in the western outskirts of London, the Ealing Tenants, Limited. By concentrating its operations on one estate, the Ealing Society was able to include many features, such as a model estate plan, an institute, recreation and playing sites, which are impossible if the property is scattered in different districts. It thus established for itself the claim of being 'The Pioneer Co-partnership Village'; and under the title of 'Co-partnership in Housing' the movement has made rapid strides in the last nine years. There are now fourteen societies, holding property at the end of 1911 to the value of about 1,005,000l., and engaged in developing further property to the value of about 1,207,500l.

Mr Unwin, the Consulting Architect to the Co-partnership Tenants Society, has well said that the Co-partnership Tenants movement marks a new era in housing; for not only is the individual likely to procure for himself a better house and a larger garden by obtaining them through a Co-partnership Society than by any other means, but the introduction of co-operation opens up quite a new range of possibilities. Through the medium of co-operation all may enjoy a share of many advantages, the individual possession of which can only be attained by the few. The man who is sufficiently wealthy may have his own shrubberies, tennis-courts, bowling-green, or play-places for his children, and may, by the size of his grounds, secure an open and pleasant outlook from all his windows; but the individual possession of such grounds is quite out of reach of the majority. A Copartnership Association can, however, provide for all its members a share of these advantages, and of far more than these. In fact, the scope of the principle is limited only by the power of those who associate to accept and enjoy the sharing of great things in place of the exclusive possession of small things.

In exceptional cases some enlightened owner company may so lay out an estate as to provide for the common enjoyment of some of the advantages of the site; but usually, everything is sacrificed which will not produce a revenue, and which cannot be divided up into the individual self-contained plots, marked by the maximum degree of detachment, which are so desired by those who know only of individual possession and have

not learned the joys of sharing. Where a site is being developed on co-partnership lines the whole position is changed. Instead of a chance assortment of individuals there is now a whole to be thought of and planned for. A home is to be made for a community with something like an organised common life. A centre is needed for this life; institutes, clubs, schools, or places of worship may form such a centre, towards which the design can be made to lead. The site can be thought of and planned as a whole; and the certainty of some degree of cooperation will enable spots of natural beauty and distant views of hill and dale to be preserved for common enjoyment. Play-places and shelters for the children, greens for tennis, bowls or croquet can be arranged, with the houses so grouped around them that, while they provide the occupants with recreation ground, they also afford both more pleasant prospects from the windows and more attractive views for the streets. In this way, instead of the buildings being mere endless rows, or the repetition of isolated houses having no connexion one with the other, they will naturally gather themselves into groups; while the groups again, clustered around the greens, will form larger units, and the interest and beauty of grouping will at once arise. The principle of sharing, therefore, not only causes each individual house to become more attractive, but gives to the whole area covered that coherence which, springing from the common life of the community, expresses itself in the harmony and beauty of the whole. This harmony of outward expression must in turn react on the life that flourishes under its influence, at once stimulating the growth of co-operation and giving wider opportunities for its practice.

It is clear that good town and city planning is greatly facilitated where building estates are being developed by Public Utility Societies or companies, such as those connected with the co-partnership movement. A public authority genuinely anxious to plan its area on enlightened principles is in a position, under the Housing and Town-planning Act, to make concessions of considerable value to estate developers, not only without detriment to the public interest, but actually so as to promote it; on the other hand, it can secure, in return for these concessions, valuable help from the estate-owners in

the carrying-out of the larger scheme of town-planning which the Public Authority has on hand. Such mutual exchange of facilities is obviously more possible when there exists a Public Utility Society engaged in develop ing, on enlightened methods, a large area of urban land That Germany has found such Public Utility Societies valuable in town-planning work may be judged from the fact that the public authorities not only co-operate with such companies, but actually promote their formation and give them financial aid.

Urban land-owners who wish their estates developed SO as to avoid the creation of slums find it difficult unless it is done through a Public Utility Society or something like it. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who have on some of the urban land they control practised a public-spirited housing policy, point out in one of their pamphlets * that:

'It is not safe merely to hand over the land for such purposes by way of leases to private individuals whose interest as lessees is mainly to secure a profitable return for their outlay in building. The erection of suitable houses can doubtless be assured in this way by the control which the lessors are able, before leases are granted, to exercise over their lessees as to the design and construction of the buildings to be placed on the land; and their continued maintenance as dwellinghouses can be safeguarded by covenant. But, upon the grant of the leases, the future management of the houses necessarily passes into the hands of the lessees; and the Commissioners or other lessors cannot effectively guard against sub-letting, which leads to the evil of the "middleman" and the raising of rents, inevitably followed by subdivision of tenements and overcrowding.'

It is clear from a study of the question that the present methods of town-development meet the needs of a growing community in a very uneven and wasteful way. Supply follows or anticipates demand in patches. A public-house or perhaps a grocer's shop is required in a new neighbourhood; and they appear fairly promptly. The demand for residences is also quickly met in a rough and ready way. The stimulus to these activities is, of

* 'Metropolitan Estates: provision of dwellings for the Work Classes' (No. 36. 1904). H.M. Stationery Office.

course, the practical certainty of a direct and quick return on the capital involved in the speculation. The same economic conditions, however, do not apply in the case of other things which are essential to the healthy growth of urban communities. There can be no direct and prompt return to a capital expended in a new neighbourhood on securing in advance such conveniences as playing-sites, sites for schools and other public buildings, or land for widening the principal thoroughfares; yet, unless there is some authority anticipating the needs of the community in these respects, not only does the speculative estate-developer neglect them, but he actually becomes an obstacle to their supply in the future. He builds on the margins which should at once be taken for main-road widenings. He cuts down the trees which a bountiful Nature has taken years to grow on land which is obviously the very site to secure for a public park. In making his little patches of road he naturally regards his present profit rather than the welfare of the community in years to come. Nevertheless, in selling or leasing his land for building lots, the estate-developer asks an enhanced price because it includes the prospective value which the open spaces, the educational facilities, the cheap transit and the good drainage offer; and he takes for granted that the heavily-rated residents will one day go to the enormous expense of providing these in the district. A pressing need to-day undoubtedly is to secure the regulation of present enterprise in estatedevelopment so that it may not hamper or even render financially impossible those future improvements upon which the health and efficiency of a town depend.

Whether Public Utility or Co-partnership Tenants Societies will come into being rapidly enough to supply any large proportion of the demand for estate-development, experience alone can determine; but it is clear that they are able to give guarantees in many desirable directions which it is difficult to get in any other way. HENRY VIVIAN.

Art. 11.-THE FACE OF THE EARTH.

1. The Face of the Earth (Das Antlitz der Erde). By Eduard Suess. Translated by Hertha B. C. Sollas under the direction of W. J. Sollas. Four vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1904-9.

2. The Founders of Geology. By Sir Archibald Geikie, F.R.S. Second edition, re-written and much enlarged. London: Macmillan, 1905.

3. The Coming of Evolution (Cambridge Manuals of Science and Literature). By John W. Judd. Cambridge: University Press, 1910.

4. The Student's Lyell. Edited by John W. Judd, with historical Introduction. London: Murray, 1911. GEOLOGY is a science comparatively modern, though, even before the Christian era, philosophers sometimes sought to explain terrestrial phenomena. For ages after the fall of the Roman Empire inductive reasoning was in dis favour, and ecclesiastical censure repressed the study of the earth; but with the stirring of the Renaissance the demands of reason became more insistent, the fear of the Church less oppressive. Here one, there another, began to investigate; and towards the end of the eighteenth century the number of students became considerable.* Foremost among the geologists of his day was James Hutton, a Scotsman, who, after a varied experience in England and abroad, returned to Edinburgh, his native city, and devoted himself to the study of geology. His great work on the Theory of the Earth' was still incomplete when he died in 1797, and might have attracted little attention, owing to certain defects in style, had not his intimate friend, John Playfair, acted as an interpreter, and published (1802) his 'Illustrations of the Huttonian Theory of the Earth.'

Catastrophism-an earth convulsed by internal spasms, shattered by omnipresent earthquakes, swept bare of life by universal deluges-was the dominant note in the teaching of earlier geologists. Hutton's philosophy found in the present the key to the past. He went into the field with no preconceived theories about the origin of rock

The story of the pioneers is told by Sir A. Geikie with his wat charm of style in 'The Founders of Geology.'