The farmers and labourers, as well as mechanics or others, who might be living upon the land thus taken over, would have the option of remaining upon it in the capacities for which they were severally fitted, as superintendents, foremen, or labourers; or if they preferred to leave would receive a reasonable “compensation for disturbance.” * * * * * There are always people who will not be satisfied with any proposed remedy for a great evil unless it deals with every possible phase and form of it, so as to abolish it completely at once, and for ever. Some of these will be sure to object that the worst of the unemployed--the tramps and the men who will not work under any conditions--will still remain; and they will ask triumphantly: “How will you bring these into your system? They will flock into your colonies in winter to enjoy the good living and do nothing to earn it.” There are two replies to this objection, which is really no valid objection at all. In the first place, it was not for _this_ class of men that the “Unemployed Workmen Bill” was brought into Parliament, or for whom legislation has been promised by the Government. It was not of _these_ unfortunates that either Socialists or Liberals drew such vivid pictures of undeserved misery, but of the genuine workmen, the men or women whose one object in life is to obtain _work_, however hard, however it may injure their own health or shorten their lives, in order that they may _save their families from starvation_, or from the deservedly hated workhouse. The whole of this great and successful agitation has been in behalf of those willing and anxious to work, but to whom by our actual social organisation it is forbidden. It was for them only that the “Right to Work” was demanded--not the right to _food_ while refusing to _work_. It is a sufficient reply to the objectors, therefore, that Mr. Mills’ proposal really solves the problem as regards those very classes of workers for whom the “Right to Work” clause was drawn. But, secondly, it is certain that the system of co-operative colonies here explained _would_, in the course of a few years, absorb also the so-called unemployable, who are in reality by no means numerous, and have _never yet been offered_ the kindly assistance, the sympathetic treatment, the amount of liberty and the congenial surroundings they would find in these colonies. General Booth’s experience at his Essex colony has shown that a considerable proportion of these men are easily reclaimable, and the system there is far less favourable and less educational than it would be in our proposed co-operative colonies. * * * * *