Ungenerous generation
Sir: I think you are looking at the past through rather rose-tinted spectacles when you write (Diary, 19 March) that 'the rich of the 1980s are less truthful, less patriotic, less generous than were their predecessors before 1914'. Less truthful, possibly; less patriotic, probably; but what makes you think they are less generous?
Goodness, how the very rich kicked and screamed and drummed their heels on the floor when contronted with the egalitarian enormity of Lloyd George's 1909 budget, with its Land Value Tax and income tax up from is to is 2d! And provision for Old Age Pension and National Insurance. The Lords threw it out by 350 to 75. Anybody would have thought that the world had come to an end.
And some of these Lords were rich beyond anything we complain about these days. Back in 1876, a time of agricultural depression, the Dukes of Devonshire, Northumberland and Sutherland enjoyed rental income alone of £180,000, £176,000 and £141,000 respectively, while the Mar- quis of Bute struggled along on £231,000 and the Duke of Buccleuch made do with £216,000. How would these figures have looked at today's values? Fifty times grea- ter?
No, I don't think anyone could accuse the generality of Lords as over generous. Certainly Lloyd George wrong-footed them and made them seem greedier than they were, and of course, as always, there were exceptions. But I don't think we should be starry-eyed about the public spirited generosity of our Edwardian aris- tocracy.
C. A. Latimer
3 The Street, Melton, Woodbridge, Suffolk
Previous page
