(Due to arrive Melbourne-21.11.25)

My dear P.M.,

The question of economy has taken up a good deal of the Cabinet's
time in the last week or so. The Economy Committee of the Cabinet
and the Cabinet itself have been considering it. I am told in
confidence by Hankey [1] that there is to be an attempt to reduce
the amount spent on the Fighting Services by about ten millions,
which, of course, will make the said Fighting Services stick their
toes in, as I gather that it is proposed that, to a great extent,
the economy will take the form of a reduction in pay all round.

They have also woken up to the fact (which has appealed to an
outsider like myself for some time) that the roads in this country
are unnecessarily good. They intend, I understand, to take several
millions at least from the Roads Fund, which is fed by taxation of
motor-cars. It is proposed that less money be spent on the roads
in future. The Ministry of Transport will naturally throw their
hands up at this.

It depends on the firmness of the Government as to how far they
allow themselves to be talked out of these proposed economies by
the departments concerned.

Domestic questions, such as the state of the iron and steel trade
in Great Britain, have been exercising the minds of the Cabinet.

There is one suggestion that the Government should grant a subsidy
on the freight of iron and steel on the railways, and this, in
conjunction with other suggestions, is being considered. However,
I thought I read a more hopeful note into the last periodical
report of the Advisory Council of the Board of Trade on the iron
and steel industry. A particularly interesting remark was made by
one of the big bankers when he said that a proportion of the
credits that they were being asked to provide for the iron and
steel industry was for an extension of activities. The truth seems
at the bottom of a very deep well!

The Cabinet has also been considering the Chiefs of Staffs Sub-
Committee and the C.I.D. reports on the Mosul situation. There is
quite a faction in the Cabinet that takes the attitude that Mr.

Amery [2] went too far in pledging H.M.G. to shoulder
responsibilities in Iraq for another 25 years. [3] It is not yet
clear how opinions is going to crystallise as the matter is not
yet finalised. Anyhow, it will be a difficult matter to back down
from the position Mr. Amery has taken up.

Sir Douglas Hogg (Attorney-General) is going to The Hague to
conduct the case for H.M.G. vis-a-vis the Turks.

The Chiefs of Staff's Sub-Committee of the C.I.D. has considered
the military situation in Mosul under three headings:-

1. The League Council should let the question remain in status quo
for an indefinite period.

2. The League Council should give a decision adverse to Great
Britain, resulting in the area under dispute being partitioned.

3. An attempt by Turkey to take Mosul by force.

Mr. Amery has received from the Governor of N.S.W. [4] an official
despatch on the visit of the American Fleet to Sydney. It is on
formal lines and contains no comment on the efficiency of the
fleet or the personalities of the Commanders, such as was
contained in the despatch from the Governor-General of N.Z. [5]

A sidelight on how things happen. A fortnight ago the 'Observer'
(Garvin [6]) attacked the Government on its lack of policy and
preparedness. Two days afterwards Tom Jones [7] was closeted with
Lord Astor (owner of the 'Observer'). Last Sunday, the 'Observer'
came out with a leader disclaiming association with those organs
of the press which attacked the Government without undue cause,
and, going further, threw a considerable bouquet at Mr.

Chamberlain [8] and H.M.G. on the successful culmination of the
Locarno Conference. This is followed by the 'Evening Standard'
commenting on the change of attitude on the part of the 'Observer'
and asking how the change in tone came about so rapidly, and
saying that Garvin rather reminds them of Satan rebuking Sin.

You may remember that in the early days of Wembley [9], there was
some rather heated discussion about certain posters (depicting
scenes in the life and industry of some of the Dominions and
Colonies) which had been submitted by a well-known artist called
Spencer Pryse. [10] The majority of the Directorate of Wembley
decided that certain of these posters, on account of their rather
broad treatment of their subjects, were unsuitable. They depicted
native women, possibly a little crudely but, I personally think,
very strikingly. One of the main objections was that these posters
would offend the Queen. Spencer Pryse, when this objection was
raised, immediately withdrew the designs, and the lithograph
stones and the right of publishing them was bought by a Mrs.

Bernard Smith, who has a small Art Gallery in London. The comic
part of the story is that when they were exhibited, the first
person to buy a complete set was the Queen, followed closely by
Viscount Lascelles [11], who bought no less than six complete sets
to present to the schools in his district. All of which must have
rather confounded the Wembley Directorate.

Tom Jones and F.L. McDougall [12] have lately been discussing the
advisability of using posters as a means of appeal to the people
in an effort to promote the increased use of Empire products. They
are thinking of this same artist, Spencer Pryse, as having the
peculiar sort of talent that is required to bring an idea
artistically and forcibly before the people. You will, no doubt,
get the scheme put before you in all its aspects by McDougall, and
I merely mention it apropos of Spencer Pryse. I understand the
scheme would be for Spencer Pryse to visit Australia and the other
Dominions in order to get the inspiration for his designs, and
that, after they have been submitted to a committee of experts in
this country, they would be printed in colour, with appropriate
letter press, and exhibited at (say) all the post offices in Great
Britain, two new posters being released (say) fortnightly. The
scheme appealed to me a good deal as I have a great faith in the
value of a well executed poster as regards its appeal to the mass
of the people.

There is a most amusing article in this week's 'Spectator', which
I enclose, about the Prince of Wales' future. It is quite
entertaining light reading.

On this same subject I am told the following story. J. H. Thomas
[13], at the close of a deputation to the Prime Minister in the
last few days, stayed behind to tell Mr. Baldwin that he had
recently been to see the Queen and that the conversation soon got
round to the Prince of Wales. Thomas quotes the Queen as saying
that she hoped now that David would settle down and get married,
and take life a little more seriously; to which J.H.T. quotes
himself as replying that he thought she was quite right and it was
time that this - - - - - nonsense should cease!

I stayed last night with Sir Hugh Trenchard [14] at his place a
few miles out of London. He is most entertaining and talks
continuously. He said of himself: 'They say I can't talk or write
English -but anyhow, I talk more sense than all of them.'
He is very interested in this new invention -the Auto-Gyro [15],
which is certainly most revolutionary. He says it is the greatest
advance since the days of the Wrights-in fact, the only completely
novel addition to aerodynamics since the introduction of the
aeroplane. It remains to be seen if it develops well. Just as
everyone had settled down to thinking that any advance in heavier
than air flight could only result from the refining of existing
practice, then out of the blue comes this quite novel application
of winged flight which may possibly be a landmark in the art. Not
that it will cheapen or simplify military flying-on the contrary
it can only substitute itself for existing design or probably be
additional to the present type.

Trenchard says of Seely [16] that he was most disappointed that he
couldn't have been the first Cabinet Minister killed in war,
although he would have been equally disappointed not to have been
able to talk about it!

I had a letter drafted to go to you by this mail, asking for your
views on a scheme under which the Dominions Office would send a
Liaison Officer to Australia as an experiment for a year. I have
been talking at them on the subject for some time trying, not to
get the arrangement finalised, but merely to get a scheme
formulated to which they would agree and which I could put up to
you to get your views on it. However, on sending my draft to
Harding [17], he asks me to hold it up for a week in order to
discuss it further.

There has been a little 'difference' in the F.O. Collier [18] of
the Far Eastern Department disagreed so continuously with the line
of policy taken by Waterlow [19], the Head of the Department, that
they had to shift Collier to the Northern Department, bringing
Strang [20] from Northern to fill his place.

I am, Yours sincerely,
R. G. CASEY