8 



was a Bill in the session of 1881, brought in by Sir Henry Holland, 

 Mr. Rodwell, and Mr. Cropper, for the purpose of exempting 

 machinery hired or borrowed by a farmer, and all stock agisted 

 upon the farm, from the operation of 



THE LAW OF DISTEESS. 



The Bill was universally approved, the agricultural journals were 

 in its favour, and there was no opposition except by Mr. Barclay, 

 the Vice-President of the Alliance. It passed the second reading 

 after a short discussion, and he then blocked it, and, in spite 

 of Sir H. Holland and Mr. Rodwell watching night after night, 

 succeeded in his obstruction. In fact, the policy of all the Alliance 

 men has been to stop the progress of any measure for the relief 

 of agriculture which did not originate from themselves. Gentle- 

 men, I have endeavoured, however inadequately, to lay before 

 you the manner in which the Farmers' Alliance proceeds in its 

 public duty both in and out of the House of Commons, and I leave 

 it for you to say whether you desire your interests as agriculturists 

 to be represented in such a manner. I venture to think that I 

 may have satisfied you as to how far this organisation is non- 

 political in its action, and to what extent its profession of being 

 agricultural first and political afterwards is justified by facts. 

 Another prominent subject in the programme of the Farmers 

 Alliance is the total abolition of the Law of Distress, which formed 

 a leading feature of discussion on both sides during the recent 

 election. Standing as I do before you, gentlemen, this evening, 

 in the varied capacity of a landlord, a representative of considerable 

 estates, and a tenant-farmer, I feel that I may be permitted to 

 make a few remarks upon this subject. Well then, gentlemen, I 

 may start by saying that, from a landlord's point of view, I look 

 upon this matter with comparative indifierence, because I am aware 

 that in letting his land the landlord can, in the event of the repeal 

 of the Law of Distress, make such special arrangements as will 

 secure him from loss of rent, though I believe these safeguards will 

 be of a much more onerous nature than at present exist towards 

 the tenant. But from the standpoint of a tenant-farmer, I regard 

 this question far otherwise. I maintain that it is essentially a tenant's 

 question, and especially a " small " tenant's question. The abolition 

 or repeal of this law would entail a levelling down of all classes. 

 The tenant of 200 acres would have to level himself down to 100 

 acres, while the occupier of 100 acres must revert to the position 

 of a farm labourer, and there he must remain. This of itself 

 would, in my eyes, be a national misfortune, for in my own county 

 I could point to hundreds of men who, by industry, thrift, and 

 integrity, "and by the protection afi'orded by this law, have risen 

 irom the position of shepherds and labourers to become considerable 

 farmers, and to occupy influential positions in the agricultural 



