296 
SOCIALISM IM ENGLAND. 
George, who, starting from the premiss that landlords are 
robbers, does not see why they should be compensated for 
being deprived of their powers to rob. The only sound 
principle, however, is that acknowledged by J. S. Mill, who, 
when advocating a radical change in the Irish Land Laws, 
said : “ Existing pecuniary interests which have the sanction of 
law ought to be respected. An equivalent ought to be given 
for the bare pecuniary value of all mischievous rights which 
landlords or any others are required to part with.” Mr. 
Wallace, indeed, labours hard to prove that, with the compen 
sation he proposes, his scheme would do no injury to existing 
landlords. But no amount of ingenuity can make out that the 
ownership of an annuity of ^100 for one, two, or three lives is 
of the same pecuniary value as the ownership in fee of land 
producing a net annual income of £\oo. The practical 
difference would be that the owner of the annuity, if he were a 
prudent man, would capitalize a portion of it, and in this way 
his net available income would be diminished. 
Mr. Wallace does not propose that any limit should be 
placed to the amount of land which an individual may hold, 
thinking that the prohibition of sub-letting would render all 
other legislative restriction unnecessary. One of his most 
distinguished disciples. Professor F. W. Newman, however, 
would render it illegal for any one person to hold more than 
five hundred acres. This modern Gracchus is somewhat less 
tender than Mr. Wallace with regard to vested interests. He 
compares Mr. Wallace’s proposal to the Sibyl’s offer to King 
Tarquin. If not listened to, less favourable terms will be 
offered next time. 
The most original and characteristic part of Mr. Wallace’s 
scheme is that by which he proposes to remedy the overpopu 
lation of towns, and draw back the people to the country, by 
offering to every one a free choice of cheap land. “ Every 
Englishman, ’ he says, “should be allowed once in his life to 
select a plot of land for his personal occupation. His right of 
choice will, of course, be limited to agricultural or waste land ; 
it will also be limited to land bordered by public roads 
affording access to it ; it will further be limited to a quantity of