SMALL-HOLDING OWNERSHIP 229 



continue to pay rent till the advent of the Day of 

 Judgment or of the Chinese invasion. Still, for prac- 

 tical purposes in a world that is very much on the 

 move, does it greatly matter what happens a hundred 

 years hence ? I think not. 



A more valid argument, to my mind, is that in a 

 country where no system of compulsory purchase 

 exists, the continual buying of properties by the aid 

 of State-advanced money unduly increases the market 

 value of land. Here again, however, we come face to 

 face with a difficulty which requires explanation. If the 

 State leases out the land it must still get it somehow, 

 presumably by purchase, and therefore its purchases 

 would raise the price of the commodity as much as do 

 those of the small-holders, which are carried out by 

 the aid of the funds it loans to them. 



Even if the suggestion which I think was advanced 

 either by the Danish Minister of Agriculture, or by 

 Mr. Waage, in conversation with me, were put in 

 practice, namely, that the glebe-lands should be used 

 for this purpose, these would still have to be bought 

 at a fair price. Moreover, if the number of applicants 

 for small-holdings continued to increase or even to be 

 considerable, the glebes could not, I presume, go very 

 far towards satisfying their needs. Therefore, as the 

 perpetual tenant would still be required to find some 

 money to furnish himself with working capital, so far 

 as I can see the thing is as broad as it is long. 



Also it must be remembered, as Mr. Schou pointed 

 out so forcibly, that if little or no extra expenditure 

 is involved, and if the obligations remain practically 

 the same, it is in the very nature of man to prefer to 

 possess rather than to hire for however long a period. 

 Most of us like to have something which we can call 



