216 RURAL RECONSTRUCTION 



home in their qffittanze, better endowed with worldly goods, and also 

 better educated. Conditions in our country are certainly different. 

 But they are not so different as in any way to invalidate the 

 principle, which is to the advantage equally of the lessor and the 

 lessee, as giving the former a good security for his rent, and the 

 latter a cheaper rent. The adoption of the same practice by 

 other countries, in which tenancy is the customary form of occupa- 

 tion, and poverty is the rule, may be taken as an additional proof of 

 its success. There the same practice is extending rapidly, bearing 

 excellent fruit, more particularly in Serbia and Roumania. Rather, 

 indeed, are our circumstances more favourable to this Italian 

 practice. For we are not here tied down to the nine years' lease, nor 

 are our landlords likely to ask for rent in advance. And we can 

 safeguard ourselves effectively against the action of emphyteusis. 

 We do not need the " preferential conditions " decreed in Italy in 

 favour of renting societies. The societies being forthcoming, 

 properly equipped, there will be plenty of landowners willing to 

 let them land in the manner in which Lord Lincolnshire and 

 the Crown have let such to Sir Richard Winfrey's society. In the 

 absence of co-operation, Sir Richard's method supplies a valuable 

 stepping stone. But, of course, one would prefer full-blown co- 

 operation, which makes the small holder entirely his own master. 

 The philanthropists serving as go-betweens might conceivably 

 change their mind, or be succeeded by less kindly disposed share- 

 holders, as Joseph's King Pharaoh came to be succeeded by the 

 dreadful Rameses, and the benevolent Stein by the rapacious Bis- 

 marck. And really, if landowners would only rise to the occasion, 

 there ought to be no need of go-betweens. Only, of course, the 

 renting societies will have to show in each case that they are deserving 

 of the credit allowed by letting them the land. 



One cannot help thinking that in this matter, if it were only so 

 inclined, the co-operative movement might render very effective 

 service. It has the influence, it has the men, and it has the money, 

 too. The service to be given seems to lie entirely within the scope 

 of its accepted programme. And it would be likely to initiate more 

 fruitful action than that which has followed the "formation" of 

 an imposing number of co-operative settlement societies, which has 

 been taken great credit for, but of the societies comprised in which 

 the majority do not appear to have advanced beyond the initial stage 

 of " mellesis," that is, being translated into English, the stage of 

 :t going to do something." In any case the result has been meagre. 



One cannot, however, help thinking that such a plan as that con- 



