308 PERMANENT v. TEMPORARY 



interest on their capital outlay. Moreover, as no 

 tenant farmer has sufficient capital for such large 

 undertakings, the land is let down in value. Small 

 farms in the same neighbourhood are sought after, 

 and maintain their former rentals, and if these 

 larger ones could be cut up they would let well. 

 But the capital has been sunk, and though it lies 

 there, yielding no return, there is no more forth- 

 coming to adapt the place to the requirements of 

 changed times. It would be interesting to work 

 out in these cases whether a lesser outlay at the 

 start on less permanent buildings would not have 

 yielded such an interest during the boom as would 

 now justify putting these buildings on the scrap- 

 heap, and have left more capital available for 

 adapting the land to those conditions which, under 

 changed times, fetch the highest interest. It may 

 be a question to consider whether it is not best to 

 meet the needs of the generation in which we are 

 living, and adapt our methods to the benefit of the 

 greatest number of those around us, and leave the 

 future free, with all its vast possibilities of inventions 

 and changed conditions of life, to those who come 

 after us, instead of sinking capital in a way which 

 may or may not benefit them. 



