326 LAND REFORM 



readjustment of rents. There is no need to attach blame 

 to landlords, or to call them " bad landlords," for doing 

 what most business men would do in their place ; but, 

 in judging the merits of any scheme for the avoidance 

 of the great national danger under consideration, it 

 would be folly to ignore the invariable experience of 

 past times, and the guidance of common sense. 



Under our present system of land-tenure, therefore, 

 the scheme referred to would, in all probability, fail in 

 its purpose. But with cultivating ownership these 

 difficulties would not exist. Public money given, 

 whether for wheat-growing or wheat-storing, would go 

 direct to its object without being liable to have a toll 

 levied on it during transit, and would make every 

 yeoman-owner eager to grow as much wheat as he 

 possibly could. 



But why resort to these costly, doubtful schemes 

 when a cheaper, simpler, and an absolutely effective 

 method is available .'* In a previous chapter it is shown 

 that by an expenditure in the form of bounties to culti- 

 vating owners of a comparatively small sum — less than 

 a few weeks' general expenditure in time of war — 

 wheat could be grown at home in such quantities 

 as, when added to the imports from India and the 

 colonies, would be sufficient to supply all the bread we 

 need. Supposing, even, that in the time of war the 

 whole of the supplies from over-sea were cut off, 

 the home produce — which nothing could cut off — 

 would be sufficient to provide bread for the whole 

 population for a period of at least nine months.^ 



^ This is reckoned on the present rate of consumption, that is, about 

 six bushels per annum per head. By the exercise of economy the supply 

 would last much longer, as there is no doubt that, in tlie majority of 

 households, the waste of bread, on account of its cheapness, is enormous. 



