landlord, of getting behind them. In one respect, and in one respect alone, was the Act of real service. It established the doctrine of Tenants' Property in the soil. It did not exactly legalise dual ownership; it recognised its existence. It was the day of small things; but it was the beginning of better times. Indeed, had the Irish landlords been wise, their day of grace might have been considerably lengthened. They were not wise. By a variety of subterfuges, they attempted to go behind the Act of 1870. They succeeded in seriously impairing its usefulness, and they necessitated the Act of 1881. This was a far bolder measure. In one sense it was thoroughly illogical; but its very thoroughness made it, notwithstanding its want of logic, a great boon, and constituted it the Charter of the Irish tenant. This measure conferred three enormous boons on the tenant. It won for him (a). Security of tenure. (b). A fair rent. (c). Legalisation of his interest in the soil. Under it eviction became practically impossible unless for non-payment of rent. The question of rent was removed from the region of contract, and a tribunal was established to find out, after inspection of the holding, what the fair rent was; and finally the tenant was enabled freely to sell his interest in the holding in the open market, just as the holder under the Ulster custom had generally been free to do. The Bill, in fact, established what was known as "the three F's-Fixity of Tenure, Fair Rent, and Free Sale." I have said it was illogical in so far as it legalized at one and the same time fair rent and free sale. Because, after a fair rent had been fixed, it was possible for the tenant to sell his interest at a price which forthwith made the rent perhaps more than it had been. But the Act saved Ireland. It struck two million pounds off the rental of the country. It gave a feeling of security. It made freemen of slaves. But it created an impossible situation. It legalized dual ownership. It established legal interests in the soil on the part of two individuals whose interests were not common, but hostile. And so statesmen began to see what Mr. Bright had clearly seen in 1870-the necessity of establishing a system of occupying ownership of the land of Ireland. Under the Church Act, by the Act of 1870, and again by the Act of 1881, facilities had been given for the purchase of the fee simple of their holdings by tenants. But owing to the halting character of the arrangements made, the number who availed themselves of the privilege conferred was comparatively small. In 1885, however, a decisive step was taken by the Conservative party, who were then in power, under the provisions of what is called the Ashbourne Act. A sum of five million pounds was placed at the disposal of the Irish farmers for the purchase of their holdings. Where the landlord and tenant agreed as to price, and the Land Commission determined that the security was sufficient, the State advanced the whole of the purchase-money, the tenant purchaser repaying the amount in ninety-eight half-yearly instalments. And such was the advantage of the State credit that on an average the purchaser found his terminable annuity twenty-five per cent. less than his annual rent to the landlord. was manifest that such a system as this was bound to extend and to prevail. It had enormous economic advantages for the tenant. It was pre-eminently a healing and pacific measure for the State. The result was that in 1888 another sum of £5.000,000 was granted. despite the somewhat singular opposition of the Irish It Nationalist party, the members of which had hailed the first grant with unbounded approbation. Even here it was impossible to stop, and in the Session of 1891 a measure was passed which authorised Imperial credit to the extent of £33,000,000 for this beneficent purpose. Under the Ashbourne Acts the landlord who sold his property received the price in cash. Under the Act of 1891 he receives it in Guaranteed Land Stock, bearing interest at the rate of 24 per cent. This is one of the main differ ences in the two measures, and it remains to be seen how far this change will affect the working of the scheme. But as things stand at present the Irish farmer has a legal position which no agriculturist in the world possesses. It may be summed up thus : Ist. Should he choose to remain a tenant he has absolute security of tenure save for non-payment of rent. His rent is fixed by a land court on a careful inspection of the holding, and after the exclusion of all his own improvements from the calculation. This even applies to farms held under lease-all of which may now be set aside. And he can sell his interest or goodwill at any moment to the highest bidder. 2nd. Should he desire to obtain the freehold he has only to agree with his landlord as to the price and satisfy the Land Commission that the security for the advance exists, and the State advances the whole of the purchase money on terms which make his repayments to the State twenty-five per cent. less than his payments as rent. At the end of forty-nine years he is the owner in fee. This is the exact agricultural position at the present moment in Ireland. Already twenty-five thousand owners have been created under the various Acts. In the main these have honourably fulfilled their obligations to the State. The repayments for the advances have been regularly made. Peace and good order prevail where the change has taken place, and that sense of "possessory right" to which the Bessborough Commission referred has been met and satisfied on terms fair alike to landlord and tenant, and safe for the State. Indeed, so strong is the feeling in favour of the Acts, that the cry of compulsory sale has been loudly raised. Enamoured of the advantages arising from the various transactions that have been carried through under the Acts, farmers have been tempted to call for the coercion of those owners who either have no desire to sell or who do not see their way to do so. This cry is a proof that at last the remedy for agrarian discontent has been found. The passion for land is the dominant passion in Ireland. Nor is this to be wondered at. Land is life. Indeed, in three provinces out of four it is the only means by which life can be sustained. But so long as the sales under the various Acts go forward as they have been doing, the cry of compulsion may be safely unheeded. It is an impossible cry, because of the demands it would make on State credit. It is also impossible, I would fain hope, because of the injustice it would inflict upon many. T. W. Russell. .!.. CHAPTER LXXXVIII. ENGLISH HOMES IN THE FAR SOUTH BY F. W. WARD. HAPPY English homes: what are they? Primarily, no doubt, the happy English home of both romance and reality is the family, dwell where and how it may, which is knit together in affection, illuminated by intelligence, and maintained in comfort by industry. Such a family is, perhaps, the highest product of Christian civilisation. But the environment of the English family counts for much both in romance and in reality. The tenant or owner of a section of a city terrace thinks himself less fortunate, other things being equal, than the tenant or owner of a house situate in broad acres where the open skies, the unimpeded and unpolluted breezes, and the marvel and the beauty of vegetable growth are round about him. When God created man He did not put him in a terrace, but in a well-watered garden where He had made to grow "every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food." Human nature has never lost its love for trees and flowers and fruits. That is assuredly true of the Englishman. When he hurries out of London, and the earth broadens out into fertile garden and corn-covered field and stately wood,-when amidst these surroundings he notes the dotted homes, spreading with careless contradiction of city values of space, the thought |