Lord Salisbury and the Duke of Richmond have both been
speaking this week on agricultural subjects. Both admitted depression, and both hoped for better times—the Duke, how- ever, being evidently doubtful whether the end might not be a general reduction of rent—and both decried peasant-proprietor- ship as a panacea. Neither, however, was willing to make any serious alteration in the land-laws. The Marquis thought, the only effect of settlement was to prevent landlords squander- ing their capital by raising money through unlimited mort- gages, but he did not explain why a landowner must "squander," any more than an owner of Consols ; or why the owner, once free, must mortgage instead of selling. Accord- ing to his view, every landlord not under settlement has an instinctive desire to ruin himself, which is, we believe, a g-ra- tuitoue slur upon a worthy, if -unintelligent, class of men. The Duke, on the other hand, did not see how settlement increased depression. They would have to show that depression did not prevail on the unsettled estates, He missed the Liberal point,. which is not that an unsettled owner will not lose money when prices are low, but that he can afford to invest money in improvements which will reduce such losses to a minimum,, or sell to men who can manage better and more cheaply than himself. Landlordism is like gentleman-farming. The pursuit is carried on without attention to minute economies, The Duke then praised himself and the Government greatly for -the result of the Contagious Diseases (Animals) Act, but forgot to tell his audience that the Act was not his, but an Act constructed by the House of Commons as an improve- ment on his Bill, which was directly protective.
Previous page
