Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, Volume 64, No. 393, July 1848Various
History
Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, Volume 64, No. 393, July 1848
Various
England -- Periodicals; Scotland -- Periodicals
It must not, however, be supposed from this remark, that any portion
of the work is appropriated to a set defence of government by
means of an aristocracy. By an aristocracy we mean the deposition
of political power in the hands of men of leisure and education,
as opposed to the tendency of the Reform Bill, to transfer
the governing functions to the "practical" men of the trading
and moneyed interests, and the analogous claims of Chartism,
founded on Jack Cade's complaint, that the "king's council are
no good workmen." In England, we are pretty sure to have an
aristocracy--that is, the influences which affect government and
legislation will emanate principally from that class which is
socially at the head of the nation; and the question is, whether
we are to have a mere moneyed aristocracy, or one qualified by
those mixed and undefinable conditions which, more than any thing
else, act to keep down the growing and eager ascendency of wealth
_per se_. Among the safeguards of such an aristocracy as we have
described, not the least powerful is to be found in the laws
discussed in the work before us. Mr M'Culloch, as we have said,
assumes the importance to the country of preserving the present
characteristics of British aristocracy; and he therefore proceeds
at once to show how the laws on which he treats operate for this
preservation, and to rebut the objections advanced against them on
the score of their relations to other classes of the community.
One of the most frequent of these objections is, that the laws
in question tend to diminish the productiveness of the land, and
thereby inflict a serious injury on the community at large; that
they prevent, in many instances, the landlord from granting leases
to his tenant beyond the term of his own life; that the tenant, in
consequence, is not willing to incur the outlay of drainage and
other expensive improvements, because he is not secured by a lease;
while the landlord, on the other hand, will not enter into these
expenses, because he does not feel the same interest in his limited
estate which he would in the unconditional fee-simple.
Note first of all the logic of this argument. The tenant, it seems,
will not spend his money in draining without a lease. As, however,
a lease would suffice to induce him so to do, we might naturally
suppose that the landlord's estate for life, or in tail, would be at
least an equal inducement. These reasoners, however, aver, that the
landlord is only to be tempted by the unrestricted fee. According to
this progressive scale, it might be fairly, argued, that the tenant,
on becoming lessee for years, would still require the landlord's
life-interest; and the latter, when seised of the fee, would decline
the requisite expense, except on a guarantee of immortality, and
justify himself by Horace's authority,--
"Tanquam
Sit proprium quidquam puncto quod mobilis horæ
Permutet dominos, et cedat in altera jura."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account