortunately, far from comprehensive. During this period.

Page 2 THE SOCIAL CREDITER Saturday, December 9th, 1939.

Mr. Stanley Baldwin ("Honest Stan") was at all materialtimes, Prime Minister, and allegedly in control of Policy.

But of course this cannot have been the case, becausewhen it became impossible any longer to disguise theimpending catastrophe, Mr. Baldwin, ("Honest Stan")instead of being impeached and shot, was given an Earldom,and the control of a Fund of £250,000, and put to raisingmore money for the Jews. We must assume therefore, thatMr. Baldwin had carried on a meritorious, if not verysuccessful, struggle against forces which, discreetly, but withall their might, were working to bring about the situationwhich they have in fact brought to pass, both in the attackon individual and National liberties.

If neither Parliament, nor even the Prime Minister, isto be held responsible in any realistic sense, for PublicPolicy, no possible contributory to it is entitled to anonymity.This is far from being a matter of mere vindictiveness.The immunity which accompanies the systematic inroadsmade upon all those priveleges for which the English havefought for centuries, and on which they have, perhaps toolightly, been wont to pride themselves, is simply aninvitation to further encroachment. There is a large andgrowing body in the swollen Bureaucracy which is dazzledby the spectacle, presented by Russia and Germany, in whichbureaucrats inherit the Earth, without the disadvantage ofany compulsion to be meek. We ought to know all theirnames, and the names of their friends.

And then, of course, there is Mr. Montagu Norman-Tennyson's Brook*, as one might describe him. His brother,Mr. Ronald Norman, was at all material times chairmanof that curious synagogue, the B.B.e. Mr. Norman is soanonymous that he is better known as Professor Skinner.He tranships on dark nights from one steamer to another,

to put the bloodhounds off the scent.Mr. Norman feels, and says:

"The higher grows the plum-treeThe bigger grow the plumsThe more the potter plys his tradeThe stronger grow his thumbs."

You may have noticed the income tax.His opinion of any lack of cordiality to this brave new

world we are entering, was expressed in the words:"The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on."

I cannot divest myself of the thought that if a youngand enthusiastic bloodhound, well trained in the maxim thatactions speak louder than words, were to join the pack, itwould tend to move the caravan, under its subsequent drivers,more in the direction most of us would like to go.

The essential point is that it has, for many years, beenaltogether too safe, lucrative, and alluring, "to impugn thesovereignty of the local national states of the world" andmore particularly, our own as well as the sovereigntyof the individual. Hundreds of mediocre individualshave received preferment out of all proportionto their abilities, merely for professing these opinions, andhelping shadowy international organisations to theirfruition. The opinions themselves are of much lessimportance than the fact that they are such an easy passportto worldly success in quarters where there ought to be anugly word for them.

(To be continued).

(W arid capyr~g~t reserved).* "Men may come and men may go, but I go on for ever."

A Roman Catholic MarksmanIn leading political circles, recogni-

tion is gaining ground that the presentwar is different from past wars, since itcontains a larger element of latent civilwar-that is, that THE enemy is notlocalised but is distributed among all thebelligerents, and even among those whoare not yet belligerents.

The enemy of any Nation is apower working for its disintegration.The enemy within all the Nations is thepower working for their disintegration.Looked at from the point of view of theindividual Nation, such a force clothesitself in a "subversive movement."Assuming even a small degree of sound-ness in a Nation, it will necessarilyappear to those composing that nation assomething to be defended with all their'Strength. This is true 'patriotism'-loyalty to an association implementing acommon policy.

Such patriotic force is underminedwhen the 'subversive' agent is unseen. Insuch circumstances, the weakness plainto all appears as a weakness inherent in

the national life itself, rather than assomething external working to weaken it.Thus the national life loses force, andcan only be restored by identification ofthe subversive agent and demonstrationof the effect he has brought about.

It does not matter from whatquarter such 'marksmen', whose eyes aretrained upon the subversive agent maycome. Every hit that is scored countsas two for the defence of the Nation.The use of power is secondary to thepossession of power; a people which haslost its power of decision is a lost people.The Social Crediter has no affiliations,political or religious, but one; and thatone is to the administrative instrumentwhich has grown out of the advice givenby Major Douglas as to how to imple-ment the policy of social credit. Atthe heart of social credit policy isFREEDOM, defined as the power tochoose one thing at a time. Wherethere is no power of choice, nothing canbe chosen: where there is power tochoose, anything may be chosen; things

which, in the, main, are good if man is(in the' main) good; other things, ifotherwise. The vast majority of socialcrediters are not far from the van ofhuman advancement in saying: "We donot know. We believe. In any case,we cannot make it other than it is."Before all things, it has to be noticed:What man has now he has chosen.

Once, a young priest, a man ofability in whom great trust had beenreposed, visited Douglas, to ascertain(whydo so few people trouble themselves toascertain?) what was the PHILOS-OPHY behind social credit. Douglas,it is to be presumed, satisfied the inquirer,who, on the point of leaving, is said tohave turned back. "We KNOW," hesaid, that what is called the SIN of thisworld, is not of much more account thanpimples upon a man's face. BUT,WE KNOW TOO THAT BEHINDAND BESIDE ALL THAT IS ADIABOLICAL WICKEDNESS whichit will be hard to overcome."

Well, it is said the Devil doesn'tlike light.

A shedder of light in dark places,if not literally upon the Devil, is T. W.

Saturday, December 9th, 1939. THE SOCIAL CREDITER. Page 3

C. Curd, who wrote, in The CatholicTimes for December 1st:

"The news of recent weeks," hesaid, "has been eloquent on the glaringrecord of the 'planners' who are bringingabout by stealth and under the guise ofwar-necessity what Soviet Russia didmore openly.

" . . . the time has already comewhen we must take stock of our ownposition and ask ourselves whether weare fighting the totalitarianism of NaziGermany only to find ourselves victimsof the totalitarianism of the bureaucratsand the 'planners' at home."

"The great advocate of a "plannedindustry" on a socialistic scale in thiscountry is the organisation known as'P.E.P.' (political and EconomicPlanning).

"Its aim is the elimination of the'small man' and the compulsoryamalgamation of industries. As ameans to the socialist state this is thefirst step to Communism, as theCommunists themselves have madeclear.

"In a recent issue of P.E.P.'s

magazine it was stated that 'only in war,or under threat of war will a BritishGovernment embark on large scaleplanning.' Well, we have the war, andnow we have the planning, which isbeing called 'control.' It is not withoutsignificance that P.E.P. is composedmostly of chain-store interests and civilservants, and under this 'control' we finda host of bureaucrats, 'planning' thenation's industry, food, entertainment,and even movements, with a maximumof cost and a minimum of efficiency.Which is strangely reminiscent ofRussia's wonderful 'Five- Year' plan."

The writer blames speakers of theLeft Book Club run by Victor Gollanczfor the alarmist propaganda for 'deepertrenches'; but

"The campaign of terror is helpedby another organisation calling itself theAir Raid Defence League. It isdirected by Sir Arthur Salter, M.P., whois also on the council of P.E.P.

"Further persuasion is threatenedby Commander King Hall, who in arecent Sunday Pictorial article urged thatit should be made a 'legal offence' forparents to keep their children in danger

areas. Commander King Hall is alsoassociated with P.E.P.

"The evacuation scheme plus thecontrol and pooling of all sorts of com-modities from petrol to prunes has dealta shattering blow at small businesses illevery evacuation area by the loss of muchtrade and the hampering of what is left.

"Big Business, that is, the busin-ess of the 'planners', with its branchesallover the country and its enormousreserves, can look on the present con-fusion and the plight of the smalltrader with complacency, knowing thatvast numbers of private businesses willnever recover from the effects of thisplanning.

"Meanwhile, Marks and Spencersare enlarging existing premises or open-ing new ones in a number of towns.Actively associated with these chainstores is Israel Moses Sieff, of P.E.P."

•" 'Freedom,'" says the posters, 'is

in Danger . . . !""It is."A useful article!

e .. .. ACCORDING TO

"Why, when the men of a greatarmy have gone out of industry andlarge numbers of women have taken oneform or another of paid national service,should there be 1,430,000 unemployed,903,000 of them men, nearly 418,000women, and more than 109,000 boysand girls? Instead of there being moreunemployment, should there be anyunemployment at all?"

-Leading article in the "Times" ofNovember 27th, 1939.

The "problem" of unemploymenthas been with us for several decades. TheTimes leader-writer is surprised that warhas not "solved" it-yet.

This is because he does not know,or will not admit one fundamental fact.

Unemployment is a sign ofprogress.

If the actual measures taken by theGovernment since September Ist had

) "solved" the unemployment problem byabsorbing the whole of our populationinto industry, our plight would be asorry one. It would mean that victory

The War and UnemploymentBy B. M. PALMER

would be uncertain, perhaps impossible,because we had no reserve of man-power.

The question of employment orunemployment can properly be under-stood only against a back-ground ofpeace. It is a fact that primitive peopleare, on the whole, peaceful. Hobbes'primeval savage whose life was "nasty,solitary and short" never existed. Manhas been a social animal from the dawnof consciousness. . He has also workedhard, on the whole; and it would be aswell to ask ourselves why he worked, or,to put this in modern parlance, why hedeveloped an economic system.

He worked in order to make him-self more comfortable, or, once more totranslate into the language of economists,"to provide himself with goods andservices."

"The purpose of an economicsystem is to provide us with goods andservices."

Primitive man has no doubt what-ever about the truth of this statement.

CLOTH"

He does not work in order to make morework, or in order to improve his owncharacter or the character of thosearound him. To him the onlyobject of production is consumption. Hetherefore proceeds to invent as manylabour-saving devices as possible, fromflint arrow-heads, bronze spades and ironploughshares, down through the ages tothe loom, the locomotive, and all thesteel miracles of the modern age ofpower production.

Whenever he succeeds in savinglabour, or in producing a better resultwith less physical effort he knows that hehas made progress. Life can hence-forth be more comfortable and secure,and he will have more leisure.

These facts are fundamental, andare accepted as such by the social credit"movement.

It follows that in a state which ismaking real economic progress theremust be less and less work and more andmore goods and services produced.

Page 4 THE SOCIAL OREDITER Saturday, December 9th, 1939.

Primitive man would regard this state ofaffairs as highly satisfactory. Butcivilised man has attempted to incorpor-ate into the economic system a fallacywhose consequences are so far-reachingthat they bid fair to wreck civilisation aswe know it.

This fallacy is, that while theeconomic system provides us with goodsand services it should provide us withwork as well, and furthermore, it is onlyas a reward for working that men shallreceive the wages by means of whichthey can gain access to the goods andservices.

Thus,"The modern economic system as

controlled by Finance at one and thesame time saves labour, and exalts itinto a religion, and a virtue. Inconsequence it condemns man toperpetual bondage."

-C. H. Douglas.

The state of the world to-daydemonstrates plainly that we can't haveit both ways. Either some means mustbe found to distribute the goods andservices without making "work" a sinequa non, or inventions and discoveriesmust be strictly forbidden, and primitivemethods of production reverted to.

Or stay. There is a third way.There might be war. This, surely,would provide a means of disposing of avast supply of goods and services. Theycan be hurled at the enemy.

Without suggesting that theexcellent people who write letters andarticles on the "unemployment problem"welcomed the war as a means of makingwork, it is quite easy to perceive theyconsider the enormous amount of toiland moil such an undertaking will in-volve to be a blessing in disguise, acompensation for all the discomforts ofblack-out and rationing, and the horrorsand sorrows of mutilation and bereave-ment. Why else should they say theyare longing for the day when there aremore jobs than men to do them?

Social crediters have no hesitationin stating that for all practical purposessuch a frame of mind, with all itsmistaken idealism, does as much harm inthe world as the acts of aggression of themost arrant dictator, because it makespossible the conditions in whichdictators flourish.

"By their fruits ye shall knowthem." It does not matter what aman's intentions are.

The scope of this article does not

admit of a discussion of the causes ofthe present war. The fact is accepted.There are two tasks before us.

(a) To win the war with as little lossof life and discomfort both to thecivil and military population aspossible.

(b) At the same time to preserve asmuch of our English heritage, orwhat we might term our civilisation,as we can.A surplus of man-power should thus

be a matter of self-congratulation to us.But it is quite evident that the orthodoxeconomist would never admit this point.To do so, he would have to abandon theposition that one of the purposes of theeconomic system is to make work, andits corollary that he who does not work,neither shall he eat, or at least, eat onlya little, just enough to keep body andsoul together.

The "work" fallacy is a two-edgedsword. If we persist in penalising thosewithout work, forcing them to live onpittances in slum conditions-( dis-closures following on evacuation provethe widespread degradation connectedwith poverty)-these poverty-strickencreatures will not have the means to buytheir due share of the country's produc-tion. Thus unemployment will· tendto increase still further in the productivetrades: Furthermore, if we increaseincome tax and tell people to save asmuch as possible in order to "pay for thewar", it follows that goods and servicesmust be still further curtailed to meetthe shrinking market. Unemploymentmust increase at a greater rate than thearmy can take up the surplus labour.

Thus financial '. poverty, broughtabout by increased taxation, leads backagain to unemployment, and the viciouscircle is complete.

We have often been told that wemust cut our coat according to our cloth.I should like to lay another picture beforeyou. It seems at the moment that wehave plenty of cloth in the shape ofsurplus man-power, and access to rawmaterials. It has never been stated thatwe are short of these. May I suggestthat there is something wrong with thepattern which we are following?

When war broke out on September3rd, we had fifty million people ready todo everything possible to help theGovernment, an efficient militarymachine, and perhaps the most highlydeveloped industrial system in the world.The task was to adapt the country toits war-time regime. In three monthsmore confusion and loss of trade

resulted than during the whole of thefour years' war.

On every occasion when it has beensuggested that better organisation mighthave resulted in more efficiency, thereply has invariably been that. "wecannot afford it."

But are we short .of men ormaterials?

Is the tailor short of cloth to makethe coat?

The mentality is one which willruin the material and present his clientwith a garment in which he can neverbe comfortable, simply because he willnot admit of a fault in the pattern.

To make the best use of our man-power and material resources it isnecessary to adapt the financial system;first, to the end of winning the war asquickly as possible and with as little"sacrifice" as possible, and then, bygradual adjustment, to adapt it towinning the peace.

The lines along which this might bedeveloped were published by Major C.H. Douglas in October last, and broughtto the notice of many members ofParliament by individuals among theirconstituents.

A machine into which one hasthrown a monkey-wrench may go onworking for a little while, but sooner orlater the great wheels will seize up.

The financial machinery of thecountry will come to a standstill. Thisis inevitable unless the defect isremoved.

There is no question but that itsremoval is a matter of life and death toeveryone of us.

B. M. PALMER.

Letter to the EditorSir,

The Times, in leader of November17th used these words: "certain essentialelements emerged clearly and distinctlyfrom the declarations of policy alreadymade by the Prime Minister and theForeign Secretary - an allusion, ofcourse, to the indispensible restoration ofthe racial and national rights destroyedby Hitler . . . "

On the production of proof that Mr.Chamberlain made use of the wordracial in such a context I will pay thesum of ten shillings to the Social CreditSecretariat. If he did not, how doesthat word come along just there?

Yours, etc.,H. E.

\ ).......

December Znd, 1939.

Saturday, December 9th, 1939. Page 5THE SOCIAL CREDITER

NEWS AND, VIEWSMr. MORGENTHAU

Why did Mr. Morgenthau, JewishSecretary of the U.S. Treasury, make ahush-hush visit to London this lastsummer, and why did he then visit theScandinavian capitals in an Americanwarship?

u

•Mr. Herbert Hoover, ex-President

of the United States, has issued a procla-mation asking "Why this tenderness toSoviet Russia." It was always clearthat there was a Raw Deal for Hoover(and 60,000,000 Americans) before theJew Steal via Roosevelt. Is Mr.Hoover going to tell us about it?

•A Price Control Committee has been

set up. Price Control is the key of theEconomic Situation. The Secretary,who is always the key of a Committee, isMiss Shufield. Pronounced with a lisp.

•Mr. Attlee is most anxious that the

Government shall state at once that wehave no intention of "dismembering"Germany. You notice the fear of anydecentralisation? Do Bavaria andSaxony love Prussia? What attack onFinance has the Labour Party ever made,except Centralise (Nationalise) it. HadGermany, after the last war, beenresolved into its constituent Provinces,and each of these given control of itsown credit, there would be no war now,and Hitler might have been a prosperousPaperhanger. Had the National Debtbeen distributed to the British Publicafter the last war instead of the imposi-tion of grinding taxation there wouldhave been no economic slump.

•Mr. Eamonn de Valera is a Roman

Catholic. The Roman Catholic Churchforbids any dealings with Freemasonry.The Headquarters of The Grand OrientOrder of Freemasons, probably one ofthe most dangerous Secret Societies inthe world, has been moved from Pragueto Dublin. Odd, isn't it?

•If you like our Planned Bureau-

crats, try our Planned Federal Union.• • •

SOVIET INVADES FINLANDThe invasion of Finland by Soviet

Russia has at least clarified the situationfor the ordinary man. One by one thetricks and technique of invasion with

which we have become so familiar inrecent years, have been employed by astate which has been consistently held upas a model of propriety for us to copy.The press campaign, the 'frontier inci-dents', the overdone indignation andsympathy for the Finnish people, theinvasion to 'liberate' them and the treatywith the puppet government. There cannow be no doubt as to the identity of'Communism' with 'Fascism' nor as towhere the real enemy both of ourselvesand the Finnish and the German peoplelies.

The Finns appear to be putting upa grand fight-and amongst other moreforceful 'measures' they have appealedto the League of Nations against Russia'saggression; ironically the President ofthe Council is M. Maisky, the (Jewish)Soviet Ambassador in London. M.Maisky has found it politic to develop acold, in spite of his country's strongdenial that they have done anythingthey shouldn't do . .

• ••SOVIET'S AIM

The cutting below is taken- from alocal paper, the Wolverhampton Expressand Star, whose circulation is 100,000per day. The Editor has twice had theopportunity of reading Warn Europe.News must come from "Reuter" to haveany effect apparently.

One wonders just how long "Reuter"has possessed the information which isnow published three months after events.

•"Russia's aim in coming to a pact

with Germany was that Germany shouldbe able to conduct the war as long aspossible and exhaust Britain and France,according to a report of a speech byStalin to the Poliburo (the Soviet InnerCabinet) on August 19th, which hasreached the Geneva correspondent of theHavas Agency from an "absolutelytrustworthy source."

The speech was made four daysbefore the Russo-German pact wassigned.

After weighing the possibilities ofan alliance with the Allies, the reportsays that Stalin advocated a non-aggress-ion pact with Germany, which wouldmake war inevitable while Russia couldremain outside the conflict.

He said Germany did not opposethe return of Bessarabia (in Rumania) toRussia, and was willing that Rumania,Bulgaria and Hungary should be Sovietspheres of influence.

Stalin is further quoted as saying,"If Germany is vanquished England andFrance will have sufficient force tooccupy Berlin and destroy Germany, andwe should be unable to help Germanyeffectively.

"Our aim, therefore, is that Ger-many should be able to conduct the warfor the longest possible time in orderthat Britain and France should becomeso exhausted as no longer be able tocrush Germany.

"It follows that while remainingneutral we should help Germany econ-omically with raw materials andfoodstuffs but naturally without com-promising our own economic position orweakening the strength of our army."

Stalin is also stated to have said thatthe Soviet must conduct active Com-munist propaganda in Britain and Franceespecially France, so as to be wellprepared for the end of the war.

The general theme of his speech, asdisclosed by the report, was that the warmust last as long as possible, in order toexhaust the belligerents.-Reuter."

• • •UNEXPLORED FIELDS OFTAXATION

In commenting on Mr. Keynes'splan for financing the war by compulsorysavings, the Economist says:

"Mr. Keynes has perhaps been alittle quick to assume that there is noremedy other than compulsory saving.There are fields of taxation as yetunexplored. Thoroughgoing ration-ing of every form of expendituremight make it possible to leave thetask to "voluntary" saving. But theone attitude that is inexcusable is tosay that there is no need to do any-thing unpleasant. If so, the un-pleasant will happen by itself-andwill be all the more unpleasant forthat."

But why not explore the not-so-unpleasant methods first? Why notconsider the proposals for financing thewar put forward by Major Douglas inthis journal of October 28th? Towhom would their adoption be un-pleasant?


VOL. 3. No. 13.SATURDAY, DECEMBER 9th, 1939.

Telephone: Bank 5260.

12, LORD STREET,LIVERPOOL, 2.

THE SOCIAL CREDITERThis journal expresses and supports the policy of theSocial Credit Secretariat, which is a non-party, non-classorganisation neither connected with nor supporting anypolitical party, Social Credit or otherwise.

SUBSCRIPTION RATES:Home and abroad, post free: One year 30/-; Six months 15/-;

Three months 7s. 6d.

Painless War FinancePeople who say it is not possible to

finance the war without taxation arewrong and probably have forgotten thelast war and how that was financed. Ifthey further say that "if we make a tre-mendous amount of armaments, themoney distributed in respect of th~sewill cause prices of ordinary commoditiesto soar, unless some of the extra moneyis withdrawn somehow," then they provethemselves victims of the banker's pro-paganda we have been suffering from inthis country for many years. Thestatements are based on so many fallaciesthat it will pay to analyse them underthree headings.

War Finance is merely ordinaryfinance stepped up into high gear. TheWar of 1914-1918 cost approximately£9,000 million, of which a little over£1,000 million came out of current taxes.The rest, viz., £8,000 million wasfinanced by credit. That credit was thenation's ·own credit and no one else's,despite the fact that the manufactoriesof credit, the banks, claimed to have"lent" it as their own property. Thereis only one reason why the present war-and the last one too for all that-should not be wholly financed by credit.That reason is that the effort to win thiswar must of necessity be so great as tonecessitate some restriction of normalconsumption. In the recent concreteproposals issued by Major Douglas andpublished in The Social Crediter ofOctober 28th, this necessity is recognisedby his proposal to collect via taxationnot more than 10 per cent. of the moneyrequired to finance the war. But it isnot the usual tax whereby the taxpayer isdeprived of the use of his money forever. He proposes that as a receipt forthe tax there be issued an interest bear-ing Government Bond. This smallcompulsory investment is all that isneeded to effect the desired restriction inconsumption. The proportion of tenper cent is a rough estimate, but is fully

justified by the experience of the lastwar, for which the figures are quotedabove.

Armaments are an essential for thesuccessful prosecution of a war. Ifprices rose owing to the concentration ofmanufacturers on production of arma-ments, that would be a small price topay for winning a war against theinstigators of a murderous system ofnational oppression and internationalpillage. Do we want to win this waror not?

Inflation is the bankers' pet bogeyand happens to be a phenomenonpeculiar to the present licentious andpiratical financial system. Its existenceunder certain conditions is proof of thatsystem's prodigious inefficiency in safe-guarding the interests of the people. Atpresent prices may rise for either of tworeasons. It can happen that the costsincurred by retailers' rise. Few personsin this war have not been told of anincrease in price of some article beingdue to War Risks Insurance. Althoughsome institution or group of institutionshas pocketed the premiums thuscollected without having to payoutanything so far, the retailers have beenhelpless. The other reason for increasesin price is what in orthodox jargon iscalled a scarcity value. In the presentsystem any trader can, if an articlebecomes naturally or artificially scarce,put up the price to "what the article willfetch." This financial anarchy is heldvery sacred by the apologists of thepresent system. Major Douglas'sproposals contain a ·clause whereby anyarticle becoming relatively scarce shouldbe rationed and its consumption notrestricted by mere price manipulation. Inthe last war public indignation and thistime the threat of it forced the author-ities to introduce such rationing for afew selected articles of consumption.

The main fallacy in the objectionsmentioned at the start of these notes is

the implication that money issued in the \....'beneficial ownership of the Stare-s-orpeople, or nation, or public, etc.,- \..causes inflation and money created out ofnothing, as happens to all credit money,and chalked up as owned by the Stateto the banking fraternity, does not.Propaganda to this effect, mainly in theform of subtle suggestion, has long beenwidespread. Put plainly, it is nonsense andpoisonous nonsense at that. The behaviourof a pound Sterling, whether honestlyearned, stolen, or created out of nothingis in all cases the same where it con-stitutes an addition to the public'smoney. Similarly the effect is the samewhether it is issued with or without theproviso that at some future date it is tobe repaid. The after effects will cer-tainly be very different, because, if theproviso attaches, then the public has notonly to perform the work and labourrequired in manufacturing the armamentsthat originally called the credit intobeing, but has to perform the equivalentof that labour all over again in order to"repay" to the financial institution, thatoriginally created it with the stroke ofthe pen, that same amount of money.In the meantime the public has to labourto find the interest on these fraudulent < j

"loans". ~It will therefore be seen that the

objections mentioned arise not so muchfrom a failure to grasp Major Douglas'sproposals but from an unfortunatelycommon ignorance of how the presentfinancing of war and peace is effected.

H. R. P.

CIRCULATiON DRIVEThis issue of The Social Crediter is the

second of a series containing articles ofspecial interest to the new reader.

We are anxious that as many newreaders as possible should have the opport-unity of using this introduction to our views,and to this end we are offering a specialmonthly trial subscription for 2/6 with acommission of 1/3 to the supporter whointroduces the new subscriber.

Further details and special aids to helpincrease the circulation will be sent post freeon application to:

K.R.P. PUBLICATIONS LTD.,12 LORD STREET, LIVERPOOL, 2.

A reader in Newcastle says:"I am pleased to say that I have

found little difficulty in getting people totake out a trial subscription. I bagged fivesubscriptions in two hours and those in thecourse of business, and I hope to get manymore. I may say that none of the five knowmuch, if anything, about social credit."

Anotbee reader writes:. "I shall be very glad if you will let

me have a much larger number of leafletsand order forms . . . we are all busy onthe circulation drive, and hope to presentsome first class results."

Saturday, December 9th, 1939. THE SOCIAL CREDITER Page 7

ALBERTA: THE WIDER FRONTThe great monopoly in this country is the monopoly of big credits. A great industrial nation is controlled

by its system of credit. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few menwho chill and check and destroy genuine economic freedom.

* * *We have been dreading all along, the time when the combined power of high finance would be greater than

the power of the Government.* * *

Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of some-body, are afraid of something. They know there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, sointerlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak incondemnation of it. --President Wilson.

;..))

The man was not a cynic whodefined the Art of Government as theArt of constraining people to do whatthey would on no account do if theyknew what it was they were doing.

There would be no need for artotherwise.

It is only supreme artistry thatkeeps the many millions of the earth'speople to the perpetual task of tighten-ing their belts in sight of abundanceproduced with less and less effort.

Not by any means the least cunningof this artists's touches is that whichpaints the attainment of a politicalobjective as a matter of clearly definedand well recognised stages which mustnecessarily be traversed and (a touch stillmore cunning!) which past experiencehas proved to be correct. It should beobvious that there has never beenexperience of anything but successfulpractice of the Art of Government asdefined above.

When a people is made to take itsmedicine, something seems to be gainedby writing "Victory" on the label on thebottle. The sound of the magic wordinduces excitement; but no cure has everbeen recorded as resulting from thismedicine, and craving for this thing,Victory, instead of being allayed,increases.

The recipe is well-known:-(1) Concoct a plan(2) Propagandise(3) Gain Power ("Victory"!)

The sort of mind which falls forthis sort of thing must be incrediblynaive. The late Lord Bryce once wrotean introduction to two massive volumeson "Democracy and the Organisation ofPolitical Parties," by Ostrogorski. Therevelations took his breath away and hecould only murmur: "I am myself anoptimist, almost a professional optimist,as indeed politics would be intolerable

were not a man grimly resolved to seebetween the clouds all the blue sky hecan."

That is all very well. But whatthey have done in Alberta is to put someblue in the sky so that even quite honestpeople can see it, with or without 'grimresolution' to do so. And this hasbeen done while the dreadful powerwhich Woodrow Wilson left unnamedwas being all the time dragged out intothe open. It is something lasting andsomething great.

Students of politics recognised that,for the first time in modern history, aGovernment had been elected against thewishes of those financial powers which,for the most part, control all Govern-ments. It was certain that the newGovernment would meet with all theopposition which International Financeand those whose policy it implementedcould mobilise. It did.

It must be borne in mind' thatprominent members of the UnitedFarmers' Party, itself brought intoexistence by revulsion from the olderpolitical parties, had been spreadingsocial credit ideas since the earlytwenties, and conceived the plan ofbringing Finance into the open throughthe medium of the Federal Parliament-ary Committee on Banking andCommerce in 1923, a preliminary to thedecennial revision of the Canadian BankCharter Act.

Major Douglas's evidence before theCommittee is historic. The UnitedFarmers, nevertheless, failed to embodythe new ideas in either their Provincialor their Federal programmes, and whenthe slump of 1929 began Mr. Aberhartsaw his opportunity and made a bid forpower with the offer of $25 a month forevery adult in the Province. Theconcrete nature of this policy is import-ant: lightly attached to "methods" as itmay have been; .those methods were a

mere name to the great majority of theelectors. They voted for a result which -they believed to be a reasonable andpracticable result.

There is little doubt that the enemydisapproved of Mr. Aberhart's estimateof the wealth of Alberta as contrastedwith the fictitious value of bankers' notesand disapproved still more of thesuggestion that' Alberta's wealth was nottheirs but Alberta's. In financial termsthe wealth of Alberta is the real equiv-alent of 46,200,000,000 goldensovereigns-not merely bankers' notes!

They appear to have disapproved. still more of the First Interim Reportpresented by Major Douglas as ChiefReconstruction Advisor to the AlbertaGovernment*, with its shrewd assessmentof political realities and its uncomprom-ising strategical outlines. They mayhave disapproved more of the UnitedFarmers than of Mr. Aberhart. In anycase, during the month of Mr. Aberhart'sgreat election victory, Mr. MontaguNorman, Governor ·of the Bank ofEngland, "ostensibly for the purpose of aholiday .en the Maine Coast, had crossedthe Atlantic and for some weeks hadbeen a daily visitor to the newly-formedBank of Canada. There is little doubtthat the situation in Alberta had receivedclose attention, and the policy to beadopted in the case of a social creditvictory was laid down at this time if notpreviously. "

While it is by no means a matter ofmerely academic interest to expose thedetailed construction of the traps set forthe new Premier of Alberta, theirgeneral nature was revealed in conversa-tion by "Mr. Weir, head of the Bankers'Clearing House Association," who"dropped in for a chat last night" [9th

* Presented May, 1935: the appointment wasnot a party political appointment; but aGovernment appointment with all that thatimplies.


September, 1935] "and I gathered thatit has been agreed for a long time that ifAberhart comes in in Alberta theirplans would be to separate him fromDouglas and urge him bit by bit intoco-operation with the banks, and thenput in Banking Committees to controlthe finance of the Province as in New-foundland."

"-As in Newfoundland!" Thatis very significant, for in fact "through

the good offices of Mr. Graham Towersof the Bank of Canada," the ReliefController of the Island of Newfound-land, Mr. Robert J. Magor, was recom-mended to Mr. Aberhart and did devotehimself for several months in Edmontonto a reorganisation of a type mostappreciated by folk who did not live inAlberta.

The stripping of Newfoundland ofsovereign rights "while Parliament

slept" is not part of this story thoughdoubtless illustrative of what might havehappened to Alberta if Mr. Aberharthad not recovered himself. He did.

After months of intrigue and con-fusion the real nature of the struggle wasmade clear to the Albertan administra-tors and their supporters themselves,with consequences which will bedescribed. T. J.

THE REAL INDIVIDUAL-AND THE UNIT

"Just as there is no true peace inus, so there is no true life in us. Whenyou shift. the emphasis from the indiv-idual to society, to social relations, youshift it from the vivid springing core oflife to a windy, if convenient,abstraction. But this is the snag: itis difficult to be a real individual livingfrom your feet up. It needs grit, andpride, and courage and power to endurethrough to dispair; you need to be quickwith beauty, and light, and love, andsex; you must see men, not as socialunits, but as your individual brothers,full of this magic thing called life. Andthat is difficult. But-it is easy to bea socialist, it is easy to cry for idealjustice and go forward as one in theranks, shedding this difficult thing thatis real life upon the imaginary back ofthe army. You are then like onecommitted to a great fate. You havethe surge of the crowd emotionalismwithin you. This surge will carry youover the barricades superbly. But whenthe surge is spent and you,are sitting onyour backside with a sore head-you arenot the Joe Wilson, the individual, anentity with its own eternal right underheaven-you are merely a unit who hasgot lost, and you scurry around until youregain the obliterating safety of thearmy, and then the surge of crowdemotionalism again, and once more thebarricades, and-so on, until, of course,you reach you own final fatal barricade.But that army has its leaders, must haveits leaders, and its leaders must be in-dividualists. Power is sweet. Thetemptation is strong. And you canalways make it look like a beneficientbureaucracy-to an army of units. Butyou could never on God's earth make itlook like a beneficent anything to anarmy of individualists."

-From "Wild Geese Overhead," byNeil M. Gunn.

The Head of Moscow's Foreign OfficeThe Jew, Soloman Abramovitch

Dridzo Lozovsky, a former SecretaryGeneral to the Profintern, the SyndicalistInternational, and now a member of theComintern's executive, has been appoint-ed permanent .head of the MoscowForeign Office, and principal adviser toMolotov.

His chief aim in life, says theCatholic Times, as he himself wroterecently in La Vie Ouvriere, is the over-throw of the existing order in the greatdemocracies.

Lozovsky is a leading apostle of theRevolution-Through-War doctrine. AfterRakovski, he is the member of theruling clique in Russia with the ' mostintimate knowledge of affairs in Franceand England. He lived in France beforethe war, returning to Russia after theOctober Revolution, and was almost atonce sent back to France to organisedisorder there.

He was responsible for the split inthe C.T.G. (General Confederation ofLabour), which took place in 1923, and

was the chief creator of the Moscowdirected C.G.T.U.

He is the author of a text-book onthe subject which has been published inFrance under the title "La Greve est unCombat."

He has also worked in Poland, wherehe is remembered as one active agentamong the textile workers at Lodz.

Lozovsky's immediate chief in theComintern, Manouilski, declared inMarch, at the Congress of the RussianCommunist Party, that

"Communists must support every warthat brings nearer the victory of theworld proletariat, of which the inter-ests coincide with those of the countryof Socialism . . .

"This war will be the most just, themost holy, that has ever been foughtin the history of mankind: a warwhich will necessarily stir up a wholeseries of revolutionary outbreaks,within the enemy ranks, and whichwill break up and demoralise theranks of imperialism."

JUD~ISED' VALVESFor instance, ever since 1655

English life has undoubtedly becomemore and more Judaised-that is to say,that the people of this country and thelife they lead have tended to approachmore and more to Jewish standards orto standards under which the Jewishcharacter flourishes.

Would there be any sense in nowexcluding the ethnic Jew, when hisGentile counterpart, his Gentile pupiland slavish imitator is everywhere en-throned by his side, and in greaternumbers than the Jews themselves?

Is there any sense in excluding thecreator of a culture if you retain hisvalues?

Modern English life is bristling withevidence of the victory of the JudaisedEnglishman and of Jewish values .•

No exclusion of the Jews from theadministrative or the cultural life ofEngland, therefore, could be more thana piece of shallow, hysterical patriotism,if it did not contemplate and include thefar more fundamental but infinitely moredifficult task of freeing the country of itswrong values. And all bodies ofEnglishmen who seriously wish torecover English civilisation at this stagecannot be regarded as any more thanemotional and hysterical flag wavers ifthey do not see the compelling need ofthat infinitely difficult task-the task ofaccompanying any gesture of organisedreform by a frontal attack upon theIudaised elements in their kith and kinand their own Judaised values.

-From "[ezos, and the '[etus inEngland", by Cobbett.


I..)I

,.)

THE POLICY OF THE JEWISH RACE (XII)

THE CONQUEST(a) DISCOVERY.

A conspicuous part in the discovery of America wasplayed by a number of converted Jews [known as Maranos]who surrounded King Ferdinand [himself a quarter-Jew]and Queen Isabella of Spain.

"Louis de Santangel was the farmer of the Royaltaxes, and owing to his being a confidant of King Ferdin-and of Spain he became chancellor of Aragon; togetherwith a relative, the royal treasurer Gabriel Sanchez, andhis friend Juan Cabrero, who was likewise of Jewish stock,Santangel entered enegetically into the far-reaching plansof Columbus. He represented to Queen Isabella theadvantage that would accrue to the Crown and to Spainfrom the discovery of the sea-route to India ... sheconsented to Columbus' undertaking and since the statetreasury was exhausted, was ready to pawn her jewels toprocure the necessary funds to fit out his expedition."2

The maturing of these plans between the 'converted'Jewish leaders coincide with the preparation for the whole-sale expulsion of the Jewish masses from the Spanishkingdoms.

. "On March 31st, 1492, the Catholic Monarchs issued adecree to the effect that within four months all Jews andjewesses were to leave the Kingdom and lands of Spain.On April 30th the decree was publicly announced by theheralds, and on the same day Columbus was ordered toequip a fleet for his voyage to the Indies. On August2nd, 1492, about 300,000 Jews left Spain to settlewherever they might find a shelter and on the followingday the fleet of Columbus set sail. His journal openswith a reference to the coincidence in time of the twoevents.

"Columbus' first account of his discovery took theform of a letter to his Jewish patron Santangel."?

The compilers of the Encyclopaedia of '[ezoish. Know-ledge were equally struck by this coincidence:

"It appeared to him [the Jew] as an act of providencethat a new continent which might afford him a haven ofrest and a home of refuge should be discovered at the verytime when ungrateful Spain ... expelled his people fromher domain and rendered them homeless and helpless."

For many years before their expulsion the masses ofSpanish Jews had lived imprisoned in so-called Judarios(Jew districts) and only their ruling families, who werealways financial advisers, royal tax-gatherers or body-physicians, were allowed the full freedom of the country and,as well, the sovereign right to tax and rule their own com-munities. These were the prevailing conditions for CentralEuropean Jewry right up to the middle of the nineteenthcentury, and for Russo-Polish Jews (where the districtswere called Ghettoes) such conditions endured till the WorldWar. The various waves of Jewish immigration (Spanish-Portugese, Dutch, German and Russian) were, unlike thespontaneous immigration of the Gentiles, merely the shiftingof whole Jew districts in

"response to the pressure of persecution, in various forms,which sent the Jews forth, first from their Iberian homes,then from the Germanic lands and lastly from Eastern

OF AMERICAEurope and the Orient. Until recently the centre ofthese converging streams of immigrants was the UnitedStates.">

(b) THE UNITING OF THE STATES OF AMERiCA.The first Jews who arrived in New Amsterdam [later

New York]"were received in an unfriendly fashion by Stuyvesant,the Dutch governor of New Amsterdam, who wrote tothe directors of the West India Company asking authorityfor their expulsion. This the directors did not grant . . ,'because of the large amount of capital they have investedin shares in the company'. They directed 'that they[the Jews 1 shall have permission to sail to and trade in .New Netherland, and to remain there'."

The passing of New Netherlands into the hands of theBritish did not (Encyclopaedia of 1ewish Knowledge)

"militate against the early Jewish immigrants, for someindividuals are recorded as being in the Government'sservice at a time when no Jew was so employed inEngland."

Their civil status quickly improved:"In November, 1727, an act was passed by the

General Assembly of New York providing that when theoath of abjuration was to be taken by any of His BritishMajesty's subjects professing the Jewish religion the word'upon .the oath of a Christian' might be withheld. Threedays later an act was passed naturalizing a Daniel daCosta. "2

Nor was British rule unfavourable to Jews in other partsof the colonies; and the history of the colonization ofGeorgia affords still another instance of those 'providentialcoincidences' so frequent in Jewish history:

"On July 7th, 1733, Oglethorpe, its founder andGovernor had assembled the colonists; who had arrivedone month previously, on the site of the present city ofSavannah for the purpose of allotting to each settler hisproportion of land. While the colonists were partakingof a public dinner given at the close of the day's pro-ceedings, there came up the Savannah river from London,a vessel containing 40 Jewish families. Their arrival wasnot expected . . . "2

But"Oglethorpe included the names of half a dozen of

them as grantors in a conveyance executed December 21st,1733, of town lots, gardens and farms.t"

B. J.References:

2 The 'Jewish Encyclopaedia.

LECTURES AND STUDIES SECTIONProspeetus« Price 3d:.

For prospectus of Courses A and B apply to:THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, Lectures and StudiesSection, Social Credit Secretariat, 12, Lord Street,

Liverpool, 2.


CHATHAM HOUSE"In plain terms we have to re-transfer the prestige

and the prerogatives of sovereignty from the fifty or sixtyfragments of contemporary society to the whole ofcontemporary society-from the local national states bywhich sovereignty has been usurped, with disastrousconsequences, for half a millenium, to some institutionembodying our society as a whole.

. "In the world as it is to-day, this institution canhardly be a universal Church. It is more likely to besomething like a League of Nations. I will not prophesy.I will merely repeat that we are at present working,discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysteriouspolitical force called sovereignty out of the clutches ofthe local national states of our world. And all the timewe are denying with our lips what we are doing with ourhands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the localnational states of the world is still a heresy for which astatesman or a publicist can be-perhaps not quite burntat the stake, but certainly ostracised and discredited."

The above extract is from an address given by ArnoldToynbee to a group of Internationalists in Copenhagen in1931. Professor Arnold Toynbee is a director of theRoyal Institute of International Affairs, an organisation forthe support of which the Government has recently voted thesum of £35,000.

The Royal Institute of International Affairs was a bye-product-and a not unimportant one--of the Peace Con-ference of Paris in 1919, which, fructifying, also broughtforth the Treaty of Versailles and the League of Nations.The former is the direct, though not the fundamental, causeof the present war; and of a special meeting of the Leagueof Nations, that "device to end war," it is currently sard(Daily Telegraph, December 4th, 1939) that it 'gives anopportunity for a number of nations to express their views' onthe invasion of Finland by Soviet Russia.

At the Peace Conference of 1919 were gathered manydistinguished experts with the very highest qualifications,and they set themselves busily to the task of planning themap of Europe according to the Best Principles. Only aminor account seems to have been taken of natural phenom-ena such as human nature; and. the Treaty they producedled so inevitably and logically to War that it is difficult toavoid the conclusion that this was a result intended-bysomeone.

We know that the conference was in part a familyaffair of the Warburgs, that Paul Warburg attended with thedelegation from the United States, and that his brother MaxWarburg was there in a similar capacity for the GermanGovernment; that Bernard Baruch, the American financier,was one of the American delegation. A member of thefirm of J. P. Morgan, the financier Thomas William Lamont, -was a representative of the United States Treasury on theAmerican Commission to negotiate peace terms. It is alsoworthy of note that both Lloyd George and Clemenceau hadsecretaries of Jewish race.

In the intervals of the business of treaty-making theBritish experts at work had time to wish for a permanentorganisation to keep them in contact, and, coincidently, theUnited States felt a similar need at precisely the same time,

as did also Germany.* The United States and GreatBritain had a joint meeting during' May, 1919, and it wasdecided to form an international institute (their minds wereworking towards centralisation just then) with branches inthe United States and Great Britain. The British groupat this meeting included Lord Eustace Percy, the Fabianwho has roomed with Felix Frankfurter, later Baruch'scolleague on Roosevelt's "Brains Trust", as well as LordRobert Cecil and Mr. J. W. Headlam Morley, afterwardsHistorical Adviser to the Foreign Office. The first task ofthis institute was to be to write a history of the PenceConference, and it was also decided that an annual surveyshould be made of international affairs.

The proposed institute, however, had not as yetmaterialised, and there were no funds to finance it.

But providence blessed it early, and in Stephen KingHall's words+ :

"At this juncture the work . . . received the first ofmany munificent and public-spirited financial offers whichhave maintained it during the past sixteen years. Mr.Thomas W. Lamont generously offered to advance £2,000to enable the task of writing the history to proceed."

Dr. H. Temperley of Peterhouse was commissioned tostart this work, to which contributions were made by mem-bers of the British and American delegations.

In 1920, after the peace conference, an organising . lcommittee was set up which included Lord Eustace Percy, ~Geoffrey ~Dawson and Dr. Temperley. A constitution wasprepared and members of the Peace Delegation at Paris andother suitable people were invited to join in founding theinstitute. The second public spirited financial offer, whichenabled this preliminary work to be carried on, was fromSir Abe Bailey.

It was found to be impracticable to start an internationalassociation, so separate ones were established in GreatBritain (British Institute of Foreign Affairs, later the RoyalInstitute of International Affairs) and the United States.

There must be a powerful impulse behind an Institutionthat began in 1920 in two rooms in Horseferry Road with anincome of £1,700 and that by 1936 had achieved thedignity of 10, St. James Square (with several adjoininghouses) and an income of £30,000; that by 1937-38 had anincome of over £35,000, and in 1939 is evacuated to BalliolCollege, Oxford, and is granted treasury funds to the extentof £35,000.

Chatham House (the building at 10, St. James's Square)was given to the organisation in 1923, two years beforeProfessor Arnold Toynbee became a director. In 1926 thelate Sir Otto Beit gave to the Institute £1,000 payable overtwo years, and this was followed by a gift from the CarnegieTrust (on one of the American Boards of which is ThomasLamont) of £3,000 for the purchase of books for theextension of the library. At this time also, the Bank ofEngland became a regular subscriber, contributing £200per annum, and J. D. Rockefeller and P. A. Molteno also

* Dr. Albrecht Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, attached to the Germandelegation, later founded the Institut fur Auswartige Politik atHamburg.

t "Chatham House," by Stephen King Hall.


.J)

subscribed heavily .In 1929 Sir Abe Bailey decided that the time had come

to provide £5,000 per annum in perpetuity, and a numberof important banks and city firms became subscribers.To-day the list of corporate subscribers includes most ofthe important banks and also Glyn Mills and Co., ImperialChemical Industries Ltd., Prudential Assurance Company,Reuters Ltd., N. M. Rothschild and Sons, and J. H.Schroeder and Company. The Rockefeller Foundation hasalso given £8,000 per annum for the last decade, to financethe extension of research.

Indeed, the finances of the Institute have been blessed bythe insouciant providence of a fairytale.

The two fundamental clauses in the constitution of theorganisation from the time it was started were:

(a) That the Institute as such could not offer any opinionon the conduct of public policy.

(b) That its membership should be confined to BritishSubjects.The expression of opinions as a result of research is

left to individual members, who must be free to say whatthey think without prejudicing the organisation as a whole.As, in fact, however much against the legal constitution itis, the opinions of the persons connected with any institutionthat lie within the field of operation of that institute areby natural association instantly connected with the organi-sation in the minds of the uninitiated, this enables the full

. prestige of the organisation to be thrown behind ideas whichwould never be sponsored officially. Another instance ofthe divorce of power from responsibility.

Chatham House has invented a method of researchpeculiarly its own: a method of eliminating, as far aspossible, all individual responsibility for the views expressed.Subjects for study are submitted to groups of experts,drafted, redrafted, criticised and examined by an advisorycommittee, drafted again, sent for criticism to authorities inGreat Britain and abroad, reconsidered, by the groupredrafted, finally revised and approved-and then published;a fine flower of the higher anonymity, however many namesmay be attached to it. The reports so produced areconglomerate ones with which probably no single memberof the group compiling them entirely agrees. And inscientific work, as in other fields, it is a preliminaryguarantee of good faith to know who is sponsoring -a givenidea.

The Charter of the Institute gives as the first aim andobject of the Institute:

"To advance the sciences of international politics,economics and jurisprudence and the study, classificationand development of the literature of these subjects."

Much has been made of the so-called scientific attitudeof the Royal Institute of International Affairs. Now theessence of 'scientific method,' if the phrase any longerpossesses a meaning at all, is the inductive approach. It isnot the same thing as detachment: it is not the same thingas impersonal examination. More is required, the proofthat the thing continues to act in all circumstances accordingto generalisations based on the detached examination. Andthat proof is obtained by experiment, according to the resultsof which the generalisation must stand or fall.

In a rather naive passage in his book, Stephen KingHall announces that "It is only in so far as we study humanrelations impartially, judicially, and scientifically that weshall arrive at conclusions which can be generally accepted.

That is how science has progressed. " Judgment by results-scientific method-whatever you like to call it, cannot begiven as a first consideration of, at any rate, many of thepaid staff of the Royal Institute of International Affairs.We cannot take seriously that "scientific" attitude which,starting from the conception of the League of Nations (atleast five of the staff of Chatham House have been veryclosely associated with the League of Nations, three ofthem paid employees of the central organisations) follow itssubsequent career, note its effect and its final break downand then proceed to support the new and revised edition ofthe League, Federal Union. It is as if the fundamentalquestion is rather "How can we ensure that a centralised in-stitution of this nature exists?" rather than "How can wesolve the question of War and Peace?"

Professor Arnold Toynbee and his father-in-law Pro-fessor Gilbert Murray are both supporters of Federal Union, .and much use is made of their prestige. Can they notjudge by results?

With Soviet Russia, one of the great exponents ofFederalism, expropriating the small national states on herborders (entirely in the manner of the 'institution' referredto by Professor Toynbee at Copenhagen) are we to believethat Federalisation will ensure the peace?

Should there be implicit faith and trust in the judgmentof those who so carefully arranged the treaty that has endedin such a catastrophe? It may not have been knavery, butit was at least foolery, and at least five of the gentlemen onthe staff of the Royal Institute of International Affairs werepresent at the Peace Conference (B. H. Sumner, H. J.Paton, Af J. Toynbee, C. K. Webster, R. G. D. Laffan) andit is worth noting that they all served in some intelligencedepartment-either Political, Admiralty or Foreign Office,during the last War. It is also interesting that five of themembers of the staff have held professorships or otherpositions in academic institutions in the United States andCanada. And finally, Professor A. G. B. Fisher, Professorof International Economics, was Professor at Dunedin, NewZealand, and at Western Australia, and economist to theBank of New South Wales.

Undoubtedly the function which the Royal Institute ofForeign Affairs is filling is a most necessary and vital one,but when the taxpayers subsidise its activities to the extentof £35,000 it is time that the policy of the Institution inits general bearings, implicit as well as explicit, was re-constructed and, if necessary, altered to fit the circumstanceof its public service.

The Institute provides information on the basis of whichaction is taken. A man's character and opinions are the filterthrough which information is selected, and are bound to mod-ify the reports presented to Parliament. Parliament is ourGovernment. Do we wish it to be influenced by ideas thathave already proved disastrous? E. S. E.

For- THE TRUTH IN ALBERTARead "Today and Tomorrow"

Send your sub. to TODAY AND TOMORROWl016-118th Street, Edmonton, Alberta.

Subscriptions $1.50 a year(at the present rate of exchange about 6s.)

You can subscribe by International MoneyOrder, obtainable at any Post Office.


ANNOUNCEMENTS AND MEETINGS

Will advertisers please note that. the latest time for accepting copyfor this column is 12 noon Mondayfor Saturday"s issue.

Special One Month' s TrialSubscription Form

K.R.P. Publications Ltd.,12, Lord Street, Liverpool, 2.

Please send THE SOCIAL CREDITERto me for the four weeks commencing..................................... for whichI enclose 2/6.

Name .Address .

(Cheques and Postal Orders should be crossedand made payable to K.R.P. PublicationsLtd.)

BELFAST D.S.C. Group. Headquarters:72, Ann Street, Belfast. Monthly GroupMeetings on First Tuesday in each month.

BIRMINGHAM and District. SocialCredi ters will find friends over tea andlight refreshments at Prince's Cafe,Temple Street, on Friday evenings, from6 p.m., in the King's Room.

.--- - ------BLACKBURN Social Credit Study Group.Enquiries to Hon. Sec., 47, Whalley NewRoad, Blackburn.

BRADFORD United Democrats. All en-quiries welcome; also helpers wanted-apply R. J. Nor thin, 11, Centre Street,Bradford.

CARDIFF Social Credi:t Association:Meeting of members and friends at 10,Park Place on Tuesday, 19th December,at 7-30 p.m. prompt.

DERBY and District-THE SOCIAL,CH.EDITER will be obtainable outsidethe Central Bus Station on Saturdaymornings from 7-15 a.m. to 8-45 a.m.,until further notice. It is also obtainablefrom Morley's, Newsagents andTobaccon-ists, Market Hall.

LIVERPOOL Social Credit Association:Weekly meetings of social crediters andenquirers will continue, but at varyingaddresses. Get in touch with the Hon.Secretary, at "Greengates", Hillside Drive,Woolton, Liverpool.

LONDON Liaison Group-Next meetingSaturday, December 16th, at 4 Mecklen-burgh Street, w.e!., from 2-5 p.m.Subject: "The Menace of Federation toDemocracy." Enquiries to B. M. Palmer,35, Birchwood Avenue, Sidcup, Kent.

LONDON Social Crediters: Lunch-timerendezvous. Social crediters will meetfriends at The Cocoa Tree Tea Rooms, 21,Palace Street, Westminster (5 minutesVictoria) on Wednesdays from 1-30 to 3p.m. Basement dining room.

The Social CrediterIf you are not a subscriber to THESOCIAL CREDITER, send this orderwithout delay.K.R.P. Publications Ltd.,12, Lord Street, Liverpool, 2.

Please send THE SOCIALCREDITER to me

Name .

. Address .For Twelve Months-I enclose 301-"Six " ,,15 I-II Three II ,,7/6

(Cheques and Postal Orders should be crossedand made payable to K.R.P. PublicationsLtd.)

Name ..............................................................•....................•..•

Address ..................................................................................••••

TO THE DIRECTOR OF REVENUE,THE SOCIAL .CREDIT SECRETARIAT,12, LORD STREET, LIVERPOOL, Z.

I wish to support Social Credit Policy as defined in the terms of association ofand pursued by The Social Credit Secretariat under the Advisory Chairmanship ofMajor C. H. Douglas.

I will, until further notice, contribute

{per month,

£ : : J per quarter,per year,

towards the funds of the Social Credit Secretariat.

I herewith enclose the sum of £the above mentioned funds.

Signature ...................•..........................................•..J as a donation towards

Signature ..................................................•..........••..

NEWCASTLE D.S.C. Group. Literature,The Social Crediter, or any other inform- \....ation required will be supplied by theHon. Secretary, Social Credit Group, 10, "-Warrington Road, Newcastle, 3.

PORTSMOUTH D.S.C. Group: Weeklymeetings every Thursday at 8 p.m., 16,Ursula Grove, Elm Grove, Southsea.

SOUTHAMPTON Group: Secretary C.Daish, 19, Merridale Road, Bitterne,Southampton.

TYNESIDE Social Credit Society inviteco-operation to establish a local centre forSocial Credit action in all its aspects.Apply W. L. Page, 74-6, High WestStreet, Gateshead.

WOL VERHAMPTON: Will all socialcrediters, old and new, keep in contact bywriting E. EVANS, 7, Oxbarn Avenue,Bradmore, Wolverhampton.

Miscellaneous Notices.Rate Is. a line. Support our Advertisers.

ROOMS OR RESIDENCE, small countryhouse in pleasant rural district, SO milesNW. London. Replies to c/o "TheSocial Crediter," 12, Lord St, Liverpool.

Information onInternational Financiers "-'We should be very grateful if social

crediters who possess any informationbearing on the. centralisation of powerinto the hands of the internationalfinanciers and their use of it, wouldsend (a) a copy of it; (b) a note of whereit occurs or (c) the original document,which would be returned when copiedto the Editor of The Social Crediter,12, Lord Street, Liverpool, 2.

EXPANSION FUNDTo the Treasurer,Social Credit Expansion Fund,c/o The Social Credit Secretariat,12, Lord Street, Liverpool, 2.

I enclose the sum of £ : : >

as a donation towards the Social CreditExpansion Fund, to be expended bythe Administrators at the Sole Discretionof Major C. H. Douglas.

Name .

Address .......................................•

Published by the proprietors, K.R.P. Publicasions,Ltd., at 12, Lord Street, Liverpool, 2.

Printed by J. Hayes & Co., Woolton, Liverpool •.

Documents

-'/THE SOCIAL CREDITER