Leonard ALSTON [277]

  General Notes:

Modern constitutions in outline : an introductory study in political science 1905
ALSTON, Leonard
Littleton Building
Inner Temple catalogue 2009

The Times 19 November 1926 pg 15 col F
To the Editor or of The Times
Sir: As a Cambridge teacher of economics I have read with no little enjoyment Sir Ernest Benn's diverging article in The Times today dealing with teaching of economics at Cambridge. I am afraid Sir Ernest would prove himself, under test, a very ingenious examinee. When the Cambridge examiner asks, in his customary solemn way: "in what circumstances, if any, do you expect two and two to make five? Give reasons for your answer; illustrating from (a) contemporary, (b) historical sources"
Sir Ernest Benn examinee would probably (if very keen on reaching the first place on the class list) racking his brains to discover some cases which might please the academic ignoramus set over him as the judge. Most Cambridge examinees, however more wiley.
As an examiner, on the other hand, Sir Ernest would painstakingly put into his questions everything that he would like the docile candidate to repeat. "Evaluate carefully the sum of two and two. Show that it must equal four. Prove (by the help of diagrams or otherwise) that if it appears to equal either (a) more than four (b) less than four, a mistake must have crept into the calculations" Cambridge examiner's, however seem to be unreasonably prejudiced against this method.
I note, with interest and alarm, Sir Ernest's indubitable proofs that the serious problems of wealth production must have been almost completely ignored. And this, though the Economics Board have apparently taken some pains in the matter. They have included among the examiners for the years 1923- 26 (1) the official at the Board of Trade who is responsible for the Census of Production: (2) the president of the L.M.S. Railway; (3) the editor of the Economist (a former secretary to the Iron and Steel Federation); (4) and (5) two non resident economists whose published writings are largely, perhaps mainly, concerned with statistics of production. Several of these eminent nonresidents were concerned in setting up in 1926 questions which Sir Ernest has so patiently dissected. Not one of them, however, seems to have assumed that it was his public duty to put into his queries the whole of what the victims were expected to put into their answers: and therefore the published questions give us no inkling of what the Orthodox candidate ought to believe about the economic fate of England and the Empire. Let us hope that their successors, now that they have read Sir Ernest's merited rebuke, will amend their slovenly ways, and so provide no future occasion for scandal.
Yours &c.,
Leonard Alston.
38 Parkside Cambridge November 17.
Leonard was not without a sense of irony.

The Times 26 May 1932 pg 10 col C.
Political Prisoners in India
Sir, When discussing the present situation in India it is customary for certain sections of the Press to lay great stress on the numbers now serving sentences of imprisonment for political offences.
In the case of a man like Mr Gandhi it is obvious that a term in prison differs scarcely at all from an enforced sojourn by a British Cabinet Minister in a nursing home, where he is expected to obey the instructions given by doctors and nurses. How does it stand in the case of the great majority of lesser folk - for example, the semi-pauper types that are paid by political organisations to carry out such tasks as picketing? I make no assertions on the point. But it would be interesting if we could be informed authoritatively by someone with first-hand knowledge, whether or not it is the case that in prison such people enjoyed a safer and larger income (food and shelter) under pleasanter conditions then they could hope to enjoy outside.
I am, Sir, yours &c.,
Leonard Alston
6 Pemberton Terrace Cambridge

The Times 5 July 1932 pg 10 col A.
Restoration of Prices
Fresh Money for Spending.
To the Editor of The Times.
Sir, The progress of the crisis is continually confirming the view that the most serious evil from which we are now suffering is a great fall in wholesale prices of the last two and a half years. This has bought about serious maladjustment as throughout the economic system owing to the fact that some prices move readily under the influence of supply and demand, while others are relatively inflexible. The most practical remedy for this situation is to operate upon the prices which are recast it will; these should be raised until they bear the same relation to the fixed prices as they bore at the outset of the crisis. This may be brought about in various ways of which we propose to mention three:-
1. Private individuals and institutions can assist by spending according to their capacity. In cases of doubt, the patriotic motive should weigh on the side of expenditure rather than economy.
2. The banking system should endeavour to increase the quantity of means of payment at the disposal of the public, both by being willing to give credit on the easiest possible terms, on all usual types of security, and by purchasing securities in the open market.
3. The government is at the heart of the economic system, and its operations have far-reaching effects for good or evil. It is therefore essential that its actions should be shaped in accordance with the general policy here outlined.
Until the restoration of prices is achieved, it should undertake to impose no additional taxation, it should be prepared to remit existing taxation, where that presses hardest, and it should encourage departments, local authorities, etc to speed up the expenditure on all sound schemes of construction and development. The government should obtain funds for these purposes from the banks which will thus be assisted in their efforts to put fresh money into circulation. To secure confidence and allay possible anxieties, the government should explicitly declare its policy in advance. A definite pronouncement of this kind should remove all fears of uncontrolled inflation - fears which arise primarily from a sense of uncertainty.
In these circumstances the government should be able to secure the external value of sterling against speculation or alarmist withdrawals. The policy of reducing the commodity value of sterling should not be associated with one of deliberate external undervaluation. So long as the financial structure of other countries it is in a position of extreme jeopardy, no attempt should be made to gain a competitive advantage by depressing the external value of the pound below its internal value. An improvement in our balance of trade secured in this way would only produce a further fall in world prices, and a consequential deterioration of the world situation.
Yours faithfully
Signed
L. Alston - Economics Faculty University of Cambridge, with 40 others from Oxford Cambridge and other universities.

The Times 18 September 1934 pg 8 col C.
Workers and Workless
The "Gainfully" Employed.
To the Editor of The Times
Sir, This is a rather belated addition to the correspondence that arose out of your contributors article on August 22 " Workers and Workless".
Neither the writer of the article nor his critics drew attention to the point that seems to me to emerge most prominently from the figures he has used. In 1881 the proportion of the population returned as gainfully occupied (a term that includes unemployed as well as employed) was 43%; the remainder being dependants or persons of independent means. The percentage is now 47. For the 21 years 1875-1895 I find that the average trade union figure for unemployment was almost exactly 5.25%. If the figures 43% and 47% can be taken as applicable within the wage earning section of the population, as well as in the population as a whole, we get the following rough result: in 1881 out of every 100 members of the wage earning section 43 had some recognized means of earning, and normally some 41 were actually earning. If in 1931 there were still 41 out of each 100 actually earning, this would appear officially as 41 out of 47 or 87% giving hours and unemployment figure of 13%.
Now, let us a picture the aggregate earnings of the wage earners as being pooled between the employed, the unemployed, and the dependants. Then, if the real wages of those in employment are no less than in 1881, the average real income of the whole working-class would be unaffected (compared with 1881) when the post-war unemployment figure is oscillating around 13%. (Though it needs to be remembered that the expenditure required to maintain an adult worker in comfort is greater than that needed for a dependent child). The last recorded unemployment figure for the last 12 months has been moving between 16.3 and 19.1; and for the period 1924/29 it really, except in 1926, rose above 11 or fell below 10; and as the post-war official figures were more comprehensive than the prewar trade union percentages, the contrast between the prewar 5.25 and the post-war 10 to 20% is probably in fact much less sharp than it appears to be (or in other words for comparative purposes, I had these actual post-war figures should be reduced, all the post-war figure equivalent to the prewar trade union figure should be taken as well above 13).
But real wages of the employed are found to be distinctly higher, if one adopts the usual methods of computation from money wagers and the cost of living index. This index, moreover, takes no account of the multitude of cheapened miscellaneous items (Cinema performances, bicycles, gramophones etc) which now form a noticeable part of the working class families real income (to say nothing of cheapened medical services connected with the Health Insurance Acts); more is spent publicly on the children's welfare (better schooling, medical inspection, meals for necessitous schoolchildren, etc); while of the social insurance schemes even out this income more satisfactorily as between relatively good and relatively bad times. So, if the well-being of the wage earning families could be satisfactorily measured by the real income received, no account being taken of disappointed expectations and frustrated energies, this section of the population as a whole would appear to be better off than in prewar days; and the elderly specially gain by the existence of old age pensions. With the falling size of the family (which accounts for the great reduction in the title of dependants in the population) it becomes possible for continually higher unemployment figures to emerge without the necessity of any reduction in average working-class incomes per head.
The very young are not very conscious of the frustrations and disappointments of industrial depression; they are getting in many ways a healthier and more enjoyable life than their predecessors; they receive a more satisfactory schooling, and there seems to be a a very much higher proportion of them who do not actively dislike schooling under present methods of teaching. In short, they are living lives that resemble much more closely than previously the lives of their coevals among the non-wage earning groups. All these are points of considerable importance when we, and the parents of these children, turn our thoughts towards the time when the children themselves will be workers, voters and parents. Moreover, just as the reduction in the size of the individual family, down to a certain point, means that the members of it can be more intensively equipped for their future careers, so also the growing reduction in the aggregate proportion of dependants in the population must mean that the gainfully occupied can between them, directly and indirectly (e.g. through rates and taxes) give a longer an qualitatively better training to the children of the nation with the same amount of sacrifice as today. Thus we may reasonably expect, even with mounting unemployment figures, a gradual advancement from a C3 in the direction of an A1 population as the country moves forward to its next testing period of national emergency.
Yours &c.,
Leonard Alston.
6 Pemberton Terrace Cambridge.

Stoic and Christian in the second century : a comparison of the ethical teaching of Marcus Aurelius with that of contemporary and antecedent Christianity by Leonard Alston.
http://www.archive.org/details/stoicandchristi05alstgoog

The Times 28 April 1937 pg 12 col A.
A further letter by Leonard on the subject "Paying for defence, spreading the burden"

The Times 27 October 1937 pg 10 col D.
A further letter by Leonard on the subject "Essential Food and Materials - storage in peacetime for war"

The Times 3 November 1938 pg 15 col F.
A further letter by Leonard on the subject "What Democracy Means - an attitude of mind, not an article for export"

1939 Register
6 Pemberton Terrace , Cambridge M.B., Cambridgeshire, England (A Lodging House)
Leonard Alston 11 Apr 1875Single University Lecturer Cambridge

The Times18 Apr 1944 pg 5 col F
A further letter by Leonard on the subject "Freedom from Want"

ALSTON, Leonard (1875-1953) [Who Was Who May 2003]
Categories: Biography
Summary: Details: ALSTON, Leonard; born Australia, 1875. Education: Thrice Univ. prizeman, Camb. . . . . Work: Deputy Prof. of History and Political Economy, Elphinstone Coll., Bombay, 1904-1905; University Lecturer, in Economics, Cambridge, 1926-1940; Litt.D, Melbourne, 1908. Publications: Modern Constitutions in Outline, 1905; The Obligation of Obedience to the Law of the State, 1905; Stoic and Christian in the Second Century, 1906; Sir Thomas Smith's De Republica Anglorum, 1906; The White Man's Work in Asia and Africa, 1907; Education and Citizenship in India, 1910; Elements of Indian Taxation, 1910; The Functions of Money, 1932. Address: 23 Warkworth Street, Cambridge. Died: 4 December 1953
Ref: Know UK CD - Colin Fenn

Death announcement:
The Times, Dec 05, 1953; pg. 1; Issue 52797; col A
ALSTON - On Dec. 4, at a nursing home, Leonard ALSTON, M.A., formerly University Lecturer in Economics of 23 Warkworth Street, Cambridge, aged 78 years. Funeral at Cambridge Crematorium on Tuesday Dec. 8, at 11 a.m.
Ref: Rosie Flower - 2008.