The Vancouver independent. (Vancouver, W.T. [Wash.]) 1875-1910, 1879-12-04
English Land Monopoly System.

Yhe peasant proprietors" were at one
time large body. They were the 'yeo-
manry," vaunted as the glory CT Eng
land But they have disappeared
crushed out by the land lust Of the noble
families. A relic of the order remains
in the Statesmen" of Cumberland and
Westmoreland, where the rapacity of
the great has been peculiarly resisted;
but, as q class, the small proprietors are
banished. The Conservatives account
for this with wave of the hand and
the formula, sSmall farms don't pay.
And perhaps there is no opinion in Eng
land more absolutely settled than this.
Agriculture means bread fields, costly
appliances, expensive manures, rota-
lions, etc. The notion that man with
little plot Of his own could dig living
out Of it and prosper, is as foreign to
the mind of an ordinary Englishman as
the project of extracting heat from Gu
cumbers. Yet, over in Flanders, the
thing is being done all the while. In
Scotland the 'crofter' more than demon
strates its practicability by making COED
land out of worthless moor under the
protection Of nineteen years lease
with the prospect of having all his accu
mutations swept up by the landlord lat
the end of the term. The Islands of
Jersey and Wight should not be too far
off for British eyes. The first is owned
for the most part by small proprietors
1t contains less than $4,000 acres, has a
population of nearly 10000, and main
tains large carrying trade reaching
every quarter of the globe. The Isle OF
Wight has not one peasant proprietor.
Its acreage is three times that of Jersey,
vet its population is less, and it has no
shipping worth mentioning. 1t is not
because "small farms do not pay" that
the yeomanry Of England have persisted,
but for many grievous and oppressive
reasops, some of which are still opera
tive:
|. The small farmer can only buy
land as business investment. The
large holder buys for social and political
aggrandizement. A peasant cannot af-
sord to tie up his land, but must mold it
subject to business contingencies. The
large holder buys at every opportunity,
and never lets go. This one difference
Of motive and policy would obviously
crowd out the small proprietors in the
long run, and the run has been very long
already.
:. The state of graduation which once
existed between the lowly laborer and
the prince of broad domains-a state in
which the "hand" could become farmer
by industry, and the farmer proprietor
by intelligence and thritt-was broken
~ by an act of spoliation from which
the lower agricultural orders have never
recovered. There was once an abund-
ance of common land;' and, by avail
ing of it in raising stock, etc, the peas
ant was able gradually to get on his feet
rs All owner But the great owners
swooped upon this land, inclosed it with
their private holdings, magnanimously
calling on those whom they ruined and re-
duced to subsection to take their cases
to trial before the land holders Judges.
English agriculture has never recuper-
sted from this assault, any more than
irish agriculture has recovered from the
closing Of Irish ports and The prohibition
Of Irish manufactures.
g. There is no system of registering
conveyances nor of recording mortgages.
Add this to the couplexity Of the titles
and it is easy to see why a small man
cannot purchase land. The searching is
extremely costly, the papers elaborate
and expensive; and, when all is done,
the purchaser may be eaten up with liti-
CATION. Cases are on record Of sales Of
hand to which the party conveying
never had shadow of a title. and OF
heavy mortgages coming to light only
after the purchase money was paid over
and the reticent seller in Continental
enjoyment of insolvency. But, fraud
aside, the cost of the transfer and risk
of litigation are enough. The convey,
ancing expenses on small lots oftea
amount to as much as 90 per cent Of
the purchase price. And litigation,
even where it issues favorably, some
times drags on so long as to swallow the
whole value of the acquisition Ora
ham McAdam.