roprietor.

These changes closely examined lose their threatening aspect, so
much so that the marvel is they did not commence fifty years ago
instead of waiting till now, and even now to be only potential. What
is there in the present condition of agriculture to make farmer or
landowner anxious that the existing system of things should
continue? Surely nothing; surely every consideration points in
favour of moderate change. Those who quote the example of France,
and would argue that dissatisfaction must, as there, increase with
efforts to allay it, must know full well in their hearts that there
is no comparison whatever with France. The two peoples are so
entirely different. So little contents our race that the danger is
rather the other way, that they will be too easily satisfied. Such
changes as I have indicated, when examined closely, are really so
mild that in full operation they would scarcely make any difference
in the relation of the classes. Such village councils would be very
anxious for the existence of the farmer, and for his interests to be
respected, for the sufficient reason that they know the value of
wages. Perhaps they might even, under certain conditions, become
almost too willing partisans of the farmer for their best interests
to be served. I can imagine such conditions easily enough, and the
possibility of the three sections, labourer, farmer, and owner,
becoming more closely welded together than ever. There is far more
stolidity to be regretted than revolution to be feared. The danger
is lest the new voters should stolidify--crystallize--in tacit
league with existing conditions; not lest we should go hop, skip,
and jump over Niagara.

A probable result of these changes is an increase in the value of
land: if thousands of people should ever really begin to desire it,
and to work and save for the object of buying it, analogy would
suppose a rise in value. Instead of a loss there would be a gain to
the landowner, and I think to the farmer, who would have a larger
supply of labour, and possibly a strong posse of supporters at the
poll in their men. Instead of division coalescence is more probable.
The greater his freedom, the greater his attachment to home, the
more settled the labourer, the firmer will become the position of
all three classes. The landowner has nothing whatever to fear for
his park, his mansion, his privacy, his shooting, or anything else.
What is taken will be paid for, and no mor