I am not arguing whether we are better or worse off in regard to;he masses of the people and their nutrition. If my hon. and gallant Friend will wait for me to develop my argument, I will supply him with the statistics which he himself could have got, if he had wanted them, from the Library. In all that prosperity that we enjoyed between 1890 and 1900–and I am not saying that the working classes enjoyed that prosperity, but only that that degree of prosperity was enjoyed by the country as a whole—with all that prosperity, when we were the undoubted masters of the world, we could not support more than 40,000,000 inhabitants. How do we, then, ever hope to be able to support 50,000,000 at the present time? It is impossible to do it, and the proof of that is that, as we went on towards 1908 and 1910, unemployment began to develop on account of other nations becoming industrialised—consider the rise of Germany—and we were not able to support that amount of population consequent on the increase between 1900 and 1910.

What I suggested in my speech on the earlier occasion was that we should study very carefully what would be the results to us and to the other nations of the Commonwealth if we developed a system of Imperial integration, and I pointed out to the House at that time that the only reliable, sure and certain markets on which we could depend at present were those markets which had grown up and had been developed through the emigration that went out from this country between 1900 and 1914, when it was at the rate of 250,000 a year. Since I last spoke, it has been pointed out to me that there are also other markets. I know there are, but I definitely said, "certain markets." One of our better markets at the present moment, in Europe, though one which I would not consider quite certain, is Sweden. I have been in Sweden recently, and I was having lunch with an important industrialist—