(Due to arrive Canberra 5.7.29)

My dear Prime Minister,

The Election has come and gone and I do not propose to labour it.

[1] However, you may care to have a few details.

Although the intense Liberal campaign failed to secure many seats,
it brought them a great many more votes than is indicated by the
numbers of seats that they won. This is certain to make Lloyd
George press for electoral reform-either proportional
representation or something of the kind. I understand that this
will be strenuously opposed by the other parties.

I enclose chart of the results-and a philosophic and cautionary
leader from the 'Times' today.

Austen Chamberlain [2] got in by only forty-odd votes. This may
have been due to the general swing towards Labour that occurred in
Birmingham (and, indeed, in all other industrial centres), but it
is thought to have been due in his case to a great extent to the
rather pontifical and omniscient attitude that he has thought fit
to adopt ever since Locarno, and which, I hear, has been much
resented in his own constituency.

Grondona [3] contested a seat but lost rather badly.

R.A. Butler [4], who I think met you in Australia, (son of Sir
Montagu Butler, Governor of the Central Provinces [5]) won his
seat well, in Essex.

The best informed and least prejudiced comments that I hear are on
the following lines.

Lloyd George could not have imagined that he would get more than a
'balance of power' party-but his revenge for the break-up of the
Coalition in 1922 took the form of putting 500 candidates into the
field, the bulk of whom had no chance of success, but who would
take away votes from the Conservative candidates. I have seen
analyses of the position in dozens of seats, which show that this
is just what happened. He is supposed to have spent something
approaching a million on the sponsoring of these 500 candidates
and in election publicity-and must be grievously disappointed at
the bare 58 successes.

I hear that the Labour 'side' is liable to be a troublesome one
for Ramsay MacDonald [6] to handle. There is a leavening of
reasonable and responsible men, but there is a great number of red
raggers and irresponsibles who are not at all to MacDonald's
liking. Even at this early stage, I hear that one of his main
difficulties will be in keeping his party disciplined, and that
this is not likely to get less as time goes on.

I have never seen Labour enthroned, so the next month will be
interesting-although I suppose one will be mistrusted for a bit
until the new Ministers and Under-Secretaries get used to one's
face.

Tom Jones [7] finds himself in an awkward position. As you know,
he is a man of the people who has educated himself, and by his
character and wisdom has drawn the respect and confidence of a
wide range of people. He has served successive Prime Ministers
most ably and well-but by so doing has forfeited the confidence of
the very people from whom he sprang-the Labour Party, and, in
particular, of Ramsay MacDonald. When the Labour Party were in
office in 1924 they boycotted T.J., left him where he was but gave
him nothing to do. This will probably happen again and it will be
a most distressing situation for him. [8] There are few people for
whom I have a greater admiration than T.J.

The personnel of the new Cabinet is not yet announced, and I can
hear nothing more than rumour which is not worth repeating.

To my increasing surprise Wilkins [9] is managing to get all he
wants from the Discovery Committee. I have been shepherding him
and doing all I could for him with them-and to my great surprise
they have agreed to let the 'William Scoresby' (a whale catcher
converted to scientific work which used to work with the
'Discovery') be at his disposal during the period of his activity
in December and January next, for conveying his aeroplanes and
personnel from Deception Island to the farthest south base that he
can establish. And, over and above this, they are, I believe,
about to agree to a contribution of 10,000 from their funds
towards the general purposes of his efforts!

They have, of course, got very considerable funds on which to
draw-something approaching 100,000 a year from whale oil taxes
from the Falkland Islands. We put it up to them with the bait that
Wilkins' work in the coming season was likely to add to the
knowledge (and sovereignty) of the Falkland islands sector of the
Antarctic mainland-this happened to be the right button to press.

On the usual principle, we asked for much more than we expected to
get-and look like getting the lot!

I will not bother you with the Mawson Expedition business [10],
which still occupies the greater part of my time. I like Davis
[11] personally, but he is rather difficult as he gets very
'cranky' and perverse when everything doesn't go exactly as he
wants it.

I would most strongly suggest to you that you get your Antarctic
Committee (in conjunction with Mawson) to draw up a comprehensive
programme for the Expedition's activities, setting out the duties
and responsibilities of all the members, and going into such
detail as who is to do other people's work when one or more is
incapacitated. Organisation is not the strong point of either
Mawson or Davis and I rather fear that they will tend to ride
their own particular hobbies and fancies to the detriment of the
main objectives. If each man knows before he starts what is the
maximum and minimum expected of him, it will at least militate
against muddle. This would not be possible in an expedition doing
a lot of sledging or land work, but as this Expedition will be
more a floating laboratory and mobile observation station, such
cut and dried instructions are possible (with a certain elasticity
allowed), and, I think, even imperative.

In addition to these detailed instructions (which can, of course,
be issued over Mawson's name), you will no doubt give Mawson
written instructions as to the broad objects of the Expedition-the
strengthening of our claims to the whole area from the Ross Sea to
Enderby Land (of which the Western half, from Queen Mary Land to
Enderby Land, is to be secured in the first season) by frequent
landings. The scientific work, whilst most admirable in itself, is
really a means of bolstering up our claims to the area.

A few days before your telegram arrived about seeing Sir Eric
Geddes [12], I had been on an Interdepartmental Committee here on
this subject, the result of which I sent in my letter LON. 1286 of
30th May, which your advisers on this matter will require to see
in order to get a complete understanding of the present state of
the arrangements for the projected England-Australia air service.

The following extract from a letter from Geneva may amuse you:-

Waitt [13], your Australian Employers' Delegate ... His record for
godliness should commend him, as within the first half hour of
making his acquaintance he told me that he was 'a lifelong
abstainer, thank God', that for eleven years he had never missed
morning or evening service at church and that for eight years he
had been President of the Sydney Y.M.C.A.; one daughter was
married to a missionary and a second daughter was on the
continent, who 'though not of robust appearance was inclined to be
rather high spirited and not a lowly godfearing woman like her
mother'. As Sir Granville Ryrie [14] is sitting with Waitt for
meals, you can imagine that the conversation is rather stilted, or
perhaps I should say one-sided, as Waitt is a great talker, and on
watching the High Commissioner I should say that his conversation
consists of yeses and noes.

I enclose confirmation from a German source of my frequently
repeated theory that inspired political cartoons do more to swing
public opinion than most other factors.

My suggestion that Major Jones [15] should be more communicative
is beginning to bear fruit. History sheets of individual
communists are beginning to trickle through to me, and are much
appreciated by New Scotland Yard.

The Canadian enthusiasm for the exchange of diplomatic
representatives is liable to lead them into an embarrassing
position. Already the Chinese are flying a kite-it has been
reported by the Chinese Nationalist official news agency that they
are considering approaching Canada with a view to a Chinese
Minister at Ottawa.

Your felicitations through me to Tyrrell [16], Hankey [17],
Lindsay [18] and Vansittart [19], about their several decorations
in the Birthday List, were very well received and I have most
grateful telephone messages of thanks and appreciation. I enclose
letter from Vansittart.

I have seen your monumental letter of 30 or 40 pages to McDougall
[20] and although, I am afraid, the subject matter does not
directly concern me, I was most interested, as the bulk of it
covered subjects from which I cannot divorce my interest. This is
not a suggestion that you should write to me at such length, which
I do not expect. I fully realise the way you are driven, and the
matters I have to deal with here are ones the consideration of
which you can luckily leave, for the most part, to others.

I am, Yours sincerely,
R.G. CASEY