THE ECONOMICS OF SMALL HOLDINGS.*

THE investigations undertaken by Miss Jebb at the request of the Co-operative Small Holdings Society into the small heldings of England have now been published in a com- pendious form, and every reader of the book will feel grateful to its author for the manner in which she has done her work. Very wisely, she has devoted herself to the study of facts rather than to the advocacy of theories ; and when she has attempted to draw general conclusions from the mass of particular cases passing under her observation, she has pro- ceeded very cautiously, and has avoided anything in the nature of dogmatism. Such cautious work may be dis- appointing to the politician, who likes to have his theories clear-cut, and to be furnished with emphatic phrases for platform use; but for that very reason it will be all the more welcome to those who realise that in the region of economics, if not in the region of politics, the world is finally governed, not by phrases, but by facts. Miss Jebb's work consists in an interesting description of the small holdings that already exist in England to a very large extent, and is an analysis Of the causes that have contributed to their success. it lb impossible to read many pages of the book without • Tha Small Moldings of England. By L. Jabb. London : John Murray. [10s. 6d. net.]

discovering that the success of small holdings, where they have succeeded, is due to various conditions which cannot be every- where obtained. If the soil is exceptionally rich, small holdings will succeed even where the market for their produce is remote ; if the soil is poor, compensation for this defect must be found in propinquity to a good market, or in some other specially favourable circumstance.

The most important of such favourable circumstances is the existence of some subsidiary industry which enables the small holder to earn something beyond what he can make out of his land. Another point well worth noting is the disproof of the assumption, so frequently made on political platforms, that small holdings are always wanted for tillage. On the contrary, figures recently published show that the bulk of small holdings in England and Wales are in grass. Generally, as Miss Jobb points out, there is a tendency for small holdings to arise in hilly country and large holdings in flat country. This tendency is strongly marked on the Continent as well as in England. The peculiarity of England is that, owing to its geological forma- tion, hills and plains are more closely mixed up than in most countries, so that small holdings may be found flourishing in one parish, while a few miles off they are non-existent.

All these facts are interesting, and are well worthy of detailed study. They do not, however, carry us very far towards a solution of the broad question whether it is possible to anticipate any general reversion to a system of small holdings in England, or whether it is even desirable to hope for such reversion. The usual argument of those politicians who advocate the establishment of small holdings with the assist- ance of the State is that by means of small holdings the rural depopulation of our country can be checked. In support of this contention they point to one or two cases where on a given area of land the establishment of small holdings has resulted in the employment of a larger population than before. But in dealing with a problem of this magnitude we must not be content to rely upon such a limited range of experi- ence. Rural depopulation is not an evil that affects this country alone. It is more or less prevalent all over the world. To see the process in full operation we need only cast our eyes

across the Channel. Among thoughtful Frenchmen there is at the present time at least as much anxiety as among

Englishmen at the growing desertion of the countryside. For proof of this statement it is sufficient to point to such books as M. Meline's Retour a /a Terre and Rene Bazin's La Terre qui lifeurt. They are samples of a growing literature upon the subject. In Bazin's book, which may be described as a "novel with a purpose," we have a tale of a peasant family broken up because the son, on whom the father relied to carry on the farm, prefers to seek his fortune in the town, and persuades his elder sister to accompany him. M. lifeline's book is by way of -being an economic treatise, though, as might be anticipated from. the leader of the French Pro- tectionists, some of the economics 's are unconsciously humorous. We may, however, accept M. Meline's statements of fact, if not as absolutely accurate, at any rate as indica- tions of truths and tendencies. Our own Tariff Reformers should study the book. They will learn that though agri- culture in France is protected by higher duties than they have ever dreamed of suggesting, there arc in that happy land, according to M. Meline, at least four hundred thousand tramps. "What," lie asks pathetically, "are we to do with these thousands of unemployed, who are at once a peril and a

humiliation for a great country like France ? "

His answer to his own question is not very convincing.

After describing the system of subsidised agricultural banks, from which the peasant can borrow the taxpayer's money at a lower rate of interest than ho can command for his own money in the open market, M. Menne proceeds to advocate the formation of a league for persuading the urban loafer to become an industrious peasant. The apostles of the league are to say to the unemployed :—

" To-morrow, if you like, you can conquer independence, security, and comfort. Learn to cultivate the land, and when you have learnt you need not trouble about the rest: You will always find a farm to let, and if you are hard-working, thrifty, and honest, you will be able to procure all the money necessary to buy manure and stock. The money will bring you in 6 per cent. to 10 per cent., and you can easily pay it back at 3 per cent. or 4 per cent."

"You will always find a farm to let " ! Surely that sentence alone is an answer both to the enthusiasts for small holdings in season and out of season, and to the Tariff Reformers. In spite of the wide extension of small holdings in France, in spite of Protection, in spite of State loans to peasants, the unemployed of the towns refuse to take the empty farms of the country.

According to the Census figures, the rural population of France declined between 1896 and 1901 by nearly five hundred thousand, and the urban population increased by nearly a million. In Germany the Census tells a similar tale, but with more precision. In 1890 the population which may be classed as rural represented fifty-three per cent. of the total ; in 1900 only forty-six per cent. Meanwhile the aggre- gate population of towns with over a hundred thousand inhabi- tants had risen from twelve per cent. of the total population of the Empire to sixteen per cent. Yet agriculture in Germany is heavily protected.

Turning to the New World, we find striking evidences of the same phenomenon. Everywhere the town population is growing at a more rapid rate than the country population. No less than one-third of the population of New South Wales is located in the single town of Sydney, and two-fifths of the population of Victoria in Melbourne. In New York State thousands of farms are tenantless ; but in New York City so great is the overcrowding that, according to a recent Report of the Tenement House Department, there are three hundred and fifty thousand rooms with no daylight whatsoever.

In face of these world-wide phenomena, it is futile to hope that we can repeople our own countryside either by endowing County Councils with compulsory powers for the acquisition of laud or by tinkering with our Customs tariff. • Our first business is to ask why it is that all the world over men and women flock to the towns and desert the country. The common reply that town life is cheerful and country life depressing carries us very little way, for the vast majority of human beings are compelled to live, not where life is most agreeable, but where employment is most plentiful. Doubtless if those wealthy people who are free to live where they choose would consent to abandon London, and live in the country, they would carry with them a very large number of persons who are economically dependent upon their expenditure. It may, indeed, safely be said that there are few ways in which men and women of independent means can better serve their country than by devoting themselves and their money to improving the social and economic conditions of rural life.

Such service as this, however, immensely valuable though it be, would still leave a large part of the problem unsolved. In order to see into the roots of that problem, let us cast our minds back for three or, four centuries and ask what sort of social life then prevailed, in this England of ours. Broadly speaking, the present distinction between town and country hardly existed. The towns were but large villages, with ample garden space attached to all the more important houses, and the inhabitants of the so-called town tilled the surrounding fields. In these rural towns, and even in the still more rural villages, most of the industries of contemporary life were represented. The carpenter and the saddler, the cobbler and the tailor, the spinner and the weaver, and a dozen other craftsmen, all had their part in rural life. To-day most of these industries have been concentrated in the towns, which have now become wholly urban in character.

This great change has been brought about because machine industry requires a large market and a plentiful labour- supply, and both requisites are most easily secured by planting industries in the larger centres of population. So complete has the revolution been that most people now assume that manufacturing industries belong by some law of Nature to the towns, and that agriculture is the exclusive concern of the country. If that were really true, we should have to resign ourselves to the ever-increasing urbanisation, not of England only, but of the whole world.

The reason can be explained in a few sentences. Man in his primitive state, when be has no tools, no machines, and little inherited knowledge, is compelled to devote the whole of his energies to the hunt for food. As he advances from stage to stage in the art of conquering Nature, the food that could only be secured after days of hungry chase with bow and arrow is poured forth in abundance at his feet by the plough and the machine reaper. He does not want more to eat than be wanted before, for his stomach remains the same size, but other desires have grown with the opportunity of gratification, and continue.to grow unceasingly. These other desires—for fine clothing and furniture, for pictures, for books, for travel-- all require the ministration of manufacturing industries, and therefore as man grows more skilful in mastering Nature the manufacturing industries must occupy relatively more of his attention, and the agricultural industries relatively less.

The real problem before us, then, is to devise some means by which modern manufacturing industries may be success- fully established amid rural surroundings. The task is not an easy one, but already there are signs that it is being attempted. The most favourable example is the printing industry ; but throughout England other instances may here and there be found of the successful establishment of a highly developed modern industry in a small country town, or even in a large village. If the nation will turn its mind in this direction, there is no reason why we should despair of making it again possible for manufacturing industries to be carried on side by side and hand in hand with agriculture, so that the people may be brought back to the land.

By all means let us remove all artificial and unnecessary obstacles to the maintenance and growth of small holdings, and let us within the limits of common-sense, justice, and sound finance directly encourage their creation, but do not let us suppose that we can by such expedients cure the evils of rural depopulation. The radical cure is, as we have said, to be found in bringing the non-agricultural industries back into the country. It is, heaven be praised, not an immutable law of Nature that factories should always stand in dirt-grimed streets, or operatives live in slums.