A “RED” LONDON

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXVI, 20 April 1934, Page 6

A “RED” LONDON

LABOUR’S VICTORY MAJORITY IN L.C.C, ' ", - LESSONS OF ELECTION LONDON, 131.1 i March. On the new London County Council the Socialists have a majority of 14. 'lie Municipal Reformers have lost 29 scats and gained one. The Socialists have, gained 35 and lost one. The small Liberal group of 6, which included Sir Percy Harris, has been wiped out completely. The poll this year was a small one in view of the importance of the issues involved. It is estimated that approximately 650,000 electors recorded their votes, in the 59 contested divisions. As some 1,970,000 persons were entitled to vote, tile aggregate poll was roughly 33 per cent, of the electorate. In East Lewisham, where Sir Paul Latham, • M.P., was defeated by 214 votes, the poll was one of 31 per cent. In West • Fulham, where Sir Cyril Cobb was in a minority of. 320, there was a 32 per ■ cent: poll. • ; “MERELY MUDDLE” Lord Jessel, one of the Municipal Reform leaders, expressed the view that the result of the Socialist victory " would be merely muddle—and that noth- ' iug startlingly revolutionary was likely, lie said: ' ' “We have the examples of tin; Socialist governments, and we have seen "that they arc very poor administrators. Wo have the example ol the Socialist councils in various parts of the country, and wc see the rates go up and affairs muddled up. I think the Socialist council will soon find itself in difficulties if it.trics to carry out the nebulous schemes it has advertised. The rates are -bound to go up, of course. And whether anything tangible comes out of its - wild .schemes is doubtful, to say the least. ' Mr W. 11. Web be, leader-designate of’t'hc. Municipal Reform Party, who lost his seat, said when the final figures were announced: “The whole situation is explained by the fact that the .Socialists cared enough for their convictions to vote and our people didn’t. Wc ’have been beaten by our own side.” PRESS COMMENT “•The lesson of the election..” comments the “Daily Telegraph,” “is that those who are not Socialists must prepare ■ intensively for the next contest, with full perception of tlie fact that the. new industries started in the South are changing the character of London constituencies. The shock of defeat, will have its value if it leads to the overhauling of the whole electoral machinery and to the recognition that victory in the political field cannot he snatched in a few weeks of intensive effort.” “The citizens will do well to think seriously over these elections,” says the “Morning Post,” “for it is no small thing when the greatest municipality in the world falls into the hands of the Socialists. For more than a generation the county has been run. on Conservative lines, and in mere justice to our municipal, reformers it should bo said that they have rio reason to lie ashamed of their record : no scandal has brought them down : on the contrary, fair-minded men will hardly.. dispkto the general honesty, economy, and ijbilitv of their administration.

• ’“While, however, apathy in some places and division in others may have contributed to this result, it would 'be foolish to ignore the fact of a great and positive increase in the Socialist vote. Over a considerable part of London the Conservatives, even if they polled every man' and woman, would still-be outnumbered by the Socialists. That is one of the several considerations which bur people have to face.”

■ • “A PLACE TO SACK” In conclusion; the writer of the lending article says: ‘‘To promise the poor more and more from tiie pockets of the rich until the one starves from the ruin of the other —hero lies the danger of democracy.

The Socialist, like Bluchor, looks round on London and exclaims, ‘What a place to sack !’ Such is the temptation ; and we shall see in due course whether this new government of our capital will ho able to resist it. In the meantime, the danger should make every Conservative resolve and work..to turn this present defeat into future victory.”

plow did the Socialists do it’? How djd they make a “Red London”? asks the “Daily Express.” “Reading their election propaganda you soon see. They exploited the slum disgrace of London, promising decent houses at rents which ‘you can easily pay.’ ‘Labour’s ideal,’ said the Socialist election addresses, ‘is a separate house or flat for each family.’ “Now the Socialists have a clear run to get those things. The Municipal Reformers are broken. The Liberals are wiped out. The Socialist victors have an absolute majority—and an absolute responsibility.” '