Our statement that the Duke of Northumberland did not "
demand " 2900 an acre for land wanted for a school, as asserted by Mr. Lloyd George, has been challenged as inaccurate. We pointed out that it was not the Duke, but an arbitrator, who named, the price to be paid by the education authority. We have inquired into the matter, and find that this statement is accurate. The arbitrator agreed on by both parties was left to decide the price by himself, and without calling witnesses. Nothing, then, could be more inaccurate than to state that the price paid was the price demanded by the Duke. It appears, how- ever, that as far back as 1904 there had been negotiations in regard to the particular site, which for estate and business reasons the Duke did not want to part with if he could avoid it. During these and subsequent negotiations a price was named by the Duke greater than that ultimately awarded. We admit, therefore, that though we were right in saying that the Duke did not demand the price paid, and that if it was too high, not he, but the arbitrator, should be blamed, we ought, had we known it, to have mentioned the previous negotiations. We desire, therefore, to express our regret that in this respect our statement was misleading. Our main point remains, however, untouched. It was most unjust of Mr. Lloyd George to hold the Duke of Northumberland up to odium—for that is what the Chancellor of the Exchequer did—for accepting a price settled by an arbitrator. The transaction, one would have thought, would have appealed specially to Mr. Lloyd George. It rested on the principle of official valuation on which his Budget is based.
Previous page
