LAND LAWS AND TRANSFEE 179 



perpetuated by want of confidence. So long as wild pro- 

 posals for compulsory redistribution of property received 

 the support of prominent politicians, no landlord would 

 expend money on improvements, no capitalist, large or 

 small, would invest in the purchase of land, no tenant 

 would accept a lease, no labourer would put his heart into 

 his work. While the intentions of the Legislature re- 

 mained dubious and threatening, land continued to be un- 

 saleable and half-farmed. Behind all legislative changes 

 lurked the ominous question of confiscation. Land may 

 be treated as private property, held so as not to prejudice 

 the public welfare, but not to be taken from owners with- 

 out fair compensation ; or it may be distinguished from 

 private property, and the principles which guard private 

 property held inapplicable to land. On which line was 

 land legislation to proceed ? Wild talk about State- 

 ownership, ransom, and natural rights, societies to nation- 

 alise the land, heroic remedies of illogical half-disciples of 

 Mr. George might be in themselves of little importance. 

 But when the air was filled with vague threats, the atti- 

 tude of ministers remained studiously neutral. Agitators 

 complained of conditions which they themselves rendered 

 chronic. Meanwhile the continued insecurity was rapidly 

 producing results which threatened the subversion of rural 

 society. Fortunately the example has been given that a 

 patriotic fusion of political parties for the promotion of 

 national interests is yet possible in party government. 

 That restoration of confidence, which is the indispensable 

 preliminary to agricultural revival, seems already to have 

 begun, and to bear fruit in renewed energy. 



Arguments urged against the artificial creation of a 

 peasant proprietary scarcely apply to their natural growth. 

 Economically States gain more by agricultural factories 



N 2 



