The Express.
London, England, 1853-09-10 00:00:00

zne erptselifi.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.
• &wad !Mann of .•Tbe Express," ecatanciad the ease 'endues
Gasehe," is published every Tuesday bad Vdday dight, lo tins
tor mak
Metr thesesla formled for "The Repress,. Londm Evening parr,
01101 be el the 4)5,, to, Beemerwarcet, by Two o'clock on the
day si publistion.

HIM WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE.
?"" 1141-11011•1. •h. At. ereeon, Ab. 53T.
To-agoaftW—Atli. 22e .A1tern.....0. 71u 571 a.

LONDOS, SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 10.

Ilnn.►cE testified to the universal tendency of the
human mind to entertain ideas of appropriation or
aanexutiou when he spoke of the effect which a plea-
sant portion of a neighbour's territory produces upon
the spectator. "04 ai anrilms ills"—" if I could
but get that slice of h►nd," is the natural exclama-
tion in such a position. The Americans have exag-
gerated a natural feeling into a national charm-
teristie. They are ever on the watch for
opportunities to extend the already tremen-
dous surface of territory which naturally
belongs to them. Louisiana in 1803, Florida in
I blto, Texas in 1815, and California in 18-18, bear
witless to this peculiarity of the American mind.
The adversaries of America do not hesitate to say
that the great Republic would not be very likely to
refuse acquisitions of territory made in a more or less
regular manner than the above, and they are not
slow in asserting that had the supporters of " The
Lone Star" managed to get possession of Cuba, the
Government of the United States would not
have been presented from retaining the
prize because the tido was acquired by
piracy. This may or may not be the case.
In the meantime it may be remarked that
the language of American statesmen on subjects of
this kind is not so explicit as to make it quite cer-
tain that there is no ground for the accusation. A
passage in Mr. EVERETT'S letter to Lord MALMES-
IVRY, on the Cuban question,—published yesterday
in our columns,—would seem to hint that the
Government itself feels a degree of incapacity
to repress, even if it wishes, the expressions
in favour of annexation which are continually
being put forth. In answer to communications from
the English and French Governments on the subject
of a convention, by which the two Governments for
themselves renounce severally and collectively all
attempts at obtaining dominion in Cuba, and giving,
as a reason for entering into the proposed compact,
the attacks lately made upon the island by lawless
adventurers from the United States, Mr. EVERETT
makes the startling admission that " the PRESI-
DENT is convinced that the conclusion of such a
treaty, instead of putting a stop to these
lawless proceedings, would give a new and powerful
impulse to them." It is scarcely possible to avoid
coming with Lord Jon: RUSSELL to the conclusion
that this is a ntelanchuly "avowal for the Chief of a
great State."

History his not yet had time to pronounce upon
the wisdom of the constant tendency manifested by
the Americans to extend their dominions. All
analogy, however, would tend to show that such an
extension can add little to the greatness of the nation,
while it may, and perhaps must, introduce seeds of
future trouble and discomfort. When we see a political
landlord, reckless of expense, adding manor to manor
—buying land with borrowed capital—for the
sole purpose of increasing the superficial area of his
estate, we generally prophesy an unpleasant termi-
nation to the experiment. What he gains in
length and breadth, he loses in solidity. He has
more on his bead and his hands than they can
satisfactorily manage. Tho rents do not compensate
for the outlay, and the man begins to travel along
the road to ruin. A Government acts as foolishly as a
landlord in preferring extension to strength
in grasping at more than it can manage, rather than
gathering up all its energies, and directing them
upon a space not too large. It will be said
that the United States are very flourishing, but
it must be remembered that a great number of these
States are rather in process of formation, than
actually formed, and that their several interests
have not yet crystallised in such definite forms
as to offer much impediment to their
united action. The growth of large separate
interests in the various States, spread over the vast
surface of America, will introduce a complexity of
calculations that may well puzzle statesmen, and
induce the successors of those who now wield the des-
tinies of America to wish that their predecessors had
not left them so heavy a teak. Tho wisest of the
Roman Emperors set their faces against the exten-
sion of territory, and wished to appoint limits
beyond which new conquests should not be
made. History proves sufilciently the sagacity of
these precautions. But if this were necessary in the
Roman Empire, it will be still more so in that of the
United States. The Roman Government extended
over a vast conglomeration of nations, from which
all nationality had been trodden out. There was
little or no strong national feeling, no cul-
tivation, no activity of thought to mar the
process of kneading the whole into a com-
pact body. The whole was bound toge-
ther by a rigid system of discipline extending
from the highest to the lowest functionaries. The
instant, however, that the relaxation of this disci-
pline, and the admixture of the northern races, had
produced something like nationality in the various
countries under the Roman yoke, the unwieldy
empire broke into fragments. It is difficult to say
whether America will present anything analogous to
this in its development, bat there is great
ground for supposing that the enormous
additions to the territory of the United States may
in process of time produce some, at least, of the effects
which have accompanied such a system in all coun-
tries or which history has triken cognisance.
Who are the prime movers in the offence of mak-
ing Cuba a bone of contention between the three
great powers of the world? Clearly the slave-
holders. It is that party which appealing skilfully to
the false ideas of glory so strangely current amongst
the most practical people on the globe, would risk
a war rather than lose the chance of introducing
new pro•slavcry-members into the Senate. But,
whatever may be the ultimate result of this
question about Cubs, it ought never to be the
subject of contention between England and
America. Far better that America should make
arrangements with Spain for annexing Cubs at once
than that it should be suffered to be the cause
of any heart-burning between the two great
nations of the Anglo-Saxon race—the two
nations to which seems entrusted the duty of pre-1
nerving the liberties of the world. In the mean-
while the island can never be in worse hands than it
is at present. Spain, degraded to the lowest point;'
unable to govern her own territory; shamefully
evading the payment of her creditors; break-
ing the treaties by which she is bound to suppress
the slave teed° ; a prey to a bigotry not
surpassed in the middle ages; groaning under
the oppression of a Government the members
of which are unable to observe the common
decencies of life,—this wretched and con-
temptible Spain is not fit to be entrusted
with the destinies of any population living
beyond her own boundaries. Far better that
she should maks was step in the path of national

honesty and sell the island to America if the latter
will purchase it, and with the proceeds pay her cre-
ditors a dividend on the debts she owes. Such a
symptom would at least be a healthy one, and we
might hope that the step in the direction of common
honesty, would be prophetic of others taken in the
paths of decency and dignity, and that Spain might
then hope once more to take a respectable position
amidst the nations of civilised Europe.

Ar the meeting of the North Lancashire Agricul-
tural Society, the other day, Mr. W. PATTEN
dilated on the benefits of agricultural machinery,
and on the advances in husbandry as indicated
by the increasing use of improved implements.
Mr. HETWOOD took a more useful, but, as he truly
said, " a delicate" line of remark. It must be
premised that the Duke of HAMILTON, being
the owner of a large estate in the North-
ern Division of Lancashire, has recently availed
himself of the existing demand for land
to take a hint from the freehold land societies, and to
sell his property, not as a vast territory, but in
smaller divisions. The result has been eminently
successful to the late owner, and this large tract of
land has now come into the hands of several owners.
To this Mr. Ilev wow:. referred, saying, " that the
principal event in the northern division was the
division of the Duke of HAMILTON'S property. It
showed how desirable it was, that when a great
landed proprietor thought proper to dispose of his
property and divide it, he should have facilities for
so doing. There was more difficulty in dividing up
agricultural property than he thought was called for.
He had been in America, and ho found that there
they could divide and possess land very easily. He
knew he was treading on delicate ground, but he did
think that greater facilities might safely be afforded for
the division of landed property. The Duke of / Lem IL-
TON'S estates were bought by Mr. STARK'S, Mr.
ORMEROD, and others, and the land would be better
cultivated." How much more is indicated than ex_
pressed in these remarks! Nothing is more certain
than that the division of the great territories
owned by our larger proprietors would add enor-
mously to the productiveness of the soil. They are
in the position of men trading beyond their capital,
they have more on their hands than they can manage:
for the outlays necessary to improve their estates far
exceed their available means, without such a degree
of self-denial, in order to improve out of income, as is
practically impossible. While land is kept in such
unmanageable marees, it will be in a comparatively
unproductive state. Until the owner can do his part,
and make all requisite permanent improvements, no
great advance can be made in husbandry.
Now there is nothing in which the division of em-
ployment adds more to the productive power of in-
dustry, and to the welfare of all concerned, than in
the cultivation of land. That is exemplified by the
superior productiveness of the soil of this country,
where alone that division is systematically carried
out. We have the owner of land, who derives from
it an income in the form of rent, without personal
interference in its management ; the tenant farmer,
who provides the working capital, and supplies the
skill requisite for cultivation ; and the farming
workman, who sells his labour to the capitalist cul-
tivator.
By no other arrangement could land be
made to yield so large a surplus beyond the cost of
its cultivation. But, though the theory of
our system is excellent, there are many
shortcomings in its execution. Oar labourers
are for the most part only labourers, and as
such they commonly obtain better reward for their
toil than they could get either as cattier tenants or
peasant proprietors. What was most required to
improve the condition of the agricultural labourers
was such an increased demand for their services as
would occur if, in the relations of landlord and
tenant, a more clear and defined line was drawn be-
tween the interest of the landowner and that of the
tenant farmer. The landowner ought not to consider
himself as merely a person born to consume the
fruits to be drawn from the earth by the industry of
others. He should regard his land as a great in-
strument of production capable of immense improve-
ment by judicious investments of fixed capital. Ho
ought to consider the management of his estate to be
what it really is—a business requiring forethought,
energy, caution, and forbearance. He must calculate his
outlays with reference to their effect upon the produc-
tiveness of the soil, and he must endeavour to render
his farms attractive to the farming capitalist. It is
his business, too, having regard to the peculiarities
of his district and the character of the class of tenant
farmers who occupy his farms, to adopt such plans
of letting as will enable them to cultivate their land
in the best manner. The landlord must do his part,
and then leave the tenant full liberty to perform his.
Let the owner erect adequate and substantial build-
ings, make roads, drain the land, and so forth; let
him then grant leases of so long duration and on
such rational terms as will enable his tenants, with
ordinary skill and activity, to farm with certainty
and security. And he should retain no more control
over the land than is necessary to enforce the tenant's
engagements. To preserve game, to grow timber
and the like, on land let to tenants, is to violate the
sound economical division between the interest of
the landlord and that of the occupying tenant.
It is from neglect of such truths that we see so
much unimproved land and so much bad farming
throughout the country. Nothing is more calculated
to produce an extensive system of improvement in
any district than the breaking up a great estate by
sale to several persons having the means of improving,
as in the Duke of HAMILTON'S Lancashire estates, re-
ferred to by Mr. HETWOOD. That landowners are
to some extent awakening to a sense of this neglect,
we believe, but it will require more knowledge of
their own affairs, and more determination to act on
such knowledge, than they generally manifest, to put
their estates into proper order.
Amongst the landowners of note in this country,
few have exhibited more business talent in the
management of landed property than Sir JAMES
GRAILtU, and we may usefully refer to him as an
example for others. He told the farmers,
at the Cumberland Agricultural Meeting of
last year, " That when ho began the manage-
ment of his property, he let improving leases
for nineteen years. He had now twice renewed
those leases. Ile renewed them for fourteen years in
1842, and he was again renewing them for a fresh
period of fourteen years; and in a very large portion
of his property he had renewed for fourteen years to
come ;" and, notwithstanding all the difficulties
which his tenants and he had had to encounter, "he
had not changed any considerable portion of his
tenantry during those three successive renewals.''
These facts show the importance of leases to the
interests of both landlord and tenants, and especially
the renewal of leases for fourteen years granted in
1442—several years before their expiration--speaks
well for the providence and confidence of the tenants.
And to understand what are the difficulties re-
ferrel toby Sir JAMES GRAIIIM, the original state
of the property when he succeeded to it in 1819
should be known. In the first place, it was much
encumbered; and in 1823 there were 309 tenants
firming on the Netherby estate, at a low rental and
with a considerable amount in arrear, a great pro-
portion of which it was found expedient to forgive.
All the property was in most ruinous condition ; the
farm buildings were very bad, chiefly formed of mud
walls and thatched; the land had been exhausted
by repeated corn crop; slam portion of the estate