governmental system of Russia to-day. That is pretty well understood, as the result of the recent visit of the Labour Delegation, and of the Reports and books to which it has given rise. The government of Russia, whatever it is in form, is run in fact by the Bolshevik organisation, which now calls itself the Communist party, and which does not claim to have more than 600,000 members, and probably numbers far less. It consists of fanatics and time-servers: it fills the vast civil service and enjoys powers and privileges which make life comfortable even in a Socialist country; and it drives along all the unwieldy mass of nominally representative councils. Its Congress speaks as master, with no pretence of subjection to a higher authority: 'it finds necessary' this or that, and it therefore decrees it.' The Bolshevik leaders realise the danger such power gives to individuals, especially in a country with the allpervasive tradition of corruption inherited from Czarist days. It is against this that their Extraordinary Commission is established, quite as much as to beat down open opponents. But terrorism has never formed an effective instrument of government for a long period; and it is probably only terrorism which stands between Russia and a government like that of Tammany. Tammany was a society which, in the guise of philanthropy, misruled New York, by driving respectable voters away from the elections and manipulating the votes of the rest. And Tammany had only the municipal taxes and city contracts to play with: it did not control the whole industrial and commercial life of a great nation. WILLIAM ASHLEY. Art. 10. THE WAGES PROBLEM IN AGRICULTURE. 1. A History of the English Agricultural Labourer, 1870-1920. By F. E. Green. King, 1920. 2. Village Trade Unions in Two Centuries. By Ernest Selley. Allen & Unwin, 1921. 3. Report of the Agricultural Policy Sub-Committee. Cd. 9079. 1916. 4. Corn Production Act, 1917. 5. Orders of the Agricultural Wages Board, 1918-20. 6. Wages and Conditions of Employment in Agriculture. Cmd. 24 and 25. 1919. 7. Report on Financial Results of Farming and Cost of Living. Cmd. 76. 1919. 8. Report and Evidence of Royal Commission on Agriculture, 1919-20. Cmd. 345, 365, 391, 445, and 665. IN the turmoil of social, political, and economic complexities which is vaguely termed 'the Labour question,' wages form only one ingredient, although necessarily the most apparent. Agricultural workers being the latest class of wage-earners to become organised, have so far been pre-occupied with a struggle for higher wages; and while having, through their leaders, some contact with industrial Trade Unions, cannot be said to have developed at present any line of action outside the improvement of their economic status. It follows that a consideration of the wages problem in agriculture comprises in effect a consideration of the general position of the farm labourer under present conditions. It is desirable, at the outset, to note the fact that there is in connexion with agricultural wages a problem which differs in some respects from that presented in other industries, although certain broad principles are common to all classes of wage-earners. A living wage -using that ambiguous term as signifying a wage sufficient to maintain a reasonable standard of life-and hours of employment which leave time for a fair amount of leisure, with provision for extra payment if such hours are exceeded, are among the demands of all workers, whether in the factory or the field. In the cultivation of the soil or the care of live stock, the conditions of employment are less under the control of the employer than in other industries. There are, of course, other occupations in which the weather is an important factor. The work of a builder, for example, may be interrupted and his men become idle for considerable periods. But in farming there is not only interruption of work at certain times, but there is also the need for a compensatory excess of work at other times. If the building of a house is delayed by weather, its ultimate completion may be delayed for a similar period; but if work on a crop is stopped at one season, it by no means follows that its harvesting can be deferred for an equivalent time. Nature, not the employer, decides when it must be in-gathered. With live stock the helplessness of the employer is still more evident. A postponement of milking means not merely the breaking of a contract to supply milk, but in a very short period the total loss of the cows, which represent the cow-owner's capital. There is no other form of enterprise in which the employer's organisation of labour-power is so liable to disturbance from causes beyond his control. The special difficulties which arise. in connexion with work on the land or with live stock do not, of course, prevent fair and satisfactory arrangements being made between employers and workers to meet them; but they necessitate recognition of the fact that the terms of employment in agriculture are subject to conditions which are exceptional and inexorable. Another point of difference which has an important influence on the present problem is the fact that agriculture is the last of the great industries in which the workers have become organised. Attempts, beginning with the tragedy of Tolpuddle in 1833, were made from time to time to organise the agricultural labourers; but although some success was achieved it was but temporary. Six or seven years ago it is probable that not more than 10,000 farm workers were enrolled in any union, although in the time when Joseph Arch's campaign reached its highest level, about 1873, it was claimed that his union had a membership of nearly 90,000. It is natural, in the light of present-day knowledge, to look back, with regret, on the sorry history of the efforts of the agricultural labourers to combine, and the way in which those efforts were met. While it is possible charitably to credit with honest convictions those who so strenuously opposed the men, it is not possible to acquit them of unwisdom. Their action left behind cruel memories, and the relations of farmers and labourers in many districts were embittered for a generation. The nemesis of this delay has come in the guise of a further difficulty in dealing with the present situation. In other great industries the unions of the workers have been built up during a considerable period, with the result that their members have gradually acquired experience, and as numbers increased the organisation developed accordingly. In the case of agriculture, the growth of the unions has been so rapid that with the exception of a few leaders who have had an education in trade unionism outside agriculture, the whole body of members are inexperienced; and it is difficult to find amongst them a sufficient number of men qualified to represent the views of their fellows. In this connexion recognition should be made of the difficulty and responsibility of the task which has fallen upon the leaders of the National Agricultural Workers' Union and the Workers' Union. Any one who realises the possibilities which arise when, within the course of a couple of years, two or three hundred thousand men are organised, filled with expectations of immediate and tangible results, and excited by visions of a new heaven and a new earth, must recognise that they might be easily led into hasty and inconsiderate action. It is to the credit of those who have guided the counsels of the men that under circumstances of much difficulty, and at a time of great social and industrial unrest, they have carried on their campaign, on the whole, with moderation and discretion. Nor are the difficulties arising from the rapid development of agricultural unionism confined to the workers' side. British farmers are the embodiment of individualism. They are probably the most obdurate class in the community to stir into collective action. They may be easily induced by some sense of grievance to hold meetings and express violent condemnation of the Government (whatever it may be); their indignation being frequently most hot against those who are attempting to further their interests. But for sustained action to achieve a definite and well-considered policy they have in the past shown little aptitude. The majority of farmers have also inherited a mental attitude towards labour which renders it difficult for them to realise the change in all social relationships which the war so greatly accelerated. The dominance of the proletariat, to which all political forces have been tending during the past fifty years, has become complete and overwhelming. Like all political changes in this country, it came so gradually, that to those who lived in the backwaters of life it was almost imperceptible. The end of the war, and the return to civil life of the youth who had been for five years maturing in the hot-bed of war, brought about the completion of the development with apparent suddenness. The extension of the franchise, with its inclusion of women, signalised the event, but its full significance was not appreciated by farmers. Indeed, the experience of the war and the blandishments of which he was the object tended to arouse a belief in the farmer's mind that he would be in future a privileged person-a kind of national pet-to be humoured and helped and exempted from all the troubles which are the common lot of those who attempt to earn their living. The shock, therefore, was severe, when he realised that in the one phase of his business in which he had always felt free and unfettered -that of dealing with his men-he was to be subjected to drastic interference. That the law should compel him to pay a certain wage and should forbid him from making his own bargain with a man who wished to be employed, was almost inconceivable. No doubt, the control exercised over his freedom of dealing with his land and the produce thereof, had done something to inure him to State intervention in the conduct of his business; but, nevertheless, the idea of authority coming between him and his men was very startling. On the whole, farmers have accepted the new conditions, if not with cheerfulness, with surprising celerity. That the Orders of the Wages Board are obeyed with reluctance, and that attempts to ignore or evade them are common, is true; but this is not infrequently due as much to bewilderment as to deliberate resistance. The acceptance with so little disturbance of what is, in fact, a revolution in the economic relationship of farmers and labourers, is |