THE NEW CENTRE OP POWER ^ 417 



which they can never become efficient workers. Agricultural 

 labourers are too well aware of what land will or will not do to 

 demand an universal system of small holdings. Tenant-farmers 

 would, therefore, still hold their own, and, in the supply of more 

 effective labour, draw their own special advantages from the re- 

 construction of village life. Nor need the means of mental expansion 

 be wanting. Co-operative societies for the wholesale purchase and 

 retail sale of commodities, credit banks managed by the members 

 themselves, approved societies in each village for the conduct of the 

 business of national insurance, parish councils freed from the 

 tutelage of larger pubUc bodies, might give to the inhabitants new 

 and wider opportunities of business training, which would make 

 them more intelligent and therefore more useful citizens. 



The centre of power has shifted. It is no longer landowners or 

 tenant-farmers, either alone or in combination, who hold the key 

 to the rural situation. It is the agricultural labourer. It seems 

 inevitable that, in the near future, sacrifices will be asked both from 

 owners and occupiers of land. To the existence of both, the main- 

 tenance of the principle of private property in land is vital. It is 

 on that issue that the battle seems hkely to be fought. The question 

 for them to consider is, whether, bj' any reasonable sacrifice, they 

 can strengthen their position by estabhshing ownership on a more 

 democratic basis, or whether, without material concessions, they 

 can successfully defend the existmg system on its merits. For 

 both views, something may be said ; for disunion, nothmg. From 

 thek own knowledge and experience, agriculturists may unite in 

 attempting to guide the movement in directions which may materially 

 affect their own position, but will at the same time benefit their 

 industry as a whole, and save mtact the prmciple of private property 

 in land. If they give no practical lead, the direction of the move- , 

 ment seems likely to fall into the hands of reforming theorists, intent 1 

 on repeating the time-honoured mistake of applying to agricultural/ 

 problems remedies which are only apphcable, if at all, to industrials 

 or urban difficulties. To all classes dependent on agriculture the' 

 consequences threaten to be disastrous, and, most of all, to agri- 

 cultural labourers. In the extreme form of the proposal of the 

 theorists, the whole taxation of the country would be ultimately 

 thrown upon rent. In order to lighten the fiscal burdens of townsmen, 

 agricultural labourers, whether in occupation of the land or not, 

 would thus be reduced to a position to which, before the estabhsh- 



2d 



