Freehold Land Societies: Their History, Present Position, and Claims

V. – MOVEMENT CONSIDERED POLITICALLY

But we may be told, politically the movement has been a failure. Our answer is, it has been nothing of the kind. It is true, and we state the fact more in sorrow than in anger, that Messrs. Newdegate and Spooner still represent North Warwickshire; but it is also clear that whilst at the election previous to the last Mr. Spooner had, in the Birmingham district, a majority of 196, at the last election, in consequence of the operation of the Freehold Land Societies of that district, he was actually in a minority of 395. But let us look nearer home. At the recent election for Middlesex, Bernal Osborne was returned, after a severe struggle, by a majority of 195. Now, when we recollect that the National alone has purchased 152 acres in Middlesex, and that each acre is capable, on an average, on subdivision, of making five votes – when we also remember that the remaining London societies have purchased between them another hundred acres in the same county – it is impossible not to feel, even supposing all the allotments have not been taken up, that out of the 250 acres thus cut up into allotments came the majority which returned Bernal Osborne as the champion of Liberalism and Free Trade. We repeat, it is impossible not to feel that if it had not been for the Freehold Land Societies, to the disgrace and shame of the county, Lord Maidstone would have misrepresented Middlesex. Then we remember that Mr. Locke King was but 400 ahead of Mr. Antrobus at the Surrey election last summer – we must also feel that that gentleman has some reason for thankfulness to Freehold Land Societies. If we pass to Herts, we shall feel that it sadly failed in its duty by returning three pledged Protectionists; but when we recollect that the National has purchased 300 acres in that county, we cannot but be persuaded that there is “a good time coming” for our friend Mr. Lattimore and the Herts Reformers. At the last election, the lowest of the Protectionist candidates – the quondam Reformer, Sir Bulwer Lytton – had 2,190 votes: the highest of the Liberals had 2,043. It is thus as clear as anything can be that a very little effort will make Hertfordshire for ever safe. It is in the power of any two hundred persons desirous of a good investment to do so at once. Essex, the home of Sir J. Tyrrel and the delight of W. B., we regret to write, is not so easily liberalised. North Essex at present is impregnable. Its squires, as Barry Cornwall ironically writes,

“With brains made clearBy the irresistible strength of beer,”

are beyond salvation: there is no hope for this generation of them. But South Essex is not so hopelessly lost to the people’s cause. It is true that last summer it did unseat Sir E. N. Buxton, and return Sir W. B. Smijth by a majority of 600; but the National has purchased 242 acres in that county, and out of that number can create 1,210 electors. Evidently, then, there is hope for Essex yet. But we need not continue this scrutiny. The people have placed within their hands the very privilege they so much desire. They need not wait for Government to emancipate them; they can emancipate themselves. For instance, the National will put any person desirous of the same in possession of a county qualification for North or South Essex, East or West Kent, Hertfordshire, West Sussex, North Hants, North Lancashire, or Middlesex. If, as some of the knowing ones maintain, we shall soon have a general election, of course the sooner one is put on the register the better. If not, the purchaser can take no harm: he will have his quid pro quo; he will have placed his money in that best of all banks, the land, and will have become one of that important class appealed to on certain occasions as the “Electors of the United Kingdom.” Heaven helps those who help themselves. Instead of the people waiting for Government to extend the franchise, they can boldly help themselves. No man deserves the electoral privilege who cannot purchase it by his own industry and self-denial. At the present time, when provisions are cheap, when work is abundant, when wages are high and labour scarce, there is not a man in our streets who may not win the franchise if he has the will. Half the men who brawled in low pot-houses, while their wives and children were starving, over their beer, for the Charter, and nothing but the Charter, if they had stopped at home, and worked and saved their money, might, by this time, have realised the manhood suffrage of which they so idly dreamed; and if, at the next election, the men of progress are beaten, and the friends of class legislation and injustice prevail, it will be because the people were not true to themselves – because they had not enough of self-denial, enough of earnestness and independence, to avail themselves of the advantages offered by the Freehold Land Movement, and thus to have a representation that shall be real, and not a sham. By means of the Freehold Land Movement, every county in England may be won. To the very natural suggestion that that is a game that two can play at, the answer is very obvious. In such a contest numbers will tell. A qualification that may be had for £30 will fall into very different hands to what it would were its price £1,000. For one aristocratic voter thus made, the people will have ten. An appeal to the masses can have but one result. Human nature must be changed before it can be otherwise. Be this as it may, the political result is undoubtedly good – the emancipation of all who have the wit, and will, and worth to win the franchise for themselves.

VI. THE MORAL AND SOCIAL ADVANTAGES OF THE MOVEMENT

Anything offering a man inducement to save must be attended with beneficial results. As society is constituted, a spendthrift is a nuisance and a curse; the charge hitherto against the working classes of this country has been, that they have been reckless and improvident – that they are beggars one day and spendthrifts the next – that the money gained with such difficulty is squandered away with a wicked wastefulness, such as can be paralleled in no other part of the world. The English lower orders have always been thus improvident. During the late war the sailors, when on shore, would resort to every absurdity to get rid of their money. Colonel Landman tells us of one who had just received prize money to the amount of £500, and, being allowed only one week in which to get rid of it, had, to do so more effectually, hired a carriage and four for himself, another for his hat, and another for his cudgel, in which style he travelled to London. A common sight at Plymouth was that of sailors sitting on the ground breaking watches to pieces for a glass of grog, for which they had previously paid £5 each; one hard-hearted captain having refused leave to a sailor to go on shore, the man, in the bitterness of his disappointment, filled a pint pot with guineas and threw them overboard, as he could not immediately derive enjoyment from their use. It is true a great change has been effected in this respect, and society has reaped the benefit. A man who saves money is not a drain upon his friend; is not a dissipated man; costs society less, and does more for it than another man. The self-imposed taxation of the working classes has been set down by Mr. Porter at fifty millions a-year. In reality it is much more: there is loss of time – there is sickness induced by intemperance – there are the gaols, and police-stations, and police, which would be much less expensive were the intemperance of the country less. Thus, if you change a nation of spendthrifts into a nation of economical men, you bring about a great and glorious result. Such a nation never can be poor. It will always have capital, and capital is the fund out of which labour is maintained, out of which the arts that humanise and bless mankind spring – out of which the soft humanities of life arise. Thus, then, the Freehold Land Movement is attended with great moral and social good. Viewed politically, also, it must be considered to have had the same result. It is something to have made a man an independent voter – to have made him feel that he has won his political rights for himself – that he has no need to cringe and beg – to have taught him that —

“Man who man would beMust rule the empire of himself.”

Such a man will infuse fresh blood into the constituency. He will not give a vote like a browbeaten tradesman or a dependent tenant-farmer. His landlord will not be able to drive him to the polling-booth like a sheep. On the contrary, he will go there erect and free – a man, and not a slave. In every point of view, indeed, the benefits of the movement are immense. In the neighbourhood of all our large towns estates are being built on, where the members of the different societies living on their own freeholds enjoy the blessings of pure air, and light, and water, of which otherwise they would have been deprived. In Birmingham the mortality amongst children has been already lessened 2½ per cent. in consequence of this very fact. If it be true that we cannot get the healthy mind without the healthy body, this is something gained; but when we further remember that the money thus profitably invested would most of it have been squandered in reckless enjoyment – in body and soul destroying drink – it is clear nothing more need be said. It was calculated that out of £25,000 received by the Birmingham Society, £20,000 have been saved from those sinks of poison, the dram-shop and the beer-house. Mr. James Taylor tells us, “Our working men are beginning to ponder the often-quoted saying that every time they swallow a glass of ale they swallow a portion of land. From calculations which have been made, it appears that the average price of land is 5½d. per yard, and therefore every time a man drinks a quart of ale he engulphs at the same time a yard of solid earth.” Nor is Mr. Taylor alone in his testimony. A correspondent of the Freeholder at Leominster stated, that instead of money being spent in drink it was devoted to the society there. In a late report of the Committee of the Coventry Society we read that “one of the most pleasing results of the society’s operations is the improved moral habits of many of its members.” The North and East Riding Society also reported “The society’s operations produce the best effects on the habits of its poorer members by encouraging them to save money from the public house.” Similar testimony was also borne by the Newcastle Committee, and at Darlington we learn that the society has been the means of converting many of its members into steady members of society, and instead of finding them at the ale-bench, wrote a correspondent, a few months since, “you may now see them at our Mechanics’ Institution, gaining all the information they can.” Thus, then, the Freehold Movement is creating everywhere a great moral revolution. It teaches the drunkard to be sober and the spendthrift to save. It comes to man in his degradation and strikes away the chain and sets him free. To the cause of Temperance it has been a most invaluable ally. For the money saved from the public-house it has been the most suitable investment. No wonder, then, that most of the leading men connected with the movement are also connected with the Temperance societies, or that it originated with them. It was born in a Temperance Hotel. Its founder was the Secretary of a Temperance society. Did the Temperance societies effect no other good, for this one fact alone would they deserve lasting honour in the land.

VII. – HINTS FOR THE FORMATION OF FREEHOLD LAND SOCIETIES

There are many counties yet to which the movement has not extended. For the sake of those who may wish to extend it to them, we state that the first step to be taken is to procure a copy of the rules of some society already in operation. For this purpose, the Birmingham, the National and the Westminster Societies’ rules, which have been prepared with care, and under the management of practical men, should be procured. They are virtually the same as the rules of an ordinary building society, and are certified by Mr. Tidd Pratt. The next step is the appointment of trustees, directors, solicitor and secretary. This is very important. The greater part of the failures which take place in working men’s associations arise from the incapacity or dishonesty of the directors or their officers. Men of character and substance should be chosen for trustees, and for directors men experienced in business, of persevering habits, and of unquestionable integrity. The solicitor and secretary ought to be favourably disposed to the objects of the society. The offices for business ought in no case to be connected either with a public-house or a Temperance coffee-house. Eating and drinking are bad adjuncts to business. As every society must incur expenses, it is not desirable to form societies in small towns or villages, but to connect them with a large society. The National, for instance, has agents to receive subscriptions in every part of the country. Indeed, many of the local societies have become merged in it. In consequence of its excellent business arrangements, and of its immense capital it can do what local societies cannot. Already the Herts and Beds Society, the Bristol Society and the Cardiff Society, have become incorporated with it, and the arrangement has been found satisfactory to all parties concerned, the National having the power to purchase an estate, when a local society with its limited funds would be utterly unable to do so. The same can be said of the Conservative and other larger societies. Local societies have, however, this in their favour. The managers are well known men. Confidence is felt in them; they appeal to local sympathies, and they will have local support.

VIII. – A LIST OF EXISTING SOCIETIES

It has been suggested that we give a list of the societies at present in operation. We do so here, though aware that the list is necessarily very imperfect. The Freeholder aimed to give a list, but it never could give a correct one. We see Mr. Brooks in his Building Societies Directory has also made a similar attempt, and in an equally unsuccessful manner. The societies are so numerous that it is impossible to do more than chronicle the existence of the more active ones. These are: – 1. The Arundel, 38, Arundel-street, Strand; Manager, Mr. J. Carpenter. 2. The Birkbeck, Mechanics’ Institution, Southampton-buildings, Chancery-lane; Secretary, Mr. F. Ravenscroft. 3. The British, 3, Ivy-lane; Secretary, Mr. H. Brooks. 4. The Britannia; Secretary, Mr. D. W. Ruffy, 1a, Great George-street, New-road. 4. The Church of England, 22, John-street, Adelphi; Secretary, Mr. Campbell. 5. The Conservative, 33, Norfolk-street, Strand; Secretary, Mr. Gruneisen. 6. The Chelsea, Cheyne-row. 7. The Finsbury, Featherstone-buildings; Secretary, Mr. Scott. 8. The Home Counties, Chatham-place, Blackfriars-bridge; Secretary, Mr. Knight. 9. The Lambeth, 90 Blackman-street, Borough; Secretary, Mr. W. Banks. 10. London District, 10, Leadenhall-street; Secretary, Mr. F. Redfern. 11. The London and Suburban; Secretary, Mr. Weale. 12. The Metropolitan, 24, East-cheap; Secretary, Mr. D. R. White. 13. The Marylebone, Great Portland-street; Secretary, Mr. J. W. Knight. 14. The Middle Class, Peele’s Coffee House, Fleet-street; Secretary, Mr. W. Peacock. 15. The National, 14, Moorgate-street; Secretary, Mr. Whittingham. 16. The North London, British School Room, Denmark-terrace, Pentonville; Secretary, Mr. Bernard. 17. The St. Pancras; Secretary, Mr. Spring. 18. The Union. 19. The Westminster, 4, Beaufort-buildings, Strand; Secretary, Mr. G. Hugget. Most of these societies are in full operation, and have purchased valuable estates. The probable number of Freehold Land Societies in the country is 130. In some parts societies have not flourished, in consequence of their being confounded with O’Connor’s Land Scheme; in others, more especially in the North, there has been an utter impossibility in the way of getting freehold property; in others, the management has been languid, and the societies have decayed. But the number is, we believe, that which we have stated; or at any rate is as near the truth as it is possible for us to be.

IX. – CONCLUSION

We have thus gone through our self-appointed task. We have considered the Freehold Land Movement in its origin and effects. We have shown them to be good. We have shown the movement itself to be well worthy the support of every philanthropic man. It has now grown, and become strong. It is now doing what Parliament dare not, providing for the political emancipation of the people. It has put the franchise in the hands of honest men. It has given a new character to political agitation. It has shown how, without resorting to intimidation, or without the frantic appeal of the demagogue, the working men of England may enfranchise themselves. Parliament may refuse to legislate on the matter – one Reform Bill after another may be prepared, and then thrown by – one party combination after another may be driven from the Treasury benches, but the movement is gradually working its way, which is to reform Parliament, to put down W. B. and his man Frail – to root out the demoralisation of which St. Albans is a type, and to give to the people a perfect representation in the peopled house. It is time the present state of things was altered. For this purpose, the Freehold Land Movement exists.

We thus make our appeal to the friends of political progress. We aim at the advocacy of the movement which has for its end what you profess to desire. That movement we believe destined to be the salvation of our country, and we ask you to rally round it. It is true Free-trade is not in danger, but Parliamentary Reform is. A large party headed by Lord Derby take their stand by the Bill of ’31, and maintain that concession has reached its limits – that class legislation is still to prevail – that the people are still to be ignored – that inside the constitution are still to be the privileged few, and outside of it the unprivileged many. Against this mockery we ask England’s manhood to protest – not by crowded assemblies or inflammatory harangues, but in the constitutional manner pointed out by Freehold Land Societies. We want not voices but votes. In the House of Commons, the thoughts that breathe and words that burn avail not, but votes are omnipotent. No member can disregard or despise his constituents; their will to him must be law.

But we stop not here. We seek a still wider support. The Freehold Land Movement has done wonders, it has removed the reproach cast upon the working man, that he is reckless and improvident. It has shown that he can save when a proper object is offered. In a speech a year or two since, in the House of Commons, by Mr. Sotheron, M.P. for Wiltshire, it was stated that the total number of friendly societies was not less than 33,232, and the aggregate of the members which they included amounted to 3,032,000. The annual revenue of these societies was £4,980,000, and the accumulated capital from the savings of these poor persons was no less a sum than £11,360,000. Faulty as most of these societies were, so desirous of saving was the working man, that he had actually entrusted them with the enormous sum we have just named. If these things were done by Friendly Societies, what will not be done when the advantages of Freehold Land Societies are well and widely understood? At this time there is much maudlin sympathy expressed on behalf of the working classes. They need it not. They are stout enough and strong enough to take care of themselves. The Freehold Land Movement has given them an investment, and they have become saving men. The money that would formerly have been spent in the public-house has given many a man a freehold and a stake in the country, such as even a revising barrister must admit. The present system of revision of votes by barristers is bad. Members of Freehold Land Societies have been much wronged in consequence. One worthy disfranchised several claimants last summer, on the ground that the forty-shilling franchise, in all cases, should cost £50. It ought to be in the power of no man to arrive at such a decision. The question should be left to a jury – not to a barrister, eager of promotion, and for that purpose desirous to please the powers that be. But still a man may thus obtain wealth and a vote. And the man thus taught self-denial and providence will not be contented with remaining merely a freeholder; he cannot make himself that without becoming intellectually and morally a better man. He will be a better father of a family, a better citizen, better in his public and private life. Workmen of England, Ireland and Wales, we call upon you to rally round the Freehold Land Societies. They exist for your benefit alone. They will give you all that you require – desirable investments for your savings – habits of economy and political influence. You have no need to cringe and beg. All that you want, you have it in your power to obtain. Never was there a more favourable time for you to avail yourselves of the Freehold Land Societies now springing up in your midst. You have now money you can put by. When the Corn Laws cursed the land, it would have been mockery to have asked you to do so then. Now the case is altered, and you must each one of you seek to elevate yourselves. As Mr. Cobden aptly remarked, half the money annually spent in gin would give the people the entire county representation, and thus also provide desirable investments for the money that you are morally bound to lay by against a rainy day. The man who refuses to make provision for the future cannot expect to prosper. Not to do so when a man can is a folly and a crime. Now then is the time to support the Freehold Land Societies. Thus when sickness or old age or bad times come, you will have something you can call your own. Habits of economy will thus grow and strengthen, and the reward will be sure. Of all luxuries, that of independence is the sweetest, and that these societies put within your reach. Their failure is impossible. They are the societies for the age: they will parcel out the English ground amongst English men: their triumph will be the emancipation of the working man from the misery and wrongs and degradation of the past.

We appeal also to men who aim at the moral reformation of our race – who care little about politics – who believe that in a world of knaves it is difficult to get a good government at all, and we claim their support. The mission of the Freehold Land Movement is the same with theirs. The philanthropist labouring to remove the degradation, which compels to a life little better than that of the beasts that perish, men made in the image of their Maker – the advocate of Temperance aiming at the destruction of a vice which has slain its thousands, and which, like a destroying pestilence, still walks the land – the Christian seeking to permeate our age with a living faith – all these we claim as co-workers. The movement, besides its direct bearings, tends to bring about the results they desire. Not merely has political emancipation been the result of the movement – moral emancipation has invariably followed in its train.

We thus make our appeal for the support of the cause which is yet in its infancy, and which has a thousand trophies yet in store. Peacefully does it conduct the people to power, and give practical utterance to the spirit of the age. The doom of whatever keeps man in subjection to another has long been sealed. The proud patrician of Imperial Rome – the feudal baron of the Middle Ages, have passed away. Even Oxford abandons the faith at one time it armed to defend, and no longer acknowledges the

“Right divine of kings to govern wrong.”

Onward to victory is the people’s march. The decree has gone forth, they must be free. For this consummation we have ever hoped and striven. From the contentions of party we have ever turned to advocate whatever gives to the people moral dignity and political power; to others we leave the cause of the privileged classes – the advocacy of existing wrongs – the preservation of existing abuses. We plead the cause of the unenfranchised, but of the unenfranchised who have faith and energy and self-denial enough to win the franchise for themselves. We conjure them to bestir themselves, to give their support to the Freehold Land Movement, to quit themselves like men. We need at the polling booths independent voters, not men who can be bullied or bribed – to make such is our aim, for such England needs, aye, and needs more than ever now.

THE END