landlord when the present leases expire--a fact that often gives rise to
some serious thoughts and reflections. Many people feel very sore upon
this matter, and wax strong and vehement upon what is known as the
"unearned increment" question. I do not propose to lash this horse,
which is every now and then trotted out and properly thrashed by
reforming economists and others. "Unearned increment" is one of those
accidental incidents of life which can hardly be controlled or reckoned
with. Why should some men be sound and healthy and six feet high, and
others weak and feeble and only four feet ten? Most unequal and unjust!
If I have a field, and a town grows up to it of its own accord, and
somebody offers me four times as much as I gave for it, I hardly see why
I should be reckoned a thief and a robber if I pocket the proffered
cash. To take another illustration. I may have on my house-walls a
picture for which I gave twenty pounds. The artist has "gone up" since I
made my purchase, and I am now offered a hundred and twenty pounds for
my painting. "Unearned increment!"

But away with this question! I find I am getting the whip out, although
I promised not to thrash this wretched old economic hack. Only just one
little parting crack of the lash. Dealing with "unearned increment"
being an impracticability, perhaps it would be well for landlords who
benefit immensely by the accident of circumstances to recognise the fact
that they _do_ pocket a great "unearned increment," and be ungrudgingly
generous in return for benefits received. If this were done the names
of suburban landlords would not be received with such derision and
contempt as they are sometimes now, and "unearned increment" would
become all but an obsolete phrase.