A SYNOPSIS 381 



like to know — " Why did he not go 'before, 1 " The obvious out- 

 come of this must be one of two things — either Mr. Lloyd- 

 George's visit to Germany was undertaken with the object of 

 throwing dust in the eyes of the justly angered tax-payers, 

 in which case nothing more will be heard of it; or, after 

 passing his plundering piece of legislation, he awoke to the 

 consciousness of its manifest injustice and was honestly 

 desirous of repairing his error. If the latter be the case, it 

 will bear fruit in due season. Lot us await the denouement 

 of the play. 



This Non-contributory Pension scheme of the Govern- 

 ment is born of Socialism, and it is of a spoliatory character. 

 It is a piece of Class Legislation, and is a dangerous quality, 

 always recoiling, like a boomerang on those who launched it 

 forth. Those who have been unjustly robl:)ed should never 

 cease in their demand to have this spoliatory Act wiped out of 

 the Statute book and replaced by a wise, well-thought-out 

 scheme, on the German principle, to which all classes would 

 be expected to contribute. The present scheme is nothing 

 more nor less than a new State Charity, and the country is 

 sick and tired of charities, because it has found that most of 

 them are really unnecessary, and that they only serve to 

 emasculate the manhood of the nation. 



The Penalty of not Growing our own Corn 



One of tlie mo.st grievous burdens imposed upon the P.ritish 

 ])eople, through the violation of a natural law in not tilling 

 their laud, is the enormous widespread loss resulting therefrom. 

 This loss is incalculable for the reason that it has the properties 

 of quicksilver, of running here and there and iindiug its way 

 into every nook and cranny of human existence. It ramifies 

 through every vein of the national life and affects every class 

 of the community, directly or indirectly, and is so woven into 

 the very being of the people, that no man can estimate its 

 capacity for good or for evil. The direct loss in agricultural 

 wealth alone in thirty years has been estimated at .sixfroi 

 hundred millions sterling — and, stupendous though this be, it 

 no more plumbs the depths of the people's losses than a ship's 

 line can plumb the immeasurable depths of the sea. 



Great Britain has been pledged to this siucidal course — 

 as Free-traders tell us — " For Good or for Evil," and after 

 sixty years of experience the verdict of the people is — " It ls 

 FOR Evil ! " Every by-election proclaims this fact, and ever}- 

 printed sheet — save those that still cling to the policy which 



