estuary lands and the draining of the marshes, England would owe them a debt of gratitude. At present they are teaching retrograde farming, and what science they have is of little value to the farmer.

Judging from the standpoint taken up by Mr. Orwin in his article, he sides with the present system, but he cannot leave the vexed question of small holdings alone. He admits that the small farm of 50 acres produces 41. 14s. Id. per acre more than the 250-acre farm, but tries to minimise this important fact by stating that the production per man is less on the 50-acre farm than on the 250-acre farm. How he arrives at this figure he does not say. In the cold light of experience and common sense, this is contrary to all the laws of ownership as against the law of production by wage-earning.

A 50-acre farm is practically run by the owner himself, and the fact of ownership makes that man work longer hours and give greater attention to his work than any wage-earner could or would do, and in consequence his work value is proportionately greater. It is a known fact that, if a farmer's land is reduced in area, his energy increases in proportion to the reduction. He finds it necessary to develop new sources of revenue and open out other branches of the farming industry, such as pigs, store cattle, poultry and dairy produce. In fact, the smaller the farm, the greater become the sources of productive revenue.

It has been proved beyond question that all land has a divisional quality dependent on its fertility and friability, e.g., that in the rich Fen district of Lincolnshire a family can prosper on 5 acres of land, while in average soil it would require 20 acres, and in the shallow chalk and sandy soils land is valueless to any small holder. Till now the land that has been available for settlement has generally been the worst in the district, and it is beyond dispute that the best land is held in large farms owned by large landlords. So long as this abnormality exists in our political and economic life, so long will our population stagnate in big towns, and social unrest remain amongst us.

Land reform is the foundation of all reforms and goes to the root of nearly every disorder. Let us picture a reformed country, our country, after having thrown its energies into land reorganisation, assailed by no prejudice and opposed by no selfish, antagonistic vested interests. Let us consider a Land Ministry run on lines similar to those of our self-governing Dominions. The first task of such a Ministry would be to classify the soils of the country into first, second, third and fourth classes, and to fix the maximum acreage to be held by a single individual at, say, 100 acres of firstclass land, 200 acres of second-class land, and 300 acres of thirdclass land, while the fourth-class land would be unrestricted.

The Land Ministry would call upon the large landowners to choose the land they preferred to retain, while the remainder would be available for land settlement, and opened out for private purchase or settlement under the laws of the new Act. A universal sale value per acre would be fixed for each class of land, with a sliding scale value in addition, to depend on proximity to markets, railway and water facilities. All land on an estate available for ultimate land settlement would be acquired after due notice had been given, and time allowed for crops to be sown or harvested. All transfers would most probably be made in the autumn, when the land was lying in fallow. A land loan would be arranged, paying interest at 3 per cent. The Treasury would be given authority to treat the land acquired by the Land Ministry on a basis of gold security, and would accordingly issue paper currency to the amount covering this security. As soon as all this was done the Land Ministry could start land settlement, commencing with the first-class land and working through to the third-class land.

Four departments of administration would probably be found adequate :

(1) A selection department to get into touch with the people and to select applicants.

(2) A land acquisition department.

(3) A constructional department for building roads and home-. steads and establishing water supply, etc.

(4) An administration department, consisting of instructors and rent collectors.

Now if such a task were to be laid on the shoulders of our present Ministry of Agriculture, and if we took as its basis of capacity its past achievements in land settlement, the result would be an absolute failure. For such an undertaking one wants a personnel chosen from the class which proved invaluable in the war, young men who brought their common sense, their practical, matter-of-fact business knowledge and patriotism,to bear on the military situation, and who turned our citizens by the million into highly trained soldiers in an incredibly short time.

Such a personnel would in a short time acquire and assimilate efficient land settlement. They would grasp the real meaning of the work upon which they were engaged, and would realise that they were building up hundreds of thousands of permanently secure family units, units that would revitalise the deteriorating manhood and womanhood of to-day. They would be building up a great and truly free community in the heart of England. The children born under these natural and healthy conditions would be the forerunners of a stronger, cleaner and happier race than those who now first see the light of day and pass their life in. the dismal squalor of our big towns.

This personnel would, in a short time, absorb, as they absorbed war efficiency, every technical detail of land settlement both from the Continent and from our colonies. From this collected knowledge, and with the incentive of giving relief to countless 'desperate and despairing families, they would build up an agricultural system of instruction, supervision, produce-collecting, grading and selling that would be able to hold its own with any outside market.

So far as the financial side is concerned, such a scheme is absolutely sound. All holdings would be valued before the lease was drawn up, and a 3 per cent. rental on capital, with supervision and dilapidation charges, fixed. All small holders would have power to purchase their holdings by instalment, on more or less the same basis as the Balfour Irish Land Bill.

In this way the country would be assured that this expenditure would not in any way affect the ordinary revenue and taxation, as it would be accumulating a per cent. reserve fund.

The benefits derived from such a policy would be incalculable. In the first place, there is room, if the land is properly divided up, to absorb one million families, each probably consisting of man and wife and three children. This would give security, health, and happiness to five million people. Secondly, the cost of establishing each family would be, on an average, 1500l. The average settlement in wooden homesteads per year would be 50,000 families, which would mean an expenditure from the loan of 75,000,000l. This sum would at once bear 3 per cent. interest, but, besides this, it would give employment up to one half of this sum in construction work, in the building of houses, etc., to the value of 37,500,000l. The remaining 37,500,000l. would fall into the hands of the landowners, who would most probably reinvest it in industry. Thirdly, the land would begin to yield a greater return through the care, energy and thoughtfulness of countless hands, and unemployment would vanish.

This rough and ready outline of a land settlement policy, carried out by an active Land Ministry, is by no means a Utopian ideal. Innumerable practical proofs could be brought to bear upon each point. There is not a small holding on good land to-day that is not well established, despite plundering local middlemen and profiteers. The rental charges are, on an average, well over 6 per cent., and a 3 per cent. rental would be willingly and easily paid. The present small holders have had to acquire their knowledge of all-round cultivation as best they could, and have had to fight their way hampered by an unsympathetic and sometimes hostile Ministry of Agriculture. With a sympathetic Land Ministry and a practical and helpful supervisionary staff, whose main duty was to encourage and raise the standard of

production, and see fair play in the marketing of produce, there would be no looking back.

It has been found that the town artisan is the best cultivator : he is more adaptable, readier to learn, and adopts efficient methods faster than the man who has spent all his life on the land, and has ingrained in him the narrow, wasteful habits of the big farmer. It can be proved that small holdings enormously increase the prosperity of the villages and country towns round them, and that where land settlements have been established trade has doubled.

If, instead of having 1 million unemployed in the large towns, the country population was doubled by self-supporting families, the internal trade of the country would be given a great impetus, the stimulating effect of which would be life-giving to many of our industries. Lastly, as our internal agricultural production increased, we would gradually become more self-supporting in many of the necessaries of life, and would thereby keep some 100,000,000l. to 200,000,000l. circulating in our own country to give work and prosperity to countless workers.

Where is the party that will champion the regeneration of England? Where is the party that will take as its guide the simple and unerring laws of Nature, and frame a policy that has been proved sound by precedents without number: The placing of the people upon their own native soil for the purpose of producing food for their industrial brothers and sisters living in the towns ?

E. HAMMOND FOOT.

AUBER'S RIDGE, MAY 1915

AFTER the success of the Neuve Chapelle offensive, which amounted in reality to little more than the capture of that place and a few prisoners, and the knowledge, acquired later through our Intelligence, that with a more enterprising plan, more shells and guns, and more men to push through, this quite local affair might have been turned into a considerable success, the General Staff seemed to develop a temporary attack of 'offensive' fever.

The height of this fever was the source of the very ambitious attempt on Auber's Ridge in May 1915, which culminated in such a dismal failure all along the line, and which, for the time being, damped the fighting men's ardour and decimated their regiments. Had all the assaulting troops been taken right away back for six to eight weeks, out of all danger, out of sight and sound and smell of trench warfare, had they been instructed never to think of a parapet or any sort of cover again, and then had they been given what the military books call a good 'jumping-off place,' they would everywhere have carried the enemy's first line trenches.

As far as my own regiment was concerned, we were given a very considerable rest in safe billets some way back; we practised wood warfare, getting out of trenches by means of ladders, dragging bridges with us, crossing dykes, and so on. This was all done by stop-watch under the eyes of the G.O.C., and it was done very well, officers and men showing intense enthusiasm.

At this time we had no idea, or at least a very vague one, as to where we were going to attack; but we knew we should have to clamber out of deep trenches, cross dykes full of water, perhaps carry our own bridges, and expected eventually to strike open country and advance through woods.

As the day for the attack grew closer we were taken a little nearer the front line at Richebourg. My company was employed for a considerable time in preparing ground for the attack. Every night we went through our own front line into No Man's Land, filled up holes, levelled old breast works, put up little direction