The Victor Vanquished
Page 29
Page 30
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Labour Party hapt gained a Cadtty. teart A Public M vieto Re-elected by ai'uoard of a Far minority vote and a meagre the Discredit majority in the House _ of Commons, it has suffered the humiliation of summary rednetion'frorn the status of a strutting demagogue to that of an anxious caretaker who hardly dare leave his house lest he return to find the bailiffs in possession. Defeat would have offered greater honour than the Nation's satirical award of a farthing damages to a discredited, although technically successful, contestant. • The Socialists can claim neither mandate nor moral power to impose their oppressive theories on the British people. in this respect, at least, their position is unchanged, for they never could.
In the 1945 General Election they were returned by 11,967,985 votes. The Conservatives, Liberals and National Liberals, all bitter opponents of nationalization and other doctrines based on the subjugation of the individual to the State, polled 12,054,522 votes. By a peculiarity of the electoral system, the Labour Party secured an overwhelming majority of seats, which created the illusion of a mass revulsion from earlier rule. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
'Millions Voted in Ignorance On that occasion the Socialists were carried to power by men and women who were weary of war and were promised.Speedy return to their families, and conditions in which they could set up homes and live in peace and prosperity. Millions of those who voted for the Labour Party were ignorant of the full implications,,of its manifesto, as the result of last week's election proves.
Disregarding the views of the majority of the electors, the Socialists used the power for which they had waited 15 years, to attack the foundations on which British industry had been built through generations. They claimed a mandate from the public to nationalize the mines, gas and electricity supply, the iron and steel industry, the railways and inland waterways, and two important sections of road transport. They even tried to restrict the manufacturer and trader in their right to carry their own goods how and where they chose_ The Socialists' assumption of moral authority to akes A . Derisive devastate the lives ot men who had built up successful thing Damages to businesses was the most ed ,Soaaltsts. unscrupulous device ever employed by a British Government in the cause. of political expediency.
The road transport industry had hoped that the General Election would bring about its salvation, and its immediate reactidn must have been one of keen disappointment:. Denationalization is, however, merely deferred, perhaps for only a few months.
• A Just Reward It is just that the Socialists should stay to reap the harvest of weeds that they . have sown in the past . 4i years. Soon, the Chancellor of the Exchequer must introduce an unpopular Budget and risk the Fall of the Government in carrying it into law. The full effects of devaluation will be felt this year and, in combination with an extortionate rate of taxation, will reduce still further the true value of wages.
An increase in the individual's contribution to the National Health Service may well be necessary and will help to remind the British people that they are paying dearly for the " gift§ " of 'a benign administration. Socialism will not 'make up the dwindling residue of the weekly pay packet after taxation has been paid and the necessities of life have been bought. Time and the running-out of Marshall Aid are strong allies of the anti-Socialists. A few more months of Labour rule and its uncomfortable results may bring about that final revulsion from Socialism, which will put Britain on the right road again.
Both the Conservative and Labour parties blame the Liberals for having spoilt their chances. On the evidence of the manifestos of the three parties, however, :there is a closer community ofinterest between the Tories and the Liberals than between the Liberals and the Socialkts, and the Conservatives may be assumed to have suffered•more. If there be another election soon—and one seems inevitable—the contest should be clear-cut, and the Conservatives may then expect a substantial majority. Denationalization of road transport can then prbceed with the full authority of:he electorate. Meanwhile, the industry demands an assurance from the Minister of Transport that the operation of Part 4 of the Transport Act, 1947, will be suspended. and that no further action will be taken to nationalize road haulage. The Road Passenger Executive has done nothing to justify its existence, because there is nothing that it can profitably do, and, in the interests of economy, it should be disbanded. The companies acquired from the Tilling and S.M.T. groups, and other concerns taken over independently, could continue to function as separate units until the industry's fate was finally sealed by another General Election.
Denationalization by Pressure ?
If the Minister refuses to modify his policy, despite the passing of what is almost a vote of censure by the electorate, consideration should be given to the possibility of promoting a private members' Bill to repeal all those parts of the 1947 Act dealing with road transport. This might invite the defeat of the Government and lay the way open to the complete freeing of the industry from State interference. The advisability of such a course would, naturally, have to be determined by political tacticians, for reckless haste might deny the Conservatives that outright victory which is essential to stable government. Specific steps should be taken at once to prevent the nationalization of iron and steel, for which the Socialist Government has no mandate, from being carried into effect. This is a matter of vital urgency.
Experience has exposed Socialism as a fulminate which, when put to the test, splutters like a damp squib. While it smoulders, however, it is still dangerous and at the next election it must be safely buried.
Will the Two-ratio Axle Survive?
THE axle with a single gear change has been popular in America for some years, and at least one type is making considerable progress in Britain, mainly in connection with overseas models. On the other hand, it is comparatively easy and cheap to install an all-over reduction gear in what is. virtually, an otherwise normal gearbox.
Supplementary boxes affording an additional ratio which doubles those available in the ordinary gearbox have also been produced from time to time, and as far back as the period of the Model T Ford; this vehicle, having only two ratios in its cpicyclic gearbox, lent itself especially to the use of these auxiliaries.
Now, however, an interesting controversy has arisen. Makers of proprietary gearboxes claim that they can achieve, with only slight modifications, all that can be obtained by special axles and that, moreover, the additional complication in the latter is bound to make them heavier—and this is all unsprung weight.
The double-ratio-axle enthusiasts, however, point out that any additional torque is confined to the parts close to the driving wheels, so with the gearing in the neighbourhood of the differential, only the driving shafts take the extra stress; indeed, in axles where there is an epicyclic or other type of reduction at the outer ends of these shafts, the torque is conveyed directly to the wheels. We do not, however, know of any axle in this second category in which a change of ratio can be effected while the vehicle is being driven.
Axle Gears Relieve Propeller Shaft • With the change speed in the axle, the propeller shaft is certainly relieved of an additional burden. There is, therefore, less risk of its failure or less need for strengthening it to meet the more severe conditions imposed by an auxiliary reduction in a forward position.
As regards the means for changing gear, the advantage probably lies with the gearbox-type unit, which, even if reasonably flexibly supported together with or apart from the engine, does not move in relation to the rest of the chassis. as does an axle.
There are also arguments as to whether it is more advantageous to employ an over-drive or to provide a high-geared, direct top speed. The latter is expressly favoured by Mr. F. J. Everest, chief engineer of David Brown and Sons (Huddersfield). Ltd., who, in his recent paper read before the Institute of Road Transport engineers, said that he saw no special advantage in the over-drive.
Some designers, however, take the view that the over-drive possesses considerable merit, particularly in the case of vehicles for overseas, where much of the heavy pulling could be carried out in a direct third and higher speed combined with economy attained on roads with few hills.