THE TOWN ROOKERY AND COUNTRY QOTTAGK, (Town and Cottntb.y) **?>

Waikato Times, Volume VII, Issue 379, 17 October 1874, Page 2

THE TOWN ROOKERY AND COUNTRY QOTTAGK, (Town and Cottntb.y) **?>

We have lately seen it argued with seme plausibility that a country labourer ought to be t g>laced on the same footing as regards [house as tiue town artisan, namely that he ought to be charged a fair rent for it, and not a mere nominal one, as is usually the case at present. Is it, however, likely that he will ever be in a position to pay a fair rent for such a house as is demanded for him ? A live-roomed cottage with proper offices cannot be built for less than .£l5O, and in order to bring a fair per centage on this it should be let for at least £10 a year. At present it is let for £3 or £4, or about a third of what it is really worth. If, however, the labourer is to spend the same proportion of his income in rent as he does now, his wages will have to rise to, treble their present amount, or about 40s or 50s a week at least, but does any body suppose that they can get to anything like that height for years to cornel Even, however, supposing that they can pay such a high rent, is it likely that they will choose to rlo so 1 There arc few villages in which there are not little bits of land which belong, not to the squire, but to small builders, who can run up very inferior cottages, and let them at a lower rent than the squire would his good ones. We certainly believe that if a labourei had his choice between the good and dear, or the cheap and nasty, he would not be long in making up his mind to choose the latter. The disheartening thing about building good cottages is that they are not half appreciated. And if a prospect of a little more beer to be bought out of savings in rent be thrown into the scale, the good cottages would be nowhere. We may regret it, but such is the uneducated bucolic mind, and for that matter, the town mind too we suspect. There has, however, been suggested a scheme by which a labourer might be enabled to pay a high rent for his house without waiting till his wages lise to such a fabulous amount, namely, the addition of a large garden to his holding. A garden at present usually consists of about an eighth of an acre. We have heard it estimated that such a garden is worth about £5 a year to its holder. It certainly is worth a good deal, as we know an instance where very great difficulty was experienced in getting a tenant for a very good pai'k lodge, rent free, to which no garden was attached. If, then, a small garden enables its owner to pay the present rent of a cottage, it is argued that one of three times the size would pay a rent three times as high. No doubt there is a good deal to be said for the argument. With the great demand that there is for garden produce, and fruit especially, cottage-gardening ought to be made to pay. Fruit-growing especially might be much more attended to. Still, there are objections to it. The one usually insisted upon, is, if the labourer has a large garden he would husband his strength when he ought to be expending it in his master's service, in order to be able to work in it more effectively. No donbt this objection is a weighty one, if the present system of day wages is continued. But there we hold that there is very great room for improvement in this respect. We know one large and very prosperous farm where almost everything is done by piece-work, and we believe that day wages will soon become more and more a thing of the past everywhere. When, however, this takes place the objection stated to large gardens would cease to have force. Still, however, we see others, You can't take much out of land Avithout putting something in. How is a labourer to get his manure ? How, again, is he to get his surplus produce to market? No doubt difficulties of this sort may be got over by some kind of co-operation. Elaborate schemes, however, of this kind may answer in exceptional cases, but we are not likely to succeed, as a rule, with the present state of education among the labourers in the purely agricultural districts : and, besides, we hold that it is much better for an agricultural labourer to aim at being a labourer and not a small farmer. It comes to exactly the same thing in the end, whether he gets high wages and pays high rent, or low wages and pays low rent. It does not matter whether you add two to two, or three to one, the r< suit will be four and notn\e, all the world over. Our belief is that the best plan is to build good cottagps, and let the rent of them be included in the labourer's wages. Let him have so much a Aveek and a cottage rent free. Other people of all classes, from the Speaker of the House of Commons downward, are engaged on similar terms. Why on earth should the labourers be treated differently from other people? We do not believe in elaborate schemes for multiplying either labour or Avages. A man can only do so much work in a day, which is -worth a definite sum of money. It does not matter lioav you diA ide the labour or its Avages; the result must be the same in any case. The great object to be aimed at is to get ea^h labourer to do the most he is capable of; it is best for all parties that it should be so; and

we believe that this is best accomplished by letting the labourer stick solely to his proper work. Let landlords treat their cottages as part of their farmbuildiugs, and let them with their farms. Good cottages will then be a good investment, by attracting a better class of labourer, while the labourer will reap the benefit by the inducement which will be held out to the landlord to house him properly. No doubt there would be some difficulty and some hardship inflicted in carrying out such a change ; but then what change is there without these drawbacks I The more one is guided by üblitical economy, and the less by philanthrophy, thle fewer will the mistakes and heartburnings be in the long run. It is far easier to assess the value of dwellings or labour than of almsgiving and other well-meant but often mistaken charity.