Columbia iBnibersilP in tbeCttpoflrtugork LIBRARY THE SELIGMAN LIBRARY OF ECONOMICS PURCHASED BY THE UNIVERSITY I929 THE IRISH LAND QUESTION. By G. 1! *• Tbo grand evil in Ireland is this—that the Irish pooplo, tho nation, are dispossessed o£ tho soil .”—Speech at Dublin , by John Bright, M.P. “ It is tho duty of Parliament to reform tho landed tennro of Ireland. Thoro is no necessity for depriving tho landlords of one farthing of tho pecuniary value of their legal rights; but justice requires that tho actual cultivators should be enablod to become in Ireland what they will bocomo in America—proprietors of tho soil which they cultivate .”—Principles of Political Economy , by John Stuart Mill, M.P. I 3Lonhon; E. TRUELOVE, 256, IIOLBORN. (twelve doors west of the inns of court hotel.) Trice One Penny. 1867. r >x, V\ c> V\ '3>%y\ c \ J. KI-NNY, PRINTER, 40, TALKER 61 KELT, LITTLE QUEEN STREET, Yi.C. THE IRISH LAND QUESTION. « Mr. Bright’s recent visit to Ireland, and the great and eloquent speeches he delivered on that occasion, have had a powerful offect in drawing attention to the wrongs and sufferings of the country. The two subjects to which he chiefly directed his remarks, as constituting tho monster evils of Ireland, wore the Established Church and the tenure of land. Those two grievances, as he showed, lie at the very root of Ireland’s misery and discontent ; the former being a standing injustice and badge of oppression, which has operated powerfully to create and keep alive a feeling of hatred to the English rule; while in the latter is to bo found the real source of tho unparalleled poverty and wretchedness which for ages have been endured by the people. As remedies for the Irish evils, ho proposed that the Established Church should bo abolished, and tho voluntary system substituted in its place, so as to put tho two religions, Catholic and Protestant, on a footing of perfect fairness and equality ; and also—what is above all important—that radical reforms should bo effected in tho laws relating to tho land. Air. Bright’s pro¬ posals have boon keenly discussed by tho press, and there is a very strong and general desire among Liberals that energetic steps should bo taken to remedy the grievances of Ireland; a desire which has been greatly intensified by tho deplorable accounts latoly received of the Bpread of disaffection, especially in the south and south-west, and tho serious apprehensions entertained of an outbreak. That the great source of Ireland’s miseries is tho system of property and tenure of land, is a point on which all those who have thought and felt most deeply on tho subject are agreed. About two-thirds of the Irish people are engaged in agricultural pursuits, and the questions which most of all affect their interests are those relating to the land. Thus Air. Alill, who has so profoundly investigated the subjoct in his “Political Economy,” declares that tho cottier system of land tonuro is “ tho very foimdation of the economical evils of Ireland.” In like man¬ ner Mr. Maguire, in moving for a Commission to inquire into the laws relating to landlord and tonant in Ireland, said in the llouso of Commons in 18t>3, “Englishmen frequently ask what is the real cause of the misery of Ireland—what is the causo of that chronic poverty and a 2 4 wretchedness which is the reproach of Europe and the astonishment the civilised world ? There are some who perhaps attribute it to the religion of the majority of the people of Ireland, and there are others who set it down to the existence of a State Church ; but these are very short-sighted views of the case—for the misery and poverty of Ireland are traceable to quite another cause. Any man who seriously considers what Ireland is, will soon begin to understand the source and cause of the evil. Ireland is essentially an agricultural country. In England you have commerce, manufactures, trade, as well as agriculture. Rut if there be commerce, manufactures, or trade in Ireland, these depend directly on the one great interest —agriculture; and upon tho agriculture of Ireland the vast mass of her people depend, not merely for theii prosperity, but for their very moans of existence. Aud thus it is that if you want to trace the cause of tho poverty and misery that exist in Ireland, you must see in what condition are the tillers of the soil; and in what relation they stand to tho soil itself. The true cause of the evil lies in the precarious hold which tho tillers of tho soil have of the land they cultivate. This is the true source of that misery which we deplore.” A similar conclusion was arrivod at by the Land Occupation Commission, held in Ireland in lb44, under the presidency of the Earl of Devon, and which collected perhaps the largest body of ovidonce over brought together in regard to the agricultural oconomy of a country. The Commissioners gavo it as tho result of their inquiries, that the un¬ certain tenure of land was the principal cause both of the backwardness of tho agriculture and the miserable condition of the people. In their Digest of Evidence tlioy say, “It has been shown that tho master evil, poverty, proceeds from the fact of occupiers of land withholding the investment of labour and capital from theamploand profitable field that lios within their reach on tho farms they occupy; that this hesitation is attributable to a reasonable disinclination to invest labour or capital on tho property of others, without a security that adequate remuneration shall be derived from the investment; that no such security at present exists in regard to the vast mass of cases, including tenancies from year to year, and leases with short unexpired terms.” “The most genoral, and indeed almost universal, topic of complaint brought boforc us, in every part of Ireland,” they say again, “ was the 1 want ol tenure,’ to use the expression most commonly employed by the witnesses Tho uncertainty of tenure is constantly referred to as a pressing grievance by all classes of tenants. It is said to paralyse all oxertion, and to plaeo a fatal impediment in tho way of improvement.” How deeply the importance of the land question is felt in Ireland, may be seen from the constant agitation that has been going on for many yoare upon the subject—from the numerous and oxcitod meetings that have been held, the efforts of the Repeal Association and Tenant Right Leaguo. and the repeated attempts made in Parliament to effect the passing of a satislactory Tenants’ Compensation Bill. Last session, the petitions presented in favour of such a measure were signed by no loss than 270,000 porsons. Indeed, it was stated by Tho O’Donoghuo in one 5 of the debates in 1858, that “the question of tenant-right had for some years past occupied the public mind of Ireland to the exclusion of almost every other topic.” One circumstance which has done much to prevent English people from rightly understanding tho Irish laud question, is the wide dif¬ ferences existing betwoon the agricultural systems in tho two countries. : It is often said that the laws relating to land, and to the rights of landlord and tenant, are the same in both, and if tho ono country has prospered under them why should not the other? But in tho first place, it is by no means true that England has “ prospered ” under its present land system. Under it, the condition of the agricultural labourers, especially in tho southern counties, is very miserable, and even tho agriculture, though it has progressed, has progressed in a much less degree than either commorco or manufactures. Moreover, oven putting aside this consideration, there are such wide differences betwoon the English and Irish agricultural systems that we cannot judge of tho one country and its requirements by tho experience of the othor. Tho most important of those differences is, that in England tho soil is ioccupied by large fanners and cultivated with the aid of hired labourers; while in Ireland, it is mostly occupied by small farmers who cultivate it by their own labour and that of their families, with or without tho occasional help of others. In the former, the tenants, as a gouoral rulo, are capitalists farming for profit, and in tho latter, labourers farming for subsistence ; the ronts in both cases being sottled by competition. Tho number of small holdings has indood greatly diminished in Ireland of late years from tho efforts of proprietors to culargo their farms —a pur¬ pose too often carried out by the most wholesale and barbarous evictions ; but tho small farming system still continues tho general and character¬ istic one of the country. Thus Mr. Hassard stated in tho House of Commons in 1858 that according to tho Official Directory thero were 80 por cent, of tenants holding from 5 to 15 acres; 23 per cont. from 15 to 30 acres; and 20 per cent, under 5 acres. In the aggregate there wore 74 por cent, of all the holdings in Ireland under 38 acres. On anc ther occasion, in 1864, Mr. Whiteside mentioned that thero were 40,000 farms of only ono acre in extent; 85,4 (>9 under 5 acres ; 183,931 between 5 and 15 acres ; and 141,000 between 15 and 30 aeros. Lord Palmerston, too, who was himself an Irish proprietor, said in 1805, “ Everybody knows that the great majority of tho tenants in Ireland are men who have very small holdings of from five to ten and fifteen acres.” It is this c )ttior system of tenure—or, in other words, this system of small tenant fanners with rents settled by competition— that lies at the root of Ireland’s evils; for the natural effect of such a tenure, in an over¬ peopled country, is to run up the rents to a point far ahovo the roal value of the land, and thus keep the tenants always extremely poor and in debt to their landlords. Competition, as a means of settling the rent of farms, can be safely borne by capitalists, but is ruinous to labourers. A largo fanner, who farms for profit, will not offer more rent than will leave him tho ordinary rate of profit on his capital; hut a labourer, who 6 is struggling for subsistence and sees no other prospect of obtaining it than to havo a piece of ground, will offer any rent, however extravagant in order to gain possession. Previous to the famine of 1846 and the enormous emigration that followed it, the competition for land in Ireland was so intense, and the rents consequently so much beyond what th« tenantry could afford to pay, as to reduce them to the most abject state of poverty and degradation. A most graphic account of the working* of the system was given by Mr. Nimmo, a high practical authority, in his evidence before a committee of the House of Lords in 1825. When asked to state his opinion as to the condition of the Irish peasantry, h« said—“ I conceive the peasantry of Ireland to bo, in general, in almost the lowest possible state of existence; their cabins are in the moat miserable condition, and their food potatoes, with water, frequently without even salt.” As to the cause of tho evils, Mr. Nimmo said—“It is unquestionable that the great cause of the miserable condition and disturbances is the management of tho land. There is no means ot employment, nor no certainty that the peasant has of existence for another year, or even for another day, but by getting possession of a portion of land, on which he can plant potatoes ; and in consequence of the increase of population, tho competition for land has attained an ap¬ pearance of something like tho competition for provisions in a besioged town, or in a ship that is out at sea; and as there is no check to the demand which may ho made by those who possess the land, it has risen to prices far beyond what it is possible for tho poor tenants to extract from it in the way in which they cultivate it, and tho landlord has, in tho eyes of the peasant, the right to take from him, in a summary way, everything he has, if he is unable to execute thoso covenants which ho was obliged to enter into from the dread of starvation.” In like man¬ ner Mr. Rovans, tho Secretary of tho Irish Poor Law Commission, says of the peasantry—“Tho rents which they promise they aro almost invariably incapablo of paying ; and consequently they becomo indebted to thoso under whom they hold, almost as soon as they take possession. Tho peasantry aro mostly a year in arroar, and their excuse for not paying more, is destitution." Besides this evil of oxcossive ronts (which is enough of itself to paralyse the enorgies of any people) the great ina-; jority of Irish tenants have no leases, but hold their farms only from! year to year. This is a fact which has boen repeatedly stated in Parlia-I ment, and among others by Mr. Cardwell in introducing the Compensation! Bill of I860. “I am sure,” ho said, “that every honourable gentleman from Ireland will hear mo witness when I say that, as a rule, tho landlord holds under a settlement, and the tenant holds without a lease. That is tho statement upon which tho Devon Commissioners proceeded, and i! is to a great extent true at the prosont time. If that be the ease, how can you expect the land to he improvod?” In tho same debate Mr. Maguiro declared that not less than “ five-sixths of the land occupied by tonants was hold from year to year.” So too, Tho O’Donogbue said, in an address delivered a few weeks ago at a public meeting at Manchester, “In Ireland there were about 600,000 persons occupying land as tenants. 7 This number included only tho heads of families. But taking the moderate estimate of Lord Duffcrin, that oach family consists of five, they would have an agricultural population of close upon 3,000,000. Of the 000,000 heads of familes, about 580,000 woro tenants-at-will, without leases, and could be dispossessed of the land on the service of a six months’ notice to quit.” These two circumstances, the high rents and the absence of leases, are not only a bar to the improvement of the land, but keep tho tenantry in the most complete subjection to the landlord, who can “drive,” or eject them from their farms whenever it suits his convenience. In many counties of England, too, the farmers have no loasos; but there is this dif¬ ference, that the rents are not excessive, and moreover, there is a confidence and good feoling between landlord and tenant which unhappily do not exist in Ireland. Owing to tho past history of landod property in that country (almost tho whole of tho soil having been again and again con¬ fiscated, and granted to English settlors, after tho conquests of the island, and these acts of injustice having been followed up by the barbarous penal laws against Roman Catholics, which wore in force till nearly tho end of last century) the Irish landlords, as a class, have been generally regarded by the people with dislike and suspicion. They have boon looked upon as aliens in race and religion, and not a few have fallen victims to agrarian outragos. Indeed, in tho writings of the Young Ireland party somo years ago, the landlords woro spokon of as tho “ English garrison,” and proposals were made, in the event of a revolu¬ tion, to confiscate their estates and divide thorn among tho peasantry. Tho evil effects arising from this want of confidence between landlord and tenant have been greatly aggravated by a circumstance, which forms another important difference between the land systems in tho two countries, and has often been adverted to in Parliamentary debates— namely, that in Ireland a proprietor does far less than in this country for tho improvement of his estate. In England and Scotland, it is tho general custom for the landlord to erect tho farm-buildings, provide gates and fences, &c., and do what else is needed to put tho farm into a tenantable state before he lets it; whereas in Ireland, tho landlord for tho most part does nothing whatever, but all these necessary works, or “improvements,” have to beexecutod by tho tenant alone. Thus tho Devon Commissioners say in their report—“ It is well known that in England and Scotland, before a landlord offers a farm for lotting, ho finds it necessary to provide a suitable farm-house, with necossary farm- buildings, for tho proper management of the farm. IIo puts tho gates and fences into good order, and ho also takes upon himself a groat part of the burden of keeping the buildings in repair during the term ; and the rent is fixed with reference to this state of things. In Ireland tho case is wholly different. Tho smallness of the farms as they aro usually lot, together with other circumstances, to which it is not necessary to advort, render the introduction of tho English system extremely difficult, and in many cases impracticable. It is admitted on all hands, that according to the genonil practice in Ireland, the landlord builds neither 8 dwelling-house, nor farm-offices, nor puts fences, gates, &c., into good order, before he lets his land to a tenant. In most cases, whatever ig done in the way of building or fencing is done by the tenant; and in the ordinary language of the country, dwelling-houses, farm-buildings, and even the making of fences, are described by the general word ‘ improve¬ ments,’ which is thus employed to denote the necessary adjuncts to a farm, without which in England or Scotland no tenant would be found to rent it.” In 1858, Mr. Maguire stated that although there are doubtless exceptions to the above description, yet “ as a general rule it is appli¬ cable to the state of things in Ireland at this day.” It is mainly on this ground—because in Ireland the tenant has to do what in Scotland and England is done by the landlord—that the demand has so often been made in Parliament for a special Act to protect the Irish tenant, and give him compensation for the improvements he has made, if he is turned out of his farm. In addition to tho evils, already noticed, of high rents, want of leases, and tho custom, so grievous to the tenant, that all improvements have to be effected by him alone, there are several other points in which the Irish land system contrasts unfavourably with tho English. One of those may bo seen in tho extremely small number of proprietors who own the soil, and the very largo proportion of estates tied up under entails or “ settlements.” In England and Scotland, too, the prevalence of entails and tho smallnoss of the proprietary class are evils whose mag¬ nitude can hardly be overrated ; but in Ireland they exist to a still more formidable extent. Thus Mr. Serjeant Sheo stated in 1855, in bringing in a Tenants’ Compensation Bill in tho House of Commons, that “ owing in a great degree to the confiscations of former times in favour of English settlers, and of powerful English families, then and still pos¬ sessed of large landod properties in England, the number of proprietors is, relatively to its area, much smaller in Ireland than in any country of Europe.” In England, as ho stated, there are three proprietors to every square mile of territory, but in Iroland only one. Mr. Horsman, then Irish Secretary, said in the course of the same dobato—“What was at tho bottom of all tho evils that were felt to exist in Ireland ? It was that tho proportionate number of landlords in Ireland to the acreage of Ireland was far smaller than in any other country in the world.” In tho whole of Ireland, indeed, it is estimated that there are only about 8,00(H landowners. Again, with regard to the number of entailed or settled estates, Mr. Sheo said—“Almost all tho land of Ireland is in strict settlement, the landlords being only tenants for life, without the power of granting leases of sufficient duration to justify any considerable outlay by the lessees. In England a man who possesses or purchases an estate for £5,000 or £0,000 or oven £10,000 never thinks of conveying it to trustees, to his own use for life, and after his death to the use of his eldest and othor sons in succession—with remainders over. But in Ireland, the smallest freehold and evon leasehold interests are thus tied up, and, except recently and to a trifling extent in tho Incumbered Estates Court, land never comes in small parcels into the market.” The 9 most grievous effect of entails is to prevent the sale of land, and thus keep it from coming into the hands of the working classes ; but another great ovil is that a proprietor, who is only a tenant for life, cannot bo expected to lay out monoy in the improvement of his estate, since what¬ ever ho spends in this way will go to the heir, and he has also to make provision for his younger children. Moreover, entails interfere greatly with the granting of leases, and in a multitude of ways hamper and obstruct all dealings with tho soil. Partly from this cause, and partly from other intricacies in tho tenure and letting of land, has arisen the extreme complexity of titles to estates, which forms so serious an ovil in this country, and prevails to even a greater extent in Ireland. On this point I may quote what was said in 184!) by Lord Chancellor Cottonham, in introducing a measure connected with Irish leaseholds to tho House of Lords. After pointing out tho grievances which the Act proposed to remedy, ho said—“This, however, formed but a small part of tho difficulty dependent upon tho tenure of land in Ireland. We had not in England tho samo system of sub-infoudation in land which prevailed in almost every part of Ireland. In that country it was difficult to know where the first holder of an estate was to be found, as thore was always a vast, if not an infinite, number of sub-lettings under the original grantor. Such a stato of things was profitable to the lawyers, but to no one else, as it was necessary upon every change in tho holding to find out who really was tho first holder of the property.” In one of the debates in tho samo year, tho Solicitor-General, Sir John Romilly, declared that “ there was scarcely to bo found a good legal marketable title in Ireland.” “ A marketable title,” he said on another occasion, “was a very scarce thing in Ireland, though a good holding title was moro common.” Tho defective stato of titles has, since then, boou remedied in tho case of property sold in the Landed Estates Court, which grants a parliamentary or indefoasible title to all purchasers; but it still exists in regard to tho great majority of Irish ostates, and by tho trouble and expense as well as tho risk and uncertainty it gives riso to, is a fruitful source of mischief in all transactions connected with landed property. If we add to the foregoing evils that a very large part, perhaps one-third, of the soil of Ireland belongs to absontoo proprietors, who rarely, if over, reside on their estates, but leave them to bo managed by stewards or agents—a class generally harder to deal with than the landlords themselves—we have a picture of a stato of things more destructive to the interests of tho peasantry than exists in any other civilised country, and lying at the very root of tho long-continued sufferings and discontent of tho Irish people. Almost tho only difference between the English and Irish systems in which tho latter can bo said to have an advantage, is in regard to tho custom called the Ulster Tenant-Right; and as this is a matter of the utmost importance, and one which requires to bo understood before wo can enter into tho peculiar feelings prevailing in Ireland with respect to the occupancy of tho soil, it merits special attention. A tenant in Ulster, even without any lease, has by the long-ostablishod usage of tho a 3 10 province a right to retain his farm so long as he pays the custeriM rent, and also to sell his goodwill to the incoming-tenant, if at an ' T time he gives up his holding. Tenant-right therefore, as exirftij i in Ulster, may be said to consist mainly in three things—firstly, that tonant, or his heir, is entitled to hold his farm so long as the rent is paid- secondly, that the landlord, unless under peculiar circumstances. cannoj raise the ront: and thirdly, thattho tenant can sell the goodwill 0 f his f ana to his successor, if for any reason ho wishes or is forced to quit it. 1W Mr. J. Hancock, the agent to a largo property in the north of Ireland, jQ whose evidence on this subject has often been referred to, said bof ore the Devon Commission: — “ The tenant-right prevails through the emir® of this district, so fur as I know; and as it is a species of tenure scarce]* j known in any other part of the L nited Kingdom out of the province cf Ulster, I mav perhaps be permitted to dwell a little more at length cm this point, conceiving, as I do, that much of our prosperity has boon the result of this extraordinary matter, in connection with tenure, and that no measure would have a greater effect in improving the condition of the south and west of Ireland than the introduction of the system of tenant- right which exists in this part of the country. Tenant-right, then, I con¬ sider to bo the claim of the tonant and his heirs to continuo iu undisturbed possession of the farm so long as the rent is paid; and in case of an ejectment, or in the event of a change of occupancy, whethor at the wish of the landlord or tenant, it is the sum of money which the new occupier must pay to the old one for the peaceable enjoyment of his holding." In a discussion on tenant-right at tho Social Science Meeting in 186’ Mr. Hancock stated that, “as an average, the rent (in Ulster) was 27s! an acre, and it was never raised except under peculiar circumstances.” A similar description of the custom is given by the Devon Commm; sionors, who say in their report:—“ In tho account given by witnesses throughout Ireland, of tho mode in which occupiers hold their lands, the most striking peculiarity is the custom prevalent in the northern counties, callod tho tenant-right,” “ Wo found that, in various parts of Ulster, sums equal to ton, twelve, or fifteen years’ purchase of the rent are commonly given for tenant-right.” On an average, tho sum ob- tainod for the goodwill of a farm is about £ 12 an acre, and the aggregate value of tho tenant-right claim throughout tho whole of Ulster is esti> mated at no less than from ten to fifteen millions sterling. It is evident that this kind of tenure is very different from any existing in England, and has in some respects moro resemblance to copyhold than to an ordinary tenancy from yoar to year. Indeed, tho Devon Commissioners remark that “tho present tenant-right of Ulster is an embryo copyhold.” Tho farmers in that part of Ireland, though usually without any leases have in course of time acquired a kind of fixed interest in their farduJ and may bo regarded as virtually—to some extent—co-proprietors of the soil. They can sell tho goodwill of their holdings, just as tho landlord can sell his estate; and as estates in Ulster generally sell for a sum equal to from twenty to thirty years’ purchaso of tho rent, while tho goodwill of a farm fetches nine, ten, or more, tho value of tho tenants’ 11 interest in the land is, on an average, about one-third, or even one-half, that of the landlord's interest. It should bo remarked, however, that the tenant-right here described exists only by custom, and not by law. Legally a landlord has the power to sot it aside, and either raise his rent, or eject the tetiant without paying him for his goodwill; but prac¬ tically, he is restrained from doing so by the force of opinion and long- established usage, as well as by his dread of provoking outrage. In fact, whenever landlords in Ulster have disregarded tho tenant-right, and evicted an occupier without payment for his goodwill, outrages have almost always beon tho consequence. Tho custom of tenant-right is said to havo had its origin in the peculiar circumstances attending the settlement of Ulster under James I.—the lands in that province having been not merely forfeited, but colonised by a Scotch and English tenantry, who acquired special privileges from their landlords; and it may be regarded as to some extent a compensation for improvements effected in tho soil by tho tenants or their ancestors. As to its efTocts on the general state of the provinco, the Devon Commissioners bear the following testimony in their report:—“Anomalous as this custom is,” they say, “if considered with reference to all ordinary notions of pro¬ perty, it must be admitted that tho district in which it prevails has thriven and improved, in comparison with other parts of the country.” The custom doos not exist, or only to a very minor degroe, in the rest of Ireland, but its prevalence in the north has had a most powerful effect on tho general ideas and feelings entertained with regard to tho occupancy of the soil. As often remarked, there i3 a far stronger clinging to tho land—a much deeper feoling of having a claim to their holdings, and a more obstinate resistance to being dis¬ possessed of them—among tho Irish tenantry, than exists in England. The small farmers or cottiers throughout tho country think that they ought to have tho same rights as those of Ulster—that they are eutitlod to hold their farms so long as the rent is paid, to leave them to thoir heirs, and to roceive compensation if thoy are turned out of thorn; a belief which is greatly strengthened by tho fact, already noticed, that in Ireland all improvements, even to tho erection of a dwelling-house, are usually effected by tho tenant alone. It is these feelings, togother with the extreme poverty of the occupiers, that givo a character of peculiar bitterness to the “ evictions” which have been carried out in such vast numbers, and which, as Mr Bright lately remarked, aro scarcely known in any othor country. The secret societies, too, and combinations among tho peasantry, which have boon so numerous in Ireland, have almost invariably arisen out of tho land quostiou, and havo had for thoir main object, by inspiring terror, to force the landlords to a recognition of the tenant-right claim. Except where protected by the tenant-right, tho position of tho Irish cottier is unfavourable and defenceless in tho extreme. Having usually no lease, ho has no secure possession of his holding, nor has he an adequate motive for laying out his capital or labour upon it; for the andlord, as the law now stands, has the powor to confiscate any im- 12 provoments he makes, either by raising the rent or ejocting him with compensation, from his farm. Besides, the high rents which are sum!!! result if the competition for land be excessive, leave the occup? 10 : nothing but a bare subsistence, and keep them always in debt and las the mercy of their landlords. How fearful was the destitution of thl Irish peasantry before the time of the famine and emigration nm h! ! gathered from the fact, mentioned by the Devon Commissioners' twl wages in some places were only fourpeneo a day, and that, even at thi. i wretched pittanco, only half-employment could bo had. In their renortl they state “ that tho agricultural labourers of Ireland suffer tho great**! privations and hardships; that they depend upon precarious and casual employment for subsistence; that they are badly housed, badly f J badly clothed, and badly paid for their labour; that it would be im. i possible to doscribo adequately the sufferings and privations which thn cottiers and labourers and their families in most parte of the country endure; that in many districts their only food is tho potato, their only beverage water; that their cabins are seldom a protection against thi weather; that a bed or blanket is a rare luxury; and that nearly in all. their pig and their manure heap constitute their only property" tkaU largo proportion of the entire population comes within tho designation of agricultural labourers, and endure sufferings groater than the people of any other country have to sustain.’ Of the agriculture, they say ‘‘The general tenor of tho evidence given before tho Commissioners proves that with tho exception of some districts in the north, and some par¬ ticular localities and ostatos, or individual farms in other parts of the country the usual agricultural practice throughout Ireland is defective in the highest degree, whether as regards tho permanent preparation and improvement of tho land essential to successful tillage, the limited succession of the crops cultivated, or tho relative succession and tillage of those crops.” With regard to tho evils resulting from the relation between landlord and tenant, I may quote the following remarks by the great reformer, Daniel O’Connell, which were read to the House of Commons in 1844 by Lord John Russell.—“ The connection between landlord and tenant m Ireland,” said Mr. O’Connell, “arranged as it has been by a long course of vicious legislation, wants the mutual confidence which is essential to tho benefit of productive industry. The labouring population unable to obtain employment, live habitually on tho verge of extremo destitution. They must obtain land or they die. The issuos of life and death are in the hands of tho landlords. Tho massacres of the clearance system consign to a promaturo and most miserable grave hundreds ol thousands of victims. They are wholesale murders, followed by the assassination in detail, of the instruments of landlord rapacity, I heso crimes on both sidos cry to Heaven for vengeanco and redress— for a redress capable of giving to the landlord his just right to adequate rent, and to tho tenant just protection for tho produce of his labour and capital. 1 be relation between landlord and tenant cannot subsist as it is m Ireland.’ “It is impossible,” Lord Russell remarked, “to read those passages and not admit the general truth of the picture they 13 present.” Since the years of tho famine, a marked improvement has taken place in tho condition of the labouring classes in Ireland, as -well as in the agriculture, in consequence chiefly of the emigration, tho enlarge¬ ment of farms, and tho sales of land with secure title in tho Incum¬ bered Estates Court. Wages, as Mr. Cardwell stated in 18C0, have risen from sixpence to lifteenpence a-day, and employment is much more con¬ stant. Still, however, there exists an immense amount of poverty and dis¬ tress, aggravated of late years by tho pressure of bad seasons, and tho mass of tho people have seldom, if ever, been more disaffected than at presont. Tho agriculture, too, though improved, is still far behind that of England. Thus Sir John Gray lately stated at a meeting at Kilkenny, that, according to statistical enquiries, The average produce of every cultivated acre in Groat Britain was equal to 4'(>, while in Ireland it was only 2-8, or scarcely over one-half.” Tho true reason is that the land system—the foundation of Ireland’s evils—still remains essentially but little altered, and tho position of the occupiers of tho soil as insecure as ever; and so long as this continues, wo cannot hope for any adequate improvement either in the agriculture of the country or tho general circumstances of the poople. From the foregoing remarks it will bo seen, that the great source of Ireland’s miseries is tho precarious and uncertain tonuro by which the occupiers hold their land. This insecurity of tenuro is an evil far less felt in England, on account of tho very different nature of tho agricul¬ tural systoni; but in Ireland, where tho occupiers are mostly a peasantry Struggling for subsistence, where confidence is wanting between thorn and their landlords, and where, moreover, all improvements are usually effected by tho capital and labour of tho tenant alone, it leads to the most ruinous consequences. To remedy' the evils of Ireland, what is above all needed is a radical reform in tho land tenure of tho country. Tho favourite plan for effecting this among tho landlord party, whe- tkor in or out of Parliament, is to introduce throughout Ireland tho English agricultural system—in other words, the system of large farms, managed by wealthy capitalist farmers and cultivated by hired labourers. Accordingly’, strenuous efforts have been made by Irish landlords during tho last thirty years, and especially’ since the time of tho famine, to enlarge their farms and get rid of the cottier tenants. It sooms to me, howover, that, although this plan has had a partial success, there are tho strongest reasons against its general adoption. In tho first placo, tho English system is itself in many respects a very bad one, and founded on tho most flagrant injustice. Under it, as remarked by Mr. Cobden, the peasantry are *• entirely divorced from tho land” and kept in the position of hired labourers, which is in tho highest degree detrimental to their interests. Indeed, Professor Cairnes, in an article on Co-opera¬ tion which appeared some time ago in Macmillan s Magazine, declares the system of hired labour to bo “ absolutely incompatible with any sub¬ stantial and permanent improvement ” in the condition of tho working classos. In like manner, Mr. Mill says of tho plan for transforming cot¬ tier tenants into hired labourers, that it “ is rather a scheme for tho im- 14 provement of Irish agriculture than of the condition of the Irish peonla. Tho status of a day labourer has no charm for infusing forethought frugality, or self-restraint into a people.” Moreover, if wo look to the means adopted by Irish landlords in carrying out their purpose, we find them too often characterized by the greatest barbarity and attended by evils of the most fearful kind. In numberless instances the occupied have boen violently driven from their little holdings, their houses jmlled down, and thomselves and their families turned out to beg or starve bv the roadside. To give an idea of the enormous extent to which tl» practice of “eviction” has been carried, I may mention that, as stated in a pamphlet by Professor Hancock, no less than oi>,64G families or 281,032 persons—men, women, and children—were evicted in tho four¬ teen years from 1849 to 1802 inclusive. Another very strong objection to this plan for improving the condition of Ireland is one which may be gathered from some remarks lately made by Mr. Bright at Dublin— namely, that the English mode of agricultural economy is to a great extent unsuited for Ireland, and could not bo successfully introduced as a general system, owing to the comparative want of commerce and manufactures in that country. Even in England itself the system would most probably have broken down, or rather would never have attained its present development, had it not been for tho unusual stimu¬ lus to agriculture and facilities for acquiring capital afl'ordod by the great trading and manufacturing towns. “ It would be easy to show,” said Mr. Bright, “ that tho land laws in England are bad enough, and that but for the outlet for the population afforded by our extraordinary manufacturing industry, the condition of England would, in all proba¬ bility, have become quite as bad as the condition of Ireland has been." As regards her laud system, England stands in quito an exceptional position, being the only counii-y in the world where such a mode of holding and managing land exists as the general rule; while in all other parts of tho globe, a very largo portion of the soil is occupied by peasant farmers, who are either themselves tho owners of their farms, or hold them, as in Ireland, from tho landlords. To suppose that the large fanning system, because it hies to some extent succeeded in this country, is equally adapted for Ireland, where tho circumstances are so widely different, seems to mo a conclusion unwarranted either by reason or experience. I ho groat object to bo aimed at, therefore, in seeking to improve tho land tenure of Ireland is, not to dispossess the small occupiers, but to givo thorn greater security and a firmer hold of the land. This is tho object to which Irish reformers have for many years directed their most strenuous and persevering efforts. It has been sought to bo accom¬ plished chiefly in two ways—firstly, by tho enactmeut of a law to give compensation to a tenant for improvements he has made on his farm, if at any timo ho is turned out of it; and secondly, by passing such measuies as would either at onco convert the cottiers into peasant pro¬ prietors, or onable them by industry and saving to acquire possession of lauded property. The former of those proposals is the one which has 15 mainly engaged the attention of Parliament, and few questions of late years have given rise to so numerous and protracted discussions. A Bill to compensate Irish tenants for their improvements was first introduced by Mr. Sharman Crawford in 1835, and from that time to this scarcely a year has passed without some measure of a similar nature being brought before Parliament. In the present state of the law a tenant who is not protected by a lease or other spocial contract has no property in his own improvements, all of which can be at onco appropriated by the landlord, according to the old feudal maxim that “whatever is affixed to the soil belongs to the soil.” Exceptions to this rule of law havo been admitted in the case of fixtures put up for trading and manufacturing purposes, as well as for domestic use or ornament; but in regard to agricultural fixtures, whether consisting of farm buildings or improvements in the soil, it remains in full force to the present day. It is this which forniB the most obvious and crying injustice under which the Irish tenantry stiffor, and to it may bo ascribed a groat part of the heartburnings and bitter sense of wrong that rankles in the minds of the people. In Ire¬ land the grievance is particularly felt, since all the permanent improve¬ ments on a farm, such as building a dwelling-house, putting up gates and fences, was two-fold—namoly, to give temporary employment to tho able-bodied out of work, and to locate a body of proprietary tenants on tho land so reclaimed.” A similar Bill was promised in 1847, by Lord John Russell, then Primo Minister, as one of tho measures of relief during the frightful distress and famine consequent upon tho potato failure. In explaining the nature of the measure to the House of Commons, Lord ltussoll said, “Sir Robert Kane, in his work on ‘The Industrial Resources of Ire¬ land,’ says that the estimato that there arc 4,000,000 acres of waste land in Ireland which might be reclaimed and formed into cultivated lands, was perfectly correct, and that it was by no means an exaggerated estimate. We propose to devote i 1,000,000 to this purpose, and wo propose that the land should, if tho proprietor bo willing to part with it, be purchased; but that if he does not improve it by accepting a loan under this measure, or out of his own resources, and if ho refuses to sell, there shall be a compulsory power to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests to take and improve wasto lands which are below a certain 24 valuo. Wo propose that such lands shall only bo improved and reclaimed so far as general operations are concerned; that roads shall bo made; that" general drainage shall bo effected, and the necessary buildings erected ; but that no cultivation of tlio land shall take place under the direction of a public department; and that tho lands having been so reclaimed shall bo divided into lots; and that when these lots have been reclaimed, they may be either sold or lot to tenants for a certain number of v'ears, with a determination that the lands let shall bo sold at tho end of that time. I own that I expect that groat advantages will gradually ariso from this plan if it bo adopted. I expect that a groat numbor of persons who have hitherto been driven to despair, and many of them into crime by tho groat demand for land, will bo placed on those holdings, and bo able to earn a comfortable living by tho produce of their labour. I think likowise, with respect to those who purchase them that we shall bv moans of tho laud reclaimed and purchased, raise a class of small proprietors, who by their industry and independence will form a valuable link in the future social condition of Ireland.” In tho debate which followed, Mr. Smith O'Brien said—“ IIo was perfectly satisfied that this part of the Ministerial scheme would confer a groat benefit on tho pooplo of Ireland, not only by employing as many as the improvement of tho land would require, but also by the creation hereafter of a class of small proprietors, of whom they had very few in Ireland. This was a class conferring groat advantages on every country where they existed; and ho believed it might bo created in Ireland without imposing any difficulty whatever on the tenant.” The Bill, though promised by tho Government, met with so much opposition that it was afterwards abandoned, and the proposals of a similar kind introduced in other years had no bettor fate. It appears to mo, however, that the measure was one of tho most valuable ever proposed for Ireland, and that tho objections mado to it at the time were by no means well founded. There are two ways in which such a measure may bo regarded—either as a scheme for reclaiming waste lands by Government agency, or as a plan for creating in Ireland a numerous body of poasant proprietors. In the former modo of regarding it the proposal is doubtless open to many objections, but in tho lattor it seems to mo perfectly defensible, and ono of tho host of all moans of effecting the purpose in view. Now, tho groat majority of tho arguments used against tho measure applied to it in the former character only. It was said, for instance, that for tho State to meddle with tho reclamation of waste lands was absurd—that all such matters are far better left to private enterprise—and that if tho cultivation of these lands did not repay the farmers or proprietors, still less could it be expected to repay tho Government. It has also been argued that one of the chief obstacles to the reclamation of waste lands in Ireland is tho state of the law, which has rendered both landlords and tenants unwilling or unable to lay out money for the purpose, and has prevented tho lands from being sold; and that the proper course for Government is to remove these legal obstacles, instead of themselves engaging in an undertaking so unsuited 25 to their capacities. But these objections are evidently directed against the measure when regarded merely as a scheme for taking in and im¬ proving waste lands. Undoubtedly, if no other objoct than this wore intended, it seems better that it should be entrusted to private enter¬ prise, and that Government should content themselves with removing all legal impediments to the improvement or sale of the lands. Indoed, as Btatod by Professor Hancock, nearly 2,000,000 acres of waste land have thus been reclaimed in Ireland from 1841 to 1860 by the offorts of indi¬ viduals alone. The real feature in the measure, however, which made it so valuable and so much desired by the Irish people, was that it pro¬ posed to create a large class of peasant proprietors, and this object is ontirely sacrificed when the reclamation of the lands is left to bo effocted in the usual manner. A modification of tho same plan, by which all outlay or superintendence on the part of Government would bo avoided, has been strongly recommended by Mr. Mill in his “ Political Economy.” Ho proposes to enact that any person in Ireland who reclaims a piece of ground should become its possessor at a quit-rent calculated on its more value as waste ; and that tho landlords should bo obliged to give up any portion of waste land (not of an ornamental character) which might be wanted with a view to reclamation. I believe that either of these plans would, if adopted, bo of the greatest benefit to the people, and that tho vast extent of uncultivated land still existing in Ireland affords peculiar facilities for raising a class of small proprietors without real loss or injury to any one. Another mode of bringing the land into tho hands of the peasantry, which is also strongly recommended by Mr. Mill, and has been alluded to in parliamentary debates, is that societies should bo formed for the purpose of buying up as much as possiblo of the land offered for sale throughout Ireland, and re-selling it in small lots; the operation being repeated as often as the funds woro set free. This is an undertaking which, it is believed, might be carried out by private individuals, not only with great advantage to tho people, but with profit to themselves. Land companies of the kind described had a powerful effect in France after the Revolution, in favouring the subdivision of large estates, and similar associations have more than onco boen projected in Ireland. In tho course of last session, too, notice was given in tho House of Com¬ mons, of a motion by which it was proposed that a sum of public money should be applied to tho purpose. A fourth proposal on tho subject is one which was lately brought forward by Mr. Bright at Dublin ; namely, that commissioners should be appointed by government, with power to treat with the groat absentee proprietors who own so much of the soil of Ireland, for the purchase of their estates, and to offer them, if need be, a sum even considerably above tho market price of the land ; and that if the proprietors could bo prevailed upon to sell their property (though Mr. Bright does not propose that any compulsion should bo used by tho State), facilities should then be given to tho tenantry for acquiring in time the actual ownership of their farms. The obstacles to the carrying out of such a scheme are evidently those arising from entails and from 26 the unwillingness 0 f landlords to dispose of their estates; but if the ' obstacles could be overcome, it cannot be doubted that the measure 1 would be attended with the most beneficial results. There is one part of Ireland, moreover, in regard to which it appears 1 to me that special legislation is needed, in order to socure the tenants in 1 the possession of property to which they have acquired a right bv I long-established usage. I refer to tho province of Ulster, where the ' custom of tenant-right exists. The Ulster tenantry, as we have already * seen, can sell the goodwill of their farms for a very considerable sum I amounting on an average to one-third or oven one-half of what tho ^ landlord could get for tho land ; and this is a right which is not only i upheld by public opinion, but is recognised and allowed by the landlords with very few exceptions, and has prevailed in the district from time I immemorial. A very largo number of the present occupiors have either 1 themselves bought the goodwill of their holdings, or have inherited ’ them from ancestors who have done so. “ In fact,” says Mr. J. Hancock. ] in his evidence before the Devon Commissioners, “ tenant-right is one of ■ tho sacred rights of tho country, which cannot be touched with im¬ punity, and if systematic attempts were made amongst the proprietors of Ulster to invade tenant right, I do not believe there is force at the i disposal of the Horse Guards sufficient to keep the peace of the province ” Tho custom of tenant-right is ofton said to bo, in reality, nothing more than a fair and adequate compensation for improvements effected by the farmers or their ancestors, and this opinion has given rise to the greatest difficulties in Parliament in settling tho provisions of a Tenants’ Com- pensation Bill. Those who took this view wero desirous that any such measure should bo wide enough in its character to secure to the Ulster j tenantry their existing privileges, and hence have strenuously con- ; tended for retrospective compensation continued over a long period of time. Tho farmers thomsolves. too, in the north of Ireland, have generally boon afraid of legislation on the subject, being apprehensive that tho landlords, who at prosont are contont to let things remain as they are, might in future seek to bind them down to the bare compen- sation provided by statute. It seems to me, however, that the tenant- right custom, though doubtless in some degree a compensation for im¬ provements, is much more than this, and that the two claims should bo defended on different grounds, and should bo matters for distinct and separate legislation. Tho essential point in which tenant-right differs from a mere right to compensation for improvements, scorns to be this— that tho former is a perpetual claim, lasting from generation to genera- ; tion, whereas tho latter should, in fairnoss, be continued only for so long 1 a period as would replace the farmer’s outlay. Tho real ground, I believe, ’ on which the privileges enjoyed by tho Ulster tenants should be justified and defondod, is that on which the English copyholders acquired tho ownership of their lands—tho ground, namely, of prescriptive right and mage. On this ground the tenants have, in my opinion, tho clearest and most indisputable right to tho property which they now possess in their farms. But although the property belongs iu justice to tho tenants, 27 tho greatest evils have arisen from the fact that it is secured to them by custom only and not by law. The consequence is that the landlords havo always the power to disregard tho claim, and in not a few instances they have dono so, and havo ejected the occupiers without payment for their goodwill. These acts of injustice are followed by outrages, and give rise to a general feeling of insecurity. “ The landlords," says Mr. J. Hancock, “ are compelled to recognize tenant-right; as in several in¬ stances in this neighbourhood whero they have refused to allow tenant- right, the incoming tenant’s house has been burned, his cattle houghed, or his crops trodden down by night. The disallowance of tho tenant- right, as far as I know, is always attended with outrage.” Disputes have also arisen from time to time (and especially in 1850) between tho two classes of landlords and tenants, in regard to tho adjustment of tho claim, which havo created the greatest embitterment, and havo led to rioting, incendiarism, and prolonged disturbances throughout the pro¬ vince. Moreover, it must evidently have a bad effect on tho general disposition of a people, to bo obliged to defond thoir rights by violence, instead of relying on tho sure protection of tho law. If the tenant’s claim be a just ono, he should have legal security for it, and it should not ho allowed to depend merely on the landloid’s will. Accordingly, there has for many years been a strong desire among tho fanners of Ulster that tho tenant-right should bo legalized, and numerous meetings havo been held and petitions presented to Parliament for the purpose. Proposals to this effect have also been made in the House of Commons, not only by Mr. Sharman Crawford and others, undor the fonn of a Tenant’s Compensation Bill, but as a matter for separate legislation. Thus Mr. Greer, in 1858, moved for a Select Committeo, “to inquire into the naturo, origin, and extent of the Tenant-Right Custom in Ire¬ land, the alleged recent violations of it in various northern counties, and to considor and report how far it may bo practicable to protect, for the benefit of the occupying tenants, the property which has been created under that custom.” The motion was negatived on the amendment of Lord Naas, who contended that tenant-right is so variable in its naturo —the sums obtained for goodwill ranging from £5 to £18 an acre, according to the locality, tho number of competitors, the state of the farm, and other circumstances - and depends so much on the character of the landlord, that it would bo impossible to legalize it. These objec¬ tions 6eem to mo well-founded in so far as they are directed against the proposal, which lias sometimes been made, to legalize tenant-right by enacting simply that the farmer should be allowed to sell his goodwill, without enacting at tho same time that tho landlord should not bo per¬ mitted to raiso his rent. I cannot see how it would bo possible to legalize tenant-right without limiting the rent which may bo imposed by tho landlord ; for, so long as tho landlord is left free to raiso tho rent at his own discretion, tho tenant can have no legal security that his goodwill will bo worth anything to a purchaser. The essence of tho tenant-right custom is not tho sale of the goodwill, but the limitation of tho rent; for the former is only a consequence of the latter. Thus Mr. Mill, in his 28 “Political Economy,” describes the custom in the following manner. In speaking of the uncertainties of the cottier system, he says, “ The only safeguard against these uncertainties would be the growth of a custom, insuring a permanence of tenure in the samo occupant, without liability to any other increase of rent than might happen to bo sanctioned by the general sentiments of the community. The Ulster tenant-right is such a custom.” However, although the objections raised by Lord Naas seem a sufficient answer to any proposal to legalize tenant-right without limiting the rent, they do not apply to another proposal on the subject; namely, that the rent should be fixed at the sums now paid by the tenantry, and thus tho latter converted into proprietors holding their farms at a quit-rent—provision being also made for compensating the landlords for the slow and moderate increase of rent which even in Ulster might bo expected to tako place. This is a proposal which has often been made, especially by the tenants themselves, who two urged it undor the name of “fixity of tenure,” and it seems to mo tho only mode of settling tho question which is at onco just and satisfactory. Tenant-right cannot lx* legalized without limiting the rent, and tho law cannot limit tho rent without fixing it altogether, and thu3 converting the farmor into a proprietor. One or other of two things must there¬ fore, as I concoive, take place, if the conflicting claims of landlord and tenant in Ulster are to bo brought, without injustice, undor the dominion of the law: eithor the tenant must becomo proprietor and pay tho land¬ lord for his interest in tho land in tho way now described; or the land¬ lord must buy out the tenant’s interest by paying him for his goodwill, and thus becomo tho full and sole proprietor of his estate. At present both parties have a property in the soil, and to make this property legal, one of them must buy off the othor’s claim. Now, on every ground it is far better for the community at largo that tho tenant should buy out the landlord's interest, than the landlord that of the tenant; and hence I cannot but think that the proposal in question would not only, if adopted, be of the utmost benefit to the people of Ulster, but is the only true solution of tho difficulties and perplexities which have so long beset tho tenant-right claim. But by far tho most important and radical remedy for the land evils of Ireland, as shown at Dublin by Mr. Bright, is the abolition of the laws of primogeniture and entail. Those laws are tho real causes which have prevented tho Irish as well as tho English peasantry from acquiring any property in land, and tho true means for bringing the soil into the hands of tho people is to remove them. All other remedies, without this, will bo but limited in their operation and fleeting in their effocts. In fact, the laws of primogeniture and entail amount to little loss, in their practical operation, than a complete legal prohibition to tho working classes to becomo owners of landed property. In all other countries of Europe tho peasantry can now acquire property in land, and a large part of tho soil has come into their possession ; but the English and Irish peasantry are still without this right, or have it in name only but not in reality. By one of tho old penal statutes, no Roman Catholic in Ireland 29 was allowed to hold any land for a longer term than thirty-one yoars, or abovo a certain value; but the laws of primogeniture and entail may bo regarded as virtually equivalent to a peual statute of this kind, directed against the whole body of the working classes. They are all the more dangerous, too, on this account—that the peasantry do not clearly see their action, nor understand what it is that so entirely shuts them out from the land. An open enactment, forbidding tho people to own any landed property, would have been long ago repealed in this country, as it ihas been in Prussia and elsowhero; but these insidious laws, which are nothing olse than such an enactment in disguise, continue still to bo tolerated among us. It is to be hoped that when once the people have obtained an extended suffrage and a Parliament more nearly represent¬ ing thoir interests, the next groat effort will bo to abolish for ever these most unjust and pernicious laws—laws which Adam Smith terms “ the barbarous institutions of primogeniture and entail,” and which havo done such an incalculable amount of harm to the working classes in this country, and still more in Ireland. THE REFORMERS’ LIBRARY, 256 IIOLBORN TWO DOORS FROM THE FIRE BRIGADE STATION, OPPOSITE DAT & MARTIN'a Instituted 1852, for the Publication of Freethought in Politics and Religion, New and Second-hand. Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary. Reprinted from the Six vol edition. Containing nearly 1360 pages, double columns, a Memoir a Medallion Portrait, and a full-length likeness of the Author. Two vols cloth, 8s., post-free. Paine’s Theological Works; including the “ Age of Reason,” and all his Miscellaneous Pieces and Poetical Works. Also Paine’s last Will. No other edition contains so much as this. To prevent disajqwintment ask for Truelove's edition. Cloth, 3s., post-free. May be had in two parts, Is. each. The Diegosis; being a discovery of tlxo Origin, Evidences, and oarly History of Christianity, never yet boforo or elsewhere so fully and faith¬ fully sot forth. By the Rev. Robert Taylor, B.A., & M.R.C.S. Published originally at 21s. Post-freo 3s. 6d. Syntagma of the Evidences of Christianity. By the Rev. R. Taylor. Is., post-froo. Tho Astronomico-Theological Discourses of the Rev. Robert Taylor B.A. 14 Nos. at 2d. each. Every No. contains a complete Discourse. * Considerations on Representative Government. By John Stuart Mill. Price 2s., post-freo. On Liberty. By John Stuart Mill. Price Is. 4d., post-freo. Principles of Political Economy. By John Stuart Mill. Price 5s. post-free. Utilitarianism. By John Stuart Mill. 5s., post-free. Tho Apocryphal New Testament. Complete, 3s. 6d., post-froo. Hone’s Ancient Mysteries; describing especially the English Miraclo Plays. 3s. 6d., post-free. Carlile’s Manual of Freemasonry. 3s., post-freo. Hume’s Inquiry concerning Human Understanding; which includes tho “ Essay on Miracles,” and othor Sceptical Essays. Price 6d., by post 7d. Humo’s Essay on Miracles. With all tho Notes. 4d. Rousseau’s Confessions. Complete edition. Plates, 6s., post-free. Bishop Colonso on tho Pontatouch and the Book of Joshua. 6s., post- freo. Renan’s Lifo of Jesus. Is. 6d., post-free. Letters to tho Human Race, on the coming Universal Revolution. Ry Robert Owen. Is., post-freo. The Revolution in Mind and Practice of tho Human Race. By Robert Owen. Is., post-free. Historic Pages from tho Fronch Revolution of February, 1848. By M. Louis Blanc. Is., post-freo. Revelations of tho Confessional; or, Master-key to Popery. By the Rev. A. Gavin (formerly a Roman Catholic Priest). Reduced to 6d., post-free. An Antidote against Arminianism ; A Confutation of Predestination : Universal Redemption : the Power of Man's Free Will: true Saints falling away finally and totally. By C. Ness. Half-price, 8d. Bacon’s Guido to American Politics; a comploto view of the funda¬ mental principles of tho National and State Governments. Half-price, 6d. “ One of the most valuable works that have appeared since the election of President Lincoln.”— Daily News. Just published, prico 6d., by post 7d., 136 pages, L OGIC AND UTILITY; the Tests of Truth and Falsehood and of Right and Wrong : being an Outline of Logic the Science of Reason¬ ing, and of tho Utilitarian or Happiness Theory of Morals. By G. R. Prico 2d., by post 3d., 50 pages, T HE LAND QUESTION; containing remarks on the right of pro¬ perty in Land, on Land tenures, large and small farms, peasant proprietors, cottiers, the laws of Primogeniture and Entail, tho Land Trausfor Act, and othor matters relating to Landed Property. By G. R. “Mr. Truclove has published a small twopenny pamphlet on the ‘Land Question’— a clear and intelligible exposition of the different systems of land tenure. If any one wishes to understand the political dispute between Mr. Cobden and the Times, he can’t do better than purchase this excellent little treatise. Here, in the compass of fifty pages, the right of property in land, the laws ot primogeniture and entail, the advantages and disadvantages of large and small farms, of peasant proprietaries, of the cottier and metayer systems, are explained by a writer who understands his sub¬ ject. and who writes of it in a manner that will enable his readers to understand it as well as himself. Need I express an opinion that the ‘land question,' setting aside the interest which the Cobden-Delane controversy has given to it, is of all questions the most permanently important in the economy of national life ?”—Newcastle Chronicle. P OPULATION FALLACIES; a Defence of the Malthusian or True Theory of Society, in reply to the Weekly Dispatch , Times , and othors. By a Graduate of Medicine, author of tho “ Elements of Social Science.” 36 pages. Price 2d., by post 3d. T he political economist and journal of social SCIENCE. By tho author of tho “ Elements of Social Science.” Is., post free. P OVERTY; ITS CAUSE AND CURE: pointing out a means by which the Working Classes may raise themselves from their present state of low wages and ceaseless toil to one of Comfort , Dignity , and Independence, and which is also capable of entirely removing in course of time the other principal social evils. By M. G. H. 16 pages, prico One Penny, by post for two Btamps. Just published, the Eighth Thousand of the •PLEMENTS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE; or, Physical, Sexual, and Vj Natural Religion. With the Solution of the Social Problem Containing an Exposition of the true Cause and only Cure of the three primary social evils— Poverty, Prostitution, and Celibacy. By a Graduate of Medicine. Price 2s. 6d.; or in cloth 3s. post-free. Upwards of 600 pages. , r Opinions of the Press. “In some respects all books of this class are evils; but it would be weakness and criminal prudery—a prudery as criminal as vice iUell—not to say that such a book as the one in question is not only a far Wser evil than the one that it combats, but in one sense a book which it is mercy to issue and courage to publish ”— Ueasoner. “We have never risen from the perusal of any work with a gre»ter satisfaction than this. Our greatest ho- e is that it may get into families where the principles will he inculcated by a parent, who will use his authority in the advice t » both song and daughters, which should always accompany the reading of works like this. And we are certain that in every case where it is read with care, there will he another soldier gained to.that brave band who are ever encircling the ramparts of bigotry amt ignorance.”— Investigator. “This hook is the BIBLE OF THE BODY. It is the founder of a great moral reform. It is the pioneer of health, peace, and virtue. It should he a household Lae in every home. Rend it, study it, husbands and wives. Had you, had your parents read a book like this, a diseased, dwarfed, deteriorated race would not now he wasting away in our country. By reading this wonderful work every young man may preserve his health and bis virtue. Some will say the disclosures are exciting or indelicate— not so; they are true, and the noblest guide to virtue and to honour. That book must be read, that subject must be umlers ood, before the population can be raised from its present degraded, diseased, unnatural, and immoral state We really know not how to speak sufficiently highly of this extraordinary work ; we can only say, conscientiously and emphatically, it is a blessing to the human race.”— People's Paper. “Though quite out of the province of our journal, we cannot refrain from stating that this work is unquestionably the most remarkable one, in many respects, we have ever met with. The anonymous author is a physician, who has brought his special know¬ ledge to bear on some of the most intricate problems of social life. He lays hare to the public, and probes with a most unsparing hand, the sores ot society, caused by anomalies in the relation of the sexes. Though we differ ioto coelo from the author in his views of religion and morality, and hold S"ine of Ins remedies to tend rather to a dissolution than a reconstruction of society, yet we a e hound to admit the benevo¬ lence arid philanthropy of his motives. The scope of the work is nothing less than the whole field of political economy.”— The British Journal of Homeopathy, January, 1860. (Published Quarterly, price 5s.) “It is because, after an impartial consideration of this book, we feelvsatisfied that the author has no meretricious professional object to subserve, that we are induced to use its publication as a text for the discussion *»f a vital and pressing subject: and because it bears evidences of research, thorough, although misapplied, pmfesoional education, some pretentions to philosophy, and a certain earnestness of misguided conviction of the truth of peculiar prevalent economical theories, which seem to have led him off his feet, and to have induced him to venture upon any extravagance in their support. It is in vain to attempt to bide these subjects out of sight. This one book of 60o closely printed pages is in its third large edition. It is of no use to ignore the topic as either delicate or disgusting It is of universal interest. It concerns intimately every human being The views of the author of this volume are largely adopted by economists and physicians; the ideas of which they treat occupy a prominent place in the thoughts, more or les9 distinctly developed, of every adult mind. Erroneous opinions on the questions here involved arc daily misleading thousands: dangerous doctrines are only too prevalent both in tiie systems of economists and the practice of medical advisers.” —From an adverse review, occupying six columns in The Weekly DiSpatcR, January and February , 1860. Orders for the preceding, enclosing the requisite number of postage stamps, will be promptly attended to by E Truelovb, Bookseller and Publisher, 256, Holborn, nearly opposite Day and Martin’s. . .isi.frtiittf;*'