Year: 1873

The late Agricultural Union meeting held
in London deserves specialization. The
case is Stlis, in brief Hodge, as the
BritOn designates his farmland, Is almost as
stolid and long enduring as when his Norman
master first put an iron collar about his neck;
and less than any class of Englishmen mas
murmured against the ruling powers. But
Hodge has found a voice at last. The cause;
Wages of from 81 30 to 81 per week, with
families to support out of it, and cottages
little better than pgstes, for which he Is
charged a high rental by his employer. The
recent rise in meat and Goals has driven
the already famshed laborer mad; mad
enough at least to remOnstrate. Mr'
Arch has become spokesman for his
class. He is labOrer who has supported
family on 81 IS per week, whose breakfasts
when he was hungry, growing Lad were Di@
of dry bread dipped in hot water. These and
other doleful tales of starvation the farm
hands set before the meeting. Other matter
for complaint lay in the eviction OF tenants
from even theic wretched huts according to
the Duke of Marlborough's late advice), when
they join Union in hope of bettering their
condition. Archbishops and members of Paria-
ment appeared at the meeting as sympatinzers.


But the plain facts of the case oppose them
selves TO all plans for their relief like a blank
wall. The first is the supply of laborers OK
ceeds the demand. "No farmer" as The Be-
viec suggests, out Of purely sentimental con-
" sideratiOns is going to pay eighteen shi1ings
"per week for a man when he can find dozen
"willing to come for four" If he does. it be-
comes a matter of charity, and the recipient
by so much pauperizes himself. The only
practicable mode of relief as to wages then.
is to raise them by diminishing the men in
the labor market, which is only to be done
by emigration With regard to the second
complaint of the wretched novels provided.
and their high rentals, there is somethingto be
said here also, on the side of the landowners.
While the builders Of houses for town laborers
realize five per cent on their investment.
country cottages barely pay two per cent.
Owners of estates who are also milliOnaires
can afford this; but the small farmer cannot
readily dock his income of four per cent for
philanthropic motives. Another difficulty, a.
pointed out by The Daily Fetcs, lies III tho
law of primOgeniture. The estate on which
are these miserable huts belongs. in fact. to
the owners eldest son. All the provision he
can make for other children must be saved
during his own life. Cottages or other non
remunerative improvements which require
cash outlay ON the land are in reality so much
taken from the younger children TO give 70
the heir already too well provided for.
man will naturally look to the interests OF
his own family rather than to those of his
tenants, and we should not be too hard upon
him for doing it, although it forces his labor
ers to lodge and starve in fashion to which
expediency woul not allow him to sentence
his oxen and pigs. either sympathy nor
outcries will avail much against these obsfa-
cles nor does it mend the matter to raise the
cry of Socialists and Agrarians against poor
Arch and his hungry colleagues. The sure
outlet of relief lies in the very emigration
which England is now ,discountenancing. II
51aaPf = "a fhe ds q her, lock- %sEa
she would not have heard the cry of "Bread I"
from her fsmished and triumphant farm
hands over his demolished throne.