The Elk County advocate. [volume] (Ridgway, Pa.) 1868-1883, 1872-08-01
Land Reform in Great Britain.

Land Reform in Great Britain.
The agricultural interests of Great
Britain are in an unsatisfactory condi-
tien, Notwithstanding the great progress
made there in scientific farming. Lord
Leicester, speaking in Norfolk last Oc-
tober, said that after careful considera-
ton he had come to the conclusion that
the product of the soil of the country
was not more than half what it ought to
be. The same opinion has more recently
been expressed by Lord Derby, who says
that calculations which he had carefully
made convinced him that the annual loss
to the country from deficient cultivation
was no less than e200,0OO,O00, sum
equal to three times the whole taxation
of the kingdom.
1t is not believed that farmers make
great profits, notwithstanding that the
agricultural laborers of England receive
but the merest pittance for their work.
The deplorable condition of this class Of
the population, as shown by the reports
OF Parliamentary commissions, and
brought Just now into special notice
by the Warwickshire strike, is exciting
general attention in England, and is as
cribed primarily to the lack of capital
at the command of those who cultivate
the soil
The opinion is expressed in influential
quarters, and is constantly gaining
ground, that the greatest drawback to
the agricultural interest of Great Britain
consists In the cumbersome and anti
quated system of land laws, which oper-
ate to keep the greater portion of arabic
IL, IL, 4 .,11,,
small number of families.
OF twenty-five million inhabitants of
Prussia, not less than five millions are
directly interested in the soil as small
proprietors while in Great Britain, with
an equal population, there are not more
than four hundred thousand persons
who own the soil they till. The cause
of this state of things is not so much the
poverty of the farmers as the fact that
the purchase of land in Great Brit
ain is attended with such extra
ordinary expenses in the way of
transfer, lawyers fees, searches for titles
extending back an indefinite number of
years, and the like, that man of small
means finds it far cheaper to rent his
farm than to buy it, even if he has the
money in his pocket. 1t follows that
persons engaged in the cultivation of
ground which does not belong to them
will not be likely to expend their money
i'll such manner as to insure its perma-
nent enrichment, and thus bring it to
the highest point of productiveness.
Another serious obstruction to the
highest development of agriculture in
Great Britain is found in the laws of
entail and strict settlement. These dis
courage the investment of capital in ag-
ricultural operations, and increase the
complications of titles and the expense
and delay incident to the transfer of real
estate. By these laws the greater por-
ton of the real estate in Great Britain
is held by persons who in reality are
only tenants for life, and who, therefore
will not spend money ON their land as
freely as if they owned it in fee simple
Indeed, it is often out of their power tc
do so, for if their property is all in land
and they become embarrassed, they can
not sell it or borrow money on it al
easonable terms, but have to struggle
On through life the nominal owners Of
large estates which they can not make
properly productive.
Tenants can not be expected to supply
the means for the full development o
the land which they cultivate, since un
der existing laws they have no CLAIM
for unexhausted improvements, excep
in Ireland, and it would be foolish il
them to spend their own means for tht
benefit of landlords, who may turn then
adrift at the expiration of their leases
without any compensation for what the!
may have added to the permanent value
OF the property.
A significant indication of the drift o
popular opinion in England on this sub
ject is found in the fact that on the 9tl
inst, in the House of Commons, Mr.. w
Fowler moved a resolution condemninl
the present state of the law of entail anC
strict settlement of land as q discour
agement to the investment of capital il
agriculture. Although the resolution
was negatived by vote of 103 to 81, it
introduction served to provoke an ami
mated discussion of four hours duration
during which Mr.. Fowler's motion re
ceived the earnest support OF severa
prominent members of the House, VIII,
gave free expression to their views il
favor of sweeping reforms in the lant
laws. 1t also had the effect of drawing
from Mr.. Gladstone an admission tina
the entire subject of the laws of entail
settlement and limited ownership de
mands the early and serious considera
ton of Parliament.
Various circumstances have combine
to give this subject SPECIAL prominenc
in Great Britain at this time, and ther
can be little doubt that the agitatio
will be pursued until it results in secul
ing important changes in the laws rels
ting to entail, settlement and transfer {
land, and also in regard to the rights {
tenants to an ownership in exhauste
improvements. So far as the law of Ell
tail is concerned, the only argumer
that can be brought in its favor is ths
it tends to uphold in power lande
aristocracy, and that is an argumer
which in these days may prove injurior
to those who use it.