On Tuesday the Timers published a letter from the aebi-
trators who decided what price should be paid by the War Office when it took Sir Michael Hicks-Beach's estate under compulsory powers. That the estate was not over-valued is apparent from the feet that the rate per acre was only 211 188, 11d., while the neighbouring estates purchased were sold at from 214 7s. id. to 212 6s. per acre. The only et- ception was a small estate sold at 211 3e. 3d. per acre. In that case, however, there was no house, no farmhouses, and only two cottages. On the Chancellor of the Exchequer's land there was a good house and park, fishing, two water. mills, one hundred and thirty-six cottages, "fifteen exoel- lent farmhouses and homesteads,.' and valuable timber and plantations. It is to be hoped that this statement of the facts will end the controversy, for it shows conclusively that Sir Michael Hicks-Beach did not sell at a special and artificial price. Thouge Mr. Bowles's suggestions or half-suggestions of a job were not fair to Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, we cannot, on the whole, regret the controversy. Free discussion is a great antiseptic, and ought not to be discouraged even when a public man, as in Sir Michael Hicks-Beach's case, is above suspicion. There is nothing like stating all the facts frankly, and courting criticism.
Previous page
