Marcli 3, 1892. ] 
JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE AND COTTAGE GARDENER. 
157 
I T is a trite saying that people cannot be made sober by Act of 
Parliament ; but, all the same, the Legislature can make it 
more or less difficult for the thriftless to indulge in pernicious 
habits ; and it follows, conversely, that it can aid the acquirement 
of what it may be deemed good or politic for the people to 
possess. It appears to be thought by our legislators that the time 
has arrived when special facilities should be afforded for the rural 
population to obtain land—not as tenants chiefly, but as owners ; 
and State aid is to be granted, under stipulated conditions, to 
enable those of the working population who can raise a little 
money to obtain possession of land for an initial outlay represent¬ 
ing one-fourth its value ; hence quite disproportionate to the 
capital invested—or, in other words, for a preliminary payment 
of £25, land to the value of £100 is to be granted to applicants. 
It is a bold, not to say a daring, experiment in, as the St. James's 
Gazette puts it, creating yeomanry by Act of Parliament. 
The Small Agricultural Holdings Bill appears destined to 
effect a revolution in rural life and habits. It is scarcely necessary 
to say that the term is not used in any anarchical sense, but in 
its social and orderly acceptation by a change of a somewhat 
fundamental character which may, and we hope will, be of benefit 
to many, without, as we also hope, doing injustice to any person 
who may be brought within the sphere of its influence. It is the 
opinion of not a few persons, who regard the matter from totally 
opposite standpoints, and who look to the possibility with widely 
differing feelings, that the tendency of the measure, which will be 
subjected, as it should be, to searching examination and discussion, 
points to the nationalisation of the land. The suggestion gives us no 
concern, for even if that should be the ultimate issue, the process 
will be so slow as to be imperceptible, and in fact may not be 
effected at all. As a rule the advocates of land nationalisation 
either possess little or no land of their own, or are encumbered 
with what is of no value to them, and they would have no objection 
to sell it to the nation at a price they may regard as advantageous. 
But the new Bill is specially intended to considerably increase the 
number of landowners, who are cultivators, and who may, there¬ 
fore, consider it their interest to make strenuous endeavour to 
retain the land which comes into their possession. If the majority 
find it advantageous the coming change may be anticipated with 
satisfaction ; but if the reverse should happen to occur, the dis¬ 
satisfaction with the then existing order of things will be as great 
as, and perhaps greater than, that which appears to exist now, and 
which has called the Bill into being. In the latter eventuality, 
which is not the remotest of probabilities, there will be lively 
times in the election of the public bodies who will be responsible 
for the working of the Act. 
Though there are many thrifty and industrious men who are 
capable of improving their position by the management of small 
plots of land, there are many more who do not possess the 
necessary qualifications for working it successfully, and it is to 
be feared that the rosy anticipations of not a few will fail to be 
realised. Every man who can improve the land and his own 
position by his labour and intelligence should, in our view, be 
afforded the opportunity ; but we also hold that no man, whether 
he be a large or a small holder, should be accorded the privilege 
of spoiling land. Kegarding the question from that point of view, 
^ 0 . 610.—VoL. XXIV.. Thied Seeiks. 
a system of tenancy on an equitable basis would seem to be 
preferable to the principle of ownership. Let an examination be 
made of a number of field allotments side by side, and an extra 
ordinary difference will be apparent between them—a difference 
wholly due to methods in cultivation. Some of the plots can be 
of no practical value to the occupiers, and it is only a question 
of time for the land to “run out”— i.e., rendered useless through 
exhaustion. 
On the other hand there are plots that show splendid results in 
cultivation, and the crops must be of distinct advantage to the 
tillers ; in other words, we see land improvers and land spoilers 
side by side. The improvers we would encourage by increasing 
the extent of their holdings, and decrease in the same proportion 
those which represent nothing but negligence or mismanagement. 
“ A very good idea,” was the remark of a gentleman to whom the 
plan was proposed, “ but in these days we landowners dare not 
carry it out, or we should be proclaimed as tyrants.” Can this 
be the reason that under the new Bill land.may be let under 
certain conditions ? But its primary object is to create owners 
whose little properties will be mortgaged to the State, with 
County Councils or other elected bodies acting as agents or 
middlemen. If the plan of encouraging the thrifty and indus¬ 
trious on sound and just lines cannot be carried out by private 
owners of land through fear of the consequences, neither can it 
be by elected bodies removeable triennially by the votes of the 
majority of electors ; and therefore, as in the past so in the 
future, it is feared that a good deal of land will not long remain 
of service to the possessors, and will depreciate in value through 
their apathy or inaptitude as cultivators. 
Allotments have been provided in past times on estates in 
various parts of the country, and for a time some zeal was 
manifested in their cultivation, but eventually one after another of 
the plots was allowed to become exhausted until the system as 
originally established broke down. It has been the same in many 
districts with so-called small owners, yeomanry, or cottagers, call 
them what we may. After a struggle with pecuniary difficulties, 
consequent on deaths occurring if nothing else, the titular possessors 
became so hopelessly involved that the dilapidated buildings and 
worked-out land could no longer be retained. It may be, and we 
trust it is so, that the present generation of workers will prove, 
more competent in the management of land than their predecessors 
were—more devoted to home duties, more intelligent and perse- 
veiingly industrious. It is certain they have greater facilities for 
acquiring information that may be of service to them than were 
ever provided before, and it is earnestly to be hoped that they will 
turn the advantages to profitable account by thoughtful action and 
determined work. In no other way can they improve their 
positions, and make the means that are instituted for their welfare 
answer the object in view. 
But though there have been failures in the past that led to the 
practical collapse of small holdings in many localities, there have 
also been successes, and one of these, which was possibly not with¬ 
out its influence in bringing about a change of views by Mr. 
Chaplin, is in a part of Lincolnshire called the Isle of Axholme. 
Taking Epworth as the centre, we find, from a statement supplied 
to us by a parish official, Mr. J. Standring, that the extent of land 
in that parish is in round figures 5742 acres. Over this area there 
are only two occupiers who have more than 200 acres of land each, 
twelve are holders of between 100 and 200 acres each, fourteen 
have between 50 and 100 acres, thirty-one each farm between 20 
and 50 acres, forty between 10 and 20 acres, 115 between 2 and 10 
acres, while eighty have plots ranging from half an acre to 2 acres.. 
The land is good in staple, and, as we have seen, is splendidly culti¬ 
vated. It is dark in colour, and affords bountiful crops. As seen 
in the autumn after harvest the appearance is somewhat remarkable. 
There are no fences between the long narrow strips, the plough 
furrows having been the accepted boundaries .for generations. 
No. 2266.— VOL. LXXXVI., Old Sbeies. 
