THE STATE AS FARMER 65 



objection to granting security of tenure now without 

 qualification is that rents are, speaking generally, below 

 their true economic level in England. Why should the 

 tenant be presented with that excess of the real over 

 the rental value of the land which is not being realized, 

 just because of his own indifferent farming or because 

 the owner for social reasons and the lack of competition 

 is not in a position to enforce a more adequate develop- 

 ment of the capabilities of the land? Apart from 

 temporary fluctuations, such as that induced by the fall 

 in prices towards the end of last century or the changes 

 the war may bring, land in Great Britain must be ex- 

 pected to rise in value as time goes on, for reasons 

 beyond the control of either owner or tenant. Little is 

 to be gained by handing over this unearned increment 

 from the present owner to the sitting tenant; indeed,' 

 such a creation of a dual ownership would only put 

 new obstacles in the way of the resumption of this 

 interest by the State, which has the only real title to it. 

 The most effective lever to secure the better farming 

 that is now needed in the national interest would be to 

 give the State powers to take over any land that is being 

 inadequately used ; the State could then develop this 

 land either on the large farm system or by settling it 

 with small-holding colonies. In this way pressure 

 would be put on the owners of land to make the most 

 of it, pressure arising on the one hand from increased 

 competition owing to displacement and on the other 

 from the implied threat of dispossession if the occupier 

 is allowed to farm badly. But if the State is to be 

 given power to take over land that is not being fully 

 utilized, it must also be prepared to farm the land 

 itself on one or other of the methods indicated. The 



