The result of English law has been to take landed property out of the hands of those who cultivate it, and to accumulate it invast latifundia for the benefit of a small number of families of princely opulence. The object of French law, on the contrary,is to secure the possession of the soil to the greatest number, by means of the equal division of inheritances. But this result isonly attained by an excessive subdivision, which often cuts the fields into strips that are almost too small for cultivation, andwhich is therefore opposed to any sound system of agriculture.. The Servian laws, by maintaining the family community,make every man co-owner of the land which he cultivates, at the same time preserving to the holdings their suitable extent.
By means of this association, the advantages of small properties are united with those of agriculture on a large scale. Thecultivators may employ the farming implements and distribution of crops customary on large farms, while the produce isdivided among the labourers, the same as in countries where the soil is subdivided among a multitude of small owners.
Civil taxes and the accidents of life are much less burdensome to the family community than where each couple has aseparate establishment. Should one of its members be summoned to the army, attacked with illness, or temporarily preventedfrom working, the others perform his task, and the community provides for his wants, the same offices being expected ofhim should occasion arise. Let the isolated individual, under other systems, fail, from any cause whatever, to win his dailybread, and he and his are at once reduced to live on public charity. Among the Southern Slave, with their zadruga system,no bureau de bienfaisance is required, as on the continent, nor any poor-rate, as with us. Official charity is replaced byfamily ties and duties. Labour is not a commodity, which, like all others, has to present itself in the market, and submit to therigorous laws of supply and demand. Very few hands seek employment, for there is hardly any paid labour. Each isco-owner of a portion of the soil, and devotes himself accordingly to the cultivation of his own land. Endemic pauperism,and even accidental distress, is, in consequence, unknown.
The family community also admits of the application of the principle of division of labour to agriculture, which ensureseconomy alike of time and of work. In three separate families there must be three women to manage household affairs, threemen to go to market and buy and sell the produce, and three children to watch the cattle. But if these three families areunited in the form of a zadruga , one woman, one man, and one child will suffice, while the others may devote themselves toproductive labour. The associates, too, will work more cheerfully and take greater pains than hired farm-servants, for theywill be animated by self-interest, inasmuch as they participate, directly in the produce of their labour. This agrarian systemhas the great advantage of allowing the use of machinery for the advantage not only of one individual but of all. The zadruga occupies a considerable extent of land; it can therefore employ an elaborate system of agriculture as well as a largeproprietor, and all benefit by it just as in small holdings.
The union in the same hands of capital. and labour, which we endeavour to attain in the West by means of cooperativesocieties, exists here in full vigour, with the additional advantage, that the foundation of the society is not mere self-interest,but the affection and confidence created by ties of blood. Co-operative societies hitherto have, with rare exceptions, had butan ephemeral existence; while the family-communities, which are nothing but co-operative societies applied to the cultivationof land, have existed from time immemorial, and are the real basis of economic being in a powerful group of nations full ofvigour and promise for the future.
The number of crimes and offences is less among the Southern Slavs than in the other provinces of the Austro-Hungarianempire, a result apparently due to the favourable influence exercised by the rural organization of zadrugas . Two causescontribute to this result. In the first place, nearly every one has sufficient to satisfy his essential wants, and distress, the greatsource of crime, contributes but a slight contingent to the tables of criminality. In the second place, as each individual lives inthe midst of a numerous family, under the eye of his relatives, he is restrained by this involuntary superintendence of thoseabout him; he has, moreover, a dignity to preserve; he has a position and a name, like the nobles of the West, and theproverb " noblesse oblige " is not without its application to him. It is evident that this family life must exercise a healthy moralinfluence, in that it developes sociability. At night to pass the evening, and in the day for work and for their meals, all themembers of the family assemble in the large common room. They converse and interchange ideas; and one or another singsor narrates a legend. Hence there is no occasion for a visit to the wine-shop in search of distraction, as in the case of theindividual living alone, who takes this means of escaping the monotony and silence of his hearth.
In these family-communities attachment to ancient traditions is handed down from generation to generation; and they are apowerful element for the preservation of social order. It is well known what extraordinary power the gens imparted to theRoman republic. As Mommsen remarks, the greatness of Rome rose on the solid foundation of its families of peasantproprietors. So long as the soil remains in the hands of family- communities, no social revolution can be apprehended, forthere exists no leaven of disorder.
