2o8 LAND REFORM 



question, which, under the fifth clause of the Act, it 

 was made compulsory for them to do. The reasons 

 for this are not far to seek. Members of County 

 Councils, in the rural counties, do not in this respect 

 represent the agricultural labourers. They are mostly 

 of the territorial class — of the old quarter sessions 

 type. They are kindly disposed towards the labourers, 

 and would do what they think is good for them, but 

 always as labourers. They have not as yet accepted 

 the idea that the creation of a class of land-owning 

 peasants would be good for agriculture itself, as well 

 as for the community. 



No one who knew the real labourers expected that, 

 on the passing of the Act, there would be a rush on 

 their part for the possession of land. The hope was, 

 that County Councils would, of their own motion, 

 have made inquiries into the subject as the Act 

 required them to do, have paid attention to petitions, 

 even to a single petition, as the Act enjoined, and 

 generally have shown a real desire to make the 

 measure a success. 



In continental countries, measures for bettering the 

 position of the cultivating classes were adopted for 

 social, economic, and political reasons. But these 

 measures have always been (except in the case of 

 France) initiated and carried out, often under great 

 difficulties, by classes above those whom they were 

 designed to benefit. This must be the case in England, 

 and if schemes for repeopling the land are to be suc- 

 cessful, it is not enough to pass good Acts of Parlia- 

 ment for the benefit of the poorer classes of the rural 

 population, there must also be a determination to put 

 them into force by those whose duty it is to administer 

 them. 



