864 report— 1884. 



and the Emilia ; in Spain, Castille and even Andalusia, with the suburbs of Valentia 

 and Barcelona ; in Portugal, the Alemtezo with the northern provinces ; in 

 Austria, all the west with Hungary ; in Germany, Eastern Prussia with Saxony 

 and Wurtemberg ; in Belgium, the eastern district with Flanders. 



But it is to be observed that small ownership is only advantageous to the culti- 

 vator when he is himself the owner. A tenant will be much more ground down by 

 a small than by a large proprietor, because the former, in order to live, is obliged 

 to raise the rent as high as he can. 



If it has been shown that small properties cultivated by the proprietors them- 

 selves is the system most favourable to good agriculture, and to an equitable distri- 

 bution of wealth, it remains to inquire what are the laws which can found and 

 maintain such a sj'stem. 



It is obvious at the very outset that perpetual and limited entail, and also the 

 law of primogeniture, securing all the real property to the eldest son, ought to be 

 proscribed. 



The French Civil Code seems to have in part attained the end aimed at. 

 Nevertheless it has been found to involve certain disadvantages. In the first place, 

 it has sometimes brought about au excessive subdivision (moreellement) , but to a 

 much smaller extent than is generally thought. And then it has not prevented 

 the existence of a rural proletariat — that is to say, of a large number of landless 

 folk. To remedy these evils, the greater part of the United States of North 

 America have adopted an excellent measure, the Homestead Law, by virtue of 

 which the farm buildings and an area of land sufficient to support a family are 

 secured against distraint and forced sale, and constitute, as it were, the inalienable 

 property upon which the family can be perpetuated. In Bosnia and Servia a 

 similar law has existed from the remotest times. Six acres of land, the house of 

 the cultivator and its out-buildings, and in addition the animals, stores, and seeds 

 necessary to carry on the cultivation, are exempt from seizure. (For details, see 

 the voluminous and instructive work of II. Rudolf Meyer-Heimstaten.) I consider 

 that this measure ought to be adopted in all civilised countries. 



The nationalisation of the land, as urged recently by Mr. Henry George, would 

 not bring us any nearer to the desideratum, indicated above ; since, far from aug- 

 menting the number of owners, it would suppress them all, converting them into 

 tenants of the State. No doubt there would result this advantage, that the State, 

 receiving the whole rent of the land, would be able to abolish the other taxes ; at 

 all events, in England, where the rent of land is estimated at 1,800,000,000 fr. 

 (72,000,000/.), equal to the amount of the public expenditure ; but not in France, 

 where the net revenue from land is estimated at two milliards, and where the expendi- 

 ture exceeds three milliards. This system, however, which was advocated by the 

 Physiocrats, who would have had a single tax (impot unique) on land, would meet 

 with an invincible opposition in every country where property is owned by a large 

 number of families. It would only be applicable in a country where the soil is in the 

 hands of a small number of persons, as in Scotland. There the nationalisation of the 

 land would be easily carried out, without any change being made in the economical 

 life of the population. The agents of the landlords would pay in their net receipts 

 to the treasury of the State, and everything would go on as before. The principle 

 of property is evidently endangered by its excessive concentration, and all the more 

 so because it appears to be contrary to the ideas of right and equity that a single 

 individual should be able to dispose of the fortunes of the inhabitants of a whole 

 district. 



Without having recourse to spoliation, and without effecting a repurchase in 

 the interests of the State, as has been proposed in the case of Ireland, an operation 

 which would be financially ruinous, the land might be brought back into the 

 possession of the communes or the nation, by means of a special tax on successions, 

 the produce of which should be employed in buying estates offered for sale or 

 expropriated. 



In any case, countries which are fortunate enough to possess public lands, in- 

 stead of selling them or handing them over to railway companies, ought only to let 

 them on lease for long terms, ninety years say. They would thus lay up for future 



