310 = 44 
British Agriculture. 
General testi- 
mony to their 
remunerative 
character. 
I Object of 
continuing 
I Government 
I control after 
issue of public 
money ceased. 
1 
experience of the system. Various instances were adduced to 
show the unremunerative nature of certain improvements, the 
explanation of which was either injudicious and imperfect exe- 
cution of the works, or inadequacy of capital, or energy, or 
knowledge, to follow them up by good culture, — want of know- 
ledge and experience on the part of the landowner or his agent, 
or the usual circumstances of a similar nature which are found 
here and there to occur in all large operations, which must often 
be unwittingly entrusted to weak or dishonest management. As 
this inquiry embraced the execution of works in all parts of 
Great Britain, spread over a period of twenty-six years, and 
embracing an expenditure then exceeding ten millions sterling, 
the comparatively few and exceptional instances of failure might 
be taken as a strong proof of the general success of the system. 
Except in such buildings as required restoration from the con- 
tinued neglect of landowners to repair — a case very common 
both north and south — some return seems always to be reckoned 
upon, even for expenditure on new buildings. On all other 
kinds of improvement there was a general testimony to their 
remunerative character. And those of the witnesses most com- 
petent to speak, the tenant-farmers who had themselves repaid 
the cost of the works, declared that they had received from the 
money spent on land-improvement much more than a return of 
capital and interest. 
The Committee very truly remark that it is an anomaly that 
private transactions should be submitted to the control of a 
Government office. This was perfectly legitimate, so long as 
the money advanced was a public loan. When the supply of 
public money ceased, and that of private persons or companies 
was substituted, the existing Government machinery of inspec- 
tion and control, which had been found on the whole to work 
well, was continued by Parliament on the ground that the im- 
provement of the land of this country was a matter of public 
interest. But this was not with the view of profecting the 
interests of the remainder-man and mortgagee, for that is no 
part of the duty of Government ; but in order to give a first 
charge on the inheritance, and so enable landowners, whether 
under settlement or otherwise, to obtain money for improving 
their estates, which is an object of public importance, at a j 
lower rate of interest than would otherwise have been possible. 
This preferential charge could be given only with the tacit] 
assent of other parties already creditors of the estate ; and the! 
condition which hitherto has assured that assent, has been the 
certificate, under statutory powers, of an acknowledged Govern- 
ment authority, that their security had not been thereby in- 
juriously affected. The continuance of the Government inspcc- 
I 
