LAND TENURE 



certain it does not add to the output of produce 

 from many a farm. I refer to that part of the Act 

 which allows a " sitting " tenant to claim a year's 

 rent or more from a landlord should he be disturbed 

 from his holding. This, in my opinion, leads to 

 indifferent farming in many instances. Take the 

 case of a man who gets into a farm, settles down 

 to a policy of least resistance, just looks with content- 

 ment on a programme which will bring in a fair 

 living and no more ; as for his obligation to the 

 land, hedges and ditches — well, he neglects them 

 and does not bother, sails along year by year, smiles 

 at his landlord as much as to say, " Well, you can't 

 turn me out. If you do I can hold out my hand 

 for a good-sized cheque, and your buildings too will 

 take another good chunk of cash to put them into 

 tenantable repair when I go out and the next man 

 comes in." 



I honestly think this clause of the Act is far too 

 severe. Why should not a good landlord be able 

 to recover his own property from a rascal tenant 

 without giving away a premium to clear him from 

 his property ? 



I know it is said that this enactment was intro- 

 duced to stay the hand of a harsh and aggressive 

 property owner who was lucky enough to have an 

 ambitious and progressive tenant, one who improved 

 the owner's property, and then having spent his 

 money well and freely was asked to leave in order 

 that the rent could be raised to fill the landlord's 

 pocket. That may have been a nineteenth-century 

 trick, certainly a reprehensible one, but is avarice 



113 



