Notebook
Elsewhere in this issue of the Spectator a number of people tell us how they are going to vote in the general election, and why. You may possibly be wondering how I am going to vote. I had more or less made up my mind to vote Conservative until I was stopped in my tracks by Mr Peregrine Worsthorne in the last Sunday Telegraph. His column began: 'If Mrs Thatcher wins on June 9, her new Cabinet may be the first not to include a single old Etonian...' and it it went on to lament that there seems to be no place for old Etonians in the new Tory order. The Sun, which is quoted by Mr Alan Rusbridger on another page, had already drawn the same conclusion, but unlike Mr Worsthorne, it was delighted that the Tories had 'at last thrown off the man- tle of aristocratic influence and privilege'. We have arrived, according to the Sun, in a new age 'of the common man, where the greatest jobs in the land are awarded on merit rather than the old school tie'. Accor- ding to Mr Jock Bruce-Gardyne, Economic Secretary to the Treasury, writing in Wednesday's Times, this is all so much rub- bish. 'The vision of a horde of hard-faced petty bourgeoisie trampling on the toes of sensitive Etonians and consigning the nobility and gentry to the trash-can of history is a product of the fevered imagina- tion of the Belgravia school of politics,' he said, though he did not explain why. Assuming that the Sun and Mr Worsthorne are right and that Mr Bruce-Gardyne is wrong, how should a sensitive old Etonian like myself vote? In our leading article this week we urge our readers to vote in their own interest rather than make a virtue of voting against it. If I were to follow this ad vice, I should probably vote for the Alliance, which far from having a prejudice against the products of my old school seems to have become a refuge for many of the grandest people in the land. Even the Duke of Devonshire is a member of the SDP. Why on earth should I vote for a par- ty — the Conservative party — which is thought to discriminate against people who, through no fault of their own, happen to have been given rather an expensive educa- tion? I can think of no reason, except that it is probably in the national interest, rather than my own, to do so. So, in defiance of our own injunction, I may vote Tory after all. If I do so, I will be comforted by the knowledge that the country is in fact run by Mr Ferdinand Mount, an old Etonian and heir to a baronetcy; and also by the fact, which Mr Rusbridger reveals, that there are at least 52 old Etonians among the Conser- vatives standing for Parliament next week.
They have been voting already during the election campaign. Last week there were two local government by-elections in the West Country, and in both polls the Labour Party was more or less wiped out. In Chipping Sodbury an Alliance candidate took a seat from the Tories, winning 843 votes as opposed to a mere 98 for the Labour candidate. In neighbouring Yate, another Bristol overspill town, the Alliance took five seats from Labour. The number of votes for Alliance candidates ranged from 389 to 429; for Labour candidates from 76 to 102. In Yate there were no Tory contestants. If this sort of voting pattern were to be repeated in the General Election, it would be very good news for the Alliance. As far as the West Country is concerned, it would mean, for example, that the Liberals would certainly win Yeovil from the Con- servatives. But being very dim about this sort of thing, I consulted Mr Robert Waller of Magdalen College, Oxford, author of an indispensable book called the Almanac of British Politics. He pointed out that the number of votes involved was so tiny as to mean practically nothing, and that it would probably be wiser to put one's faith in the opinion polls which are far less encouraging for the Alliance. Even so, Mr Waller is not one of those who believe in a Tory land- slide; he is predicting a Conservative ma- jority of about 50 seats over Labour, with the Alliance having about 20 seats in the next Parliament. This is rather good news for Labour.
Miss Betty Trask, author of some 50 light romances, died the other day and left the sum of £400,000 to fund a literary prize for an author under 35 'on the strength of a romantic novel or other novel of a traditional rather than experimental nature.' Her own novels are reputedly very bad, but she obviously did not think so for she wanted to encourage others to go on writing in the same vein. The Society of Authors has been entrusted with the task of implementing her will. Immediately, dif- ficulties are found. According to press reports, there is embarrassment at the size of her bequest. Investment of the £400,000 would yield about £40,000 a year, making Miss Trask's literary prize much the most valuable in Britain. It is, in the view of the literary establishment, highly improper that a young writer of romantic rubbish should stand to win £40,000 when the Booker Prize for the best novel of the year is worth only £10,000. There are signs, therefore, that the Society of Authors is trying to wriggle its way out of its obligations. It is pointed out that Miss Trask did not insist on the prize going to a romantic novelist and had left the Society considerable flexibility. Legally this may be true. But there is no doubt at all about what she intended, and the money should be used as she wished. If the Society feels squeamish, its only honourable course is to reject the bequest completely and ar- range for some other body to carry out her intentions.
The entries to my election competition were a little disappointing. Using the Boer War music-hall song 'The Baby's name is Kitchener' as a model, readers were invited to submit two verses employing as many names as possible from the present election campaign. Most of the entries bore little relation to the original, and those that did were among the least imaginative. I am therefore giving the £15 prize to the author of the poem which bears least relation to the original of all, because it seems to me to be the best. The winner is Dr Philip Peacock, and this is his poem (all the words in capital letters are the names of candidates in the election):
This SPRING our BODY politic is in AMESS Good men and TRUE, with verbal BLADES and SHIELDS, Inflict KEEN PAYNE, take SAVAGE KNOX, And leave the FIELD of BATTLE REDDISH From the SLAUGHTER, a LITTLE PRICE To pay, for freedom in this other EDEN The BOOKMAKER BEGGS us to pick the WINNER, And BUTCHER, BAKER, CARTER, PORTER, TAYLOR,
GARDNER, SEXTON, SHEPHERD, THATCHER,
Will hold their HEAD and MUTTER Who's BEST? Then MARKS his vote. This DONE, He'll STEEL away, on FOOT, Or SPEED through VERNAL GROVES To some FARR BRIGHT SHORE. The NOBLE LORD, behind his CASTLE MOATE, Unlike his BUTLER, has no vote!
Alexander Chancellor
Previous page
