SPECTATOR COMPETITION No. 113 Report by D. R. Peddy Dr.
Mont Follick, M.P., recently managed to transform a debate on the naval estimates into one on spelling reform. A prize of £5 was offered for an extract from a speech in a Parliamentary debate by a Member who is trying to make one of the following changes of sub- feet: capital punishment to proportional representation ; atomic energy to the price of nylons ; prison reform to Federal Union ; Colonial affairs to road safety ; cattle-breeding to divorce.
I regret that, on the whole, entries were on the heavy side ; perhaps this was to be expected in view of the sombre nature of some of the topics—capital punishment, for instance, and road safety. The brightest speeches were those on the road from cattle-breeding to divorce, which bristled with biological arguments.
Precipitousness in the change of subject lost marks, of course, and the thing to aim for was a transition so insidious that the Members themselves would hardly notice that it had taken place. The zebra provided an all-too-facile path from the Colonies to the Queen's Highway. But many competitors managed the change over very well—notably A. Palmer, A. M. Sayers, N. Hodgson, and H. A. C. Evans, who went from capital punishment to proportional represen- tation by way of Ancient Rome. R. B. Browning unfortunately disqualified himself by starting with capital punishment and ending with nylons. T. E. Casson—quite legitimately—scorned the Mother of Parliaments and delved back into the proceedings of the Roman Senate.
Among the non-prizewinners the following merit quotation :— " The policy of Socialism, Sir, is more Pylons, more Skylons, and above all, more and cheaper Nylons ! " (R. Kennard Davis.)
" The only sound argument advanced by Members opposite in favour of capital punishment is the ancient Mosaic axiom—' An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth ' . It implies surely that, other things being equal, one man's tooth is as good as another's, that one man's life is as good as another's, and, still more emphatically, that one man's vote is as good as another's." (Arthur Thomson.) "How long will our cattle remain content with promiscuity while we enjoy matrimony ? Will they not demand laws of marriage and legiti- macy? Will not some cattle-rouser cry : What is good for Man's heirs is good for his heifers ' ? Which brings me to divorce ..." (Effie).
Allan M. Laing and Edward Blishen, with their similar approach to cattle-breeding and divorce, and Admiral Sir W. M. James, are recommended for equal shares in the prize. Honoui ably mentioned —Guy Kendall and A. Macdonald.
PRIZES (ALLAN M. LAING) .
I may say, at the outset, Sir, that I have no intention of criticising adversely the measures proposed by the Minister to improve the breed of British cattle. They seem to me admirably adapted to produce and maintain contented cows ; and I think both sides of this House will agree with me when I say that without such contentment neither the marriage of cattle noeihat of human.beings can safely promise offspring of a high quality. Cattle are, on the whole, more fortunate than human beings in that no old-fashioned and puritanical laws compel them to associate for life with the same wedded partner. If it did so, no doubt our fields would be, as so many of our houses and flats are, the scene of bitter clashes of temperament, in which the contentment of the couples and the welfare of their offspring would alike suffer. It is, indeed, one of the paradoxes of our civilisation, Sir, that cattle, far less sensitive than human beings, should enjoy matrimonial freedoms denied to mere men and women • and I suggest, Sir, that the Home Secretary might take a leaf from the book of the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries and make it at least easier for those unfortunate human beings incompatibly coupled to sever the legal knot which binds them together in indissoluble discord. Or does he think, perhaps, that it is more important to the community to ensure a breed of contented cattle than a nation of contented men and women ?
(EDWARD BLISHEN)
. . . It is plain nonsense for the Hon. Member to claim that our fat stock is being impoverished by promiscuous breeding. Would he really have us believe that any important degree of incompatibility could enter into the relations of two animals ? Surely he has not reflected that the marital connection here is casual and brief. I would like to make a simple comparison. Human beings, unlike farmyard animals (Uproar) —I will ignore these raucous interjections—human beings, for ostensibly the reasons which bring about the association of these cattle, enter a relationship neither casual nor brief. It is not their good fortune to be forever separated after a simple purpose has been fulfilled. Divorce (Clamour)—divorce, I repeat, is, one might say, an intrinsic feature of the marriage of cattle : with them marriage involves, as a consequence, divorce. Does one see—and here I am answering the Hon. Member's assertion—does one see neurotic, marriage-maddened, sexually-distem- pered cattle ? I contend that our English herds are the fine, famous sought-after beasts that they are simply because they have such facile access to divorce. (Interruptions.) Oh, I expect some of the Hon. Members who are farmers will want to controvert this on narrowly agricultural grounds. What I am anxious to assert is that the freedom of cattle from marriage grievances of any kind is an overwhelming proof that. .. (Uproar).
(ADMIRAL SIR W. M. JAMES)
The teeming populations of our Colonies are on the march along the road that leads to self-government, but unless their rate of advance is attuned to their political enlightenment the road will end in a quagmire. We, their trustees, are responsible for regulating the rate of advance. We, so to speak, control the traffic-lights. We have not always exercised that control wisely. We have provoked bloodshed by keeping on the red light too long ; we have not kept the amber light on long enough to give time to consolidate before a further delegation of authority ; in some cases we have switched over from -red to green and left the green light on despite the evidence that we have acted too precipitately, and our subsequent spasmodic attempts to safeguard politically immature people from the consequences of their own impetuosity have often been as ineffective as pose ill-considered devices, Belisha Beacons, were to check the impetuosity of pedestrians and car-drivers on our own roads. Members of all parties evince alarm and indignation against the Govern- ment when there are a score of casualties during a political riot in Africa ; they show far less concern over the thousands of innocent victims of the failure of successive Governments to introduce legislation that would end the holocaust on our • roads. During last Thursday's debate I pointed out that the provision of zebra crossings would not ... •
Previous page
