THE BATTLE FOR BREAD

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21384, 29 January 1935, Page 8

THE BATTLE FOR BREAD

TO TITB BOiro* or THE PRB33. Sir,—A rather interesting report appeared in your columns recently about the Bishop of London's condemnation <_.£ the policy of destroying food whilst n; nv hungered. One is led to wonder '."iv'i behind these statements. Too v-'V ir.ei:-: have passed over my ;-, UiC j' 1 to nelievc? that organised !•'. lit'i'i:/ will do anything about it but u, oiiV" : l lemn platitudes and sit on • b,.These people are nearly . if v.-unh'v it::iiaior-- of (he historical V: ■:■■■ "of *l3rav, and to look for any :n assistance from this quarter is. i hopeless. ; , :iV unc' religiously inclined, Uictv is something about the ivsatjoM which should give •; *.!:• / tight. It is an undisputed ; !(«.• refusal to use any natural • \v:i! n uit in a gradual lessening , ; \vers in that direction. Do .' • ih j acts suggest thai this law r-'.ht through the scheme of t '" if •' reason America destroyed ni" v.-hile <he bread lines grew in W'rcat belt of the greatest wheat cv ''",- of the world. We know what tu the wheat crop year in !:r.: country; the same to a lesser ex\t- ■ can be applied to Australia. y, . r ourselves, we fed the uneni-r,;.A-ed people's children on dripping we had huge stocks of butter »:vu-rioratiii{,' in store. The results at are a diminished supply: but '•he littivr harvest of a C.3 population v.v h:iv vet to reap. In order to books balance we have i :;i -■< n the shadow instead of the sub"'v.'hile not expecting anything prac- « from religious bodies is it too r'.ii.'h to ask that they at least raise -voice in protest against this vi-'i -irons sacrilege?— Yours, etc.. F. HARRISON. T'J mil l!)! 10» Of THB rßiss. .Sir,—l was present one evening last week at the Seventh Day Adventists' tamp at Addington, with a view to analysing any project or plan which mii;ht be put forward to deal with the present world-wide economic anomalies " Pastor Silby's statement that "No human mind had yet propounded a successful solution to these problems (>c'-as'on< ouite a controversial trend (i thou "hi' He also added, No . a v! hlv "system devised by man has bt-n .'ufheient to meet our needs and ( n.-: ect our palsied economic system. This to a certain extent is obvious, but what scheme has been tried that }:<_ can mention which savours of a true humanitarian religious context? No human after having visited a physician for treatment for a disease can proclaim judgment of a derogative nature until he has tried the prescribed romedv and found it futile. The edict issued by the Bishop of London last week regarding the tragic conditio*}: - , prevailing to-day is quite obvujus to countless thousands of people al! the world over. The question is, what is he prepared to suggest j'> connexion with his much-belated assertion? The attitude adopted, or rather suggested, the other evening, that «>f waiting for the second advent «'ti\, fail:, lamentably to inspire. This : airie attitude has been primarily responsible for the embodiment of the

: pint of inefficiency or inertia in our !: r x;jal structure —a defeatist policy. The ; o-cii ilcd economic order of things has fietimtciv made it impossible for reju;icus stimulus to be applied with a v;ev.' to putting society on a sane, logical basis. The solution is to be found in man's determination to put ;•]] practical measures forward and deal definitely with the factors that obviously militate against social security. If *!h'> pastor is honestly tinder* the i repression (and I do not question it) i!;at aii persons who have striven and a.--;- striving to introduce an order of human society which can only be as sane and moral, are doing futile work, and would advise them i<i adopt a passive attitude of come ;<:x! wait for a millennium, then his dictum conflicts with definitely sane conclusions. Dr. T. V/. Norwood, at the City Tc-njple, London, recently said: "It is <'bvfous to anyone who looks round that v.i have come to the end of the road. We can no longer get on with that paradox which demands at one ;md tht* same time plenty and scar-'-:tyThis recognised fact does not tail for inertia or is it a logical exf'oc \n adopt a Micawberian attitude, "Wait and See."—Yours, etc., .T H. ROBINSON. •"aj.-uary 28.