The erudite writer of the "Country Diary" was, of course, perfectly correct in associating yesterday's fes-rival with the mating of his beloved birds. He was, however, a little hard fon humans in suggesting that St Valentine's Day 1 necessarily taken fag the occasion for sending "silly pictures." In East Anglia, until hot #0 very long ago, St." Valentines Day" was a time for giving presents and the children of an Eust, Anglian household sometimes received more gifts on that day than at Christmas Time. In Norwich particularly was the pleasant custom served. Although its religious signifeance was not fully recognized by the Church—Valentine was not a [Saint at all—the celebrations of the festival had their inspiration from on old Roman custom which enabled Young men_and maidens to exercise their choice in mating. Tt became the habit for the young woman to take charms to her pillow on Valentines Eve and on the morrow, the frst unmarried man met by her, outside the inmates of the household, Was her future husband. The duty of the husband to make his wife 2 present on Valentine's Day was ob-Ferved by Samuel Pepys, but sue more also bestowed that favour on othe: Iovely Indies. The custom of sending anonymous Valentines expressing affection for the recipient finds mention in Hardy's "Far From the Mac ding Crowd". It led to the tragedy in that novel. As for the vulgar pletures eireulaied on Valentine's Day, they seem to have emerged from the coarser proclivities of the 17th cen-Yury but have survived until the present era, as residents in English countries, towns and prowlers in the meaner parts of London will agree. expense. He is called upon to vote simply because his failure to ex-excise that privilege must mean his political extinction leading inevitably and inexorably to his economic elimination from the scheme of things in Shanghai. If he is content with such suicide, let him continue to be. apathetic by all means. But he has surely much too much commonsense to choose that course.
It is a happy decision which the House of Commons has reached to continue the £2,000,000 subsidy to British tramp shipping during 1936. Dr. Edward Leslie Burgin, Parliamentary Secretary of the Board of Trade, corroborated. the impression which has been formed from occational reports that the subsidy was Undoubtedly conferring beneficial effects upon a branch of the British mercantile marine which was sorely in need of assistance. Mere reference, however, to the number of extra ships employed, or the number of men and officers taken back into, employment as compared with the amount of the subsidy, Is likely to give an erroneous impression. Those who are merely concerned with the re-employment of seamen would contend that £1,333 each per annum would be an enormous sum to pay, or that some £16 odd per ton for extra shipping put into commission is exorbitant. For. those reasons the telegram in question fails to present full view of the facts, which are that the subsidy was frst of all spread over all necessitous cases in the tramp shipping fleet, and that a condition. of the grant was that recipients should follow an approved system of breaking up obsolete Vessels and replacing them with the latest improved types. How much of this has been done up to the present.
not stated, but, on the figures, it fs safe to hazard that a very considerable proportion of the £2,000,000 has been and is being spent on the Improvement of a type of vessel in connection with which Britain was very far behind some of her competitors.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.