290 SMALL HOLDINGS SYNDICATES 



the case of the former, or in any similar case, that the 

 rent charged to the intermediary body may not be 

 raised by the land-owner when the time comes for 

 renewing the lease. Although, some persons will say, 

 the present land-owner may be quite sympathetic and 

 reasonable, it is possible that his successor will be 

 neither, and may raise the rent on the tenants' own 

 improvements. 



Criticisms such as these have a direct bearing on the 

 question whether an intermediary association should 

 lease or purchase. At first sight the objection to the 

 former course appears to be well based ; but, on look- 

 ing closer into the facts and probabilities, it will be 

 found to have less weight. In the first place, the pre- 

 sent lease of the South Lincolnshire Association with 

 Lord Carrington is for seven, fourteen, or twenty-one 

 years, the option of renewal being on the side of the 

 association, whose members are thus secure for prac- 

 tically a generation. Should the lease not be renewed 

 at all at the end of the present possible term, the sub- 

 tenants will, nevertheless, have had a good innings ; 

 the land-owners will take over important improvements 

 (such as the bridge already mentioned) at a valuation, 

 while the minor improvements by the tenants fences, 

 gates, etc. will be of no great value at the end of 

 the term. 



Then, one must assume that no small holdings 

 syndicate or registered society treating with a land- 

 owner for a farm would pay him a rent in excess of 

 that paid for other farms on the estate, solely because 

 they desired it for small holdings. If, therefore, the 

 land-owner were unreasonable, he would probably have 

 the land left on his hands by the syndicate. But he 

 might then (it will be said) instruct his agent to take 

 over the land, and raise the rents of all existing 



