State  Loews  and  J^and  linprorement  Companies. 
131 
will  suffer.  This  is  a view  of  the  question  which  Kural 
District  Councils  may  do  well  to  take  into  consideration.  A 
considerable  number  of  these  bodies,  in  Worcestershire,  Essex, 
(Cambridgeshire,  and  Hampshire,  and  doubtless  in  other  counties 
as  well,  have  not  adopted  any  hye-laws. 
It  really  cannot  matter  to  the  general  public  in  rural  places 
whether  houses,  which  are  detached,  or  which  are  in  groujrs 
belonging  to  one  owner  (as  is  usually  the  case),  are  built  of 
wood,  iron,  or  any  other  material,  nor  what  they  are  covered 
with — thatch  or  other  substance.  That  is  the  owner's  concern, 
and  if  he  desires  to  build  of  cheap  materials  the  occupiers 
may  still  have  healthy  houses,  although  the  construction  may 
not  be  durable. 
Poor  Hates. 
In  passing,  I may  refer  to  another  serious  source  of 
<liscouragement  in  the  building  of  cottages,  viz.,  the  great 
increase  of  local  rates,  and  the  want  of  some  radical  alteration  in 
the  assessment  of  real  property  by  which  an  e(|uitable  contribution 
would  be  obtained  from  personalty  for  the  benefits  it  receives 
from  local  taxation.  Something  of  the  kind  was  promised  by 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exche([uer  who  introduced  the  Estate 
Duty,  but  it  appears  that  no  Parliamentary  party  cares  to  take 
sxich  a radical  measure  of  reform  in  hand. 
State  Loans  and  Land  Improvement  (V)mpanies. 
As  the  rent  of  agricultural  labourers’  cottages  does  not 
yield  a profitable  return,  except  indirectly  by  enhancing  the 
value  of  farm  lands,  there  is  naturally  some  hesitation  in 
investing  ca])ital  in  their  erection,  esj)ecially  on  the  part  of 
limited  owners.  State  loans  were  authorised  in  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century  for  these  and  other  purposes  on 
the  security  of  estates,  but  there  are  no  funds  now  available 
for  the  purpose,  notwithstanding  that  the  Report  of  the  Royal 
Commission  on  Agricultural  Dej)ression  recommended  that 
Parliament  should  again  authorise  an  issue  of  such  loans. 
This  part  of  the  ((uestion  was  referred  to  at  some  length  in 
an  article  I wrote  in  the  Journal  on  a j)revious  occasion,'  as 
well  as  the  work  done  by  the  companies  formed  under  the 
Land  Improvements  Acts  for  financing  owners,  and,  with  the 
* “Smiill  Holdings  and  their  Equipment,”  Journal  R.A.S.E.,  Vol.  57, 1896,  p.  271 . 
