We know of nothing more annoying than to be publicly
accused of being richer than you are. Not to mention the tantalising nature of the charge, the applications for money are instantly doubled, your benefactions are at once considered stingy, and your dependants think they may spend without -detection or remonstrance. Tenants become acigeants about repairs, and debtors think a reminder, however gentle, proof of your unnecessary graspingness. We are really sorry, therefore, for a misconception, or rather a blunder, in consulting Domes- -day Book, under which, in our issue of December 1st, we im- puted to Lord Shaftesbury a rent-roll of 240,000 a year. He has 20,000 acres, but they only yield him nominally £16,000 a year, and probably, at a time like this, somewhat less. The argument, to support which we quoted, as we thought, the of- figures, is not, of course, affected by the error. Even were his rent-roll only £10,000 a year, Lord Shaftesbury would still be a man whose interests are opposed to any attack on landlords, and who, in condemning them as he does for letting uninhabit- able buildings, must be disinterested.
Previous page
