won

| &R

— $D

— 409

| &87

CORNELL

lr

LIBRARY

Martin P. Catherwood Library
School of Industrial and Labor Relations

| -2. 2 AREER

AFFORESTATION.

THE UNEMPLOYED AND THE
LAND.
—

— BY —

T. SUMMERBELL, M.P.

ONE PENNY.

FLEET STREET, LONDON, E.C.

This pamphlet is issued with the endorse-
ment of the Council of the Independent Labour
Party, but for the opinions expressed the Author

is responsible.

AFFPORESTATION

THE UNEMPLOYED AND
THE LAND.

an unemployed standpoint, has not received that atten-
tion which is due to it. It is, therefore, with the object
of calling -attention to a few important particulars
appertaining thereto that this pamphlet is written, not so much as
to the Agricultural side of the matter, as to the one of afforestation.
Of course to the Socialist there can be no complete solution of this
question apart from the abolition of private es aly and the
restoration of the land to the people. In the words of J. A. Froude:
“Land is not, and cannot be, property in the sense in which
movable things are property. Every human being born into this
planet must live upon the land if he lives at all. | He did not ask
to be born, and, being born, room must be found for him. The
land in any country is really the property of the: nation which
occupies it,” Let that be our ideal, but in the meantime it is our
duty to lay hold of each and every refor m that will carry us to the
goal we have in view.

_ To enable the reader to grasp how important it is that some-
thing should at once be done in the direction of putting the land
to its proper use, a few general facts’ may not be out of place.

It is estimated that there are about 77,000,000 acres of land in
the United Kingdom, of which about 35,000,000 acres are considered:
as cultivatible. That nothing like this quantity is cultivated. goes
without saying, the total arable land in 1907 being below fifteen
million acres. In fact during the past 30 years a reduction has
proceeded, with comparatively slight yearly fluctuations, at the rate
of about one miljion acres per decade. Wheat, green crops,
afforestation, and the raising of cattle all show a decline. The
cultivator of the soil, with his wife and family, has had to give wa; y
to the gatekeeper and the stray shepherd. The breeding of gaine,
i order that pleasure may be afforded the rich, is considered of
greater importance by those in authority than the one of the
cultivation of food. In 1860 nearly three-fourths of the wheat
consumed.in the United Kingdom was home-grown, but in 1886 it

My’ mty mind the Land question, and its possibilities from

4

had dropped dowt to ttle more than one-third, and that in spite
of an increase in population of eight millions. As stated above, this
decline has continued, the worst feature of all being that compared
to 1861 it is estimated that there are about one million less men
employed on the land at present than at that time in England and
Wales alone. The number of agricultural labourers in 1861 was
2,100,000, whereas the number now stands at about 1,311,000, the
decline having taken place in every county except Anglesea and
Flint, In 1907 as compared to 1906 there were 89,423 acres less
under cultivation for wheat, barley, and oats, the total average
being 6,460,437, the lowest on record. There was a decrease also
in regard to potatoes, turnips, carrots, hops, and timber, but an
increase as to cabbages, onions, and fruit. Land laid down to
grass increased by 33,150 acres, making the total under this jhead
17,277,884 acres, being the largest figure ever reached.

Under this head alone, we have a crushing indictment against.
private ownership of land, and the strongest possible argument in
favour of State action. ‘The landed aristocracy have failed miser-
ably, and stand condemned in the eyes of the people, no matter from
what standpoint we view the question. In order that the reader
may have some idea as to the justification for the latter sentence,
allow me to quote a passage from Prince Kropotkin’s excellent book
“Fields, Factories, and Workshops.” Under the head of the
possibilities of Agriculture, he points out that (1) if the soil of the
United Kingdom were cultivated only as it was thirty-five years
ago, 24,000,000 people, instead of 17,000,000, could live on home-
grown food; and that culture, while giving occupation to an.
additional 750,000 men, would give nearly 3,000,000 wealthy home
customers to British manufactures. (2) If the cultivatible area of
the United Kingdom were cultivated as the soil is cultivated on
the average in Belgium, the Unitad Kingdom would have food for
at least 37,000,000 inhabitants, and it might export agricultural
produce without ceasing to manufacture, so as freely to supply all
the needs of a wealthy population, and finally (3) if the population’
of this country came to be doubled, all that would be required for
producing the food for 80,000,000 inhabitants, would be to cultivate
the soil as it is cultivated in the best farms of Lombardy and in
Flanders. :

The cause of this downward movement is self-evident. It is
the desertion, the abandonment of the land. Each crop requiring
humam labour has: had its area reduced, and agricultural labourers
have beet: sent away to reinforce the ranks of the unemployed in
our cities and towns, so that far from being over populated, the
fields of Britain are starved of human labour. As James Laird
used to say. “ The British nation does not work on her soil, she is
prevented from doing so, and the would-be economists complain
that the soil will not nourish its inhabitants,”

To every land reformer, particularly the men and women in the
Socialist movement, these words will appeal strongly. Think of it,
about one million men, with their wives and families divorced from
the land, about equal to the number of our unemployed at the present
moment. On, every hand we are faced with great stretches of
barren wastes, instead of which, had the nation’s welfare been the
first consideration, we might have had smiling fields of grain and
woodland, and millions of the population living a pure and healthy
life. © Thousands who have drifted into our towns from the rural
areas are to-day living under miserable and degrading conditions,
and would gladly return to the land if reasonable opportunity pre-
sented itself. The opportunity must be given, and that before long;
but the time of its advent rests with the working-class voters of the
country. The composition of the House of Commons will have to
be changed by the sending of more representatives from the ranks
of the people, and fewer of the wealthy land-owning class. By the
aid of the parliamentary machine the latter have robbed the people
of their birth-right, and the same machine will have again to be
used to restore the land again to the people. That we cannot hope
for much from the land-owning class is evidenced from their con-

stant cry to be still further relieved from taxation. In 1896, the
Right Honorable Mi Chaplin said: “In our opinion the condition of
agriculture throughout the country is such that the relief from the
burdens placed upon it will not brook more delay .
the unfair proportion, as we think, in which the land is taxed,
especially when compared with its ability to bear such taxation.”
That the land-owning class have used this cry to their own advant-
age, and to the detriment of the working class, is easily demonstrated.
At the beginning of the last century land paid 3/- in the £, but in
1896 it was down as low as 9d. inthe £. In 1817 the total amount
of rates borne by land amounted to £6,730,000, and house and
other property paid £3,370,000, but in 1868 land only contributed
£5,500,000, as against £11,000,000 by other property. And when we
get up to 1891 we find the difference still greater in favour of land,
the totals being house and other property £23,560,000, as against.
a paltry £4,260,000 from land. To grasp more clearly how the idle
landed. aristocracy have shifted the incidence of taxation off their
own shoulders on to the shoulders of the people in towns, I may
say that house and other property in 1891 bore 84°69 per cent. of the
whole, whereas in 1817 it was land 66°66 per cent., and house and
other property 33°33 per cent. In face of these figures it is
audacious. that these people should still cry out for more, especially
when it is borne in mind that they were granted relief in regard to
the Poor Rate a few years ago to the extent of 22,000,000 per
ftitium, Wher we claima larger share of the Parliamentary repre-
setitation, we ate often fettided by otir opporierts that we are
fighting for class legislation, which in their opinion is wrong. Is
the above tot class jegislation with a vengeance, to be condemned

6

by every right thinking man and woman. The object of such a cry
is patent to any one, but it will have no effect in checking the
demand for more democratic land legislation.

Let me further call attention to two other particulars. For
over a century the landowners have been asking to be relieved of
taxation, in order that through the agency of such relief they might
be enabled to cultivate the land with advantage to themselves from
a paying standpoint. As indicated, they have been relieved to an
outrageous extent, yet this important fact remains, that more land
year by year has gone out of cultivation. ‘The inference, therefore,
to be drawn is, that if the land was more heavily taxed—as it should
undoubtedly be—more of it would be under cultivation. That
there would be more used for the growing of food and timber, and
less used for the cultivation of deer and game for sport. Let me
therefore ask the reader to assist the Independent Labour Party in
resisting any futher concessions to the landed interest, and to help
in bringing about Land Nationalisation, which is the only effective
way of grappling with the question. The landlord class earns
nothing, aid reaps where they have not sown. They give no
service to the community, and yet they take over £100,000,000 per
annum in the shape of rent out of the industry of the country.
The old Book says: “The Earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness
thereof.” It is a good text, and cannot be too often quoted,
especially to those religious people who are so loud in their
condemnation of Socialism.

It is generally accepted by a large number of people that the
land of this country is not of a character suitable for cultivation to
the samme extent as it is cultivated in other countries. The weight
of evidence, however, is in direct opposition to such a contention,
either from the standpoint of soil and climate, or crops per acre
that could be secured if an earnest effort was put forth in regard to
the question. Within 10 miles of London, with its 5,000,000 people,
there is practically nothing but meadowland, yet London is supplied
with Flemish and Jersey ‘potatoes, French salads, and Canadian
apples. If this land were in the hands of Paris gardeners it is
estimated that 2,000 people at least could be employed on this land,
and that vegetables to the value of from £50 to £800 per acre could
be got from it. Of the total area of France, 57 per cent. is under
crops; in this country we have but 25 per cent. Only 12 per cent.
of the land of France is in meadow and permanent pasture; in
Britain we have considerably more acres in theadow, pasture, and
grazing land than ate devoted to the same purposes in France; but
notwithstanditig, France supports 8,250,000 dairy cows to our
2,750,000; and 7,500,000 pigs to our 2,500,000. A comparison with
Germany also ptits tts in an equally unfavourable light, the latter
country havitig half her area under crops, 15 pet cent. meadow and
pastute, and:26 per cent, forests, These are facts which claim our

7

serious consideration, and demand an explanation from those who
now own the land. Now, as to crops. According to the best
authorities on land cultivation, it is estimated that French crops
yield on an average 17 bushels to the acre, Belgium crops 27 bushels
to the acre, whereas British crops yield on an average 28 bushels to
the acre. The same satisfactory results could be achieved as to the
growing of timber, in regard to which I will deal more fully in the
following pages. If other nations, with no better soil or natural
conditions, can get more from the land than we are doing, then we
must confess to either a colossal ignorance of agriculture, or a wil-
ful neglect of developing this great potential wealth. In my
opinion the latter assertion is the more correct one.

At the present moment, however, there is evidence of an
awakening in regard to this great problem, and it is for the men and
women of the Socialist movement to see to it that the nation does
not again fall asleep over it. We have got the Small Holdings Act,
a Commission has recently issued a report as to Afforestation in
Ireland, and a Commission is now sitting as to the same question in
England, Scotland, and Wales. Resolutions in favour of State
action in regard to Forestry have been passed by many authorities,
the Association of Municipal Corporations having passed a resolu-
tion to the effect “T’hat the time has now arrived when the question
of Afforestation should be seriously considered by the Government, .
and that the Law Committee take steps to urge upon the Govern-
ment the necessity for initiating Afforestation schemes.” Arising
out of this, a representative gathering, under the auspices of the
Board of Agriculture, was held in London, when with unanimity
it was declared that the time had arrived for action in regard to the
matter. In fact all the bodies that have at all gone into the ques-
tion have arrived at the same conclusion. Opinions vary as to the
volume of labour afforestation would call into being, but in con-
sidering this aspect of the question many things have to be taken
into account. The appalling extent of rural depopulation I have
already indicated, and our efforts ought to be focussed with a view
in the first place to check this depopulation. The great evil in
regard to our rural life to-day is the want of continuous employ’
ment. Such labour as now exists only provides a few months’
work in the year, and therefore any scheme that lends itself to the
provision of a few months’ additional work per year will be in the
direction of checking this rural exodus. Afforestation would pro-
vide employment at a tite of year—November, December, January,
and February—when very little labour is required on the farms, in
planting and preparing the land for timber growing. Should the
latter be taken in hand by the Government, and the workmen be
granted facilities to acquire small holdings, something like con-
tinuous employment would thus be placed within the reach of the
inajor portion of our agricultural population. ‘The gradual flow of |

8

the people from our rural areas to our great towns and cities would
in a great measure be thus checked. This I know is a small matter
in so far as grappling with the great unemployed army, but yet it 1s
a point worth bearing in mind. When looked at from a national
standpoint, however, greater possibilities present themselves, and
we are better able to grasp the amount of additional labour that
would be required for a State scheme of Sylviculture.

‘In spite of the enormous increase in the manufacture of steel
and iron, and the pretliction that steel and iron would take the
place of timber in many ways, there is an increasing use of timber i
the world over. The use of timber for a multitude of purposes in
industry and art has brought a timber famine within measureable
distance, while in this country little or nothing has been done to
provide against it. Timber has risen rapidly in value during recent
years, atid is still rising, with every prospect of it continuing to do
so. The home production of timber probably does not exceed two
million tons, and we import more than ten million tons. The in-
crease in our imports since 1864 has been at the rate of about
190,000 tons a year, and we have got to ask ourselves—presuming
we are going to sit still and do nothing—as to whether we can rely
for any length of time on getting the necessary timber we reqttire.
Prof. Schlich, one of the best known authorities on afforestation, is
of the opinion that we cannot. Most of. the European countries
import, and but a few export timber. The countries that import
timber to-day are:—Great Britain and Ireland, Germany, France,
Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Spaiti, Holland, Switzerland, Portugal,
Bulgaria, Greece, and Servia. The exporting countries are :—
Roumania, Norway, Austria-Hungary, Sweden, and Russia. In
fact, if we draw the balance for the whole of Europe, we find an
annual deficiency of 2,620,000 tons.” Europe has not been able for
many years to supply, from within its own limits, the timber required
by the several nations. This deficiency is on the increase, and goes
to prove that prices will be higher in the future than they have
been in the past. Our main supplies come from the Baltic, Canada,
and the United States of America, and it is estimated that the latter |
country is at present consuming five times more timber than she is
producing. Mr James Wilson, the Secretary of the Agricultural °
Department of Washington, in a pamphlet entitled the “Timber :
Supply of the United States,” poitits out that the area of all forests
in the United States is about 700,000,000 acres. The annual cut-
ting is 400,000,000 tous, which is equal to the increment of three
years. As only one-fifth of the area belotigs to the Government,
atid four-fifths ate private property, the result is that the pressure
for supplying the United States is increasing evety year, and they
must more and more fall back tpott ittiports fromt Canada. - This
will seriously affect us in this eouitry, and is to my thittd conclusive
proof as to the growing scarcity of timber, and the high prices thag |

v

will have to be paid. During the years 1890 to 1896 there has
been an increase in price equal to 17 per cent., and if we take
coniferous woods only, the increase is equal to 30 per cent. during
the same period. In fact, so far as timber is concerned, the world
has been living greatly on its capital, and not upon its production
alone. Vast areas of forests have been destroyed, or their produce
converted into timber, and countries which have been, large
exporters are finding themselves to be in danger of shortage for
their own requirements.

According to the Report on Irish Forestry, the area under
timber in 1907 in England was equal to 5°3 per cent., Scotland 4°6
per cent., Wales 3°9 per cent., and Ireland only 1°5 per cent.
Whereas in Austria the area under timber was equal to 32 per cent.,
Hungary 27 per cent., France 17 per cent., Belgium 17 per cent.,
Germany 26 per cent., Holland 8 per cent., and Denmark 7 per
cent. Compared with other countries we occupy an unenviable
position, a continuance of which cannot be justified.

Of the timber we import at the present time, 87 per cent. are
pine and fir, 3 per cent. oak, and 10 per cent. teak, mahogany, and
other furniture woods. Hence 90 per cent., or nine million tons,
are material which can be produced in this country by the afforesta-
tion of six or seven million acres of land: ‘The total value of our
imports to-day cannot be far short of 30 million pounds. The
expenditure of only a reasonable sum of this money at home on
afforestation would mean employment for a considerable number
of our unemployed in digging, trenching, planting, &c. Some
experts are of opinion that every 1,000 acres of added forest would
provide work for about 16 men, representing a population of 80
persons. This is without taking into account those that would
ultimately be employed in the transport of the produce, and in the
various industries—chair making, cartwrighting, coach building,
furniture making, packing box making, the making of bobbins,
spools, tool handles, and timber for building trades and railway
companies—which regularly managed woodlands generally give
tise to. It is estimated that 2,500 acres of sheep land are looked
after by one shepherd, whereas under forestry one man to about
100 acres would be employed, or in other words, 20 men in place
of one. The estimates do not vary to any great extent, and all go
to prove that forestry on an adequate scale will provide a great
deal of employment, and that is one of its principal advantages to
a country.

Up to this point several important ‘particulars have been
brought home tous. First, that land in this country under all
heads is going out of cultivation, and that we are far behitid other
European countries in this respect; second, that we are threatened
with a timber famine, and, therefore, a steady increase in the price
of the timber we require; and, third, that afforestation, especially in _
conjtinction with a scheine of snial! holdings, would provide labout’

10

for a large number of those at present unemployed. In regard to
these three points there will be practical agreement, and what we
have now to prove is as to whether there is sufficient land for a
State scheme of afforestation, whether such land could be profitably
used for the purpose, and next, as to whether the unemployed.
could with beneficial results be employed upon it.

As to how much land there is available for afforestation, the
agricultural returns for 1906 give the following information :—
England has 2,371,000 acres of mountain and heath land used for
grazing, Wales 1,288,000 acres, Scotland 9,088,000 acres, and
Ireland 2,244,000 acres, giving a grand total of 14,922,000 acres
available for the purpose. In addition to this there is an additional
area in Ireland of bog, marsh, and barren mountain land, waste, &c.,
of over 2,000,000 acres, fully one-third of which might be profitably
used for the purpose of timber growing. Great quantities of similar
land in England, Wales, and Scotland also exist. The land, there-
fore, abounds in plenty, and seeing that much of it is at present let
for sums varying from 1/- to 2/6 per acre, it will not be seriously
argued that it could not be more profitably put to a better use.

As to the financial aspect of the question, much valuable
information exists to guide us in regard to this point. Whatever
might be said as to our climate in other respects, it is all right for
the growing of timber, and, therefore, what other countries have
achieved, we could equally do. In 1904 the capital value of the
forests in Saxony, the land, and the timber standing upon it, came
to £19,070,606, and calculated according to the outlay, with com-
pound interest at 34 per cent., it comes to £48 8s. Od. per acre.
Taking the forests of Saxony all round, good, bad, and indifferent,.
there is a return equal to 24 per cent. on the present capital
value. Owing to the difference in climate, however, the production
of timber in these islands will be more rapidythan in Saxony, so
that if we take into consideration, by way ofta comparison, that
we can produce timber crops more rapidly, and possibly of more
valuable kinds, we might safely count on a return of from
3 to 34 per cent. ‘The State or Crown forests of Hesse Darmstadt
cover an area of 175,700 acres, and the yield of timber per acre
is only 17 cubic feet, and the firewood represents 46 cubic feet
per acre per annum. The actual receipts per acre are £1 3s. 6d.,
and when 5/3 is deducted for preparation, you have a net receipt
from wood ‘alone of 18/3 per acre. Though these returns are
satisfactory, much better results, as indicated above, could be
achieved in this country. Dr. Schlich, at a conference on afforesta-
tion, in London, on June 25th, 1907, gave particulars of a: larch
wood of 208 acres belonging to Sir Herbert Lewis. The
wood was cut down sottie. yedrs ago, the locality being a
very steep hill side, and the soil light sandy loam, but
hot deep. The rental value of the locality was originally given

11

at 5/- pet acre per annum. At 30 years’ purchase the value of the
soil comes to £7 10s, Od. per acre. The actual returns were as
follows :—From thinnings, £4,500; from final fellings at the age
of 50 years, £14,500. Throwing the thinnings together with the
final yield, the total receipts came to £19,000, or £91 per acre at
the age of 50 years. Putting the cost of planting at £5 per acre,
which, according to Sir Herbert, is more than it did cost, the
result is that this plantation has given all round compound interest
at 54 per cent. Take two other examples by Mr Elwes. The.
first example is as follows :—The value of the land is £8 per acre;
cost of planting larch, fencing, &c., £7 10s. Od. per acre; annual
expetises, 7/6 per acre throughout. The returns from thinnings
at 25 years, £10; thinnings at 40 years, £30; thinnings at 60 years,
£60; and the final yield at 100 years was £150. Assuming that
the capital was taken out of investments which yielded 3 per cent.,
the result is that this wood would have yielded compound interest
at the rate of 4°312 per cent. In the second example the value of
the land is £6 per acre; the cost of planting, £7 10s. Od. an acre;
antiual expenses, 7/6 an acre during the first 25 years, and after-
wards 2/6, owing to receipts from shooting. The returns are :—
Thinnings at 25 years, £10 an acre; thinnings at 40 years, £20 an
acre; and the final yield at 60 years, £100 an acre. The result is
that the plantation gives compound interest at 74 per cent.

We have next the example given by Mr W. B, Havelock, who
is well known as an authority. The return is of a wood 18 acres in
extent actually cut down, and the land value of which he estimates
at £7 10s, Od. an acre, because as soon as the wood was cut, gorse
and other shrubs made their appearance. The cost of planting
that wood, including fencing, &c., came to £8 an acre. The value
of the thinnings is not known, but the old woodma: asserts that
several hundred pounds’ worth have been taken out for sale and
estate purposes. The value of the shooting is not given, but it
might easily be put at cost of looking after the wood. ‘The age of
that wood when cut was betwéen 75 and 80 years, and it gave the
following results :—There were 1,328 larch trees, 262 Scotch pine,
74 oak, 116 beech, 35 birch, 12 spruce, and 120 ash. The net
receipts, after deducting all expenses of harvesting, selling, &c.,
were £2,835 3s. 10d., which is equal to £157 10s. Od. per: acre.
Taking the mean between 75 and 80 years as the age of the wood,
and allowing compound ititerest, it will be found that this wood has
yielded to the proprietor 3°56 per cent., or a little over 34 per cent.
If the value of the thinnings were known, and included, the rate of
interest would certainly have been not less than 4 per cent.

Mr Fraser Story, of the University College of North Wales,
Bangor, in an interesting article to the “ Manchester Guardian,”
points out that the actual experience of Western Europe is that

12

afforestation may be highly remunerative. ‘The Hartz Mountains
yield a revenue of 14/- per acre, while the Giant Mountains in
Silesia—a wild district—give a return of about £1 per acre. The
woods belonging to the town of Zurich, in Switzerland, yield a net
revenue of 30/- per acre, and goes to demonstrate what can be done
under favourable conditions. Taking together, both the good and
the bad, the State woods of Germany, extending over 10,000,000
acres of land, produce 11/- per acre of profit each year, and they
give employment to nearly, 100,000 people. Experiments are
being conducted by this gentleman in Derbyshire on 50 acres of
land, the elevation of which ranges from 950 to 1,250 feet above sea
level. The land is rough pasture, consisting of grass and extensive
patches of gorse, and is used for the grazing of Welsh mountain
sheep. ‘ 115,000 plants are required for the area, which it is
intended to raise in their own nursery. He states:—There are
many ways of bringing about improvements in British forestry, but
surely nothing is more certain to inspire confidence in modern
methods than actual tests with the trees themselves. We might
reasonably insist that better timber, and more of it per acre, could
be raised than is usual under existing treatment. Practical investi-
gation into forestry is urgently needed in all parts of the country,
and it is earnestly hoped that County Councils, other public bodies, _
and Government itself will recognise the fact. ©

The State Forests of Germany in 1905 yielded the following
results :—

Area of Forests* Nett Return

per acre,
Acres, Shillings,
Dm PYUSS18 ys sasesnsinspeesisveadedereessnsessssessast 200, 0LO rs seereesie ... 100
A—Bavaria .iscesscccsccssseoes Salasaguedogina ado 2,315,252......ssecesee0 10°4
3—Wiirtemberg .......ccecsees Pecacanicsdutens © 4B3,487 oe cecceeee BOS
4 Saxony? cesivssstccsvetcpdeteceasoatenseaveess 443,312... .cccceceesee 21°2
5—Alsace-Lorraine .....ccsscscsseseessesoeees 580,649......ccesseere 120
6--Baden ...... seu sderatansuampeacaobenesueaeuess oe 254,455. .0.0008 sooeeel 99
T—Brumswick .....cssecccccersnssnvesseeseeseenee 210,338.....0rceeceekl 3
8—Hesse Darmstadt .........ssssseeseseecenene 178,801.,...0.06 seeveeOS -
9—Saxe-Weittar.....ccsccccccccseseonssseeee vase 114,349 seseccconseven ll 'F
10—Saxe-Meiningen .... secsecesoree 109,878. csccssveve v008L'S
11—Anhalt......... Mi eatuariaesa sasasecagedars HL DOS raise ccessisei O'S
12—Waldeck-Pyrmont . sorencesere— BT, 330. ssseeceersevee 6°2
1W3—Oldenburg wi.ciiccesssssssscessscssseseeets C444 csessrcerene 7B
1W4—Schwatzburg ccccsstssissscerceresseces 94,599 sscorreeerecn Ol

The. results financially, both at home and abroad, are, there-
fore, of a most satisfactory character, and go far to remove any
doubt existing under this Head. In fact, generally speaking, it is
estimated that on Jand for which £1 per acre was paid there would

‘#iicluditig some bate ground,

13

be a return of 4 per cent.; £2 per acre, 3'9 per cent.; £4 per acre,
3°65 per cent.; £6 per acre, 3'5 per cent.; £8 per acre, 3°3 per
cent.; £10 per acre, 3°l per cent.; £15 per acre, 2°9 per cent.;
£20 per acre, 2°65 per cent.; £25 per acre, 2°45 per cent.; and
£30 per acre, 2'23 per cent. Noone anticipates that forests would
yield a bigger percentage than agriculture, but it will give an
exceedingly steady revenue, and will not change anything like the
revenue from cultivated fields, or even so much as the revenue to
be derived from British Consols.

One is not surprised, therefore, at the report of the Irish
Committee, who recommend a national scheme of afforestation..
The area available for woodland they put at one million acres, and
they suggest as a start the planting of 200,000 acres. The expenses
are put, including the purchase of land required, at £44,525 per
annum in the first decade, to £66,725 in the second decade, to
£74,600 in the third, to £67,100 in the fourth, and: to £32,600 in
the fifth. After this period the scheme provides a surplus over
purchase annuities and working and administrative. expenses,
eventually yielding a return of 4$ per cent. on the total capital
invested. They state further:—In presenting our report, we desire
to express in the strongest way our sense of the obligation which
lies upon the State to act immediately in this matter. Grievous
mischief, loss, and waste are going on, and ought to be checked
without delay.

The Government have started upon a scheme of afforestation
in Scotland. They have purchased an estate in Argyllshire for
some £30,000, and it will ‘shortly be planted with trees for the.
production of commercial timber. The area of the estate is 12,000
acres, and the ground is merely rough heather and moor. It is
practically uninhabited, and treeless, but in a few years there will
bea great change. It can safely be assumed that under systematic.
forest treatment ten men will find employment permanently to every,
one man hitherto engaged on this estate, while the profit will be at.
least from five to six times greater than before. The Office of
Woods and Forests have also one or two small plantations, and
although they are only of a timorous character, they have been
quite successful. Again, there are 34 local authorities in England
and Wales who own or lease 90,000 acres, and eight schemes of
afforestation are actually at work, or have been attempted in some
form or other by the authorities. Of the 90,000 acres, 2,000 acres
are in woodland. Liverpool possesses the largest tract of actual
ferest or potential land, owning 22,000 acres in Montgomery, of
which 606 acres are in woodland. Leeds has 11,778 acres of
watershed, and 239 in process of development for afforestation
purposes. Birmingham has about 5,000 acres, 410 in woodland ;
Bradford, 7,000 acres, but no woodland; and Manchester has
11,000 acres in Cumberland, but there are not many acres in the

14

condition of forestry. We have, therefore, in the hands of
Municipalities already a great quantity of land that might be used
for the purposes of afforestation,

When we come to ask ourselves the question as to what we
can do with the unemployed in regard to this matter, arguments
and prejudices to the contrary have got to be met and dealt with.
In the case of each of the examples quoted on previous pages,
apart from Municipal effort, the work has been performed by men
trained and accustomed to rural life. And having this in mind,
many people at once conclude that it is out of the question to'think,
of setting the unemployéd to work at afforestation. They will tell
you of a Municipality that has made the attempt with unemployed
labour, and as settling the matter once for all, point out that the
work cost anything from 25 per cent. to 50 per cent. more than
would have been the case had men accustomed to the work been
employed thereon instead. This is the type of opponent with
which we have to deal, and our endeavour ought to be to convince
him that his view is an unjust one, and not at all- businesslike,

The unemployed man, with a wife and family, who is in poverty,
has to be kept, and it is estimated that the cost of keeping a pauper
in London amounts to 14/- per week. In the end the man is still
a pauper, and the nation has in no way been recompensed for the
money sperit on him. From an economic standpoint, the longer.a
man is out of work the more costly will the solution of the problem
become. His wife and children and himself will all deteriorate.
Our opponents must, therefore, fix that.14/- per week in their minds
when considering the question of cost. What are the facts of the
case, however, as to the supposed failures in dealing with the un-
employed on this and work of a similar character on the land?
Take the man who has been some time out of work, and whose
wage when in work did not amount to more than 20/- or 25/- per
week, and out of which he had a wife and family to support. Out
of such a wage he could not possibly put anything away for the
time of necessity, and do justice to himself and family. After a
fortnight’s unemployment the position of such a man is most
precarious, and after a few months is most appalling. Tea and
bread, and that not regular, takes the place of somewhat substantial
and regular meals. The inevitable result is that deterioration,
both physical and moral, takes place, and he naturally becomes
quite unable to perform the work he originally did. Evidence from
every town can be adduced as proof of this. One case out of
many from my own town (Sunderland), however, will probably
suffice. It is as follows:—A man in appealing for cast-off clothing
or boots, goes on to say that he and his wife had stripped them-
selves and their three children for food, and the beds also. The
cause of poverty is only want of work. This is 15 weeks since
we hadapenny. IJ have pledged everything we had before asking

15

for help.” Councillor Swan, Ex-Mayor, who investigated the tase,
said they were a very respectable family, and that the house had
been almost stripped in order to keep the rent paid up to date.
They had been tenants in their present house for 11 years. There
were sacks on the beds for covering, with the exception of a quilt
which had been given them, &c. The man is a dock labourer, and
has been a soldier. It was a most patHetic case, and quite genuine.

Can any person in reason expect a man tike this to turn out
and do work equal with that performed by a man who has been
well fed, housed, and having a contented mind? Yet that is what
we have been doing, and because he has failed many people argue
that it is quite impossible to grapple with the unemployed problem.
All those who have had any experience whatever in regard to such
schemes agree that if the unemployed were given a chance in
regard to good food and housing for but a' week or two, that they
would give quite satisfactory results in comparison with the work
performed by men constantly employed.

There are, however, some thousands of men who have migrated
from the rural areas, and who would return to the country if the
opportunity presented itself. With a central Government depart-
ment in touch with all the unemployed agencies jn the country,
this class of labour could be first got together and set to work on
afforestation. If this were done, success financially would attend
it from the start. As to the town-bred unemployed workman, all
that is wanted is willingness on his part to do the work, and on
the part of the promoters to give him a week or two, with good
food and housing accommodation, and even he would do this class
of work all right.

The possibilities in regard to this question are greater than
some people imagine. Why even the spoil banks of the black
country are being made pleasing to the eye by the planting of trees
on them. This is being done by an Association, who pay the
unemployed 18/- per week for such work, and who go as far as to.
say that they anticipate a return of 24 per cent. These hideous
spéil heaps exist all over the country, and inasmuch as trees will
grow on them, why not have them used for that purpose? The
landscape would be all the better for it.

Mr Chiozza Money, M.P., in that excellent book of his,
“ Riches and Poverty,” writes :—‘‘ Forestry is almost an unknown
art in the United Kingdom. Landowners do not understand it;
their agents do not understand it. Yet its possibilities are
enormous, and might be realised. There need be no acre of the
77,000,000 not useful or not beautiful. Millions of acres of
land now termed waste may be clothed in verdure to yield a
steady and certain income, and make us largely independent of
imported timber, , , » » Hvery acre afforested would require

suiiaiignyuy
3 1924 092 434 715 |

about £2 worth of labour. After planting each acre would need
only about five days’ labour a year, but that means 30,000,000 days
of work. The timber grown and cut, there would be the transport,
lumbering, and allied industries calling for labour. Dr. Schlichk
estimates ‘that 500,000 men, or say 2,500,000 people, would find
employment through the afforestation of say six million acres, and
the estimate is based upon solid foundations. A business which

does not begin to yield income for some 15 years is not for the |

average private landowner. But the people, who have waited so
long for the right to tread their own soil, can wait these 15 years,
and other 15 if need be. Given thé overlordship of area, the
establishment of a permanent Land and Housing Commission, the
nationalization of the means of transport, the establishment of
well-endowed schools of agriculture and forestry, and a generation
of well-born children; what possibilities open out before us. Is
this idea too large for a race which talks of Empire’?

I have attempted to prove that afforestation schemes on a
large scale can be put into operation with advantage by the State
in England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland.

If the reader is of the same opinion, then I would ask hith to, :

join the Independent Labour Party, in order that next election.
may see a larger number of the Labour Party in the House of.
Commons, pledged and prepared to tackle this problem. The
landed interest, my friends, have monopolised the Commons of
England too long. ta

Much more might be said, but space will not permit, and any-, ?

one desiring of still further considering the question cannot ‘do

better than read Dr. Schlich’s book on “Forestry,” Prince —

Kropotkin’s “Fields, Factories, and Workshops,” and Mr’
Blatchford’s “Britain for the British,” in addition to the book’
last quoted.

1.L.P. PAMPHLETS, ONE PENNY EACH.

The Problem of Unemployment. By G. N. Barnes, M.P.

The Unemployed Bill of the Labour Party. By J. Ramsay Macdonald, M.P.
John Bull and His Unemployed. By J. Keir Hardie, M.P.

The Right to Work. By H. Russell Smart.

Send for complete list, post free, from I.L.P. Publication Depart-.

ment, 23 Bride Lane, Fleet Street, London, E.C.

SUMMBRBELL, PRINTER, SUNDERLAND.