are framed. At that stage of human progress where slavery and polygamy prevail, where private rights are at the mercy of the chief or despot, where agriculture is unknown, and population is kept down by incessant wars and famines, we find the land unappropriated. Wherever these abuses disappear, and the garments of civilization are put on, there private ownership of land appears. The pastoral or nomadic state is exchanged for the agricultural, and dense populations take the place of thinly scattered tribes " (Mr. SAMUEL SMITH, M.P.).

We hear too much of "the vast amount of wealth accumulated in individual hands, and the poverty and the starvation lying at the very doors of the rich." And to remedy this, we are told that the land must revert to the State, because it is impossible for a mail to subsist comfortably unless he has trio necessary land for him to live upon. Natural justice, we are told, ''can recognize no right in one man to the possession and enjoyment of land that is not equally the right of all his fellows." The people have a right to the land; landlords are "marauders.'' Time owner may have bought and paid for the land, but lie has bought a something that these theorists say could not in justice be sold. Land owning is the same to them as slave owning; no matter how acquired, it is as unfair and unjust to have land as to have slaves. I do not think the comparison a fair one, and fail to see that natural justice denies to any man the right to own all the land lie can pay for; the argument that by the few owning the land, the many are excluded there from, is absurd; people do not