LETTERS TO THE -EDITOR
[Ccrrespondents are requested to keep their letters as brief as is reasonably possible. The most suitable length is that of one of our "News of the Week" paragraphs. Signed letters are. given a preferencs over those bearing a pseudonym, and the latter must be accomnamed by the name and address of ths author, which will be treated as confidential.—Ed. THE SPECTATOR.] Snt,—I have been acting as Devil's Advocate in this discussion, and nothing is further from my thoughts than to suggest that we should let agriculture disappear from this country. My personal activities are in fact directed towards the opposite. Indeed, as you, Sir, know, the article originally bore the title " Agriculture and Defence "—more non-committal though less piquant than the one which now heads this column.
But if we want home agriculture to contribute to the defence of the country in war-time, we are going exactly the wrong way about it. Mr. Theodore Bulmer has hit the nail on the head when he points out that to encourage an increase of pigs and poultry in this country is quite the most foolish thing we could do in this respect. They demand an enormous ration of cereals, most of which have to be imported. To a less extent this applies to the bullock and the cow, though she produces a food which can scarcely be dispensed with or imported. The sheep is nearly independent of imported fodder. Cereal growing for human consumption is an import- ant measure of defence, but a much greater output per acre can be obtained by growing potatoes.
I think that our agricultural policy—if we do seriously think of it as a defensive measure—ought to be worked out along something like this order of preferences. I hope to be able to return to the subject later.
Mr. Hughes, I suggest, should re-read the article, because he has completely failed to understand what it was about. As for his proposal that agriculture should be encouraged to import as large a quantity as possible of bulky articles from abroad, so as to encourage the Merchant Navy, that seems to me ludicrous. Though I cannot blame Mr. Hughes for holding this view, because I believe it was shared by the last
Minister of Agriculture !—Yours, &c., COLIN CLARK.
Cambridge.
Previous page
