398 History of the English Landed Interest. 



and created by the refined taste and spare capital of English 

 landlords. Moreover, if it be an economical oifence for the 

 squire to have thus expended his surplus cash, he has but 

 indulged in a practice common to all men of fortune, com- 

 mercial as well as landed, and consequently his actions, in this 

 particular direction at any rate, cannot arouse class prejudices. 

 The embellishment of a landed estate is often a godsend to 

 the labouring section of the community, and should not shock 

 the delicate susceptibilities of the townsmen, many of whom 

 entertain every intention of doing likewise as soon as they 

 have collected sufficient funds to purchase a landed estate. 

 On careful examination, therefore, nothing detrimental to the 

 public interests, such as would have provoked aud justified the 

 concerted opposition of the community, seems to have existed 

 at this period. 



No oue will pretend to assert that the Landed System be- 

 queathed to us by our feudal forefathers is perfect. It still has 

 many drawbacks, and it had many more at the beginning of 

 this century which the legislature has subsequently removed. 

 Most of these, however, would have been aggravated, as they 

 have been elsewhere, by the compulsory division of estates 

 amongst all the children of the deceased owner. The practice 

 of making land a security for debt, and thereby relieving its 

 proprietor of the necessity of selling a portion, often burdens 

 an estate to such an extent that improvements are phiced be- 

 yond the reach of his limited means. The restrictions placed 

 by law on a tenant- for-life curtail his powers of letting on 

 long lease, and prevent the farming tenant from permanently 

 improving his holding in such a manner as he might have 

 been induced to do had some modified scheme like that 

 suggested by Lord Kaimes been permissible. These drawbacks 

 have been recently reduced to a minimum by such legislation 

 as the various Settled Land, Copyhold Enfranchisement,^ and 

 Agricultural Holdings Acts, and it is not an exaggeration to 



' Tn tVic opinion of somo, the Copyhold Acts of 18tl, 1852, 1858, and 

 ly87 requii'O further alteration in order to render the process of enfran- 

 chisement less costly and complicated. For example, manj- would not 

 object to seeing the apiiointment of valuers transferred from the Justices 



