LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
THE AGRICULTURAL LABOURER.
[TO THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR...1
EIR,—Your correspondent's suggestion that the agricultural `labourer's revolt is due to his weariness of his subjection to the tenant-farmer, contains some truth, but by no means the 'whole. It is the fashion at the present day to speak of the farm-labourers throughout the country as though they formed a homogeneous class, with the same grounds of complaint, -the same aspirations, and the same prejudices. There can be no greater mistake. Not only does the condition of the rural peasant vary in different localities, but even in the same dis- tricts there are marked differences in the treatment of the labourer by his employers.
It is quite true there are many tenant-farmers whose treat- ment of their workmen is harsh and unfeeling, and who neither deserve nor obtain the esteem or respect of their men. But such farmers are seldom brought into contact with the better class of labourers. The steady, sober, industrious man has little difficulty in these days in obtaining permanent employment, kindly treatment, and a sufficient, if a moderate, wage. In agriculture, as in other businesses, the good masters have and keep the best servants ; the best servants fill the good situations. And of these labourers we hear very little in politics. They find more pleasure in their work and in their families than in listening to party oratory, and they are very apt to give their votes in the way that will please their employers. Unfortunately, however, many farms are occupied by tenants in straitened circumstances and with insufficient capital. Their landlords are often more pinched than the
tenants, and in such cases there is a tendency to "keep down the wages-bill." But, in these days especially, the best class of labourer shuns such masters, and if it be true that tenant. farmers of this class act with harshness towards their labourers, it must not be forgotten that the labourers on their side in no way study the interests of their employers, as the higher type of farm-workmen do even in these days.
I believe your correspondent is wholly mistaken in sug- gesting that the depopulation of the country districts is due to the treatment of the farm-labourers by the farmers. It is caused rather by the facilities for locomotion, by the spread of knowledge, by the tales that reach the country-side of the excitement and amusement to be obtained in the towns, and by the rumours of higher wages. I doubt, however, if the remuneration of the town workman is higher, when all things are considered, than that of the agricultural labourer. The comparison should be made, not between the unskilled peasant and the trained artisan, but between the artisan and the upper servant, or the head cowman or the waggoner ; or between the casual urban labourer and the ordinary farm-hand ; and the value of the cottage and garden, the pigstye, the skim- milk—often, but not always, given by the farmer to his work- men—of the harvest-money, must not be overlooked.
But if there are different types of employers of labour, so there are different types of landlord and squire. The country gentleman who resides on his estate, makes himself accessible to his tenantry, and takes an interest in the well-being of those resident on his property, whatever be their lot or station, who himself attends, in some measure at least, to the repairs and arrangements of the farmhouses and cottages, and under- takes his share of public business, whether as a Magistrate or as an elected representative on the County Council and else- where, will certainly earn the esteem and affection of the inhabitants of his district, and obtain that power and influence which is spoken of as popularity. The clamour for Village Councils, for the destruction of the authority and power of the squirearchy, so far as it is not wholly factitious and unreal, is due to the neglect by the landowners of their duties, to their absence from their estates, and to their devo- tion to various forms of amusement in which their tenantry and the poor people can take no interest.
I believe that at the next election the labourers' vote will certainly be divided, and that Unionist Members will be generally returned in those constituencies in which the land- owners are found residing on their estates and doing their duty.
Whatever politicians and wirepullers may allege to the con- trary, everybody acquainted with the agricultural labourer knows that his vote is influenced by the wishes of those of his neighbours who have deserved his confidence by kindness and consideration. It is only where the landlord and the tenant-farmer neglect their opportunities, and prefer their own ease and pecuniary advantage to the regard and esteem of their humble neighbours, that the principles of Mr. Schnad- horst's delegates find much acceptance ; and a very good motto for party managers when dealing with rural con- stituencies would be, "Men rather than measures," in this sense, and this sense only, that the average country voter considers the character and antecedents of the candidate, thraer than the principles he professes.—I am, Sir, &c., H.
Previous page
