456 READINGS IN RURAL ECONOMICS 



as a whole ; and it is one by which a country, one might say by 

 nature incapable of cultivation, has become the garden of Europe. 



Thus the example of Flanders shows that, as far as the pro- 

 duction of wealth and even the clear produce are concerned, 

 the spade ought to get a verdict in an action against the plough. 

 I admit at once that it would be well for the spadesman could 

 he have his work done for him by horses and steam engines, 

 that his work is harder and his returns smaller than is good for 

 man. But would he be happier, wealthier, better, under a land 

 system under which he would be a labourer for hire without pros- 

 pect of elevation ? Especially would he be so on the barren 

 sands of Flanders ? 



The system of tenure. usual in Belgium is a lease. In the 

 Middle Ages there also existed the form of tenure known by the 

 name of metayage, of which, however, traces are now to be 

 found only in some of the polders along the coast of the Ger- 

 man Ocean. The cultivation of land by the intervention of a 

 bailiff .or steward, so common in eastern Europe, is a rare 

 exception in Belgium. 



The leases are, as a rule, very short nine years at most ; very 

 seldom indeed for so much as eighteen years. On the other hand, 

 yearly tenancy and tenure-at-will are also very exceptional. All 

 who devote attention to agriculture, even the agricultural societies, 

 though consisting almost exclusively of landowners, admit that 

 the leases are too short. The tenant is not encouraged to im- 

 prove ; and if he does make improvements, he can hardly be 

 said to reap the benefit of them. The landlords will not grant 

 longer leases, because they want, in the first place, to keep a hold 

 upon their tenants ; and secondly, to raise the rents when the 

 leases expire. It may be said that throughout Belgium such 

 increases of rent take place regularly and periodically. 



The table on the next page gives an idea of this continuous 

 increase of rents since 1830. 



Since 1856, rents have risen even more in proportion than 

 during the preceding period. It may thus be affirmed that, 

 since 1830, the value of land and the rents have doubled. This 

 is a further proof of the proposition so clearly set forth by 



