148 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



I 



European countries, and particularly in England. A table given by Mr. Orr on 

 p. 97 of Agriculture in Oxfordshire indicates the resulting depression very clearly, 

 and shows how the rent of the same estate fell gradually from .£8,583 in 1876-7 to 

 ^4,892 in 1902, in spite of a slight addition in area during the interval. During 

 the succeding ten years the rent rose slightly to .£5,348 in 1912. The depression 

 was not nearly so great in Denmark as in England. " English agriculture," says 

 Dr. Russell, " suffered a terrible set-back, and did not begin to recover until about 

 1896. Danish agriculture, on the other hand, was able not only to weather the 

 storm, but even to make headway all the time." 



The wisdom of the Danish choice in developing dairying is now obvious, but 

 it seems certain that the great difference to-day between the position of English 

 and Danish agriculture is not to be attributed wholly to the choice made in the 

 sixties. There are two other factors which must have played a great part, in one 

 way or another, in determining the course of events. These factors are no doubt 

 not independent of the first nor of one another. One of them is the system of 

 land tenure, the other is co-operation. 



Although in 1910 it seemed that a start had been made at a break-up in this 

 country of the large estates, yet even now, as all through the last century, 

 the system of land tenure is essentially that of the landlord-tenant system, in 

 which the farmer who works the land very generally holds the land on a yearly 

 tenancy. Mr. Orr apparently likes to regard this system as a partnership in 

 which the two partners, landlord and tenant, both have well-defined duties and 

 responsibilities, and in which they each invest a certain amount of capital. Our 

 author states that Oxfordshire farmers approve of the system, the advantage of it 

 being that fluctuations which affect the farmer's position are not so wide and 

 violent as if he owned the land. On the other hand, the system has many dis- 

 advantages, which Mr. Orr sets out, such as the failure of landlords to co-operate 

 closely enough in particular schemes, and the inconstancy of the landlord's desire 

 to make money out of the concern, resulting sometimes in very erratic policy, such 

 as an alternation of benevolence and harshness in the matter of rent, which is 

 very unsound economically. Most people will probably agree with the remarks 

 of Mr. Price, quoted on p. 148 of Agriculture in Oxfordshire, " I am not sure that 

 the conception of the partnership between landlord and tenant is not carried 

 beyond the limitations of the actual work-a-day world." 



That the system, as it is worked at present, is not at all ideal is sufficiently 

 indicated by the following quotations from Mr. Orr : " What are regarded'as 

 defects in soil and climate frequently cause loss and disappointment, but if the 

 men engaged in developing the different branches of the industry were to fill their 

 parts more fully, and were to stand by each other, these physical difficulties 

 could be made less formidable." "Thus landlords are not and cannot be present 

 on their estates as they once were. It is, perhaps, not too much to say that they 

 will never be present again with the same intensity of interest which they once 

 displayed." " It [agriculture] has suffered by the loss of the landlords' interest." 

 " This process [i.e. removal of the landlord's interest] has gone so far that 

 agriculture has been left relatively, at least, in a looser and less organised state 

 than before." 



The system of tenure in Denmark is very different. From tables given by 

 Mr. Faber it appears that even in 1873 no l ess tnan 8i"i per cent, of agricultural 

 holdings were held freehold, while in 1905 the number had increased to 89^9 per 

 cent., covering about 7 "8 million acres, the remaining leasehold and tenancy 

 holdings occupying less than a quarter million acres. 



