The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-03-16

The lottery is managed in such way that
each Individual has strip OF each zone OF
category of land, but no caro- is taken to
dovctal the three or moro parcels falling to
one household. Often given share Ia made
up Of parcels distant one from another, and
perhaps shut off by a neighbours ground. To
appreciate the smallncss of the fragments
thus acquired, we must call to mind that the
mean amount of land appropriated to the
peasants at the time of the emancipation
was from seven to ten acres per male resi-
dent, but that, many having purchased only
the legal minimum. the individual share is
frequently much less. In some ovcrpopu-
lated communes the process Of subdivision
ia carried SO far that parcels are cited not
exceeding two yards in breadth.
These are the facts, but before CHANGING at
their consequences we may note the appa-
rent stability Of the system in other words
its hold on the affections Of the persons di-
rectly concerned. 1t is tolerated, but not
prescribed, by the imperial code, and any
commune, by the vote of two-thrds of the
members, may substitute the principle OF
individual Unbeatable property. Ncvcrthe-
less, such changes are very rare; while on
the other hand there are instances Of lands
gratuitOusly distributed by proprctors
among their former scrfs, which have been
ultimately restored TO the communal regime
10y the peasant owners. Its certain, however
that the moVk, although upholding the GUS
tom Of collective ownership, has not for the
opposite mode of tenure the instructive re-
pugnancc or deliberate disapproval which
HEREIN and the Russian socialists have AS
cribcd to him. Far from seeing in per
sonal title to propcrtya monstrous anomaly
and usurpation, he is eager to invest his
savings IN land outside of the corporate ter
ritory, holding fast, however, as his sheet
anchor the right to share in the communal
allotment.
This characteristic institution can hardly
be shaken from without so long as tradition
and interest concur in recommending it to
the peasant but there are signs of a counter
tendency in the modified economy of the
commune itself, under the action Of the new
spiritof liberty. Wcmu-t remember that n
Russian village community is in principle an
aggregation not of persons. but of families,
each OF which holds in pcrpctuty its isba OF
cottage. with tho small adjacent close not
comprised in the corporate territory. and
not alicnahle 10 strangers Here, too, within
this small domain and over the chattels per-
tanning to II. rcigns the system Of iniivis-
ibc ownership the family being minia-
turc commune or species of economical as
ISOLATION, whose members are allied in
blood and whose director is the natural
head Of the house. Just as all the male
members of the community might claim an
equal share Of the common ground. -O all
male kmfolk have a joint title u the hou-c-
hold property. This may be suh-diNidcd
by mutual consent. but in the time of -crf-
dom "a family preferred To- remain concern
tratcd, the mutilation of the patrimoual
capital being regarded with misgiving and
stigmati2cd as the black sharing But
such patriarchal manners cannot long sur
vivc the Acknowledgement Of the peasant
class cmancipated before the law; and. To-
hahiliiatcd in his own eyes. the mouJm Is
showing disposition t. free himself from
the patcrnal dc-potsm. Already the rrac-
ticc of partition has gained 50 much ground
as seriously t. fritt'rthr appliances of till
age and curtail production. At the present
time the M.ui,tryof Agriculture i. seeking
means OF arrrsting this di-intcgration ol
farming capital. but it is hard to see what
restrictions can be devised which would
not infringe the liberties guaranteed 10y the
act Of manumie-ion.
Now Is the growthof indivilualism, which
apparently points 70 a rccoil from COM
muni-tic institutions, t. he supplemented
hereafter by motives Of scli-interc-t W,
are brought thu. to a question of which w
hear a great dsal from theorists. and which
will be pressed more and more urgently
upon the Russian mogk l. the communal
sv-tcm on the scheme of individual property
which obtains among western nations the
more fruitful OF general well-bcing? With
out pursuing this inquiry, We may point ont
that some of the objections to colloctiv,
owner ship do not impcach its essential prin
ciplc. For instance. the abuse and impover'
| ishmcnt OF the soil resulting from want
If interest on the part OF the cultivation
! is no unusual occurrence on the lease
| farms OF individual proprictors; an,
we may add that many Russian com
munc- are beginning to remedy the evil 10y
prescribing compulsory fertilization, under
penalty Of keeping the same lot upon IN
noXt partition. Again, W. must concoie tha'
the plan Of minute parcollatun anl -hnr
term Of u-ufru-t are not inscpardble from
the institution. We have seen that in SOM
district. tine period of tenancy +, ten years
AMI the prevailing tendency seem g. be- To-
ward prulongation. \ stock charge agaia-
the tenure in question makes it attach
premium To wa-tofuluce- and Incidence, hu
il may Lc asked how would the c0-rol
Mn-eDvi'o poa-l ant, whose occupancy -houl
br secured for an cxtonlcl term, din iroi