11 FEBRUARY 1938, Page 22


[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.]

Sta,—As an interested reader of your paper under the above heading in your issue of February 4th reference is made to the Government's attitude on Part II of the Coal Bill. The article states that " if the Government is disposed to give way . . . that Part II of the Bill fulfils a solemn pledge to the electorate, and that a Government which cannot over- ride private interests, however powerful, ill merits the name of National."

As the opposition to Part II of the Coal Bill comes not only from the coal industry but from some of the largest consumers of coal and many of the public, who strongly object to bureaucratic control by Parliamentary Departments, preferring the traditional right of appeal to the Courts, which are not tainted with politics, I hardly see how the words in the article " ill merits the name of National " apply..

I am one of the public not interested financially in the coal industry, but who realises the greatness of this country and Empire has been largely the result of private enterprise and not the State.

As an example of the misuse of bureaucratic power .one has only to see the effects and results of some of the Housing Acts by the L.C.C.. and other bodies.—I am, Sir, yours faith-