andanxietytoallthetribe。AproofoftheimportanceoftheKhaunduringamarch，is`shewnbytheconductoftheNausser
atonetime，whenJunusKhan，theirpresentchief，refusedtoaccompanytheminoneoftheirmigrations。Hewasanxiousto
remaininDamaunwith200or300ofhisrelations，toassistSurwurKhaunagainsttheVizeerees；buthisresolution
occasionedgreatdistressinthetribe，whodeclareditwasimpossibletomarchwithouttheirKhaun。Soearnestweretheir
representations，thatJunuswasatlastcompelledtoabandonhisformerdesign，andtoaccompanythemontheirmarchto
Khorassaun3。Colebroke\'sDig。ofHindooLaw，Vol。I。p。480。
4。ForthecourseofthesesandsontheconfinesofPersiaandTartary，seeFraser\'sKhorauan，p。253。
5。Fraser6。Fraser，p。168。7。Thisperhapsisafable，butthecannautsmustsometimesdischargeveryconsiderablebodiesofwater。Mr。Fraser，who
firstmetwiththematKauseroon，says:Thecannautsorsubterraneancanalshavefrequentlybeendescribed，andconstitute
almosttheonlyspeciesofimprovementrequiringoutlay，stillcarriedoninPersia:becausethepropertythusacquiredis
protected，andtheprofitconsiderable，andnotveryremote:indeed，theyaremostcommonlyconstructedbypersonsin
authority，whodisposeofthewaterthusbroughttothesurfaceatveryhighrates。Severalnewoneshavebeenlatelymade
intheKauseroonvalley，andsomenotionmaybeformedofthevalueofsuchproperty，whenitisunderstoodthatthesmall
streamatDalakeebringsinarevenueof4000rupeesayear；andthatonecannaut，latelyopenedbyKuibAlleeKhan，
governorofKauseroon，affordsastreamatleastfiveorsixtimesmoreconsiderable。Amongotheruses，itservestoirrigate
agardenwhichcontainssomeofthefinestorangetreesbothbitterandsweet，shaddock，lime，andpomegranatetrees，that
canbefoundinthecountry。Fraser\'sKhorassan，p。79。
8。Fraser，p。118。
9。Fraser，p。405。
10。Fraser，p。208。
11。Fraser，p。211。
12。Fraser，p。205。13。Fraser，p。390。TheKetkhodaheadmanofthevillageobservedthatthoseryotswhoaccountwiththeirlandlords，are
betteroffthanthosewhoaccountdirectlytogovernment，fromtheofficersofwhichthepoorerclassessuffergreat
extortions。
14。Frazer，p。173。
15。Thornton，p。166。
16。Oliv。p。192。
17。Patton，232，233。18。Frazer，Appendix，p。114。SeeFrazer\'saccountoftheChineseadministrationintheprovincesnearestKhorasan，andof
theeffectwhichthespectacleofthatadministrationproducedonthemindsofmerchantsandtravellersfromotherAsiatic
states。
19。BulletindesSciences，No。5，Mai1829。p。314。
20。Appendix。
CHAPTERV。
CottierRents。Undertheheadofcottierrents，wemayincludeallrentscontractedtobepaidinmoney，bypeasanttenants，extractingtheirownmaintenancefromthesoil。Theyarefoundtosomeextentinvariouscountries；butitisinIrelandalonethattheyexistinsuchamass，aspalpablyto
influencethegeneralstateofthecountry。Theydifferfromtheotherclassesofpeasantrentsinthisthemostmaterially；that
itisnotenoughforthetenanttobepreparedtogiveinreturnforthelandwhichenableshimtomaintainhimself，apartof
hislabor，asinthecaseofserfrents，oradefiniteproportionoftheproduce，asinthecaseofmetayerorryotrents。Heis
bound，whateverthequantityorvalueofhisproducemaybe，topayafixedsumofmoneytotheproprietor。Thisisa
changemostdifficulttointroduce，andveryimportantwhenintroduced。Moneypaymentsfromtheoccupiers，arebyno
meansessential，wemustrecollect，totheriseorprogressofrents。Overbyfarthegreaterpartoftheglobesuchpayments
haveneveryetbeenestablished。Tenantsyieldingplentifulrentsinproduce，maybequiteunable，fromtheinfrequencyof
exchanges，topayevensmallsumsinmoney，andtheownersofthelandmay，anddo，formanaffluentbody，consumingand
distributingalargeproportionoftheannualproduceofacountry，whileitisextremely
difficultforthemtolaytheirhands
onveryinsignificantsumsincash。Moneyrents，indeed，aresoveryrarelypaidbypeasantcultivators，thatwheretheydo
existamongthem，wemayexpecttofindthepowerofdischargingthemfoundedonpeculiarcircumstances。Inthecaseof
Ireland，itistheneighbourhoodofEngland，andtheconnectionbetweenthetwocountries，whichsupportsthesystemof
moneyrentspaidbythepeasantry。FromallpartsofIreland，theaccess，directorindirect，totheEnglishmarket，givesthe
Irishcultivatorsmeansofobtainingcashforaportionoftheirproduce。Insomedistricts，itevenappearsthattherentsare
paidinmoneyearntbyharvest-workinEngland；anditisrepeatedlystatedintheevidencebeforetheEmigration
Committee，that，werethisresourcetofail，thepowerofpayingrentswouldceaseinthese
districtsatonce。WereIreland
placedinaremoterpartoftheworld，surroundedbynationsnotmoreadvancedthanherself，andwerehercultivators
dependentfortheirmeansofgettingcashonherowninternalopportunitiesofexchange；itseemshighlyprobable，thatthe
landlordswouldsoonbedrivenbynecessitytoadoptasystemofeitherlabororproducerents，similartothosewhichprevailoverthelargeportionoftheglobe，cultivatedbytheotherclassesofpeasanttenantry。Onceestablished，however，theeffectsoftheprevalenceofcottierrentsamongapeasantpopulationareimportant:some
advantageous，someprejudicial。Inestimatingthem，welaborunderthegreatdisadvantageofhavingtoformourgeneral
conclusionsfromaviewofasingleinstance，thatofIreland。Didweknownothingoflaborrentsbutwhatwecollectfromonecountry，Hungaryforinstance，howverydeficientwouldhavebeennotionsoftheircharacteristics。Thedisadvantagesofcottierrentsmayberangedunderthreeheads。First，thewantofanyexternalchecktoassistin
repressingtheincreaseofthepeasantpopulationbeyondtheboundsofaneasysubsistence。Secondly，thewantofany
protectiontotheirinterests，fromtheinfluenceofusageandprescriptionindeterminingtheamountoftheirpayments。And，
thirdly，theabsenceofthatobviousanddirectcommoninterest，betweentheownersandtheoccupiersofthesoil，which
undertheothersystemsofpeasantrents，securetothetenantstheforbearanceandassistanceoftheirlandlordswhencalamityovertakesthem。Thefirst，andcertainlythemostimportantdisadvantageofcottierrentsistheabsenceofthoseexternalcheckscommonto
everyotherclassofpeasantrentswhichassistinrepressingtheeffectsofthedispositionfoundinallpeasantcultivators，toincreaseuptothelimitsofaveryscantysubsistence。Toexplainthis，wemust，toaslightextent，anticipatethesubjectofpopulation。Itshallbeasshortlyaspossible。Weknow
thatmen\'sanimalpowerofincreaseissuch，astoadmitofaveryrapidreplenishingofthedistrictstheyinhabit。Whentheir
numbersareasgreatastheirterritorywillsupportinplenty，iftheeffectsofsuchapowerofincreasearenotdiminished，
theirconditionmustgetworse。If，however，theeffectsoftheiranimalpowerofmultiplicationarediminished，thismust
happen，eitherfrominternalcausesormotives，indisposingthemtoitsfullexercise，orfromexternalcausesacting
independentlyoftheirwill。Butapeasantpopulation，raisingtheirownwagesfromthesoil，andconsumingtheminkind，
whatevermaybetheformoftheirrents，areuniversallyacteduponveryfeeblybyinternalchecks，orbymotivesdisposing
themtorestraint。Thecausesofthispeculiarityweshallhavehereaftertopointout。Theconsequenceis，thatunlesssome
externalcause，quiteindependentoftheirwill，forcessuchpeasantcultivatorstoslackentheirrateofincrease，theywill，ina
limitedterritory，whateverbetheformoftheirrents，veryrapidlyapproachastateofwantandpenury，andwillbestopped
atlastonlybythephysicalimpossibilityofprocuringsubsistence。Wherelaborormetayerrentsprevail，suchexternalcauses
ofrepressionarefoundintheinterestsandinterferenceofthelandlords:whereryotrentsareestablished，inthevicesand
mismanagementofthegovernment:1wherecottierrentsprevail，nosuchexternalcausesexist，andtheunchecked
dispositionofthepeopleleadstoamultiplicationwhichendsinwretchedness。Cottierrents，then，evidentlydifferforthe
worseinthisrespectfromserfandmetayerrents。Itisnotmeantofcoursethatserfsandmetayersdonotincreasetilltheir
numbersandwantswouldaloneplacethemverymuchatthemercyoftheproprietors，buttheobviousinterestsofthose
proprietorsleadsthemtorefusetheirassenttothefurtherdivisionofthesoil，andsotowithholdthemeansofsettlingmore
families，longbeforetheearthbecomesthrongedwithamultitudinoustenantry，towhichitcanbarelyyieldsubsistence。The
RussianorHungariannoblewantsnomoreserftenantsthanaresufficientforthecultivationofhisdomain；andherefuses
allotmentsoflandtoanygreaternumber，orperhapsforbidsthemtomarry。Thepowerofdoingthishasatonetimeorother
existedasalegalrightwhereverlaborrentshaveprevailed。Theownerofadomaincultivatedbymetayers，hasaninterestin
notmultiplyinghistenants，andthemouthstobefed，beyondthenumbernecessarytoitscompletecultivation。Whenhe
refusestosubdividethegroundfurther，freshfamiliescanfindnohome，andtheincreaseof
theaggregatenumbersofthe
peopleischecked。Thethinnessofthepopulationinryotcountriesisordinarilycausedbythevicesandviolenceofthe
government，andthereisnoquestionthatthisiswhatkeepssolargeaportionofAsiaillpeopledordesolate。Butwhencottierrentshaveestablishedthemselves，theinfluenceofthelandlordisnotexertedtocheckthemultiplicationofthepeasantcultivators，tillanextremecasearrives。Thefirsteffectsoftheincreasingnumbersofthepeople，thatis，themore
ardentcompetitionforallotments，andthegeneralriseofrents，seemforatimeunquestionableadvantagestothelandlords，
andtheyhavenodirectorobviousmotivetorefusefurthersubdivision，ortointerferewiththesettlementoffreshfamilies，
tilltheevidentimpossibilityofgettingthestipulatedrents，andperhapstheturbulenceofpeasantsstarvingoninsufficient
patchesofland，warntheproprietorsthatthetimeiscome，whentheirowninterestsimperiouslyrequirethatthe
multiplicationofthetenantryshouldbemoderated。Weknow，however，fromtheinstanceofIreland，theonlyoneonalarge
scaleopentoourobservation，thatwhilerentsareactuallyrising，aconvictionthattheirnominalincreaseispreparingareal
diminution，comesslowly，andisreceivedreluctantly；andthatbeforesuchaconvictionbeginstobegenerallyactedupon，thecultivatorsmaybereducedtoasituation，inwhichtheyarebothwretchedanddangerous。Thetardinesswithwhichlandlordsexerttheirinfluenceinrepressingthemultiplicationofthepeople，mustberankedthenamongthedisadvantagesofcottier，whencomparedwithserformetayerrents。Theirseconddisadvantageisthewantofanyinfluenceofcustomandprescription，inkeepingthetermsofthecontractbetweentheproprietorsandtheirtenantry，steadyandfixed。Insurveyingthehabitsofaserformetayercountry，weareusuallyabletotracesomeeffectsofancientusage。Thenumber
ofdays\'laborperformedforthelandlordbytheserfremainsthesame，fromgenerationtogeneration，inalltheprovincesof
considerableempires。ThemetayerderivedhisoldnameofColonusMedietariusfromtakinghalftheproduce；andhalfthe
produceweseestillhisusualportion，throughoutlargedistrictscontainingsoilsofverydifferentqualities。Itistruethatthis
influenceofancientusagedoesnotalwaysprotectthetenantfromwantoroppression；itstendencyhoweverisdecidedlyin
hisfavor。Butcottierrents，contractedtobepaidinmoney，mustvaryinnominalamountwiththevariationsinthepriceof
produce:afterchangehasbecomehabitual，alltracesofarent，consideredequitablebecauseitisprescriptive，arewhollylost，andeachbargainisdeterminedbycompetition。Therecanbelittledoubtthatthetendencytoconstancyinthetermsoftheircontract，observableinserfandmetayer
countries，isonthewholeaprotectiontothecultivators，andthatchangeandcompetition，commonamongstcottiers，aredisadvantageoustothem。Thethirddisadvantageofcottierrentsistheabsenceofsuchadirectandobviouscommoninterestbetweenlandlordandtenant，asmightsecuretothecultivatorassistancewhenindistress。Therecanbenocaseinwhichthereisnot，inreality，acommunityofinterestbetweentheproprietorsofthesoil，andthose
whocultivateit；buttheircommoninterestintheotherformsofpeasantholding，ismoredirectandobvious，andtherefore
moreinfluential，uponthehabitsandfeelingsofbothtenantsandlandlords。Theownerofaserfreliesuponthelaborofhis
tenantsforproducinghisownsubsistence，andwhenhistenantbecomesamoreinefficientinstrumentofcultivation，he
sustainsaloss。Theownerofametairie，whotakesaproportionoftheproduce，cannotbutseethattheenergyand
efficiencyofhistenant，arehisowngain:languidandimperfectcultivationhisloss。Theserf，therefore，reliesuponhislord\'s
senseofinterest，orfeelingsofkindnessforassistance，ifhiscropsfail，orcalamityovertakeshiminanyshape；andhe
seldomisrepulsedordeceived。Thishalfrecognizedclaimtoassistanceseems，weknow，occasionally，sovaluabletothe
serfs，thattheyhaverejectedfreedomfromthefearoflosingit。Themetayersreceiveconstantlyloansoffoodandother
assistancefromthelandlord，whenfromanycausestheirownresourcesfail。Thefearoflosingtheirstock，theirrevenue，
andalltheadvancesalreadymade，preventthemostreluctantlandlordsfromwithholdingaidonsuchoccasions。Eventhe
Ryot，miserableasheordinarilyis，andgreatasisthedistancewhichseparateshimfromthesovereignproprietor，isnot
alwayswithoutsomeshareintheseadvantages。Hisexertionsarefelttobethegreatsourceoftherevenueofthestate，and
undertolerablywellregulatedgovernments，theimportanceisfeltandadmitted，ofaidingthecultivatorswhendistressed，by
forbearance，andsometimesbyadvances。2
Theinterestsofthecottiertenantarelessobviouslyidentifiedwiththoseofthe
proprietor:changesoftenants，andvariationsofrent，arecommonoccurrences，andtheremovalofanunluckyadventurer，
andtheacceptanceofamoresanguinebidder，areexpedientsmoreeasyandpalateabletotheproprietors，thanthatof
mixingthemselvesupwiththerisksandburthensofcultivation，byadvancestotheirtenants。InthehighlandsofScotland，
indeed，thechiefassistedhisclanlargely。Theywerehiskinsmenanddefenders:boundtohimbytiesofblood，andthe
guardiansofhispersonalsafety。Thehabitsengenderedwhilethesefeelingswerefresh，arenotyetwornout。LordStafford
hassenttoSutherlandverylargesuppliesoffood。ThechiefoftheisleofRumseysupportedhispeopletosuchanextent，
thathehaslatelyfounditworthwhiletoexpendveryconsiderablesumsinenablingthemtoemigrate。3Butthecottier
merelyassuch，theIrishcottier，forinstance，hasnosuchholdonthesympathiesofhislandlord，andtherecanbeno
questionthatofthevariousclassesofpeasanttenantry，theystandthemostthoroughlydesolateandaloneinthetimeof
calamity:thattheyhavetheleastprotectionfromtheordinaryeffectsofdisastrousreverses，orofthefailureoftheirscantyresourcesfromanyothercauses。Sucharethedisadvantagesofthistheleastextensivesystemofpeasantrents。Theprincipaladvantagethecottierderives
fromhisformoftenure，isthegreatfacilitywithwhich，whencircumstancesarefavourabletohim，hechangesaltogetherhis
conditioninsociety。Inserf，metayer，orryotcountries，extensivechangesmusttakeplaceinthewholeframeworkof
society，beforethepeasantsbecomecapitalists，andindependentfarmers。Theserfhasmanystagestogothroughbeforehe
arrivesatthispoint，andwehaveseenhowharditisforhimtoadvanceonestep。Themetayertoomustbecometheowner
ofthestockonhisfarm，andbeabletoundertaketopayamoneyrent。Bothchangestakeplaceslowlyandwithdifficulty，
especiallythelast，thesubstitutionofmoneyrents，whichsupposesaconsiderablepreviousimprovementintheinternal
commerceofthenation，andisordinarilytheresult，notthecommencement，ofimprovementintheconditionofthe
cultivators。Butthecottierisalreadytheownerofhisownstock，heexistsinasocietyinwhichthepowerofpayingmoney
rentsisalreadyestablished。Ifhethrivesinhisoccupation，thereisnothingtopreventhisenlarginghisholding，increasinghis
stock，andbecomingacapitalist，andafarmerinthepropersenseoftheword。ItispleasingtoheartheresidentIrish
landlords，whohavetakensomepains，andmadesomesacrifices，toimprovethecharacterandconditionoftheirtenantry，
bearingtheirtestimonytothisfact，andstatingtherapiditywithwhichsomeofthecottiershave，undertheirauspices，
acquiredstock，andbecomesmallfarmers。Mostofthecountriesoccupiedbymetayers，serfs，andryots，willprobably
containasimilarraceoftenantryforsomeages。IftheeventsofthenexthalfcenturyarefavourabletoIreland，hercottiers
arelikelytodisappear，andtobemergedinaverydifferentraceofcultivators。Thisfacilityforglidingoutoftheiractual
conditiontoahigherandabetter，isanadvantage，andaverygreatadvantage，ofthecottierovertheothersystemsofpeasantrents，andatonesforsomeofitsgloomierfeatures。Makingallowancesforthepeculiaritiespointedout，theeffectsofcottierrentsonthewagesoflabor，andotherrelationsof
society，willbesimilartothoseofotherpeasantrents。Thequantityofproducebeingdeterminedbythefertilityofthesoil，
theextentoftheallotment，andtheskillandindustryofthecottier；thedivisionofthatproduceonwhichhiswagesdepend，
isdeterminedbyhiscontractwiththelandlord；bytherenthepays。Andagain，thewholeamountofproducebeing
determinedasbefore，thelandlord\'sshare，therent，dependsuponthemaintenancelefttothepeasant，thatis，uponhiswages。Theexistenceofrent，underasystemofcottiertenants，isinnodegreedependentupontheexistenceofdifferentqualitiesof
soil，orofdifferentreturnstothestockandlaboremployed。Where，ashasbeenrepeatedlyobserved，nofundssufficientto
supportthebodyofthelaborers，areinexistence，theymustraisefoodthemselvesfromtheearth，orstarve；and。this
circumstancewouldmakethemtributarytothelandlords，andgiverisetorents，and，astheirnumberincreased，toveryhighrents，thoughallthelandswereperfectlyequalinquality。Cottierrents，likeotherpeasantrents，mayincreasefromtwocauses；first，fromanincreaseofthewholeproduce，ofwhich
increasethelandlordtakesthewholeorapart。Or，theproduceremainingstationary，theymayincreasefromanaugmentationofthelandlord\'sshare，thatofthetenantbeingdiminishedtotheexactamountoftheadditionalrent。Whentherentincreasesandtheproduceremainsstationary，theincreaseofrentindicatesnoincreaseoftherichesand
revenueofthecountry:therehasbeenatransferofwealth，butnoadditiontoit:onepartyisimpoverishedtothepreciseamounttowhichanotherisenriched。When，ontheotherhand，increasedrentsarepaidbyincreasedproduce，thereisanadditiontothewealthofthecountry，not
ameretransferofthatalreadyexisting:thecountryisrichertotheextent，atleast，oftheincreasedrent:and，probably，toagreaterextentfromtheincreasedrevenueofthecultivators。Itisobviouslytheinterestofthelandlordofcottier，asofotherpeasanttenants，thatanincreaseofhisrentsshouldalways
originateintheprosperityofcultivation，notinpressureonthetenants。Thepowerofincreasefromthelastsourceisverylimited:fromimprovement，indefinite。Itisclearlytootheinterestofthelandlord，thatthecottiertenantryshouldbereplacedbycapitalists，capablebothof
pushingcultivationtothefullextenttowhichskillandmeanscancarryit:insteadofthelandbeingentrustedtothehandsof
merelaborers，strugglingtoexist，unabletoimprove，andwhenmuchimpoverishedbycompetition，degraded，turbulent，anddangerous。AsitisproposedtoconsiderthepresentconditionofboththeIrishandEnglishpoorattheendofthework，whenweshall
havetheassistanceofallthemoregeneralprinciplesweshallventuretounfold，thesubjectofcottierrentsneednotbe
fartherpursuedhere。Theyhavealreadybeensufficientlyexamined，toshewthepointsinwhichtheywillagreewithordifferfromotherpeasantrents。1。Wherethephenomenoncanbeobservedofamildandefficientgovernmentoveraraceofryottenants，asinChina，they
arefoundtoincreasewithextraordinaryrapidity。
2。Aurenzebe\'sInstructionstohisCollectors。
3。SeeEmigrationReport。
CHAPTERVI。
SUMMARYOFPEASANTRENTS。
InfluenceofRentonWages。Oneimportantfactmuststrikeusforciblyonlookingbackonthecollectivebodyofthoseprimaryorpeasantrents，which
wehavebeentracing，intheirvariousforms，overthesurfaceoftheglobe。Itistheirconstantandveryintimateconnectionwiththewagesoflabor。Inthisrespecttheserf，themetayer，theryot，thecottier，arealike:thetermsonwhichtheycanobtainthespotofground
theycultivate，exerciseanactiveandpredominantinfluence，indeterminingtherewardtheyshallreceivefortheirpersonal
exertions；or，inotherwords，theirrealwages。Weshouldtakeaveryfalseviewofthecauseswhichregulatetheamountof
theirearnings，ifwemerelycalculatedthequantityofcapitalinexistenceatanygiventime，andthenattemptedtocompute
theirshareofitbyasurveyoftheirnumbers。Astheyproducetheirownwages，allthecircumstanceswhichaffecteither
theirpowersofproduction，ortheirshareoftheproduce，mustbetakenintotheestimate。
Andamongthese，principally，
thosecircumstances，whichwehaveseendistinguishonesetofpeasanttenantryfromanother。Themodeinwhichtheirrent
ispaid，whetherinlabor，produce，ormoney:theeffectsoftimeandusageinsoftening，orexaggerating，ormodifying，the
originalformorresultsoftheircontract:allthesethings，andtheircombinedeffects，mustbecarefullyexamined，andwell
considered，beforewecanexpecttounderstandwhatitiswhichlimitsthewagesofthepeasant，andfixesthestandardofhisconditionandenjoyments。While，then，thepositionofalargeproportionofthepopulationoftheearthcontinuestobewhatithaseveryetbeen，such
astoobligethemtoextracttheirownfoodwiththeirownhandsfromitsbosom；theformandconditionofpeasanttenures，
andthenatureandamountoftherentspaidunderthem，willnecessarilyexercisealeadinginfluenceontheconditionofthe
laboringclasses，andontherealwagesoftheirlabor。
InfluenceofPeasantRentsonAgriculturalProduction。Thenextremarkableeffect，commontoalltheformsofpeasantrents，istheirinfluenceinpreventingthefulldevelopementoftheproductivepowersoftheearth。Ifweobservethedifferencewhichexistsintheproductivenessoftheindustryofdifferentbodiesofmen，inanyofthe
variousdepartmentsofhumanexertion，weshallfindthatdifferencetodepend，almostwholly，ontwocircumstances:first，
onthequantityofcontrivanceusedinapplyingmanuallabor:secondly，ontheextenttowhichthemerephysicalexertionsof
men\'shandsareassistedbytheaccumulatedresultsofpastlabor:inotherwords，onthedifferentquantitiesofskill，
knowledge，andcapital，broughttothetaskofproduction。Adifferenceinthese，occasionsallthedifferencebetweenthe
productivepowersofabodyofsavages，andthoseofanequalbodyofEnglishagriculturistsormanufacturers:andit
occasionsalsothelessstrikingdifferences，whichexistbetweentheproductivepowersofthevariousbodiesofmen，whooccupygradationsbetweenthesetwoextremes。Whentheearthiscultivatedunderasystemofpeasantrents，thetaskofdirectingagriculture，andofprovidingwhatis
necessarytoassistitsoperations，iseitherthrownwhollyuponthepeasants，asinthecaseofryotandcottierrents，or
dividedbetweenthemandtheirlandlords，asinthecaseofserfandmetayerrents。Inneitherofthesecasesistheefficiency
ofagriculturalindustrylikelytobecarriedasfarasitmightbe。Poverty，andtheconstantfatiguesoflaboriousexertion，put
bothscience，andthemeansofassistinghisindustrybytheaccumulationofcapital，outofthereachofthepeasant。And
whenthelandlordshaveoncesucceededingettingridinpartoftheburthenofcultivation，andhaveformedabodyof
peasanttenantry，itisinvaintohopeformuchsteadysuperintendanceorassistancefromthem。Thefixedandsecurenature
oftheirproperty，andtheinfluencewhichitgivesthemintheearlystagesofsocietyoverthecultivatingclass，thatis，over
thegreatmajorityofthenation，leadtotheformationoffeelingsandhabits，inconsistentwithadetailedattentiontothe
conductofcultivation；whiletheyveryrarelypossessthepowerandthetempersteadilytoaccumulatethemeansofassisting
theindustryemployedontheirestates。Someskill，andsomecapital，mustbefoundamongtheveryrudestcultivators:but
themostefficientdirectionoflabor，andtheaccumulationandcontrivanceofthemeanstoendowitwiththegreatest
attainablepower，seemtobethepeculiarprovince，theappointedtask，ofaraceofmen，capitalists，distinctfromboth
laborersandlandlords，morecapableofintellectualeffortsthanthelower，morewillingtobring
sucheffortstobearonthe
improvementofthepowersofindustry，thanthehigher，ofthoseclasses。Onthepeculiarfunctionsofthisthirdclassofmen
insociety，andofthevariouseffectsmoral，economical，andpolitical，producedbythemultiplicationoftheirnumbersand
theirmeans，weshallhereafterhavetotreat。Theirabsencefromthetaskofcultivation，whichiscommontoallthewide
classesofpeasanttenures，preventsthatperfectdevelopementoftheresourcesoftheearth，whichtheirskill，their
contrivance，andthepowertheyexercisebytheemploymentofaccumulatedresources，doandcanaloneeffect。
SmallNumbersoftheNon-agriculturalClasses。Resultingfromthisimperfectdevelopementofthepowersoftheearth，willbefoundastuntedgrowthoftheclassesof
societyunconnectedwiththesoil。Itisobvious，thattherelativenumbersofthosepersonswhocanbemaintainedwithout
agriculturallabor，mustbemeasuredwhollybytheproductivepowersofthecultivators。Wherethesecultivateskilfully，they
obtainproducetomaintainthemselvesandmanyothers；wheretheycultivatelessskilfully，theyobtainproducesufficientto
maintainthemselvesandasmallernumberofothers。Therelativenumbersofthenon-agriculturalclasseswillneverbeso
great，therefore，wheretheresourcesoftheeartharedevelopedwithdeficientormoderateskill
andpower，astheyarewhen
theseresourcesaredevelopedmoreperfectly。InFranceandItaly，theagricultureofthepeasanttenantryisgoodwhen
comparedwiththatofsimilarclasseselsewhere，andthesoilandclimateare，onthewhole，excellent；yetthenumberof
non-agriculturistsisinFranceonlyas1to2，inItalyas4to18，whileinEngland，withaninferiorsoilandclimate
agriculturalclimate，thatis，thenon-agriculturistsaretothecultivatorsas2to1。1Therelativenumbersandinfluenceof
thenon-agriculturalclassespowerfullyaffect，aswehavehadoccasionbeforetoremark，thesocialandpolitical
circumstancesofdifferentcountries，and，indeed，mainlydecidewhatmaterialseachcountryshallpossess，fortheformation
ofthosemixedconstitutionsinwhichthepowerofthecrown，andofalandedaristocracy，arebalancedandcontrolledbytheinfluenceofnumbers，andofpropertyfreedfromalldependanceonthesoil。Ishallnotbeunderstoodofcourse，asmeaningtoassert，thatthepresenceofalargeproportionofnon-agriculturistsis
essentialtotheexistenceofdemocraticinstitutions:wehaveabundanceofinstancestothecontrary。Butwhenapowerful
aristocracyalreadyexistsonthesoil，aswherepeasantrentsprevail，itneedsmust；thentheefficientintroductionof
democraticelementsintotheconstitution，dependsalmostentirelyuponthenumbersandpropertyofthenon-agricultural
classes。Theindirectinfluenceofpeasanttenurestherefore，inlimitingthenumbersofthenon-agriculturalclasses，mustbe
reckonedamongthemostimportantofthepoliticalresultsofthosetenures。
IdentityoftheInterestsofLandlordswiththoseoftheirTenantryandtheCommunity。Alittleattentionissufficienttoshew，thatunderalltheformsofpeasanttenures，theinterestsofthelandlordsare
indissolublyconnectedwiththoseoftheirtenantryandofthecommunityatlarge。Theinterestofthestateobviouslyis，that
theresourcesofitsterritoryshouldbefullydevelopedbyaclassofcultivatorsfree，rich，andprosperous，andtherefore
equaltothetask。Theinterestofthetenantmusteverbetoincreasetheproduceoftheland，onwhichproducehefeeds，to
shakeofftheshacklesofserviledependence:andtoattainthatformofholdingwhichleaveshimmostcompletelyhisown
master，andpresentsthefewestobstructionstohisaccumulationofproperty。
Theinterestsofthelandedproprietorconcurwiththeseinterestsofthestateandthetenantry。Thereisindeedamethodbywhichhisrevenuemaybeincreased，neitherbeneficialtothecommunity，noradvantageousto
thetenant；thatis，byencroachingonthetenant\'sshareoftheproduce，whiletheproduceitselfremainsunaltered。Butthisis
alimitedandmiserableresource，whichcontainswithinitselftheprinciplesofaspeedystoppageandfailure。Thatfull
developementoftheproductivepowersofaterritory，whichisessentialtotheprogressiveriseoftheproprietor\'sincome，
canneverbeforwardedbytheincreasingpenuryofthecultivators。Whilethepeasantistheagentorprincipalinstrumentof
production，theagricultureofacountrycanneverthrivewithhisdeepeningdepression。IfthewasteplainsofAsia，andthe
forestsofEasternEurope，areevertoproducetotheirproprietorsarevenueatalllikewhatsimilarquantitiesoflandyieldinthebettercultivatedpartsoftheworla；itisnotbyincreasingthepenuryoftheraceofpeasantrybywhicharenowlooselyoccupied，thatsucharesultwillbebroughtabout。Theirincreasedmiserycanonlystaythespreadofcultivationand
diminishitspowers。Themiserablescantinessoftheproduceofagreatpartoftheearth，isvisiblymainlyowingtotheactual
povertyanddegradationofthepeasantcultivators。Buttherealinterestoftheproprietorsnevercanbetosnatchasmall
gainfromadwindlingfund，whichateveryinvasionoftheirsislesslikelytobeaugmented，whentheymightensurea
progressiveincreasefromtheindefiniteaugmentationofthefunditself。Itisobviouslythereforemostadvantageoustothe
proprietors，thattheirrevenuesshouldincreasefromtheincreasingproduceoftheland，andnotfromthedecreasingmeansofitscultivators；andsofartheirinterestisclearlythesamewiththatofthestateandthepeasantry。Andfurther，itisnolesstheinterestofthelandlords，thanitisthatofotherclassesinthestate，thattheruderandmore
oppressiveformsofhiscontractwithhistenantshouldgraduallybeexchangedforothers，moreconsistentwiththesocial
andpoliticalwelfareofthecultivators。Thelandlordwhoreceiveslaborrentsmustbeafarmerhimself:thelandlordofthe
metayermustsupportmostoftheburthensofcultivation，andshareinallitshazards；thelandlordofthecottiermustbe
exposedtofrequentlossesfromthefailureofthemeansofhistenantry，andafteracertainpointintheirdepression，to
considerabledangerfromtheirdesperation。Alltheadvantagesincidenttothepositionofalandedproprietor，areonly
reapedintheirbestshape，whenhisincomeisfixed，andextraordinarycasualtiesexcepted
certain；whenheisfreefrom
anyshareintheburthensandhazardsofcultivation；whenwiththeprogressofnationalimprovementhispropertyhasits
utmostpowersofproductionbroughtintofullplay，byaraceoftenantspossessedofintellectandmeansequaltothetask。
Thereceiveroflaborrentstherefore，gainsapointwhentheyarechangedtoproducerents；thereceiverofproducerents
fromametayergainsapointwhentheyarechangedtomoneyrents。Thelandlordofcottiersgainsapointwhenthey
becomecapitalists；andthesovereignoftheryotcultivatorsgainsapointwhentheproduceduefromthemcanbe
commutedforfixedpaymentsinmoney。Thereisnoonestepintheprosperouscareerofapeasanttenantry，ofany
description，atwhichtheinterestsofthelandlordsarenotbestpromotedbytheirprosperity:andthatinspiteoftheadmitted
possibilityofastintedgaintotheproprietors，foundedontheincreasingpenuryofthecultivators。
OntheCausesofthelongDurationoftheSystemsofPrimaryorPeasantRents。Perhapsinanenquiryintothenatureandeffectsofthedifferentsystemsofpeasantrents。themostinterestingtractinthe
wholelineofinvestigation，isthatinwhichweseektodiscoverthecauseswhichhavekeptthempermanentandunchanged，overalargepartoftheearth，throughalongsuccessionofages。Theinterestsofthestate，oftheproprietors，ofthetenantrythemselves，arealladvancedbytheprogressivechangeswhich
inprosperouscommunitiessuccessivelytakeplaceinthemodeofcultivatingthesoil。Andyetinspiteoftheordinary
tendencyofhumaninstitutionstochange，andofthenumerousinterestswhichinthisinstancecombinetomakechange
desirable，ageshavetravelledpast，andagreatportionoftheearth\'ssurfaceisstilltilledbyracesofpeasantry，holdingthe
landbytenuresandonconditionssimilartothoseimposeduponthepersonsinwhosehandsthetaskofcultivationwasfirst
placed。Sucharetheserfsoftheeast，themetayerswhocoverthewestofEurope，andtheryotswhooccupythewholeofAsia。Whenwelookatthosecountriesinwhichpeasantrentshaveatanytimeprevailed，andobservetheiractualconditionwith
referencetopast，orprobablechanges，thoserentsshewthemselvesinfourunequalmasses。Fromthefirstdivision，they
havealreadypassed；spontaneouschanges，graduallybroughtabout，inslowsuccession，haveobliteratedallmarksofthe
earlierandruderformsofholding。Araceofcapitalistsprovidingthestockadvancingthewagesoflabor，andpayingfixed
moneyrents，havetakenentirepossessionofthetaskofcultivation，fromwhichtheproprietorsarecompletelyextricated。
Theportionoftheearth\'ssurfaceonwhichthishastakenplaceissmall。ltcomprisesEngland，thegreaterpartofScotland，a
partofthekingdomoftheNetherlands，andspotsinFrance，Italy，Spain，andGermany。Inanotherpartoftheglobe，wesee
thecauseswhichhaveelsewhereproducedthechangesjustreferredto，stillactuallyatwork，buttheirresultsyet
incomplete。Withoutanydeliberatepurposeonthepartofanyclass，changesarequietlyandsilentlytakingplace，through
whichtheagriculturalpopulationareadvancingtoapositionsimilartothatoftheEnglishfarmersandlaborers。Thisprocess
maybeobservedinthewestofGermany:theretheserfshaveforsomeagesbeengoingthroughasluggishprocessof
transmutationintoleibeigeners，hereditarytenantswithfixedlaborrents，andnotchainedtothesoil。Theleibeigenersare
slowlyassumingthecharacterofmeyers，subjecttoanunalterableproducerent；averyfewstepsinadvancewillrangethe
meyerbythesideoftheEnglishcopyholder；andthenallthesubstantialeffectsoftheirformercondition，astenantspayinglaborrents，willhavedisappeared。Thereisthismaterialdifference，however，betweenthepaststateofEngland，andthepresentstateofGermany。InEngland，
thetenantswhoonthedisuseofthelaboroftheserftenantry，tookchargeofthecultivationofthedomainsofthe
proprietors，werefoundontheland；theywereyeomen。InGermany，thetenantsofthedomainsareoffsetsfromthe
non-agriculturalpopulation，andtheircapitalhasbeenaccumulatedinemploymentsdistinctfromagriculture。InEngland，
thesourcefromwhichthenewtenantryproceeded，waslarge，andtheirspreadrapid。InGermany，thesourceissmaller，and
thecreationofsuchatenantrymustbetheworkofamuchlongerperiod。Butthechangehasbeenslowinbothcountries。
CultivationbythelaborofthemanerialtenantswasverylongbeforeitfinallydisappearedfromEngland:thelegalobligation
toperformsuchlaborhasglidedoutofsightalmostwithinmemory。SotoointhosepartsofGermanyinwhichtheprogress
oftherelationsbetweentheproprietorsandthetenantryislefttotakeitsowncourse，itseemshighlyprobablethatavery
longperiodwillyetelapsebeforelaborrentswhollydisappear。Spontaneouschangesinthehabitsofnationsusuallytakeplaceslowly，andoccupyagesintheirprogress。Gradualalterationsinthemodeofholdingandcultivatingland，occupiedbyapeasanttenantry，arenotconfinedtothe
countriesinwhichlaborrentsprevail:metayershave，insomedistricts，givenplacetocapitalisttenants，andinothersareto
befoundinastateoftransition；owningpartofthecapital，payingsometimesafixedquantityofproduce，sometimesamoneyrent，andpreparing，evidently，totakeuponthemselvesalltheburthensandhazardsofcultivation。Thetwodivisionsofrentswhichwehavejustnoticed，comprise，jointly，butasmallportionoftheearth。Inthem，aswe
haveseen，amovementinadvanceofthecultivatorsthemselveshastakenplace，whichhasproceededfromtheinsensible
improvementoftheircondition，andhasendedinone，andislikelytoendintheother，inanalterationintheformofrents。
Butinthatgreaterportionoftheearthwhichremainstobenoticed，therehasbeennospontaneousmovementinadvance，
andthereisnotendencytoinsensiblechangetobeperceived。Yetinasmalldivisionofthatlargerportionveryrapid
alterationsareinprogress，inadifferentmanner，andfromadifferentcause。Andthisconstitutesathirddivisionofpeasantrents，whenclassedwithreferencetotheirtendenciestochange。IntheEasternpartofEurope，thepeoplehaveneverreachedthemeans，oreventhewish，ofelevatingtheircondition:the
modeofcultivationandtherelationsbetweentheproprietorsandtheirtenantry，might，apparently，asfarastheexertionsofthecultivatorsthemselvesareconcerned，havecontinuedunchangedwhiletheearthlasts。But，inthesecountries，theintellectandknowledgeofthehigherclassesarefarinadvanceoftheapathy，andstationary
ignorance，ofthelower。Thelandedproprietorshavebeenabletocontrasttheconditionoftheircountryandtheirproperty，
withthestateofmoreimprovednations，andhavebecomeanimatedbyazealousdesireofalteringtheconditionofthe
peasantry，andthemodeofconductingagriculture。Thiscommonspirithasproduced，andisdailyproducing，avarietyof
changes；differingindetailwiththeactualcircumstancesofdifferentdistricts，buthaving
twocommonobjects；namely，the
elevationofthecharacterandcircumstancesofthepresentpeasantcultivators，andtheimprovementofagricultureonthe
domainsheldbytheproprietors。Wehavealreadyseen，thattheultimateresultsofthesevariouschangesareyetproblematical；thatwhatevertheymaybe，alongperiodoftimewillprobablyelapse，beforetheyarefullydeveloped。Abstracting，however，altogetherfromthethreedistrictswehavebeenconsidering，namely，thatinwhichpeasantrentshave
beenactuallysuperseded，thatfromwhichtheyareslowlydisappearing，andthatfromwhichanattemptismakingforcibly
toexpelthem；therestillremainsalargefourthdistrict:avastunbrokenmass，whichnomovementfromwithin，andnoinfluencefromwithout，haveyetbroughttogivesignsofapproachingchange。Astheattentionisnaturallymorecaughtbywhatisstirringandinmotion，thanbythingsofgreatermagnitudeand
importancewhichareinertandstationary，thecountriesinwhichalterationsinthemodeofconductingagriculturearein
progress，attractobservationmuchmorereadilythanthosewhichreallypresentamorecuriousandinterestingphenomenon；
thoseinwhichtheformsofoccupyingthesoilfirstadopted，andthesystemsandrelationsofsocietyfoundedonthem，still
prevail；inwhichthefaceofsocietyhasundergoneforcenturiesaslittlealterationastheface
ofnature，andmenseemas
unchangeableastheregionstheyinhabit。TheRyotsthroughoutAsia，andthepeasantsinaveryconsiderableportionof
Europe，arepreciselywhattheyhaveeverbeen。Inspiteofthefluctuationsnaturaltoallhumaninstitutions，andofthe
obviousdisadvantagesoftheirsystemsofcultivation，stilltheyendure，andarelikelytoendure，unlesssomegeneral
movementtakesplaceonthepartofthehigherclasses，draggingthelowerfromtheirapathyandpoverty；orsomeinsensibleimprovementoftheircondition，enablesthelowerclassesthemselvestobeginaforwardprogress。Effortsofthehigherclasses，tointroduceforciblyimprovementsintotheconditionofthelower，arelittlelikelyeverto
becomegeneralandsystematic，overanygreatproportionoftheearth\'ssurface。Tosupposeageneraldiffusionofpolitical
knowledgeandphilosophy，dispellingeverywherethesluggishdreamsofselfishness，maybeapleasingreverie，butcan
hardlyaffordanygroundforrationalanticipation。TheproprietorsoftheserfsofEasternEuropehavemade，itistrue，
vigorousefforts，buttheywerestimulatedbytheintolerableburthensandembarrassmentswhichtheold
systembrought
uponthemselves，andnothingshortofsuchastimuluswouldmakesucheffortsgeneral。TheItalianorSpanishnoblesshew
nosymptomsofbeingrousedtotaketheleadinalteringthetermsonwhichtheirestatesareused:eventheFrenchnoblesse，
beforetherevolution，werequitepassiveundertheevilsandlosseswhichtheconditionoftheirmetayertenantrymade
common。ThenativeprincesofAsiaarelittlelikelytobereformersintheagriculturaleconomyoftheircountry。seehowlittletheAnglo-Indiangovernmenthaseffectedinthisrespect。Butifthehigherclassesarelittlelikelytodisplaygeneralactivityasreformers，then，asthefoundationoffuture
improvementsinthecircumstancesofthecultivatorsofalargepartoftheworld，thereremainonlysuchalterationsforthe
better，asmayinsensiblytakeplaceintheconditionofthelowerclasses:suchbenefitsastheymaywinforthemselvesamidstthesilentlapseoftimeandeverydayevents。Ifthisisseen，itmustbeperceivedatonce，thattheactualstateofpenuryandmisery，whichmakesthecultivatorshelpless，
andkeepsthemdestitute，isthegreatobstacletothecommencementofnationalimprovement；theheavyweightwhich
keepsstationarythewealthandnumberandcivilizationofaverylargepartoftheearth。Ibelievethis，indeed，tobeonlyone
caseofageneraltruth，withwhich，inourfutureprogress，weshallbecomemorefamiliar，thatthedegradationandabject
povertyofthelowerclasses，canneverbefoundincombinationwithnationalwealth，andpoliticalstrength。Butwhenthe
lowerclassesexistinthecharacterofpeasantcultivators，thisismorestrikinglytruethanelsewhere。Inpoorcountries，of