Readers Write

Northern Advocate, 29 July 1938, Page 4

Readers Write

Having spent the first thirty years of my life amongst people holding university degrees, T cannot agree' with “Farmer's Daughter’’ that they all possess an open mind to different points of view. Re her friend who for 23 years has milked cows, and has just got out of debt, due to the guaranteed price (which, by the way, is below market' level), this is a bit of a query, for the. guaranteed price is based on the ’aver-' age cf the previous ten years. Assuming that the production has not increased during the last two years, li claim that her 'average income for '■ the last twelve years is exactly the] same.

WOMEN ON FARMS.

Now, as to women working in the] cowsheds, I would like to point out| that those women mentioned in my | letter are not doing it to save wages, j but because their help dannot be done | without. Lastly, I still maintain that] the limit of cur dairy production will | be determined by the amount of lab-1 our we can procure to help produce ■ it.—“A FARMER’S WIFE.” j

Your correspondent “Onlooker” draws attention to one of the most un-British and iniquitous pieces of legislation placed on the Statute Book by the Socialist Government. The latter prates of “Freedom,” and denies it to both employee and employer. To the worker it says: “Join the union, and contribute to the Socialist political | fighting fund—or starve.” To the employer, Mr Armstrong has said: “It is no longer the privilege of the boss to say whether one is more able than the other—it is mandatory preference.” Skill and ability apparently count for nought.

COMPULSORY UNIONISM.

This pernicious Act is, of course, one of the rungs down the ladder of Socialism, vide Mr Armstrong again; “I hope the Labour movement willgoon be well enough organised to take control of industry without reference to any Arbitration Court. We haven’t reached that stage yet.” Apparently this is to be added to the mounting list of Acts where the right of appeal to the courts is denied,, and the Minister constituted the final appeal. Socialist dictatorship in practice! To those who place any value on personal liberty, it is some solace to have the Hon. Adam Hamilton’s assurance that this piece of piracy will be wiped off the Statute Book.— STUART A. BROltfN.

Having read with interest the article in your issue ot July 23 by S. H. Spencer Jones, F.R.S., “Astrology is Rubbish” and noticing his query, may I also raise a query? I am wondering how “Chiero,” simply by the study of astrology, reached his remarkable conclusions if this fs all rubbish. At the time of the abdication of Edward VIII, the “Advocate” of that date printed an extract from one of “Chiero’s” (Count Louis Harmon) most famous books, concerning the remarkable decision the Prince of Wales was likely to make before he was crowned. This astrological prediction was taken from the book “Chiero's World Predictions.” This book, even in its reprint in 1931, was published years before the events then predicted actually took place. The quotation referred to above was evidently taken from the third chapter, “The House of Windsor,” and ran as follows: — “The astrological chart of the Prince of Wales shows perplexing and batfling influences that most unquestionably point to changes likely to take place greatly affecting the Throne of England. The birthdate of the Prince places him in a category of individuals who are strangely baffling in temperament. In the case of those who live ordinary lives, these peculiarities escape much comment, or have little effect, but where it is a Prince of the Blood, called by birth to fill a high position, it is a very different matter. The Prince was born under peculiar astrological combinations which makes his character a difficult one to understand. His planetary signs give intense restlessness, a lack of continuity of thought, a difficulty of concentration, and an absorbing love for change of scene and travel, a lack of what may be called a sense of danger. . . . The Prince is determined not to settle down until he feels a grande passion, but it is within the range of possibility that owing to the peculiar planetary influences to which he is subjected that he will in the end fall a victim of a de- ! vastating love affair. If he does, I j predict that the Prince will give up I everything, even the chance of being j crowned, rather than lose the objec* j of his affection.” Not fatalism is thus implied, for the I astrologer believes that “the stars imI pel, but do not compel.” The will of I the individual is supreme in life’s de- . . cisions. The famous astronomer Apler, who in his studies of the heavens said, 1 am thinking God’s thoughts after ! Him,” also said: “I had a strong dei sire not to believe in astrology, but i the unfailing concurrence of stellar I configuration and sublimary events compelled my unwilling belief.

WHAT OF ASTROLOGY?

There are learned and brainy men of today who agree with him. There is good corn among the chaff—or “rubbish.” —“QUERIST.”