224 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES. 



system, which is many centuries old, has of late years been breaking 

 down, and the War has accelerated its downfall. The landowner, who 

 was originally its creator and the main source of its stability, was too 

 far detached from the soil to know how the system from time to time 

 had to be modified. The result was that his tenants revolted, and have 

 in many cases obtained for themselves conditions of tenancy to which 

 they were not properly entitled, on the strength of their temporary 

 prosperity resulting from the War. Throughout Eastern Europe, too, 

 and particularly in Eumania and Czecho-Slovakia, there has been a 

 land revolution. Great estates have been forfeited and their land sub- 

 divided, solely because the owners have not during the last generation 

 been active participators in the work of production. 



The absentee landlord, a rara avis in all Continental countries except 

 Italy, is another example of the baneful effects of his non-industrial 

 character in this country. Oblivious of the true meaning of ' manor ' ^ 

 and ' mansion, ' he often separates himself entirely, not merely from 

 the industry, but from the locality, in which he comes to be regarded as 

 an unsympathetic stranger. 



The plight of the Irish landowner, and indeed of Ireland itself, might 

 to-day be far less serious if, during the century prior to the last fifty 

 years, the landowners of that unfortunate country had as a class made 

 their homes amongst the rural population and identified themselves 

 closely with their industrial welfare. 



It has come, perhaps unfortunately, to be assumed in this country 

 that there are three classes or sections of the agricultural community, 

 whose interests are distinct and largely divergent, and for whose partici- 

 pation in the proceeds of the industry separate provision must be made. ' 

 But the divorce of landownership from land cultivation is unnatural ; it j 

 is not to be found universally prevalent in other countries, nor indeed 

 has it always existed in our own. Its very existence is a deterrent to 

 the full industrial development of agricultural land. It may be (and 

 it is unfortunately the case to-day among many new occupying-owners),; 

 that the producer's monetary resources do not suffice to provide him 

 both with the land itself and with adequate capital for the business of] 

 farming it. If, therefore, he can obtain his land, buildings and per-i 

 manent equipment at a moderate rent, representing to the owner only 

 2 or 3 per cent, on his capital, and without the added burden of mainten- 

 ance and repairs, it is undoubtedly attractive as a commercial proposi- 

 tion. But whatever provision may be made by the Legislature for 

 securing to the cultivator fair compensation as the reward of his enter- 

 prise, the latter must necessarily be restricted in respect of the full 

 development of the property of another, and an adequate return for 

 such full development (even if wise and prudent) can never be provided 

 for by the State without imposing upon the owner of the land a pro- 

 spective financial burden admittedly too heavy for him to bear or too 

 risky for him to face. In fact, the unification of the roles of the land- 

 owner and farm tenant is a condition precedent to the full, confident 

 and enterprising development of the agricultural industry on economic 

 lines. Moreover, although eighteenth-century economists laid stress 



' From Latin manere, to remain. 



