of ownership to tenancy is smaller than in France (where it is nearly a half), or in Germany or Denmark (nearly nine-tenths). In Great Britain 12 per cent. of the agricultural land is cultivated by owners.* Evidently there is in Belgium a slight rise in the proportion let to tenants. A desire for ownership is undoubtedly felt. It is due to sentiment, a desire for independence, and a belief in the social status of the landowner; but the price to which land has risen stands in the way of a more general realisation of that desire. Mr Rowntree is disposed to think that English leases are slightly more favourable to the tenant than Belgian. He is not convinced that owned land is on the whole better worked than rented land. It is worth noticing that there are 32,000 acres of cultivated land owned by the communes. After special investigations Mr Rowntree thinks that the average value of agricultural land in Belgium, taking pasture and arable together, is close on 60l. an acre, and the average rent 36s. 3d., in both cases without buildings. Between 1880 and 1895 the value of arable fell 33 per cent. and that of pasture 23 per cent. By 1908 the average value of land had risen to within 81. an acre of the 1880 price, and the average rent to within 4d. an acre. It would appear that the recovery has been brought about by more intensive cultivation and the adoption of new crops, by co-operation, by increased belief in artificials and in agricultural science, and by improved prices.

Why does land fetch so much more in Belgium than in England? It is not the greater fertility of Belgium, Mr Rowntree replies, because nine of the ten arrondissements where the agricultural values are highest consist of that sandy soil which Laveleye called the worst in Europe.' Though fertilised by ten centuries of laborious husbandry,' said that Belgian economist, the soil does not yield a crop without being manured once or twicea fact unique in Europe.' Nor is it, in Mr Rowntree's opinion, the density of the population, though in Belgium there are 866 persons per square mile of cultivated area to 759 in England and Wales, and the number

• Mr Rowntree, whose figures these are, explains that they are of the years specified: Belgium, 1895; Denmark, 1901; Germany, 1895; France, 1892; Great Britain, 1905.

of agriculturists is proportionately thrice as large as in Great Britain. The principal reason is the demand for land, due to Belgium being a country of small farms, while Great Britain is a country of comparatively large ones. Also the greater part of the work on the land of Belgium is done by the farmers themselves or their relatives, that is, by persons directly interested in the best possible working of it. Then, when a farm is cut up for sale, there are always eager buyers on the spot, which is not always the case with us. Mr Rowntree believes that the Belgian farmer was able to pay so much more for his land than the English farmer because of Government help, with light railways, for example- the transport facilities are better than in any other country in the world' because of his own excellent cultivation and 'extremely hard work,' because of agricultural education, because of a 'world's record' in the amount of artificials used per acre, because of co-operation, and because the low rate of industrial wages prevents town life from offering an attractive alternative to a life on the land. As to help from tariffs, all cereals (with the exception of oats, on which the duty is 18. 2d. per cwt.) and potatoes and beet, were admitted to Belgium free. But there was a duty of 88. per cwt. on butter; and, though horses and pigs-Belgium keeps 101 pigs per square mile against 90 in Denmark-came in free, there was an impost of 18. 7d. on cattle and sheep, and of 6s. per cwt. on meat. These duties have, no doubt, added something to the farmers' profits. Although Belgium fed a smaller proportion of her population than formerly, the value per head of the food imported was only 17. 18s. 2d. against 37. 14s. 10d. for the United Kingdom. (In Denmark the excess of exports over imports per head may be set down as 3l. 138. 10d.) The difference between Belgium and England, Mr Rowntree points out, is as striking in the case of eggs and vegetables, which were free from duty, as in the case of meat and dairy product, which were mulcted by the Customs. Belgium, after providing herself with vegetables and fruit, exported to the value of 710,000l. a year; the net annual import of the United Kingdom is valued at 2,638,000l.

Those who feel that attention cannot be too often directed to the necessity of increasing the production per

acre in Great Britain must continually point to the example of Belgium, which, with twice the proportional area devoted to wheat and oats that is given to these crops in England, showed a national yield per acre of 33-5 bushels of wheat and 54.5 bushels of oats against our 29-7 bushels of wheat and 41 bushels of oats.* Mr Rowntree speaks of one commune which produced 57 bushels of wheat per acre, and of a second, the oat-yield of which was 111 bushels. Apart from crops, it is to be remembered that Belgium had 156 cattle per square mile against 120 in Denmark and 97 in England.

The other side of the picture is, of course, that, with the value of land what it is, only very arduous toil enables the cultivator to make a living.' As to low agricultural wages, Mr Rowntree thinks that the average may be 1s. 7d. a day, with some perquisites. With regard to the financial indebtedness of the farmers, the author of 'Land and Labour' is of opinion that the facts contradict the assertion that the land of small proprietors is usually mortgaged to the hilt. The proportion of mortgage to the value of properties is 'comparatively small, less than one-sixth.'

It is sad to have to write in the past tense of so many matters in connexion with the agriculture of Belgium. We all cherish the hope that before very long the indomitable Belgians may once more be the masters of the destinies of their own country, the rural development of which has been for so many years an inspiration to every student of agricultural sociology.

J. W. ROBERTSON SCOTT.

The recently issued (1903-12) average is 31.74 bushels of wheat and 41.84 of oats.

The Drysdale Dalmeny figures are-wheat, 64 bushels; oats, 120 bushels.

Art. 3. RECENT

ARGENTINA.

POLITICAL

EVOLUTION IN

DISCOVERED and first occupied by the Spaniards early in the 16th century, the colony of Argentina was in the 18th transformed into a vice-royalty. Its history is uneventful until the commencement of the 19th century. The events which at that epoch agitated Europe had their counterparts in America. In 1806 an English military expedition laid siege to Buenos Ayres and twice occupied the city; but the invaders were finally beaten by Liniers, a French officer in the service of Spain. The invasion of Spain by Napoleon, in 1808, was the signal of independence for the Spanish colonies. A 'Junta' or provisional Assembly proclaimed the independence of the Argentine Republic on May 25, -1810, a date which was afterwards chosen for the celebration of the annual national festival.

In 1814 Uruguay, Santa Fé, Cordoba and other provinces constituted themselves into independent republics under the direction of D'Artigas. It was a period of anarchy between federals and unionists; the words 'liberty' and 'republic' remained for a long time a signal of discord, favoured by ambitious rivals. In 1825 war was carried on against Brazil. The Brazilians were beaten-by General Alvear; and Uruguay seized the opportunity to declare her independence. The struggle between federalists and unionists continued even during the dictatorship of the sanguinary Rozas (1827-1852). He was succeeded by General Bartolome Mitre, and Mitre by Sarmiento. These two rulers did much for the material and intellectual development of Argentina; and progress continued under the presidency of Nicolas Avellaneda (1874—1880).

A popular rising drove President Celman from power in 1890; but since that year the Argentine Republic has been free from any revolutionary shock, the transmission of legislative and administrative power taking place in a normal and legal manner. The most remarkable name in the list of rulers is that of Dr Roque Saenz Pena, who took office in 1910. He was a man resolutely opposed to sterile political dissensions; and his integrity and honesty

of purpose were admitted even by his opponents. During his presidency of less than four years, ending with his untimely death after a prolonged illness, on Aug. 9, 1914, he managed to establish the important political transformations which we shall outline further on.

Within a week after the demise of Saenz Pena the Argentinos also had to mourn the death of General Julio A. Roca, ex-President of the Republic. General Roca had been for many years a prominent figure in Argentine national life. Born in the year 1843, much of his early military life was spent in fighting the Indian tribes who then infested the western parts of the province of Buenos Ayres, now among its most prosperous districts. He was President of the Republic from 1880 to 1886, and again from 1898 to 1904. The rapid rise of Argentina from a comparatively unknown State to one of world-wide importance is due to a considerable extent to his activity and influence among his countrymen. He was an ardent patriot and a sincere friend of England.

The present Chief of the State is Dr Vieterino de la Plaza, formerly Vice-President under Saenz Pena. He is a barrister of distinction, and collaborated in the making of the Argentine Civil Code. He was elected a deputy in 1875, and since then has acquired considerable political experience, having been Minister of Finance under President Avellaneda, and successively Minister 'par interim' of Justice, of Public Instruction, of War and the Navy. Under President Roca he was in charge of Foreign Affairs and of Finance. During the international political crisis of 1908 he again acted as Minister of Foreign Affairs, and rendered his country good service by his calm and far-sighted diplomacy. Having been elected Vice-President for six years, in 1910, at the same time as President Saenz Pena, his Presidency will expire on Oct. 12, 1916. He has lived for some years in England, and is a great admirer of English institutions.

In accordance with the constitution voted in 1853 at Santa Fé, and somewhat modified in 1861, the country is governed on the federal representative system. Under this form of government the provinces composing the federation enjoy a limited autonomy. They nominate