276 THE FUTURE OF OUR AGRICULTURE. 



liar emphasis of our long neglect of that calling, meaning 

 thereby that the community should have done something 

 by means of specia] concessions and sacrifices, more parti- 

 cularly by taxing itself, for the benefit of those who at the 

 time produce foodstuffs, to give additional encouragement to 

 Agriculture, as represented by the landlord and the farmer. 

 The point, however, at which there has undoubtedly 

 been gravest neglect — neglect which was long in producing 

 its Nemesis, but which has in the end brought down serious 

 retribution upon offenders— is that of Agriculture Labour. 

 For many decades back — one may say since grasping " lay- 

 ing field to field "deprived him of the use of the common — 

 the agricultural labourer has had a sorry time of it. There 

 was no deliberate ill-will harboured against him. But he 

 was so helpless, so utterly dependent upon employment, 

 without any other standby to support him, so broken in 

 by the curb of need to abject submission, that almost any 

 treatment of him seemed possible and economically, at any 

 rate, legitimate. There was no power of resistence. The 

 agricultural labourer could not, like his industrial brother, 

 " form his battalions " to fight for his own emancipation. 

 Local dispersion and a certain slowness of mind generally 

 accompan3dng agricultural employment stood in the way 

 of this. Joseph Arch for a short span of time roused his 

 class to action and achieved a certain success. But it was 

 all short-lived. And even the most combative leaders of the 

 trade union movement have had to admit that " organisa- 

 tion " among agricultural labourers is not seriously to be 

 counted upon — at any rate, under present circumstances. 

 Tenant farmers have in their hour of need stood together, 

 forming their " Alliance," which in the end brought them 

 a very fair amount of gain. Agricultural labourers could not 

 do the same thing. Hence they came to be set light by and 

 treated practically like those instrumenta vocalia — implements 

 of labour endowed with speech^ — as which Roman capitalists 

 knew their predecessors. There was, as observed, no inten- 

 tional unkindness in this. Agricultural employers generally, 

 without question, intended to be fair to their labourers. 

 Many enough among them desired to be kind. However, 



