5 i6 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



Spencer had not said that he could not be sure that he had never 

 preached it, we might conclude without further inquiry that the 

 doctrine had never been his. As matters stand it would be an 

 extremely good thing if he could assert that he does not hold it 

 now, anyway. That done, his counsel against the nationalization 

 of the land as a fatally bad bargain (since it must be carried 

 out on just compensation principles if at all) would have full 

 effect. It is to be hoped that Mr. Laidler's questions in "The 

 Times " of to-day will be answered, and they will be if Mr. Spen- 

 cer does not turn his back on doubting disciples who cry to him. 

 Your obedient servant, Frederick Greenwood. 



November 15th. 



MR. WILSON'S LETTER. 



To the Editor of " The Times " : 



Sir : Mr. Laidler has given us a digest of the ninth chapter of 

 Mr. Herbert Spencer's " Social Statics/' and asks triumphantly, 

 " Does it not constitute an unanswerable argument in favor of the 

 nationalization of the land ? " Mr. Spencer has modified the views 

 expressed in that work, but, as Mr. Laidler now elects to stand or 

 fall by them, it may perhaps be worth while to inquire how far 

 they support his proposals. 



The nationalization of the land, as defined by Mr. Laidler in 

 his interview with Mr. Morley, means that the land, but not the 

 houses, of this country should, on the death of the present owners, 

 revert to the nation or State without any payment therefor. 



In the " Social Statics " it is argued that each one of the race 

 of beings born into the world has equal rights to the use of this 

 world, and that no one or part of such race of beings may use the 

 earth in such a way as to prevent the rest from similarly using 

 it. From this it follows that land can not justly become the 

 property of individuals ; but it also follows that no given portion 

 of the globe can justly become the property of any individual 

 nation, for that would be to deprive the rest of "mankind at 

 large," the rest of " the human race," of their equal rights. It is 

 true that Mr. Spencer in one place says that under his system, 

 instead of leasing his acres from an isolated proprietor, the 

 farmer would lease them from the " nation." But this can only 

 be reconciled with the rest of the chapter if the nation is under- 

 stood to be acting as the " agent or deputy agent " of the commu- 

 nity at large. According, then, to the argument in the " Social 

 Statics," the land of this country should belong, not to individuals 

 nor to the State, but to the human race. 



Mr. Spencer is also in favor of giving existing owners compen- 

 sation. On this he says that 



Great difficulties must attend the resumption by mankind at large of their 

 rights to the soil. Had we to deal with the parties who originally robbed the 



