332 Mr. H. Rider Haggard [May 8, 



ments at Winterslow on the Wiltshire border, which are even more 

 remarkable, and also on other instances, among them to those districts 

 in which fruit is grown, but find that I have no time. Still those 

 that I have given above may suffice for my argument. 



It amounts to this — that where small-holdings exist the exodus 

 from the land is comparatively little ; that labour is more plentiful, 

 since the small-holders are trenerally glad to work for others in their 

 spare time ; that there are more children ; that the production from 

 the land is larger ; and that an altogether better and more hopeful 

 tone prevails than is the case elsewhere. 



If these things are true — and I believe them to be true — it follows 

 that it would be well for England if small-holdings were largely 

 multiplied, and that it ought to be the object of all sound statesman- 

 ship to multiply them accordingly. 



I wish to make it clear, however, that I do not advocate the 

 cutting up of the whole country into such holdings. England is 

 very large, and in it there is room for every kind and class of estate. 

 But I do advocate the employment of much land, which at present 

 produces but very little and is useless even for sporting purposes, in 

 this fashion. It seems to me further that many thousands of our 

 population would be better employed in cultivating that land and 

 adding to the national wealth by the production of foodstuffs, than in 

 walking the streets of London and other great cities shaking money 

 boxes in the faces of the passers-by. 



The problem is how to get them there. Or, if that be not possible, 

 how to prevent new thousands from joining their melancholy multi- 

 tude — a problem, I may add, that no Government seems to have 

 thought worthy even of consideration. I do not urge the artificial 

 creation of small-holdings, which in my opinion would be bound to 

 end in failure. But there are things that might be done if only our 

 rulers could be persuaded to do them. 



Thus, Co-operative Credit Banks on the Eaffeisen system which 

 have worked such wonders on the Continent, might be estatdished 

 under Government inspection and control without the risk of loss to 

 the nation, from which banks intending small-holders could borrow 

 upon the well-tested and approved principles of mutual guarantee. 

 Loans might be advanced to landowners or corporations at a moderate 

 rate of interest, which would include a sinking fund by which they 

 would be automatically repaid in an agreed term of years, to enable 

 such individuals or bodies to erect the cottages and buildings neces- 

 sary to small-holdings. The Housing of the Working Classes Act 

 of 1890 is, I may remark, practicall}^ a dead letter in the country 

 districts, chiefly owing to the high minimum rate of interest charged 

 by the Treasury. 



Co-operative associations might be fostered, or even inaugurated 

 by the Board of Agriculture to facilitate the collection and disposal 

 of the produce of small-holders at a reasonable but remunerative rate 

 of charge. Let those who doubt the advantages of co-operation as 



