Page images
PDF
EPUB

Journal

Not very complimentary to the sex was the answer of an old bachelor to a young mother, who exclaimed: 'Shouldn't you like to have a family of rosy boys about your knees?'-'No, ma'am,' said he; I'd rather have a lot of yellow boys in my pocket.'

'You say your brother is younger than you, yet he looks much older.'-Yes, he has seen a great deal of trouble; but I never married,' was the ready reply. More sarcastic is the next. 'Are you fond of tongue, sir?'-'I was always fond of tongue, madam, and like it still.'

'John, what is the best thing to feed a parrot on?' asked an elderly lady of her bachelor brother, who hated parrots. 'Arsenic!' gruffly answered John.

A

being rather mystifying than otherwise. French savant, M. Duclaux, has, however, recently conducted certain experiments on the ordinary germs of the air that produce putrefaction, with some definite and therefore gratifying results. The experiments, though no doubt difficult to carry out, were very simple in their nature, and are quite within the comprehension of the ordinary reader.

M. Duclaux commenced by cultivating the microbes which are chiefly responsible for the 'turning' of milk, because a microbe that can break down a substance such as milk would, generally speaking, be very similar to the disease germ that breaks down the tissues of the body. At the germ-forming period, he introduced some Rather severe are the three following com- into each of a number of carefully sterilised flasks. ments. 'I've turned many a woman's head,' The flasks he then stopped with wool, so that boasted a French dandy. "Yes,' replied his the air, but no fresh germs, could enter. The hearer away from you.'-'That's the sort of various flasks were then treated in different ways. umbrella that people appropriate,' said a gentle- Some were exposed to sunlight; others were kept man to a companion one morning, showing him in ordinary light-that is, not in the sun; others, a very handsome one. 'Yes,' rejoined his com- again, were kept in an ordinary light, but in a panion quickly; 'I thought so when I saw you temperature equal to sun-heat. The results holding it.'-The guests having dined, the host proved the great value of sunlight. The milk hands round a box of cigars. 'I don't smoke in the flasks which were exposed to heat only, myself,' he says; but you will find them good-turned putrid almost immediately that is to my man steals more of them than any other brand I ever had.'

THE VALUE OF SUNSHINE.

'WHAT a horrible glare! The sun will take all the colour out of the carpet;' and such-like remarks, issue daily from the lips of thrifty housewives in summer. The value of sunlight is but little understood, and yet its advantages are apparent everywhere. Note the pale cheeks of the town-bred child which passes more than half its existence in the house, and which, when out of doors, the sun usually reaches through a veil-like cloud of smoke. Note, again, a geranium grown in a dimly-lighted cellar. Its leaves will be pale, if not almost white, for lack of sunlight, and it will look only what it is a weakly, sickly plant. Transplant child and geranium into the country-roses bloom at the end of a few weeks on the cheeks of one, flowers and green leaves appear on the other. But sunlight does more than give rosy cheeks and health; it absolutely prevents disease in many cases; for, if given time enough, it kills the germs of the air which produce putrefaction. It seems to be a wonderful provision of nature that the putrefaction which is often caused by the heat of the sun, can be prevented, or even stopped after it has commenced, by exposure of the putrefying substance to direct sunlight. This fact is evidenced in sun-dried meat or fish. If the meat or fish, instead of being hung in the sun, were placed, subject to a similar heat, in the shade, it would quickly become tainted. It is clear, therefore, that the light has as important an influence in the operation as the heat. The latter dries up the juices; the former prevents putrefaction; for in sunlight, the germs which bring about that state cannot continue to live.

say, the germs preserved their vitality. (It had been ascertained that for three years the germs could be exposed to a tropical heat, provided there was no direct sunlight, without harm to them.) The results were very different with regard to the flasks exposed to the sunlight: in these, it was found that, after a month, the power of putrefaction of the germs decidedly diminished, and that their vitality was lowered. After two months' exposure, the noxious germs were destroyed in two out of five flasks. There the experiments stopped. It is probable, if not certain, that different varieties of germs require different periods of exposure to sunlight to be killed.

These scientific experiments are valuable as showing how mankind is benefited by sunlight. That mankind is so benefited has been acknowledged for ages by thoughtful persons, though the extent of those benefits are not so generally known or appreciated as they ought to be. Except in the hottest summer weather, sunlight should be admitted freely into houses; and never, even on the plea that otherwise the sun will put out the fire, should blinds be pulled wholly or partially down in winter. It should at the same time be borne in mind that in hygiene, fresh air ranks equal to sunlight in importance. Live on the sunny side of the street, for there the doctor never comes,' is a proverb which should never be forgotten, and is the outcome, not of scientific experiments, but of the experience of generations.

RAILWAY ACCIDENTS AND CASUALTIES.

DURING the twelve months ending December 31, 1884, the total number of personal accidents on all the railways and on railway premises in

the United Kingdom amounted to one thousand Many experiments have been attempted to one hundred and eighty-six persons killed and determine the effect of sunlight on germs; but eight thousand and twenty-three injured. This the results have been anything but satisfactory, of course includes passengers, railway servants,

trespassers, suicides, and all other classes, and all cranes or capstans, three were killed and one kinds of accidents; but the number of persons hundred and sixty-nine injured; and one was killed and injured from accidents to trains, killed and forty-nine were injured by being rolling-stock, or permanent way, &c., is very trampled on or kicked by horses. The occupamuch smaller, there being thirty-one passengers tion of a platelayer on a railway would seem killed and eight hundred and sixty-four injured; to be a very dangerous one, for during the and of servants of Companies or contractors, twelve months, one hundred and twenty-five twenty-three were killed and one hundred and servants of this class were killed and one hunfifteen injured. dred and fifty-four injured.

By accidents from other causes, but still connected with the movement of vehicles used exclusively upon railways, one hundred and four passengers were killed and six hundred and twenty-seven injured; while from the same class of accidents, five hundred and twenty-three servants of Companies or contractors were killed and two thousand two hundred and four injured. These 'accidents from other causes' include, in the case of passengers, falling between trains and platforms (twenty-nine killed and sixty-one injured); falling on to the platform, ballast, &c., when getting in and out of trains (six killed and four hundred and five injured); accidents whilst crossing the line at stations (forty-one killed and twenty-two injured); from falling out of carriages during the travelling of trains (seven killed and thirty injured, &c.). This class of accidents includes, in the case of servants, accidents during shunting and other operations while on duty, and whilst crossing or standing on the line on duty; accidents from coming in contact with bridges, &c., during the travelling of trains, &c.

During the year, sixty-five persons were killed and twenty-seven injured while passing over railways at level crossings. Of trespassers, two hundred and ninety-five were killed and one hundred and eighty-seven injured; while fiftythree persons committed suicide. Forty other persons were killed and seventy-six injured, not coming in any of the classifications given above.

In the class of accidents occurring on railway premises, but not connected with the movement of vehicles used exclusively on railways, fiftytwo persons were killed and three thousand nine hundred and twenty-three injured. Out of these, six of the killed and two hundred and forty-one of the injured were passengers; seven killed and ninety-four injured were persons on business at stations; and the remainder, thirty-nine killed and three thousand five hundred and eightyeight injured, were servants. In connection with this class of accidents, several of a very peculiar nature may be noticed. They include three passengers killed and one hundred and fourteen injured while ascending or descending steps at stations, thirty-nine injured by being struck by barrows and falling over packages, &c., on station platforms, and two killed and thirty injured from falling off platforms. In the case of servants, six were killed and nine hundred and eighty-two injured while engaged in loading and unloading or sheeting wagons; three were killed and three hundred and twenty-two injured by the falling of wagon-doors, bales of goods, lamps, &c.; six were killed and two hundred and thirtythree injured from falling off platforms, ladders, &c.; from stumbling whilst walking on the line or platforms, one was killed and two hundred and thirty-four were injured; while working at

After reading all these particulars of killed and injured, it might be inferred that railway travelling is a dangerous mode of transit; but when the number of passengers carried is taken into consideration, it will be found that such is by no means the case. During the twelve months ending December 31, 1884, over six hundred and ninety-five million passengers were conveyed on all the railways in the United Kingdom, and, as stated before, the number of passengers killed during the same period from accidents to trains, rolling-stock, &c., was thirty-one, and the number injured, eight hundred and sixty-four, or an average, very nearly, of one killed out of every twenty-two millions carried, and one injured out of every eight hundred thousand carried.

During the year, thirty-one horses, thirty-nine oxen and cows, one hundred and thirty-two sheep, ten pigs, and ten donkeys were run over and killed. We wonder how many dogs!

'WAIT FOR ME'
SEAWARD runs the little stream,
Where the wagoner cools his team,
Where, between the banks of moss,
Stand the stepping-stones to cross.
O'er them comes a little maid,
Laughing, not a bit afraid;
Mother, there upon the shore,
Crossed them safely just before.

This the little lassie's plea-
Wait for me, wait for me!

Ah, so swift the waters run,
One false step, 'twere all undone;
Little heart begins to beat,
Fearing for the little feet.
Soon her fear will all be lost,
When the stepping-stones are crossed;
Three more yet on which to stand-
Two more-one more-then on land!
'Tis the little lassie's plea-
Wait for me, wait for me!

Ah, for you, my laughing lass,
When the years have come to pass,
May one still be near to guide
While you cross Life's river wide.
When no helping hand is near,
None, if you should call, to hear,
Think, however far away,
Mother still knows all you say;
F'en in heaven heeds your plea-
Wait for me, wait for me!

G. CLIFTON BINGHAM.

Printed and Published by W. & R. CHAMBERS, 47 Paternoster Row, LONDON, and 339 High Street, EDINBURGH

All Rights Reserved.

e

CHAMBERS'S JOURNAL

OF

POPULAR

LITERATURE, SCIENCE, AND ART

Fifth Series

ESTABLISHED BY WILLIAM AND ROBERT CHAMBERS, 1832
CONDUCTED BY R. CHAMBERS (SECUNDUS)

No. 96.-VOL. II.

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 31, 1885.

THE STORY OF LAND.

As what is comprehensively called 'the Land Question' is occupying so much thought and attention everywhere in the country just now, and seems likely to attain even greater prominence, we have thought it would be of interest to present a brief historical sketch of the system of land-tenure in Britain and of the growth and changes in the public burdens on land. It would serve no good purpose to consider the conditions of society in ancient Britain prior to and during the Roman rule, for whatever these conditions were, they were dispelled by the Saxon invasion. As it is to the coming of the Saxons that we look for the beginning of the 'making of England,' so it is from the Anglo-Saxon period that we must trace the rights in and the burdens on land.*

Of the Teutonic race, which from the fifth to the seventh century overran Britain, we have Mr Green's authority for saying that the basis of their society was the free landholder.' They were bound together by blood-bond, which widened, with settlement, into a tie of land. 'Land with the German race seems everywhere,' says Mr Green, 'to have been the accompaniment of full freedom. The freeman was strictly the freeholder, and the exercise of his full rights as a free member of the community to which he belonged was inseparable from the possession of his "holding.” Besides the freemen or churls, there were the nobles or eorls, from whom were selected the leaders in war-time and the rulers of villages in times of peace. The selection was voluntary; and the nobles had no legal privileges above the freemen, who were the actual rulers as well as the

The chief authorities consulted for this article are: Green's Short History of the English People; Hallam's Constitutional History of England; the Cobden Club's Systems of Land-tenure in Various Countries; Dowell's History of Taxation and Taxes in England; Arthur Arnold's Free Land; and the official Statistical

Abstracts.

PRICE 1d.

possessors of the settlements. It was thus a race of republican landowners who dispossessed the ancient Britons, and who, as soon as the bloody work of conquest was over, settled down to occupy and till the land as they had done in their northern home. The conquered land was divided by lot among the conquerors, the freemen; and prisoners-at-war unable to pay ransom, became the serfs-ploughmen, shepherds, cowherds, &c.— of the capturer. Out of these apportioned lands, again, the kings rewarded by gifts of sections those who rendered the State signal service. Thus arose the thegns, who superseded the old eorls, and became the foundation of the English nobility in Britain.

Society, then, in the Anglo-Saxon period was composed of landed proprietors (or freemen) and slaves, and the rulers were elected by and endowed by the freemen. Neither gold nor cattle nor any other movable wealth would make a man a 'freeman.' Land was not only the basis of civil rank, but also the foundation of all personal privileges. The survival of this state of things is to be seen in our own day in the high estimation in which property in land is held, its social importance, and its political influence. And it was in such a condition of society that we trace the genesis of the taxation of privately owned land for the needs of the commonwealth. The kings subsisted on the produce of the folklands allotted to them; and when all the kingdoms of the Saxon Heptarchy merged under one sovereign, the several territories so allotted became one great royal demesne. Besides this, from every shire where folkland had been allocated to others or appropriated by townships, the king received an agreed compensation, which was called the feorum fultum. Taxes for special purposes were from time to time imposed by the Witenagemote, and one of these taxes was the shipgeld, which took the form of a levy upon every shire for the provision and equipment of ships of war in proportion to the property of the shire. But the first express tax upon land was the Danegeld.

time, became an annual charge of two shillings It can be traced on the Exchequer per hide.

Rolls down to 1163.

But Norman William also introduced the feudal

This was levied in A.D. 991, and its object was to raise money wherewith to buy off the Danish rovers who were ranging the coasts and harrying the villages. It was imposed at first at the system, which changed the conditions of the tenure rate of one shilling for every hide of land of land. Repeated revolts of the English led to held by freemen. A hide of land used to be the repeated confiscation of lands, which were reconsidered one hundred acres, but is now con- distributed among his Norman supporters. These sidered to have meant one hundred and twenty allocations were made with obligations for speciThe rate grew, as the incursions of the fied military services in return, and gradually the whole of the landowners of the country were Danes increased, and sometimes ran up to four brought under the same system of vassalage. The shillings the hide. When first imposed this tax feudal system was not completely established until realised ten thousand pounds. This was in 991; the time of William Rufus, although the Doomsbut in 1002 the Danegeld had to provide twenty-day Book placed all landowners as vassals either four thousand pounds; in 1007 thirty-six thousand pounds; in 1012 forty-eight thousand pounds;

acres.

[ocr errors]

and in 1018 seventy-two thousand pounds. Although this tax was devised for the express purpose of buying off the Danes, it was retained long after the Danes had ceased to trouble. The revenue was found very useful, and it was always possible to expect' attacks, which would justify the levy. Still, like all taxes, it was very unpopular, and became increasingly difficult to collect, so much so, that the kings had often to gather in the money at the point of the sword, and to employ their paid soldiers as collectors. The Danegeld endured till the time of Edward the Confessor, who abolished it.

Of the system of land-tenure in the time of the Anglo-Saxons, it is to be observed that freemen had absolute right to alienate their lands by gift or sale, to dispose of them by will, and to transmit them by inheritance. There was obligation for military service in case of invasion, and there was also a law by which in some cases land reverted to the State on failure of male heirs. There was thus something like a resemblance to feudalism even before the Norman Conquest.

to the king or to some tenant of the king.
bound, in return for the land he held, to assist

Under the feudal system, every vassal was

his lord in fight; and the lords, in turn, were bound to aid the king in proportion to the extent of their estates. At first, there was no clear limit of service; but the arrangement in time became, that a knight was to be furnished for every four to five hides of land held of which the annual value was twenty pounds. The term for such service became also limited to forty days annually; so the tax paid by the landowners to the state, reprevice, and that of a knight for every knight's sented by the king, was their own personal serfee' they held, for the term named. This was the ordinary service; but there was also special service required for special occasions, which was usually commuted into a money payment. Norman system also established primogeniture, and removed the right to alienate land or to devise it by will. Not until the time of Henry VIII. was the power restored for the testamentary disposition of land; and not until the time of Charles II. was military tenure finally abolished by law.

The

The Court of Exchequer was established by William the Conqueror, and was so called because of the checkered cloth laid on the table where the accounts and money were placed for audit. It was in the reign of Henry II., and by arrangement with this Court of Exchequer, that the military obligation upon landowners was transformed into a fixed money-tax. This tax was called scutage (shield-money), and was at the rate of two marks, or twenty-six shillings and eightpence, for every knight's fee of landequal to twenty pounds of annual rental rate was only exigible in case of war or threatened war, and varied from time to time In the same reign, according to circumstances. the peculiar obligations of the tenants of the royal demesne were also commuted into money car-payments, called tallage, which was assessed on different bases for town and country.

When the Normans came, William simply stepped into possession of the property of his royal Saxon predecessors. That property, or demesne, had grown to be of vast extent, and was considered to be inalienable from the Crown. The Norman kings added to it the lands which they confiscated from rebellious Englishmen. For a time, the revenue from the royal demesne was sufficient for the requirements of the Conqueror, supplemented as it was by the right to assess the tenants of the demesne on occasions of extraordinary military expeditions; to impress riages and horses whenever and wherever required for the conveyance of the royal household and impedimenta; to receive supplies of provisions, &c., at prices fixed by the king's officer; and to claim a cask or two from every cargo of wine entered at any port. But by-and-by the Danegeld was reimposed-namely, in 1084, when an attack was threatened by Sweyn of Denmark. The rate this time was higher than ever-namely, six shillings per hide of land. This land-tax was imposed from time to time by all the Norman kings, at varying rates; and in Stephen's

The

The scutage continued to be levied as required for more than a century, and at times was so onerous that it was provocative of continual disputes between the nobles and the king. Ultimately, in 1213, some of the nobles pleaded exhaustion by previous levies, denied liability, and Charta, one of the clauses of which was, that refused to pay any more. Then came Magna No scutage or aid shall be imposed in the kingdom unless by the common consent of the realm, except for the purpose of ransoming the king's person, making his first-born son a knight, and

marrying his eldest daughter once; and the aids (levies) for these purposes shall be reasonable in amount.' Another clause provided for the calling and constitution of the common counsel of the realm' for imposing scutage. After this, scutage was levied at different times down to 1322, and then disappeared.

But another form of land-tax was devised in 1194, to take the place of the Danegeld. It was called the carucage, because it was levied upon the carucate or quantity of land that could be ploughed by one plough in one season. The rate of the first carucage was two shillings the carucate; but it appears for the last time in 1224, and is thereafter replaced by a general tax on movables. This was leviable upon rents, as well as upon crops, cattle, stock-in-trade, and other possessions, and finally settled into a charge of a fifteenth and a tenth of the valuation for the year. The fifteenth and tenth' thus became merely a name for a compounded fixed charge upon the whole population. But in 1382, 'on account of the poverty of the country,' the landowners took the whole burden of this tax, not as a precedent, but for reverence of God, and for the support, aid, and relief of the poor commonalty, who appeared to be weaker and poorer than theretofore.' In the following year, the former method was returned to, and it remained in force down to 1399.

In 1404, a special tax on land was imposed by Henry IV.'s parliament on all landowners possessing land of the annual value of five hundred marks or more. It was at the rate of five per cent., and was therefore one pound in every twenty pounds of rental. In 1411, this tax was altered to one upon all landowners of not less than twenty pounds annual value, and was at the rate of six shillings and eightpence for every twenty pounds clear. In 1431, besides the reimposition of the 'fifteenth and tenth,' the tax on the knight's fee was continued, and a tax was imposed for the first time upon land not held for knight-service-that is, upon freeholders. It was soon superseded by other subsidies not necessary to detail here. În 1450, we find a graduated income-tax granted, which included all freeholders of lands and tenements, as well as fees and profits. One or other or all of these forms of taxation existed in varying degrees down to the time of the Tudors. Under the Tudors' Subsidies' Acts, the charge upon landowners was four shillings in the pound for all freehold, according to the clear annual value.

Under the Stuarts, repeated levies of 'fifteenths and tenths' occurred, but did not bring in money quick enough, so that a poll-tax was tried by Charles I. After this, a land-tax was instituted upon a new basis. A lump sum to be raised was levied upon each county and town, and was then re-assessed upon the several occupiers of land-tenants having the power to deduct their payments from the rents.

Under the Commonwealth, the assessments were made more equitable. They were levied by the local authorities, and proportioned to the means of the taxpayers. After the Restoration, the old Tudor system was reverted to; but, proving offensive, was again abandoned; and the Commonwealth system prevailed during a great part of the reign of Charles II. It was also

used in the earlier years of the reign of William III.; but in that reign, a new system came into vogue. About 1692 a tax was levied for one year of a uniform rate of four shillings in the pound on the annual value of all lands. This was to meet the expenses of the war with France. As the assessment was not rigorous, the rate produced less than was expected, and it produced less and less as the tax was reimposed in succeeding years. In 1697, the rate was made three shillings in the pound; but the Act, in authorising it, also fixed the amount which it should yield, which led to a considerable change in the method of assessing property. The same principle was followed in succeeding years, the rate nominally varying from one, two, three, to four shillings in the pound, but always for a fixed sum, which was to be raised pro rata in the various counties and towns.

This principle of levying an annual fixed sum to be contributed by the land remained in force until 1798, and at first it was, as has been said, four shillings in the pound. But this amount was not permanent, and fluctuated from time to time, falling as low as two shillings, but never rising above four. In 1798, prior to the imposition of a general income-tax of ten per cent., Pitt constituted the land-tax a perpetual charge of four shillings in the pound, subject to redemption and purchase. It was a charge defined by the Act which specified the various districts, and power was given 'to persons interested in lands to buy up and become themselves entitled to an amount of rent-charge equal to the tax.' In the first year, nearly half a million was so redeemed, which was a great help to the government finances; but for some years afterwards, the terms of redemption were less favourable. Between 1800 and 1878, some £840,000 was redeemed; and in 1879, the amount remaining payable annually in respect of this land-tax was reduced to £1,075,000. Since 1798, then, this fixed but redeemable burden has remained upon land, and land has been bought and sold subject to it. This charge was quite apart from all subsequent levies upon the profits of lands under the headings of the various property and income taxes which have been in vogue down to our own time. The income-tax as at present constituted levies, under Schedule A, a tax upon the income, or rents, from all landed property including houses, of eightpence in the pound.

In 1881, the remnant of the old land-tax in Great Britain realised upon the assessments of 1798, £1,050,000; while the yield under Schedule A-that is, the profits from land in the United Kingdom-of the income-tax was £3,545,000. Land also contributed largely under the head of succession duties, which yielded £3,064,000 for probate, and £3,592,000 for legacy and succession duties, equal to £6,656,000.

In 1853, Mr Goschen stated that the special contribution by land to imperial taxation was only five and a half per cent. of the total taxes raised. At the same time, it was stated that in Holland, land paid nine per cent.; in Austria, seventeen and a half per cent.; in France, eighteen and a half per cent.; in Belgium, twenty and a half per cent. ; and in Hungary, thirty-two and a half per cent. But a comparison of this sort is quite imperfect, unless we have a complete

« PreviousContinue »