Phillips. — On the Laiv of Gavelkind. 521 



England, that we may hope to progress, and to check poverty and crime. 

 The feudal land law may be regarded as a great curse, which enslaved the 

 free English people. 



Herein Mr. George's* reading of history and my own entirely disagree. 

 Mr. George, an able writer and an accomplished writer, advocates that the 

 land must be held as common property. I need only point to the fact that 

 the north-western nations of Europe broke away from the communal 

 custom, and they determined to individualize their title. 



The reason why we attach so much importance to our " Crown grant" 

 is, that previous to William the Norman's time, land was held some by 

 custom, other by direct grant from different kings. William determined 

 that every acre should be held from him alone, and by his grant, although 

 in the Domesday Survey all such grants as those made by Edward the 

 Confessor were duly recognized. This simplified matters greatly, and 

 because our ancestors each had to plead his Crown grant, therefore we have 

 learnt to value it. 



The reason why William determined to take this step was, that the 

 Church of Eome at that time determined, not only that the occupant of the 

 Papal chair should be the spiritual lord of Europe, but also the temporal 

 lord. If the king of every feudal state was supreme lord of every acre of 

 land in that state, or a proper gradation of sub-lords established, then it 

 would be easy for the Eoman Pontiff to over-lord the eight or ten kings, 

 and thereby restore, in a higher degree, the vanished splendour of the 

 Augustan Caesars. This policy was tried, but after a few centuries it com- 

 pletely failed. It left, however, the law of primogeniture firmly established. 

 The fact of William reserving a rent under all his grants, since lost by 

 the Crown, and appropriated by the English landlord, a matter specially 

 relied upon by Mr. George, who advocates a policy of re-confiscation, can be 

 dismissed with the remark that William had no right to subjugate the free 

 English people and impose this rent. We cannot allow Mr. George to 

 plead the benefit from a wrong. Previous to William's coming, and the im- 

 position of the feudal laws, the lands of England were rapidly becoming 

 individualized among a free independent people. Our duty now is to return 

 to the custom of gavelkind, and endeavour to sweep away any vestige of 

 the feudal laws. 



Mr. Wallace too relies upon this feudal reservation of rent in his advocacy 

 of State nationalization. Randolph Flambard certainly never dreamt that 

 he would have such strong supporters so many centuries after his death. 

 But herein Mr. Wallace has not treated us fairly. Travelling in Malaysia, 



: Progress and Poverty. 



