Some Present-Da^ Policies. 43 



is incompatible with competitive rents, which have not 

 been a source of strength to agriculture, but the reverse. 

 Machinery would have to be devised for fixing rents. We 

 have had experience in Scotland for the past ten years of 

 security of tenure and fair rents for holdings under 50 

 acres or ;£.^o rent and the system has worked well. There 

 is no reason why the system should not be extended to all 

 holdings, and the machinery of the Land Court could be 

 extended to deal with all holdings and similar arrange- 

 ments made for England and Wales. When a change of 

 tenancy occurs the value of the tenant's improvements are 

 assessed at their value to an incoming tenant, and the 

 disadvantages of free sale and of dual ownership are thus 

 avoided. 



It is not always recognised, however, by the advocates 

 of security of tenure and judicial rents, that the system 

 practically puts an end to the system of private ownership 

 of land as we know it. The owner is left very little control 

 over the land. He becomes in reality what the landowners 

 have tended to become in effect for many years past, a 

 mere receiver of rent, and even then, of rent which he has 

 little power to influence. The result in Scotland, where 

 the system has been in operation on small holdings, has 

 been that the landowners content themselves with drawing 

 the rents fixed by the Court and shift the burden of pro- 

 viding the capital for permanent improvements on to the 

 State. If the larger farmers are given security of tenure 

 and judicial rents we may expect that the landowners will 

 be even less inclined to spend money on their estates than 

 they now are, and that the State will find it necessary to 

 take up the duty of financing the permanent equipment 



