THE REJECTED AGRICULTURAL SUBSIDIES.
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sin, —In your issue of December 15th, Mr. Philip Morrell writes on " The Defeat of Subsidies," speaking later of the offer as a " programme of despair." I was speaking and working in an agricultural constituency—which was wrested from the Liberals—and found this " programme of despair " very acceptable. It seems rather as if it was killed—as were the Conservatives generally—by an assortment of untruths. I understand that a leading paper, early on in the election, stated that farmers might exercise an option to pay the extra money—up to 80s. a week—in kind : in milk, eggs, &c. This story was, I believe, immediately and officially denied. But the mischief was done, and, in areas where the mistake was used unscrupulously, the effect was disastrous.
It appears necessary, to-day, to refute political untruths every day and every evening as well. One plain, simple denial will not do it. As far as I know no one in our constituency had to meet this misstatement.
It is clear that a " spoon-fed " agriculture would not be of lasting benefit. There is a remedy for the present state of affairs, but no one seems to have thought of what is neces- sary, and no official is ever likely to find out. If he did he could hardly attack the matter officially.—I am, Sir, etc., W. F. DOWNING. Authors' Club, 2 Whitehall Court, S.W . 1.
Previous page
