APPENDIX VII 243 



One would almost have thought that the experience we 

 have just had of industries run by the State would have some- 

 what discouraged our nationalizers, but it docs not seem to 

 have had that effect ! 



However, there are indications of their shifting their 

 ground ; the nationalization of the industry, rather than of 

 the land itself, seems to be increasingly the objective. 



This suggestion is in no way less mischievous and dangerous 

 than that of taking the land itself, for it would involve the 

 running by the State of the biggest industry of all, and the 

 one hardest of all to manage. 



Most of the people who advocate this are the very first to 

 cry out against any suggestion of guaranteed prices or subsidy 

 for the cultivators of the soil ; if they could give effect to 

 their scheme, three things are certain — 



1. That the land would yield less than ever. 



2. That the cost of management would greatly increase. 



3. That the subsidy that would have to be paid to the cul- 

 tivator under this regime would far exceed the wildest limits 

 ever dreamed of by any " vampire " agriculturist of to-day ! 



It is either a question of that or of the agricultural worker 

 sweating, at a poor remuneration, to fill the bellies of the 

 townsmen. 



There is an idea abroad that every citizen should have the 

 right of access to land, and that every labourer should be a 

 manager of a farm : the ignorance of it all ! 



In an old and thickly settled country it is quite impossible 

 for every citizen to have access to the land. We certainly 

 should and could see a very much larger number working on 

 the land ; but after every effort in this direction it is doubtful 

 if, even with the assistance of allotments, we could get more 

 than half our population into direct touch with the land, and 

 no system can be devised under which all the cultivators can 

 act as managers. 



In conclusion, it may be well to set out the aims and objects 

 of the moderate nationalizers of land (as distinct from the 

 extremists who would advocate conHscation). 



