OWNERSHIP
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
Sir,—In your issue of December 6th you say: " We sincerely hope that Mr. Wood and the whole Government are bearing in mind the importance of increasing ownership. Ultimately, it is only by increasing ownership, by spreading far and wide the magic of property, that Socialism can be fought. This is true of many things—of houses, of shares in all the industrial companies, and so on—but it is particularly true of the land."
I have been saying what practically amounts to this in substance for more than thirty years, and never once have I come across an anti-Socialist who did not fully agree with it. And yet how little have any of them ever done in this country to show that it is anything more to them than a pious opinion ? On February 25th Mr. J. Goschen said : " It is desirable that men should own their own houses, and that as large a number of the population as possible should be able to acquire their holdings." At a meeting at the Mansion House in 1885 a resolution was passed " that, in the opinion of this meeting, it is desirable to promote the growing demand of the people to become the owners of their own lands and dwelling houses." This meeting was presided over by Sir Robert Fowler, then Lord Mayor of London. At that time the Socialist movement in Britain was a mere cloud in the political firmament, not larger than a man's hand. What is it to-day ? What is it likely to be to-morrow ?
According to The Land and the Empire, by Mr. Christopher Tumor, only 12 per cent. of those who work on the land in this country own the land on which they work, whereas in Denmark 88 per cent. of the land is the property of those who cultivate it. Sixty years ago the latter country was just where Britain is to-day, so far as the ownership of the land by those who cultivate it is concerned. But by means of land Acts and credit banks the great and beneficent change has been brought about.
In this country, however, the bulk of anti-Socialists, whether in the Liberal or in the Conservative camp, would far rather run the risk of a Russian Revolution than have radical changes for the better in any sphere of human activity.
—I am, Sir, &c., M. D. O'BRIEN. 56 Nelson Street, Liverpool.
Previous page
