256 LAND REFORM 



he been a slovenly farmer and kept the land in the 

 bad condition in which he found it, no increase of rent 

 could be demanded. This is one proof, among so 

 many, of the truth of the statement made by practical 

 men, that the present system is "a premium on bad 

 farming." 



Any so-called compensation which this occupier 

 might receive is not worth consideration, in view of 

 the fact that the man is turned out of his home and 

 out of a holding where for so many years he has been 

 doing work profitable to himself and of great value 

 to the community. Were he a tenant in Ireland, 

 how different would be his position ! 



Further, there is reason to believe that, under the 

 system we are discussing, many landlords would be 

 willing to sell at least a portion of their land to tenants 

 who wished to buy. A most competent witness, 

 speaking on this point, says : " The landowners of 

 England, under the bitter experience of past years, 

 are as anxious as any men can be to part with a very 

 laree area of their land." And ao^ain : " Landlords 

 were generally willing to sell their land, or even por- 

 tions of it, and to forego the territorial advantages 

 which attached to land in the past."^ 



A friend of the present writer, who is a wealthy 

 commercial man, and also a large landowner, in a 

 letter (5 October, 1904) expressing approval of the 

 Land Purchase Bill, states: "Things are going wrong- 

 in England, and going wrong rapidly. ... If your 

 Bill should become law, I will do what I can to help 

 it forward. I have 2000 acres of good land in the 

 county of , let to nine farmers, who are satisfac- 



^ Mr. Elias Squarey. Evidence before the Select Committee on 

 Small Holdings, 1889. 



