AN AGRICULTURAL FAGGOT.*
THE number of new books treating of Hodge and his masters tempts us to borrow here the title of Mr. Rew's volumet of reprinted addresses and articles, for it is impossible to do more than indicate comprehensively what kind of facts and what theoretic tendency are to be found in some of them. The passing shadow of party politics bangs over several, blurring honest outlines or throwing up in exaggerated glare injustices and mistakes, whether isolated or general. We may be sure that abuse of persons mid reiteration of hard cases will not help much, and this is the prevailing note of Mr. Marks's The Land and the Commcmwealth.2 Mr. Rew points out that even self-interest requires a farmer to have fit and active men, and that those landlords and others who know the labourer are as likely to be his good friends as the "whose affection has curiously coincided with political exigencies." Mr. Marks, however, does not emulate the feat that he ascribes to the recent Land Taxes, of "erring on the side of reasonableness." To him landowners of the old territorial class, especially Dukes and Marquesses, with their feudal and unbusinesslike habits, are a sadly vicious crew for whom no words are bad enough, until they are compared with the nouveau riche landowner who is either too cruelly businesslike in seeking returns from his purchases, or so consumed with snobbery that be turns his land into a game-farm in order to curry favour with that survival of Radical rhetoric, "the county." The author's experience as a land surveyor saves him from any blind adhesion to the Single Tax, which he con- demns. Though his knowledge elsewhere seems occasionally shaky, we may attribute to printer's devilry rather than to the writer's ignorance his commendation of Lord Salisbury's cottages, where "each of the three bedrooms are [sic] 9 feet by 6 feet " ! The principal remedy advocated for all agricultural ills is the establishment of Land Courts to destroy freedom of contract and the landlord's interest in his property. The establishment of Land Commissions, National and Local Boards, is also urged by Mr. Harben in The Rural Problem,3 which is a Report that he drew up for a Fabian Committee. Mr. Harben is an honest enthusiast, and must therefore expect blame from all sides. He commands respect without convincing us. But nothing his opponents can say is likely to be so bitter as his Mende' exclamations when they find that he knows something about shooting. He thinks that a day's wage and a hearty lunch are accept- able to beaters. As for that mcntstrum horrendum, ingens, the partridge, it is "quite harmless" ; "they never seek out the grain newly sown, like the rooks . . . the more the soil is worked, the more good they do." Mr. Harben's serious proposals all lead to the apotheosis of protected monopoly, nationalization. He incidentally advocates the nationalization of railways and motor transport services, and his Commissions and Boards are to be always sweeping parcels of land into the "dead hand" whose grip is never again loosened. To the same end he would substitute for the payment of Death Duties irredeemable mortgages to the State. Similarly he would centralize the Poor Rates, and everybody who is unfit to earn a living should have a State pension. Another honest enthusiast is "Agricola," apparently a Surrey doctor, who is deeply stirred by the hard- ships of his village neighbours. Ile reads his Spectator to little purpose, for though he complains of being bidden to " remember " this or that week by week, he does not obey, but is left in a state of impotent despair. He rails at Parlia- ment and politicians, yet he looks nowhere else for help. He says that the State should be the common beast of burden, without realizing that the ass and his master would soon change places. The labourer would find himself worse enslaved by all-pervading officials than by any landlord or farmer. The admirable aids that the writer desires for the labourer are obtainable, and we cannot doubt that " Agricola "
• (1) An Agricultural Faggot. By R. H. Rem, C.B. London : P. S. King and Son. [5s. net.]—(2) The Land and the Commonwealth. By T. E. Marks. Same publishers and price.—(1) The Rural Problem. By H. D. Barbel:.
London : Constable and Co. [2s. 6d. net.] — (4) A Voice from, the Vitlage. By Agricola, M.D. London: J. M. Dent and Sons. rig. net(5) The Farm Labourer. By 0. J. Dunlop. London : T. Fisher Unwin. s. 6d. net.] —(6) Co-operation and Co-partnership. By L. L. Price. London: Collins. [1s. net.]—(7) The Land and the People. Reprinted from the Times. London :
. cu
J Murray. [is. net.]—(8) The Ocpyin O
g wnership of Land. By B.
T
ollemache. 3 me publisher. [2s. 6d. net.1—(9) English Agricultural Wages. By R. Lennard. London: Macmillan and Co. [5e. net.]—(10) Land and the Politicians. By H. Orisewood and E. Robins. London Duckworth and Co. Lls. net.] could help his 'village immensely if he would take the lead in organizing co-operation and a local credit bank, by getting a lecturer from the Agricultural Organization Society to tell the farmers about the Daniell methods that he so greatly admires, or by spreading some of the knowledge of cottage- building that he can find in the Spectator; but bleating for State-aid is an unworthy total of effort.
The early chapters of Miss Dunlop's The Farm Labourer' cover the same ground as portions of Mr. and Mrs. Haniniond's 77ie Village Labourer. In *pito of a bias against parsons and squires, there is less bitterness, ac also there is less brilliance, than was shown in the older book. It is a sound and interesting historical sketch carried down to the present time, without any rash attempt to find cut-and-dried remedies for all troubles. A point which is referred to by Mr. Rew in one of his papers might well have been developed by Miss Dunlop—namely, that the landlords of a century ago, who are accused of exacting enormous rents, did put back a great deal of capital into the land, without which the test of the transition to Free Trade would have been even more bitterly severe. The writer very properly condemns Poor Law doles, and fully recognizes the burden of rates and taxes upon British agriculture, handicapping the industry in com- petition with Canada and other freer fields. She awards due praise to small-holdings, allotments, and co-operation. The last subject is treated of by nearly all the writers under notice. Mr. Hew writes of it for farmers ; Mr. Harben describes it more generally, and summarizes the work of co-operative credit in Europe. " Agricola " yearns for the State to create it. Mr. Lovell Price, in his small and impartial volume, Oo.pperatirm and Co-partnership 6 (which unfortunately omits to describe co-partnership in Longing), gives a useful chapter on the agricultural side of the movement. In the series of articles reprinted from the Times under the title of The Land and 11w .People7 we read that "Co-operation is a great help in all circumstance; but in adverse ones it is almost a necessity." It is the basis taken for success in The Occupying Ownership of Land.8 Space does not allow us to recapitulate reasons for strenuously advo- cating voluntary co-operation, but these books confirm our opinion that, for the success of small-holdings, it is absolutely vital. Mr. Bevil Tollemache bears a name honoured by all who desire the labourer's access to land in his own occupation, for his grandfather, in hie somewhat autocratic way, solved some of these problems on his Cheshire property by insisting that land, often as mach as three acres, should he attached to every cottage, and that the labourers should work the land. Mr. Tollema.che has had practical experience at the Fairby Farm estate in Kent, where the small-owners co-operate for pur- chases and salee at a central depot. He also gives accounts of other communities that demonstrate the success of organization on similar lines at CatehiU, Winterslow, and Maulden. He and Mr. Rowland Prothero, who has written a preface, try to prove that the secret of progress lies in owner- ship rather than tenancy. This is a large Eubject, with much to be said on both sides. Obviously if small-holders are to pay, besides rent, instalments of a sinking fund for purchase, it would seem that they would do better if the laud became their own upon completion than if the County Council should then own the freehold for which the occupier has paid ; and this is practically the position under the Small Holdings Act. We also know the pride of ownership and the stimulus derived therefrom. We are with Lord Lansdowne in wishing to see greater opportunities for ownership, preferring, of course, that they should be attained by voluntary means, as in Mr. Tollemache's examples, than through the State. But we ehould be sorry to see opportunities for small tenancies jeopardized by any fashion or artificial pressure of ownership, because it ie certain that many a far-seeing MU prefers tenancy under a good landlord. His risks are far less at all times, and the man who puts nearly all his capital into purchase is feud with the losses of a forced Bale at the firet bad season or misfortune.
Another book which deals with one particular rural problem is English Agricultural Wages,' by a young Oxford economist, Mr. Leenard. Mr. Harben wishes to see enacted a reininintp wage of 28e. for a fifty-four-hour week. Mr. Rew's comment on such proposals (written in 1897) is that such interference with the freedom of contract involves &leo Protective tariffs on food imported from abroad, and few will disagree. be same sensible author said in 1892 that the only way to raise wages is to increase the efficiency of the labourer. Ur. Le,nnard treats the subject rather confusedly for the simple reader, because he is clever enough to see at least three sides to every question, and cautiously qualifies every deduction from his arguments, giving us moderate and rather indecisive guidance. On the whole, be seems to favour the raising of the lowest agricultural wages by authority. He thinks this possible without raising prices. In the districts where wages are lowest a minimum wage would only abolish the privilege of using unduly cheap labour, and the cure of underfeeding would make stronger Find more productive labourers. But he admits that if the State takes any privilege from landlords or farmers in this way, it can but give another protected privilege to labourers; and he evidently dislikes Protective principles which would diminish wealth ite a whole by diverting effort from high productivity in other industries to lqw productivity in agriculture. Agricultural education is naturally a subject touched upon by nearly all these writers, who wish to see farm schools, peripatetio instructors, or demonstration farms established by authority. Mr. Lennard boldly states his opinion that the literary curriculum is the most valuable, as it enables a child to open its mind to broader views and interests, and intelligence is the great thing needed for the farmers, small, holders, and labourers of the future. With these books we may mention Land and the _Politicians,'" a small volume that deals faithfully with the Land Report. It is mainly statistical, and effectively pulls to pieces the figures and deductions of the secret inquirers. The compilers very use- fully point out how the Land Report is contradicted by the official Reports of the Small Holdings Commissioners. The book has not quite the impressive style of The Land Retort, and will be more useful for those who prepare contentious speeches than for the general reader. Few readers could plough their way through these contradictory books without concluding that free play is the best soil to nourish both workers and industry. For Hodge we plead with politicians, "Let the poor wretch alone I" For agriculture we urge that it will work out its own salvation most surely, though perhaps with slow adaptation to change, if it is allowed to choose its own path ineteaxl of being pulled hither and thither to try short cuts to happiness. No one can expose a quack better than a rival in his own profession, and these books confirm the belief that freedom of trade and of contract are beneficent and active organizing forces in every industry. We agree with the implication a Mr. Rew's comment upon the period of the Black Death: " The Legislature, not for the first orlast time, tried to stem the economic tide with Parliamentary mops." This candour ie as admirable as it is rare in a Civil servant, but Mr. Flew has a wider ontloolc than that of the ordinary bureau- crat or fidgety petit maitre who longs to manage everybody else's business. So long as we do not break our beads against economic walls there ip no reason why farmers and labourer; and even rural landlords, should not receive a helping hand here and there which may hasten their common progress along sound lines of expansion of opportunity, not of authoritative restriction. No one deserves it more, for the landlord cer- tainly has a less good time than his predecessors; the farmer has suffered more directly than other classes from the com- petition of foreign resources which have brought cheapness and plenty to the bulk of the nation ; and the labourer, though be owes en immense prpgress to the advance of humanity and to his larger share in the wider distribution of the world's products, yet has the mortification of believing that every one else has progressed more rapidly. The artisan, the Trade Unionist, and the clerk seem to have got a fatter share in the material welfare of the day, by the side of which his own appears deplorably lean.
Previous page
