New-York tribune., 1906-06-03
REASON ANp uNREASoN IN RUssIl

II.
The tendency of extremists in both directions
practically TO join forces against moderate poll
Cies which we have recently remarked upon
as observable in various countries, continues
TO be conspicuous and pernicious in the Rus
sian parliament The chief matter under dis
cussion there is that of the land and the ways
and means of distributing it among the people
There are three we'll defined policies to the
fore. One is that of the extremists of the
Right the reactionaries who oppose any such
distribution, even though landowners should
voluntarily desire to sell to their tenants. An
other is that of the extremists of the Left, the
Socialists who demand outright coniscatiOn OF
private estates without a kopeck of compensa-
ton. The third Is that of the moderates of
the Centre, the Constitutional DemOcrats$ who
advocate a scheme of land transfer under which
the government shall forcibly appropriate pri-
vate estates, though presumably at fair price
and resell them to the peasants in small par
GELS very easy terms of payment.
The proposals of the extremists cannot be
regarded with approval. Beyond question it
is desirable for the peasants to own the land
which they occupy and cultivate. Such pro
prietorShip has been the secret of Frances mar
Gellous prosperity. 1t is of the founda-
uons of prosperity and industrial stability i'll
America. 1t is being looked to with confident
expectation by thoughtful men in Great Britain
and Ireland as cure for some OF the gravest
economic ills of those countries We believe
it would be a good thing for Russia, and that
the reactonaries make great mistake in op-
posing it. On the other hand, the idea of con-
fscation is repugnant to our minds and 1t
should be evident 70 those who favor it In
Russia that the adoption of such n principle
would be a menace to the little farm and cot
tage of the peasant just the same as to the
castle and vast domain of the noble Nor VET
is the scheme of the moderates to be altogether
approved. In some circumstances II might he
Oh the ground Of necessity. But 1t does not
appear that such necessity exists or is likely
TO arise If the great landowners stubbornIy
refused to sell any of their land to the peas
ants, and such transfer of it were essential to
the welfare of the state, compulsory eXDro-
priaticn, with remuneration judicially deter
mined, might be not only just but desirable
But present indications are that there will he
no such refusal, and that all the land needed
for the peasants will be voluntarily offered by
the proprietors.
Apart from that single feature however the
plan of the moderates appears to be commendo
ble, providing it does for the taking of land
at fair price and the resale of it on easy
terms The unfortunate. annoying and almost
dSheartening thing Is that the two extreme fac
tions. really far apart in aims and princj
pies as the poles, are practically cooperating
against the moderate and generally admirable
plan Of the Centre and that the latter. bv its
refusal to unite with the ministry through
abandonment of the unnecessary forced expro-
priation" clause, permits itself 10 be made for
the time their victim. We cannot believe thar
the extremists will ultimately triumph Rut
they are causing delay and are arousnC oni
nous and pernicious passions, which II will take
long TO aliay in even the most favorable cir
cumstances. There could be nothing more al
spicious for Russia than that the majorlty party
in the Douma and the ministry should get to-
gether" on this important and fundamental mat
ter. If they would do So a land law practically
settling the agrarian question might be enacted
within fortnight 1t is lamentable that they
should be kept from doing so by mere sticking
over unnecessary detail