[To THE EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR:1 SIa,—Mr. Chamberlain, speaking
with characteristic con. fidence for a future Government and future Chancellor of the Exchequer, holds out to the working classes the promise that the whole proceeds of the proposed taxes upon the bread and meat of the nation shall be used exclusively for their benefit. He says they are to have old-age pensions and higher wages, though he does not explain whence the latter are to come. There is another class, a very numerous one — which, for convenience, one may call the poor middle class—of whom he says nothing. It comprises those whose income is between, say, £100 and £250 a year—a patient, struggling crowd—the clerk, the small annuitant without other resource, the small shopkeeper, the teacher, the young professional man, the woman trying to earn her own livelihood, the Nonconformist minister, the clergyman of the Church of England, of whose distress we have lately beard so much, whose incomes are in numerous cases below £100. I will not attempt to enumerate more. They are a multitude on whom every statesman should have compassion, to whom, rather, he should do justice. From the necessities of their position they are often really poorer than those who are called working men. Rates and taxes hit them harder. Poor as they are now, they will be poorer still when the daily loaf and every pound of meat are higher in price. No one will raise their salaries or incomes. Old-age pensions will scarcely affect them. When they grasp the facts they will, I think, make their voices heard. I am a Unionist and Imperialist, and so far an admiring follower of Mr. Chamberlain, but I cannot but oppose Protective duties upon food.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
